Pursuing Marriage Equality in Four Democracies: Canada, the United States, Belgium, and Spain

David Paternotte
David Paternotte * §
Contact
Susan Gluck Mezey
Susan Gluck Mezey
Contact
§ Loyola University Chicago Loyola University Chicago

Send Message

To: Author

Pursuing Marriage Equality in Four Democracies: Canada, the United States, Belgium, and Spain

Article Fingerprint

ReserarchID

K7QG1

Pursuing Marriage Equality in Four Democracies: Canada, the United States, Belgium, and Spain Banner

Key Research Insights

Synthesized scholarly intelligence & interactive research assistant
Access Review Comments
  • English
  • Afrikaans
  • Albanian
  • Amharic
  • Arabic
  • Armenian
  • Azerbaijani
  • Basque
  • Belarusian
  • Bengali
  • Bosnian
  • Bulgarian
  • Catalan
  • Cebuano
  • Chichewa
  • Chinese (Simplified)
  • Chinese (Traditional)
  • Corsican
  • Croatian
  • Czech
  • Danish
  • Dutch
  • Esperanto
  • Estonian
  • Filipino
  • Finnish
  • French
  • Frisian
  • Galician
  • Georgian
  • German
  • Greek
  • Gujarati
  • Haitian Creole
  • Hausa
  • Hawaiian
  • Hebrew
  • Hindi
  • Hmong
  • Hungarian
  • Icelandic
  • Igbo
  • Indonesian
  • Irish
  • Italian
  • Japanese
  • Javanese
  • Kannada
  • Kazakh
  • Khmer
  • Korean
  • Kurdish (Kurmanji)
  • Kyrgyz
  • Lao
  • Latin
  • Latvian
  • Lithuanian
  • Luxembourgish
  • Macedonian
  • Malagasy
  • Malay
  • Malayalam
  • Maltese
  • Maori
  • Marathi
  • Mongolian
  • Myanmar (Burmese)
  • Nepali
  • Norwegian
  • Pashto
  • Persian
  • Polish
  • Portuguese
  • Punjabi
  • Romanian
  • Russian
  • Samoan
  • Scots Gaelic
  • Serbian
  • Sesotho
  • Shona
  • Sindhi
  • Sinhala
  • Slovak
  • Slovenian
  • Somali
  • Spanish
  • Sundanese
  • Swahili
  • Swedish
  • Tajik
  • Tamil
  • Telugu
  • Thai
  • Turkish
  • Ukrainian
  • Urdu
  • Uzbek
  • Vietnamese
  • Welsh
  • Xhosa
  • Yiddish
  • Yoruba
  • Zulu
Reading Preferences
Font Size
Line Spacing
Background

Abstract

Viewing litigation as an effective weapon in minority group politics, gay and lesbian rights activists in Canada and the United States turned to the judicial arena, seeking the courts’ affirmation of their fundamental right to marry. In contrast, Belgian and Spanish activists refrained from constitutional litigation, choosing instead to pursue marriage equality by appealing to national legislative and executive institutions, and developing insider strategies within the political parties. This paper explores the asymmetry between the four countries: it highlights the key differences and similarities among them and offers preliminary explanations for the disparities in strategies for marriage equality. It concludes that the strategies developed by same-sex marriage advocates in these four cases reflected their countries’ legal and political environment as well as their historical approach to social reform.

References

57 Cites in Article
  1. Craig Bavis,B Vriend V. Alberta,Law Canada,Ontario,H (1999). The Latest Stepson the Winding Path to Substantive Equality.
  2. Beck,Volcker (2011). The Social Struggle of a Minority for Equal Rights.
  3. Mary Bernstein,Nancy Naples (2010). Sexual Citizenship and the Pursuit of Relationship-Recognition Policies in Australia and the United States.
  4. Mary Bernstein,Nancy Naples (2011). Altared States.
  5. Paul Borghs,Bart Eeckhout (2009). LGB rights in Belgium, 1999-2007: A historic survey of a velvet revolution.
  6. Kerman Calvo (2011). Spain: Building reciprocal relations between lesbian and gay organizations and the State.
  7. Rachel Cichowski (2007). The European Court and Civil Society: Litigation, Mobilization and Govern-ance.
  8. Christine Davies (2008). Canadian Same-Sex Marriage Litigation: Individual Rights, Community Strategy.
  9. Jeffrey Friesen (1996). When Common Law Countries Interpret Civil Codes.
  10. Guido Groeseneken (1993). Het homohuwelijk. Het verschil tussen strategie en taktiek!.
  11. Yuri Guaiana (2011). Dal cuore delle coppie al cuore del diritto.
  12. Kristen Hansen,Marie (2004). 3.1 Common law and civil law.
  13. Chris Hilson (2002). New Social Movements: The Role of Legal Opportunity.
  14. Loveday Hodson (2011). NGOs and the Struggle for Human Rights in Europe.
  15. Thomas Keck (2009). Beyond Backlash: Assessing the Impact of Judicial Decisions on LGBT Rights.
  16. Kensie Kim (2010). Mixed Systems in Legal Origins Analysis.
  17. Kelly Kollman (2009). European institutions, transnational networks and national same-sex unions policy: when soft law hits harder.
  18. Mc Cann,Michael (2004). Law and Social Movements.
  19. Mécary,Caroline (2013). L"amour et la loi.
  20. José Pichardo Galán,Ignacio (2011). We are family (or not). Social and legal recognition of same-sex relationships and lesbian and gay families in Spain.
  21. Daniel Pinello (2003). Gay Rights and American Law.
  22. Raquel Platero (2007). Love and the State: Gay Marriage in Spain.
  23. Sánchez Amillategui,Fernando,Luis Rodríguez-Piñero Royo (2006). Kiddushin : An Equal Opportunity Covenant, Not Only for Heterosexuals.
  24. Stuart Scheingold (2004). The Politics of Rights.
  25. Miriam Smith (2008). Political Institutions and Lesbian and Gay Rights in the United States and Canada.
  26. Kees Waaldijk (2000). Civil Developments: Patterns of Reform in the Legal Position of Same-Sex Partners in Europe.
  27. Robert Wintemute (2011). Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Discrimination: The Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union. Summary prepared for ILGA-Europe.
  28. Susan Mezey,Gluck (2007). Queers in Court.
  29. (2009). Gay Families and the State: The Quest for Equality.
  30. David Paternotte (2008). Les lieux d'activisme : le «mariage gai» en Belgique, en France et en Espagne.
  31. David Paternotte (2012). La juridification ou le droit comme matrice de l’action collective : la revendication du droit au mariage entre personnes du même sexe.
  32. Fabienne Leconte (2013). La médiation entre français et langues de la migration en France.
  33. Egale V,Canada (2001). Unknown Title.
  34. Egale V,Canada (2003). Unknown Title.
  35. Egale V,Canada (2003). Unknown Title.
  36. Egan Canada (1995). 6 May 25, 1995 Egan v. Canada.
  37. S Unknown Title.
  38. Halpern Canada (2002). Unknown Title.
  39. Unknown Title.
  40. Halpern Canada (2003). Unknown Title.
  41. R Barnett (1961). Feedback.
  42. Hendricks V,Quebec (2002). Unknown Title.
  43. R Unknown Title.
  44. Hendricks V,Quebec (2004). Unknown Title.
  45. R (null). SEG 64-851. Kaulonia (area of: Punta Stilo). Dedication and metrical inscription by Pythokritos (Tabula Cauloniensis), ca. 480-470.
  46. M (1999). Unknown Title.
  47. S Unknown Title.
  48. Vriend Alberta (1998). Unknown Title.
  49. S United States Court Cases.
  50. Brown V (1954). Unknown Title.
  51. Goodridge V (2003). Constitutional Law. Due Process Clause. Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Holds That Opposite-Sex Marriage Law Violates Right to Marry. Goodridge v. Department of Public Health, 798 N.E.2d 941 (Mass. 2003).
  52. (2008). Family Law. Child Support Orders. Court May Terminate Child Support Order If Custodial Parent Intentionally Interferes with Visitation Rights. In re Marriage of Boudreaux, 201 Cal. App. 3d 447, 247 Cal. Rptr. 234 (6th Dist. 1988).
  53. Kerrigan V (2008). Unknown Title.
  54. Lawrence Texas (2003). Unknown Title.
  55. Romer Evans (1996). Unknown Title.
  56. (2013). Unknown Title.
  57. Varnum Brien (2001). Unknown Title.
Show All References
Download References

Funding

No external funding was declared for this work.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

No ethics committee approval was required for this article type.

Data Availability

Not applicable for this article.

How to Cite This Article

David Paternotte, Susan Gluck Mezey. 2013. "Pursuing Marriage Equality in Four Democracies: Canada, the United States, Belgium, and Spain". Global Journal of Human-Social Science - C: Sociology & Culture GJHSS-C Volume 13 (GJHSS Volume 13 Issue C3).

More Citation Formats

Download Citation

  • Open Access
  • CC-BY-ND-NC 4.0
Download Article
Access OJS
Journal Specifications

Crossref Journal DOI 10.17406/GJHSS

Print ISSN 0975-587X

e-ISSN 2249-460X

Keywords
courtsequalitylegislaturesMarriagePolitical Partiessexual orientation
Classification
GJHSS-C Classification FOR Code: 160899
160805
  • Submission ReceivedDecember 8, 2012
  • Peer Review Double Blind
    Handling Editor
  • Accepted January 4, 2013
  • Published January 15, 2013
Version of record

v1.2

Issue date
July 9, 2013

Language
English
Order Article Reprint
Experiance in AR

Explore published articles in an immersive Augmented Reality environment. Our platform converts research papers into interactive 3D books, allowing readers to view and interact with content using AR and VR compatible devices.

View in VR
Read in 3D

Your published article is automatically converted into a realistic 3D book. Flip through pages and read research papers in a more engaging and interactive format.

View in 3D
Article Matrices
Total Views: 1.3K
Total Downloads: 62
All Trends

Request Access

Please fill out the form below to request access to this research paper. Your request will be reviewed by the editorial or author team.
X

This is the heading

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

High-quality academic research articles on global topics and journals.

Pursuing Marriage Equality in Four Democracies: Canada, the United States, Belgium, and Spain

David Paternotte
David Paternotte Loyola University Chicago
Susan Mezey
Susan Mezey
  • Submission ReceivedDecember 8, 2012
  • Peer Review Double Blind
    Handling Editor
  • Accepted January 4, 2013
  • Published January 15, 2013