An analysis of comparative legislative racionality: Spain (2005) and Peru (2014) about the debate around the civil union and same-sex marriage
Descripción del Articulo
This article studies the parliamentary debate over the approval of a legislative change on the Spanish Civil Code, which gave permission to Same-Sex marriages since 2005. The author tries to approach to Congress debates as complex processes, in which different levels of rationality (as of irrational...
Autor: | |
---|---|
Formato: | artículo |
Fecha de Publicación: | 2017 |
Institución: | Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú |
Repositorio: | Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú |
Lenguaje: | español |
OAI Identifier: | oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/19824 |
Enlace del recurso: | http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/themis/article/view/19824 |
Nivel de acceso: | acceso abierto |
Materia: | legislative rationality legisprudence studies levels of parlament rationality same-sex marriage civil union racionalidad legislativa Estudios legisprudenciales niveles de racionalidad parlamentaria matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo unión civil |
id |
REVPUCP_6af9e8f98a3d2d39b80ea7e8ef12fe35 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/19824 |
network_acronym_str |
REVPUCP |
network_name_str |
Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
An analysis of comparative legislative racionality: Spain (2005) and Peru (2014) about the debate around the civil union and same-sex marriageUn análisis de racionalidad legislativa comparada: España (2005) y Perú (2014) sobre el debate en torno a la unión civil y matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexoSotomayor Trelles, José Enriquelegislative rationalitylegisprudence studieslevels of parlament rationalitysame-sex marriagecivil unionracionalidad legislativaEstudios legisprudencialesniveles de racionalidad parlamentariamatrimonio entre personas del mismo sexounión civilThis article studies the parliamentary debate over the approval of a legislative change on the Spanish Civil Code, which gave permission to Same-Sex marriages since 2005. The author tries to approach to Congress debates as complex processes, in which different levels of rationality (as of irrationality) are intersperse in the argumentations of senators and deputies.In order to clarify this confounding scenario, the tools of ‘legisprudential studies’ or legislative rationality are of utmost importance, because they allow us to group the reasons in typologies, and to analyze possible counter-arguments or voids relating to supporting evidence. That is why the approach of this work, in relation to the substance of the matter, is neutral and rather points to demonstrate the immense methodological potential of legislative rationality models, and how these could contribute to illuminate the ongoing discussion on our country.El presente artículo realiza un estudio sobre el debate parlamentario en torno a la aprobación de una modificación al Código Civil español, que permitió el matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo desde el 2005. En ese sentido, el autor busca aproximarse a los debates parlamentarios como procesos complejos, en donde los distintos niveles de racionalidad (e irracionalidad) están entremezclados en las argumentaciones de senadores y diputados.Para aclarar el confuso panorama, las herramientas de los “estudios legisprudenciales” o de racionalidad legislativa resultan fundamentales, pues permiten agrupar a los argumentos en tipologías, y pasar a analizar posibles contraargumentos o vacíos en cuanto a evidencia de respaldo. Es por ello que la perspectiva del presente trabajo es neutral en cuanto al fondo del asunto, y apunta más bien a mostrar el gran potencial metodológico de modelos de racionalidad legislativa, y cómo estos contribuirían a aclarar el debate en curso en nuestro país.Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú2017-04-24info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttp://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/themis/article/view/19824THEMIS Revista de Derecho; Núm. 71 (2017): Derecho procesal y arbitraje; 231-2381810-9934reponame:Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perúinstname:Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perúinstacron:PUCPspahttp://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/themis/article/view/19824/19870Derechos de autor 2018 TH?MIS-Revista de Derechoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/198242020-03-13T13:30:41Z |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
An analysis of comparative legislative racionality: Spain (2005) and Peru (2014) about the debate around the civil union and same-sex marriage Un análisis de racionalidad legislativa comparada: España (2005) y Perú (2014) sobre el debate en torno a la unión civil y matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo |
title |
An analysis of comparative legislative racionality: Spain (2005) and Peru (2014) about the debate around the civil union and same-sex marriage |
spellingShingle |
An analysis of comparative legislative racionality: Spain (2005) and Peru (2014) about the debate around the civil union and same-sex marriage Sotomayor Trelles, José Enrique legislative rationality legisprudence studies levels of parlament rationality same-sex marriage civil union racionalidad legislativa Estudios legisprudenciales niveles de racionalidad parlamentaria matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo unión civil |
title_short |
An analysis of comparative legislative racionality: Spain (2005) and Peru (2014) about the debate around the civil union and same-sex marriage |
title_full |
An analysis of comparative legislative racionality: Spain (2005) and Peru (2014) about the debate around the civil union and same-sex marriage |
title_fullStr |
An analysis of comparative legislative racionality: Spain (2005) and Peru (2014) about the debate around the civil union and same-sex marriage |
title_full_unstemmed |
An analysis of comparative legislative racionality: Spain (2005) and Peru (2014) about the debate around the civil union and same-sex marriage |
title_sort |
An analysis of comparative legislative racionality: Spain (2005) and Peru (2014) about the debate around the civil union and same-sex marriage |
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv |
Sotomayor Trelles, José Enrique |
author |
Sotomayor Trelles, José Enrique |
author_facet |
Sotomayor Trelles, José Enrique |
author_role |
author |
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
legislative rationality legisprudence studies levels of parlament rationality same-sex marriage civil union racionalidad legislativa Estudios legisprudenciales niveles de racionalidad parlamentaria matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo unión civil |
topic |
legislative rationality legisprudence studies levels of parlament rationality same-sex marriage civil union racionalidad legislativa Estudios legisprudenciales niveles de racionalidad parlamentaria matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo unión civil |
description |
This article studies the parliamentary debate over the approval of a legislative change on the Spanish Civil Code, which gave permission to Same-Sex marriages since 2005. The author tries to approach to Congress debates as complex processes, in which different levels of rationality (as of irrationality) are intersperse in the argumentations of senators and deputies.In order to clarify this confounding scenario, the tools of ‘legisprudential studies’ or legislative rationality are of utmost importance, because they allow us to group the reasons in typologies, and to analyze possible counter-arguments or voids relating to supporting evidence. That is why the approach of this work, in relation to the substance of the matter, is neutral and rather points to demonstrate the immense methodological potential of legislative rationality models, and how these could contribute to illuminate the ongoing discussion on our country. |
publishDate |
2017 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2017-04-24 |
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/themis/article/view/19824 |
url |
http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/themis/article/view/19824 |
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
spa |
language |
spa |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/themis/article/view/19824/19870 |
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv |
Derechos de autor 2018 TH?MIS-Revista de Derecho info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Derechos de autor 2018 TH?MIS-Revista de Derecho |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
THEMIS Revista de Derecho; Núm. 71 (2017): Derecho procesal y arbitraje; 231-238 1810-9934 reponame:Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú instname:Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú instacron:PUCP |
instname_str |
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú |
instacron_str |
PUCP |
institution |
PUCP |
reponame_str |
Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú |
collection |
Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
|
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1841536831672287232 |
score |
13.958958 |
Nota importante:
La información contenida en este registro es de entera responsabilidad de la institución que gestiona el repositorio institucional donde esta contenido este documento o set de datos. El CONCYTEC no se hace responsable por los contenidos (publicaciones y/o datos) accesibles a través del Repositorio Nacional Digital de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación de Acceso Abierto (ALICIA).
La información contenida en este registro es de entera responsabilidad de la institución que gestiona el repositorio institucional donde esta contenido este documento o set de datos. El CONCYTEC no se hace responsable por los contenidos (publicaciones y/o datos) accesibles a través del Repositorio Nacional Digital de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación de Acceso Abierto (ALICIA).