Search results

Using multivariate regression analysis, this study compares the relative effects of traditional aggregate rational choice electoral behavior with a more recent perspective focusing on the preservation of group norms and group morality in the context of county economic classification and the presence or absence of same‐sex marriage referenda in the 2004 presidential election in Appalachian counties. Our findings suggest that economic factors, in the aggregate, retain the explanatory value commonly afforded them, but the presence of same‐sex marriage referenda fails to conform with the expectations of the group norm/morality perspective of rational choice behavior. We discuss how this study fits with other analyses of same‐sex marriage referenda in the 2004 election. Our findings suggest that the region can no longer, if it ever was, be considered politically and socially cohesive.

Cover -- Half Title -- Title -- Copyright -- Contents -- Foreword -- Introduction -- Chapter 1: How Did Same-Sex Marriage Become Legal in the United States? -- Overview: The Complex Issue of Same-Sex Marriage -- Four Decades of LGBT Activism Paved the Way for Marriage Equality -- American Politics have Shifted Significantly Since the 1990s -- Unequal Treatment Led the Supreme Court to Overturn DOMA -- State Marriage Laws Vary Widely Following DOMA's Demise -- Young People Helped Shift Public Opinion on Same-Sex Marriage -- Gay Marriage Around the World -- Chapter 2: Does Same-Sex Marriage Benefit Society? -- Chapter Preface -- Same-Sex Marriage Benefits Society in Many Ways -- Same-Sex Marriage Strengthens the Institution of Marriage -- Same-Sex Marriage Furthers the American Values of Freedom and Equality -- Marriage Equality Reduces Dependence on Government Social Services -- What's Wrong with Letting Same-Sex Couples "Marry?" -- Same-Sex Marriage Weakens the Institution of Marriage -- Chapter 3: Is Same-Sex Marriage Good for Families and Children? -- Overview: Gay Couples Weigh Financial Options that Accompany Marriage -- Same-Sex Marriage Protects Families and Children in Many Ways -- There is No Scientific Evidence that Same-Sex Marriage Harms Children -- Children in Same-Sex Households are Healthier than their Peers -- Same-Sex Marriage is not Good for Families and Children -- Children Pay a Lifelong Emotional Price for Same-Sex Parenting -- Gay Marriage, then Group Marriage? -- Chapter 4: What are Some other Key Issues with Same-Sex Marriage? -- Chapter Preface -- Same-Sex Marriage has Negative Consequences for Religious Liberty -- Same-Sex Marriage does not Impact Religious Freedom -- Beyond Gay Marriage-Is the LGBT Movement Walking down the Aisle to Nowhere? -- Same-Sex Marriage is Good for the Economy

With same-sex marriage igniting a firestorm of controversy in the press and in the courts, in legislative chambers and in living rooms, Andrew Sullivan, a pioneering voice in the debate, has brought together two thousand years of argument in an anthology of historic inclusiveness and evenhandedness. Among the selections included here:- The 2003 Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruling in support of same-sex marriage- Justice Kennedy's majority opinion and Justice Scalia's dissent in the 2003 landmark Supreme Court decision striking down anti-sodomy laws- President George W. Bush's call for a Federal Marriage Amendment- John Kerry's Senate speech urging defeat of the Defense of Marriage Act- Harvard historian Nancy F. Cott's testimony before the Vermont House Judiciary Committee- Reverend Peter J. Gomes on the distinction between civil and religious marriage- Stanley Kurtz on the politics of gay marriage- Evan Wolfson on the popularity of the right to marry among lesbians and gay men- New York Times op-ed columnist David Brooks' conservative case for same-sex marriage- Excerpts from Genesis, Leviticus, and other essential biblical texts- Aristophanes's classic theory of same-sex love, from Plato's Symposium- Hannah Arendt on marriage as a fundamental right- Camille Paglia's skepticismRepresenting the full range of perspectives and the most cogent and arresting arguments, Same-Sex Marriage is essential to a balanced understanding of the most pressing cultural question we face today.From the Trade Paperback edition.

Cover -- Title -- Copyright -- Contents -- Introduction Real-life case study -- Chapter 1 Same-sex relationships -- Chapter 2 Why get married? -- Chapter 3 Religious rite or civil right? -- Chapter 4 Families and children -- Chapter 5 Effects on society -- Chapter 6 Into the future -- Timeline -- Glossary -- Further Reading -- Index

Taking a "point/counterpoint" approach, John Corvino (a philosopher and a prominent gay advocate) and Maggie Gallagher (a nationally syndicated columnist and co-founder of the National Organization for Marriage) consider key questions about the institution itself: What is marriage for? Is marriage meant to be a gendered institution? Why is the state in the business of sanctioning marriage? Where do the needs of children fit in? Will legalization of same-sex marriage lead to legalization of polygamy? Corvino argues that society should support same-sex marriage because of its interest in supporting stable households for all its members, gay and straight alike. Gallagher argues that government recognition of same-sex unions as marriages will disconnect marriage from its key public mission furthering responsible procreation, while stigmatizing traditional views of sex, marriage and family as bigotry. Both agree that the issue deserves thoughtful, rigorous engagement.

As the uproar over the recent New York State law demonstrates, same-sex marriage is a perennial hot-button issue, certain to impact the 2012 election. This book provides a useful roadmap to both sides of this contentious matter. Taking a 'point/counterpoint' approach, the authors consider key questions about the institution itself: What is marriage for? Is marriage meant to be a gendered institution? Why is the state in the business of sanctioning marriage? Where do the needs of children fit in? Will legalisation of same-sex marriage lead to legalisation of polygamy?

Same-sex marriages are currently not permitted under Australian federal law. Although same-sex couples in de facto relationships have had most of the legal rights of married couples since July 2009, there is however no national registered partnership or civil union scheme. Public opinion polls in Australia consistently show majority support for same-sex marriage, yet political and legal opposition to it has stymied a number of recent attempts at state and federal level to legislate for 'marriage equality', which would require amending the federal Marriage Act. Should marriage only be between a

This article explores some limits to freedom imposed by family law & considers the merit of extending marriage rights to homosexual cohabitants -- a topic of heated debate throughout the world. Answering this question requires first examining the relationship between marriage & cohabitation. Marriage is a contract into which most heterosexual couples choose to enter, though the number of those who do not is growing. It is not a choice in most places for homosexual couples. However, there has been a recent trend to increase the obligations of unmarried intimate cohabitants, both hetero- & same-sex couples. In essence this trend has implications for personal autonomy. The contrasting legal positions of cohabitants & spouses are examined. It is concluded that marriage is useful in cohabitation settings where there is asymmetry in life profiles. It allows spouses or partners to feel comfortable with long-term investments of time & effort, especially when there are children involved. This is true for both opposite- & same-sex couples. Therefore it is suggested that a new form of obligated cohabitation, called the "marriage lite," might be an acceptable alternative for those who do not wish to marry but do wish for a certain degree of legal obligation & commitment. References. J. Stanton

AbstractIn the majority opinion by the U.S. Supreme Court over same-sex marriage, a claim by Confucius was quoted, which led to an uproar among Confucian scholars in mainland China. In this article, I will first explain the background of the debate over same-sex marriage in the United States, and why Confucius's claim was quoted. I will then show how a contemporary Confucian philosopher Zhang Xianglong addressed the issue of same-sex marriage from a Confucian perspective. In my view, compared with other mainland Confucians' responses, Zhang's are one of the most scholarly and moderate responses that nevertheless follow Confucian values. But he eventually rejected same-sex marriage on the Confucian ground. I will argue that, based on some Confucian values and principles which are shared by Zhang, we can answer Zhang's concerns with same-sex marriage, thus offering an even more moderate Confucian stance that accepts same-sex marriage. But this stance is still different from the typical liberal one. We will also see that, in order to accept same-sex marriage, it is the liberals, not the Confucians, who will have to deal with an issue—the acceptance of polygamy—that poses a serious challenge to the principle of equality, which is fundamental to some liberals.