Biology, Moral Agency, and Choice

 

Recently, my college's newspaper had a serious of letters condemning discrimination against homosexuals. The letters sprang from the fact that two students at my school were upset that their future roommate was gay and were trying to get him to change rooms. When word of this got out students decried their bigotry and wrote letters to the editor stating that such discriminations was akin to objecting to roommate's race. I think many students in this debate made an elementary blunder by failing to account for moral agency.

Before going any further let me preface by saying that, I have no strong views on sexual orientation, and don't see someone's orientation as a good or bad thing, it's simply just a fact. However, I do have a problem with sloppy reasoning and that's what I want to address here. Sexuality differs from race and gender (I define gender as either having an XX or XY chromosome configuration) in one critical aspect, it can (though not necessary) involve moral agency. Race and gender have no moral agency component; they are simply a biological fact determined by forces outside the moral agent's will. A person's race and gender are determined prior to birth by the chance combination of certain genetic material. This is why people see it as deplorable to judge others based on race and gender, the person qua moral agent had nothing to do with picking their race or gender, it was thrust upon them by forces outside their control. Since the forces were outside their control, don't attribute responsibility to them for their race and gender, and hence have no grounds on which to hold them morally responsible.

Sexuality differs in this key aspect. Yes, sexual orientation is probably a product of biology, and as such can't really be morally condemned. However, how a person handles their orientation is not purely biological, free will is involved. A person with a given orientation makes choices. They exercise free choice and will themselves qua moral agents to take certain actions. Since they choose to partake in certain sexual behavior, they are responsible (at least in part) for their behavior. This allows for criticism that is not possible in the case of race and gender. You can critique people on the sexual choices they make because they are making choices as moral agents, and moral agents are responsible for the choices they make. So when people say sexuality is the same as race they are neglecting an important distinction. Sexual behavior has a moral component because it involves choices and responsibility, while race and gender involve neither of these.

Now, this isn't to say that some the sexual choices people make are better than others. I am arguing simply that we can hold people be responsible for the expression of their sexuality in way we cannot do for race and gender. The moral value that attached to a particular choice, however, is open to debate.