Suchergebnisse

Notably, in 2013, Maryland, Rhode Island, Delaware, and Minnesota became the 10th, 11th, 12th, and 13th states, respectively, to legalize same-gender marriage. Without legal recognition or social support from the larger society, the majority of same-gender partnerships in the U.S. are denied privileges and rights that are considered basic for heterosexual marriages. This manuscript draws from a national cross section of published survey data from 1996 to 2013 reporting Americans' attitudes regarding same-gender marriage and civil unions. Social work practitioners have broad opportunity to apply their skills to the critical needs facing same-gender partners. After an overview of the legal status of same-gender marriages and their accompanying social and policy issues, recommendations are provided that include identification of specific needs for premarital counseling of same-gender partners and ensuring sensitivity to the myriad challenges they face.

Throughout the course of their lives, same-sex couples experience many legal challenges not faced by their heterosexual peers. Federal estate tax law continues this differential treatment into death. While the estate tax laws generally allow married heterosexuals to transfer unlimited assets to their spouses at death without incurring estate tax liability, Americans in same-sex relationships are limited in their ability to transfer assets tax-free to their same-sex partner upon death. Using data from several government data sources, this report estimates the dollar value of the estate tax disadvantage faced by same-sex couples. In 2009, the differential treatment of same-sex and married couples in the estate tax code will affect an estimated 73 same-sex couples, costing them each, on average, more than $3.3 million.

Same-sex marriage and family counselors usually do not have enough experience and training background to help same-sex couples with marriage and family issues. Some counselors may have a personal bias toward same-sex couples due to the absence of same-sex couples and families' background. Marriage and family counselors provide counseling services to their clients with marriage and family problems and conflicts, resulting in a positive recovery negotiation. The purpose of this study was to understand and investigate the attitudes of marriage and family counselors regarding same-sex couples and families, an area ignored in mainstream marriage and family counseling. Based on 300 surveys and 38 interviews from marriage and family counselors in the United States, the researcher categorized that more than half of the participants expressed negative attitudes against same-sex couples and families, due to cheating, unsafe sexual activities, and domestic violence. Some counselors refused to provide counseling services to same-sex couples and families due to misunderstanding and prejudice. The results suggested that additional in-service professional developments and curriculum reforms are essential to promoting multicultural family structure.

Received: 13 September 2021 / Accepted: 25 November 2021 / Published: 3 January 2022

AbstractIn 2 studies, university students from the United States rated the importance of 43 behavior expectations about their cross‐sex friends, same‐sex friends and romantic partners. In Study 1, all 399 participants had a current romantic partner, whereas in Study 2, romantic partner status varied across the 165 participants. Participants always rated their expectations for romantic partners higher than for either type of friend, and expectations for behaviors promoting emotional closeness were always rated higher than expectations about behaviors promoting social companionship or relationship positivity. In Study 2, expectations for cross‐sex friends were rated lower and more similar to same‐sex friends when participants had a current romantic partner than when they did not.

Introduction / Krista B. Nadakavukaren Schefer -- Sincerity in politics : How much is too much? / Sorin Baiasu -- Why informed opinions matter for democracy and why misinformation should not be underestimated in referendum processes / Sandrine Baume -- The (mis)use of statistics in referendum votes / Anke Tresch and Lukas Lauener -- Fact-checking direct democracy : When journalists set out to correct misinformation / Laurent Bernhard -- Judicial remedies in a comparative perspective / Andreas Glaser -- Direct democracy, misinformation, and judicial review in the United States / -- Amanda L. Tyler -- Judicial remedies in Switzerland / Vincent Martenet -- Securing rational discourse surrounding referenda in Germany / Bernd Holznagel and Maximilian Hemmert-Halswick -- Online disinformation and freedom of expression in the democratic context : The European and Italian responses / Oreste Pollicino and Laura Somaini -- Tackling misinformation in referendums : Lessons from anglophone democracies / Alan Renwick and Micaela Palese -- How to define misinformation? : The French attempt / Thomas Hochmann -- The guarantee of political rights in view of misinformation : Is new regulation needed for Swiss referenda? / Michel Besson and Véronique Boillet -- From veracity to traceability : A new Canadian legal framework for deliberative referenda / Patrick Taillon -- All fake? : Information disorders and the 2017 referendum in Catalonia / -- Oscar Barberà -- Conclusion / Sandrine Baume, Véronique Boillet and Vincent Martenet

Four experiments were conducted in which subjects evaluated people who talked 20, 50 or 80% of the time in opposite-sex or same-sex interactions. Multivariate analysis of results showed that first impressions of talking rate can be understood in terms of a "potency" dimension and a "liking" dimension. People who talked 80% of the time were evaluated as being domineering, out going, selfish, inconsiderate, inattentive, impolite, cold, and disliked by the other person. People talking 50% of the time were evaluated as being likeable, attentive, polite, and warm. People talking 20% of the time were evaluated as being submissive, introverted, unselfish and unintelligent. There was no interaction between speaker sex and amount of talking in opposite-sex dyads. Males in same-sex interactions were evaluated as being cold when they spoke 20% of the time and females in same-sex interactions were evaluated as being cold, inattentive, and intelligent when they spoke 80% of the time. Suggestions were given for an attributional study of talking rate.

This article offers the first analysis to date of national data evaluating whether defense of marriage acts (mini or super-DOMAs) preserve and stabilize the family. After finding that they do not—just as same sex marriage does not appear to destabilize families—the article analyzes what variables are, in fact, associated with family stability. Specifically, those variables are: families below the poverty line; men and women married three or more times; religiosity; percent conservative versus liberal in a state; disposable income; percent with bachelor's degree; and median age of first marriage. Next, the article applies the sociological concepts of moral entrepreneurism and moral panic, defined, respectively, as the practice of political groups labeling certain behavior as deviant, and the reframing of a social phenomenon in moral terms to create an exaggerated sense of fear. These concepts serve as the theoretical explanation for mini-DOMAs continued attraction, even in the face of a looming U.S. Supreme Court decision that is likely to command the co-existence of same sex marriage and same sex marriage bans for some time to come. Finally, the article offers pragmatic recommendations for achieving family stability in light of mini-DOMA's inability to succeed in this goal.

After being recognized as a legitimate form of marriage in various countries, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the American Constitution guarantee the marriage of same-sex. It is the syllabus of same-sex Marriage in the United States that become the object of the research. This thesis aims to identify the attitude types and clauses constituent of syllabus constructed by same-sex marriage proposer in the United States and examines how attitude types in the syllabus of Same-sex Marriage in the United States indicates the meaning and relation with the readers. The theory proposed by Martin and White of Appraisal system (2005) based on attitude types is used to support the analysis. The research found that the attitude types in same-sex marriage syllabus there are 92 affect, 54 judgement, and 58 appreciation. Based on the attitudinal types in this research, the same-sex proposers feeling indicates they are being discriminated because their citizenship rights have not been fulfilled. It can be seen from the most choice of the word "harm" that indicates the existence of a condition that there is a rule injustice. Therefore the same-sex proposers need to be protected their right to marry the same-sex couples. Validation the right of same-sex marriage, will give them a guarantee to live safely. If the right cannot be avowed, the same-sex actor will be suspected as a criminal by the state. The same-sex proposers believe this is harmful decision. Because they think that marriage is an important right that everyone can procure it, including the same-sex orientation. This right cannot be parting from the other right and same-sex marriage right must be legalized by the state. Therefore the state must to treat the citizen equally.

Research comparing the relative significance of economic exchange theories and gender norms on parents' division of income‐producing and domestic responsibilities often fails to consider sufficiently the role that marriage may play. This article shows that, in the United States, numerous aspects of state and federal law relating to marriage encourage spouses to specialize in distinct breadwinning and caretaking roles. Same‐sex marriage offers new opportunities to assess the importance of marriage in household labor allocation decisions while controlling for gender. For any data gathered before June 2015, however, it may be distorting to characterize same‐sex couples as simply "married" or "unmarried"; rather, legal recognition during the past 10 years is better conceptualized as discrete bundles of rights and tracked accordingly. This article, written by a legal scholar, provides substantive legal analysis that is integral to developing a research agenda in this area.