从消除性取向歧视到同性婚姻:香港的经验

Q1 Arts and Humanities
J. Chan
{"title":"从消除性取向歧视到同性婚姻:香港的经验","authors":"J. Chan","doi":"10.1080/1323238X.2021.2017556","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In recognition of Professor Andrew Byrnes’ contribution to promoting gender equality in Hong Kong, this article traces the development of equal treatment of LGBT in Hong Kong. This development is entirely court-led, and the LGBT community has been highly strategic in launching legal attacks. This approach has successfully extended the protection of LGBT’s rights in the last two decades, and the highest court in Hong Kong will soon have to confront the constitutionality of same-sex marriage. In MK v Government of the HKSAR, the Court of First Instance held against the recognition of same-sex marriage or an alternative form of civil partnership. In reviewing this important decision, this article argues that while there are powerful arguments in favour of recognising same-sex marriage, the issue is ultimately one of separation of powers. Given that marriage is deeply rooted in the community’s social and cultural values, this article considers that there is little prospect of successfully arguing for same-sex marriage in Hong Kong in the absence of sufficient social consensus, and that the best bet for Hong Kong is to argue for the recognition of an alternative form of civil partnership. Social consensus should be given less weight in this regard, as civil partnership is to exist alongside and not to replace traditional marriage. There is no evidence that civil partnership will threaten traditional marriage, as Hong Kong used to recognise the co-existence of different forms of marriage for a long time.","PeriodicalId":37430,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Human Rights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From eliminating discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation to same-sex marriage: the Hong Kong experience\",\"authors\":\"J. Chan\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1323238X.2021.2017556\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT In recognition of Professor Andrew Byrnes’ contribution to promoting gender equality in Hong Kong, this article traces the development of equal treatment of LGBT in Hong Kong. This development is entirely court-led, and the LGBT community has been highly strategic in launching legal attacks. This approach has successfully extended the protection of LGBT’s rights in the last two decades, and the highest court in Hong Kong will soon have to confront the constitutionality of same-sex marriage. In MK v Government of the HKSAR, the Court of First Instance held against the recognition of same-sex marriage or an alternative form of civil partnership. In reviewing this important decision, this article argues that while there are powerful arguments in favour of recognising same-sex marriage, the issue is ultimately one of separation of powers. Given that marriage is deeply rooted in the community’s social and cultural values, this article considers that there is little prospect of successfully arguing for same-sex marriage in Hong Kong in the absence of sufficient social consensus, and that the best bet for Hong Kong is to argue for the recognition of an alternative form of civil partnership. Social consensus should be given less weight in this regard, as civil partnership is to exist alongside and not to replace traditional marriage. There is no evidence that civil partnership will threaten traditional marriage, as Hong Kong used to recognise the co-existence of different forms of marriage for a long time.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37430,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Journal of Human Rights\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Journal of Human Rights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1323238X.2021.2017556\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Human Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1323238X.2021.2017556","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要为了表彰Andrew Byrnes教授为促进香港性别平等所做的贡献,本文追溯了香港LGBT平等待遇的发展历程。这一发展完全是由法院主导的,LGBT群体在发起法律攻击方面具有高度战略意义。在过去二十年中,这种方法成功地扩大了对LGBT权利的保护,香港最高法院很快将不得不面对同性婚姻的合宪性。在MK诉香港特区政府一案中,原讼法庭裁定不承认同性婚姻或其他形式的民事伴侣关系。在回顾这一重要决定时,本文认为,尽管有强有力的论据支持承认同性婚姻,但问题最终是三权分立。鉴于婚姻深深植根于社会的社会和文化价值观,本文认为,在缺乏足够的社会共识的情况下,香港成功争取同性婚姻的可能性很小,香港的最佳选择是争取承认另一种形式的民事伴侣关系。在这方面,社会共识应该不那么重要,因为民事伴侣关系是与传统婚姻共存的,而不是取代传统婚姻。没有证据表明民事伴侣关系会威胁传统婚姻,因为香港长期以来一直承认不同形式的婚姻共存。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
From eliminating discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation to same-sex marriage: the Hong Kong experience
ABSTRACT In recognition of Professor Andrew Byrnes’ contribution to promoting gender equality in Hong Kong, this article traces the development of equal treatment of LGBT in Hong Kong. This development is entirely court-led, and the LGBT community has been highly strategic in launching legal attacks. This approach has successfully extended the protection of LGBT’s rights in the last two decades, and the highest court in Hong Kong will soon have to confront the constitutionality of same-sex marriage. In MK v Government of the HKSAR, the Court of First Instance held against the recognition of same-sex marriage or an alternative form of civil partnership. In reviewing this important decision, this article argues that while there are powerful arguments in favour of recognising same-sex marriage, the issue is ultimately one of separation of powers. Given that marriage is deeply rooted in the community’s social and cultural values, this article considers that there is little prospect of successfully arguing for same-sex marriage in Hong Kong in the absence of sufficient social consensus, and that the best bet for Hong Kong is to argue for the recognition of an alternative form of civil partnership. Social consensus should be given less weight in this regard, as civil partnership is to exist alongside and not to replace traditional marriage. There is no evidence that civil partnership will threaten traditional marriage, as Hong Kong used to recognise the co-existence of different forms of marriage for a long time.
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
Australian Journal of Human Rights
Australian Journal of Human Rights Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
43
期刊介绍: The Australian Journal of Human Rights (AJHR) is Australia’s first peer reviewed journal devoted exclusively to human rights development in Australia, the Asia-Pacific region and internationally. The journal aims to raise awareness of human rights issues in Australia and the Asia-Pacific region by providing a forum for scholarship and discussion. The AJHR examines legal aspects of human rights, along with associated philosophical, historical, economic and political considerations, across a range of issues, including aboriginal ownership of land, racial discrimination and vilification, human rights in the criminal justice system, children’s rights, homelessness, immigration, asylum and detention, corporate accountability, disability standards and free speech.
×
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