Sexual Morality

Sexual morality is a wide concept that has been debated over the years, with different
scholars and philosophers holding divergent points of view. Sexual activity is morally acceptable
if it meets its end goal- procreation and should be within the confines of marriage according to
natural law (Dimmock & Fisher, 2017). Agreeably, sex is pleasurable, but apart from this fact, it
must fulfil its end. Sexual activity is termed right or wrong based on whether it meets its end
goal. Based on this, therefore, many actions related to sex can be seen as morally wrong. For
instance, contraception interferes with the procreative end and is thus morally wrong.
According to Kant, Aquinas, and other Natural Law theorists, sexual activity is morally
right and permissible as long as it occurs within the context of a lifelong- monogamous and
heterosexual marriage (Dimmock & Fisher, 2017). Thus, according to Kant, any sexual act
occurring outside these contexts is morally wrong. Some of the acts he deems wrong include
masturbation, homosexuality, premarital sex, and adultery. Based on his views on sex, Alan
Soble refers to Kant as a sexual pessimist (Dimmock & Fisher, 2017). Sexual pessimists hold the
view that acting on sexual impulses and desires is undignified. He believes that the sexual nature
is unbefitting to human beings and that it threatens their moral lives.
Based on this pessimistic view, any sexual act is immoral, and since the existence and
continuity of the human race relies on procreation, then even human existence is immoral
behavior (Dimmock & Fisher, 2017). Based on this, then Kant is wrong. However, Kant states
that since in marriage people come together as reciprocals and treat each other as wholes, then
sex within marriage is moral. It is thus only moral within the confines of a marriage where
people do not treat each other simply as a means to an end.

3
Further, the virtue theory holds a different view. In the Aristotelian view, the virtue that
should determine how humans approach sexual desires is temperance. A modern interpretation
of temperance is moderation (Dimmock & Fisher, 2017). A person who is driven by moderation
will not be guided by unchecked sexual desires. They will have their sexual desires under
control. Additionally, they will not deny their natural sexual desires, as Kant suggests. Instead,
this individual will engage in sexual activity at the right tie for the right reasons and with the
right people.
A key moral issue in the different arguments made is on whether a sexual activity should
result in pregnancies for it to be considered morally right; natural theorists agree that there
should be an end goal, which is a baby. If this does not occur, then sex is morally unacceptable.
Virtue theorists hold that the end product is not important as long as there is moderation in the
whole process. Non-traditional theorists also support the view that sex does not have to always
lead to pregnancy (Fletcher, 1963).
In my opinion, sexual activity is not morally wrong, neither is having and dealing with
sexual desires wrong. However, just like virtues theory suggests, there is a need for temperance.
Human beings should allow themselves to experience their natural sexual desires. The individual
should deal with these desires in moderation by ensuring that they engage in sexual activity at
the right tie, with the right person and for the right reasons. Thus, even if a sexual activity does
not result in a pregnancy, it is still morally acceptable as long as it is done in moderation.

4

References

Dimmock, M., & Fisher, A. (2017). Ethics for A-level. Open Book Publishers.
Fletcher, J. (1963). A Moral Tension and an Ethical Frontier. The Christian Scholar, 256-266.