Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Type of publication: research article
Type of publication (PDB): Straipsnis kituose recenzuojamuose leidiniuose / Article in other peer-reviewed editions (S5)
Field of Science: Filosofija / Philosophy (H001)
Author(s): Obelenienė, Birutė;Narbekovas, Andrius
Title: Ethics of natural family planning (NFP) vs ethics of contraception
Is part of: New trends and issues proceedings on humanities and social sciences. Cyprus : University of Nicosia, 2016, iss. 7
Extent: p. 21-26
Date: 2016
Note: Selected Paper of 2nd Global Conference on Contemporary Issues in Education (GLOBE-EDU 2015) August 27-28, The University of Chicago Chicago, USA
Keywords: Christian anthropology;Bodility;Sexuality;Natural family planning;Dualistic anthropology
Abstract: The article analyses the moral difference between Natural Family Planning (NFP) and contraception. Problem Statement: Today one of the most frequently asked questions is the following: if contraception and NFP both have the same purpose of avoiding pregnancy, how can there be any moral difference between them. Moreover, people state that it does not make any difference which method is used, if the end and purpose are the same. In fact, proponents of contraceptives often argue that there is no moral difference between contraception and NFP and even treat NFP as a natural form of contraception. Purpose of the study: To disclose the ethical/moral difference between contraception and NFP. Research methods: Theoretical structural method was used for thorough understanding of human person as a bodily and sexual being. Comparative analysis was used to find the distinction between Christian anthropology and dualistic anthropology. Action assessment criteria were used to evaluate the difference between contraceptive action and contraceptive purpose. Findings: In order to show the moral difference between contraception and NFP, firstly thorough understanding of human person as a bodily and sexual being is given, the difference of the use of NFP and contraception in the aspect of human dignity is revealed, and then a distinction between a contraceptive action and a contraceptive will is drawn. Conclusion. The end or purpose of family planning does not make all of the various practices ethically the same. NFP is not a natural contraception; it is the ethical opposite
Affiliation(s): Teologijos katedra
Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas
Appears in Collections:1. Straipsniai / Articles
Universiteto mokslo publikacijos / University Research Publications

Files in This Item:
marc.xml7.58 kBXMLView/Open

MARC21 XML metadata

Show full item record
Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats
Export to Other Non-XML Formats

CORE Recommender

Page view(s)

checked on Mar 30, 2021


checked on Mar 31, 2021

Google ScholarTM


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons