Patriarchal Religion, Sexuality, and Gender

David A. J. Richards is Edwin D. Webb Professor of Law at New York University School of Law. He received his AB from Harvard College in 1966, his D. Phil. in moral philosophy from Oxford University in 1971, and his JD from Harvard Law School in 1971. His Oxford Doctoral dissertation was published by Oxford University Press in 1971 as A Theory of Reasons for Action, and he has published an additional 12 books, including Sex, Drugs, Death, and the Law: An Essay on Human Rights and Overcriminalization (Rowan and Littlefield, 1982) which was named the best book in criminal justice ethics by the John Jay College of Criminal Ethics in 1982. Choice Magazine named his book Foundations of American Constitutionalism (Oxford) one of the best academic books of the year in 1989. He has served as vice-president of the American Society for Political and Legal Philosophy and was the Shikes lecturer in civil liberties at the Harvard Law School in 1998.

• 1. New natural law in context; 2. The architecture and reach of new natural law; 3. Criteria for evaluating new natural law; 4. Internal consistency: is new natural law secular?; 5. Internal consistency: is new natural law Thomistic?; 6. Substantive appeal: what's wrong with homophobia and sexism?; 7. Substantive appeal: new natural law, sexism, and homophobia; 8. Substantive appeal: moral absolutes and the inconsistent fundamentalism of new natural law; 9. New natural law and patriarchal religion; 10. Conclusions: Christian alternatives to new natural law.

'Nicholas Bamforth and David A. J. Richards make a full frontal attack on the philosophical consistency, social relevance, and political desirability of new natural law … will be welcomed … this text presents challenging philosophical insights as well as informative commentary on the role of doctrinal religion in the construction of seemingly secular law. … constructive mode … meticulously argued, well-written, and thoroughly annotated … provides a detailed map of the philosophical, personal, and political affiliations between Grisez, Finnis, George and, most importantly, it closely traces their arguments to 'illiberal prescriptions' concerning sexuality and gender. … This is the gap in the philosophical investigation of new natural law that the text wishes to fill.' Politics and Religion