The chapter begins with the author talking about gay pride and how over time, the public's view has changed and leaned more to supporting them. Furthermore, the author describes a viewpoint made by a woman named Michele Bachmann. Bachmann's definition of …show more content…
homosexuality is that, "It is personal bondage, personal despair, and personal enslavement." The reason this is important is because of we examine her opinion through ethical subjectivism, she is right and anyone else with an opinion is right as well.
That is one flawed issue with the theory, as stated by the book. The theory began from a simple idea but over time, it became more sophisticated and more and more people supported it. This is bad because the problems with this theory as stated by the book is that it cannot account for disagreement and, it implies that we're alway right. This first stage of ethical subjectivism is called simple subjectivism. Simple subjectivism cannot be correct because, if it was right, then there will never be any disagreement. The same goes for the second flaw, if simple subjectivism were correct then it would be impossible for our moral evaluations to be wrong. The second stage of this theory is called emotivism. In summary, emotivism is that we don't really have moral judgements all we say are, "...mere expressions of attitude, which cannot be false." Another problem is that, "...emotivism cannot explain the role reason plays in ethics." In addition, the author changes the topic to reason and the role it has on ethics. In summary, it says
that reason plays a role in our judgement and that our reasons are easily swayed and might not always be right or wrong. The last little bit of subjectivism that the author covered was whether or not there are proofs in ethics. The problem with ethics is that you cannot prove something unlike science can. Because ethics cannot be proven like science can, ethicists rely on rational thinking to make and prove their points. In finality, rational thinking is giving reasons, analyzing arguments, and justifying principles.
The chapter concludes with coming back to the topic of homosexuality. In essence, all the pro-gay activists want is equal rights that a straight couple can have. People make the argument that homosexuality should be condemned because it is unnatural but who is to say what unnatural is? The author then examines the contents of the bible and how it condemns homosexuality. Furthermore, why does everyone believe what the bible has to say when it says other outrages things. The main point of this examination is to show how we need to examine problems on their own merits.