Sexual Morality

Conventional Sex is only morally acceptable within marriage, and perhaps only in ways that do not cut off the possibility of procreation. Arguments for the limit of marriage: 1. Social utility - The well-being of society depends on a stable family life, and sex outside of marriage destabilizes the family. 2. Personal excellence - Non-committed sex leads to a division between ones sexuality and other aspects of ones person, and consequently, to missing out on the highest form of relationship. (Punzo) Argument for the limit of procreation: Natural law theory - The natural end of human sexuality is to generate children who should be brought up properly. Thus, only sexual relations between a married man and woman that can lead to procreation are moral. Liberal Sex is judged morally like any other action: It is only immoral if it breaks some wellestablished moral rule. Examples of relevant rules are 1. not harming another person, and 2. not using another person, by undermining their voluntary informed consent through deception and coercion (Mappes). (Erickson adult prostitution is morally acceptable because it doesnt break any such rule.) A liberal may respond to the other positions by arguing that many forms of sexuality are moral but also imprudent. Sex with Love (Moderate) Sex is only moral if the partners are in love, since sex without love reduces a humanly significant activity to a merely mechanical performance, which leads to the negative consequences of dehumanization and psychological disintegration. Some argue that it is possible to love several people simultaneously. Feminist

Conventional sexual morality is oppressive to homosexuals and lesbians, and also to all women since it is tied to the patriarchical institutions of marriage and traditional sex roles. Conventional sexual morality is a double standard since in reality it applies most heavily, or perhaps only, to women. Some feminists are liberal about sexual relations. But others question the ability of women to freely consent to heterosexual sexual relations given their economic and social inequality, or argue that women are harmed by heterosexual sexual relations because their self-assertiveness and sense of self-possession are undermined (West), or because certain sexual practices are inherently degrading to women. Homosexuality Homosexuality, though common, is one of the most controversial sexual practices. Many people reject conventional sexual morality but also find homosexuality morally problematic. Some reasons given for this response: 1. Homosexual acts are repulsive and offensive. 2. Homosexuals are inherently promiscuous and cannot achieve enduring love relations. Consequently, homosexuality undermines the family structure (Social utility and Georgia sodomy statute; responses by White and Arthur). 3. Homosexuals have a greater tendency to molest children than heterosexuals. 4. Homosexuality is contrary to nature (Natural law theory and Georgia sodomy statute; responses by White Arthur). 5. Homosexuals are more likely to spread AIDS. As a sexual practice, it seriously threatens public health (Georgia sodomy statute; response by Arthur). There are strong counter arguments against each of these claims, including that they are based merely on opinion or murky concepts, or are not backed up by evidence. The challenge to non-conventional opponents of homosexuality is to draw a relevant difference between homo- and heterosexual sexual practices.