Applied Ethics: Sexual Ethics Revision Notes
Subject: Religious Studies | Level: A-Level | Exam Board: Edexcel
This study guide provides a comprehensive overview of Applied Ethics: Sexual Ethics for Edexcel A-Level Religious Studies. It explores the complex interplay between religious doctrines and secular philosophies, equipping candidates with the critical tools needed to analyse and evaluate these sensitive issues for high marks.
Revision Notes & Key Concepts
Revision Podcast Transcript
SEXUAL ETHICS — EDEXCEL A-LEVEL RELIGIOUS STUDIES A Study Guide Podcast | Approximately 10 Minutes Female Voice — Warm, Conversational, Enthusiastic Tutor Tone --- [INTRO — 1 MINUTE] Hello and welcome! I'm so glad you're here, because today we're diving into one of the most fascinating and genuinely thought-provoking topics on the entire Edexcel A-Level Religious Studies specification — Applied Ethics: Sexual Ethics. Now, I know what some of you might be thinking — "this sounds awkward." But trust me, once you see how the big ethical theories clash head-on with religious tradition on these issues, you'll find it genuinely gripping. And more importantly, you'll be able to pick up serious marks in your Paper 2 exam. Here's what we're covering today: the three specific issues Edexcel wants you to address — premarital sex, extramarital sex, and homosexuality — and how four ethical theories plus religious perspectives apply to each one. We'll also go through the most common mistakes candidates make and finish with a quick-fire recall quiz to lock it all in. Let's go. --- [CORE CONCEPTS — 5 MINUTES] Let's start with the foundation. Edexcel Paper 2 requires you to apply four ethical theories to sexual ethics: Natural Moral Law, Situation Ethics, Kantian Ethics, and Utilitarianism. You also need to engage with religious perspectives — specifically Traditional Catholic, Evangelical, and Liberal or Anglican Christianity — and contrast these with secular views, particularly J.S. Mill's Libertarianism. First up: Natural Moral Law. This comes from Thomas Aquinas in the thirteenth century, though its roots go back to Aristotle. The key idea is that everything has a natural purpose — a telos — and morality means acting in accordance with that purpose. Aquinas identified five primary precepts: the preservation of life, reproduction, the nurture and education of children, living in an ordered society, and the worship of God. Now apply this to sexual ethics. Sex, under Natural Moral Law, has two essential functions: the procreative function — producing children — and the unitive function — bonding the couple. Here's a crucial exam point: you must distinguish between these two. The Catholic Church, drawing directly on Aquinas, teaches that both functions must be present in every sexual act. This is precisely what Pope Paul the Sixth argued in Humanae Vitae in 1968 — that artificial contraception is wrong because it separates the procreative from the unitive. Premarital sex therefore violates Natural Moral Law because it lacks the stability of marriage needed for the nurture of children. Extramarital sex violates it because it undermines the ordered society and the marriage covenant. And homosexual acts, under a strict Natural Moral Law reading, are seen as contrary to the procreative purpose of sex — though note that modern Catholic teaching, as in the Catechism, distinguishes between homosexual orientation, which is not sinful, and homosexual acts, which are considered disordered. Now let's move to Situation Ethics, developed by Joseph Fletcher in 1966. Fletcher's approach is radically different. He argues that love — specifically agape, unconditional Christian love — is the only absolute. Every other rule is relative to the situation. Fletcher famously gave the example of "sacrificial adultery" — a woman who sleeps with a prison guard to secure her husband's release — and argued this could be morally justified if it was the most loving act in that situation. Applied to sexual ethics, Situation Ethics is far more permissive. Premarital sex could be morally acceptable if it is based on genuine love, mutual respect, and commitment. Extramarital sex is generally unloving because it involves deception and harm — but Fletcher's framework would not rule it out absolutely in every conceivable circumstance. And homosexuality, under Situation Ethics, is entirely acceptable if the relationship is grounded in genuine agape love. Fletcher explicitly supported this view. John Robinson, in Honest to God in 1963, similarly argued that love is the only ultimate criterion for sexual ethics. Now, Kantian Ethics. Immanuel Kant's approach is deontological — it's about duty and universal moral laws, not consequences. The key tool is the Categorical Imperative, and for this topic, examiners particularly want you to apply the Second Formulation: act so that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or that of another, always as an end and never merely as a means. This is powerful when applied to sexual ethics. Premarital sex is not automatically wrong under Kant — what matters is whether both parties are being treated as rational ends in themselves, with full consent and respect. Exploitation, manipulation, or using someone purely for physical gratification would violate the Second Formulation. Extramarital sex is more problematic — it typically involves deception of the spouse, which treats them as a means to an end. It also fails the First Formulation: you could not universalise a law that everyone should break their marriage promises. Homosexuality, under a Kantian framework, is morally neutral if it involves mutual consent and respect — both parties are treated as ends in themselves. Finally, Utilitarianism. Jeremy Bentham's original version uses the Hedonic Calculus — measuring pleasure and pain across seven dimensions including intensity, duration, certainty, and extent — to determine the morally right action. John Stuart Mill refined this with his distinction between higher and lower pleasures. Applied to sexual ethics, the question is always: does this action produce the greatest happiness for the greatest number? Premarital sex, if consensual and causing no harm, could be morally acceptable. Extramarital sex is likely to cause significant pain — to the deceived spouse, to children, to wider family — which would outweigh any pleasure gained. Homosexuality, under Utilitarianism, is entirely acceptable where it produces happiness and causes no harm to others. And this brings us neatly to J.S. Mill's Harm Principle from On Liberty in 1859. Mill argued that society is only justified in interfering with an individual's freedom to prevent harm to others. This is the foundation of the libertarian secular view: what consenting adults do in private is their own business, provided no harm is caused. This directly informed the Wolfenden Report of 1957, which recommended the decriminalisation of homosexual acts between consenting adults in private — a recommendation eventually enacted in the Sexual Offences Act of 1967. Now, the religious perspectives. You must not present a single monolithic "Christian view" — this is one of the most common mistakes candidates make, and it costs marks. You need to distinguish between at least three strands. Traditional Catholic teaching, grounded in Natural Moral Law and Humanae Vitae, takes an absolutist position: sex belongs exclusively within heterosexual marriage and must always be open to procreation. Evangelical Christianity draws primarily on Scripture — Leviticus 18:22, which condemns homosexual acts, and 1 Corinthians 6:9, which lists homosexuality among behaviours that exclude people from the kingdom of God. The Lambeth Conference of 1998 passed Resolution 1.10, which affirmed that homosexual practice is incompatible with Scripture, though this was contested by many Anglican bishops. Liberal and Anglican Christianity takes a more contextual approach, emphasising love, consent, and the quality of relationships. Theologians like Jack Dominian developed a person-centred theology of sexuality, arguing that what matters is whether a sexual relationship promotes the full flourishing of the persons involved. --- [EXAM TIPS AND COMMON MISTAKES — 2 MINUTES] Right, let's talk marks. Edexcel Paper 2 has two question types you need to master for this topic. The Examine question is worth 10 marks and is pure AO1 — Knowledge and Understanding. Do not evaluate. Do not say "however, critics argue." Simply explain the theory or concept in depth, with precise references. If the question asks you to examine Natural Moral Law's approach to sexual ethics, you need to explain the primary precepts, the unitive and procreative functions, and reference Aquinas and Humanae Vitae. That's it. The Evaluate question is worth 20 marks and is predominantly AO2 — critical analysis and evaluation. This is where 60 percent of your marks live. Your conclusion must not be a summary of what you've already said — it must be a genuine judgment that weighs the strength of competing arguments. Use the Scholarly Triangle: contrast a religious source like Aquinas with a secular critic like Mill, and then bring in a modern theologian like Vardy or Dominian for the highest AO2 credit. Now, the three biggest mistakes. First: conflating premarital and extramarital sex. These are distinct issues. Premarital sex means sex before marriage — fornication in traditional terminology. Extramarital sex means adultery — sex outside an existing marriage. They have different ethical implications under every theory. Under Natural Moral Law, both are wrong, but for slightly different reasons. Under Situation Ethics, adultery is generally more problematic because of the harm caused to the existing partner. Don't muddle them. Second: presenting a monolithic Christian view. As I've just explained, Catholic, Evangelical, and Liberal Anglican positions differ significantly. Examiners will reward candidates who demonstrate this nuance. Third: describing theories without applying them. If the question is about homosexuality, don't just explain the Hedonic Calculus in the abstract — apply it. Ask: does homosexual practice cause harm? Does it produce happiness? That's the application examiners are looking for. --- [QUICK-FIRE RECALL QUIZ — 1 MINUTE] Okay, quick-fire time. I'll ask the question, you pause and think, then I'll give the answer. Question one: What year was Humanae Vitae published, and who wrote it? — 1968, Pope Paul the Sixth. Question two: What are the two functions of sex according to Catholic teaching? — Unitive and procreative. Question three: What is Fletcher's only absolute in Situation Ethics? — Agape love. Question four: Which formulation of Kant's Categorical Imperative is most relevant to sexual ethics? — The Second Formulation — treat persons as ends, never merely as means. Question five: What did the Wolfenden Report of 1957 recommend? — The decriminalisation of homosexual acts between consenting adults in private. Question six: Name one biblical text used to condemn homosexual acts. — Leviticus 18:22 or 1 Corinthians 6:9. --- [SUMMARY AND SIGN-OFF — 1 MINUTE] Let's bring it all together. Sexual ethics on the Edexcel specification requires you to apply four ethical theories — Natural Moral Law, Situation Ethics, Kantian Ethics, and Utilitarianism — to three specific issues: premarital sex, extramarital sex, and homosexuality. You must engage with religious perspectives, distinguishing between Catholic, Evangelical, and Liberal Christian views, and contrast these with secular libertarian arguments rooted in Mill's Harm Principle. Remember: AO1 is 40 percent of your marks — get the knowledge precise. AO2 is 60 percent — your analysis and evaluation is where you win or lose the grade. Use the Scholarly Triangle, distinguish your Christian traditions, and always apply theories directly to the specific issue in the question. You've got this. Keep revising, keep practising those 20-mark essays, and remember — the examiner wants to give you marks. Show them the knowledge, show them the analysis, and you'll do brilliantly. Good luck, and I'll see you in the next episode. --- END OF SCRIPT Total approximate reading time at natural pace: 10 minutes
Key Terms & Definitions
- Telos
- (From Greek) The end, purpose, or ultimate goal of a thing. A core concept in Natural Moral Law.
- Deontology
- An ethical theory that judges the morality of an action based on rules or duties. The focus is on the intrinsic rightness or wrongness of actions, regardless of the consequences.
- Agape
- (From Greek) Unconditional, selfless, Christian love. The central principle of Fletcher's Situation Ethics.
- Categorical Imperative
- The supreme principle of morality in Kantian ethics. An unconditional command that must be obeyed in all circumstances.
- Harm Principle
- J.S. Mill's principle that the only legitimate reason to restrict an individual's liberty is to prevent harm to others.
- Unitive and Procreative
- The two functions of the sexual act as defined by the Catholic Church. Unitive refers to the bonding of the couple, and procreative refers to openness to conception.
Worked Examples
Worked Example
Question: Examine the application of Natural Moral Law to the issue of homosexuality. (10 marks)
Solution: **Introduction**: Natural Moral Law, a deontological theory developed by St. Thomas Aquinas, determines the morality of an action based on whether it fulfils its God-given purpose, or *telos*. When applied to homosexuality, it concludes that homosexual acts are morally wrong because they cannot fulfil the procreative purpose of the sexual faculty. **Paragraph 1 - The Procreative Telos**: According to Aquinas, the primary purpose of the sexual act is procreation, which is one of the five primary precepts. Homosexual acts are, by their nature, non-procreative. Therefore, they are considered a frustration of the sexual faculty's natural purpose and are deemed 'intrinsically disordered' as stated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. This is an application of the principle of double effect, where the act itself is seen as flawed. **Paragraph 2 - The Unitive Telos and Ordered Society**: While NML also recognises a 'unitive' purpose of sex (to bond the couple), this is seen as secondary to and inseparable from the procreative purpose within the context of heterosexual marriage. The Catholic Church teaches that marriage is the only appropriate context for sexual relations, as it provides the stable and ordered society required for the primary precept of nurturing and educating children. As homosexual unions cannot procreate, they cannot form a marriage in the eyes of the Church, and thus homosexual acts outside this context also violate the precept of an ordered society.
Worked Example
Question: 'Situation Ethics is the best approach to the issue of premarital sex.' Evaluate this view. (20 marks)
Solution: **Introduction**: The claim that Situation Ethics is the 'best' approach to premarital sex hinges on whether a flexible, love-based ethic is preferable to the fixed, rule-based systems of other theories like Natural Moral Law or Kantian Ethics. While Situation Ethics offers a compassionate and person-centred framework, its subjectivity and potential to justify any action arguably make it a less reliable guide than more structured ethical systems. **Paragraph 1 - Argument for Situation Ethics**: Joseph Fletcher's Situation Ethics, with its single maxim of *agape* love, provides a compelling framework for modern relationships. It rightly moves the moral focus from the physical act itself to the quality of the relationship. A premarital relationship based on mutual respect, commitment, and genuine love could be seen as morally good, whereas a loveless and exploitative marriage would be condemned. This approach, supported by theologians like Jack Dominian, prioritises the person over the rule, which many would see as a more Christian and humane approach. **Paragraph 2 - Argument Against (from Natural Moral Law)**: However, from a Natural Moral Law perspective, Situation Ethics is dangerously relativistic. NML provides clear, absolute rules: sex is for procreation and union within marriage. Premarital sex is always wrong because it occurs outside the stable institution required for the potential arrival and nurture of children, thus violating the primary precepts. A follower of Aquinas would argue that Fletcher's approach ignores God's revealed purpose for humanity and opens the door to moral chaos, where individual emotions trump objective moral law. **Paragraph 3 - Argument Against (from Kantian Ethics)**: Similarly, a Kantian would be wary of Situation Ethics. While Kant does not automatically condemn premarital sex, the key test is the Categorical Imperative. If a person is being used 'merely as a means' to an end (i.e., for sexual gratification), the act is wrong. The danger of Situation Ethics is that 'love' could be used to justify exploitation. Kant's insistence on universal principles and respect for persons as ends in themselves provides a more robust protection against this than Fletcher's subjective 'agapeic calculus'. **Conclusion**: In conclusion, while Situation Ethics' focus on love is an attractive and compassionate element, it is not the 'best' approach. Its radical flexibility makes it an unreliable guide, potentially sanctioning actions that are exploitative or harmful in the long run. The principles of Natural Moral Law, while perhaps too rigid for modern society, and particularly Kantian ethics, with its emphasis on consent and respect for persons, provide clearer and safer moral guidance. Therefore, the claim is unconvincing; a combination of Kantian principles with the loving concern of Situation Ethics would likely provide a stronger overall approach.
Worked Example
Question: Examine the arguments of J.S. Mill regarding sexual ethics. (10 marks)
Solution: **Introduction**: John Stuart Mill, a 19th-century philosopher, provides a foundational secular and libertarian approach to sexual ethics, primarily through his work 'On Liberty' (1859). His arguments are not based on religious authority or tradition, but on the principle of individual autonomy and the prevention of harm. **Paragraph 1 - The Harm Principle**: The cornerstone of Mill's argument is the 'Harm Principle'. Mill asserts that 'the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.' Applied to sexual ethics, this means that what consenting adults do in private is their own business. Society has no right to interfere in actions that do not cause harm to non-consenting parties. This directly challenges religious views that condemn certain sexual acts (like homosexual acts) as intrinsically sinful, even if they are consensual and private. **Paragraph 2 - Distinction between Higher and Lower Pleasures**: As a utilitarian, Mill believed the goal of ethics was to maximise happiness. However, he refined Bentham's theory by distinguishing between 'higher' (intellectual, emotional) and 'lower' (purely physical) pleasures. He argued that a life focused only on lower pleasures was not a truly happy one. In sexual ethics, this implies that while physical pleasure is a good, a relationship based on mutual respect, intellectual connection, and emotional intimacy (higher pleasures) is morally superior to one based merely on lust. This provides a framework for judging the quality of a relationship beyond simple consent.
Practice Questions
Question: Examine the teachings of the Natural Law tradition on extramarital sex. (10 marks)
Answer:
Question: 'Kantian ethics provides a helpful approach to the issue of homosexuality.' Evaluate this view. (20 marks)
Answer:
Question: Examine how a follower of Utilitarianism might approach the issue of premarital sex. (10 marks)
Answer:
Question: Examine the contribution of the Wolfenden Report to the debate on sexual ethics. (10 marks)
Answer:
Question: 'Religious approaches to sexual ethics are no longer relevant in the 21st century.' Evaluate this view. (20 marks)
Answer:
