Judicial regimes and same-sex marriage: Enforcing judicially determined personal autonomy at the expense of majoritarian democracy
|Abstract||In this article, the author discusses the Marriage Cases opinion issued by the California Supreme Court in May of 2008. In that decision, a majority of the justices of the California Supreme Court found that the California Constitution requires affording the designation of marriage to same-sex couples. Though the article focuses on California, the article is equally applicable to other opinions discussing same-sex marriage. (The views expressed in the article do not necessarily represent the views of the agency or the U.S.).|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Loren Cannon (2009). Trans-Marriage and the Unacceptability of Same-Sex Marriage Restrictions. Social Philosophy Today 25:75-89.
Andrew Stivers & Andrew Valls (2007). Same-Sex Marriage and the Regulation of Language. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 6 (2):237-253.
Benjamin A. Gorman (2004). Brief Refutations of Some Common Arguments Against Same-Sex Marriage. American Philosophical Association Newsletter on Philosophy and Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Issues 4 (1):13-15.
Reginald Williams (2011). Same-Sex Marriage and Equality. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (5):589-595.
Carlos A. Ball, The Blurring of the Lines: Children and Bans on Interracial Unions and Same-Sex Marriages.
Matthew C. Altman (2010). Kant on Sex and Marriage: The Implications for the Same-Sex Marriage Debate. Kant-Studien 101 (3):309-330.
Added to index2009-04-16
Total downloads6 ( #154,770 of 722,933 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,087 of 722,933 )
How can I increase my downloads?