The moral abyss draws near, that’s how we non-leftists thinks, whether we’re “right wing” or something closer to the so-called center. As “a culture,” we mutilate children for short-term profit, if we even allow them to be born in the first place. We’ve already aborted more than 60 million in the United States since Roe v. Wade. I give some of the blame to contraception for changing our idea of sex at the root, and this essay explains my point of view in a kind of sketch.
It’s undeniable that sex exists for procreation. Every aspect of its design is related to this purpose, and its existence couldn’t be explained without said purpose. Procreation is the final cause or telos of sexuality, and for that reason is essential to fully and properly understand it.
Contraception becomes problematic here. Once we say it’s good under all circumstances, without exception, we must likewise accept that procreation isn’t part of “how sex is supposed to be.” It’s a contradiction, because a thing’s final cause is, by definition, part of how it ought to be. It’s an element that determines the other features in its “design.” Nevertheless, those who say contraception is always and everwhere acceptable are saying that procreation isn’t sexuality’s final cause. Obviously, it’s impossible to provide an alternative, nothing else serves to explain its nature. The only remaining option is to deny that it has any telos, which is the same as asserting that it’s arbitrary. There’s no morally significant reason explaining our design’s details.
The thesis that sexuality has no “way it’s meant to be” leads us to the nihilistic premise that nothing has a “way it’s meant to be.” If sexuality, despite being so important for our survival as a species until now —and therefore the place where we have the most reason to expect some kind of teleology— doesn’t really have a final cause, then, a fortiori, nothing else does, either.
What say you?