Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
This article analyses the Italian parliamentary debate on the Same-sex Civil Partnerships (SSP) bill, highlighting a 'traditionalist' pattern in Italy's morality politics. It investigates the multifaceted arguments brought to the debate, revealing a range of stances within and across parties. The study emphasizes a shift from religious justifications to post-materialist argumentative frames deployed by MPs to influence the highly conflictual negotiation process in a context of external and internal pressures. It posits that the traditionalist model in Italian morality politics is defined by a complex array of argumentative framing strategies that transcend party lines. This approach is pivotal in understanding the nuanced legislative outcome of the SSP bill – falling, strictly speaking, neither into the category of success nor into the category of failure – which recognized same-sex partnerships but fell short of equating them with marriage (notably excluding same-sex parenting and filiation rights) and preventing them from being recognized as families.
Massimo Prearo (Thu,) studied this question.