Same-sex relationships, religious traditions, marriage and the law

2000 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 465-480 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pamela Dickey Young

This article reviews the historical relationship of religious institutions to the performance of marriage ceremonies. It looks at what various religious traditions say officially about homosexuality and about same-sex relationships. It also considers how gay and lesbian couples have negotiated their places, especially in terms of same-sex ceremonies of commitment, within religious traditions which have offered varying degrees and kinds of affirmation. The author goes on to argue that there will be a variety of religious views concerning the legalization of same-sex relationships as marriages or marriage-like relationships. Religious institutions are not now obliged to marry all those who can be legally married, so the objections that arise within religious institutions should be handled as matters of policy within those religious institutions rather than as grounds for denying the legal right to marriage to gay and lesbian couples. The author further argues that all marriage as a legal entity should rest in the hands of the state, and that churches should bless relationships rather continue to be involved in legalizing marriages.

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (06) ◽  
pp. 220-225
Author(s):  
Fauzan Prasetya ◽  
Busyra Azheri ◽  
Ismansyah ◽  
Sukanda Husin

The Government through the Minister of State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) in his position as a Shareholder in SOEs (Indonesian: Badan Usaha Milik Negara (BUMN) enacts the Minister of SOE Regulation Number: PER-15 / MBU / 2012 Regarding Amendments to the Regulation of the State Minister of State-Owned Enterprises Number PER-05 / MBU / 2008 Regarding Guidelines General Implementation of Procurement of Goods and Services of State-Owned Enterprises in SOE Subsidiaries. Which actions have raised the pros and cons of the capacity of the Minister of SOEs as BUMN shareholders in SOE subsidiaries. The legal status of BUMN subsidiaries in the BUMN holding scheme remains a separate legal entity that has their respective organs and responsibilities as regulated in the Law of PT. When the SOE Minister acts on behalf of the State, he is the shareholder of SOE as contained in Article 1 paragraph (1) of the BUMN Law. As a shareholder, the Minister of SOEs can only establish policies towards SOEs. Whereas in SOE Subsidiaries, the shareholders are SOEs as legal subjects. So that the provisions of Article 1 number (2) SOE Ministerial Regulation Number 3 of 2012 whereby the Minister of BUMN cannot act as a shareholder. The enactment of BUMN Permen 15/2012 to SOE Subsidiaries by SOEs Minister in his capacity as BUMN shareholder is an ultra vires action.


2010 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 461-475 ◽  
Author(s):  
HANS BAKKER

AbstractPatronage by the royal court of religious institutions and foundations is one of the hallmarks of the development of India under the rule of the Gupta and Vākāṭaka kings (4th–5th centuries). This patronage was extended also to religious movements other than the king's own persuasion. The evolving culture of religious tolerance and enthusiasm is apparent in the temple monuments of the time. In this article we focus on four archeological sites where these developments become best visible: Udayagiri, Māṇḍhaḷ, Rāmagiri (Ramtek), and Mansar. The close relationship of the Gupta and Vākāṭaka realms is investigated in its local settings. Renewed attention is given to the ‘Mandhal Inscription, Year 5’ of the Vākāṭaka king Rudrasena II and the deity on whose authority the charter was issued: Muṇḍasvāmin. It is argued that the name Muṇḍa refers to no one else than the Gupta queen of Rudrasena II, Prabhāvatī Guptā. During the last decade, excavations in Mansar (5 km west of Ramtek) have brought to light the state sanctuary of the youngest son of Prabhāvatī, Pravarasena II. The findings there are placed within the tradition that can be traced back, through Rāmagiri and Māṇḍhaḷ, to the religious foundations in Udayagiri.


Author(s):  
Silvia Di Battista ◽  
Daniele Paolini ◽  
Monica Pivetti ◽  
Lucia Mongelli

Research found that those who believe sexual orientation is inborn have generally positive attitudes towards gay men and lesbians. However, other studies have also found that these beliefs could include negative eugenic ideas. This study aims to investigate the role of people’s beliefs about the aetiology of sexual orientation on attitudes towards adoption for both gay and lesbian couples. We hypothesized that this relationship would be mediated by sexual prejudice. To test the predictions, 256 Italian heterosexual participants were asked to answer to a scale about their beliefs regarding the aetiology of sexual orientation, sexual prejudice, and attitudes towards adoption by same-sex couples. Results confirmed that the relationship between aetiology beliefs and adoption support was fully mediated by sexual prejudice. These investigation results suggest that the belief that sexual orientation is controllable may serve to justify one’s prejudice and, in turn, result in a lower support for same-sex couples’ adoption.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 29-48
Author(s):  
I. A. Fargiev ◽  

Introduction. As a result of the Russian legal reform, a new legal system was formed; an important feature of which is the power of a lawyer to interpret various forms of national and international law implemented by the state. The scientific understanding of the interpretation of the law has significant gaps which make it difficult to apply in practice. Theoretical basis. Methods. The theoretical basis of the study was the work of Russian and foreign scientists on the interpretation of law. Research methods were as follows: systematic, historical, formally logical, comparative approaches, interpretation of legal and philosophical ideas. Results. The article presents the author’s opinions on problematic issues of the theory and practice of interpretation of law, which are the subject of constant attention of legal scholars, law-makers and law enforcement agencies. The author justifies the need to adopt a special law on normative legal acts, which should give a legal definition of “interpretation of law”, establish a procedure for the interpretation of law, fix the range of subjects of interpretation and other important scientific and applied issues. Discussion and Conclusion. The term “interpretation”, in modern legislation, is used to address the issue of official clarification and explanation of the content of norms and principles of international law employed in developing a multi-level system of forms of national and/or international law, which is then implemented by the state. Other interpretations of the law, referred to as doctrinal, ordinary, professional, etc, can be called a conditional interpretation of the law. Using scientific conclusions about the dialectical relationship of law with philosophy and sociology, history and politics, economics and ideology, etc, the author came to conclusion that there is a need to adopt a special law on the interpretation of law.


Author(s):  
Annabel S. Brett

This chapter discusses the relationship of the state to its subjects as necessarily physically embodied beings. The primary way in which the commonwealth commands its subjects is through the medium of its law. The law is for the common good and obliges the community as a whole, and thus the ontological status of the law—as distinct from any particular command of a superior to an individual—is intimately tied to that of the body politic. The question, then, concerning the relationship of the state to the natural body of the individual can be framed in terms of the extent of the obligation of the civil law.


Author(s):  
Stephen Gilmore ◽  
Lisa Glennon

This chapter examines the law surrounding the formation of the formal relationships of marriage and civil partnership, including the law on nullity. It also explores, by way of contrast, non-formal cohabiting relationships. Topics discussed include void and voidable marriages, sham marriages, forced marriages; the development of gay and lesbian rights; the road to same-sex marriage and the extension of civil partnership to opposite-sex couples; and the legal consequences of marriage.


Author(s):  
Alexander Kondakov

Abstract In the new, post-Soviet Russia, some people have been excluded from the possibility of possessing human rights based on different identity claims. Lesbians and gay men are among those who are excluded. Though in some states the mechanism of this is manifestly inscribed in the law, in Russia the mechanism is hidden in the field of silence: the field of discourse on homosexuality is full of lacunas. While the most productive speakers are certainly LGBT activists, the most passive ones are the state officials. These forces come into discursive play where rights are at stake. The purpose of this paper, based on original research on the emerging activism of gays and lesbians in Russia, is to uncover the regulative features of silence in the Russian discourse on homosexuality.


2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 319-327 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppina Valle Holway ◽  
Debra Umberson ◽  
Rachel Donnelly

Research shows that heterosexual spouses are concordant on a variety of health and health behavior outcomes. Yet, little is known about patterns of concordance between spouses in same-sex marriages, or whether concordance patterns differ for spouses in same- and different-sex marriages. Using descriptive techniques, we analyze survey data from both spouses in 121 gay, 168 lesbian, and 122 heterosexual married couples to examine health and health behavior concordance. We find that gay and lesbian couples are more concordant than heterosexual couples on several health and health behavior outcomes. Differences in concordance between gay and lesbian couples are also found. Findings suggest that the pathways through which concordance occurs may differ in important ways for same-sex and different-sex unions.


Author(s):  
Stephen Gilmore ◽  
Lisa Glennon

This chapter examines the law surrounding the formation of the formal relationships of marriage and civil partnership, including the law on nullity. It also explores, by way of contrast, non-formal cohabiting relationships. Topics discussed include void and voidable marriages, sham marriages, forced marriages; the development of gay and lesbian rights; the road to same-sex marriage; and the legal consequences of marriage.


Sexualities ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 691-709 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diego Lasio ◽  
Francesco Serri

After many years of heated debate, in 2016 the Italian parliament approved a law to regulate same-sex civil unions. Although this can be considered a significant step towards the equality of lesbian and gay couples, the law preserves legal differences between heterosexual marriage and homosexual union and does not guarantee the rights of lesbian and gay parents and their children. In this article, we analyze the public debate on same-sex couples and gay and lesbian parenting that occurred in Italy while the parliament was discussing the law. Findings highlight that the ‘natural order’ argument and the irreducible differences between heterosexual marriage and same-sex union are the bedrock of the current expression of heteronormativity in Italy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document