Homosexuality has been on debate for numerous years. It is mentioned in the Bible which is thousands of years old. But recently two philosophers have spoken how they feel about Homosexuality. Michael Levin and Richard Mohr's views on the subject are in conflict with one another. Levin argues that homosexuality is abnormal because it is a misuse of body parts that have evolved for use in heterosexual intercourse (Levin 354). Furthermore, because natural selection has made the exercise of heterosexuality rewarding to human beings, homosexuality has a high probability to unhappiness. Mohr refutes Levin's stance about homosexuality myths and stereotypes. He rejects arguments that homosexuality is immoral or unnatural.
Levin exemplifies the point that homosexuality is misuse of body parts with the case of Mr. Smith, who likes to play "Old MacDonald" on his teeth so devoted is he to this amusement, in fact, that he never uses his teeth for chewing but instead takes nourishment intravenously. This is a clear example where Mr. Smith is misusing his teeth. In addition to misuse, Levine states that this man will have a dim future on purely physiological grounds (Levin 355). Since Mr. Smith isn't using his teeth for chewing, his digestive system will suffer from disuse. The result will be Mr. Smiths deteriorating health. Levin incorporates the evolution process into this example. He states that Mr. Smith descended from creatures who enjoy the use of such parts. Creatures who do not enjoy using such parts of their bodies will tend to be selected out. In particular, human males who enjoyed inserting their penises into each other's anuses have left no descendants. Homosexuality is likely to cause unhappiness because it leaves unfulfilled an innate and innately rewarding desire (Levin 355).
Mohr takes a completely different stance on homosexuality. According to Mohr, homosexuality is perfectly unobjectionable. The unnaturalness charge...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document