Lewis’s controversial argument in his essay We have no “Right To Happiness” he begins by bringing up a quote by a character named Clare who says, “After all, they had a right to happiness.” He then proceeds to describe a situation in which a husband abandons his wife in exchange for another women. The events that unfold involve his ex-wife committing suicide after devoting and consuming herself to her earlier married life. The man justifies his decision and shies away from feeling any guilt by, in C.S Lewis’s eyes, a pathetic excuse which goes, “But what could I do?” he said. “A man had a right to happiness. I had to take my one chance when it came.” Basically what happened is his pursuit of happiness had the ripple effect of being the reason…
After reading C.S Lewis’s essay I can understand his argument and why he feels the way he feels about man using the excuse of his “pursuit of happiness” to justify his misdoings. I agree with his idea that our sexual impulses have been put in a position of “preposterous privilege” because it condones all behavior because it was done in mans interest of happiness. In reality what Mr.A did is immoral and many of our strongest impulses must be squashed in the interest of the greater good. Many of our desires, specifically sexual, tend to be selfish and if acted upon come at the expense of anothers happiness. C.S Lewis made me question is it wrong to be happy if it would mean destroying anothers happiness? I do not think that we have a right to happiness if it is obtained by cruelty , but I do believe that man is free to pursue happiness when their pursuit is in the confinements of the Laws of Nature and is honorable. In society today I believe the “right to sexual happiness” is the root cause of many marriages which ended up crumbling. There was once a time when partners stayed together because they knew it was right and had made a promise to love one another forever, and slowly that promise has come to lose some of its power. It is not necessarily that in past generations men were not…
