What is marriage?

  • Sherif Girgis Princeton University (United States)
  • Robert P. George Princeton University (United States)
  • Ryan T. Anderson Princeton University (United States)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.31207/ih.v9i1.226
Keywords: Same Sex Marriage, Heterosexual Marriage, Notion of Marriage, Family Protection, Sex Orientation Discrimination

Abstract

Here is studied mainly what marriage is. By the way, the analysis shows how this debate has profound consequences in the common good and how its protection should be regulated. With a systematically method, authors review the most important opinions about marriage, for and against the usual notion, and then they weigh their consistency. The analysis is divided into two parts. In the first one is defined the notion of the authentic marriage and the consequences that it has on the common good (consequences that justify the State’s actions in this matter). There are analyzed all kinds of romantic unions, monogamous or not, taking care of the public interest that they can present. Part II considers all of the serious concerns that are not treated earlier: the objections from conservatism (Why not spread traditional norms to the gay community?), from practicality (What about partners’ concrete needs?), from fairness (Doesn’t the conjugal conception of marriage sacrifice some people’s fulfillment for others’?), from naturalness (Isn’t it only natural?), and from neutrality (Doesnʹt traditional marriage law impose controversial moral and religious views on everyone?). The main conclusion is that marriage understood as the conjugal union of man and woman really serves for the good of the children, the good of the spouses, and the common good of the society; these benefits do not occur in the same way in same sex marriage.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Sherif Girgis, Princeton University (United States)

Doctor en Filosofía (c) por la Universidad de Princeton (Estados Unidos de Norteamérica). Research Scholar del Witherspoon Institute.

Robert P. George, Princeton University (United States)

Robert P. George es profesor de jurisprudencia la cátedra McCormick y Director del "James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions" en Princeton University (Estados Unidos). Profesor visitante de Harvard Law School.

Se ha desempeñado como presidente de la Comisión de los Estados Unidos sobre Libertad Religiosa Internacional. También ha servido en el Consejo de Bioética del Presidente, como candidato presidencial a la Comisión de Derechos Civiles de los Estados Unidos y como miembro estadounidense de la Comisión Mundial de Ética de la Ciencia y Tecnología de la UNESCO. Es un antiguo Judicial Fellosw de la Corte Suprema de los Estados Unidos, donde recibió el Premio de Justicia Tom C. Clark.

Además es miembro de las juntas directivas de John M. Templeton Foundation Religion Trust, de Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, de Ethics and Public Policy Center, de Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, de National Center on Sexual Exploitation, y del Center for Individual Rights, among others.

Autor de las obras: Making Men Moral:  Civil Liberties and Public Morality (Oxford University Press, 1993), In Defense of Natural Law (Oxford University Press, 1999), The Clash of Orthodoxies (ISI, 2001) y Conscience and Its Enemies (ISI, 2013). Es coautor de Conjugal Union: What Marriage Is (Cambridge University Press, 2014), Embryo: A Defense of Human Life (2nd edition, Doubleday, 2011), Body-Self Dualism in Contemporary Ethics and Politics (Cambridge University Press, 2008), and What is Marriage? (Encounter, 2012). Editor de muchas más obras.

Ryan T. Anderson, Princeton University (United States)

Doctor en Ciencia Política (c) por la Universidad de Notre Dame (Estados Unidos). William E. Simon Senior Research Fellow en American Principles & Public Policy.

References

A Vermont Court Speaks (1999, Diciembre 22). Boston Globe, p. A22.
Alexander, A. (2009, Septiembre 6). “Sanity & a Smile” and an Outporing of Rage. Washington Post, p. A17.
Anderson Moore, K., Jekielek, S. & Emig, C. (2002, Junio). Marriage from a Child’s Perspective: How Does Family Structure Affect Children, and What Can We Do about It? Research Brief. Washington, DC: Child Trends.
Anderson v. King County., 138 P.3d 963, 1018 (Washington 2006).
Aristóteles (1985). Ética Nicomaquea. Traducción de Terrence Irwin. Indianapolis: Hacket Pub. Co.
Bennet, J. (2009, Julio 29). Only you. And you. And you: Polyamorous-relationships with multiple, mutually consenting partners — has a coming out party. Newsweek. En http://newsweek.com/2009/07/28/only-you-and-you-and-you.html.
Beyond Same-Sex Marriage: A New Strategic Vision For All our Families and Relationships. (2006, Julio 26) Beyondmarriage.org. En http://beyondmarriage.org/full_statement.html.
Black´s Law Dictionary (2009). 9ª ed. St. Paul, Minn.: West Pub. Co.
Boaz, D. (1997, Abril 25). Paradise Marriage: A Simple Solution to the Gay-Marriage Debate. Slate. En http://slate.com/id/2440/.
Book of Common Prayer (1815). Oxford.
Bradford Wilcox, W. (2009). The Evolution of Divorce. National Affairs, 1, 81-93.
Bradford Wilcox, W. et al. (2005). Why Marriage Matters: Twenty six Conclusions from the Social Sciences. New York: Institute for American Values.
Brake, E. (2010). Minimal Marriage: What Political Liberalism Implies for Marriage Law. Ethics, 120(1), 302-337.
Corvino, J. (2004, Agosto 12). Nature? Nurture? It Doesn´t Matter. Independent Gay Forum. En http://igfculturewatch.com/2004/08/12/nature-nurture-it-doesnt-matter/.
DiMassa, C.M. & Garrison, J. (2008, Noviembre 8). Why Gays, Blacks are Divided on Prop. 8. Los Angeles Times, p. A1.
Doerflinger, R. (1980). Family policy in the United States. En http://www.usccb.org/prolife/tdocs/FaithfulForLife.pdf
Eskridge, W.N. Jr. (1993). A History of Same Sex Marriage. Virginia Law Review, 79(7), 1419-1424.
Esolen, A. (2005, Septiembre). A Requiem For Friendship: Why Boys Will Not Be Boys & Other Consequences of the Sexual Revolution. Touchstone Magazine. En http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=18-07-021-f.
Finnis, J. (1994). Law, Morality and “sexual orientation”. Notre Dame Law Review, 69.
Finnis, J. (2008). Marriage: a Basic and Exigent Good. The Monist, 3-4, 388-406.
Gallagher, M. & Dafoe Whitehead, B. (1997). End No-Fault Divorce? First Things, 75, p. 24.
Gallagher, M. (1996). The abolition of marriage: How we destroy lasting love. Washington, D.C.: Regnery.
Gallagher, M. (2004). (How) Will Gay Marriage Weaken Marriage as a Social Institution: A Reply to Andrew Koppelman. U. ST. THOMAS. Law Journal, 33(2).
Gallagher, M., (2006, Mayo 5). Banned in Boston: The Coming Conflict Between Same-Sex Marriage and Religious Liberty. The Weekly Standard. En http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/191kgwgh.asp.
Girgis, Sh., George, R.P. & Anderson, R.T. (2011). Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, 34(1), pp. 245-287.
Graff, E.J. (1997). Retying the Knot. En A. Sullivan (ed.). Same-sex Marriage: pro and con: a reader. New York: Vintage Books.
Harper v. Poway United School District, 435 F. Supp, 2d 1096, 1122 (S.D. Cal. 2004).
Heard, J. (2009, Mayo 4). Dreadtalk: “Holy Sex & Christian Friendship” John Heard-Life Week 2009 en The University of Sidney — Remarks. Dreadnoughts. En http://johnheard.blogspot.com/2009/02/dreadtalk-holy-sex-christian-friendship.html.
Hernández v. Robles, 805 N.Y.S2d 354, 377 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005) (Saxe, J., Disenso).
Hesse, M. (2009, Agosto 28). Opposing Gay Unions With Sanity & a Smile. Washington Post, p. C01.
Horn, W.F., Blankenhorn, D. &Pearlstein, M.B. (eds.) (1999). The fatherhood movement: A call to action. Lanham, Md.: Lexington Books.
Human Rights Campaign (2020). En http://www.hrc.org
James, S. (2010, Enero 29). Many Succesful Gay Marriages Share and Open Secret. New York Times, p. A17. en http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/us/29sfmetro.html?ref=us
Koppelman, A. (2002). The Gay Rights Question in Contemporary American Law. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kurtz, S. (2004, Enero 23). The End of Marriage in Scandinavia. The Weekly Standard. En http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/660zypwj.asp
Laqueur, T.W. (1990). Making Sex. Body and Gender from the Greeks to Freud. Cambridge, Mass. : Harvard University Press.
Laumann, E.O. (1994). The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States. Chicago : University of Chicago Press
Lee, P., & George, R. (2007). Body-Self Dualism in Contemporary Ethics and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511509643.
Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 11 (1967).
Mack, D. & Blankenhorn, D. (eds.) (2001). The book of marriage: The wisest answers to the toughest questions. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans.
Manning, W.D. & Lamb, K.A. (2003). Adolescent Well-Being in Cohabitating, Married, and Single-Parent Families. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65(4), pp. 876-893.
McLanahan, S., Donahue, E. & Haskins, R. (2005). Introducing the Issue. The Future of Child, 15(2), 3-12.
McWhirther, D.P. & Mattison, A.M. (1984). The Male Couple. How Relationships Develop. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Mercer, C.H., Hart, G.J., Johnson, A.M. & Cassell, J.A. (2009). Behaviourally bisexual men as a bridge population for HIV and sexually transmitted infections? Evidence from a national probability survey. International Journal of STD & AIDS: SAGE Journals, 20.
Oxford English Dictionary (1989). 2ª ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Parke M. (2003, Mayo). Are Married Parents Really Better for Children?, Clasp Policy Brief. Center for Law and Social Politic. En https://www.clasp.org/sites/default/files/public/resources-and-publications/states/0086.pdf
Parker v. Hurley, 514 F.3d 87 (1st Cir. 2008).
Perry v. Schwarzenegger, 704 F. Supp. 2d 921 (N.D. Cal. 2010).
Popenoe, D. (1988). Disturbing the nest: Family change and decline in modern societies. New York: Aldine.
Popenoe, D., Bethke Elshtain, J. & Blankenhorn, D. (eds.) (1996). Promises to keep: Decline and renewal of marriage in America. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Rauch, J. (1996, Mayo 6). For Better or Worse? The Case for Gay (and Straight) Marriage. The New Republic. En www.jonathanrauch.com/jrauch_articles/gay_marriage_1_the_case_for_marriage.
Rauch, J. (2005). Gay Marriage: Why it is good for gays, Good for Straights, and Good for America. New York: Henry Holt and Co.
Rauch, J. (2006, Agosto 2). Not So Fast, Mr. George. Independent Gay Forum. http://igfculturewatch.com/2006/08/02/not-so-fast-mr-george
Real Academia Española (2018). Madrid: Espasa-Calpe.
Rich, F. (2009, Abril 19). Op-Ed., The Bigots Last Hurrah. New York Times, p. 10.
Sawhill, I.V. (1999). Families at Risk. En H.J. Aaron & R.D. Reischauer (eds.), Setting National Priorities: The 2000 Election and Beyond. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
Signoreli, M. (1994, Diciembre-Enero). Bridal Wave. Out, p. 161.
Stephen Macedo (1995). Homosexuality and the Conservative Mind. GEO. Law Journal 84, 261-279.
Stern, M.D. (2008). Same-Sex Marriage and the Churches. En D. Laycock & A.R. Picarello; Robin Fretwell Wilsonet al. (eds.), Same-sex marriage and religious liberty: Emerging conflicts, 1, pp. 11-14. Washington, D.C.: Beckett Fund for Religious Liberty–Lanham, Md.–Rowman & Littlefield Publisher.
Stockwell, A. (2008. Agosto 20). Stop the Hate: Vote No on 8., Advocate.com, En http://www.advocate.com/Arts_and_Entertainment/People/Stop_the_Hate
Sullivan, A. (1996). Virtually Normal: An Argument about Homosexuality. Lóndres: Picador.
Sullivan, A. (1997). Introduction. En A. Sullivan (ed.). Same-sex Marriage: pro and con: a reader. New York: Vintage Books.
Sullivan, A. (2009, Agosto 4). Only the Right Kind of Symbolic Sex. The Daily Dish. En https://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2009/08/only-the-right-kind-of-symbolic-sex/197964/
The Witherspoon Institute (2008). Marriage and the Public Good: Ten Principles. En http://www.winst.org/family_marriage_and_democracy/WI_marriage.pdf
Tomás de Aquino (1232). Summa Theologica.
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (1975). Marriage and the family life. En http://www.usccb.org/prolife/programs/rlp/Marriages&FamilyLife75.pdf
Victoria A. Brownsworth, Something Borrowed. Something Blue: Is Marriage Right for Queers?, en I DO/ I DON´T: QUEERS ON MARRIAGE: 53, 58-59 (Greg Wharton & Ian Phillips eds., 2004).
Wedgewood, R. (1999). The Fundamental Argument for Same-Sex Marriage. Journal of Political Philosophy, 7(3), pp. 225–242.
Willis, E. (2004, Julio 5). Can Marriage Be Saved? A Forum. The Nation, p. 16.
Wolfe, A. (1989). Whose Keeper? Social Science and Moral Obligations. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Pres.
Zagano, Ph. (2010, Septiembre 30). Nature vs. Nurture. National Catholic Reporter. En http://ncronline.org/blogs/just-catholic/nature-vs-nurture
Published
2020-02-23
How to Cite
Girgis, S., George, R., & Anderson, R. (2020). What is marriage?. Ius Humani. Law Journal, 9(1), 87-137. https://doi.org/10.31207/ih.v9i1.226
Issue
Vol 9 No 1 (2020): Ius Humani. Law Journal
Section
Papers

Copyright (c) 2020 Sherif Girgis, Robert P. George, Ryan T. Anderson

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors publishing in our Journal comply to the following terms:
1. Authors keep their work’s copyrights, but they guarantee Ius Humani Law Journal to be the first publisher of their papers. They grant the Journal will a Creative Commons Attribution License, under which their work can be shared with the condition that it is appropriately cited.
2. Authors are aware and accept that the Ius Humani Team will try to give the greatest diffusion to the Journal, which means, among other things, that its printed and electronic editions will be distributed among different databases and scientific indexes.
3. Authors can establish further clauses for non exclusive distribution, such as publication on a separate book or placing in an institutional data-base. Nevertheless, a note should be always added to explain that the paper was originally published in Ius Humani Law Journal.
4. We permit and encourage authors to share their work through Internet before and during the editorial process to receive further recommendations and wider references (we recommend you read the article The Effect of Open Access).