How The Times came to its gay marriage conclusion

The Times (UK) newspaper just came out in favour of gay marriage in a 5 March 2012 editorial.

I find this interesting not because of what view they took but because of how they came to their conclusion.

The Times said it would increase the sum of human happiness. They are therefore arguing from a uutilitarian moral view point.

Normally current affairs debate is characterised by intuitive, this feels right or wrong positioning. It is rare to find an underlying moral philosophy in Parliament or media.

Here's was one though.

Counting felicity

Utilitarianism says the morally right thing to do is that which increases the greatest happiness for the greatest number. Morality isn't the rules of a god (Archbishops opposed gay marriage), abstract Greek ideas of maximising your potential or any notion of absolute individual rights .

If it lessens pain and increases happiness it must be good.

Now utilitarianism has flaws such as the problem of how to measure all this (felicit calculus) and that of sacrificing the individual on the alter of society. It's a useful rule of thumb to consider stuff in the news though.

Mostly I'm pleased as it is so rare to see reasoning based on coherent moral philosophy, be it Bentham's or otherwise.