David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
This paper explores the relevance of the morality of homosexuality in judicial decisions written in cases challenging laws that limit marriage to heterosexual couples. That study shows that judges ruling in favor of same-sex marriage eschew moral opprobrium as a legitimate basis for legal decisionmaking in favor of a traditional liberal vision of the neutral state. By contrast, judges who support the exclusion of same sex couples from marriage unapologetically endorse the majority's preference for heterosexual procreative sex to legitimate legal barriers to marriage for same-sex couples. Despite this superficial difference, neither pro-marriage nor traditional marriage judges remain morally neutral in their decisionmaking. Even judges who claim to bracket morality do not remain morally neutral toward homosexual relationships when they justify the grant of marriage rights. Instead, they make the case that same-sex relationships are normatively valuable for the very reasons that heterosexual marriages are normatively valuable. It is only the judges who take the middle ground - condemning discriminatory laws without granting the affirmative right to marriage itself - who come close to achieving moral neutrality toward homosexuality and same-sex relationships in their opinions.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Andrew Stivers & Andrew Valls (2007). Same-Sex Marriage and the Regulation of Language. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 6 (2):237-253.
Loren Cannon (2009). Trans-Marriage and the Unacceptability of Same-Sex Marriage Restrictions. Social Philosophy Today 25:75-89.
Carlos A. Ball, The Blurring of the Lines: Children and Bans on Interracial Unions and Same-Sex Marriages.
Brook J. Sadler (2010). Public or Private Good? The Contested Meaning of Marriage. Social Philosophy Today 26:23-38.
Thomas Burrell, Judicial Regimes and Same-Sex Marriage: Enforcing Judicially Determined Personal Autonomy at the Expense of Majoritarian Democracy.
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.
Mark E. Wojcik, The Wedding Bells Heard Around the World: Years From Now, Will We Wonder Why We Worried About Same-Sex Marriage?
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 index2009-01-28
Total downloads49 ( #68,321 of 1,724,745 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #210,951 of 1,724,745 )
How can I increase my downloads?