The Moral Defense of Homosexuality: Why Every Argument against Gay Rights Fails

259 Pages·2015·1.18 MB·English

by  Chris Meyers

THE MORAL DEFENSE OF
HOMOSEXUALITY

THE MORAL DEFENSE OF
HOMOSEXUALITY
Why Every Argument against Gay
Rights Fails
Chris Meyers
ROWMAN & LITTLEFIELD
Lanham • Boulder • New York • London
PublishedbyRowman&Littlefield
AwhollyownedsubsidiaryofTheRowman&LittlefieldPublishingGroup,
Inc.
4501ForbesBoulevard,Suite200,Lanham,Maryland20706
www.rowman.com
UnitA,WhitacreMews,26-34StannaryStreet,LondonSE114AB
Copyright©2015byRowman&Littlefield
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthisbookmaybereproducedinanyformorby
anyelectronicormechanicalmeans,includinginformationstorageandretriev-
alsystems,withoutwrittenpermissionfromthepublisher,exceptbyareviewer
whomayquotepassagesinareview.
BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationInformationAvailable
LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationDataAvailable
Meyers,Chris,1968–
Themoraldefenseofhomosexuality:whyeveryargumentagainstgayrightsfails/ChrisMeyers.
pagescm
Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.
ISBN978-1-4422-4931-8(cloth:alk.paper)—ISBN978-1-4422-4932-5(electronic)
1.Gayrights—Philosophy.2.Gayrights—UnitedStates.3.Homosexuality—Moralandethical
aspects.I.Title.
HQ76.5.M492015
323.3'2640973—dc23
2014050081
TMThepaperusedinthispublicationmeetstheminimumrequirementsof
AmericanNationalStandardforInformationSciencesPermanenceofPaper
forPrintedLibraryMaterials,ANSI/NISOZ39.48-1992.
PrintedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica
CONTENTS
Preface vii
1 Introduction 1
2 WhatIsMorality? 23
3 MoralTheoryandDivineCommand 45
4 DestinyorChoice?Biology,SexualOrientation,and
Responsibility 63
5 HomosexualityandMoralityI—TheNaturalLawArgument 91
6 HomosexualityandMoralityII—TheTeleological
ArgumentandMoralIntuitionistism 115
7 DebunkingPsychologicalExplanationsforDisapprovalof
Homosexuality 133
8 Homosexuality,Consequences,andJusticeI—Slippery
SlopeArguments 153
9 Homosexuality,Consequences,andJusticeII:AllegedBad
ConsequencesofGay-TolerantPublicPolicies 173
10 ArgumentsinFavorofHomosexualityandGayRights 197
Notes 221
Bibliography 239
Index 243
AbouttheAuthor 247
v

PREFACE
I
t is common practice in a preface for the author to tell some story
about how he or she came to write the book. In a book like this one—
defending the morality of homosexuality and arguing for gay rights—
one might expect that story to involve personal struggles of discrimina-
tion or sentimental descriptions of loved ones who are gay. But the
motivation for the writing of this book is not like that. I am not a
homosexual,nordo I have anyclosefriends orrelativeswhoarehomo-
sexuals.
One might be suspiciousofabook on themorality ofhomosexuality
and gay rights that is written by a straight man with very little acquain-
tance with gay people. I would share that suspicion were the author to
argue that homosexuality is a sin or that same-sex marriage should be
againstthelaw.Itwouldbeeasytodismissthatauthorasarguingonthe
basisofignorance.Ofcourse,Itoomightbeignorantaboutthelivesof
gay people, but my argumentsarenotbasedonthatignorance.Rather,
Iassumethatmostgaypeoplearenotsodifferentfrommeandmostof
my heterosexual friends and relatives. This is not to deny that gay peo-
plemightbedifferentfrommeintheirbeliefs,values,anddispositions.
But I am sure that they also differ from each other in their beliefs,
values, and dispositions. The differences matter much less than the
similarities. Most people, gay or straight, share similar desires for op-
portunity,equality, companionship, dignity,and theliberty tolivetheir
livesaccordingtotheirowngoalsandvalues.
I should confess that I have not always had the most tolerant or
enlightened attitude toward gay people. In my youth I adopted the
same mildly homophobic attitudes of the culture around me. But even
thenI neverunderstoodwhy anyonewould think ofhomosexuality asa
vii
viii PREFACE
moral issue. We might not like the way certain people live, but if they
arenothurtinganyonethenwhyshouldwecare?Itseemsverystrange
to me that anyone could think of sexual preference as a moral issue at
all.Itispuzzlingwhyweareevenhavingthisdebate.
Having said that, opponents of gay rights might be tempted to ac-
cuse me of being ignorant about the anti-gay position. Not so. I have
acquaintedmyselfwithalltheargumentsagainsthomosexualityandgay
rights.When I say thatI do notunderstand them, I do notmean thatI
amunfamiliarwiththem.ThereasonthatIdonotunderstandtheanti-
gay position is that their arguments do not make any sense. This is not
somethingthatI willmerelyassume fromthestart.On thecontrary,in
thisbookItrytomakeasmuchsenseasIcanoftheargumentsagainst
homosexualityandgayrightsandthenshowthateventhebestversions
oftheseargumentsfail.
So why didI writethisbook?Andwhy shouldI care somuchabout
gay rights? I came to write this book rather by accident. It all started
with a psychology professor in Kentucky named “Bob”—a man I’ve
never met—who happens to be gay. He wrote the following e-mail
message to a friend of mine, a fellow philosopher named “Sara,” with
whomhehadbeencollaboratingonanunrelatedproject.
We have a LUNATIC on campus who is writing crazy things, and
claimsthatgaysex is“morallydisordered,”andwantstheuniversity
to rescind the domestic partner benefits. He’s speaking today on
“What is marriage?” Apparently it [marriage] is not what you think.
I’veattachedanarticlehe’susing.I’vealreadygotmanythingsdown
about how stupid it is, particularly its use of medieval notions of
biology. Anyway, I was wondering if you wanted to collaborate on a
rebuttal?
The attachment was an article entitled “What Is Marriage?” written by
conservative law professor Robert George and a couple of graduate
students, Sherif Girgis and Ryan Anderson. (The article was published
in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy.) Sara agreed to co-
writetherebuttal.Butherspecializationisinepistemologyandphiloso-
phy of mind, not ethics. So she thought it would be useful to bring a
moralphilosopher(me)onboard.Sheforwardedhercolleague’se-mail
tome,withthismessageofherown.
Chris—Iknowyouarebusy,butifyouhavetimewouldyoulookat
this CRAZY attached article? The dude is speaking on my friend’s
campusinKentucky,andIamabout1/3ofthewaythroughandthe
argumentsaresoinsaneIwouldreallyliketobringarealethicistin
onthis.