Prejudice And Homosexuality Richard D Mohr Summary
Prejudice and Homosexuality For many years homosexuality has been frowned upon in America. Gays and lesbians are denied many rights in the land of the free. If they want to be in the military they aren’t suppose to disclose their sexual orientation, so they can’t make this the home of the brave either. Homosexuality is when someone is attracted to their same gender, sexually and/or emotionally. In the article Prejudice and homosexuality By Richard D Mohr, there are statistics about homosexuality that are a little out of date. There is a statistic from 1948 and 1993. The gay civil rights movement changes rapidly. We are year after year becoming less prejudice. I do agree with the author though, that Gay-Hate is unethical but something very real that America deals with. There still is a lot of Americans who are against homosexuality and feel it is immoral, unnatural, and unacceptable. People should not be treated differently because of their choice of sexual interest. This is ethically wrong and devalues people. We are going to explore homosexuality in three different ethical reasoning’s Utilitarian, Kantian, and Natural.
…show more content…
Utilitarian reasoning has to do with making the most people happy.
You would look at homosexuality most likely on a situational basis. Utilitarian’s would find homosexuality acceptable and morally correct based on the biggest amount of pleasure for the biggest number of people. For example in a Muslim community within a Muslim family and culture, being openly gay could cause lots of harassment and even death in countries like Saudi. In this culture lives Amir, Amir Feels like he is attracted to men. If he is seen holding a man’s hand he can be put to death. This would make it unethical to be gay because it would cause more pain and strife to that person and the community than pleasure and
happiness. Kantian reasoning would have us reason based on what would seem acceptable from every ones point of view. Especially the person I was practicing Homosexuality with, whether sexual relations or a committed relationship. If there was any form of deceit than it would be morally wrong. For example I coerced someone to have homosexual relations with me and I didn’t tell them I had a sexually transmitted disease, than that would be deemed according to Kant’s reasoning as unethical. Another example is if I was to say if you don’t do the dishes I won’t be with you anymore. So if the practice of homosexuality is acceptable to the other person in your relation than it is morally right. Natural reasoning condones what would seem humanly natural or for continuing human nature. In this ethical reasoning I feel there is the most space for interpretations. What we really consider natural or unnatural. Some would say that the male and female genitals are only supposed to be used for reproduction. If you can’t produce babies the sexual act is considered unnatural. Then there is the evolutionary argument that homosexuals are nature creating its own population control. It’s really difficult to say exactly what is and isn’t human nature. For this type of reasoning you would resort to biological happenings in the brain and other scientific arguments to say whether being gay is natural [moral] or unnatural [immoral]. No matter which reasoning defines you, a decision needs to be made, is homosexuality wrong? Gay people face harassment every single day. I remember in the news when people protested at Port Charlotte high school when they opened the Gay Straight Alliance club for students. They held up signs reading “God hates fags”, and “God hates fag enablers “. These types of things are very hurtful. In the media there has been more than one suicide of a teenager because of the discrimination they’ve received for their sexuality. So whether or not it condemns the act in your religion, makes you uncomfortable, or seems unnatural decide whether it’s your place to choose how others live their lives. People are dying because of the way people treat them. We can make a difference even if it’s a kind word to a gay or lesbian person. It’s your choice choose life, or choose to speak words of death into people’s lives.
Utilitarian reasoning has to do with making the most people happy.
You would look at homosexuality most likely on a situational basis. Utilitarian’s would find homosexuality acceptable and morally correct based on the biggest amount of pleasure for the biggest number of people. For example in a Muslim community within a Muslim family and culture, being openly gay could cause lots of harassment and even death in countries like Saudi. In this culture lives Amir, Amir Feels like he is attracted to men. If he is seen holding a man’s hand he can be put to death. This would make it unethical to be gay because it would cause more pain and strife to that person and the community than pleasure and
happiness. Kantian reasoning would have us reason based on what would seem acceptable from every ones point of view. Especially the person I was practicing Homosexuality with, whether sexual relations or a committed relationship. If there was any form of deceit than it would be morally wrong. For example I coerced someone to have homosexual relations with me and I didn’t tell them I had a sexually transmitted disease, than that would be deemed according to Kant’s reasoning as unethical. Another example is if I was to say if you don’t do the dishes I won’t be with you anymore. So if the practice of homosexuality is acceptable to the other person in your relation than it is morally right. Natural reasoning condones what would seem humanly natural or for continuing human nature. In this ethical reasoning I feel there is the most space for interpretations. What we really consider natural or unnatural. Some would say that the male and female genitals are only supposed to be used for reproduction. If you can’t produce babies the sexual act is considered unnatural. Then there is the evolutionary argument that homosexuals are nature creating its own population control. It’s really difficult to say exactly what is and isn’t human nature. For this type of reasoning you would resort to biological happenings in the brain and other scientific arguments to say whether being gay is natural [moral] or unnatural [immoral]. No matter which reasoning defines you, a decision needs to be made, is homosexuality wrong? Gay people face harassment every single day. I remember in the news when people protested at Port Charlotte high school when they opened the Gay Straight Alliance club for students. They held up signs reading “God hates fags”, and “God hates fag enablers “. These types of things are very hurtful. In the media there has been more than one suicide of a teenager because of the discrimination they’ve received for their sexuality. So whether or not it condemns the act in your religion, makes you uncomfortable, or seems unnatural decide whether it’s your place to choose how others live their lives. People are dying because of the way people treat them. We can make a difference even if it’s a kind word to a gay or lesbian person. It’s your choice choose life, or choose to speak words of death into people’s lives.