PublisherThe University of Arizona.
RightsCopyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.
AbstractThis thesis examines the contemporary debates over the meaning of natural law. Kent Greenawalt and Ronald Dworkin weigh in on this debate and oppose the theory of natural law with some theories of law that they have developed themselves. Greenawalt argues that citizens in a liberal democracy are not to rely on their religious convictions but rather on publicly accessible reasons. The religious convictions that these citizens have are to be a secondary reliance but can be used in situations where publicly accessible reasons are absent such as abortion. Dworkin develops his theory of Integrity as Law which he explains as a "chain novel." Law is like a novel being written in which the judges must continually add chapters. The goal is integrity. Judges must treat the law that is in place as part of the novel that has already been partly written. It is a way to improve upon the existing laws and precedents. In order for a unifying acceptance of law and development of law, theories of law must be developed. Greenawalt and Dworkin each offer alternative approaches to natural law, and in this thesis, I compare how these theories apply to legal debates concerning abortion and pornography.
Degree ProgramHonors College