This came up on another thread however I think it will receive more attention here.
I’m going to quote from PJPII book on Love and Responsibility where all of Catholic ethics can be summed up in a person can never be an object of use.
“Catholic moral teaching is first and last an ethical problem. Utilitarian thinking here remains true to its premis: what matters is maximize the pleasure which sex affords in such large measure in the form of the libido. Whereas Catholic ethics protest in the name of its own, personalize tic premises: no one must take the ‘calculus of pleasure,’ as his sole guide where a relationship with another personis concerned-a person can never be an object of use. That is the nub of the conflict.”
Granted this chapter has to do with the sexual urge primarily with the opposite sex. If Catholic ethics can be summed up that a person can not be an object of use. Then it must hold that homosexuality being an ethical problem to Catholicism it must be true that it is egocentric in nature.
How do we prove this?
I took a stab at it and here is what I said.
Without the possibility of generating life in the conjugal act you don’t have anything to stop the act from becoming egocentric. What does a contraceptive or homosexual couple have to keep the act from turning into *using another from acheiving their own purpose?
The two may care about and wish each other well; but what unites them is primarily pleasure.
What happens the moment they cease to match and be of advantage to one another? Nothing at all love wil be no more.*
Since this kind of relationship is still dependent on what I get out of others, it prevents me from truly being in communion with them and being committed to them as a person. A person in their fullest sense. Their relationship will be based on a mutual use rather than on a committed love or true communion of persons all due to the fact that there is nothing there to keep the act from being limited to themselves and their own gratification.
Do you have anything to add?
Also I would like to hear opposing views.