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.

Marriage Equality, Public Accommodations Laws, and Religious Exercise

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Gluck Mezey
Keyword(s):  
First Amendment ◽  
Religious Beliefs ◽  
Business Owners ◽  
The State ◽  
Marriage Equality ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Free Exercise ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
Antidiscrimination Law

Opposition to same-sex marriage in the United States is frequently based on the religious belief that marriage should be reserved for a man and a woman. With most of the attention focused on wedding vendors, the clash between religious liberty and marriage equality has largely manifested itself in efforts by business owners, such as photographers, florists, caterers, and bakers, to deny their services to same-sex couples celebrating their marriages. Citing state antidiscrimination laws, the couples demand the owners treat them as they do their other customers. Owners of public accommodations (privately owned business open to the public) who object to facilitating the weddings of same-sex couples do so typically by asserting their personal religious beliefs as defenses when charged with violating such laws; they argue that they would view their participation (albeit indirect) in wedding ceremonies as endorsing same-sex marriage. As the lawsuits against them began to proliferate, the business owners asked the courts to shield them from liability for violating the laws prohibiting discrimination because of sexual orientation in places of public accommodation. They cited their First Amendment right to the free exercise of their religion and their right not to be compelled to speak, that is, to express a positive message about same-sex marriage. With conflicts between same-sex couples and owners of business establishments arising in a number of states, the focus of the nation’s attention was on a New Mexico photographer, a Washington State florist, and a Colorado baker, each of whom sought an exemption from their state’s antidiscrimination law to enable them to exercise their religious tenets against marriage equality. In these cases, the state human rights commissions and the state appellate courts ruled that the antidiscrimination laws outweighed the rights of the business owners to exercise their religious beliefs against marriage equality by refusing to play a role, no matter how limited, in a same-sex marriage ceremony. In June 2018, in Masterpiece Cakeshop, LTD. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the state’s antidiscrimination law that guaranteed equal treatment for same-sex couples in places of public accommodations but reversed the Commission’s ruling against the Colorado baker. In a narrow decision, the Court held that the Commission infringed on the baker’s First Amendment right to free exercise by uttering comments that, in the Court’s view, demonstrated hostility to his sincerely held religious beliefs. The ruling affirmed that society has a strong interest in protecting gay men and lesbians from harm as they engage in the marketplace as well as in respecting sincerely held religious beliefs.

The Right to Religious Freedom, with Particular Reference to Same-Sex Marriage

2012 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 147-179
Author(s):  
Michael J. Perry
Keyword(s):  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
Civil Marriage ◽  
The Right

In this essay, I elaborate and defend the internationally recognized human right to religious freedom. I then pursue the implications of the right for government’s exclusion of same-sex couples from of civil marriage.

scholarly journals Homo-Ehe oder Solidaritätsvertrag?

2013 ◽  
Vol 43 (173) ◽  
Author(s):  
Heinz-Jürgen Voß
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Gay Marriage ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Media Attention ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
Family Models

With the opening of marriage for same-sex couples, respectively the institution of ‘gay marriage’ as a special law, attracting all media attention, the alternative family models debated in the 1990’s have disappeared from view – even though these debates were intense, and it was not at all clear that ‘gay marriage’ would gain acceptance. As even in recent scientific literature the alternative family models are hardly considered, they will be brought into focus here. The following article centers on the model of a ‘family of choice’ and the French PACS as alternatives to same-sex marriage.

What Obergefell v. Hodges Should Have Said

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Social Movement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Gay Rights ◽  
Political Struggle ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Right

The authors of this book, sitting as a hypothetical Supreme Court, rewrite the famous 2015 opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges, which guaranteed same-sex couples the right to marry. In eleven incisive opinions, the authors offer the best constitutional arguments for and against the right to same-sex marriage, and debate what Obergefell should mean for the future. In addition to serving as Chief Justice of this imaginary court, the book's editor provides a critical introduction to the case. He recounts the story of the gay rights litigation that led to Obergefell, and he explains how courts respond to political mobilizations for new rights claims. The social movement for gay rights and marriage equality is a powerful example of how — through legal imagination and political struggle — arguments once dismissed as “off-the-wall” can later become established in American constitutional law.

scholarly journals ‘One can hardly call them homophobic’: Denials of antigay prejudice within the same-sex marriage debate

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 281-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Jowett
Keyword(s):  
Marriage Equality ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
The Government ◽  
British Press ◽  
Racist Discourse ◽  
Antigay Prejudice

The United Kingdom’s Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act (2013) was framed by the Government as an equality measure and, as such, those who opposed the legislation were likely to be sensitive to possible accusations of prejudice. This article examines opposition to marriage equality within the British press and explores how denials of homophobia were made. Opponents to same-sex marriage attended to commonsense notions of ‘homophobes’, either by aligning their views with categories of persons not typically considered homophobic or by distancing their views from a homophobic other. Opponents also offered a counter-accusation that it was liberal supporters of same-sex marriage who were intolerant. Parallels are drawn with discursive literature on racist discourse and it appears that despite social scientists’ attempts to expand the concept of antigay prejudice, homophobia is commonly referred to in terms of irrational bigoted individuals.

scholarly journals The Role Of Canadian National Print Media In Fostering Positive Public Opinion Towards The Legislation Of Same-Sex Marriage In Canada

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda Piche
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
News Coverage ◽  
Marriage Equality ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Sexual Diversity ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
News Reporting ◽  
National Newspaper ◽  
Mainstream Press

<div>Since the Charter of Rights and Freedoms emerged in 1982, Canadian national print news was central to the complex networks in the establishment of same-sex marriage in 2005. Newspapers framed marriage equality as a human rights’ issue, within conventions for balance and objectivity. However, LGBTQrelated issues have not consistently been approached this way by the media, which have traditionally created and regulated boundaries of gender and sexuality (Rubin 2007). This dissertation explores why Canadian mainstream press oscillated between anti-queer and pro-LGBTQ approaches in a post-Charter Canada and its effect on public opinion.</div><div>I show how news reporting is symbiotically implicated in Canadian public perspectives through public sphere theory (Habermas 1989; Fraser 1992). Frame analysis demonstrates how the issue was ideologically positioned in print (Goffman, 1974; Entman 1993; McCombs 2004; Scheufele 1999, 2000).</div><div>A content analysis of over 2,000 national newspaper articles published between 1982 and 2005 reveal the frames used in stories about marriage equality. Semi-structured interviews with journalists and activists contextualize the analysis. Responses determine how media frames may have implicated understanding and support of the issue, and why and how certain frames were decided by journalists.</div><div>This work informs the history of LGBTQ rights in Canada by exploring how the national news industry contributed to the framing of marriage equality. Analyses of news coverage of marriage equality remains largely US-centric (Brewer 2002 & 2003; Tadlock, et. al, 2007; Liebler et al., 2009; Li and Liu, 2010; Pan et al. 2010). Research on framing marriage equality in Canada focuses on litigants (Smith 2007), courts (Matthews 2005), and newspapers in 2003 and 2004 (Bannerman 2012). Despite several studies concerning the politics of sexual diversity in Canada (Hogg 2006; Kinsman 1996; Kinsman and Gentile 2010; Pettinicchio 2010; Rayside 2008; M. Smith 2008, 2012), marriage equality has not been studied extensively.</div>

NeJaime and Siegel, JJ., concurring.

2020 ◽  
pp. 112-128
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Equal Protection ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Equal Protection Clause ◽  
Majority Opinion ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
The Right

Today the Court holds that laws banning same-sex marriage are a form of caste or class legislation that violates the Equal Protection Clause. The Court recognizes the right of same-sex couples to marry under the suspect classification and fundamental rights strands of our equal protection case law. We join the majority opinion holding that equal protection guarantees the right of same-sex couples to marry....

Courts and Same-Sex Marriage in Latin America

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maximiliano Campana ◽  
Juan Marco Vaggione
Keyword(s):  
Latin America ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Latin American ◽  
The United States ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
Historical Developments ◽  
The Right ◽  
Lgbt Movement

Same-sex marriage has become one of the LGBT movement’s main demands in Latin America in the past decade. Argentina was the first Latin American country to recognize same-sex marriage in 2010, and it has been replicated in other countries such as Brazil, Uruguay, Colombia, Ecuador, Costa Rica, and Mexico. In all these cases, the courts have been an important ally of the LGBT movement, generating the constitutional grounds and decisions for the recognition and expansion of the rights of same-sex couples. In this sense, litigation has proved to be a powerful strategy for LGBT groups for their demands of recognition, and in the analyzed cases, the judiciary has been receptive to these petitions and claims assuming different roles. The litigation experience in Latin America has been shaped by the U.S. litigation model for the advancements of civil rights, a model that has had an impact in the LGBT campaigns for same-sex marriage, and as a result it is possible to identify different roles that the Latin-American courts have played in protecting same-sex couples and legally recognizing their partnerships in the region. Thus the historical developments of the strategic litigation have been crucial for the recognition and advancement of rights, generating a type of litigation that was originated in the United States and later replicated in Latin America, thanks to institutional changes and successful experiences of same-sex marriage litigation. However, the courts have assumed different roles when recognizing the right to marriage between same-sex couples in the region, according to the legal, social, political, and international context where they are inserted, showing that the “politization of the justice” and the “judicialization of politics” are two interconnected procceses that combine in different and complex manners when debating sexuality in the region.

Marriage Equality

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Dombrink
Keyword(s):  
Gay Rights ◽  
Legal Reform ◽  
Center Of Gravity ◽  
Gay Marriage ◽  
Marriage Equality ◽  
Significant Issue ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
The Social

This chapter traces the steady and dramatic changes in American attitudes toward, and legal reform of, marriage equality. This is analyzed as an example of the “de-wedging” of one of the key “wedge issues” utilized by the social and religious conservatives from 1980 onward, that of gay rights generally and same-sex marriage specifically. It uses as a touchpoint one analyst’s observation: “It’s hard to imagine a significant issue in which the center of gravity is shifting faster than gay marriage in this country.”

Getting (Un-)Hitched

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 257-284
Author(s):  
Brook J. Sadler ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Individual Autonomy ◽  
Children And Families ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Majority Opinion ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
Civil Marriage ◽  
The Right ◽  
The U.S

In 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of same-sex marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges. Although I concur that same-sex couples should have the right to marry if anyone does, I argue that civil marriage is an unjust institution. By examining the claims employed in the majority opinion, I expose the Court’s romanticized, patriarchal view of marriage. I critique four central claims: (1) that marriage is central to individual autonomy and liberty; (2) that civil marriage is uniquely valuable; (3) that marriage “safeguards” children and families; and (4) that marriage is fundamental to civil society.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document