Morality Of Same-Sex Marriage

Running head: MORALITY OF SAME-SEX MARRIAGE
1
Morality of Same Sex Marriage
Ricardo DeAvila
PHI 208: Ethics and Moral Reasoning
Prof. Robert Gertz
February 16, 2020

MORALITY OF SAME-SEX MARRIAGE 2
Morality of Same-sex Marriage
Part 3: Explanation of the Ethical Theory
Utilitarianism is an approach to the history of philosophy that contributes to normative
ethics expressed in the 19th century shaping the classical approaches. This theory holds that
“moral right action is the action that produces the best”. The consequences produced after the
right action make it boldly accepted. Utilitarianism is associated with two philosophers; Jeremy
Bentham and John Stuart Mill (Driver, 2014). According to Bentham, humans are governed by
pain and pleasure as the sovereign players. Humans seek for pleasure intending to avoid pain.
Actions that advocate for happiness and pleasure are accepted, unlike actions that consistently
cause pain and unhappiness that are disapproved. Besides, Mill believed that perfectionist
intuitions influence hedonism. Pleasures that are just sensual are less sought, unlike the
intellectual pleasures which are perceived as better. The core principle of utilitarianism is that it
is distinguished by agent-neutrality and objectivity. This implies that one’s good does not count
for any other individuals good hence if an individual promotes personal good, any different
person promotes his or her good as well, thus it should not sound odd. This implies in same-sex
marriages. In as much as an individual may perceive it to be a moral taboo, it is accepted by
individuals practicing it and therefore should not be an issue to those opposed to it.
Part 4: Application of the Ethical Theory
This principle leads to the acceptance of same-sex marriages because the couples involved in
same-sex marriages attain direct benefits and thus the benefit supersedes indirect harms that
people opposed to it perceives. The principle, therefore, defines the state of affairs in the future
as encompassed with benefits with minimum discounts (Langrell, 2015). This principle fails to
distinguish between benefits ad harms as it suffers ceaseless difficulties in defining and