sexual ethics Flashcards
(18 cards)
what is the religious view on sexual ethics
the bible is against homosexuality, pre marital sex and extra marital sex
‘Thou shall not commit adultery’ - adultery is sex outside marriage, pre or extra and homosexuals can’t get married in the eyes of the church so all homosexual sex is adultery and thus not allowed
Homosexuality - ‘man shall not lie with man as he does with woman, that is an abomination, they shall both surely be put to death, their blood is upon them’ = Leviticus 20:13
what was St Augustine’s view on sexual desire and original sin (religious)
Augustine thinks that our sexual desire is one of the key features of original sin. In Genesis after disobeying God, Adam and Eve became aware of their nakedness and covered up out of shame. Augustine claims it Is ‘just’ that we feel shame about our naked bodies, since it is just that we feel shame over having lust because our inability to control it is the result of our fallen state. Augustine argues that this is universal - people of all cultures cover up their genitals, and sex is done in private, which Augustine suggests is due to shame associated with it. This all shows the connection between sex, sex organs and the shame of original sin which caused Adam and Eve to feel shame and wear clothes. Augustine concludes that sex must be confined to marriage for the purpose of having children - as the Bible commands reproduction and Jesus recommended marriage (man and woman) - homosexual sex not allowed. Anything else is just giving in to original sin in a deprived and disordered way.
what is Freud’s rejection of christian approaches to sex as overly repressive
He thought that traditional christian attitudes toward sex resulted in a feeling of shame about sexual desire which led to unhealthy repression and mental issues.
what is the liberal secular attitude towards sex ethics as influenced by Freud
claims that sex is a natural biological desire which shouldn’t be a source of shame but of wellbeing. Augustine’s insistence that there is something shameful about lust is absurd and pointless once you understand it is the result of evolution, not original sin.
how can secular views be a counter to religious views then
Conservative religious attitudes towards sex are therefore unnecessarily oppressive and puritanical. they become an unhealthy and pointless obsession with self-control both from insecurity over a mythical fall from grace. However, today arguably humans have developed to the point where they can be trusted with more freedom. This suggests that our nature is not cursed with original sin such that we need draconian sexual norms and legislation. Sexual behaviour between consenting adults is no business of any else, especially of the state law. Traditionalists always fought against the sexual liberalisation of society, concerned it would harm social order, and yet society seems fine if not better.
evaluation points for the over sexualisation of society
- secular society seems over sexualised to a concerning degree
- sexual imagery is used as advertising everywhere
- people have an unhealthy super fixation on their appearance
- Bishop Barron agrees with this point and argues that the superficial secular attitude towards sex has turned it into a meaningless act, which can be psychologically damaging for people
- god designed sex to be within a loving marriage
- having sex outside marriage, engaging in what is meant to be meaningful and personal act in such a superficial way is actually psychologically harmful
what is a further evaluation on the over-sexualisation of the secular view
Barron has a point about the danger of over-sexualisation and superficiality regarding sex and relationships of modern culture. However, this doesn’t.t justify a return to christian medieval approach to sex and relationships. He suggests that liberal secular culture needs to improve its cultural attitudes around sex and relationships. secular people could agree with this point about the way its gone wrong, but still disagree about his Christian standards
what is natural laws (religious) approach to sex ethics
when applying it to homo, pre and extra sex natural law argues that the telos of sex is for reproduction. Arguing that children are best raised within marriage and education can only be fulfilled as long as children are in wedlock. Children born outside marriage tend top be less educated and so sex must be confined to marriage to fulfil the primary precept of education/ Therefore, all sex outside marriage is wrong because homosexual sex cannot lead to children
what is the response to natural law approach
- Natural law is outdated - it was created in a medieval socio-economic time and its rules reflect that. in aquinas’ time, having sex outside marriage was often a death sentence because sex led to children, and single mothers struggled to survive. there was a great need for reproduction, because so many children died which was part of why it was against homosexuality, because of the intense need for reproduction. homosexuality was also seen as against the nuclear family dynamic, which was also needed for reproduction and education.
- Today, these socio-economic conditions are no longer present. we know have effective contraception and support for single parents. we have overpopulation, and it is no longer the case that children outside marriage are doomed to lack education. The reasoning behind Aquinas’ view on sexual ethics no longer apply. It is outdated. In Aquinas’ time, his reasoning made sense - but that’s because of the dire situation society was in.
evaluation of natural law
Outdated doesn’t mean wrong - it just means popular opinion has changed - the best version of the outdated critique is to argue that Aquinas’ theory was actually a response a reaction to his socio-economic context and since that has changed, natural law is no longer relevant.
Aquinas thought that he discovered the primary precepts through human reason, as God designed. However, arguably it is a simpler explanation that Aquinas was simply figuring out what would have been good for people in his socio-economic condition. That the resulting principles actually come from God was only in his imagination
what is the argument from natural law and cross-cultural moral variations
Fletcher argues a weakness of Aquinas’ view approach is a cross-cultural moral differences. Aquinas claimed that conscience involved the ability to reason to know the primary precepts, to guide us towards our good ends (telos). But if that was true, it should be universally true of all humans regardless of their culture. we would expect to find moral agreement.
- Different cultures have different moral views eg some cultures accept pre-marital while others reject. Not only is there disagreement but it tends to fall along cultural boundaries. Culture and social condition is the better explanation of what determines our moral compass, not telos. This was the view of psychologists like Freud and Skinner - scientific approach
what critiques is there of the cross-cultural approach
Aquinas would disagree - he would say that even though there’s disagreement there is still a core set of moral values all cultures share which is very similar to the primary precepts. Everyone agrees that killing for no reason is wrong. Moral disagreement could just be the result of sinful and corrupt cultures and original sin.
what is the evaluation of natural law and cross-cultural moral variation
Richard Dawkins argues our moral sense partly came from evolution - which programmed us with empathy to care about other people, reproduce, educate etc all of which is evolutionary advantages.
- there is just a practical requirement for a society to exist. imagine a culture started allowing killing and stealing -it would fall apart- and end. So no special explanation of cross-cultural moral codes is needed
- conscience isn’t God’s design directing us towards our telos. It’s from evolution, social conditioning and social practicality
- Aquinas’ whole theory of natural law is better explained by scientific analysis of the nature vs nurture that goes into human moral decision making. Freud’s scientific approach is a simpler and better explanation of our moral compass than Aquinas’ teleological approach. so, we do not need the idea of natural law built into us by a God as our telos- unnecessary hypothesis
what is situation ethics view on sex ethics (religious)
when applying SE to pre, extra and homo.
As long as homosexuality of premarital sex has a loving outcome, Fletcher thinks its good.
what is Fletcher’s view on homosexuality
if someone is in a very homophobic society which could threaten their life if discovered, then fletcher might be in favour of not acting on homosexual impulses in that situation for their own protection. However, if someone would not face violent homophobia, then it seems more loving to allow them to live like they want to.
what is Fletcher’s view on pre-marital sex
Fletcher would be against it if someone was pressured into it, either by others or by society in general. However, if all people involved ar happy and it’s a genuine choice, then Fletcher would say it had a loving outcome and there’s no ethical issue with it
what is fletchers view on extra marital sex
Fletcher would be against it in most cases because cheating on someone is not exercising agape. However, in rare cases, Fletcher would accept it eg mrs bergmeier were adultery has a loving outcome
what is the counter to fletchers arguments
Fletcher ignores most of the commandments in the bible. the bible is clearly against homosexuality and pre/extra marital sex, so fletchers theory is not being true to Christin ethics.
- Mouw’s critique = Mouw pointed out that Jesus made other commands. it makes no sense for Jesus to have only wanted us to follow the command of agape - then why would Jesus make other commandments
- pope pius xii criticised se on the grounds that christ himself frequently spoke of the importance of following all the commandments (Matthew 19:17 AND John 14:15. Fletcher is therefore unwittingly challenging Christ.
