El matrimonio y la progenie ante la diversidad sexual en colombia análisis desde la bioética, biojurisprudencia y el bioderecho
Bibliographic record
Abstract
El vinculo fundante de la sociedad y por ende del Estado, es sin duda la familia. Tanto implicita como explicitamente el articulo 42 de la Carta Politica de Colombia establece como una de las modalidades de con-formar familia, prima facie, al matrimonio conformado por un hombre y una mujer. De esta manera, tambien lo consagra el ordenamiento civil en su articulo 113, al precisar que el matrimonio es un contrato solemne entre un hombre y una mujer, con el fin de vivir juntos, pro-crear y auxiliarse mutuamente.396 Sin embargo, la identidad sexual, de genero u orientacion sexual, son expresiones que conllevan a los cambios paradigmaticos de la institucion matrimonial, que actualmente no se concibe unicamente como la asociacion entre un hombre y una mujer con fines procreativos; sino, que ha trascendido a las diferentes alianzas afectivas que se constituyen entre dos hombres, dos mujeres, dos hombres y una mujer, dos mujeres y un hombre, tres hombres, tres mujeres y hasta los poliamorosos, pretendiendo que estos tipos de relaciones se constituyan en matrimonios y por consiguiente la generacion de progenie que originan cuestiones a la bioetica e implicaciones en el plexo normativo en cuanto a la naturaleza biojuridica de la “familia homoparental” en la geografia patria colombiana.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".