Reason and Impartiality on Same-Sex Marriage
To answer the question concerning whether same-sex marriage is good or bad for our society, one needs to apply reason and impartiality—two factors that compose the “minimum conception” of morality or, as some put it, the minimum requirement for morality.
Some ethicists (or ethical theories) have tried using reason and impartiality in making their stand concerning homosexuality and same-sex marriage while some have not. Let’s tackle two of them and be the judge which of the two really considers reason and impartiality.
Homosexuality in Ethical Subjectivism
Ethical Subjectivism is a theory in ethics which utterly runs contrary to the principle that there is objectivity in morality. Fundamentally a meta-ethical theory, Ethical Subjectivism is not about what things are good and what things are bad. It also does not tell how we should live or what moral norms we should practice. Instead, it is a theory about the nature of moral judgments.
Although it admits that moral judgments are ‘truth bearers,’ Ethical Subjectivism holds that the truth or falsity of ethical propositions is dependent on the feelings, attitudes, or standards of a person or group of persons. Contrary to the belief that morality is about objective facts, this theory states that moral judgments simply describe our personal feelings.
For every controversial ethical topic, say homosexuality or same-sex marriage, we usually hear at least two opposing views concerning the matter. One camp which declares that the action as immoral may express its stand by saying, for instance, that God hates it, or that it is unethical, or that doers of the action must be punished by the government. On the other hand, the rival group may claim that the action is perfectly normal and practitioners must be tolerated, if not respected.
But there is a third stance—another group might say that people in the first two groups are expressing their respective opinion, but where morality is concerned, there are no objective facts and no position is objectively right. This third stance represents Ethical Subjectivism. It submits that our moral opinions are based on our feelings, and nothing more.
In Ethical Subjectivism, it is a fact that some people are homosexual and some are heterosexual; but it is not a fact that one is really good and the other, bad. So when Pedro says that homosexuality is wrong, Pedro is, according to the theory, not stating a fact about homosexuality but merely saying something about his feelings toward it. Subjectivists hold that there is no such thing as objective right or real wrong. (Read also: Same Sex Marriage: Good or Bad for our Society?)
Read: Do you agree with same-sex marriage?
SA MGA MAG-AARAL: Maaaring ilagay ang inyong assignment/comment dito sa comment section ng Ways to Become a Responsible Person in Society
Also check out:
From Socrates to Mill: An Analysis of Prominent Ethical Theories
Click when you’re DONE with your assignment
NOTE TO STUDENTS:
If the comment section fails to function, just SHARE this article to your social media account (Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest, etc) and start the conversation there.
IMPORTANT:
TO STUDENTS (and their friends/relatives): For your comments NOT to be DELETED by the system, pls SUBSCRIBE first (if you have not subscribed yet). Thanks.
=====
To post comment, briefly watch this related short video:
====
For your COMMENT, use the comment section here: Comments of RATIONAL STUDENTS