The document discusses several topics related to Christian responses to special social and moral issues including sexuality, abortion, euthanasia, and birth regulation. It provides context on each topic from theological and philosophical perspectives. For sexuality, it discusses the public and private aspects and purposes. For abortion, it defines and distinguishes between spontaneous and induced abortion and discusses arguments for and against abortion. For euthanasia, it defines types and discusses arguments for and against as well as the Church's perspective of it being morally unacceptable. For birth regulation, it discusses natural versus artificial methods.

1. Norly Daang Lamayo
Nino Encarnacion Raya
Rojely Absin Martinez - Maam Esterlina Valero

2. TOPIC 7
CHRISTIAN
RESPONSE TO
SPECIAL SOCIAL
MORAL ISSUES

3. Maturity in our
Christian life does
not simply denote
that we know all the
Christian
moral principles,
laws, and maxims. It
means that we are
applying these
principles,
laws, and maxims in
our daily life.

4. When confronted with
moral dilemmas and
questions
– pertaining to
sexuality, bioethics,
human rights and other
contentious issues – we
must be able to
respond to them, and
act based on and in
accordance with the
Christian
principles that we have
learned.

6. Sexuality cannot be separated publicly and
privately with regards to one’s
attitudes, values, feelings and relationship
with the opposite sex. Sexuality is the sum
total of a human beings’ social, physical,
intellectual, emotional and spiritual
aspects. All of us have to develop
integrally and grow according to our own
sexuality.

7. Jacques P. Thiroux, in his book Ethics( cited in Agbuya, 1997),
states that the public aspect is concerned with the way matters
of sex overtly affect others, and the effects of basic governing
principles of morality on life, goodness, and justice. The private
aspect, on the other hand, is concerned with sexual
relationship between or among consenting adults, vis-à-vis the
basic governing principles of goodness, justice,
freedom, fidelity and honesty.
The nature or purpose of human sexuality as a gift from God
manifests in four
dimensions or levels:
1) pleasure and satisfaction;
2) procreation and multiplication;
3) expression of love and commitment;
4) expression of friendship and companionship

8. Through physical bodies, we are accessible to one another
and our presence to other people is as much a bodily
presence to theirs is to us.
Through our sexual meaning, we realize that we are alone
and separate, powerless and ignorant, helpless and weak,
empty and homeless, inadequate and incomplete.
Through human sexuality, we become aware of our
emptiness, incompleteness, and bareness; we come to know
that we need each other to be full, complete, and protected.
The sharing of each other’s being or the giving of oneself to
the other makes human sexuality more meaningful.
Human sexuality should lead an individual, in his/ her
relationship with others in the society, to his/ her personal
integration and full self-realization as a person and as
a Christian.

11. The word “ abortion” comes from the Latin verbs aborior,
abortiri and abortus which “ to set, to disappear, to fail, or to
perish by untimely birth.” Technically, abortion refers to the
termination of pregnancy in the first trimester of its existence.
In cases of spontaneous abortions, the termination of
pregnancy during the second trimester is called a “
miscarriage”. If the termination occurs in the last trimester
before the pregnancy reaches full term, it is dubbed as a “
premature birth”.

12. Spontaneous Abortion refers to the premature expulsion of the embryo
brought about by nature, not by any outside agent. Thus, the death of the
embryo is not provoked by any intentional act by the mother or by any
other person. Spontaneous abortion is involuntary and not willed by any
person.
Induced abortion involves the premature expulsion of the embryo by the
deliberate action undertaken by a person. It is the destruction of the life of
the embryo or the termination of pregnancy deliberately effected by an
individual. It is the removal of the embryo whish is precipitated by some
intentional act of the pregnant woman or another person before the
embryo grows to the point where it can survive.

13. 1. To safeguard the life of the mother
2. Abortion as a woman’s right
3. Abortion as an expression of a woman’s sexual
freedom.
4. The fetus is not human
5. The unwanted child syndrome
6. To stave off the birth of a potentially deformed child
7. Abortion as a means of improving the quality of life
8. Abortion as a means of controlling the population

14. From the Christian perspective, fetal life is sacred. As such, it
calls for respect, for reverence. So, too, the respect for the
sanctity of human life borders on equality. The Church always
upholds the sanctity of human life. She always condemns
uncompromisingly any direct attack on or violation of human
life. She, too, respects the natural right to life of individuals,
maintaining that a violation of this right is incompatible with
the fundamental Christian norms of justice and charity. As
early a s the apostolic times, abortion is already forbidden by
the Church.

15. No one chooses to be born. Everyone is born in a certain
place, time, and manner. No one choose one’s own
parents, nor the time and the place where one will be
brought forth into this world. There is no freedom to be
born. Ultimately too, everyone is going to die sometime,
some place, somehow.
When a person is born, his/ her parents take care of him/
her until he/she grows up. If life is kind he/ she will
develop into a full-grown person. But life can be harsh,
too, and interspersed with sufferings, pains and
sicknesses. But the worst thing about pain is when there
is no more end to it and when one can only hope to die
soon, to end his/ her sufferings either with or without the
aid of another person. Does a person have the right to
end his/ her life just to end these sufferings? Can a
person” plan” his/ her death just as his/ her parents have
“ planned” his birth or conception? these are the
interesting and bewildering questions surrounding

16. Euthanasia means “ easy death” ( from the Greek eu or “easy” and thanatos or “death”). It means a painless, peaceful death. It is the
deliberate putting to death an individual suffering from an incurable and agonizing disease in an easy, painless way. It is also called “
mercy killing.” Some call euthanasia as the art of practice of painlessly putting to death a person suffering from a marked deformity or
from an unbearable and distressing disease”( Timbreza, 1993)
1. active and voluntary euthanasia happens when either a physician, a spouse, or a friend or the patient terminates the latter’s life upon
the latter’s request.
2. Passive and voluntary euthanasia occurs when a terminally ill patient is simply allowed to die by the physician, spouse of an
immediate relative, upon the 91 patient’s request.
3. Active and nonvoluntary euthanasia happens when it is the physician, spouse, close friend, or relative who decides that the life of the
terminally ill patient should be terminated.
4. Passive and nonvoluntary euthanasia occurs when a terminally ill patient is simply allowed to die, as requested by immediate family
member (spouse or parents) or the attending physician It is “passive” insofar as no positive means is employed to end the patient’s
life; it is “nonvoluntary” insofar as other persons make the moral decision to terminate the patient’s life (Timbreza, 1993).

17. Promoters of the right to euthanasia use mainly two arguments: compassion for the
suffering person and the quality- of – life argument. The argument of “ unbearable
suffering” becomes less and less convincing, since in almost all cases, modern
medicine has new and very effective means of combating great pain without
depriving patient of consciousness. The quality-of-life argument in favor of
euthanasia is the more unjust argument. It is based on the presumption that there
are people who have the right to judge whether or not other person’s lives are still
worthwhile, valuable, and must be prolonged. Their judgment can only be
contemptuous; it represents a death sentence. Although some would confine this
argument to cases in which consciousness is lost or the death process seems to be
irreversible, in principle it entitles one to pass judgment on other’s life and to execute
others on the basis of one’s evaluation.

18. Whatever its motive and means, direct ( positive or active) euthanasia consists in
putting an end to the lives of handicapped, sick, or terminally ill person; thus, it is
morally unacceptable. The Church condemns direct euthanasia as morally wrong
and a grave sin by directly causing the death of oneself or another, a person
assumes an authority over life which belongs to God Himself. The Church also
teaches that we must take all the proportionate means to preserve life even if
there is little hope for recovery. Disproportionate means, on the other hand,
maybe applied if a person so decides, through this is not a moral obligation.
Disproportionate means refer to the kinds of treatment, medication, or some
other medical assistance which inconvenience the patient and are excessively
expensive, yet do not offer a reasonable hope for recovery. However, it is always
acceptable to give the patient the needed medication to keep him/ her free from
pain and to assist him/ her to remain lucid and alert.

21. God blessed the first human couple with the
words: “ Be fruitful and multiply”(Gen 1:28; 9:1-7).
This blessing expresses the conviction that
sexuality and marriage serve the propagation of
humankind. A wealth of children is considered by
the Holy Scriptures as a favor from God and a
reason for joy.( Gen. 26: 60; Ru. 4:1 f). Conversely,
childlessness is a misfortune and a divine
punishment ( Lev. 20:20f; Is. 47:9;Jer.18:21). “
Sons are a heritage from the Lord, the fruit of the
womb as reward,” prays the Psalmist(Ps. 127:3 ).
Even today, a child is considered as a gift and a
blessing from God. A poet write: “ A babe in a
house is a wellspring of pleasure.” The baby is
the fulfillment of human matrimony and the
pride of parents.

22. The natural method of birth
regulation requires no outside
prevention method for pregnancy. It
is natural because it allows the
prevention of conception through the
course of nature without using any
artificial or mechanical means.
Natural methods include the calendar
or rhythm method, body basal
temperature, withdrawal and
periodic abstinence.

23. This method refers to the application of
artificial means for the prevention of
pregnancy. while a few require operative
sterilization, many involve the use of either
mechanical or chemical devices known as
contraceptives.
1. Local-mechanical and chemical means. These
include the condom, the intrauterine device
(IUD), and the vaginal diaphragm.
2. Local- chemical means. These include
antiseptics, such as spermicidal jellies and
suppositories, that kill the spermatozoa. They
only possess a moderate reliability. They are
not used at present.
3. Hormonal means or sterilizing drugs.

25. Within the Filipino family, adultery and
concubinage can be considered the greatest
moral and social evils. This is especially true
with Filipino husbands who have“ queridas”.
Nowadays. not only is infidelity a problem of
Filipino husbands, but of Filipino wives as
well. Wives whose husbands are working
abroad are exposed to the danger of
infidelity. Being left alone by their husbands,
wives might express their wanting for men
other than their husbands

27. Another roadblock to successful marriage is divorce, completely opposite to the most distinctive
feature of Christian matrimonial tradition insistence to the permanence of the marriage bond.
Jesus Christ’s teaching on marriage condemns divorce because it is contrary to the will of God.
It therefore implies that remarriage by divorce is adultery ( Mk. 10:1-2). Christ’s statement on
divorce has been treated as law. St. Paul, who had been the church’s greatest teacher in this
matter, knew better. He saw clearly that to keep one’s marriage intact Christians should make
Christ as its foundation, binding cord of couple’s relationship. But he related that in certain
circumstances. Christians failed to do this vital step. Christ’s rejection of divorce and his
accusation of adultery are simply other expression of his insistence on what marriage is
supposed to be – two in one flesh, a living union brought by love in conformity with the creative
wisdom of god. If the reality of that union is shattered, regardless of what legal formalities do or
do not accompany its shattering. God’s wisdom is stultified, his creation is spoiled; the damage
is done., the divorce. If we allow that term any but juridical meaning, is already a fact ( Gaffney
1974:58).
Both the church and state grant annulments. When the state grants an annulment, it is saying
that there was no legal contract, hence, the legal bonds between partners did not exist from the
beginning. when the church grants an annulment, it is saying that there was no valid
sacramental marriage from the beginning. In both case, the two persons are free to marry
again.

29. Homosexuality is the sexual orientation toward
people of the same sex. Homosexuality contrasts
with heterosexuality which is a sexual orientation
toward people of the opposite sex. People with a
sexual orientation toward members of both sexes
are called bisexuals . Female homosexuals are
frequently called lesbians. In recent years, the
term gay has been applied to both homosexual
men and women.
Homosexuality appears in virtually all social
contexts—within different community settings,
socioeconomic levels, and ethnic and religious
groups. The number of homosexuals in the
population is difficult to determine, and reliable
data do not exist.
Gay Pride Parade
Members of the activist
group ACT UP (AIDS
Coalition to Unleash
Power) rally at a gay pride
parade in New York City.
Such groups have helped
raise public awareness
about acquired
Immunodeficiency
syndrome (AIDS), which
affects millions of people.

30. Attitudes toward homosexual behavior have varied with time and place. In ancient Greece,
homosexual relations were accepted and, in some cases, expected activity in certain segments of
society. Later attitudes toward homosexuality in the Western world was determined largely by
prevailing Judeo-Christian moral codes, which treat homosexuality as immoral or sinful. But like
many other sins, homosexual relations were seen as expressions of the weakness inherent in all
human beings, and not as a mental disorder or as the behavior of a specific type of person. This
latter view, which regarded homosexuality as a pathology, developed in the late 19th century. By
the beginning of the 20th century, psychoanalysts viewed homosexuals as the victims of faulty
development. Austrian physician Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, considered
homosexuality a deviant condition. More recently, scientists have searched for a biological
explanation of sexual orientation. A study published in 1993 sought to identify a genetic marker for
sexual orientation. The research, which did not include a cross section of the population, was
inconclusive.

31. In recent years, people who support homosexual rights have worked and demonstrated to
increase those rights. In the United States, the watershed event for homosexual activism was the
Stonewall riot, which protested a police raid on a gay bar in New York City in 1969. It was the first
public protest by homosexuals against harassment by police. Since then, homosexual
communities in the United States have organized to work for gay rights. Such groups include the
National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, a civil rights organization that promotes equality and
freedom from prejudice and discrimination for gays and lesbians; Lambda Legal Defense and
Education Fund, which provides legal representation for gays and lesbians; and the Human Rights
Campaign Fund, which lobbies state and national legislators. In Canada, Equality for Gays and
Lesbians Everywhere (EGALE) has worked to secure equal rights for gays and lesbians and to
influence federal legislation on gay rights. Canadian gay rights groups helped bring about the
amendment in 1996 of the Canadian Human Rights Act to explicitly prohibit discrimination based
on sexual orientation.

32. Other countries that have specifically outlawed discrimination against
homosexuals and bisexuals include. The Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, South
Africa, Australia, and New Zealand. One of the greatest challenges to face the
homosexual community was the outbreak of acquired immunodeficiency
syndrome (AIDS) in the early 1980s. In the United States, the disease first
became prevalent among gay men and spread with devastating effect. When little
was known about the disease and how it was spread, AIDS patients and
homosexuals experienced an increase in discrimination in housing and health
insurance. Many people protested against agencies of the U.S. government—
including the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), the National Institutes of Health
(NIH), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)—claiming they were slow to
study the disease and search for treatment. More organizations were formed to
help educate people about the disease and to help AIDS patients get proper care.

33. In the 1990s and 2000s homosexual rights groups addressed a number of other issues, including the rights of
gay and lesbian families. In 2001 The Netherlands became the first country to legalize same-sex marriages,
giving same-sex couples the same rights that heterosexual couples have in areas such as inheritance, taxes,
divorce, and pension benefits. Belgium legalized same-sex marriages in 2003. Spain and Canada followed
suit in 2005. Canada became the fourth nation to legalize same- sex marriage and the first outside of Europe.
Several other European countries recognize homosexual unions, although these unions are generally called
civil unions or registered partnerships rather than marriages. The United Kingdom, for example, permitted civil
partnerships beginning in December 2005. The same month the Constitutional Court of South Africa struck
down the country’s Marriage Act as unconstitutional because it did not permit same-sex marriage. The court
stayed its ruling for one year to allow parliament to amend the act, but it stipulated that the ruling would go
into effect regardless by December 2006. In December 2006 South Africa became the fifth country to legalize
gay marriage. In the United States, 39 states have passed laws forbidding same-sex marriages and denying
recognition of same-sex marriages obtained elsewhere. In 2004, 13 states—most of which already prohibited
such marriages by law—enacted constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriages, joining four other
states that had previously done so. Gay couples can legally marry in only one state in the United States, the
state of Massachusetts. Three states—Connecticut, New Jersey, and Vermont—permit civil unions, which
extend the same legal rights of marriage to same-sex couples that heterosexual couples have under state
law. Vermont legalized civil unions in 2000, Connecticut did so in 2005, and New Jersey in 2006.

34. The year 2003 marked a milestone in extending legal rights to homosexuals in North America. In June 2003 the
Supreme Court of the United States struck down laws that criminalized homosexual behavior. Gay rights activists
regarded it as a landmark ruling. The decision in the case, Lawrence v. Texas, involved a Texas state law that
made sodomy (oral and anal sex) between members of the same sex illegal. Five of the nine Supreme Court
justices ruled that the law violated the Constitution guarantee of due process, and their opinion drew on other
court precedents regarding privacy. In a forceful opinion written by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, the Court found
that gays are “entitled to respect for their private lives” and that “the state cannot demean their existence or
control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime.” The opinion reversed an earlier 1986
decision known as Bowers v. Hardwick, which had upheld a similar law against sodomy in the state of Georgia.
“Bowers was not correct when it was decided, and it is not correct today,” Justice Kennedy wrote. A sixth justice,
Sandra Day O’Connor, issued a concurring opinion but based her objection to the Texas law on the grounds that
it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution. O’Connor noted that the Texas law applied only to gays
and therefore discriminated against gays as a class. (See the Sidebars “Lawrence v. Texas” and “Bowers v.
Hardwick.”) The ruling struck down sodomy laws still in existence in 13 states. Although many of these laws were
rarely enforced, they nevertheless had widespread implications and often resulted in denying gays the right to
hold certain jobs, the right to adopt children, and rights to child custody and visitation on the grounds that they
were engaged in criminal conduct.

35. Lesbianism
les·bi·an·ism [lézbee ə nìzzəm] noun homosexuality in women: sexual attraction and sexual relations between
women.
Bisexuality
Bisexuality, sexual orientation toward people of either sex. Bisexuality is distinguished from
homosexuality, which is sexual orientation toward members of one own sex, and from
heterosexuality, which is sexual orientation toward members of the opposite sex.

36. Transvestism, the practice of wearing the clothing of the opposite sex for
emotional or sexual expression. Transvestism does not include all
instances of wearing such clothing, however. Cross-dressing differs from
transvestism in that it is conducted for different reasons; a person cross-
dresses to make a comment on society or to entertain. Cross-dressing is
not usually referred to as transvestism. Transvestites tend to perceive
themselves either as women with masculine predispositions, or as men
with comparable feminine predispositions. For some, transvestism is
limited to using the clothing of the other gender to elicit sexual
excitement. However, for more transvestites, sexual behavior is involved
only slightly or not at all; instead, the transvestite gains emotional
satisfaction from dressing in the clothing of the opposite sex.
Transvestites often describe their behavior as expressing those aspects
of the identity and roles of the other gender that they feel are important
aspects of their self definition. Transvestism is not a reliable indication of
sexual orientation; it does not necessarily involve abandoning ones
original gender identity as a woman or man. Transvestism occurs among
both sexes, but is more common among men than among women and
more common among heterosexuals than among homosexuals. In some
cultures, transvestism is an accepted behavior, with members of the
population adopting the identity of the opposite sex. One example is the
berdaches, people in some Native American groups who assume the
role of the opposite sex, including dress.