本文選題：同性婚姻　切入點(diǎn)：馬薩諸塞州　出處：《中國政法大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：作為美國第一個(gè)通過司法機(jī)構(gòu)承認(rèn)同性婚姻的州,馬薩諸塞州具有典型性。2003年的Goodridge v. Department of Public Health案正是創(chuàng)造這個(gè)歷史典型的功臣。 本文立足于美國歷史上與同性戀、同性戀行為相關(guān)的社會(huì)、法律背景,在整體歷史的框架之下,以馬薩諸塞州為一個(gè)小的切入點(diǎn),研究該州同性婚姻在司法上的發(fā)展進(jìn)程。筆者以案例分析的方法,通過對相關(guān)案件的研究,揭示馬薩諸塞州同性婚姻司法進(jìn)程中的爭議,并從法學(xué)的視角對爭議點(diǎn)進(jìn)行分析,考察爭議背后各種概念的變化,分析變化的過程、原因以及這些變化帶來的影響。 本文包括緒論和正文兩個(gè)部分。緒論部分介紹了本文的寫作動(dòng)機(jī)與意義,并對國內(nèi)外研究現(xiàn)狀進(jìn)行了概述,最后對本文的主要研究對象——Goodridge v.Department of Public Health案的研究材料進(jìn)行了簡介。 正文第一部分主要對相關(guān)概念進(jìn)行了分析及界定,具體包括同性戀、婚姻與同性婚姻、家庭與家庭結(jié)構(gòu)這幾個(gè)概念。其中婚姻定義是分析的重點(diǎn),因?yàn)樵诎ū景冈趦?nèi)的同性婚姻案件中,婚姻定義本身就是爭議焦點(diǎn)之一。 正文第二部分圍繞原被告雙方爭論的馬薩諸塞州政府禁止同性婚姻的法規(guī)是否違反州憲法的問題,逐層地進(jìn)行分析。首先探討了婚姻的屬性問題,其次是審查婚姻法規(guī)的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)問題,最后通過典型案例分析了州婚姻法是否違反憲法中的正當(dāng)程序與平等保護(hù)原則。 正文第三部分主要對州政府提出的三點(diǎn)辯護(hù)理由進(jìn)行了分析。分別是:異性婚姻是否提供了適合的生育條件;異性婚姻是否保證了撫養(yǎng)孩子的最優(yōu)環(huán)境;異性婚姻是否可以節(jié)約個(gè)人或州的財(cái)產(chǎn)資源。 正文第四部分主要論述了Goodridge案對馬薩諸塞州同性伴侶的不同層面的影響,包括直接的和間接的影響。文中論述的主要有三方面,即對家庭權(quán)力結(jié)構(gòu)、對同性伴侶的權(quán)利義務(wù)范圍以及對州司法機(jī)關(guān)面對同性婚姻態(tài)度的影響。 最后是本文的余論部分。余論部分筆者是在本案的研究基礎(chǔ)之上,借助對傳統(tǒng)的異性婚姻制度是國家、家庭權(quán)力結(jié)構(gòu)作用的一種結(jié)果的理論剖析,來說明馬薩諸塞州同性婚姻的司法發(fā)展只是婚姻制度發(fā)展的一個(gè)階段,它見證著家庭權(quán)力結(jié)構(gòu)的變化、婚姻家庭定義等的變化,這一系列的變化無論是一種進(jìn)步抑或倒退,都客觀存在于人類婚姻史的長河之中。
[Abstract]:As the first state in the United States to recognize same-sex marriage through the judiciary, Massachusetts is typical. The Goodridge v. Department of Public Health case of 2003 was a classic contributor to this history. This paper is based on the social and legal background related to homosexuality and homosexual behavior in American history, and takes Massachusetts as a small entry point under the framework of overall history. This paper studies the judicial development of same-sex marriage in the state. By the method of case study, the author reveals the controversy in the judicial process of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, and analyzes the controversial points from the perspective of jurisprudence. Examine the changes in concepts behind the controversy, analyze the process, causes, and effects of these changes. This paper includes two parts: introduction and text. The introduction introduces the motivation and significance of this paper, summarizes the current research situation at home and abroad, and finally introduces the research materials of the case of Goodridge v. Department of Public Health. The first part of the text mainly analyzes and defines the related concepts, including homosexuality, marriage and same-sex marriage, family and family structure, among which the definition of marriage is the focus of the analysis. Because in same-sex marriage cases, including this case, the definition of marriage itself is one of the controversies. In the second part of the text, the author analyzes whether the Massachusetts state government forbids same-sex marriage in accordance with the state constitution, and analyzes it layer by layer. First, it discusses the property of marriage. Secondly, it reviews the standard of marriage law, and finally analyzes whether the state marriage law violates the constitutional principle of due process and equal protection through typical cases. The third part of the text mainly analyzes the three defense reasons put forward by the state government. They are: whether heterosexual marriage provides suitable fertility conditions, whether heterosexual marriage guarantees the optimal environment for raising children, and whether heterosexual marriage ensures the optimal environment for raising children. Whether heterosexual marriage can save personal or state property resources. Part 4th mainly discusses the impact of the Goodridge case on same-sex couples in Massachusetts at different levels, including direct and indirect effects. There are three main aspects discussed in this paper, namely, the structure of family power. The scope of rights and obligations for same-sex couples and the impact on state jurisdictions' attitudes towards same-sex marriage. The last part is the conclusion of this paper. Based on the research of this case, the author makes a theoretical analysis of the traditional heterosexual marriage system, which is a result of the function of the state and the family power structure. To illustrate that the judicial development of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts is only a stage in the development of the marriage system. It is witnessing changes in the structure of family power, the definition of marriage and family, whether it is progress or retrogression. Both exist objectively in the long history of human marriage.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：D971.2;DD913

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 曹寧校;對同性征婚事件的看法[J];中國性科學(xué);2005年08期

2 青瓷;;同性之戀[J];南方人物周刊;2006年08期

3 李華成;;論同性婚姻[J];法制與社會(huì);2007年06期

4 李昌道;;《加拿大同性婚姻法》透視[J];比較法研究;2006年01期

5 戴娜娜;;同性婚姻的法律思考[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年04期

6 許文星;;對同性婚姻合理性的一點(diǎn)思考[J];今日南國(理論創(chuàng)新版);2008年06期

7 黃宇;;一個(gè)未定的但卻肯定的趨勢[J];檢察風(fēng)云;2007年05期

8 劉韜;;從人權(quán)法看中國的同性婚姻合法化[J];法制與社會(huì);2009年21期

9 宇捷;;同性婚姻在馬薩諸塞州[J];檢察風(fēng)云;2009年14期

10 何東平;同性婚姻合理性的研究[J];樂山師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年08期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前10條

1 楊鴻臺(tái);高慧開;;同性婚姻法律規(guī)制研究[A];2010年中國社會(huì)學(xué)年會(huì)“社會(huì)性別視野下的中國道路和社會(huì)發(fā)展”論壇論文集[C];2010年

2 王浩;;關(guān)于同性伴侶關(guān)系[A];全國男男性行為人群艾滋病防治工作經(jīng)驗(yàn)交流暨《朋友》項(xiàng)目十周年慶典與貝利—馬丁獎(jiǎng)?lì)C獎(jiǎng)大會(huì)文集[C];2008年

3 楊n，

本文編號(hào)：1604140