Date of Award
7-31-2006
Degree Type
Thesis
Degree Name
Master of Arts (MA)
Department
Philosophy
First Advisor
Andrew Altman - Chair
Second Advisor
Timothy Renick
Third Advisor
Peter Lindsay
Abstract
This essay is an exploration of the debate between John Finnis and Stephen Macedo on the value of homosexuality. In “Is Natural Law Theory Compatible with Limited Government?” Finnis, a natural law theorist, rejects value-neutralist arguments, stating that the political community can and should make value judgments about its members’ life-choices and that such normative evaluations are compatible with liberalism. Particularly, Finnis argues that homosexuality is in its essence always harmful and degrading, thus unable to participate in the basic human goods it imitates. Furthermore, he argues that the political community in liberal democratic societies is justified in discouraging homosexual conduct as a viable way of life. Macedo, while also rejecting pure value-neutralist liberalism, carefully considers but rejects Finnis’s argument, which rests on an unrealistic description of value and ends of human sexual activity.
DOI
https://doi.org/10.57709/1059744
Recommended Citation
Coleman, Brian B., "On the Stephen Macedo and John Finnis Exchange: Natural Law, Liberalism, and Homosexuality: A Critical Assessment." Thesis, Georgia State University, 2006.
doi: https://doi.org/10.57709/1059744