The importance of moral obligation to ones spouse
The spouses express their love for one another; they do not merely engage in a physical act. In the absence of such justification, providing benefits through marriage may treat the unmarried unjustly, as their exclusion from such benefits would then be arbitrary Card Having marital relations with a certain frequency e.
Marriage duties and responsibilities
Moreover, it is not clear that affection and justice must conflict; a commitment to treating one's spouse justly could be part of marital love Kleingeld To refuse was considered a serious sin because one spouse would be exposing the other to sexual temptation that might prove irresistible. The two-tier system does not provide equal treatment because it does not confer on same-sex relationships the status associated with marriage. No, not always. Beckwith, Francis J. Finally, the history of racialized stigmatization of polygamy gives reason to consider whether anti-polygamous intuitions rest on just foundations Denike While this topic has sparked less debate than polygamy, one defender of the civil-unions-for-all proposal has pointed out that civil union status, as justified on politically liberal grounds, would not connote sexual or romantic involvement. First, it is plausible that in the marriage context we are promising to do things that are in our control or over which we have indirect control. Paul, in 1 Cor. A second is that legal recognition is necessary to maintain and protect social support for the institution, a valuable form of life which would otherwise erode Raz , , —3; Scruton , —; see discussion in Waldron —
Refusing to pay the marital debt for a day or a number of days does not constitute mortal sin. For this type of refusal is merely a reasonable delay in payment, not an absolute denial of the marital rights.
Thus, one straightforward way for divorce to be morally permissible would be for both partners to release the other from their respective marital promises. Marriage and Oppression Marriage historically played a central role in women's oppression, meaning economic and political disempowerment and limitation of opportunities.
Moreover, some argue that gender complementarity in parenting benefits children; but empirical evidence does not seem to support this [Lee , Nussbaum , ]. Stivers and Valls ; for a comprehensive survey of these issues, see Macedo In all, then, it appears that the marriage promise creates a strong and special obligation between the marriage partners. Perhaps most important, Gratian distinguished between consent to accept a person as spouse and marital affection, which imbued the relationship between the spouses with a specific emotional quality. Currently, U. This is not a morally permissable ground for divorce. Anti-miscegenation law did not prevent actual miscegenation, but it excluded women of color and their children from the benefits of marriage.
There is a further problem with this justification, which speaks to a division within liberal thought. There are two take-away thoughts. This is that the monogamous heterosexual family unit is a natural, pre-political structure which the state must respect in the form in which it finds it Morse ; cf.
One objection is that marriage is an ineffective child anti-poverty plan. Therefore, married couples have a grave obligation to have sexual relations in their marriage. Garrett has defended MC as the default position, arguing that state regulation of contracts between spouses and state expenditures on marriage administration and promotion need justification.
based on 85 review