Judging the Case Against Same-Sex Marriage by Andrew Koppelman :: SSRN

Robert George - the Princeton-based Catholic uber-conservative legal philosopher-polemicist gets under my skin.  I keep looking at Mirror of Justice - in hopes of..., oh I guess because they're a burr under my saddle.  Koppelman, a Northwestern law prof, has the patience to engage their arguments in detail and (in my opinion) dismantle them.  I love his phrase `tough luck constitutionalism' for Randy Barnett - whose specious "government can't force me to engage in commerce" argument nearly derailed the Affordable Care Act.  Here's Koppelman's latest salvo. - gwc

Judging the Case Against Same-Sex Marriage by Andrew Koppelman :: SSRN:
by Andrew Koppelman
Abstract
The case for same-sex marriage has been politically triumphant, and its victory looks inevitable. It nonetheless is curiously incomplete. It has succeeded, not because the most sophisticated opposing arguments have been considered and rejected, but because those arguments have not even been understood. Those arguments rest on complex claims, either about what sustains the stability of heterosexual marriages or about what those marriages essentially are. The most familiar claim, that recognition of same-sex marriage jeopardizes the heterosexual family, demands an account of the transformation of family norms in the past half century. Major social change should not be undertaken without a full awareness of what is at stake.

This essay remedies a major gap in the literature. It critically surveys and evaluates the arguments against same-sex marriage. You may not be persuaded by them. In fact, you shouldn’t be persuaded by them. But you need to know what they are.

'via Blog this'