Ethics:vincent Punzo

Ethics:vincent Punzo

Audrey Small
March 4, 2010
In “Morality and Human Sexuality,” Vincent Punzo, a proponent of conventional to moderate views of sexual morality, contends that premarital sexual unions are “morally deficient,” unless they are shared between couples in a totally loving and committed relationship (L, pg. 279).   Punzo distinguishes sexual intimacy from other recreational activities that men and women share such as playing tennis or going to the movies, exhibiting how today’s society views sex as two individuals casually merging and exchanging themselves, similar to an “economic transaction” (L, pg. 278).   He condemns this “reductionistic outlook” describing sexual intercourse as “a man and a woman giving their bodies the most intimate, physical expression of themselves, over to the other” (L, pg. 278).   Moreover, Punzo continues to denounce uncommitted sex stating that it is solely a physical union between two partners that denies any other personal or emotional connections and is therefore lacking in “existential integrity” (L, pg. 279).   Comparable to Punzo’s beliefs, I believe that sexual intercourse should be a personal and intimate experience in an arena of mutual trust, confidence, and security. I agree with Punzo’s reasoning that chastity is using his body as an element of his personal identity, instead of using his body merely as an instrument for temporary sexual pleasure (L, pg. 280).   In addition, casual sex is not morally justified because it is not fulfilling for most human beings, sensually or spiritually, and may cause psychological harm. Sexual relationships between uncommitted partners can also have negative consequences in regard to pregnancy and diseases, as well as go against traditional religious beliefs.
Punzo presents an objection from the economic standpoint of sexual intercourse stating that if each sexual partner is honest about any contagious diseases that they may have and is in agreement that each partner is...