Love, Sex and Death

Running head: LOVE, SEX AND DEATH
Love, Sex and Death
Name of Student:
Name of the University:
Author note:

1LOVE, SEX AND DEATH
Almost everyone has an opinion about same-sex marriages and whether it should be
legalized. These points of view come from personal beliefs to what a marriage is, as is
mentioned in the Bible, to contrasting views coming from people who do not see same-sex
marriages as being anything different from traditional marriages (Bernstein 2016). Before
forming one’s own thought on the matter, it is important to ask yourselves that why should a
couple be forbidden to get married in front of family and friends, to show their commitment
to each other? As a nation, Australia has been trying for a long time to respond to the
society’s changing values and needs (Harris 2017). This paper aims to evaluate the different
views held by the New Natural Law, Mohr and Card on the legalization of same-sex
marriages.
The New Natural Law (NNL) theory, which is sometimes called the New Classical
Natural theory, was initiated in the 1960s by an individual named Germain Grisez (Finnis
2017). From the time of Aquinas, many philosophers have been trying to engage with
forming the correct definition of the natural moral law and making it the formative system
which agree with ethics to form a basic legal structure. The opposition of the legal
recognition of same-sex marriage is closely interrelated to the belief that the act of sex
between people of the same-sex is morally inappropriate. This comes with the analysis
whether it is important for law to be “natural” or “positive” (Selznick 2018). Individuals that
believe in the natural law assert that laws are required to be able to reflect morals that are
universal to protect one’s inherent right to be human. On the other hand, individuals that
believe laws need to be positive assert that legislators need to create laws based on the
particular society that it applies to.
It is important to note natural has been in discussion since before the prevalence of
Christianity however, philosophers like Aquinas who are key figures in the development of
this theory have argued that the basis of natural law is to appeal to a higher moral

2LOVE, SEX AND DEATH
authoritarian figure on the basis of what is counted as justice, and that authority figure is God
(Seidman 2016). John Finnis, a Catholic philosopher studying natural law has traced much of
his findings and thinking to the ideas that were first expressed by Aquinas. According to
Finnis’ theory, marriage is considered a basic good which is meant for the heterosexual good
leading to procreation (Finnis 2017). He says that the act of sex is only considered moral
when it takes place within a heterosexual marriage. The sexual acts which are considered to
be in the immoral category by Finnis, in accordance to the Natural Law, are homosexual sex,
masturbation bestiality and adultery.
Same-sex marriage is handed a heavy burden on proving the natural right for
individuals if they want to have a same-sex marriage, and this will only be possible if this
type of union is found to be confining with the principles of the natural law. Even though it is
never correct to condemn an individuals’ intrinsic human right in forming a matrimonial
congregation with another individual of their choice, there are many factors that come into
play with the topic of same-sex marriages trying to fulfil the laws of natural law (Halwani
2018). One of the main arguments is that homosexuality has failed to fulfil the natural ends
that exist in the body parts to procreate life in a union.
As it has been mentioned in the paper, the perception that homosexuality is immoral
is deeply rooted in the religious doctrine and the cultural norms that have developed due to
this. Numerous Christian entities has out rightly rejected the acceptance of homosexuality,
but there exists many arguments over the biblical interpretations of homosexuality.
According to Mohr (1999), there has never been a mention of homosexuality by Christ in the
Bible with the most recent clarification saying that the story of Lot at Sodom is not intended
towards homosexuality, but actually relates inhospitality. Furthermore, Mohr states that if the
story of Lot at Sodom is to denounce homosexuality, then similarly the story of Lot in the
cave should be seen as praising of incestuous rape (Mohr 1999). According to Mohr, the