Social Change

2022 ◽  
pp. 43-68
Author(s):  
Karla L. Drenner

The differences between states and within states are profound, and while that has long been true, it is much more consequential to LGBT individuals since the legalization of same-sex marriage. Social change relating to LGBT issues were originally addressed in a 1997 article written by Thomas Stoddard titled “Bleeding Heart: Reflections on Using the Law to Make Social Change.” This chapter uses his framework and examines legislative responses to the legalization of same-sex marriage focusing on place.

The differences between states and within states are profound, and while that has long been true, it is much more consequential to LGBT individuals since the legalization of same-sex marriage. Social change relating to LGBT issues were originally addressed in a 1997 article written by Thomas Stoddard titled “Bleeding Heart: Reflections on Using the Law to Make Social Change.” This chapter uses his framework and examines legislative responses to the legalization of same-sex marriage focusing on place.


Culture shifts relating to LGBT rights were originally addressed in a 1997 article written by Thomas Stoddard titled “Bleeding Heart: Reflections on Using the Law to Make Social Change.” This chapter uses his framework for social change and examines how rule shifting and cultural shifts interact with the legalization of same-sex marriage.


2021 ◽  
pp. 073112142199485
Author(s):  
Ashley Wendell Kranjac ◽  
Robert L. Wagmiller

Americans’ attitudes toward same-sex relationships have liberalized considerably over the last 40 years. We examine how the demographic processes generating social change in attitudes toward same-sex relationships changed over time. Using data from the 1973 to 2018 General Social Survey and decomposition techniques, we estimate the relative contributions of intracohort change and cohort replacement to overall social change for three different periods. We examine (1) the period prior to the rapid increase in attitude liberalization toward same-sex marriage rights (1973–1991), (2) the period of contentious debate about same-sex marriage and lesbian and gay rights (1991–2002), and (3) the period of legislative and judicial liberalization at the state and federal levels (2002–2018). We find that both intracohort and intercohort change played positive and significant roles in the liberalization of attitudes toward same-sex relationships in the postlegalization period, but that individual change was more important than population turnover over this period.


Author(s):  
Stephen Macedo

This chapter considers the main arguments raised by conservatives against same-sex marriage and gay rights more generally. Defenders of same-sex marriage acknowledge the fact that marriage is in many ways a conservative institution. Libertarians, liberationists, and some liberals doubt that marriage is fair given the diversity of people's conceptions of meaning and value in life. Many adopt an unnecessarily critical posture toward civil marriage. This chapter offers a sympathetic account of marriage that recognizes the importance for many people of marital commitment while also honoring, and indeed helping to secure, the equal liberty and fairness prized by liberals. It shows that the debate over gay rights has been shaped by the repeated articulation of a demand for public reasons and evidence to justify the shape of the law touching on gay rights and marriage. The demand for reasons was laid down by the dissenters in Bowers v. Hardwick (1987).


2012 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 231-256
Author(s):  
Corinne A. Seals

This paper uses the theory of intertextuality to examine the discourse surrounding California’s Proposition 8, the statewide ballot measure to reverse legalization of same-sex marriage. More specifically, this paper analyzes the newspaper reports that surfaced in February 2010, concerned with the fact that the judge deciding the case is a gay man. The initial story, which claimed that this should be a “non-issue,” sparked a multitude of articles aimed at different readerships over the following week, therein making the “non-issue” an issue. I analyze how intertextuality is used by three types of news sources (LGBT, mainstream, and Religious Right) to report the same issue but in ways specifically aimed at the ideal reader of each. I argue that the way intertextuality occurs in constructed dialogue, lexical choice, and semantic presupposition creates an ideological message meant for and decodable by each publication’s ideal reader, therein reinforcing group ideologies about LGBT issues.


Author(s):  
Gary R. Hicks

The public’s perception of, beliefs about, and interest in LGBT individuals and the issues impacting them has long had great significance to the community’s social, political, and legal progress. The last decade has seen monumental changes in public attitudes about LGBT people and the laws that affect them in the United States and around the world. Much of this change has been positive, including the landmark Supreme Court decision to legalize same-sex marriage. In some parts of the world—even those that have witnessed great strides for LGBT equality—there have also been signs of a backlash against the community’s newfound rights and visibility in society. Stereotypes of LGBT individuals, mostly negative, have been responsible for much of this reaction, as well as their historically negative view in by the public. In the 20th and 21st centuries, the mass media has played a major role in creating and perpetuating these stereotypes.


2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 620
Author(s):  
Timbo Mangaranap Sirait

Diskursus hubungan antara hukum dengan “moral” dan “fakta” selalu saja menarik untuk dibahas di kalangan sarjana hukum. Hukum kodrat irrasional adalah teori hukum besar yang pertama yang cara pandangnya theocentris mengakui bahwa hukum bersumber dari “moralitas” Tuhan YME. Derivasi nilai moral universal ternyata semakin bermetamorfosa dalam berbagai fenomena kehidupan kemudian dituntut agar diperlakukan setara di hadapan hukum. Di berbagai belahan dunia, Gerakan LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Biseksual, dan Transgender) dengan perjuangan perkawinan sesama jenis berkembang semakin luas dan telah memfalsifikasi dominasi perkawinan kodrati heteroseksual. Untuk itu, perlu ditilik secara reflektif filosofis akseptabilitas Konstitusi Indonesia atas perkawinan sesama jenis ini. Penelitian ini dilakukan dengan metode pendekatan yuridis normatif melalui cara berpikir deduktif dengan kriterium kebenaran koheren. Sehingga disimpulkan: pertama, kritikan hukum kodrat irrasional yang teosentris terhadap perkawinan sesama jenis, menganggap bahwa sumber hukum adalah “moral” bukan “fakta”, oleh karenanya aturan perundang-undangan dipositifkan dari/dan tidak boleh bertentangan dengan moral Ketuhanan. Oleh karena itu, menurut hukum kodrat irrasional perkawinan sesama jenis tidak mungkin dapat diterima dalam hukum karena bertentangan dengan moralitas Ketuhanan Y.M.E. Kedua, bahwa Konstitusi Indonesia menempatkan Pancasila sebagai grundnorm dengan sila Ketuhanan Yang Maha Esa menjadi fondasi dan bintang pemandu pada Undang-undang Perkawinan Indonesia, yang intinya perkawinan harus antara pria dan wanita (heteroseksual) dengan tujuan membentuk keluarga (rumah tangga). Perkawinan sesama jenis juga tidak dapat diterima karena ketidakmampuan bentuk perkawinan ini untuk memenuhi unsur-unsur utama perkawinan, untuk terjaminnya keberlangsungan kemanusiaan secara berkelanjutan (sustainable).The discourse of relationships between law, moral and facts are always interesting to be discussed among legal scholars. Irrational natural law is the first major legal theory that which theocentris worldview admit that the law derived from the “morality” of the God. The derivation of universal moral values appear increasingly metamorphosed into various life phenomena then are required to be treated equally before the law. In different parts of the world the movement LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender) struggle for same-sex marriage has grown falsified domination of heterosexual marriage. Therefore it is necessary be a reflective philosophical divine the acceptability of the Constitution of Indonesia on same-sex marriage. This research was conducted by the method of normative juridical approach, in the frame of a coherent deductive acknowledgement. Concluded, Firstly, criticism Irrational natural law against same-sex marriage, assume that the source of the law is a “moral” rather than “facts”, therefore the rules of law are made of / and should not contradict with the morals of God. Therefore, according to irrational natural law that same-sex marriage may not be accepted in law as contrary to morality God. Secondly, That the Constitution of Indonesia puts Pancasila as the basic norms to please Almighty God be the foundation and a guiding star in the Indonesian Marriage Law, which is essentially a marriage should be between a man and a woman (heterosexual) with purpose of forming a family. Same-sex marriage is not acceptable also because of the inability to fulfill marriage form of the major elements of marriage, ensuring the sustainability of humanity in a sustainable manner.


2011 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanni Damele

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.


2019 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-74
Author(s):  
Marie Balas ◽  
Josselin Tricou

The debate about the same sex marriage bill in France has launched a significant sequence of politicization and assertion in the streets for the conservative Catholics. Though mobilization declined after the law was passed, these initiatives still arouse differentiated appropriation of public urban space. Relying on ethnographic work, this article analyses two logics of action emerging complementarily and organizing these post-‘Mariage pour tous’ demonstrations in Paris. In both cases there is a real ‘place-taking/place-making’ at work. Extending the study of recent Catholic mobilizations to the different activists still active after ‘La Manif Pour Tous’ makes it possible to understand how central the issue of drop in status seems in order to analyze these protest repertoires and their evolutionary inscription in the city, especially in the direction of the ‘peripheries’.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document