Conscientious objection to same-sex marriages: beyond the limits of toleration

Stijn Smet
{"title":"Conscientious objection to same-sex marriages: beyond the limits of toleration","authors":"Stijn Smet","doi":"10.1163/18710328-12341301","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"When civil servants conscientiously refuse to register same-sex marriages, a clash arises between freedom of religion and same-sex equality. The scholarly world is divided on the optimal way to tackle this human rights clash. States, however, are not. Courts and legislators in the US, the UK and the Netherlands—among others—have decisively and unequivocally sided with same-sex equality. This article contributes to the debate by presenting an alternative to existing scholarly analyses, which the author finds wanting. The primary aim is to offer a coherent account of the relevant practice in the UK and the Netherlands. The article’s core argument is that this practice is best understood in terms of the limits of toleration in liberal States. The author argues, in particular, that the UK courts and Dutch legislators have drawn those limits at the point where civil servants cause same-sex couples expressive harm.","PeriodicalId":168375,"journal":{"name":"Religion and Human Rights","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Religion and Human Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18710328-12341301","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

When civil servants conscientiously refuse to register same-sex marriages, a clash arises between freedom of religion and same-sex equality. The scholarly world is divided on the optimal way to tackle this human rights clash. States, however, are not. Courts and legislators in the US, the UK and the Netherlands—among others—have decisively and unequivocally sided with same-sex equality. This article contributes to the debate by presenting an alternative to existing scholarly analyses, which the author finds wanting. The primary aim is to offer a coherent account of the relevant practice in the UK and the Netherlands. The article’s core argument is that this practice is best understood in terms of the limits of toleration in liberal States. The author argues, in particular, that the UK courts and Dutch legislators have drawn those limits at the point where civil servants cause same-sex couples expressive harm.
出于良心反对同性婚姻:超出容忍的范围
当公务员自觉拒绝同性婚姻登记时,宗教自由与同性平等之间就产生了冲突。学术界对于解决这一人权冲突的最佳方式存在分歧。然而,国家并非如此。美国、英国和荷兰等国的法院和立法机构都坚定而明确地支持同性平等。本文通过提出现有学术分析的替代方案来促进辩论,这是作者发现的不足之处。主要目的是提供一个连贯的帐户在英国和荷兰的相关做法。这篇文章的核心论点是,最好从自由国家的容忍限度的角度来理解这种做法。作者特别指出,英国法院和荷兰立法者在公务员对同性伴侣造成表达性伤害的问题上已经划定了这些限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信