Main Article Content

Abstract

Abstract

The ‘rights’ and ‘equality’ arguments have been widely used in the last couple of years by the same-sex marriage supporters in claiming the legalization of same-sex marriage. The principle of equality in same-sex marriage legalization claims is closely related with the concept of human rights on the ground that the principle of equality is considered as one of the most important principles in the said concept. The decision of the Supreme Court of the United States of America in Obergefell et al. v. Hodges, Director, Ohio Department of Health is the latest decision concerning the legalization of same-sex marriage that changes radically the legality of same-sex marriage in the United States and may affect other nations. This research analyzes the said Decision, specifically on the application of the principle of equality. This research also analyzes the same-sex marriage issue in Indonesia from the perspective of universality and cultural relativism of human rights. The conclusion of this research is that the principle of equality in the Decision of the Supreme Court of the United States of America was not correctly applied and therefore it cannot be used in the same-sex marriage claims. And in Indonesia, it can be concluded that from the perspective of universality and cultural relativism of human rights, same-sex marriage cannot be legalized.

Keywords: human, rights, same-sex, marriage, equality, universality, cultural, relativism.

Article Details

Author Biographies

Holy K.M. Kalangit, Faculty of Law Universitas Indonesia

Associate Professor

Faculty of Law Universitas Indonesia

 

Heru Susetyo, Faculty of Law Universitas Indonesia

Associate Professor Faculty of Law Universitas Indonesia

Editor in Chief Jurnal Hukum dan Pembangunan FHUI

How to Cite
Kalangit, H. K., & Susetyo, H. (2020). PERKAWINAN SESAMA JENIS DAN HAK ASASI MANUSIA: PENERAPAN PRINSIP EQUALITY DALAM PUTUSAN OBERGEFELL, et.al. v. HODGES, USA SERTA ANALISIS MENGENAI PERKAWINAN SESAMA JENIS DI INDONESIA. University Of Bengkulu Law Journal, 5(2), 177–200. https://doi.org/10.33369/ubelaj.5.2.177-200

References

  1. DAFTAR REFERENSI
  2. BUKU:
  3. Arinanto. Satya. Hak Asasi Manusia dalam Transisi Politik di Indonesia. Jakarta: Pusat Studi Hukum Tata Negara Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia, 2015.
  4. Asplund, Knut D. Suparman Marzuki, Eko Riyadi, ed. Hukum Hak Asasi Manusia Yogyakarta: PUSHAM UII, 2008.
  5. Berting, Jan et.al, ed. Human Rights in a Pluralist World – Individual and Collectivities. The Hague: the Netherlands Commission for UNESCO, 1990.
  6. Ishay, Micheline R. The History of Human Rights From Ancient Times to the Globalization Era, Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008.
  7. Lenzerini, Federico. The Culturization of Human Rights Law. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014.
  8. Nino, Carlos Santiago. The Ethics of Human Rights. New York: Oxford University Press, 1991.
  9. Vrdoljak, Ana Filipa ed. The Cultural Dimensions of Human Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
  10. JURNAL DAN DISERTASI
  11. Allagan, Tiurma M.P. “Are You “(Wo)Man” Enough to Get Married?”. Indonesia Law Review (2016) 3 : 345 – 368.
  12. Araujo, Robert John. “A Natural Law Approach to an Issue of the Day: A Critique of the (Equality) Justification for Same Sex Marriage”. St. John's University Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development, 26 J. Civ. Rts. & Econ. Dev. 565, Spring, 2012.
  13. Choudhury, Cyra Akhila. “Beyond Culture: Human Rights Universalisms versus Religious and Cultural Relativism in the Activism for Gender Justice”. Berkeley Journal of Law, Gender and Justice, Volume 30, Issue 2, Article 2, 2015.
  14. Clifford, Jarlath. “Locating Equality: from Historical Philosophical Thought to Modern Legal Norms”. The Equal Rights Review, Vol. One, 2008.
  15. Donnelly, Jack. “Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights”. Human Rights Quarterly Vol. 6, No. 4 (Nov., 1984).
  16. Duncan, Wiliam C. "The Mere Allusion to Gender: Answering the Charge that Marriage is Sex Discrimination”. Saint Louis University School of Law Saint Louis University Law Journal, 46 St. Louis L.J. 963, Fall, 2002.
  17. Facio, Alda dan Martha I. Morgan. “Equity or Equality for Women? Understanding CEDAW's Equality Principles”. Alabama Law Review, 60 Ala. L. Rev. 1133, 2009
  18. Fineman, Martha Albertson. “Equality Across Legal Cultures: The Role for International Human Rights”. Thomas Jefferson Law Review, 27 T. Jefferson L. Rev. 1, Fall 2004.
  19. Girgis, Sherif, Robert P. George dan Ryan T. Anderson. “What is Marriage?”. Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy Vol. 34 , hlm. 245 – 287, 2010.
  20. Hopkins, Anthony. “Equality before the Law: The Importance of Understanding the Experience of ‘Others’ in the Criminal Justice System.” (Disertasi Doctor of Philosophy in Law, University of Canberra, 2015).
  21. Hunter, Nan D. “Interpreting Liberty and Equality Through the Lens of Marriage”, California Law Review Vol. 6, November 2015.
  22. Impicciatore, Roberto dan Francesco C. Billari. “Secularization, Union Formation Practices, and Marital Stability: Evidence from Italy”. European Journal of Population / Revue Européenne de Démographie, Vol. 28, No. 2 (May 2012), pp. 119-138 .
  23. Kielsgard, Mark D. “Critiquing Cultural Relativism: A Fresh View from the New Haven School of Jurisprudence”. Cumberland Law Review, 42 Cumb. L. Rev. 441, 2011 / 2012.
  24. Klein, Richard. “Cultural Relativism, Economic Development and International Human Rights in the Asian Context”. Touro International Law Review, Spring, 2001.
  25. O’Brien, Mathew B. “Why Liberal Neutrality Prohibits Same-Sex Marriage: Rawls, Political Liberalism, and the Family”. 1 Br. J. Am. Leg. Studies (2012).
  26. Peters, Christopher J.. “Equality Revisited”. Harvard Law Review 110 Harv. L. Rev. 1210, April 1997.
  27. Pobjoy, Jason. “Treating Like Alike: The Principle of Nondiscrimination as a Tool to Mandate The Equal Treatment of Refugees and Beneficiaries of Complementary Protection”. Melbourne University Law Review Volume 34, 2010.
  28. Reddy, Rita. “Marriage and Divorce Regulation and Recognition in Malaysia”. Family Law Quarterly, Vol. 29, No. 3 (Fall 1995), pp. 613-625.
  29. Sorrell, Kory. “Cultural Pluralism and International Rights”. Tulsa Journal Comparative and International Law, 10 Tulsa J. Comp. & Int'l L. 369 Spring, 2003.
  30. Spano, Robert. “Universality or Diversity of Human Rights? Strasbourg in the Age of Subsidiarity”. Human Rights Law Review, 2014, 14, hlm. 487–502.
  31. Wardle, Lynn D. “Equality Principles as Asserted Justifications for Mandating the Legalization of Same-Sex Marriage in American and Intercountry-Comparative Constitutional Law”. The BYU Journal of Public Law, 27 BYU J. Pub. L. 489, 2013.
  32. _____________. “A Critical Analysis of Constitutional Claims for Same-Sex Marriage”. 1996 BYU L. Rev. 1 (1996).
  33. INTERNET DAN LAIN - LAIN
  34. Crehan, Margaret Gram dan Katherine Rickenbacker, “The Changing Debate on Same-Sex Marriage in the United States”, Fall 2006-Spring 2007, http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/textidx?cc=mfsfront;c=mfs;c=mfsfront;idno=ark5583.0020.001;rgn=main;view=text;xc=1;g=mfsg, diakses pada 25 November 2016.
  35. http://thelawdictionary.org/legalization/ , diakses pada 29 Mei 2017.
  36. “The State of Gay Rights Around The World”, updated 14 Juni 2016, https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/world/gay-rights/, diakses pada 19 Mei 2017.
  37. Supreme Court of the United States, Obergefell et al. v. Hodges, Director, Ohio Department of Health, et.al, No. 14–556, 14-562, 14-571, 14-574, diputuskan pada 26 Juni 2015. Putusan diunduh dari https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf, diakses pada 10 April 2016.
  38. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fourteenth_amendment_0, diakses pada 27 Mei 2017.
  39. “Legalisasi pernikahan sejenis di AS 'kuatkan gerakan di Indonesia”, 29 Juni 2015, http://www.bbc.com/indonesia/majalah/2015/06/150629_trensosial_lgbt, diakses pada 29 Mei 2017.
  40. Vikers, Lucy. “Equality and Human Rights: New Grounds for Concern”. http://sim.rebo.uu.nl/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Vickers_Equality-and-Human-Rights.pdf, diakses pada 3 Februari 2017.
  41. Donnelly, Jack. “Human Rights: Both Universal and Relative (A Reply to Michael Goodhart)“, Human Rights Quarterly, Vol. 30, No. 1 (Feb., 2008), pp. 194-204, http://www.jstor.org/stable/20486703, diakses pada 1 Mei 2017.
  42. Gosepath, Stefan. “Equality”, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/equality/, diakses pada 18 Maret 2017.
  43. Dent Jr, George W. “The Defense of Traditional Marriage”, Faculty Publications Paper 515. http://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/faculty_publications/515, 1999, diakses pada 16 Februari 2017.
  44. Asshidique, Jimly. “‘Tuhan’ dan Agama dalam Konstitusi : Pergesekan antara Ide-Ide ‘Godly Constitution Versus Godless Constitution” www.jimly.com/makalah/namafile/130/Tuhan_Dalam_Konstitusi.pdf, diakses pada 19 Mei 2017.
  45. Tim Penyusun Revisi Naskah Komprehensif Perubahan Undang-Undang Dasar Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945. Latar Belakang, Proses, dan Hasil Pembahasan 1999-2002, Naskah Komprehensif Perubahan Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 Latar Belakang, Proses, Dan Hasil Pembahasan 1999-2002 Buku II Sendi-Sendi / Fundamen Negara (Edisi Revisi). Jakarta: Sekretariat Jenderal dan Kepaniteraan Mahkamah Konstitusi, 2010.