1/7/2016

The Critique Alan Turing, Natural Law & Homosexuality

How many new

By admin Posted December 31, 2014 In Articles
issues, which sho
have been the rig
Picture:Alan Turing sculpture and photograph by Ian Usher on Flickr. Follow The
domain of philos
Critique onFacebookand Twitter@dekritikfor hourly news about all things philosophy!
have been usurpe
by re
In 1951, Alan Turing began a relationship with a younger man, Arnoldrecent
Murray.years
Soon after
law, and
psychol
their affair began, Turing began to suspect Murray of stealing small amounts
of money
from
him. Turing confronted Murray, who heatedly denied the allegation. Soon after, Turings

Lee McIntyr

house was burgled. Again, Turing accused Murray; again, Murray denied the allegation but
stated that he probably did know who did it, an acquaintance of his. Turing reported the
robbery to the police, along with Murrays information about a likely suspect. The
ABOUT

fingerprints found in Turings home did match those of the suspect, who then made a
statement to the police alleging that Murray had described having sexual relations with
CATEGORIES

Turing, which was a serious crime under British law at the time. When police questioned
Turing about the allegation he tripped up, was caught in a minor lie, and quickly confessed

FOLLOW AND CONTACT

to the sexual relationship. He voluntarily submitted a five page confession that the police
admired for its fine writing and polish.

SEARCH

Search site

Turing was charged with Gross Indecency contrary to Section II of the Criminal Law
Amendment Act of 1885, more commonly known as the Labouchere Amendment. The
penalty was two years in prison, with or without hard labor. Oscar Wilde had been

prosecuted under the same law. Yet even while under questioning and facing time in prison,
Turing displayed no sense of shame. The police noted that he came across as a real
converthe really believed he was doing the right thing.[i] At his trial, counsel for
prosecution likewise noted the lack of contrition or shame, even while he pled guilty. It is
http://peter-tang.com/critique-test/2014/12/31/alan-turing-natural-law-homosexuality/

1/12

1/7/2016

The Critique Alan Turing, Natural Law & Homosexuality

likely, however, that Turings particular difficulties with interpersonal interactions, which
today would often result in a diagnosis of Asperger Syndrome, contributed to his lack of
shame.

Natural law theory persecuted Alan Turing for his homosexuality. Putting it thus is an
exaggeration, but only a slight one, since to the extent that anti-homosexual laws and
persecutions have had an intellectual defense in the modern West, they have most often
been grounded in this theory. The language incorporated into British criminal and colonial laws
came straight from this theory, with references to crimes against nature, and unnatural
acts. To this day, natural law theorists defend the unequal legal treatment of gays and
lesbians,[ii] even to the point of submitting amicus curiae briefs in support of anti-sodomy
laws, testifying as an expert witness in defense of a state anti-gay initiative, and making
extended arguments against gay marriage.[iii] This article will lay out the central elements of
natural law theory, emphasizing its arguments against homosexual sex. It will then describe
some of the criticisms of that theory.

Natural Law Theory

Thomas Aquinas offered the most important historical formulation of natural law theory.
Even contemporary natural law theorists, such as John Finnis, Robert George, and Alasdair
MacIntyre (in his later work), see themselves as merely amending a theory presented by

Aquinas that remains sound in its central precepts. Fundamentally, it is a theory that marries
Aristotelian forms of reasoning, and a number of Aristotles own conclusions, to Christian
theology. Aquinas clearly did draw on other sources such as Stoicism and the early Fathers
http://peter-tang.com/critique-test/2014/12/31/alan-turing-natural-law-homosexuality/

2/12

1/7/2016

The Critique Alan Turing, Natural Law & Homosexuality

of Christianity, however. The most common and influential version of the theory is
presented here, but there have been other notable versions.

For Aquinas, a law is an authoritative rule of action laid down by an individual or

individuals who are responsible for the care of a community. Since God is responsible for
the care of the universe, the rules of action He has laid down are thereby laws. Natural law
is Gods rational plan for the universe and thus it is best understood not solely as a set of
religious precepts or rules, but also as the basis for practical reasoning and living a rational

life. In this way, to violate natural law strictures, such as by engaging in same-sex relations, is
to commit acts that are simultaneously sinful and irrational.

In addition to arguing that all humans are under natural law, just by being human, Aquinas
also argued that the natural law can be known by all humans. In fact, all humans have at
least an unreflective, partial knowledge of the law, which can be refined and made
propositional by reflecting upon human practices. This knowledge points us to the various
goods that contribute to the best human life. The rightness or wrongness of actions follows
from whether they help bring about these goods. The good is prior to the right, to use
philosophical language.

Aquinas emphasized how specific goods, such as friendship, society, and knowledge, are
essential to a full human life. Marriage is another core human good, and in fact Aquinas
referred to it as the greatest friendship. Marriage, for Aquinas, should embody fides, which
combines monogamy, love, and mutual regard, and it is in turn oriented towards the goods
of procreation and the raising of children. Sex within the confines of marriage (understood
http://peter-tang.com/critique-test/2014/12/31/alan-turing-natural-law-homosexuality/

3/12

1/7/2016

The Critique Alan Turing, Natural Law & Homosexuality

as opposite-sex marriage), and which is supportive of the goods of marriage, is permissible

and can even be described as a moral good. That is, opposite-sex sex acts that embody love
and mutual regard between spouses contribute to real human goods and are thus laudable.
Procreation is not the central issue here. Sexual relations between loving spouses where one
or both partners is sterile (e.g., due to age) are also morally permissible and even quite
worthy in their own right.

Aquinas adds, however, another requirement for sexual acts to be moral: they must be
potentially procreative. Hence, only opposite-sex relations involving vaginal intercourse are
acceptable; non-generative sex acts are immoral, even when meeting the various criteria
presented above. Aquinas does not explain the reasoning behind his addition of this
generative requirement. It is a rather central point, as without it natural law theorists

would have to admit that same-sex sex acts, as long as they are done between loving
spouses, would be permissible and even morally good. Since Aquinas allowed that
sexual relations between sterile opposite-sex couples can be valuable, by the same reasoning
same-sex sexuality between gay and lesbian partners should also be valuable. Why then the
stipulation that acts must be generative?

Twentieth century natural law theorists sometimes argued that the purpose of the sex

organs is reproductive. Hence any sex acts involving non-procreative sex (e.g., because it is a
same-sex sex act, or one that uses contraception) are contrary to the purpose of the
involved organ and hence are immoral. This view, sometimes called the perverted faculty
argument, is perhaps implicit in Aquinass work, but it has come under sharp attack and
contemporary natural law theorists have abandoned it.

http://peter-tang.com/critique-test/2014/12/31/alan-turing-natural-law-homosexuality/

4/12

1/7/2016

The Critique Alan Turing, Natural Law & Homosexuality

Instead, the updated version of the defense of only vaginal sex, and hence the
condemnation of sodomitical sex acts (whether heterosexual or homosexual) rests on
specifically drawn accounts of two human goods: integration of the self and marriage

The idea of integration of self is that there should be an alignment between ones intentional
self and ones embodied self. That is, since one is a body, one should not treat ones (or
anothers) body solely as a means to ones goals. Sex acts engaged in purely for pleasure are
immoral, for instance, since one is using ones own and anothers body in a reductive,
instrumental fashion. One could easily reply that gay lovers (perhaps gay married lovers) are
doing the same thing straight married couples are, in expressing affection and emotion,
sharing pleasure, and cultivating the bonds of their relationship. The crucial natural law

claim about this good, at least as far as sex goes, is that unless it is a reproductive style act, it
is not truly unitive and hence is instrumental in nature. Thus it is dis-integrative of the
self. At its root, this disallows gay sex by metaphysical fiat. It asserts that one and only one
type of sex actwhich can only be done by heterosexual couplestruly unites persons.
Anything else, regardless of spousal intent or desire, is mere use.

Critiques of Natural Law Theory

Various criticisms of natural law theory can be lumped together as either friendly or
unfriendly. The former class of criticisms accepts the broad outlines and structure of the

theory but seeks to amend specific accounts of the various central human goods, or to allow
http://peter-tang.com/critique-test/2014/12/31/alan-turing-natural-law-homosexuality/

5/12

1/7/2016

The Critique Alan Turing, Natural Law & Homosexuality

for greater cultural variety in how those goods are understood, or to allow for more
variation in how those goods apply to specific persons. In many ways, the friendly authors
are simply putting forward non-traditional versions of the theory. Typically, these views
emphasize how Aquinas allowed that there is meaningful variety between persons, which
affects how moral rules pertain to individuals.[iv]

In regards to homosexuality, the most common friendly critique focuses on the generative
requirement for sexual acts, described above. Again, natural law theory endorses the idea
that sex acts where one or both partners are sterile can be morally good, as long as various
other moral criteria are met. So why not then just allow that the nature of gays and lesbians
is sufficiently different that their sex acts are permissible and even morally good, even
though they are not of a potentially generative kind? Some mainstream contemporary
natural law theorists do allow that heterosexual sex acts need not always solely involve
vaginal intercourse, but even they argue that the male orgasm must only occur in the vagina
of ones loving spouse.[v] The arguments as to why this should apply even in the case of
non-fertile couples seem weak (and are perhaps no stronger in regards to fertile ones).

In order to rule out the possibility of moral non-generative sex, natural law theorists
emphasize procreation in their account of marriage and sexuality. As many point out, this
strongly implies that the marriages of infertile couples are impoverished. Some defenders of
the theory deny this, although it is difficult to take that denial at face value as procreation
and the type of sex act needed for it do such heavy lifting in their theory. Natural law
theorists of a more theological bent contend that couples should be open to the possibility
of a miracle, that their infertility may be overcome during a specific coupling. Yet since a
miracle is a miracle, presumably this reasoning should apply to the possibility of a same-sex
http://peter-tang.com/critique-test/2014/12/31/alan-turing-natural-law-homosexuality/

6/12

1/7/2016

The Critique Alan Turing, Natural Law & Homosexuality

act leading to conception as well.

What is clear is that the requirement that sex acts must be generative (that is, heterosexual
and involving vaginal intercourse) in order to be moral is a common point of criticism.

Leading contemporary natural law theorists have allied themselves with the Catholic Church
and its orthodoxy, and hence in their more recent writings one finds allowances that a
homosexual orientation in itself is not immoral; it is only acting upon it that is
impermissible. If, however, the Catholic Church changes its position and embraces samesex marriage, it will place natural law theorists in a bind, forcing a choice between staying
with the traditional position and thus being out of alignment with the church, or altering a
view that has been held for centuries. If they modify their position to stay aligned with the
Church, it almost certainly would result in a stronger philosophical position. Since it would
then also accord with most academics view that gay marriage is on par with opposite-sex
marriages, it would likely help natural law theory play a larger role in contemporary moral
and philosophic debates.

As far as unfriendly critiques go, that is, those that seek to dispense of natural law theory
root and branch, there is again a broad gamut. Any argument in favor of atheism or

agnosticism is, intentionally or not, an argument against most versions of natural law theory,
since at the core of this theory is a God who has laid down an authoritative set of rules for
mankind.[vi] Similarly, any account of morality that denies objective reality to moral rules is
anti-natural law. A Nietzschean or post-modernist viewpoint is incompatible with one
derived from Aquinas and his heirs, for example.

http://peter-tang.com/critique-test/2014/12/31/alan-turing-natural-law-homosexuality/

7/12

1/7/2016

The Critique Alan Turing, Natural Law & Homosexuality

Nietzsche-derived theories are not merely opposed to natural law, however. Works such as
Nietzsches On the Genealogy of Morals, and the French philosopher Michel Foucaults
Discipline and Punish and The History of Sexuality, have been very effective at showing the deep
variety and incompatibility of rival conceptual schemes of morality, punishment, sexuality,
and other areas of human action and knowledge. Cumulatively, such works make it difficult
to hold onto an account of ethics premised on a God-given, immutable, determinate good
that is also (imperfectly) known by all humans. From this perspective, natural law theory is
yet another example of an historically contingent account of morality attempting to
masquerade as timeless truth. More broadly, the temper of postmodernist and genealogical
investigations, even for those who do not subscribe to their relativistic or nihilistic moral
stance, fuels wide-spread skepticism about ethical theories based on specific and very thick
accounts of the good.

From a different direction, one of the most prominent contemporary critiques of the theory
takes issue with how it structures ethics, by placing the good prior to the right.
Deontological theories reverse this relationship and start with principles that place limits on
permissible action. The pursuit of goods is constrained by these principles. Relatedly, liberal
political theories (understood as a broad range of approaches with roots typically in the
work of Locke, Kant, or Mill) generally eschew any comprehensive account of the good in
establishing the framework of basic social institutions. Instead, basic principles of fairness
(e.g., Rawls) or fundamental rights (e.g., Nozick) should provide the fundamental basis of

social order. Liberals contend that the natural law approach is based on a very particular and
deeply contested notion of the good. By basing legal systems on accounts of those goods,
rather than on rights, there is no principled basis for limiting the scope of laws. As a result,
governments may criminalize consensual sex between adults, prohibit the sale of
contraceptives, ban pornography, and otherwise act to promote virtuous behavior in a
http://peter-tang.com/critique-test/2014/12/31/alan-turing-natural-law-homosexuality/

8/12

1/7/2016

The Critique Alan Turing, Natural Law & Homosexuality

manner deeply at odds with mainstream contemporary understandings of the limits of

governmental power. A prominent recent title in natural law theory is Making Men Moral
which the author, Robert George, argues for all the regulations just mentioned.[vii]

My two broad categories of friendly and unfriendly moral criticism miss some other kinds
of objections to natural law thinking. For instance, one can criticize natural law theorists
emphasis on potentially reproductive sex acts for engaging in bad science. Germain Grisez
important twentieth century proponent of the theory, argued that reproductive pairs are
one organism, for example.[viii] Greater knowledge of cultural and historical variety,

arising primarily from the work of historians and anthropologists, also makes the natural law

account of human goods as timeless and immutable seem less credible. In turn, this helps to
explain why natural law writings sometimes contain hostile asides about historical and
anthropological accounts.[ix]

Conclusion

Natural law theory is not widely defended today within academic circles. In particular, its
commitments to a specific conception of God, combined with an ethical viewpoint
premised on a robust and even dogmatic account of human goods, has made it a minority
perspective in an age where well-educated persons often tend towards various forms of
disbelief and moral pluralism. One suspects that those who subscribe to it do so for the
social conservatism it is usually made to favor (but arguably should not[x]). As suggested
above, a change in Catholic Church doctrine making it more open to gays and lesbians
would put natural law theorists in a bind, caught between their respect for hierarchy and
http://peter-tang.com/critique-test/2014/12/31/alan-turing-natural-law-homosexuality/

9/12

1/7/2016

The Critique Alan Turing, Natural Law & Homosexuality

official dogma, on the one hand, and their commitment to social conservatism, on the
other. The recent synod convened by Pope Francis gestured in this very direction.

Natural law theory has updated itself previously. Most recently, in the twentieth century
several writers refashioned it to accommodate it to the modern, liberal order, by allowing
for meaningful restrictions on how far the state can promote moral virtue and accepting
religious pluralism based on the separation of church and state. In the twenty-first century,
the theory could go through another wave of revision, making it accord with contemporary
Western societies that are increasingly, albeit it still quite imperfectly, accepting of
homosexuality and are willing to treat gays and lesbians as legal and social equals. As
outlined above, this would not involve significant theoretical revisions and the result would
be philosophically more cogent. It would also allow natural law theory to play a larger role
in academic and social debates than it currently does. Of course, such a change, even if it

does happen, would not eradicate an ugly history of the persecution of thousands, including
Alan Turing.[xi]

This article is part of the Critiques exclusive series on the Alan Turing biopic The
Imitation Game. Follow The Critique onFacebookand Twitter@dekritikfor hourly
news about all things philosophy!

References
[i] Andrew Hodges, Alan Turing: The Enigma (Centenary Edition), Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 2012, p.457.
http://peter-tang.com/critique-test/2014/12/31/alan-turing-natural-law-homosexuality/

10/12

1/7/2016

The Critique Alan Turing, Natural Law & Homosexuality

[ii] To avoid anachronism, in this article I will use the terminology about homosexuality that is most
common for the era I am writing about. For instance, Turing himself most commonly used the word

homosexual to describe himself, although with friends he would often use queer. In a short story he
wrote, he did use the term gay, but that was certainly atypical. Here, referring to a 1990s legal dispute
in Colorado, I use the contemporary terminology of gay and lesbian.
[iii] Gerard Bradley of the Notre Dame School of Law and Robert George authored an amicus brief
on behalf of the Family Research Council and Focus on the Family. John Finnis and Robert George
testified in the Romer v. Colorado case on behalf of the initiative which would have struck down
protections for gays and lesbians. George, Finnis, and other contemporary natural law theorists have
been the leading public intellectual proponents of not allowing same-sex marriage.
[iv] Basic Writings of St. Thomas Aquinas, New York: Random House, 1945, p.776.
[v] For example, see Robert George, In Defense of Natural Law New York: Oxford University Press,
1999.
[vi] There are examples of nontheistic natural law perspectives. See, for instance, Philippa Foot,
Natural Goodness, New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.
[vii] Robert George, New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.
[viii] Quoted in George, The Clash of Orthodoxies, Wilmington, Delaware: ISI Books, 2001, p.78.
[ix] Ibid.
[x] See Brent Pickett, Natural Law and the Regulation of Sexuality Richmond Journal of Law and the
Public Interest, Vol.8, Issue 1 (Summer 2004).

[xi] I want to thank Patrick Blythe and David Mapel for their comments on earlier drafts of this article

RELATED
http://peter-tang.com/critique-test/2014/12/31/alan-turing-natural-law-homosexuality/

11/12

1/7/2016

The Critique Alan Turing, Natural Law & Homosexuality

Decoding Apologies to Alan Turing: Is

Post-Mortem Pardon Meaningless?
December 31, 2014
In "Articles"

0 Comments
Recommend

The Philosophical Legacy of Alan

Turing
December 31, 2014
In "Articles"

Alan Turing & The Chinese Room

Argument
December 31, 2014
In "Articles"

The Critique

Share

Login

Sort by Best

Start the discussion

Be the first to comment.

WHAT'S THIS?

ALSO ON THE CRITIQUE

Private: Police Loyalty: Understanding The

Post-Shooting Support For Officer Darren
1 comment 10 months ago
Wilson

Private: Christianity & Philosophy: Five

Misunderstandings
3 comments a year ago

Chris Wilson Attempting to formalize the

Graham Oppy I agree with more or less

essay, would it be fair to say that: in a system of

two values, community or partnership, we can
only have both values if community

everything that John Cottingham says in his

reply to my comment. I believe that it is worth
saying that many theists active in

Oskar Groening & Our Own Guilt for Crimes

Committed Collectively

Private: Whats All The Fuss With Police

Militarization?

2 comments 7 months ago

2 comments 10 months ago

AvatarCharles Crawford Agreed. It's all a bit

muddled. "Perhaps he can be blamed for joining
the SS. People have a duty to avoid being led
astray by false doctrines" is a

AvatarRichard Arlen EXCELLENT ARTICLE.HOW

EVER THE POLICE IN THE U.S HAVE
ALWAYS BEEN ARMED TO THE TEETH
DEPENDING ON WERE AND HOW

Subscribe

Add Disqus to your site Add Disqus Add

http://peter-tang.com/critique-test/2014/12/31/alan-turing-natural-law-homosexuality/

Privacy

12/12