Defense of Catholic Sexual Morality w/ non-Catholic persuasion

[Dranu]

I thought a thread would be helpful for those of us who seek to convince outsiders of the virtues of Catholic chastity. of course any Catholic who is faithful can draw from a first principle of Church authority to accept her most holy teachings (even while being uncertain belief =/= knowledge), and experience the fruits of obedience, but this is aimed to convince outsiders of this specific issue. Since this is a major issue in the world today, I see a need for clear argumentation addressing this issue to those outside as very pressing. Perhaps one needs the Curch for confirmation of such morality, but I am holding out hope for a strogn argument that appeals to others.

Since the thread on Catholic sexual morality forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=309165 has become cluttered with responses that are not entirely philosophical (on both sides) I would like to create this thread as a consolidated discussion that is limited to logical argumentation (no fact throwing unless it is part of a premise), since there seems to be an apparent lack of such arguments.

This is not a thread to produce arguments against Catholic sexual morality, but rather in defense of them. Of course, arguments are welcome and requested that are intended to refute any given argument presented in this thread.

So here are the rules clearly spelled out:

1.) No citing facts, statistics, or tradition unless they are used to support a premise.

2.) No arguments against Catholic morality unless it is an argument against one presented in this thread (in which case they are highly requested).

3.) Try to make the argument at least feasible to those who do not adhere to Catholic authority. I consent to the authority, and that is enough for me so long as I agree with the first principles of the Tradition itself by history, experience, and philosophically, but our aim is to those outside in this thread.

4.) Try to avoid non-philosophical discussion. I.e. confirming or denying other’s posts without logical critiques and the like.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I shall work to formulate an argument of my own perhaps in the coming weeks (yes I am slovenly wanting to reap rewards of arguments I did not first see ).

“Fides quaerens intellectum” -St. Anselm

 

[Spock]

Wonderful idea! I can hardly wait.

\//

 

[Paladin_V]

That is to say, we need to defend our views of sexual morality from the standpoint of natural law rather than from God’s revelation to us.

At the fundamental level, ANY morality, be it sexual or whatever, will require at least the recognition of a God, and generally more than that… a loving, personal God, whom we reflect, both body and soul. Without God, there is no basis for any morality. If we suppose a God, we can begin to talk about natural law and the natural order of things. Indeed, Genesis begins with the natural order… male and female he created them.

So I just wanted to point out… we can have a discussion from the point of view of natural law, but any discussion of morality involves a discussion of objective goodness, and hence, of God.