Slovenski predlog Družinskega zakonika in njegovi politični argumenti

Prispevek analizira argumente "za" in "proti", ki so se pojavili v postopku deliberacije o predlogu besedila Družinskega zakonika, ki ga je leta 2009 v razpravo dala predlagateljica - Vlada Republike Slovenije. S pomočjo kvalitativne analize argumentov in analize diskurza prispevek analizira prepise razprav, ki so potekale v letih 2010 in 2011 v Državnem zboru, Državnem svetu in na Odboru za delo, družino, socialne zadeve in invalide. Prispevek razdela strukture predstavljenih argumentov in njihove argumentacijskie sheme. Prispevek se konča z vsebinsko razpravo, ki povezuje teorijo argumentacije s teorijo diskurza in skuša pokazati, da je bil DZak zavrnjen na podlagi argumentov, zasidranih v esencialističnem pojmovanju spola, spolne usmerjenosti, družine in nacije.The article analyses the "pro" and "contra" arguments which appeared in the process of deliberating the proposed Family Act initiated by the Government of the Republic of Slovenia in 2009. A qualitative analysis is made of arguments and discourse analysis of transcripts of conversations which took place in 2010 and 2011 in the National Assembly, the National Council, and the Committee for Labour, Family, Social Affairs and the Disabled. The structure of the arguments and the related argumentation schemes are outlined. The article concludes with a substantive debate which connects discourse theory with argumentation theory and claims the draft Family Act was rejected with arguments anchored in essentialist conceptions of gender, sexual orientation, family and nation