Kantian ethics

• what are Kantians approach to homosexuality?

  Kantian ethics offers principles that can be used to formulate rules governing sexual behaviour. Traditional rules prohibited homosexual sex. It is possible, that the Kantian principle of treating every human person with dignity would require all sexual relationships, including homosexual relationships, to be treated equally.
• what are Kant's views?

  •According to Kant, our actions must be universalised (good for all people in all situations) and these principles can be applied to all relationships, irrespective of the gender of the participants in the relationship or whether the couple are married or not. Universalising reproduction as a requirement of sex would make homosexual sex unethical.

  •Kant believed that homosexuality was wrong. He said it degrades human beings below the level of animals. He regarded sex outside of marriage as a means to an end which includes homosexuality.
• what are the strengths?

  •It is the couple’s relationship that is important to Kant so he may consider a loving, life-long homosexual relationship as entirely acceptable.

  Kant see’s sexual relationships as perfectly acceptable as long as one person is not using another as a means to an end.  As soon as someone is an object of someone else’s lust, they are being used as a means to an end
• what are the weaknesses?

  •If Kant takes the 'end' to be the continuation of humanity, homosexuality blatantly disregards such a purpose. However, such a statement can be rebutted in two ways:

  1.Surrogacy and adoption are alternatives - surely this erases the problem? Kant would say no - surrogacy and adoption aren't universalisable
• what is a weakness?

  Who says reproduction is the 'end'? Can't love be the end? If the end purpose of humanity is to love, homosexuality is acceptable and should be treated just like heterosexuality. Who is Kant to decide what our purpose is? There isn't even any empirical evidence to suggest a purpose. 
• •'It is always right to love someone in a consenting relationship' seems like a fair maxim which is universalisable. Unluckily for Kant, this allows homosexuality. Kantian ethics seems a bit conflicted here, and virtue ethicist MacIntyre argues that anybody can universalise anything for their own situation.
• •Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) attacked Kant’s views on homosexuality by asserting that it is a means of preventing greater evils such as the birth of unwanted children.
• •Kant was celibate; he never married. If his own rule was applied to celibacy then, as with homosexuality, the whole human race would disappear. Does this mean that all human beings have a duty to marry and reproduce? In a world of overpopulation this may seem an immoral suggestion. Modern philosophers have therefore found it hard to create a strong case for using Kant’s ideas when dealing with homosexuality. They often appear contradictory.