CHRISTOPHER BENNETT AUTONOMY AND CONJUGAL LOVE: A REPLY TO GOLASH ABSTRACT. In my response to Golash I distinguish between two steps in my original argument. The first relates to the special value of conjugal (two-person) love relationships. I defend this step against criticisms, arguing that the two-person relationship provides a form of recognition that is of special importance to us and cannot be found in other sorts of relationship. The two-person relationship is one that, at least as private individuals, we have special reason to pursue. The second step concerns the claim that the special value of such relationships tends to pro- mote the autonomy of those who have them. It is this second step that is important for the argument that a liberal state – one, at any rate, that takes itself to be in the business of safeguarding the pre-conditions of autonomy – could have reason to favour marriage or some form of civic partnership over other forms of intimate adult tie. However, I admit that Golash puts forward plausible – if anecdotal – arguments against this second step. I therefore agree that I need to be more tentative about this step than I was in the original paper. KEY WORDS: autonomy, friendship, Hegel, marriage, recognition Let me start my response to Deirdre Golash’s perceptive and helpful paper 1 by re-stating my argument that the liberal state has reason to support the two-person (same-sex or otherwise) marital relationship I have called ‘conjugal love’. As I will pres- ent it here, my case rests on two steps. The first step is a Hege- lian argument about the need for such a relationship. The second step is the claim that the Hegelian argument shows conjugal love to be an important contributor to individual autonomy. This leads us to the conclusion that a liberal state that has reason to support autonomy also has reason to support conjugal love. 1 Deirdre Golash, ‘Marriage, Autonomy and the State’, in this issue. References in the text are to this article. Res Publica (2006) 12: 191–201 Ó Springer 2006 DOI 10.1007/s11158-006-9003-x