Sex

Sir.—In his article on Sex Apartheid. Mr. Oestreicher mentions the natural law; but his argument loses a good deal of force because he seems to regard the natural law as the preserve of Christians, or anyone who happens to agree with their moral code. The natural law however, is not a force that a nation or any individual can play around with impunity; and Mr. Oestreicher neglected the most Important point when he did not point out that if sexual relationships are not related to the natural law there will be certain unpleasant inevitable consequences.

He did not mention, for example, the most important fact of the lot: that the primary end of sexual congress is the procreation of children. Where this primary end is neglected in favour of the second and third ends (the fostering of mutual love, and the allaying of concupiscence) the result is the breakdown of social life.

This I think, is a sufficiently strong reason for saying not that the natural law is merely desirable, or a Good Thing, but that the natural law is inevitable and inviolable.

And, incidentally, members of the Catholic Church do not accept the touching of their Church on faith alone, but because the teaching is that which their reason tells them is the natural law.

—Ergo.