San Diego Law Review
Document Type
Article
Abstract
There is legitimacy to the conservative approach that goes beyond looking at the impact on people's welfare. This article responds to Professor Arneson by offering a different framework to investigate the underlying theoretical values behind appropriate state policies regarding private relationships. Neither the prioritarian consequentialist, nor the lockean libertarian captures the other side of the marriage debate, that is, the traditional ideal. The state’s interest in fostering the conservative, traditional marriage relationships begins to emerge through the author's assumptions that Kantian ethics is correct, that social stability depends on others—inviolate value, and that through love one can apprehend the value of another. Therefore, the author concludes that to the extent that same-sex marriage helps to encourage these assumptions—that is, encouraging a regard for the value of others—the state also has compelling reasons to extend the boundaries of legal marriage to encompass same sex-unions.
Recommended Citation
Connie S. Rosati,
What is the "Meaning" of "Marriage"?,
42
San Diego L. Rev.
1003
(2005).
Available at:
https://digital.sandiego.edu/sdlr/vol42/iss3/15