Given the scientific advances in our understanding of human sexuality and the discovery of homosexual acts by non human species, a present day Kant might reject his 18th century definition of gay sex as "unnatural. Notify me of follow-up comments by email. Online ISSN One ; two ; three. Moreover, she argues that because any rightful sexual deeds require consent, marriage is not what makes the sexual deed rightful but rather the public institution of marriage is needed. What would count as a perversion of the locomotive faculty?
You're using an out-of-date version of Internet Explorer.
I wonder how he would see a life of abstinence, which would obviously have exactly the same result? Volume 52 Issue Janpp. This is patently false, and will be demonstrated with textual evidence throughout this reply. Sure, that's what Kant would say, but what about other philosophers, or hell, even some modern Kantians?
Volume 3 Issue Julpp.