<?xml version="1.0"?><rdf:RDF xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:edm="http://www.europeana.eu/schemas/edm/" xmlns:wgs84_pos="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos" xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" xmlns:rdaGr2="http://rdvocab.info/ElementsGr2" xmlns:oai="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:owl="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:ore="http://www.openarchives.org/ore/terms/" xmlns:skos="http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#" xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"><edm:WebResource rdf:about="http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:doc-A85QWRPN/8fdae0af-2f97-42ea-a53d-78cd1c92afe0/PDF"><dcterms:extent>1923 KB</dcterms:extent></edm:WebResource><edm:WebResource rdf:about="http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:doc-A85QWRPN/357e8248-e28b-4ad5-bb2f-bc4ff02d4b17/TEXT"><dcterms:extent>57 KB</dcterms:extent></edm:WebResource><edm:TimeSpan rdf:about="1965-2025"><edm:begin xml:lang="en">1965</edm:begin><edm:end xml:lang="en">2025</edm:end></edm:TimeSpan><edm:ProvidedCHO rdf:about="URN:NBN:SI:doc-A85QWRPN"><dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://www.dlib.si/details/URN:NBN:SI:spr-ETPSIC7M" /><dcterms:issued>2015</dcterms:issued><dc:creator>Vezovnik, Andreja</dc:creator><dc:format xml:lang="sl">letnik:52</dc:format><dc:format xml:lang="sl">številka:6</dc:format><dc:format xml:lang="sl">str. 1191-1211, 1248</dc:format><dc:identifier>ISSN:0040-3598</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>COBISSID:584447</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-A85QWRPN</dc:identifier><dc:language>sl</dc:language><dc:publisher xml:lang="sl">Fakulteta za sociologijo, politične vede in novinarstvo v Ljubljani</dc:publisher><dcterms:isPartOf xml:lang="sl">Teorija in praksa</dcterms:isPartOf><dc:subject xml:lang="sl">2010-2011</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="sl">družine</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="sl">Družinsko pravo</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="en">Family law</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="sl">istospolne družine</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="sl">istospolni partnerji</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="sl">Kvalitativna analiza</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="sl">Parlamentarna razprava</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="en">Parliamentary debate</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="sl">politični argumenti</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="sl">politični diskurz</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="sl">pravica do posvojitve</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="en">Qualitative analysis</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="en">Slovenia</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="sl">Slovenija</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="sl">zakonske zveze</dc:subject><dcterms:temporal rdf:resource="1965-2025" /><dc:title xml:lang="sl">Slovenski predlog Družinskega zakonika in njegovi politični argumenti|</dc:title><dc:description xml:lang="sl">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</dc:description><dc:description xml:lang="sl">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</dc:description><edm:type>TEXT</edm:type><dc:type xml:lang="sl">znanstveno časopisje</dc:type><dc:type xml:lang="en">journals</dc:type><dc:type rdf:resource="http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q361785" /></edm:ProvidedCHO><ore:Aggregation rdf:about="http://www.dlib.si/?URN=URN:NBN:SI:doc-A85QWRPN"><edm:aggregatedCHO rdf:resource="URN:NBN:SI:doc-A85QWRPN" /><edm:isShownBy rdf:resource="http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:doc-A85QWRPN/8fdae0af-2f97-42ea-a53d-78cd1c92afe0/PDF" /><edm:rights rdf:resource="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/" /><edm:provider>Slovenian National E-content Aggregator</edm:provider><edm:intermediateProvider xml:lang="en">National and University Library of Slovenia</edm:intermediateProvider><edm:dataProvider xml:lang="sl">Univerza v Ljubljani, Fakulteta za družbene vede</edm:dataProvider><edm:object rdf:resource="http://www.dlib.si/streamdb/URN:NBN:SI:doc-A85QWRPN/maxi/edm" /><edm:isShownAt rdf:resource="http://www.dlib.si/details/URN:NBN:SI:doc-A85QWRPN" /></ore:Aggregation></rdf:RDF>