The Sexual and Theological Ethics of Gay Marriage in France: A Dialectic between Autonomy and Universalism

Abstract

The debate on gay marriage has gathered pace globally and particularly in France. Here, the secularization of marriage as an ‘acte laïque’ has furthered progress towards a political and juridic recognition of gay marriage. The Catholic church (Vatican) has opposed this development in its re-enforcement of Catholic sexual ethics and the distinction it draws between secular and religious definitions of marriage. Complicating this distinction is the perception of a trend towards post-secularism in France where religion is making a return to democratic debates on citizenship and gender, and raising concerns over the status of the civility of the marriage act. The focus of this article is to look at gay marriage from the perspective of contemporary ethical and theological thinking. Specifically, I aim to examine alternative discourses that open up new ways of configuring gay marriage through an examination of concepts of integrity, responsibility and asceticism, and critically the ethical relationship between autonomy and norms.     

努力做好婚恋受挫官兵的心理调适

青年官兵在婚恋上遇到挫折是正常的事情,但处理不好往往会产生不利的影响。因而,有必要做好这些人的心理调适工作。青年官兵婚恋受挫后,一般有积极、消极和妥协等三种心理防卫形式。各级管理者要采取有效措施,努力做好青年官兵婚恋受挫的心理调适,帮助受挫官兵重新振作起来,积极热情地投入工作。     

Distributive justice in marriage: Equality or equity?

Experimental studies of distributive justice suggest that men prefer an equity rule for allocating rewards, whereas women prefer equality. These differences are likely to carry implications for distributive justice in the context of marriage. There is a popular view in Western societies that marriage should be regarded as a partnership of equals, and this is also an implicit assumption in microeconomic accounts of the family. However, inequality between spouses is still commonplace, with the husband more likely to have overall financial control and greater access to money for personal spending (PSM). This paper investigates the issue of sharing in marriage, with particular reference to PSM, using data from an in-depth interview study supplemented by some follow-up questionnaires. The participants were 13 women and nine of their partners, mainly ‘middle class’ and aged between 30 and 50. After classifying each couple's system of financial management, the paper focuses upon eight couples with a philosophy of sharing. The findings show that, despite attempts to equalize outcomes for both partners, a sense of ‘ownership’ associated with having earned the money seemed to render it more salient than other, non-financial contributions to the marriage. As a result, patterns of control and personal spending appeared to be based upon equity rather than equality.     

Sex and the Statehouse: The Law and the American Same‐Sex Marriage Debate

Abstract : Same‐sex marriage remains a point of contention in American politics. The recent history of this conflict suggests that the Court's attempt to frame issues of sexual politics through paradigms of the right to choose and the tolerance principle, and constitutional ‘liberty’ and ‘equality’ cases raises difficult questions of justice. This article proposes that a Lutheran response, grounded in an understanding of the orders of creation, might interrogate these assumptions, particularly about the appropriate reach of government in sexual and family matters.     

Autonomy and Conjugal Love: A Reply to Golash

In my response to Golash I distinguish between two steps in my original argument. The first relates to the special value of conjugal (two-person) love relationships. I defend this step against criticisms, arguing that the two-person relationship provides a form of recognition that is of special importance to us and cannot be found in other sorts of relationship. The two-person relationship is one that, at least as private individuals, we have special reason to pursue. The second step concerns the claim that the special value of such relationships tends to promote the autonomy of those who have them. It is this second step that is important for the argument that a liberal state – one, at any rate, that takes itself to be in the business of safeguarding the pre-conditions of autonomy – could have reason to favour marriage or some form of civic partnership over other forms of intimate adult tie. However, I admit that Golash puts forward plausible – if anecdotal – arguments against this second step. I therefore agree that I need to be more tentative about this step than I was in the original paper.