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

Authors

  • David Paternotte

  • Susan Gluck Mezey

Keywords:

equality, marriage, sexual orientation, courts, legislatures, political parties

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.

How to Cite

Pursuing Marriage Equality in Four Democracies: Canada, the United States, Belgium, and Spain. (2013). Global Journal of Human-Social Science, 13(C3), 1-11. https://socialscienceresearch.org/index.php/GJHSS/article/view/673

References

Craig Bavis, B Vriend V. Alberta, Law Canada, Ontario, H (1999) The Latest Stepson the Winding Path to Substantive Equality. 37, 683-714.

Beck, Volcker (2011) The Social Struggle of a Minority for Equal Rights. 76-81.

Mary Bernstein, Nancy Naples (2010) Sexual Citizenship and the Pursuit of Relationship-Recognition Policies in Australia and the United States. 38(1-2), 132-156.

Mary Bernstein, Nancy Naples (2011) Altared States. 80(6), 1226-1249.

Paul Borghs, Bart Eeckhout (2009) LGB rights in Belgium, 1999-2007: A historic survey of a velvet revolution. 24, 1-28.

Kerman Calvo (2011) Spain: Building reciprocal relations between lesbian and gay organizations and the State. 167-180.

Rachel Cichowski (2007) The European Court and Civil Society: Litigation, Mobilization and Govern-ance.

Christine Davies (2008) Canadian Same-Sex Marriage Litigation: Individual Rights, Community Strategy. 66, 101-134.

Jeffrey Friesen (1996) When Common Law Countries Interpret Civil Codes. 15, 1-28.

Guido Groeseneken (1993) Het homohuwelijk. Het verschil tussen strategie en taktiek!. 10.

Yuri Guaiana (2011) Dal cuore delle coppie al cuore del diritto.

Kristen Hansen, Marie (2004) 3.1 Common law and civil law. 69, 46-55.

Chris Hilson (2002) New Social Movements: The Role of Legal Opportunity. 9, 238-255.

Loveday Hodson (2011) NGOs and the Struggle for Human Rights in Europe.

Thomas Keck (2009) Beyond Backlash: Assessing the Impact of Judicial Decisions on LGBT Rights. 43(1), 151-185.

Kensie Kim (2010) Mixed Systems in Legal Origins Analysis. 83, 693-728.

Kelly Kollman (2009) European institutions, transnational networks and national same-sex unions policy: when soft law hits harder. 15(1), 37-53.

Mc Cann, Michael (2004) Law and Social Movements. 506-522.

Mécary, Caroline (2013) L"amour et la loi.

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. 14, 503-622.

Daniel Pinello (2003) Gay Rights and American Law.

Raquel Platero (2007) Love and the State: Gay Marriage in Spain. 15(3), 329-340.

Sánchez Amillategui, Fernando, Luis Rodríguez-Piñero Royo (2006) Kiddushin : An Equal Opportunity Covenant, Not Only for Heterosexuals. ii85-96.

Stuart Scheingold (2004) The Politics of Rights.

Miriam Smith (2008) Political Institutions and Lesbian and Gay Rights in the United States and Canada.

Kees Waaldijk (2000) Civil Developments: Patterns of Reform in the Legal Position of Same-Sex Partners in Europe. 17, 62-88.

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.

Susan Mezey, Gluck (2007) Queers in Court.

(2009) Gay Families and the State: The Quest for Equality.

David Paternotte (2008) Les lieux d'activisme : le «mariage gai» en Belgique, en France et en Espagne. 41(4), 935-952.

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. 31(2), 93-112.

Fabienne Leconte (2013) La médiation entre français et langues de la migration en France. 17-28.

Egale V, Canada (2001) Unknown Title. 1365.

Egale V, Canada (2003) Unknown Title. 251.

Egale V, Canada (2003) Unknown Title. 406.

Egan Canada (1995) 6 May 25, 1995 Egan v. Canada. 109-128.

S Unknown Title. 513.

Halpern Canada (2002) Unknown Title.

Unknown Title. 3, 321.

Halpern Canada (2003) Unknown Title.

R Barnett (1961) Feedback. 11(4), 161-161.

Hendricks V, Quebec (2002) Unknown Title.

R Unknown Title. 2506.

Hendricks V, Quebec (2004) Unknown Title.

R (null) SEG 64-851. Kaulonia (area of: Punta Stilo). Dedication and metrical inscription by Pythokritos (Tabula Cauloniensis), ca. 480-470. 851.

M (1999) Unknown Title.

S Unknown Title. 3.

Vriend Alberta (1998) Unknown Title.

S United States Court Cases. 493.

Brown V (1954) Unknown Title. 483.

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). 117(7), 2441.

(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). 102(4), 920.

Kerrigan V (2008) Unknown Title. 957(2), 407.

Lawrence Texas (2003) Unknown Title. 539, 558.

Romer Evans (1996) Unknown Title. 517, 620.

(2013) Unknown Title.

Varnum Brien (2001) Unknown Title. 2, 18-23.

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

Published

2013-07-09

How to Cite

Pursuing Marriage Equality in Four Democracies: Canada, the United States, Belgium, and Spain. (2013). Global Journal of Human-Social Science, 13(C3), 1-11. https://socialscienceresearch.org/index.php/GJHSS/article/view/673