scholarly journals Let’s Talk About Same Sex: How Social Workers Can Make Judges Listen

10.18060/432 ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 117-128
Author(s):  
Stephanie K. Boys
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Social Work ◽  
Social Workers ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Amicus Curiae ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Legal Frameworks ◽  
Social Work Policy ◽  
Existing Data

Researchers have created a diverse toolbox of literature reporting that same sex cohabitating relationships are strikingly similar to heterosexual marriages in amicus curiae briefs submitted to the courts. However, judges are trained to fit information into legal frameworks and to ignore data that does not fit the rhetoric of a case. The following article aims to fit existing data on same sex relationships into the framework judges will use to decide whether same sex marriage can be prohibited. The primary precedent used to support same sex marriage is based on the analogy of a case prohibiting marriage discrimination based on race. The legal framework created by this case requires social work policy practitioners to frame research in terms of the evolution that has occurred in scientific understanding of same sex attraction and public opinion. A simple shift in the discourse used to frame the data can significantly impact whether judges listen.

scholarly journals Moving a Mountain: The Extraordinary Trajectory of Same-Sex Marriage Approval in the United States

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 237802311772765 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Rosenfeld
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Gay Rights ◽  
General Social Survey ◽  
The United States ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Small Set ◽  
Using Data ◽  
Election Studies

Most public opinion attitudes in the United States are reasonably stable over time. Using data from the General Social Survey and the American National Election Studies, I quantify typical change rates across all attitudes. I quantify the extent to which change in same-sex marriage approval (and liberalization in attitudes toward gay rights in general) are among a small set of rapid changing outliers in surveyed public opinions. No measured public opinion attitude in the United States has changed more and more quickly than same-sex marriage. I use survey data from Newsweek to illustrate the rapid increase in the 1980s and 1990s in Americans who had friends or family who they knew to be gay or lesbian and demonstrate how contact with out-of-the-closet gays and lesbians was influential. I discuss several potential historical and social movement theory explanations for the rapid liberalization of attitudes toward gay rights in the United States, including the surprising influence of Bill Clinton’s 1992 presidential campaign.

Religion and Public Opinion about Same-Sex Marriage*

2006 ◽  
Vol 87 (2) ◽  
pp. 340-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura R. Olson ◽  
Wendy Cadge ◽  
James T. Harrison
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage

Who Speaks and Why? An Examination of Outspokenness on Social Networking Sites and a Reflection on Assessing Public Opinion Online

2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 421-441 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stella C Chia
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Social Networking ◽  
National Survey ◽  
Social Networking Sites ◽  
Spiral Of Silence ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Speaking Out ◽  
The Spiral Of Silence ◽  
Attitude Extremity

Abstract Incorporating the spiral of silence theory and the model of corrective behavior, this study utilized a national survey (N = 373) to investigate the questions of who chooses to speak out on social networking sites (SNSs) and for what reasons in the context of same-sex marriage in Taiwan. Strong partisans were found the most outspoken; they spoke out to prevent media influence that might sway public opinion to the disagreeable side. Only respondents of low attitude extremity would refrain themselves from speaking out on SNSs when perceiving opinion incongruence. Nonpartisans who held a neutral stand could be motivated to speak out when perceiving majority’s support for same-sex marriage. The roles that opinion stances or attitude extremity each play in public opinion process online are discussed.

scholarly journals Rhetorical Strategies in Legal Argumentation. Some remarks on the recent decisions of the Portuguese Tribunal Constitucional and the Italian Corte Costituzionale on same-sex marriage

2011 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanni Damele
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Legal Argumentation ◽  
Rhetorical Strategies ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
High Courts ◽  
Differences Of Opinion ◽  
The Law ◽  
Practical Argumentation

Legal argumentation is usually considered the more formal (or, at least, formalistic) kind of practical argumentation, thanks to the long tradition of “legal syllogism” as its formal instrument, but also to its legal restraint (the formalistic aspect). Yet, in arguments such as those used, for example, by high courts in their justifications, we may find not only strict formalism and adherence to the letter of the law, but also the attempt to resolve differences of opinion and conflicts of interest, and perhaps also the rhetorical attempt to persuade the legal community, the legislator or even public opinion of the soundness of the court’s decision. But there could be more than that.

Just Married

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Macedo
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Gay Marriage ◽  
Public Institution ◽  
Marriage Equality ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Critical Juncture ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
The Right ◽  
Marriage Reform

The institution of marriage stands at a critical juncture. As gay marriage equality gains acceptance in law and public opinion, questions abound regarding marriage's future. Will same-sex marriage lead to more radical marriage reform? Should it? Antonin Scalia and many others on the right warn of a slippery slope from same-sex marriage toward polygamy, adult incest, and the dissolution of marriage as we know it. Equally, many academics, activists, and intellectuals on the left contend that there is no place for monogamous marriage as a special status defined by law. This book demonstrates that both sides are wrong: the same principles of democratic justice that demand marriage equality for same-sex couples also lend support to monogamous marriage. The book displays the groundlessness of arguments against same-sex marriage and defends marriage as a public institution against those who would eliminate its special status or supplant it with private arrangements. Arguing that monogamy reflects and cultivates our most basic democratic values, the book opposes the legal recognition of polygamy, but agrees with progressives that public policies should do more to support nontraditional caring and caregiving relationships. Throughout, the book explores the meaning of contemporary marriage and the reasons for its fragility and its enduring significance. Casting new light on today's debates over the future of marriage, the book lays the groundwork for a stronger institution.

Public Opinion and State Action on Same-Sex Marriage

2008 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory B. Lewis ◽  
Seong Soo Oh
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
State Action

scholarly journals Changing Public Opinion on Same-Sex Marriage: The Case of California

2008 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory B. Lewis ◽  
Charles W. Gossett
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document