A Summary: Sexual Ethics

You should be able to outline the debate surrounding a number of key issues. These should include marital/non-marital/extra-marital sex, & homosexuality. You should also be able to explain the distinction between absolutist (Kantian, Natural law) and relativist (Utilitarian or situationist) approaches to sexual ethics.

Sex and Marriage

Marital sex is sex which occurs within marriage (i.e. between husband and wife).

Non-marital sex occurs between unmarried parties (e.g. boyfriend & girlfriend, etc.).

Extra-marital sex occurs between a married and unmarried individual (i.e. adultery).

The Bible regards marital sex as normal and moral behaviour. Saint Paul says that marriage “is no sin” (1 Corinthians 7) – sex in that context is fine. However, non-marital sexual activity is strongly discouraged. Extra-marital sex is also regarded as a sexual crime, being condemned in the Ten Commandments (“You shall not commit adultery” Exodus 20).

The majority of churches today follow these biblical principles, encouraging marriage as the ‘right’ environment for sex. The Roman Catholic Church gives clear teaching on this: “every genital act must be within the framework of marriage”. Some liberal Christians disagree; the psychologist Jack Dominion argues that non-marital sexual relationships may be acceptable to Christians if they are an expression of love.

Homosexuality

Traditionally, Christians have condemned homosexual sex as immoral. Perhaps their main reason for doing so has been the teaching of the Bible, which takes a very negative view: Homosexual sex is to be punishable by death (Leviticus 20:13).

Some Christians have also argued that homosexuality is wrong because it contradicts the order of God’s creation. God made humans as man and woman, so that they could be partners together (Genesis 2). Therefore, homosexuality seems to be unintended.

The Catholic Church has further argued that homosexuality contradicts the intended purpose of sexual activity: procreation. The natural order suggests that sex is intended to produce children; homosexual relationships fail to live up to this ideal.

Again, some liberal Christians take a more positive view. Controversially, in 2003 an openly gay man, Gene Robinson, was made Anglican archbishop of New Hampshire (USA). Some in the Church of England argue that loving homosexual relationships are acceptable.

Absolutist and Relativist Approaches to Sexual Ethics

An absolutist approach to ethics emphasises fixed moral rules which hold in all times and in all places. If we apply this approach to sexual ethics, it might lead us to say that certain acts are always right or wrong. Conservative religious approaches (like the R.C. Church) tend to be absolutist, stating that certain sexual activities are fundamentally displeasing to God.

One absolutist approach is Natural Moral Law as interpreted by the Catholic Church in for example Humanae Vitae (1968) – the view that the morality of actions may be known through the exercise of natural human reason. This applies in the Catholic argument that homosexuality is wrong because it contradicts the intended purpose of sex (procreation). It is criticised on the basis of a rational argument (i.e. not just the Bible). Homosexuality is seen as “intrinsically disordered”, a view attacked by Stephen Fry in a debate with Ann Widdicombe you can view on Youtube.

A relativist approach by contrast states that there are no fixed moral rules – principles vary from culture to culture, so they cannot be true in an absolute sense. In terms of sexual ethics, this suggests that moral conventions (e.g. no sex before marriage) need not apply. Some relativists reject the whole idea of sexual morality, emphasising a ‘liberated’ attitude.

Arguments in Favour of Religious or Absolutist Sexual Ethics such as Catholic Natural Law

· If humans were created by God, then surely he designed their sexual organs for a purpose. Mere pleasure ignores God’s intentions (love, child-birth).

· Sex is a sacred activity; it should be entered into with reverence and the commitment of marriage (during a marriage ceremony, Anglicans vow “with my body I thee worship”).

· Since the sexual revolution of the 1960s, Britain has witnessed increased numbers of teenage pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections. Fixed moral and religious rules would have prevented these problems.

· Rule Utilitarianism might support religious and absolutist principles. For example, as a general rule, adultery inflicts pain and brings a poor quality of pleasure. Thus, it is wrong.

· But, some people argue that an absolute ethical approach to sexuality is repressive and prevents people from expressing something that is fundamentally part of who they are. In countries where homosexuality is still punished severely, gay people live repressed lives: this can lead to psychological problems that cause harm. In countries where Roman Catholicism is the dominant religion, contraception is often forbidden leading to unwanted pregnancies and higher incidence of STIs.

Arguments in Favour of a more Relativist Sexual Ethics such as Situation Ethics

· Non-marital sex can be an expression of real love; why have rules against it? Situation Ethics (Joseph Fletcher) emphasises the value of love above any fixed rule.

· The Bible  can be rejected as a definitive moral code; why not choose our own ethics?

· Traditional sexual morality developed in pre-modern societies, when people got married in their teens. This simply is not relevant to today’s world.

· Surely the only sensible measure of sex is pleasure and pain (Utilitarianism). Certain acts which have been condemned (masturbation, homosexual sex) cause nobody any harm.

· But, people are worried that a more relativist view of sexual ethics will lead to a permissive society. Some people believe that there are aspects of sexuality, such as rape and paedophilia that are objectively morally wrong and that there should be absolute rules to prevent them.