What is Right About the Contra-Life Argument Against Contraception?

Author:

Anderson Robert D.1

Affiliation:

1. Philosophy Department of Saint Anselm College, Manchester, New Hampshire

Abstract

The contra-life argument against contraception by Germain Grisez, Joseph Boyle, John Finnis, and William May maintains that contraception is always and everywhere morally wrong because it involves a contra-life choice to impede new human life. This article develops four problems that people might have with the contra-life argument and then shows that none of those problems undercut the argument. The most serious problem is that the contra-life argument seems to fail to show adequately what is wrong with impeding new human life, and this article neutralizes that problem by showing that choices to impede new human life are wrong because they involve unreasonable self-preference. Finally, this article shows that the moral character of contraceptive use for non-contraceptive reasons is often difficult to determine.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Health Policy,Philosophy

Reference24 articles.

1. In The Teaching of "Humanae Vitae": A Defense (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1988), 35-116, reprinted from The Thomist 52 (1988): 365-426. All citations here are to the former edition. See also Joseph Boyle, "Contraception and Natural Family Planning," in Why Humanae Vitae Was Right: A Reader, ed. Janet Smith (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1993), 407-417, and which first appeared in International Review of Natural Family Planning 44 (1980): 309-315

2. Germain Grisez, The Way of the Lord Jesus, vol. 2, Living a Christian Life (Quincy, IL: Franciscan Press, 1993), 506-519

3. and John Finnis, Moral Absolutes: Tradition, Revision, and Truth (Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 1991), ch. 4.

4. IMPROVING THE ANALOGIES IN CONTRALIFE ARGUMENTS: THE CONSISTENCY OF CATHOLIC TEACHINGS ABOUT REGULATING BIRTHS

5. The False Theory UndergirdingCondomitic Exceptionalism

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3