Journal of Political Philosophy 7 (3):225–242 (1999)
This paper offers an argument in favour of the conclusion that it is seriously unjust to exclude same-sex couples from the institution of civil marriage. The argument is based on an interpretation of what the institution of marriage essentially is, and of its essential rationale; the crucial claim is that although marriage is a legal institution, it is also a social institution, involving a "social meaning" -- a body of common knowledge and expectations about marriage that is generally shared throughout society.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Justificatory Liberalism and Same‐Sex Marriage.Francis J. Beckwith - 2013 - Ratio Juris 26 (4):487-509.
Similar books and articles
Public or Private Good? The Contested Meaning of Marriage.Brook J. Sadler - 2010 - Social Philosophy Today 26:23-38.
The Wedding Bells Heard Around the World: Years From Now, Will We Wonder Why We Worried About Same-Sex Marriage?Mark E. Wojcik - manuscript
Brief Refutations of Some Common Arguments Against Same-Sex Marriage.Benjamin A. Gorman - 2004 - American Philosophical Association Newsletter on Philosophy and Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Issues 4 (1):13-15.
Trans-Marriage and the Unacceptability of Same-Sex Marriage Restrictions.Loren Cannon - 2009 - Social Philosophy Today 25:75-89.
Same-Sex Marriage and Equality.Reginald Williams - 2011 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (5):589-595.
Kant on Sex and Marriage: The Implications for the Same-Sex Marriage Debate.Matthew C. Altman - 2010 - Kant-Studien 101 (3):309-330.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads371 ( #6,827 of 2,153,823 )
Recent downloads (6 months)18 ( #23,180 of 2,153,823 )
How can I increase my downloads?