Saint Anthony Mary Claret College

UNDERGRADUATE DEPARTMENT
December 6, 2017
Amisola, Michael Jhon L.
Xaverian Missionaries

Philosophical Paper in Ethics

Main Question of Inquiry: Should Chemical castration though Anaphrodisiac Drugs be revived
to curtail Homosexuality?

I. Issues Angle

Chemical Castration in history has Legal sanctions against homosexual behaviour

together with prejudice against gay men and lesbians rose to a peak after the second world war
and laid the foundation on which interest in psychological interventions to alter sexuality
increased sharply in the 1960s and 70s. The administration of a drug (such
as medroxyprogesterone acetate) to bring about a marked reduction in the body's production
of androgens and especially testosterone (Meriam Websters online). The angle of this issue is
driven from the history of the human reality during the era of World War II. There is a certain
person named Allan Turing who is an intellectually intellectual person who happened to break
the code of enigma. Allan Turing is a homosexual and during that time homosexuality is highly
prohibited in the British society.

Relating the angle of the issue in our contemporary time today there is a regard of
bringing the chemical castration in the society in order to aid homosexual urges that also paves
way to the prevalent issue on the sexually transmitted disease (STD) or AIDS. Chemical
castration apart from natural castration it is a mode of medication that is usually given to old
people who had a high sexual urges and in order to regulate them it has been used. As for Allan
Turing he had taken the medication in order to not let him be put to death. For such a great
thinker in the society and in history but because he is a homosexual he is subject to death. In
relating the issue in today’s point of view I had formulated a question, “Should chemical
castration through anaphrodisiac drugs be revived to curtail homosexuality?”

II. Judgment Angle

Grounds and bases of Ethical Standards

In this philosophical paper the writer conducted interviews and hearing opinions from
different interviewees about the topic current topic or issue in our society about homosexuality.
In the interview conducted the first interviewee is a woman, a mother with two children but
wished not to include her name in the paper. In the interview she speculated her answers
regarding the question above. In her opinion, “Is homosexuality a disease or illness that needs to
be cure?” According to her, if chemical castration be applied and revived it will become a one
sided angle favoring argument. There should be a consideration for human rights.

Homosexuals, human as they are also having emotions and feelings. If it will be applied,
then it costs the lives of many individual homosexuals because in humanitarian interiority of
his/her body and interior self-there will be a struggle between the DNA structure and
psychological emotions. There should also be grounds for considering the feeling of the subject
because if the person’s in born reality there will be no amount of any medication that will realign
or correct his/her personality. However, in addition the interviewee also mentioned that on the
other side of the case of the situation if an individual homosexual would permit or allow to
undergo to such medication to happen in his/her life then be it applied but certainly not all will
agree and support to such proposition of revival of chemical castration.

The second interviewee is a male also ask to keep his name confidential in this paper. As
he has contested that it should not be revive because first things first chemical castration towards
homosexuals is already an offense against them. He mentioned that applying chemical castration
would lead to certain arguments because it also entails and be referred to certain cultures in every
continental society. As he elaborated, and provide some examples of his knowledge in Japan
history way back then there was a time where women were outnumbered by men hence it leads
to homosexual development in the country. There are also some of the countries in the world like
the Americas that openly accepts homosexuals.

Upon judging of opening up the chemical castration to homosexuals it depends upon the
culture because some countries who do have restrictions and strict emphasis regarding
homosexuality. But for the second interviewee homosexuality isn’t an illness. Forcibly taking
them to medication would degrade their lives and dignity. If it will be traced back as for studies
in science and biology, DNA structure of a homosexuals could not be blame why he/she has
become a homosexual. There is a certain fact that homosexuality happens when during the
conception or the period of the development of the baby inside the womb of a mother there are
plenty of estrogen that low testosterone that leads to being a homosexual especially gay men. As
he said, “Sometimes homosexuals feel that they aren’t in the man’s body.” In reviving the
chemical castration in society we develop inequality and discrimination on other people.

Grounds for Opposing positions

In the interviews conducted the interviewees mentioned one of the underlying problem
beneath the question. As they contended, some of the countries do tolerate and culturally accepts
the homosexuality. However in some countries especially here in our country, Philippines though
homosexuality number is rising but there is still strictness of acceptance with homosexuality. For
some, homosexuality or a man being s homosexual is not a problem but the problem comes in
when the action and the kind of relationship that a homosexual engage into especially same sex
relationship. Sometimes the acts that the other people perceive comes to the point that is no
longer socially acceptable.

Homosexuals usually engage to same sex intercourse that is why one of the common
grounds of the HIV/ AIDS and the result is increase of number of infected in the Philippines.
from those grounds maybe there is an issue of chemical castration to be brought up. However it
is not a reason of opening up chemical castration to homosexuality. By homosexuality as the
interviewees explain that it is not a situation or a time loop that can be reversed and it is also
most importantly not an illness. If a homosexual would allow to be taken up the medicine then it
is all up to him/her but the question that remains is that for how long would the medication last?
Will the problem of aids be grounds for putting up chemical castration in the society?

In the interviews and speculation of the interviewees it appeared that there are two
grounds or considering the issue of opening up chemical castration and by judging the question
of the main inquiry of this paper. One is chemical castration can’t be done due to the reason that
homosexuality is not an illness that needs to be cured. Second, is that by the result of some
homosexual acts urges to open the possibility of chemical castration for the sake of demising the
prevalent issue of AIDS.

Writer’s position and subscription

In this paper the writer found a hard position upon judging the position that to where to
subscribe to. However, seeing the issue on a greater and wide perspective the writer will
subscribe to not to revive and or opening up the chemical castration due to the fact that obviously
looking at homosexuality isn’t an illness that needs an urgent cure. Although nowadays in our
society homosexuals is becoming large in number and has also product of influence and
biological upbringing but the writer still believe that one is not deemed to be condemned to what
he has born and brought up.

III. Application Angle

Considering all the approaches that the writer learned in the class the best options that the
writer best addresses in the ethical issue that has been chosen is the Kantian Ethics. In
considering the issue of homosexuality first an individual person has Autonomous law which is
the self-law that and individual being is capable of legislating. For Kant Autonomy is always
good. In addition to self-autonomy is the command which for Kant is an unconditional command
with no feeling or reason and this command is the categorical command that is inherent from the
action itself.

In Kantian Universal Law also I see the proposition of not everyone cannot will to act or
apply the chemical castration to homosexuals. Given the reason that using the example of Saving
a drowning person. The maxim here is “I will let chemical castration to be open up ion the
society to curtail Homosexuality.” “The Universal law is that “Everyone will allow such a
chemical castration to be opened up and be used to curtail Homosexuality.” In my conclusion to
such argument by using this universal law one cannot coherently will that everyone follow such
a law. The motive of curtailing homosexuality and wanting to pursue freedom of life in society
are to most opposing sides. These motives are in conflict, so it is not permissible to allow that
chemical castration will be applied to homosexuals without common grounds for agreement.

To elaborate more and explain the position of the issue the writer will use the Kantian
Humanitarian formula or the Categorical Imperative 2 (CI2). CI2 states that “An action is
permissible if and only if the agent does not treat any rational being merely as a means.” Hence
the possibility of opening up the chemical castration for homosexuality for the reason of aiding
the AIDS is impossible to be opened up and do medication to the homosexuals. I contend that the
disease of AIDS is primarily a sexually transmitted disease and I believe that bot all
homosexuals are engage to same sex intercourse. Sexually transmitted disease is a result of
having an intercourse with any person. For example, a woman or a man having an intercourse to
any other person regularly then it would lead to AIDS. It is a clear proof of that it could not be
grounds for generalizing the issue and opening up chemical castration. The other people who had
Aids are not subject or means of raising the chemical castration in the society. The CI2 states that
“Others are treated with politeness and respect.” Obviously it resolves to answer the main
question of inquiry in the issue.

In addition, I remember in our discussion in the class about the Eudaimonia. Considering
the happiness or well-being according to the fundamental function of a human being I can say
that I cannot permit such chemical castration be applied among homosexuals. Any person
regardless of gender identification has his or her own motivational and persistent to seek his or
her happiness and well-being in life. Also adding Kant’s notion on duty we as humans and
rational being in the society do have ontical duty a duty that is beyond hypothetical command or
with the factions involvement around our nature of human. A duty that is not only based upon
conscience base because using Kant’s notion we can obey and let Homosexuals go on because
they are also the humans by all means.

This approach that I have chosen in my own opinion it implements the greatest care and
attention to the concerns of all concerned persons and entities by providing a point of view that is
not what we only see as normative or socially acceptable in the society. In my own opinion the
issue of homosexuality is an issue a between science and what is socially accepted and normative
in the society. I have learned in class that every individual is a culture himself or herself. Science
explains what is factual on the biological explanation of the structure of the person’s individual
or hereditary nature. Where also norms and societal point of view of the majority dictates what
should be the standards and norms of life and the way of living in the society. These two are
irreconcilable and I see it is where ethics contend to. Everyone has concerned and moral
valuation in the society but sometimes it is also culture bias.
 IV. Personal Evaluation

I have learned so much from the specific issue that I have chosen. I have seen even in my
own point of view the issue of homosexuality is as of today an issue that irreconcilable. There
are grounds of considering the chemical castration such as to prevent the spread of AIDS or
sexually transmitted disease. Also there are huge grounds to consider that not to apply and
subject all homosexuals to chemical castration such as that it is not an illness. Because if it will
be termed as “medication” then automatically it already connotes that it is a severe disease.
Homosexuality isn’t a matter of problem but the action that a certain homosexual that do that
seeing in the normative way of seeing is not acceptable.

I see here the essence of studying the ethics here as what is discussed “Ethics is not a
theory or a programmatic norm. It is a way.” I cannot judge to homosexuality because like
myself I also grappling. Yes, there are plenty of principles and norms that has been established in
the society but in terms of application it is very true that there can be no unified principle that
will reconcile everything in the society. Of course those approaches and principle that we have in
the society can be a big tool towards understanding and examining what is it in the nature of
human world and existence but they can only provide us a grasp of the view of the society
because ethics I believe lies in each person and as an individual culture we possess different
point of views to which is on how we see or evaluate the things to which is around us.

By the issue that I have chosen it brings me back to the previous discussions that we have
from the beginning towards the end. From the references and the dynamics that we had in Greek
moral valuation. I see the progress of how moral valuation develops. Towards the end there are
valuations that we had discussed in class. There are some that I disagree for the reason that
sometimes the moral valuation is too subjective or either way objective. But all in all I can say
that those approaches that we have tackled opening up for a horizon that subjects us all human to
the issues around us. It is really indeed a Moral Maturity. It is really a challenge of moving
forward and backward the capacity of being humble and go back from the beginning. With
regards to the issue of homosexuality applied in ethics I can say that the approaches does not
lead us to be too much objective and be narrow minded in seeing the issue but rather the
approaches and topics that we have are all a door to be challenged on our own way of coping
with the certain realities that sprout in our life especially in the contemporary world of today. It
isn’t about what is the right way or wrong way either rather it is how we see the reality from
within and outside our human reality.