Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2008
Publication Information
91 Monist 606 (2008).
Abstract
'Civil unions' represent a fragile political armistice, not lasting peace. My interest in 'civil unions' is not, however, political. It is philosophical. I argue in this paper that 'civil unions' are wrong - and should be abandoned in law - because they are incoherent. This article is about what's in the name, marriage. My thesis is that the reason why same-sex couples may not marry defeats the case for 'civil unions' defined (even in part) as a sexual relationship. To reasonably deny these couples access to marriage is to deny them access to 'civil unions'. Conversely, to create 'civil unions' out of a sexual relationship is to evacuate any coherent ground for withholding the name 'marriage' from them.
Recommended Citation
Gerard V. Bradley,
What's in a Name? A Philosophical Critique of 'Civil Unions' Predicated Upon a Sexual Relationship,
91 Monist 606 (2008)..
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/1864