同婚有理，歧視無罪？「司法院釋字第748號解釋施行法」的網路問卷調查研究

NHUIR > College of Social Sciences > Department of International and China Studies, The M.A. Program of Asia-Pacific Studies and Public Policy Studies > Disserations and Theses(M.A. Program in Asia-Pacific Studies) > Item 987654321/28536

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nhuir.nhu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/28536

Title:	同婚有理，歧視無罪？「司法院釋字第748號解釋施行法」的網路問卷調查研究
Other Titles:	Same-Sex Marriage and Discrimination: An Internet Questionnaire Survey on ＂The Law to Enforce the Explanation of Constitution No. 748＂
Authors:	雅耿．鐵木 TEMU, AKIN
Contributors:	國際事務與企業學系亞太研究碩士班楊仕樂 YANG, SHIH-YUEH
Keywords:	性別平等;婚姻平權;同性婚姻;748號釋憲;同婚專法 Same-sex marriage;Explanation of constitution no. 748;Same-sex marriage law;Marriage equality;Gender equality
Date:	2020
Issue Date:	2022-08-08 13:39:10 (UTC+8)
Abstract:	同性婚姻在台灣多年來引起激烈爭辯，正、反兩方各自都從平等、自由、倫理、道德、法律、健康等角度申明自己的主張，呈現水火不容之勢相持不下。在大法官對憲法作出「司法院釋字第748號解釋」，引發後續多達四項全體公民投票之下，同性婚姻最後以釋憲案「施行法」的名目迂迴通過。不過，對於堅持直接在民法中解除婚姻一男一女限制的所謂「民法派」來說，這樣專門另立釋憲案施行法的所謂「專法派」作法，仍是一種歧視。為什麼呢？認為另立專法就是歧視的論點其實相當遷強，而自詡思想進步的同志竟觀念然執著於保守的婚姻約束也顯得十分矛盾，同時更是對其他法律仍不允許的婚姻組合購成歧視。對此，本文主張，透過適當的說理與引導，大多數民眾並不會認為立專法是歧視，堅決認為立專法就是歧視者，相較於一般大眾會有其特定的背景條件。本文的問卷調查也驗證了此一推論。　　Same-sex marriage has caused fierce debates in Taiwan for many years. Supports and opponent both make their arguments based on equality, freedom, ethics, morals, law, health, etc., and they cannot reach a consensus. After the Chief Judges gave the ＂Explanation of Constitution No. 748＂ which triggered up to four subsequent referendums, same-sex marriage was finally approved in the name of the ＂enforcement law.＂ For those radical supports of same-sex marriage, this is not acceptable and still a form of discrimination. However, as a progressive value, same-sex marriage supporters should not care about the reactionary value of marriage. In addition, same-sex marriage is itself a form of discrimination against marriage combinations that are still not allowed by current laws. This article argues that, through proper reasoning and guidance, most people will not consider the ＂enforcement law＂ f as discriminatory, and those radical supports will have their specific background conditions. This argument is verified through a questionnaire survey.
Appears in Collections:	[Department of International and China Studies, The M.A. Program of Asia-Pacific Studies and Public Policy Studies] Disserations and Theses(M.A. Program in Asia-Pacific Studies)

Files in This Item:

File	Description	Size	Format
108NHU00025041-002.pdf		4409Kb	Adobe PDF	75	View/Open
index.html		0Kb	HTML	331	View/Open

Loading...