Resumen
The article explores the criticisms that have been made about
the concept of marriage contained in Advisory Opinion 24/17. From a conservative position it
is indicated that the marriage is limited to people of different sex. The premise that
supports the “heterosexual” pro-marriage establishes the union between man and woman, for
that reason only and exclusively the marriage bond could be constituted with people of
different sex. The central thesis about marriage focuses on the fact that, from its origins,
its concept or nature, it has been exclusive to heterosexual people. Also, this notion would
be based on article 67 of the Ecuadorian Constitution. While from a more progressive
position it is rejected that the concept is so reduced. Meanwhile, the egalitarian
pro-marriage movement supports its reasoning on the principle of equality, but specifically,
in the prohibition of discrimination found in the second clause of the same article 11
numeral 2. Therefore, I analyze and criticize the first and second position, from an
interpretative and moral perspective, in order to obtain a good argumentation, from a
meticulous conceptual analysis. The interpretative thesis the rule of article 67 could be
seen in four possible “interpretations” - plausible rules of marriage. On the other hand,
under the moral thesis I will use the naive and sophisticated moral argument with the aim of
realizing a redefinition of moral arguments regarding marriage.
| Idioma original | Español |
|---|---|
| Publicación | Foro, Revista de Derecho |
| Estado | Publicada - 2019 |
| Publicado de forma externa | Sí |
Palabras clave
- Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos; Función consultiva; Matrimonio igualitario; Género; Moral