Roman Catholic

Natural Law

Church of England

More situational

Kant

Apply categorical imperative (3 versions)

Utilitarian

Distinguish between Act and Rule

Contraception

Anything that breaks intrinsic relationship between procreation and sex is wrong- natural law, primary precept is procreation, secondary precept no contraception.

1920s & 1930s , attitudes change– contraception is accepted (e.g. to limit population growth )

By 1968, C of E accepts morality of contraception.

(Conscience is the key!)

 Kant emphasises the dignity and autonomy of individuals.  Use of contraception can be universalised, and choice means treating people as an end in themselves.

Utilitarians would approve of the good consequences of birth control eg lower population and greater personal happiness and pleasure.

Pre- Marital Sex

Augustine’s view of marriage: Faithfulness companionship & procreation are the elements.

(1 Cor 7 ) Self – Control “it’s better to marry than to burn with passion”

“God’s perfect will… is chastity before marriage and lifelong fidelity” 1998 Lambeth

1 Cor 6:18 “Shun Fornication!” Paul argues it is a sin against your body.

It depends if the woman/man is being pressurised: a woman cannot be a “means” to an “end”, and a man should never treat a woman as such (and vice versa).

As long as sex is responsible ie not exploiting people, causing unwanted pregnancy etc a utilitarian would see it as maximising pleasure and happiness.

Homosexuality

“Intrinsically Disordered” Humane Vitae 1968.

Homosexuality is like a disease – something in which is “against nature” – unnatural, Romans 1:26 “God gave people up to a debased existence” as men and women “exchanged natural relations for unnatural”

 1998 Lambeth Conf – debated homosexuality to try and prevent a split between Liberal (US) and African/ Evangelical.

A call for “Deep + Dispassionate Study”  and conversation between traditional and liberal views.  US Bishop Gene Robinson is practising gay.

The difficulty is: if most people are “straight”, can they universalise the idea of homosexual behaviour?  Kantians argue we should be able to ignore our own gender/sexual preferences so homosexuality should present no problem.

Problem that the majority may wish to eliminate this practice as it offends them. (Problem of minorities for utilitarians). Mill would argue for a rule that we respect each others’ sexual preferences and guarantee certain freedoms to maximise social happiness.