scholarly journals Introduction: For Better or For Worse? Relational Landscapes in the Time of Same-Sex Marriage

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael W. Yarbrough
Keyword(s):  
Married Couples ◽  
Marriage Equality ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Critical Research ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
Different Types ◽  
The Status ◽  
The One ◽  
Full Volume

This paper is a pre-print version of the introduction chapter to the edited volume, Queer Families and Relationships After Marriage Equality, published with Routledge in 2018. As same-sex marriage has become a legal reality in a rapidly growing list of countries, the time has come to assess what this means for families and relationships on the ground. Many scholars have already begun to examine how marriage is helping some same-sex couples, but in this introduction I call for a broader and more critical research agenda. In particular, I argue that same-sex marriage crystallizes a key tension surrounding families and relationships in many contemporary societies. On the one hand, strict family norms are relaxing in many places, allowing more people to form more diverse types of caring relationships. On the other hand, some relationships continue to be more honored and protected than others. I frame the spread of same-sex marriage as an opportunity to study this tension, and I argue that queer critiques of marriage provide useful tools for helping ground such research. I argue for research that sees same-sex marriage not as an isolated shift in the status of some same-sex couples, but instead as embedded in broader “relational landscapes” where different relationships of different types intersect with each other and shape each other. Such research would highlight inequalities among married couples and between married and unmarried people, and it would trace changes in other relationship forms outside of same-sex marriage itself. I describe how the chapters in this volume pursue these goals, helping develop queer and other critiques of marriage to lay the groundwork for a contextualized, critical research program on families and relationships after same-sex marriage. For the full volume this chapter introduces, please visit https://www.routledge.com/Queer-Families-and-Relationships-After-Marriage-Equality/Yarbrough-Jones-DeFilippis/p/book/9781138557468.

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.

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.

scholarly journals What's in a Name Case? Some Lessons for the Debate Over the Free Movement of Same-Sex Couples Within the EU

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 421-449 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martijn van den Brink
Keyword(s):  
Married Couples ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Member States ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
The Eu

This Article engages the debate over the free movement of same-sex couples and explores what can, and should, be learned from the case law on the recognition of names. These “name cases” provide valuable lessons for both the proponents and opponents of same-sex marriage recognition. These cases show, first, that Member States are under the presumption to recognize marriages performed in other Member States. This Article also considers the importance of the national and constitutional identities of the Member States and suggests that there remains a possibility that Member States may justify the non-recognition of a marriage or deprive same-sex couples of some of the rights heterosexual married couples benefit from. The Article explores how the EU is confronted with a federal clash of values and offers some suggestions on how to solve this clash.

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.

Implications of Obergefell for Same-Sex Marriage, Divorce, and Parental Rights

2018 ◽  
pp. 7-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy J. Knauer
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Married Couples ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Parental Rights ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Nontraditional Families ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
State Laws ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
Domestic Partnerships

This chapter examines the implications of the landmark US Supreme Court decision Obergefell v. Hodges for same-sex marriage, divorce, and parental rights. Heralded as one of the most significant civil rights victories in recent memory, Obergefell had an immediate impact on the lives of same-sex couples by providing uniform and nationwide access to both marriage and divorce. It ended a confusing patchwork of state laws, some of which recognized same-sex marriage and some of which prohibited not only same-sex marriage but also domestic partnerships and civil unions. Obergefell also ensured that all same-sex married couples would be eligible for federal benefits regardless of where they lived. The longer-term effects and applications of Obergefell remain unclear, especially with respect to parental rights. In addition, Obergefell has ignited a backlash of religious exemptions law and concern remains that marriage equality may further marginalize nontraditional families and those who choose not to marry.

Same-Sex Marriage and Italian Exceptionalism

ICL Journal ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 431-456
Author(s):  
Matteo M Winkler
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Three Dimension ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
Dimension Analysis ◽  
The Status ◽  
Heated Debate ◽  
Male To Female

Abstract This article unveils Italy’s exceptionalism in recognising and protecting same-sex couples by adopting a three-dimension analysis: constitutional, comparative and supranational. It maintains that, compared to other countries whose courts were sympathetic with the legal claims raised by lesbian and gay people, Italy’s Constitutional Court adopted a totally different approach, reinforcing the heteronormativity of marriage in a way that delayed all efforts to pass a law on same-sex registered partnerships. The Constitutional Court, in particular, interpreted the Constitution, the experience of other nations and supranational law according to heteronormativity, an example that is unique in the comparative context. As an illustration, this article addresses the case Bernaroli vs Ministry of the Interior. In Bernaroli, a male-to-female transgender person wanted to remain married to her wife notwithstanding the transition. The case ignited a heated debate among scholars and questioned the courts’ opinions as to the human rights dynamics surrounding same-sex marriage and, more importantly, about the current role of heteronormativity in marriage law. This article concludes that the legal existence of Bernaroli’s marriage represents a constant challenge to the status quo and highlights the permanent crisis of heteronormativity. After the Austrian Constitutional Court’s recent ruling that declared the law on same-sex domestic partnership to be discriminatory, heteronormativity’s defence became even more untenable, making Italy’s a true exception in the continent’s legal landscape.

The Evolution of Same-Sex Marriage Policy in the United States

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Poggione
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
Marriage Equality ◽  
Strategic Choices ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
State And Local ◽  
The U.S

On June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that same-sex couples have the right to marry, and newspapers across the country declared that gay couples could now exercise this right in all 50 states. While the Obergefell decision was an important moment in history and a significant victory for the LGBT movement, it was not an immediate and complete change in policy. Rather, the change emerged slowly over decades from numerous complex interactions among federal, state, and local governmental actors. These same actors continue to influence marriage equality even after the Supreme Court’s historic ruling. A careful consideration of the path of marriage equality demonstrates the importance of federalism in the evolution of policy in the U.S. context. Not only does the extent of federal involvement influence state decision-making, but state policies also respond to the policymaking processes in other states. Examining the progression of marriage rights for same-sex couples also illustrates how variation in state government institutions shape policy outcomes in the U.S. system. For example, aspects of state courts such as judicial capacity influence the nature of state policy responses on the issue of gay marriage. Finally, focusing on marriage equality provides an opportunity to consider how institutions of government and political actors strategically interact to influence the policymaking process. For example, advocacy coalitions make strategic choices to focus on levels and institutions of government that are more responsive to their interests. Overall, same-sex marriage policy and the scholarship that investigates it highlight the complex and sometimes convoluted development that characterizes the policymaking process on many important issues in American politics and society.

Juridical Insights and Theological Disputes

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cathleen Kaveny
Keyword(s):  
Culture Wars ◽  
Moral Values ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Ethical Problems ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
The World ◽  
Different Types ◽  
The One ◽  
The Church ◽  
Shed Light

This chapter highlights the methodological contributions of Robert E. Rodes Jr. Writing at the intersection of law and theology, Rodes shows how conceptual tools used to distinguish between different types of legal statements can shed light on knotty theological and ethical problems. He distinguishes among three functions of law: normative, constitutive, and epistemic. He also differentiates between two methods by which the law promotes moral values: didactic and instrumental. And he identifies two strategies for relating the church to the world: Erastian and High Church. By reframing conflicts like the one between religious liberty and same-sex marriage, Rodes offers legally-inspired strategies for diffusing the culture wars.

The Civil Partnership Act 2004, Same-Sex Marriage and the Church of England

2006 ◽  
Vol 8 (38) ◽  
pp. 289-306 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacqueline Humphreys
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Understanding ◽  
Church Of England ◽  
Married Couples ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Current Conception ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
Civil Partnership ◽  
Practical Effect ◽  
The Church

The Civil Partnership Act 2004 enables same-sex couples to enter into a status that provides very many of the same rights and responsibilities that married couples have in respect to each other and the wider community. This paper first considers the extent of the legal similarities between civil partnerships and marriage; that is to what extent civil partnerships are 'same-sex marriage' in practical effect. Secondly it considers to what extent the conceptual understanding of civil partnerships within the Act reflects the current conception of marriage within English law; that is the extent to which civil partnerships are 'same-sex marriage' in theory. Thirdly, and finally, some of the specific dilemmas for the Church of England in the light of this are considered.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document