Regarding Sartre, Matt says:
>Sartre, on the other hand, *does* make the quasi-Kantian argument
about
>sexuality. Here is a passage from _Existentialism and Humanism_:
>
>"When I confront a real situation--for example, that I am a
sexual being,
>able to have relations with a being of the other sex and able
to have
>children--I am obliged to choose my attitude to it, and in every
respect I
>bear the responsibility of the choice which, in committing myself,
also
>commits the whole of humanity" (Jean-Paul Sartre, _Existentialism
and
>Humanism_, Tr. Philip Mairet, Methuen, 1973, p. 48).
I don't know the context of this passage, but based on my knowledge
of Sartre's ethics I don't think that it is fair to interpret
Sartre as making the "quasi-Kantian" argument being discussed.
Perhaps the context will prove me wrong, but I think Sartre here
is simply using sexuality as an example. You could perhaps argue
that Sartre's ethics leads one into the kind of thinking whereby
one would evaluate the consequences of everyone's having sex
exclusively with people of the same gender...
~Nate
--
"If some woman tried to kick my ass, I'd be like, 'Hey...woman!
Don't you dress me up...like a mailman...and make me dance for
you...while you go smoke crack...in the bedroom...and have sex
with some guy...I don't even know...on my dad's bed!'"
~Eric Cartman