Janet E. Smith's Articles
The Catholic Church has a wisdom about sexuality derived from Scripture and natural law (good common sense) that too few Catholics know and live. Sexual Common Sense features publised articles by Janet E. Smith, an author and expert on Catholic Ethics, that make clear the common sense teachings of the Chuch on sexuality. Addressing issues from abortion to contraception and bioethics Sexual Common Sense will arm you with information and insights that will help you both live out and spread the Churchs' teachings.
|
|
Janet E. Smith's Articles
|
|
Written by Dr. Janet E. Smith
|
The year 1993 marks the twenty-fifth year anniversary of Humanae Vitae. Twenty-fifth year anniversaries seem to be a good time for taking stock. What is the status of the debate between traditionalists and revisionists on the issue of contraception?
Sad to say, if the debate between traditionalists and revisionists about Humanae Vitae were an athletic contest, the revisionists should rightfully have had to forfeit because of a failure to show up on game day.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Janet E. Smith's Articles
|
|
Written by Dr. Janet E. Smith
|
The modern world considers contraception one of the most important discoveries of the late twentieth century. And rightly so, in a sense, for our modern lifestyle is in large part made possible by contraception. Thus it is no surprise that the Church’s condemnation of contraception is one of its most controversial teachings.
The sexual revolution of the sixties was a true revolution; our understanding and practice of sex changed radically. Contraception made sex outside of marriage “doable” in an unprecedented way. The modern world thinks of sex as a momentary pleasure that requires no commitment to one’s sexual partner nor to any children that may result. Pregnancy is now considered largely an “accident” of sexual intercourse. The landscape of our lives is now cluttered with individuals damaged by unsuccessful “love” affairs (was true love really involved?), broken marriages, children born out of wedlock (1 in 3 are) and women and men hurt by abortions (nearly 1 in 3 pregnancies is aborted).
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Janet E. Smith's Articles
|
|
Written by Dr. Janet E. Smith
|
Upon reading case books on medical ethics or simply news reports in the media, one cannot escape noticing that the medical professions are currently involved in practices that some few decades ago would have been unthinkable, not only because of the level of technology involved, but because of the then prevailing moral evaluation of the practices. One reads of Dr. Kevorkian and his death machine; of a sixty-one year old woman having a baby conceived with another woman's ova in a petri dish; of embryos created solely for experimental purposes; of vital organs taken from living anencephalic infants; of millions of abortions yearly. Clearly a revolution of some kind, beyond the merely technological, has taken place.
Again, some few decades ago all of these procedures would have horrified most individuals for there was a widespread consensus that such practices violate some fundamental good, such as the laws of nature, or the dignity of persons, or God's laws or that they were indicative of bad character -- that those who performed them were venal or malicious. Perhaps there is not yet a consensus that these practices are morally good. Many factors, beyond a favorable moral evaluation, undoubtedly contribute to the growing acceptance and legalization of such practices. Certainly a major contributing factor is the importance that our culture and bioethicists in particular have come to put on respect for autonomy.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Janet E. Smith's Articles
|
|
Written by Dr. Janet E. Smith
|
Many in the pro-life movement are reluctant to make a connection between contraception and abortion. They insist that these are two very different acts -- that there is all the difference in the world between contraception, which prevents a life from coming to be and abortion, which takes a life that has already begun.
With some contraceptives there is not only a link with abortion there is an identity. Some contraceptives are abortifacients; they work by causing early term abortions. The IUD seems to prevent a fertilized egg -- a new little human being -- from implanting in the uterine wall. The pill does not always stop ovulation but sometimes prevents implantation of the growing embryo. And, of course, the new RU 486 pill works altogether by aborting a new fetus, a new baby. Although some in the prolife movement occasional speak out against the contraceptives that are abortifacients most generally steer clear of the issue of contraception.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Janet E. Smith's Articles
|
|
Written by Dr. Janet E. Smith
|
I am honored to be among the lecturers in this series on natural law. Many of the speakers are among my heroes and friends. One of my heroes, Alasdair MacIntyre, used one of his favorite terms in his talk: he spoke of "plain persons" and their grasp of morality and natural law in contradistinction to the experts and professional philosophers and their grasp of these matters. A few years ago in Dallas he gave a talk entitled "Do plain persons need to be moral philosophers?" When I was asked to give the response to his talk, I was most honored because I considered Prof. MacIntyre one of the foremost moral philosophers in the world and it was a thrill to comment on his work. I felt dreadfully underqualified -- I felt like some high school kid going up against Larry Bird -- until I realized that I need not respond as an expert, as a moral philosopher of his caliber, but that I could respond as the quintessential plain person -- for that is what I am. After all, I am Janet Smith, daughter of John and Anne Smith; I grew up at 5 Hill Street and went to Home Street School -- I could go on but it is all very plain.
The point I am making here is not merely a flip one -- designed to ease us into more serious matters through an attempt at humor. There is a serious point here -- natural law, is the "plain person's" morality -- in a sense it is simply plain old common sense. There are profound and sophisticated ways at explaining natural law, but the practice of reasoning in accord with natural law principals, according to the theory itself, is natural to plain persons -- that is, natural to all mankind for natural law holds that many of the most fundamental principles of moral reasoning are obvious, that is easily known by all. Yet, in spite of the plain commonsensicalness of natural law, it can seem shocking and provocative in many ways, for like natural law, plain old common sense does not command a lot of followers these days and can be shocking when juxtaposed to the values of our times.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
|
|
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>
|
|
Page 5 of 10 |
