Sexual Ethics

Pre-marital sex

Sex before marriage

3 teachings from the RCC on pre-marital sex

1. ‘Marriage should be honoured by all and the marriage bed made pure’

2. ‘It is better to marry than be aflame with passion’

3. St Paul: ‘make no mistake, no fornicator will possess the Kingdom of God’

Sex is likened to…

A ‘holy mystery’

• Church teaches sex before marriage is wrong

• Meant to be saved only for a marriage partner

What does the Catholic church teach about pre-marital sex?

‘Carnal union is morally legitimate only’ in marriage

• Pre-marital sex is wrong

• Marriage is the only legitimate place for sex

Silver Ring Thing

• American evangelical movement (est. 2005)

• Key message: abstinence

• Every time someone has pre-marital sex they ‘cut up a piece of their heart’

• 2003 study: 6/10 broke the oath

What does the Church of England teach about pre-marital sex?

• Accepts within a loving, committed relationship progressing towards marriage

• 1995: most practical thing to accept pre-marital co-habitation as a step towards ‘a fuller and more complete commitment’

John Sentamu

• Archbishop

• Supported Prince William and Kate Middleton cohabiting

Rowan Williams (1989)

‘An absolute declaration that every partnership must conform to the patter of commitment […] is unreal and silly’

• If the Church accepted use of contraception, it could not maintain that sex was just for procreation

British Social Attitudes Survey (2017)

• 73% Anglicans, 76% Catholics did not think pre-marital sex was wrong

3 reasons for changing attitudes towards pre-marital sex

1. Ruth (OT): widower who has sex with a land-owner called Boaz - their child is King David’s grandfather

2. Jesus did not condemn pre-marital sex

3. Love seen as inherently important and so for a couple in a loving relationship en route to marriage it is acceptable

1960s ‘sexual revolution’

• Change in attitudes to sex

• Contraception/pill available to women - gave them control

• Pre-marital sex ‘normalised’

• Acceptance of co-habitation and single parents

Natural Law states that pre-marital sex is wrong because… (3)

1. Goes against primary precept reproduction - people outside of marriage unlikely to want to reproduce

2. Pre-marital sex may be an apparent good - doesn’t fit the human ideal (synderesis fails)

3. Marriage is a sacrament enshrined in human law - encouraged by God

Strengths of an NL approach to pre-marital sex

• Gives importance to marriage

• Stops unwanted pregnancies and STIs

• Clear-cut way of making moral decisions (i.e. knowing pre-marital sex is wrong)

• Explains how people make mistakes - real and apparent goods

Weaknesses of an NL approach to pre-marital sex

• Does not take into account sex for reasons other than reproduction e.g. pleasure

• Does not consider some marriages are not stable relationships

• Some long-term relationships are healthier/more stable than marriage - negates Primary Precepts

Situation Ethics states that pre-marital sex can be acceptable because… (4)

1. There are no absolutes - nothing is absolutely wrong

2. The four working principles can help make moral decisions

3. Although marriage is encouraged it is not an intrinsic good

4. Fletcher’s sacrificial adultery example

Strengths of an SE approach to pre-marital sex

• Sees sex as having a purpose other than procreation e.g. pleasure

• Recognises importance of all loving relationships, not just marriage

• No moral truths; individual is at the heart of the decision

Weaknesses of an SE approach to pre-marital sex

• Doesn’t give full importance to sanctity of marriage and sacredness of sex

• Vague on what constitutes ‘love’ and how it can be distinguished from lust

• Too easily twisted/can be made to fit different situations

• Doesn’t always consider the consequences

What is the Kantian Ethics approach to pre-marital sex?

• Duty: sex out of duty is not in line with KE. Sex must be given freely/consensually

• Cat 1: cannot universalise pre-marital sex. Marriage based on fidelity - fundamental

• Cat 2: marriage can’t be used only for sex. Casual sex treats the other person as a means therefore is unacceptable.

• Cat 3: people should respect marriage as it works towards the summum bonum

Believed anyone who had pre-marital sex should then marry

Strengths of a KE approach to pre-marital sex

• Marriage must be more than just sex

• Looks at the worth of both people within the marriage

• No abuse of sex (even within marriage) - protects the vulnerable

Weaknesses of a KE approach to pre-marital sex

• Kant saw sex as taking away our rational dignity - did not place importance on it as it is an animal instinct

• Kant called sex ‘degrading’ and treats a person as ‘an object of appetite’

• Kant would prohibit cohabitation as there is a lack of commitment

What is the Utilitarian approach to pre-marital sex?

• Act can be used to support sex due to the principle of utility

  • May also support casual sex - aim is to maximise pleasure

  • Accepts long-term consequences can’t be known ∴ ppl can’t be blamed

• Rule places emphasis on monogamy whether in marriage or not

Strengths of a util approach to pre-marital sex

• Protects vulnerable from abuse and being forced into prostitution

• Emphasis on monogamy (whether in marriage or not) - security

Weaknesses of a util approach to pre-marital sex

• Doesn’t value commitment of marriage as much as other ethical theories

• Ends justifies the means, meaning people could be used for sexual gain

Extramarital sex

When someone voluntarily has sex with someone other than their marriage partner

Give 3 Christian teachings on extramarital sex

1. ‘Do not commit adultery’ - 10 Commandments

2. ‘God will judge the adulterer’

3. Jesus: ‘Anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart’

John 8:1-11

Jesus saves a woman about to be stoned for adultery - hypocrisy

• ‘Let he without sin cast the first stone’

How have beliefs and teachings about extramarital sex changed over time?

• No shift in change or attitudes

• Christians teach forgiveness for the adulterer, but there is no justification

• 2015: 1/5 British adults admit to having an affair

Why does NL claim extramarital sex is wrong? (5)

• Goes against primary precept ordered society and defending the innocent

• Marriage is a sacrament

• Adultery is an apparent good - does not fit the human ideal

• Sex should only happen within marriage as the key purpose is to procreate

• Divine Law states adultery is wrong

Strengths of an NL approach to extramarital sex

• Gives importance to marriage - ideal state of human flourishing

• Clear moral guidance against adultery

• Emphasis on universal goods - reproduction, education, family

Weaknesses of an NL approach to extramarital sex

• Doesn’t consider that some marriages are not stable relationships

• Exclusion of non-procreatie sexual acts

• Disregard for individual autonomy and consent-based ethics

Situation Ethics argues extramarital sex can be acceptable because…

• There are no absolute rules, only do the most loving thing

• Sacrificial adultery - Mrs Bergmeier (forced labour camp)

• Fletcher on the Biblical example of the adulteress - ‘Jesus showed more concern about pride and hypocrisy than sex’

Strengths of an SE approach to extramarital sex

• Fletcher: marriage is not an intrinsic good - what matters is friendship between the couple

• Emphasises love over religious doctrine

• Requires consent to be aligned with agape

Weaknesses of an SE approach to extramarital sex

• Doesn’t protect vulnerable from exploitation

• Difficult to distinguish agape from eros in tense moral situations

• Too easily twisted and made to fit any situation

What is the Kantian approach to extramarital sex?

• Marriage based on promise-keeping and duties

• Kant argues adultery breaks the promise on which marriage is based

• Cat 1: you can’t universalise extra-marital sex. Marriage is based on fidelity

• Cat 3: people should respect marriage as it works towards the summum bonum

Strengths of a KE approach to extramarital sex

• Upholds human dignity - people treated as an ends not a means

• Emphasises duty and promise-keeping

• Provides a clear, rule-based answer that adultery is wrong

Weaknesses of a KE approach to extramarital sex

• Fails to account for unhappy relationships - absolutist and inflexible

• Struggle when duties conflict

• Narrow view of marriage (only for procreation)

What is the approach of Act util to extramarital sex?

• Can be used to support it - principle of utility - maximising pleasure

• Accepts long-term consequences can’t be known, therefore we can’t be blamed

• Bentham (Act) considered prostitution a dangerous occupation, exploitative - sex inside marriage offered protection

What is the approach of Rule util to extramarital sex?

• Follows the rules of the majority of society - extramarital sex is wrong

• Emphasis on monogamy

• Maintains the benefits of fidelity in marriage (stability)

What are the strengths of a util approach to extramarital sex?

• Act is flexible - looks at each encounter individually

• Act prioritises pleasure of people involved in the situation

• Act questions traditional rules that might not always lead to the best outcomes

• Rule protects vulnerable individuals

Weaknesses of a util approach to extramarital sex

• Acknowledges long-term consequences can’t be predicted, so shouldn’t be key in deciding whether to have sex

• Happiness/pleasure are subjective, difficult to quantify

3 Christian teachings on homosexuality

1. ‘You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination’

2. Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because inhabitants were practicising homosexual rape

What does the RCC teach about homosexuality?

• It is wrong and must not be practiced

• ‘Improper and misdirected use of sexual organs given the impossibility of conception’

• Homosexuals are accepted, but no the act of homosexuality (chastity)

What does the Church of England teach about homosexuality?

• Anglican: allows gay members of the clergy, but they must be celibate

• Church may bless gay marriage but not conduct same-sex marriage

• 2008: St Bart’s Church blessed 2 priests entering into a civil partnership

What is the United Reformed Church’s approach to homosexuality?

From 2016 conduct same-sex marriages

3 key teachings which influence the Church’s approach to homosexuality

• Some argue everyone seeks God’s forgiveness, regardless of sexual orientation

• Bible as a product of its time (advocates for slavery)

• Some believe only the words/actions of Christ are true - Jesus never spoke about homosexuality + taught God’s all-encompassing love

Natural Law argues that homosexuality is wrong because…

• Sex has a procreative purpose, which gay sex cannot lead to

• Doesn’t follow the primary precepts, cannot lead to a flourishing society

• John Finnis: ‘homosexuality is harmful and degrading’

Strengths of a NL approach to homosexuality

• Provides a clear moral framework

• Emphasis on human flourishing - can occur in any sort of relationship dynamic

• Liberal law argument: sex equally regarded as purposeful for recreation and loving ends

Weaknesses of a NL approach to homosexuality

• Perceived discrimination against LGBTQ+ identities

• Gay couples can’t have sex for procreation

• Rigid and inflexible

Situation Ethics argues that homosexuality can be acceptable because…

• Fletcher pointed out that ‘Jesus said nothing about…homosexuality’

• Bible is not a list of commands, but allows a loving and personal relationship with God

• Fletcher argues for homosexuality to be decriminalised

Strengths of an SE approach to homosexuality

• Person-centered: allows individuals to make decisions on intimacy

• Defends same-sex relationships by emphasising agape love over religion

• ‘Whether any form of sex is good or evil depends on whether love is fully served’ (Fletcher)

Weaknesses of an SE approach to homosexuality

• Agape love is subjective - can easily be twisted

• Vague on what constitutes love and how it can be distinguished from lust

• Doesn’t protect the vulnerable from exploitation

What is Kant’s approach to homosexuality?

• Procreation is the only way sex can be done out of good will

• Sexual behaviour is an animal instinct that takes away out rationality/autonomy

Strengths of a Kantian approach to homosexuality

• Avoids relativism and emotional bias

• Cat 2: Modern Kantians argue consensual, loving same-sex relationships respect autonomy and dignity

• Kant judges actions by rational intention, not identity - homosexuality in itself is not immoral

Weaknesses of a Kantian approach to homosexuality

• Kant condemned homosexuality as unnatural

• Overly rigid, lacks compassion - unrealistic and harsh

• Kant assumes sexual desire risks using others as a means - this misunderstands mutual, respectful relationships

What is Util’s approach to homosexuality?

• Bentham and Mill - progressive in approach to homosexuality

• Argued there was no logical reason that it should be criminality

Strengths of util’s approach to homosexuality

• Modern preference utilitarians (e.g. Peter Singer) reject idea that homosexuality causes offence - people should be free to pursue things that bring them happiness

• Act Util - support gay because PofU = maximise pleasure

• Rule Util - emphasis on monogamy, so in principle would support

• Flexible/context-based - allows moral views to adapt with society

Weaknesses of Util’s approach to homosexuality

• Risks oppressing minorities for the sake of the majority

• Focuses only on consequences, not inherent rights or dignity

• Happiness is subjective and hard to quantify