The issue of same-sex espousement is something of a sultry topic in our country these days. In March, Michigan decided that same-sex espousements were licit, then later the same day, that ruling was stayed, and then determinately, later the same month, a federal appeals court stayed the ruling indefinitely (Egan, 2014).
The theological voluntarism approach suggests that God decides what is right and what is erroneous. These are absolute morals that never transmute. God decides moral principles, and they are fine-tuned and aeonian. If God verbally expresses that homosexual sex is erroneous, then it is erroneous, and homosexuals cannot be sanctioned to espouse (Waller, 2011). According to a majority in this country,…show more content… The nonobjectivist view is a skeptic’s view (Waller, 2011). It suggests that neither side of an ethical argument has made its case, and either side could be right, because there are no moral absolutes. To nonobjectivist, moral claims like “homosexuality is wrong” are opinions that depend on one’s perspective, not facts that can be proved. A nonobjectionivist can heedfully aurally perceive the argument that same-sex espousement is erroneous because the Bible verbally expresses that homosexual sex is erroneous, and understand that the person making the argument has substantial reasons to cerebrate so. The person making such an argument must have grown up being edified that the argument is a vigorous one. But, that argument, utilizing the Bible as a standard, is just as vigorous as the argument from someone who verbally expresses that same-sex espousement should be sanctioned, because in doing so, we are sanctioning homosexuals to express their love and their desire to bond, and that desire is just as legitimate as the heterosexual’s desire. A nonobjectivist could never come to a decision about whether or not to sanction same-sex espousement, because to them, one view of ethical demeanor is just as good as another.
A moral realist believes that there are absolute morals. He accepts that homosexuality is either right, or erroneous. But, he additionally accepts he may not be able