以色列的经验对美国同性婚姻辩论的潜在启示

Shahar Lifshitz
{"title":"以色列的经验对美国同性婚姻辩论的潜在启示","authors":"Shahar Lifshitz","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1633832","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the past decade American marriage law has been the arena for a major controversy regarding same-sex marriage. Typically, liberals tend to support same-sex marriage, while conservatives oppose it. The liberal-conservative dispute concerning Same Sex Marriage is usually related to a broader debate on the legitimacy of limiting the possibilities for marrying: liberals present marriage as a private arrangement between the partners, and they therefore oppose restricting the right to marry The opponents of single-sex marriage, in contrast, legitimize legal limits to the right to be married by presenting marriage as a public institution.Based on the unique experience amassed in Israel on this question, I seek to reveal the potential consequences of the struggle between liberals and conservatives regarding limitations of the right to marriage for an additional liberal-conservative confrontation concerning the uniqueness of legal marriages, and the difference between them and alternative family types.The conservative position limiting entry to marriage won a decisive victory in Israel. Accordingly, partners of the same sex, like partners from different religious communities, are not allowed to formally marry. Generally speaking, the right to marry is subject to a broad range of civil and religious restrictions. Ironically, the strict limitations on the right to marry were a trigger for the development of the institution of cohabitation as a substitute for formal marriage. Accordingly, the array of the rights and obligations of cohabitants is approaching that of married partners, and at times even exceeds the latter. I will argue for the existence of a similar dynamic in the United States, where the distress of same-sex partners serves as the basis for notions and proposals, both in the academic realm and in the more general public realm, for strengthening the institution of cohabitation, the weakening of the institution of marriage, and at times even the abrogation of marriage as a legal institution.On the background of this developing dynamic, and taking into account the aggregate Israeli experience, I will advance three arguments: First, I will present a conservative critique of the conservative position against same-sex partners. I will argue that, in the final analysis, the conservative camp's relative success in negating the possibility of same-sex marriages harms this camp's broader agenda for the preference of legal marriages.Second, I will present a liberal critique of the liberal camp. My proposition is that, despite the essentially liberal motivation for weakening legal marriages in order to decrease the gap between them and cohabitation, in many instances this activity harms the liberal values of freedom of choice and autonomy in the name of which they act.Finally, I will argue on behalf of democratic compromises such as civil union in the United States and spousal registry in Israel.","PeriodicalId":122941,"journal":{"name":"Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Potential Lesson from the Israeli Experience for the American Same-Sex Marriage Debate\",\"authors\":\"Shahar Lifshitz\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.1633832\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the past decade American marriage law has been the arena for a major controversy regarding same-sex marriage. Typically, liberals tend to support same-sex marriage, while conservatives oppose it. The liberal-conservative dispute concerning Same Sex Marriage is usually related to a broader debate on the legitimacy of limiting the possibilities for marrying: liberals present marriage as a private arrangement between the partners, and they therefore oppose restricting the right to marry The opponents of single-sex marriage, in contrast, legitimize legal limits to the right to be married by presenting marriage as a public institution.Based on the unique experience amassed in Israel on this question, I seek to reveal the potential consequences of the struggle between liberals and conservatives regarding limitations of the right to marriage for an additional liberal-conservative confrontation concerning the uniqueness of legal marriages, and the difference between them and alternative family types.The conservative position limiting entry to marriage won a decisive victory in Israel. Accordingly, partners of the same sex, like partners from different religious communities, are not allowed to formally marry. Generally speaking, the right to marry is subject to a broad range of civil and religious restrictions. Ironically, the strict limitations on the right to marry were a trigger for the development of the institution of cohabitation as a substitute for formal marriage. Accordingly, the array of the rights and obligations of cohabitants is approaching that of married partners, and at times even exceeds the latter. I will argue for the existence of a similar dynamic in the United States, where the distress of same-sex partners serves as the basis for notions and proposals, both in the academic realm and in the more general public realm, for strengthening the institution of cohabitation, the weakening of the institution of marriage, and at times even the abrogation of marriage as a legal institution.On the background of this developing dynamic, and taking into account the aggregate Israeli experience, I will advance three arguments: First, I will present a conservative critique of the conservative position against same-sex partners. I will argue that, in the final analysis, the conservative camp's relative success in negating the possibility of same-sex marriages harms this camp's broader agenda for the preference of legal marriages.Second, I will present a liberal critique of the liberal camp. My proposition is that, despite the essentially liberal motivation for weakening legal marriages in order to decrease the gap between them and cohabitation, in many instances this activity harms the liberal values of freedom of choice and autonomy in the name of which they act.Finally, I will argue on behalf of democratic compromises such as civil union in the United States and spousal registry in Israel.\",\"PeriodicalId\":122941,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1633832\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1633832","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

在过去的十年里,美国婚姻法一直是关于同性婚姻的重大争议的舞台。通常情况下,自由派倾向于支持同性婚姻,而保守派则反对。自由派和保守派关于同性婚姻的争论通常与限制婚姻可能性的合法性的更广泛的辩论有关:自由派认为婚姻是伴侣之间的私人安排,因此他们反对限制结婚的权利。相反,反对单一性别婚姻的人,通过将婚姻呈现为一种公共制度,使对结婚权利的法律限制合法化。基于以色列在这个问题上积累的独特经验,我试图揭示自由主义者和保守主义者之间关于婚姻权利限制的斗争的潜在后果,从而导致自由主义者和保守主义者之间关于合法婚姻的独特性的对抗,以及它们与其他家庭类型之间的差异。限制结婚的保守立场在以色列赢得了决定性的胜利。因此,同性伴侣,就像来自不同宗教团体的伴侣一样,不允许正式结婚。一般来说,结婚的权利受到广泛的民事和宗教限制。具有讽刺意味的是,对结婚权利的严格限制引发了同居制度的发展,作为正式婚姻的替代品。因此,同居者的权利和义务的范围正在接近已婚伴侣,有时甚至超过后者。我认为在美国也存在着类似的动态,在那里,同性伴侣的痛苦作为观念和建议的基础,无论是在学术领域还是在更广泛的公共领域,都是为了加强同居制度,削弱婚姻制度,有时甚至废除婚姻作为一种法律制度。在这种发展动态的背景下,并考虑到以色列的总体经验,我将提出三个论点:首先,我将对反对同性伴侣的保守立场提出保守的批评。我认为,在最后的分析中,保守阵营在否定同性婚姻可能性方面的相对成功损害了该阵营更广泛的议程,即优先考虑合法婚姻。其次,我将对自由主义阵营进行自由主义批判。我的观点是,尽管从本质上讲,自由主义的动机是削弱合法婚姻,以缩小合法婚姻与同居之间的差距,但在许多情况下,这种行为损害了自由选择和自主的自由价值观。最后,我将代表民主妥协进行辩论,例如美国的民事结合和以色列的配偶登记。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Potential Lesson from the Israeli Experience for the American Same-Sex Marriage Debate
In the past decade American marriage law has been the arena for a major controversy regarding same-sex marriage. Typically, liberals tend to support same-sex marriage, while conservatives oppose it. The liberal-conservative dispute concerning Same Sex Marriage is usually related to a broader debate on the legitimacy of limiting the possibilities for marrying: liberals present marriage as a private arrangement between the partners, and they therefore oppose restricting the right to marry The opponents of single-sex marriage, in contrast, legitimize legal limits to the right to be married by presenting marriage as a public institution.Based on the unique experience amassed in Israel on this question, I seek to reveal the potential consequences of the struggle between liberals and conservatives regarding limitations of the right to marriage for an additional liberal-conservative confrontation concerning the uniqueness of legal marriages, and the difference between them and alternative family types.The conservative position limiting entry to marriage won a decisive victory in Israel. Accordingly, partners of the same sex, like partners from different religious communities, are not allowed to formally marry. Generally speaking, the right to marry is subject to a broad range of civil and religious restrictions. Ironically, the strict limitations on the right to marry were a trigger for the development of the institution of cohabitation as a substitute for formal marriage. Accordingly, the array of the rights and obligations of cohabitants is approaching that of married partners, and at times even exceeds the latter. I will argue for the existence of a similar dynamic in the United States, where the distress of same-sex partners serves as the basis for notions and proposals, both in the academic realm and in the more general public realm, for strengthening the institution of cohabitation, the weakening of the institution of marriage, and at times even the abrogation of marriage as a legal institution.On the background of this developing dynamic, and taking into account the aggregate Israeli experience, I will advance three arguments: First, I will present a conservative critique of the conservative position against same-sex partners. I will argue that, in the final analysis, the conservative camp's relative success in negating the possibility of same-sex marriages harms this camp's broader agenda for the preference of legal marriages.Second, I will present a liberal critique of the liberal camp. My proposition is that, despite the essentially liberal motivation for weakening legal marriages in order to decrease the gap between them and cohabitation, in many instances this activity harms the liberal values of freedom of choice and autonomy in the name of which they act.Finally, I will argue on behalf of democratic compromises such as civil union in the United States and spousal registry in Israel.
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