John Corvino's Arguments For The Morality Of Homosexuality

Good Essays
Natural law theorists claim that actions are deemed right just because they are looked at as natural and something that is unnatural is immoral. However, there are different understandings of what is natural and what is not, which can make support for this theory hard. Examples such as homosexuality, give a strong argument against the natural law theory. We will look at the work of John Corvino as he explains the arguments for the immorality of homosexuality, but also the reasons why these arguments are not strong evidence. With these examples in mind, the fact that something is unnatural is not a good enough reason to claim something immoral.
A natural law theorist says that actions are right because they are natural and wrong because they
…show more content…
People’s different values and morals play a role in defining what they believe. Many people find homosexuality to be not natural, and it goes against many people’s views. However, there is also a lot of people who argue in favor of homosexuality and find nothing about it unnatural. For those people who do think it is not natural they normally use the argument that this kind of sex can not reproduce, therefore it is not right because the point of sex is to reproduce. Many times the Bible will also be used to refer to verses that condemn acts of homosexual sex. People who favor the morality of homosexuality find many things wrong with these arguments. To say that the only purpose of sex is to reproduce would be wrong because there are many examples of heterosexual couples who have sex without the intention of conception. Medical problems, protected sex, and just sex for fun are all reasons why…show more content…
He examines the core arguments against homosexual sex such as: it is abnormal, the idea that homosexuals choose to be that way, it goes against the purpose of our sexual reproductive organs, it is disgusting and how it goes against biblical teachings. He first looks at the meaning of homosexual sex being “unnatural”. It is hard for him to claim that one definition of natural is right compared to another person’s. He does argue against the idea of natural law theorists by saying that many things that are important in our society are not natural, and there are many natural things that people detest. He says, “If the unnaturalness charge is to be more than empty rhetorical flourish, those who levy it must specify what they mean”(Shafer-Landau 239). Disease and death are natural things that people do not like. Cancer is natural but no one believes that it is just or good. Then there are unnatural things people enjoy in life such as medications and a democratic government. These examples refer back to Corvino’s quote, challenging the true intentions of those who argue things based on naturalness. Another challenge to the naturalness of homosexuality is the idea that a homosexual person chooses to live that lifestyle, they were not born that way. It is hard to believe this is true however due to the fact that most heterosexuals cannot
Get Access