Analyse the extent to which religious teaching on sexual ethics is helpful (20 marks)

Created by: B.B.Revision
Created on: 08-03-24 12:25


	Analyse the extent to which religious teaching on sexual ethics is helpful (20 marks)
	Advantages Religious approaches to sexual ethics have a firm foundation and are more coherent - Christians understand that the sexual ethics found in the Bible are rooted in God's design for humanity and his creation of sex as a sacred union between one man and one woman. It is on this basis that homosexuality, adultery etc. are prohibited. Religious teaching on sexual ethics is for our good, as it helps us to flourish in the way God intended Even in modern society, many ethical principles are rooted in the Bible and the Western mind is heavily influenced by Christian teachings. Even J. S. Mill's Harm Principle requires that each of the parties involved in a sexual relationship are considered equally as valuable which, had Christianity not spread across Europe, would be unlikely to be the case - in Roman society, women were treated as inferior and slavery was commonplace and an accepted norm. Religious teaching on ethics in general will subliminally be helpful in making decisions regarding sexual ethics, whether we like it or not The Bible does not paint the repressive picture of sex often perceived, with the book of Song of Songs for example being a love song between two lovers, and marriage considered a covenant intended to demonstrate Christ's love for the Church Modern society is over-sexualised and this is damaging to society - Lord Devlin argued against the 1957 Wolfenden Report (which recommended the decriminalisation of homosexuality in England and Wales) on the basis that, for a society to survive, there needs to be some moral standards imposed upon everyone, as a society is "held by the invisible strands of common thought". Religious morality provides a universal sexual ethic which society can unite around and thus does not cause as much harm to society as libertarian approaches. Devlin argued that if the average member of a society viewed homosexuality with "intolerance, indignation or disgust", then this was a sign that making such a thing permissible would have a disruptive effect on society Devlin could argue back against Mill, claiming that the private and public are too heavily intertwined for the distinction made by the Harm Principle to work - private life should be subject to regulation if it could have a significant impact on public life. The way in which children are raised can have a significant impact on the relationships they have later in life and the way they interact in the wider world. Religious teaching is therefore helpful as it prevents this disruption in social norms within a society William Barclay would respond to the claims of situation ethics by arguing that man has not "come of age" and we still require rules and moral guidelines. We do not naturally do that which is most loving and are not capable judges of what is good. Religious teaching is therefore necessary to teach us good sexual ethical conduct	Disadvantages While it may have a firm foundation and be coherent, it is based on assumptions that are not held in modern western society, since the fall of the Christendom, such as the idea that humans were created by God and with purpose. Some may argue that, given that evolutionary theory provides an alternative explanation for human existence, the sexual ethical teaching in the Bible is now superfluous - post-modernism would dictate that there isn't only one overarching narrative to the world and our purpose is whatever we want it to be The Harm Principle is sufficient in a Libertarian society - as long as we hold to a contractarian ethic when it comes to sex, and no harm is done, there should be no restriction on the kind of sexual ethics engaged in and this allows people to be free to pursue their own goods without the oppression of the government or religious organisations. This would also prevent the damage caused by the suppression of sexual desires and behaviours The shame associated with sexual behaviour in Christianity is damaging - St. Augustine viewed this shame as 'just' being grounded in the Fall of mankind, and the fact that we no-longer have control over our lusts. Freud argued that these feeling of shame lead to repression, which in turn leads to mental illness. Stephen Fry took this idea further, arguing that, while secular attitudes to sex are not perfect, they are significantly better than religious approaches, as celibacy is ultimately what led to the ********** priest scandal, as such a repressive attitude to sex is not natural or normal. Mill argued against Devlin's view about the feelings of the majority in society, saying that this is adopting "the logic of persecutors". He said only the Harm Principle is able to correctly draw the line between public and private life without enabling persecution, and instead allowing individual flourishing The legalisation of homosexuality and the rise in sexual permissiveness since the 1960s has not caused the damage predicted and children raised by parents of the same sex do not seem less well-off than those raised with heterosexual parents. Furthermore, Devlin's argument seems to require that there is no social change in any sphere of life, not just sexual ethics, given that the opinion of the majority would remain unchallenged in an attempt to maintain social cohesion. But social development is necessary for a society to progress. Joseph Fletcher would argue that religious views about sexual ethics were useful in the past, when we were savage and not as morally developed. Now that man has "come of age" (J. A. T. Robinson), religious teaching is no longer necessary, because we are capable of enacting agape love which is, "the only ruling norm" (Fletcher)
	Evaluation While it can certainly be argued that complete agreement with religious teaching on sexual ethics is unlikely if someone is not a believer and lives in western society, it can be argued that the view that there needs to be any ethical principles at all regarding sex demonstrates the lingering influence of the Christendom on the Western mind. It follows logically from viewing human nature and purpose through a scientific lens that our purpose is to reproduce as much as possible, to promote the survival of the fittest but this is not what the majority consider to be right, as value is placed on the autonomy of the individuals involved. Furthermore, while religious teachings can be accused of being repressive, in the Bible sex is considered something to be enjoyed and celebrated when it occurs within the boundaries instigated by God, and reproduction is not the sole purpose of sexual intercourse. Religious teaching on sexual ethics therefore is helpful, as it guides individuals to the ways in which they will find the most sexual fulfilment, pointing them back to God's original design. Regardless of whether one has the same postulates about human nature and purpose, it can be seem historically that society flourishes best when the familial structures designated by God are maintained, making religious teaching helpful.

Analyse the extent to which religious teaching on sexual ethics is helpful (20 marks)

Advantages

Religious approaches to sexual ethics have a firm foundation and are more coherent - Christians understand that the sexual ethics found in the Bible are rooted in God's design for humanity and his creation of sex as a sacred union between one man and one woman. It is on this basis that homosexuality, adultery etc. are prohibited. Religious teaching on sexual ethics is for our good, as it helps us to flourish in the way God intended
Even in modern society, many ethical principles are rooted in the Bible and the Western mind is heavily influenced by Christian teachings. Even J. S. Mill's Harm Principle requires that each of the parties involved in a sexual relationship are considered equally as valuable which, had Christianity not spread across Europe, would be unlikely to be the case - in Roman society, women were treated as inferior and slavery was commonplace and an accepted norm. Religious teaching on ethics in general will subliminally be helpful in making decisions regarding sexual ethics, whether we like it or not
The Bible does not paint the repressive picture of sex often perceived, with the book of Song of Songs for example being a love song between two lovers, and marriage considered a covenant intended to demonstrate Christ's love for the Church
Modern society is over-sexualised and this is damaging to society - Lord Devlin argued against the 1957 Wolfenden Report (which recommended the decriminalisation of homosexuality in England and Wales) on the basis that, for a society to survive, there needs to be some moral standards imposed upon everyone, as a society is "held by the invisible strands of common thought". Religious morality provides a universal sexual ethic which society can unite around and thus does not cause as much harm to society as libertarian approaches. Devlin argued that if the average member of a society viewed homosexuality with "intolerance, indignation or disgust", then this was a sign that making such a thing permissible would have a disruptive effect on society
Devlin could argue back against Mill, claiming that the private and public are too heavily intertwined for the distinction made by the Harm Principle to work - private life should be subject to regulation if it could have a significant impact on public life. The way in which children are raised can have a significant impact on the relationships they have later in life and the way they interact in the wider world. Religious teaching is therefore helpful as it prevents this disruption in social norms within a society
William Barclay would respond to the claims of situation ethics by arguing that man has not "come of age" and we still require rules and moral guidelines. We do not naturally do that which is most loving and are not capable judges of what is good. Religious teaching is therefore necessary to teach us good sexual ethical conduct

Disadvantages

While it may have a firm foundation and be coherent, it is based on assumptions that are not held in modern western society, since the fall of the Christendom, such as the idea that humans were created by God and with purpose. Some may argue that, given that evolutionary theory provides an alternative explanation for human existence, the sexual ethical teaching in the Bible is now superfluous - post-modernism would dictate that there isn't only one overarching narrative to the world and our purpose is whatever we want it to be
The Harm Principle is sufficient in a Libertarian society - as long as we hold to a contractarian ethic when it comes to sex, and no harm is done, there should be no restriction on the kind of sexual ethics engaged in and this allows people to be free to pursue their own goods without the oppression of the government or religious organisations. This would also prevent the damage caused by the suppression of sexual desires and behaviours
The shame associated with sexual behaviour in Christianity is damaging - St. Augustine viewed this shame as 'just' being grounded in the Fall of mankind, and the fact that we no-longer have control over our lusts. Freud argued that these feeling of shame lead to repression, which in turn leads to mental illness. Stephen Fry took this idea further, arguing that, while secular attitudes to sex are not perfect, they are significantly better than religious approaches, as celibacy is ultimately what led to the ********** priest scandal, as such a repressive attitude to sex is not natural or normal.
Mill argued against Devlin's view about the feelings of the majority in society, saying that this is adopting "the logic of persecutors". He said only the Harm Principle is able to correctly draw the line between public and private life without enabling persecution, and instead allowing individual flourishing
The legalisation of homosexuality and the rise in sexual permissiveness since the 1960s has not caused the damage predicted and children raised by parents of the same sex do not seem less well-off than those raised with heterosexual parents. Furthermore, Devlin's argument seems to require that there is no social change in any sphere of life, not just sexual ethics, given that the opinion of the majority would remain unchallenged in an attempt to maintain social cohesion. But social development is necessary for a society to progress. Joseph Fletcher would argue that religious views about sexual ethics were useful in the past, when we were savage and not as morally developed. Now that man has "come of age" (J. A. T. Robinson), religious teaching is no longer necessary, because we are capable of enacting agape love which is, "the only ruling norm" (Fletcher)

Evaluation

While it can certainly be argued that complete agreement with religious teaching on sexual ethics is unlikely if someone is not a believer and lives in western society, it can be argued that the view that there needs to be any ethical principles at all regarding sex demonstrates the lingering influence of the Christendom on the Western mind. It follows logically from viewing human nature and purpose through a scientific lens that our purpose is to reproduce as much as possible, to promote the survival of the fittest but this is not what the majority consider to be right, as value is placed on the autonomy of the individuals involved. Furthermore, while religious teachings can be accused of being repressive, in the Bible sex is considered something to be enjoyed and celebrated when it occurs within the boundaries instigated by God, and reproduction is not the sole purpose of sexual intercourse. Religious teaching on sexual ethics therefore is helpful, as it guides individuals to the ways in which they will find the most sexual fulfilment, pointing them back to God's original design. Regardless of whether one has the same postulates about human nature and purpose, it can be seem historically that society flourishes best when the familial structures designated by God are maintained, making religious teaching helpful.

Get Revising

Analyse the extent to which religious teaching on sexual ethics is helpful (20 marks)