Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 33 (1):1-16 (2008)
|Abstract||I argue that contraception is morally wrong but that periodic abstinence (or natural family planning) is not. Further, I argue that altered nuclear transfer—a proposed technique for creating human stem cells without destroying human embryos—is morally wrong for the same reason that contraception is. Contrary to what readers might expect, my argument assumes nothing about the morality of cloning or abortion and requires no premises about God or natural teleology. Instead, I argue that contraception and altered nuclear transfer are morally wrong because they fail to treat humanity as an inviolable end|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Joshua Glasgow (2007). Kant's Conception of Humanity. Journal of the History of Philosophy 45 (2):291-308.
Japa Pallikkathayil (2010). Deriving Morality From Politics: Rethinking the Formula of Humanity. Ethics 121 (1).
Richard Dean (2008). Glasgow's Conception of Kantian Humanity. Journal of the History of Philosophy 46 (2):pp. 307-314.
Tuija Takala (2007). Designer Babies and Treating People as a Means. The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 1:245-249.
Richard Dean (2006). The Value of Humanity in Kant's Moral Theory. Oxford University Press.
Ken D. Olum (2002). The Doomsday Argument and the Number of Possible Observers. Philosophical Quarterly 52 (207):164-184.
Dmitry Shlapentokh (2001). Cosmism in European Thought. Journal of Philosophical Research 26:497-546.
Added to index2009-02-08
Total downloads54 ( #22,460 of 722,698 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,006 of 722,698 )
How can I increase my downloads?