As this will surely be my most comprehensive collection of posts, I have decided to split it into multiple sections. I figure that it will feel less overwhelming if I do it this way. In this running series, I will be discussing the philosophy behind natural law as it applies to human sexuality. Many of the ideas I present here will not be my own and will merely be helpful summaries of other great thinkers. I do hope that I am able to add meaningful content, though, and I think, considering my somewhat unique position, I will be able to. Most importantly, what I'll be trying to do is collect and explain as best I can the underlying philosophy of traditional sexual morality. I have found very few places that provide both the initial argument and rigorous defenses against criticisms of the position. This is supposed to be just that.
More specifically, the whole argument will probably be presented this way (this is of course subject to change, and each section will probably take multiple posts):
- Background metaphysics
- How the background metaphysics applies to morality
- Natural law and sexual morality
- Individual posts addressing common objections
At any rate, the basic argument is this: that morality is an objective issue, and that questions concerning "good" and "bad" can be answered objectively. As morality applies to every human action and sexuality is a significant part of the human experience, questions concerning what counts as "good" sexual action and "bad" sexual action can likewise be answered objectively through philosophical analysis, without appealing to things like God or religion. As I noted, I am going to avoid most appeals to religious text or doctrine. (A post will follow explaining why this is the case.)
Please note that I do not have all the answers to every question. My goal is not that crazy. I just think that a helpful guide that tackles the issue and provides significant argument should be easily available on the internet---the place where most misinformation and perversion is spread. I want a person (especially a Catholic) to be able to say to himself "why is masturbation/homosexuality/contraception actually bad?" and be able to find a source that explains, at least generally, why. I think the modern world (including the Church) underestimates the value of this.
A short explanation on the title of the series. I don't mean to put "homosexual" in the "ugly" part of the saying as a means of ridiculing gay people. I just thought it rolled off the tongue in a sort of interesting way. I originally had "The Good, the Bad, and the Gay," but I thought that sounded a bit too much like an entertainment news story. Either way, I will be discussing exactly what it says: Goodness, Badness, and how these concepts apply to the homosexual person.
Wish me luck.