Getting (Un-)Hitched

Radical Philosophy Review 22 (2):257-284 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of same-sex marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges. Although I concur that same-sex couples should have the right to marry if anyone does, I argue that civil marriage is an unjust institution. By examining the claims employed in the majority opinion, I expose the Court’s romanticized, patriarchal view of marriage. I critique four central claims: (1) that marriage is central to individual autonomy and liberty; (2) that civil marriage is uniquely valuable; (3) that marriage “safeguards” children and families; and (4) that marriage is fundamental to civil society.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Fundamental Argument for Same Sex Marriage.Ralph Wedgwood - 1999 - Journal of Political Philosophy 7 (3):225–242.
Reforming Marriage: A Comparative Approach.Laurie Shrage - 2013 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 30 (2):107-121.
Is Civil Marriage Illiberal?Ralph Wedgwood - 2016 - In Elizabeth Brake, After Marriage: Rethinking Marital Relationships. , US: Oxford University Press USA. pp. 29–50.
Why the Teleology of Marriage Matters to Law.Mark J. Boone - 2015 - The Evangelical Philosophical Society's Web Project for Philosophical Discussions of Marriage and Family Topics.
Liberalism, Civil Marriage, and Amorous Caregiving Dyads.Eric M. Cave - 2019 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 36 (1):50-72.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-07-23

Downloads
106 (#477,761)

6 months
28 (#324,228)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Brook J. Sadler
University of South Florida

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations