Liberalism, Republicanism and Same-Sex Marriage

Abstract

The controversy regarding same-sex civil marriage is currently one that is shedding more heat than light on matters of political first principles. One way of conceiving the same sex marriage debate in the Western democracies is to compare and contrast the approaches that could be taken by liberals and republicans. This is a useful exercise because it brings out not only some of the key issues involved in the same-sex marriage debate but also unpicks some of the differences between liberal and republican approaches to one of the most controverted topics in contemporary politics. I will argue that liberal and republican approaches are at least partly consonant and that by reconciling core ideas from each approach can help us theorise and legislate on the issue of same-sex marriage in a helpful way. At the same time, alternative approaches may not help achieve the social progress that same sex marriage represents. In making this argument I will draw on the notion raised by Jurgen Habermas on the ‘internal relation’ between human rights and popular sovereignty, contrasting it with approaches to human rights that see rights as trumps over conceptions of the political common good. I conclude that same-sex civil marriage is clearly justifiable in civil law - from both the liberal and republican perspective.