Contraception A2 Sexual Ethics

No single view on contraception. There are differences between denominations and within these groups too.

The writers of the Bible and early Christians did not live in a world when contraception was around. Instead it worked by causing a very early miscarriage and therefore this was seen as morally bad since it had the same effect as abortion.

However, today many Christians no longer regard contraception as morally wrong. Many regard it as the most moral thing to do in certain situations, as it reduces the amount of unwanted babies. It was also seen as a way of relieving the poverty of the labouring classes. Many argue that God is love and therefore does not wish people to give birth to unwanted children, nor does he want the spead of STIs.

Evangelical Christians disagree as it does not promote "fruitfullness" as the Bible states we must be.

They are opposed to artificial contraception. They assert the importance of allowing the potential to create human life in intercourse. Paul VI allowed for the rhythm method of birth control however. This suggests for some contemporary Catholic scholars an inconsistency in the approach. Either sexual intercourse is primarily about reproduction of it is not.

It is argued that the ban does not address two views. The first is the importance of the consience. We should follow what our conscience says and if that is to use contraception then we should. The second being the double effect. Some argue the use of condoms prevent STIs and so is encouraging life.

During Bentham and Mill's era women did not have rights and this extended to when having intercourse. It was the husbands choice when controlling sex and so contraception was forbidden.

Mill was in favour of contraception as he saw that the greatest good of the greatest number would not be possible if women were denied liberty. Contraception gives women control over their lives. It prevents unwanted pregnancies and theoretically it can stop a woman being forced to have a family.

There is no clear argument made for virtue ethics. Some believe in a Natural Law theoretical explanation, whereby a virtuous life lies in human reproduction and the loving caring relationship that exists in family life. This position is held by Rosalind Hurthous. It is argued that contraception leads to casual sex, which is inherently immoral as it treats the other person as a means to personal satisfaction.

Michael Slote argues that the caring nature of a virtuous person is all that matters. He emphasised the care for youself, if you care for yourself you will not wish to die or be sick through STIs. If you care for your family you will not produce unwanted members. If you care for humanity you will desire to reduce the population so we can sustain human life.

Many argue that the approach depends on the virtuous nature of the individual, each case and each situation becomes unique.