Ethics Short Essay

Homosexuality and the Evolving World

When we as creatures of superior intellect and morality are presented with a conflict of interest, we turn to sophisticated ethical arguments between each other for the pursuit of truth and validity. In an article entitled “Why Shouldn’t Tommy and Jim Have Sex? A Defense of Homosexuality”, John Corvino constitutes a very powerful argument for homosexual matrimony. In what seems to be a statement to trump all rebuttals against the gay lifestyle, Corvino successfully laments on four of the “most popular kinds of arguments that seek to establish the immorality of homosexuality” (Landau 237). However, since this is an ethical argument that he is making, the opinions of all parties should be adhered, including mine. I as an individual and an American believe that every person has a right to marriage, including gays and lesbians. Although I make this claim and have no good reason to think homosexual sex is wrong because of the prevalence of gay and lesbian couples today, my environment growing up and my upbringing has had no homosexual influence or involvement. Therefore, I find homosexuality strange and unnatural. This is a serious issue to keep in mind while commenting on Corvino’s compelling narrative of homosexual partnership. To touch upon what Corvino has stated very briefly, he rejects many types of arguments, the first being how homosexuality is unnatural which leads to its immorality. Corvino defines the terms “natural” and “unnatural” not as what is the norm and what isn’t. Saying that, would mean that if you “…read Sanskrit, pilot ships, play the mandolin, breed goats, or write with both hands…” (239), you are not committing an immoral act, just an unnatural one. In this case, and in many others in Corvino’s article, he is always technically speaking; a technique that philosophers and lawyers often use to convey a point “legally”.
Corvino speaks to the everyday man’s hypocritical statements in which someone would argue against homosexuality because it violates an organ’s principal purpose (sexually speaking). Society today has strayed far away from tradition and the synonymous religious experience that was so prevalent centuries ago. Simply speaking, people now have sex for fun more than ever, and with the technologies available today, contraception has never seemed so socially accepted. What Corvino argues is that if you are going to blame homosexuals for having sex for fun and ultimately not accomplishing what sex was meant for (procreation), you have to judge and blame everyone else who does this as well, including a good amount of heterosexuals. Corvino makes an important point relating a homosexual couple (sexually) to an infertile couple that still partakes in sexual intercourse.
The final point he brings up concerns the role of homosexuality and its violation of biblical teaching. Although Leviticus 18:22 famously quoted “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination”, Corvino uses this and other verses surrounding it to portray that these commands from God must be understood and interpreted in their historical context. As a Roman Catholic I believe what Corvino is trying to say because we do many things that God has previously forbidden without regret. We eat pork even if it was written that the pig should never be consumed. Because of its historical context, owning slaves was an issue back then that people needed God’s Holy word on. Today, that seems inhumane in every aspect. Though Corvino makes this seemingly persuasive argument, I personally disapprove of his technique. The examples that he uses for many of his arguments often do not relate to the issue of homosexuality. That is, he uses the reasoning for other issues to justify Tommy and Jim’s predisposition to the gay culture.
Here is how I see it. Corvino is trying to defend his friends Tommy and Jim, a gay couple who seem to be in great shape emotionally and mentally. For John, making this argument seems like the right thing to do, as they are his friends. The truth is, not every gay Tommy is an accountant and not every gay Jim is a botany professor. Not every gay couple has “been together for fourteen years, the last five of which they’ve lived in a Victorian house that they’ve lovingly restored” (238). In their case, the relationship is very successful, and Corvino himself is signifying that every relationship, gay or straight, can be like this. He does not realize the responsibility he is assuming by trying to defend homosexuality against a world that is not prepared for it.
Although we as a people are making progress with gay rights by leaps and bounds, it will take time to grow a culture of people who will accept gay marriage as a normal and prevalent thing. Until then we are in a transitional period; a shift. The same has happened when we abolished slavery in the late 1800’s. The same has happened in the Civil Rights movement. We are a people that will grow and change. If you ask me what I think of homosexuality, I will tell you that like the famous philosopher Voltaire once said, “I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.” Likewise, homosexual couples have every right to get married. There is no good reason, I believe, to think homosexual sex is wrong, but for me it simply is.