The article, written by John Corvino, is a short series of paragraphs in support of homosexual relationships. The reasoning is through the use of an abstract example, which is two men, Tommy and Jim. Corvino discusses one of the most common arguments against such couples, namely that homosexuality is supposedly immoral. The author cites heterosexual couples as an example, saying that the same positive motives drive them that gays are also motivated (Corvino, 1997). If it is immoral, then, according to Corvino, there must be some other reason why two men are unable to have sex.
specifically for you
for only $16.05 $11/page
In nine paragraphs, the author considers this issue from different points of view, raising various arguments. Such opinions are, for example, the unusual nature of homosexuality, its absence as a phenomenon in the animal world, its disgusting nature (Corvino, 1997). Nevertheless, each of the arguments was successfully countered by the author using specific examples. Corvino says Sanskrit’s reading is also an unusual activity, just as there are many subjectively disgusting activities, but they cannot be called immoral (Corvino, 1997). Thus, homosexuality cannot be called corrupt just because it stands out.
Six out of nine arguments boil down to the fact that homosexuality allegedly harms either the vital organs of a person or society as a whole. However, as the author says, there is nothing wrong with using a part of the body for a non-intended purpose, because otherwise, people would not wear glasses on their noses (Corvino, 1997). On the other hand, the risks of homosexuality are incredibly exaggerated, both physically and morally. Thus, Corvino, in his article, considers the problem of homosexuality from different perspectives and puts forward compelling arguments in defense of this phenomenon.
Corvino, J. (1997). Why shouldn’t Tommy and Jim have sex? A defense of homosexuality. The Ethical Life, 368-81.