检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:黄凌云[1]
机构地区:[1]广西政法管理干部学院民商法系,广西南宁530022
出 处:《广西政法管理干部学院学报》2011年第6期11-16,共6页Journal of Guangxi Administrative Cadre Institute of Politics and Law
摘 要:媒体和学界对《婚姻法解释三》第七条、第十一条等条文的诟病甚多,认为它们弱化了对妇女的保护,违反甚至冲击、摧毁我国传统婚姻家庭文化、婚姻家庭伦理和婚姻家庭价值取向;另外还认为婚姻家庭领域与物权、合同领域殊有不同,这两条司法解释是将后者的原理粗暴地适用于前者,甚为谬误。笔者认为,这些抨击是对婚姻法解释三的误读。本文试图从对这些抨击作出辩驳的角度论证婚姻法解释三第七条、第十一条的正当性。The No. 3 Judicial Interpretation to Marriage Law has encountered many criticisms from the media and academic circles, who blame that its Art. 7 and 11 will weaken the protection of women, violate our country's traditional culture of mar- riage and family, and impact or even destroy the ethics and values of marriage and family. They also criticize that it is ridiculous to apply property law rules to marriage and family, for the latter has a unique character quite different from that of the former. The author of this article argues that those criticisms are a misunderstanding and then, by refuting them, tries to justify Art. 7 and 11 of the No. 3 Judicial interpretation to Marriage Law.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.28