A Defense of the Perverted Faculty Argument against Homosexual Sex

Heythrop Journal 56 (5):751-758 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Critics of homosexual activity often appeal to some form of natural law theory as a basis for their arguments. According to one version of natural law theory, actions that “pervert” or misuse a bodily faculty are immoral. In this paper, I argue that this “perverted faculty argument” provides a successful account of good and evil action. Several objections are assessed and found inadequate.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,610

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-03-25

Downloads
473 (#40,117)

6 months
50 (#88,642)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Tim Hsiao
University of Arkansas Grantham

Citations of this work

Sex and Sexuality.Raja Halwani - 2018 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The elements of moral philosophy.James Rachels & Stuart Rachels - 2015 - [Dubuque]: McGraw-Hill Education. Edited by James Rachels.
Natural law and natural rights.John Finnis - 1979 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Real Essentialism.David S. Oderberg - 2007 - New York: Routledge.
Good and Evil.Peter Geach - 1956 - Analysis 17 (2):33 - 42.

View all 13 references / Add more references