宗教与同性婚姻

Russell Sandberg
{"title":"宗教与同性婚姻","authors":"Russell Sandberg","doi":"10.1332/policypress/9781529212808.003.0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For a legal status which has existed for less than twenty years, the law concerning same sex partnerships and religion has had a turbulent and somewhat confusing history. This chapter examines the story so far. The first part examines how the Civil Partnership Act 2004 originally ignored religion, copying the template of civil marriage. It will then chart how this approach fell apart with the introduction of religious civil partnerships. The second part looks at the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 that was enacted by building upon the existing structure for opposite sex marriage rather than using the opportunity to craft a modernised, rationalised and codified law on marriage. This has led to an increasingly complex legal framework as shown by the ‘quadruple lock’ that permits but does not oblige religious groups to conduct same sex marriages.","PeriodicalId":250688,"journal":{"name":"Religion and Marriage Law","volume":"132 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Religion and Same-Sex Marriage\",\"authors\":\"Russell Sandberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1332/policypress/9781529212808.003.0003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"For a legal status which has existed for less than twenty years, the law concerning same sex partnerships and religion has had a turbulent and somewhat confusing history. This chapter examines the story so far. The first part examines how the Civil Partnership Act 2004 originally ignored religion, copying the template of civil marriage. It will then chart how this approach fell apart with the introduction of religious civil partnerships. The second part looks at the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 that was enacted by building upon the existing structure for opposite sex marriage rather than using the opportunity to craft a modernised, rationalised and codified law on marriage. This has led to an increasingly complex legal framework as shown by the ‘quadruple lock’ that permits but does not oblige religious groups to conduct same sex marriages.\",\"PeriodicalId\":250688,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Religion and Marriage Law\",\"volume\":\"132 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Religion and Marriage Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1332/policypress/9781529212808.003.0003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Religion and Marriage Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1332/policypress/9781529212808.003.0003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

作为一个存在不到二十年的法律地位,关于同性伴侣关系和宗教的法律经历了一段动荡和有些混乱的历史。本章考察了到目前为止的故事。第一部分考察了《2004年民事伴侣法》最初是如何忽视宗教,复制民事婚姻的模板的。然后,它将描绘出这种方法是如何随着宗教民事伴侣关系的引入而瓦解的。第二部分着眼于《2013年婚姻(同性伴侣)法案》,该法案是在现有异性婚姻结构的基础上制定的,而不是利用这个机会制定一部现代化、合理化和法典化的婚姻法。这导致了一个越来越复杂的法律框架,正如“四重锁”所显示的那样,它允许但不强制宗教团体举行同性婚姻。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Religion and Same-Sex Marriage
For a legal status which has existed for less than twenty years, the law concerning same sex partnerships and religion has had a turbulent and somewhat confusing history. This chapter examines the story so far. The first part examines how the Civil Partnership Act 2004 originally ignored religion, copying the template of civil marriage. It will then chart how this approach fell apart with the introduction of religious civil partnerships. The second part looks at the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 that was enacted by building upon the existing structure for opposite sex marriage rather than using the opportunity to craft a modernised, rationalised and codified law on marriage. This has led to an increasingly complex legal framework as shown by the ‘quadruple lock’ that permits but does not oblige religious groups to conduct same sex marriages.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信