Upvote:4
From a Thomistic perspective, why is there h*m*sexuality among animals?
Thomasistic philosophy does not accord to animals the same moral status or equal consideration with humans due to a lack of consciousness, reason, or autonomy. In other words, animals are irrational animals that can neither comprehend intellectual thought or adore their Creator. Thus animals may act in animalistic manners, yet are not guilty of moral or immoral conduct as man is able to do.
Biblically speaking h*m*sexuality is considered sinful. Thus is true for men, but not for animals. Animals being irrational beings are not capable of consent in terms of doing something sinful. There Acts are on a level conducive to their natures.
Thomas Aquinas would deny animals moral status or equal consideration with humans due to a lack of consciousness, reason, or autonomy.
Consent, properly speaking, is not in irrational animals. The reason of this is that consent implies an application of the appetitive movement to something as to be done. Now to apply the appetitive movement to the doing of something, belongs to the subject in whose power it is to move the appetite: thus to touch a stone is an action suitable to a stick, but to apply the stick so that it touch the stone, belongs to one who has the power of moving the stick. But irrational animals have not the command of the appetitive movement; for this is in them through natural instinct. Hence in the irrational animal, there is indeed the movement of the appetite, but it does not apply that movement to some particular thing. And hence it is that the irrational animal is not properly said to consent: this is proper to the rational nature, which has the command of the appetitive movement, and is able to apply or not to apply it to this or that thing. - Whether consent is to be found in irrational animals?
Only human beings are rational, autonomous, and self-conscious.
Only human beings can act morally.
The term rational animal refers to a classical definition of humanity or human nature, associated with Aristotelianism, from which Thomas Aquinas basis his theological and philosophical perspectives with the understandings gained in mediation on the Scriptures and other classical patristic writings.
Animals are not bound to natural law, for they are incapable of intellectual thought. Thus no law (natural or otherwise) can be communicated to them.