Public Reason Liberalism and Sex‐Neutral Marriage A Response to Francis J. Beckwith

Ratio Juris 28 (4):486-503 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article responds to an article by Francis J. Beckwith that argued that the consistent application of generic liberal principles requires that same-sex marriage not be recognised in civil law. This response demonstrates that Beckwith's article contains a series of interpretative and substantive flaws that render his argument unsuccessful. These relate to a misinterpretation of core liberal principles and a sidestepping of the matter of undue bias against same-sex partners. In correcting these flaws I tentatively propose a Voltairean argument in favour of same-sex civil marriage for those citizens with moral qualms about same-sex relationships derived from their reasonable comprehensive doctrine

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 76,140

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Replies to Evan Fales: On History and Miracles.Francis J. Beckwith - 2001 - Philosophia Christi 3 (1):42 - 45.
Rawls, Political Liberalism, and the Family: A Reply to Matthew B. O'Brien.Greg Walker - 2014 - British Journal of American Legal Studies 3 (1):37-70.
Civil Unions for All.Lori Keleher - 2013 - Philosophy in the Contemporary World 20 (2):55-64.
Legal Neutrality and Same-Sex Marriage.Francis J. Beckwith - 2005 - Philosophia Christi 7 (1):19-25.
Is Civil Marriage Illiberal?Ralph Wedgwood - 2016 - In Elizabeth Brake (ed.), After Marriage: Rethinking Marital Relationships. Oxford University Press. pp. 29–50.
A Populist Argument for Same-Sex Marriage.Alex Rajczi - 2008 - The Monist 91 (3-4):475-505.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-09-14

Downloads
27 (#433,061)

6 months
1 (#447,993)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations