In Defense of What Good Sex Can Be: Reimagining the New Natural Law Theory’s Stance on Homosexuality

Abstract

Homosexual sex is considered to be a morally unacceptable form of sexual conduct based on a lot of flawed arguments, such as the Against -Nature Argument, the Harm Argument, and the Universalization Argument with its different interpretations. However, one argument stands out amongst these, and that is the one constructed by the New Natural Law Theory (NNLT). While the Theory itself has several objections within the literature, such as the NNLT is overly restrictive, the NNLT is too demanding, the No-Harm reply, the Sterility Argument, and the Doctrine of the Double Effect, the argument that the theory constructs against homosexuality is one that is truly formidable. We go over the objections against the NNLT, and instead of rejecting the theory entirely, the aim was to modify the theory in face of the objections presented and determine whether a more consistent account of the theory can be made while simultaneously allowing it to accept homosexuality into the camp of moral sexual conduct.