|
The American Psychological Association stated in 2004:[14] The institution of civil marriage confers a social status and important legal benefits, rights, and privileges. ... The same-sex couples are denied equal access to civil marriage. ... Same-sex couples who enter into a civil union are denied equal access to all the benefits, rights, and privileges provided by federal law to those of married couples ... The benefits, rights, and privileges associated with domestic partnerships are not universally available, are not equal to those associated with marriage, and are rarely portable ... Denial of access to marriage to same-sex couples may especially harm people who also experience discrimination based on age, race, ethnicity, disability, gender and gender identity, religion, socioeconomic status and so on ... The APA believes that it is unfair to deny same-sex couples legal access to civil marriage and to all its attendant benefits, rights, and privileges. The American Sociological Association stated in 2004:[15] ... a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman intentionally discriminates against lesbians and gay men as well as their children and other dependents by denying access to the protections, benefits, and responsibilities extended automatically to married couples ... we believe that the official justification for the proposed constitutional amendment is based on prejudice rather than empirical research ... the American Sociological Association strongly opposes the proposed constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman. The Canadian Psychological Association stated in 2006:[17] The literature (including the literature on which opponents to marriage of same-sex couples appear to rely) indicates that parents' financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally-recognized union. As the CPA stated in 2003, the stressors encountered by gay and lesbian parents and their children are more likely the result of the way society treats them than because of any deficiencies in fitness to parent. The CPA recognizes and appreciates that persons and institutions are entitled to their opinions and positions on this issue. However, CPA is concerned that some are mis-interpreting the findings of psychological research to support their positions, when their positions are more accurately based on other systems of belief or values. CPA asserts that children stand to benefit from the well-being that results when their parents' relationship is recognized and supported by society's institutions. The American Anthropological Association stated in 2005:[20] The results of more than a century of anthropological research on households, kinship relationships, and families, across cultures and through time, provide no support whatsoever for the view that either civilization or viable social orders depend upon marriage as an exclusively heterosexual institution. Rather, anthropological research supports the conclusion that a vast array of family types, including families built upon same-sex partnerships, can contribute to stable and humane societies. The American Academy of Pediatrics concluded in 2006, in an analysis published in the journal Pediatrics:[23] There is ample evidence to show that children raised by same-gender parents fare as well as those raised by heterosexual parents. More than 25 years of research have documented that there is no relationship between parents' sexual orientation and any measure of a child's emotional, psychosocial, and behavioral adjustment. These data have demonstrated no risk to children as a result of growing up in a family with 1 or more gay parents. Conscientious and nurturing adults, whether they are men or women, heterosexual or homosexual, can be excellent parents. The rights, benefits, and protections of civil marriage can further strengthen these families. The United Kingdom's Royal College of Psychiatrists has stated:[24] ... lesbian, gay and bisexual people are and should be regarded as valued members of society who have exactly similar [sic] rights and responsibilities as all other citizens. This includes ... the rights and responsibilities involved in a civil partnership ... Health A same-sex wedding ceremony in June 2006. In 2010, a Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health study examining the effects of institutional discrimination on the psychiatric health of lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) individuals found an increase in psychiatric disorders, including a more than doubling of anxiety disorders, among the LGB population living in states that instituted bans on same-sex marriage. According to the author, the study highlighted the importance of abolishing institutional forms of discrimination, including those leading to disparities in the mental health and well-being of LGB individuals. Institutional discrimination is characterized by societal-level conditions that limit the opportunities and access to resources by socially disadvantaged groups.[25][26] Gay activist Jonathan Rauch has argued that marriage is good for all men, whether homosexual or heterosexual, because engaging in its social roles reduces men's aggression and promiscuity.[27][28] The data of current psychological and other social science studies on same-sex marriage in comparison to mixed-sex marriage indicate that same-sex and mixed-sex relationships do not differ in their essential psychosocial dimensions; that a parent's sexual orientation is unrelated to their ability to provide a healthy and nurturing family environment; and that marriage bestows substantial psychological, social, and health benefits. Same-sex couples and their children are likely to benefit in numerous ways from legal recognition of their families, and providing such recognition through marriage will bestow greater benefit than civil unions or domestic partnerships.[23][29] In 2009, a pair of economists at Emory University tied the passage of state bans on same-sex marriage in the US to an increase in the rates of HIV infection.[30][31] The study linked the passage of a same-sex marriage ban in a state to an increase in the annual HIV rate within that state of roughly 4 cases per 100,000 population.[32] Opinion polling LGBT rainbow flag Numerous polls and studies on the issue have been conducted, including those that were completed throughout the first decade of the 21st century. A consistent trend of increasing support for same-sex marriage has been revealed across the world. Much of the research that was conducted in developed countries in the first decade of the 21st century shows a majority of people in support of same-sex marriage. Support for legal same-sex marriage has increased across every age group, political ideology, religion, gender, race and region of various developed countries in the world.[33][34][35][36][37] Recent polling in the United States has shown a further increase in public support for same-sex marriage. When adults were asked in 2005 if they thought "marriages between homosexuals should or should not be recognized by the law as valid, with the same rights as traditional marriages", 28 percent replied in the affirmative, while 68 percent replied in the negative (the remaining 4 percent stated that they were unsure). When adults were asked in March 2013 if they supported or opposed same-sex marriage, 50 percent said they supported same-sex marriage, while 41 percent were opposed, and the remaining 9 percent stated that they were unsure.[38] Various detailed polls and studies on same-sex marriage that were conducted in several countries show that support for same-sex marriage generally increases with higher levels of education, and that younger people are more likely to support legalization than older generations.[39][40][41][42][43] History Main articles: History of same-sex unions, Timeline of same-sex marriage and History of homosexuality Ancient The first historical mention of the performance of same-sex marriages occurred during the early Roman Empire according to controversial[44] historian John Boswell.[45] These were usually reported in a critical or satirical manner.[46] Child emperor Elagabalus referred to his chariot driver, a blond slave from Caria named Hierocles, as his husband.[47] He also married an athlete named Zoticus in a lavish public ceremony in Rome amidst the rejoicings of the citizens.[48][49] The first Roman emperor to have married a man was Nero, who is reported to have married two other males on different occasions. His first marriage was with one of his freedmen, Pythagoras, with whom Nero took the role of the bride.[50] Later, as a groom, Nero married Sporus, a young boy, to replace the teenage female concubine he had killed [51] and married him in a very public ceremony with all the solemnities of matrimony, after which Sporus was forced to pretend to be the female concubine that Nero had killed and act as though they were really married.[51] A friend gave the "bride" away as required by law. The marriage was celebrated in both Greece and Rome in extravagant public ceremonies.[52] It should be noted, however, that conubium existed only between a civis Romanus and a civis Romana (that is, between a male Roman citizen and a female Roman citizen), so that a marriage between two Roman males (or with a slave) would have no legal standing in Roman law (apart, presumably, from the arbitrary will of the emperor in the two aforementioned cases).[53] Furthermore, according to Susan Treggiari, "matrimonium was then an institution involving a mother, mater. The idea implicit in the word is that a man took a woman in marriage, in matrimonium ducere, so that he might have children by her."[54] Still, the lack of legal validity notwithstanding, there is a consensus among modern historians that same-sex relationships existed in ancient Rome, but the frequency and nature of "same-sex unions" during that period are obscure.[55] In 342 AD Christian emperors Constantius II and Constans issued a law in the Theodosian Code (C. Th. 9.7.3) prohibiting same-sex marriage in Rome and ordering execution for those so married.[56] Medieval A same-sex marriage between the two men Pedro Díaz and Muño Vandilaz in the Galician municipality of Rairiz de Veiga in Spain occurred on 16 April 1061. They were married by a priest at a small chapel. The historic documents about the church wedding were found at Monastery of San Salvador de Celanova.[57] Modern During the Victorian Era, two women cohabiting was termed a Boston marriage.[58] Contemporary Denmark was the first state to recognize a legal relationship for same-sex couples, establishing "registered partnerships" very much like marriage in 1989.[59] In 2001, the Netherlands[nb 2] became the first nation in the world to grant same-sex marriages.[60] Same-sex marriages are also granted and mutually recognized by Belgium (2003),[61] Spain (2005), Canada (2005), South Africa (2006), Norway (2009), Sweden (2009), Portugal (2010),[62] Iceland (2010), Argentina (2010), Denmark (2012),[nb 1] Brazil (2013), France (2013), Uruguay (2013), New Zealand[nb 3] (2013), United Kingdom[nb 4] (2014) and Luxembourg (2015). In Mexico, same-sex marriage is recognized in all thirty-one states but only performed in Mexico City, Quintana Roo and Coahuila. In Nepal, their recognition has been judicially mandated but not yet legislated.[63] In the United States, thirty-six states (Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming), the District of Columbia, St. Louis (Missouri), St. Louis County (Missouri), Jackson County (Missouri) and twenty-one Native American tribes permit same-sex marriage, beginning with Massachusetts in 2004.[64][65] Additionally, per the Supreme Court's ruling in United States v. Windsor (2013), the federal government recognizes same-sex marriages performed in foreign countries and in the U.S. states where they are legal. Timeline Main article: Timeline of same-sex marriage 2001 Netherlands (1 April) 2003 Belgium (1 June), Ontario (10 June), British Columbia (8 July) 2004 Sandoval County, New Mexico (20 February; discontinued, reinstated by statewide legalization 19 December 2013), New Paltz, New York (27 February; discontinued, reinstated by statewide legalization 24 July 2011), Quebec (19 March), Massachusetts (17 May), Yukon (14 July), Manitoba (16 September), Nova Scotia (24 September), Saskatchewan (5 November), Newfoundland (21 December) 2005 New Brunswick (23 June), Spain (3 July), Canada [national] (20 July) 2006 South Africa (30 November) 2008 California (16 June, discontinued 5 November; reinstated 28 June 2013), Connecticut (12 November), Mashantucket Pequot 2009 Norway (1 January), Iowa (27 April), Sweden (1 May), Coquille Indian Tribe (May), Vermont (1 September) 2010 New Hampshire (1 January), District of Columbia (3 March), Mexican Federal District (4 March), Portugal (5 June), Iceland (27 June), Argentina (22 July) 2011 New York [statewide] (24 July), Suquamish tribe (1 August) 2012 Alagoas (6 January), Quintana Roo (May), Denmark (15 June), Santa Rita do Sapucaí, Minas Gerais (11 July), Sergipe (15 July), Espírito Santo (15 August), Caribbean Netherlands (10 October), Bahia (26 November), Brazilian Federal District (1 December), Washington (6 December), Piauí (15 December), Maine (29 December) 2013 Maryland (1 January), São Paulo (16 February), Ceará (15 March), Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians (15 March), Paraná (26 March), Mato Grosso do Sul (2 April), Rondônia (26 April), Santa Catarina (29 April), Paraíba (29 April), Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians (8 May), Brazil [national] (16 May), France (18 May), Santa Ysabel Tribe (24 June), Delaware (1 July), Minnesota (1 August), Rhode Island (1 August), Uruguay (5 August), New Zealand (19 August), Doña Ana County, New Mexico (21 August), Santa Fe County, New Mexico (23 August), Bernalillo County, New Mexico (26 August), San Miguel County, New Mexico (27 August), Valencia County, New Mexico (27 August), Taos County, New Mexico (28 August), Los Alamos County, New Mexico (4 September), Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation (5 September), Grant County, New Mexico (9 September), Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes (18 October),[66][67] New Jersey (21 October), Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe (15 November), Hawaii (2 December), Australian Capital Territory (7 December, invalidated 12 December), New Mexico [statewide] (19 December), Utah (20 December, discontinued 6 January 2014, reinstated 6 October 2014) 2014 Cook County, Illinois (21 February), England and Wales (13 March), Michigan (21 March, discontinued 22 March), Arkansas (9 May, discontinued 16 May), Oregon (19 May), Pennsylvania (20 May), Illinois [statewide] (1 June), Wisconsin (6 June, discontinued 13 June, reinstated 6 October), Indiana (25 June, discontinued 27 June, reinstated 6 October), Puyallup Tribe of Indians (9 July), Coahuila (17 September), Oklahoma (6 October), Virginia (6 October), Colorado (7 October), West Virginia (9 October), Nevada (9 October), North Carolina (10 October), Alaska (12 October), Idaho (15 October), Arizona (17 October), Wyoming (21 October), St. Louis, Missouri (5 November), Douglas County, Kansas (12 November), Sedgwick County, Kansas (12 November), Wind River Indian Reservation (14 November), Montana (19 November), South Carolina (20 November), Keweenaw Bay Indian Community (13 December), Scotland (16 December) 2015 Luxembourg (1 January), Miami-Dade County, Florida (5 January), Florida [statewide] (6 January), Alabama (9 February) International organisations European Court of Human Rights In 2010 the European Court of Human Rights ruled on Schalk and Kopf v Austria, a case involving an Austrian same-sex couple who were denied the right to marry.[68] The court found that their human rights had not been violated, with a result of 3 votes for and 4 votes against.[69] British judge Sir Nicolas Bratza, then head of the European Court of Human Rights, delivered a speech in 2012 that signalled the court was ready to declare same-sex marriage a "human right", as soon as enough countries fell into line.[70][71][72] Article 12 of the European Convention on Human Rights states that: "Men and women of marriageable age have the right to marry and to found a family, according to the national laws governing the exercise of this right",[73] not limiting marriage to heterosexual couples. Same-sex marriage around the world Main articles: Status of same-sex marriage and Same-sex union legislation v t e Worldwide laws regarding homosexual relationships and expression Same-sex marriage Restricted freedom of expression Other type of partnership or unregistered cohabitation* Unenforced penalty Marriage recognized but not performed Imprisonment Marriage recognized federally but not performed Up to life in prison Same-sex unions not recognized Death penalty Click on map to view an enlarged version where rings in various locations become visible. These indicate places with local and/or case-by-case applications of law. *Civil Unions in Chile are not in effect and has not been approved by the president yet[discuss]. Same-sex marriage is legally recognized nationwide in Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark,[nb 1] France, Iceland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands,[nb 2] New Zealand,[nb 3] Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Uruguay and the United Kingdom.[nb 4] The law in Finland will come into force on 1 March 2017. In the United States, same-sex marriages are recognized on the federal level, and same-sex couples can marry in thirty-six of the fifty states, in St. Louis (Missouri) and in Washington, DC. In Mexico, same-sex marriages are only performed regularly in Mexico City, Coahuila and Quintana Roo, but these marriages are recognized by all Mexican states and by the Mexican federal government.[74] Israel does not recognize same-sex marriages performed on their territory. Same-sex marriages performed in foreign jurisdictions are recorded strictly 'for statistical purposes', thereby avoiding official recognition of same-sex marriages by the state.[75] Legal recognition Argentina Main article: Same-sex marriage in Argentina On 15 July 2010, the Argentine Senate approved a bill extending marriage rights to same-sex couples. It was supported by the Government of President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner and opposed by the Catholic Church.[76] Polls showed that nearly 70% of Argentines supported giving gay people the same marital rights as heterosexuals.[77] The law came into effect on 22 July 2010. Belgium Main article: Same-sex marriage in Belgium Belgium became the second country in the world to legally recognize same-sex marriages when a bill passed by the Belgian Federal Parliament took effect on 1 June 2003. Originally, Belgium allowed the marriages of foreign same-sex couples only if their country of origin also allowed these unions, however legislation enacted in October 2004 permits any couple to marry if at least one of the spouses has lived in the country for a minimum of three months. A 2006 statute legalized adoption by same-sex spouses. Brazil Main article: Same-sex marriage in Brazil Recognition of same-sex unions in South America Same-sex marriage Other type of partnership Unrecognized or unknown Same-sex marriage banned Same-sex sexual activity illegal v t e Brazil's Supreme Court ruled in May 2011 that same-sex couples are legally entitled to legal recognition of cohabitation (known as união estável, one of the two possible family entities in Brazilian legislation, it includes all family and married couple rights in Brazil – besides automatic opt-in for one of four systems of property share and automatic right to inheritance –, and was available for all same-sex couples since the same date), turning same-sex marriage legally possible as a consequence, and just stopping short of equalization of same-sex marriage (potentially confusing, a civil marriage or casamento civil is often rendered as união civil in legal Brazilian Portuguese; a same-sex marriage is a casamento civil homoafetivo or an união civil homoafetiva).[78] Between mid-2011 and May 2013, same-sex couples had their cohabitation issues converted into marriage in several Brazil states with the approval of a state judge. All legal Brazilian marriages were always recognized all over Brazil.[79] In November 2012, the Court of Bahia equalized marriage in the state of Bahia.[80][81] In December 2012, the state of São Paulo likewise had same-sex marriage allowed in demand by Court order.[82] Same-sex marriages also became equalized in relation to mixed-sex ones between January 2012 and April 2013 by Court order in Alagoas, Ceará, Espírito Santo, the Federal District, Mato Grosso do Sul, Paraíba, Paraná, Piauí, Rondônia, Santa Catarina and Sergipe, and in Santa Rita do Sapucaí, a municipality in Minas Gerais; in Rio de Janeiro, the State Court facilitated its realization by district judges in agreement with the equalization (instead of ordering notaries to accept same-sex marriages in demand as all others). On 14 May 2013, The Justice's National Council of Brazil issues a ruling requiring all civil registers of the country to perform same-sex marriages by a 14–1 vote, thus legalizing same-sex marriage in the entire country.[83][84][85] The resolution came into effect on 16 May 2013.[86][87] In March 2013, polls suggested that 47% of Brazilians supported marriage equalization and 57% supported adoption equalization for same-sex couples.[88] Polls in June 2013 also supported the conclusion that the division of opinion between acceptance and rejection of same-sex marriage is in about equal halves. When the distinction between same-sex unions that are not termed marriages in relation to same-sex marriage is made, the difference in the numbers of approval and disapproval is still insignificant, below 1%; the most frequent reason for disapproval is a supposed 'unnaturalness' of same-sex relationships, followed by religious beliefs.[89][90] Canada Main article: Same-sex marriage in Canada Legal recognition of same-sex marriage in Canada followed a series of constitutional challenges based on the equality provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In the first such case, Halpern v. Canada (Attorney General), same-sex marriage ceremonies performed in Ontario on 14 January 2001 were subsequently validated when the common law, mixed-sex definition of marriage was held to be unconstitutional. Similar rulings had legalized same-sex marriage in eight provinces and one territory when the 2005 Civil Marriage Act defined marriage throughout Canada as "the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others." Denmark Main article: Same-sex marriage in Denmark On 7 June 2012, the Folketing (Danish parliament) approved new laws regarding same-sex civil and religious marriage. These laws permit same-sex couples to get married in the Church of Denmark. The bills received Royal Assent on 12 June and took effect on 15 June 2012.[91] Denmark was previously the first country in the world to legally recognize same-sex couples through registered partnerships in 1989.[92][93] Laws regarding same-sex partnerships in Europe Same-sex marriage Other type of partnership Unregistered cohabitation Unrecognized Constitution limits marriage to opposite-sex couples Includes laws that have not yet gone into effect. v t e Finland Main article: Same-sex marriage in Finland Registered partnerships have been legal in Finland since in 2002.[94] In 2010, Minister of Justice Tuija Brax said her Ministry was preparing to amend the Marriage Act to allow same-sex marriage by 2012.[95] On 27 February 2013, the bill was rejected by the Legal Affairs Committee of the Finnish Parliament on a vote of 9–8. A citizens' initiative was launched to put the issue before Parliament.[96] The initiative gathered the required 50,000 signatures of Finnish citizens in one day and exceeded 107,000 signatures by the time the media reported the figures.[97] The campaign collected 166,000 signatures and the initiative was presented to the Parliament in December 2013.[98] The initiative went to introductory debate on 20 February 2014 and was sent again to the Legal Affairs Committee.[99][100] On 25 June, the bill was rejected by the Legal Affairs Committee on a vote of 10–6 and the third time on 20 November 2014, by 9–8.[101] It faced the first vote in full session on 28 November 2014,[102] which passed the bill 105–92. The bill passed the second and final vote by 101–90 on 12 December 2014, and will take effect in 2016 at the earliest if enacted.[103] It was the first time a citizens' initiative has been approved by the Parliament.[94] France Main article: Same-sex marriage in France Following the election of François Hollande as President of France in May 2012 and the subsequent legislative election in which the Socialist party took a majority of seats in the French National Assembly, the new Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault stated that a same-sex marriage bill had been drafted and would be passed.[104] The government introduced a bill to legalize same-sex marriage, Bill 344, in the National Assembly on 17 November 2012. Article 1 of the bill defining marriage as an agreement between two people was passed on 2 February 2013 in its first reading by a 249–97 vote. On 12 February 2013, the National Assembly approved the entire bill in a 329–229 vote.[105] On 12 April 2013, the upper house of the French parliament voted to legalise same-sex marriage.[106] On 23 April 2013 the law was approved by the National Assembly in a 331–225 vote.[107] Law No.2013-404 grants same-sex couples living in France, including foreigners provided at least one of the partners has their domicile or residence in France, the legal right to get married. The law also allows the recognition in France of same-sex couples’ marriages that occurred abroad before the bill's enactment.[108] Following the announcement of the French parliament's vote results, those in opposition to the legalisation of same-sex marriage in France participated in public protests. In both Paris and Lyon, violence erupted as protesters clashed with police; the issue has mobilised right-wing forces in the country, including neo-Nazis.[109] The main right-wing opposition party UMP challenged the law in the Constitutional Council, which had one month to rule on whether the law conformed to the Constitution. The Constitutional Council had previously ruled that the issue of same-sex marriage was one for the legislature to decide [110] and there was only little hope for UMP to overturn the parliament's vote. On 17 May 2013, the Constitutional Council declared the Bill legal in its entire redaction. President Hollande signed it into law on 18 May 2013.[111] Iceland Main article: Same-sex marriage in Iceland Same-sex marriage was introduced in Iceland through legislation establishing a gender-neutral definition of marriage introduced by the coalition government of the Social Democratic Alliance and Left-Green Movement. The legislation was passed unanimously by the Icelandic Althing on 11 June 2010, and took effect on 27 June 2010, replacing an earlier system of registered partnerships for same-sex couples.[112][113] Prime Minister Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir and her partner were among the first married same-sex couples in the country.[114] Luxembourg Main article: Same-sex marriage in Luxembourg The Parliament approved the bill to legalise same-sex marriage on 18 June 2014.[115] The law was published in the official gazette on 17 July and took effect 1 January 2015.[116][117][118] Mexico State recognition of same-sex relationships in Mexico Same-sex marriage (Rings: Individual cases) Same-sex civil unions Same-sex marriages recognized but not performed Main articles: Recognition of same-sex unions in Mexico, Same-sex marriage in Mexico City and Same-sex marriage in Quintana Roo On 21 December 2009, the Federal District's Legislative Assembly legalized same-sex marriages and adoption by same-sex couples. The law was enacted eight days later and became effective in early March 2010.[119] On 10 August 2010, the Mexican Supreme Court ruled that while not every state must grant same-sex marriages, they must all recognize those performed where they are legal.[120] On 28 November 2011, the first two same-sex marriages occurred in Quintana Roo after it was discovered that Quintana Roo's Civil Code did not explicitly prohibit same-sex marriage,[121] but these marriages were later annulled by the governor of Quintana Roo in April 2012.[122] In May 2012, the Secretary of State of Quintana Roo reversed the annulments and allowed for future same-sex marriages to be performed in the state.[123] On 11 February 2014, the Congress of Coahuila approved adoptions by same-sex couples and a bill legalizing same-sex marriages passed on September 1, 2014 making Coahuila the second state to reform its Civil Code to allow same sex marriages. It took effect on 17 September, and the first couple married on 20 September. On 13 November 2014, the Supreme Court of Mexico ruled that Baja California's constitutional ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional.[124][125] On 17 January 2015, the first same-sex marriage in Baja California was held in the city of Mexicali.[126] Netherlands Main article: Same-sex marriage in the Netherlands The Netherlands was the first country to extend marriage laws to include same-sex couples, following the recommendation of a special commission appointed to investigate the issue in 1995. A same-sex marriage bill passed the House of Representatives and the Senate in 2000, taking effect on 1 April 2001.[127] In the Dutch Caribbean special municipalities of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba, marriage is open to same-sex couples. A law enabling same-sex couples to marry in these municipalities passed and came into effect on 10 October 2012.[128] The Caribbean countries Aruba, Curaçao and Sint Maarten, forming the remainder of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, do not perform same-sex marriages, but must recognize those performed in the Netherlands proper. Same-sex marriage Other type of partnership Limited recognition of same-sex marriages at the federal level, no territory level recognition Homosexuality illegal New Zealand Main article: Same-sex marriage in New Zealand On 14 May 2012, Labour Party MP Louisa Wall stated that she would introduce a private member's bill, the Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill, allowing same-sex couples to marry.[129] The bill was submitted to the members' bill ballot on 30 May 2012.[130] It was drawn from the ballot and passed the first and second readings on 29 August 2012 and 13 March 2013, respectively.[131][132] The final reading passed on 17 April 2013 by 77 votes to 44.[133][134] The bill received Royal Assent from the Governor-General on 19 April and took effect on 19 August 2013.[135][136] New Zealand marriage law only applies to New Zealand proper and the Ross Dependency in Antarctica. Other New Zealand territories, including Cook Islands, Niue and Tokelau, have their own marriage law and do not perform nor recognise same-sex marriage. Norway Main article: Same-sex marriage in Norway Same-sex marriage became legal in Norway on 1 January 2009 when a gender neutral marriage bill was enacted after being passed by the Norwegian legislature in June 2008.[137][138] Norway became the first Scandinavian country and the sixth country in the world to legalize same-sex marriage. Gender neutral marriage replaced Norway's previous system of registered partnerships for same-sex couples. Couples in registered partnerships are able to retain that status or convert their registered partnership to a marriage. No new registered partnerships may be created. Same-sex marriage (also known as gay marriage) is marriage between two people of the same sex. Legal recognition of same-sex marriage or the possibility to perform a same-sex marriage is sometimes referred to as marriage equality or equal marriage, particularly by supporters.[1][2][3][4][5] The legalization of same-sex marriage is characterized as "redefining marriage" by many opponents.[6][7][8] The first laws enabling same-sex marriage in modern times were enacted during the first decade of the 21st century. As of 1 January 2015, seventeen countries (Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark,[nb 1] France, Iceland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands,[nb 2] New Zealand,[nb 3] Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom,[nb 4] and Uruguay) and certain sub-national jurisdictions (parts of Mexico and most states of the United States) allow same-sex couples to marry. Polls show rising support for legally recognizing same-sex marriage in the Americas and in parts of Europe.[9] Marriage open to same-sex couples Recognized when performed in certain other jurisdictions Government/court legalized or announced intention to legalize Federal recognition of marriages at the state level Civil unions* Unregistered cohabitation Same-sex unions not legally recognized *Civil Unions aren't legal in Chile[discuss]. Colors higher in the list override those lower down. rings = individual cases Introduction of same-sex marriage laws has varied by jurisdiction, being variously accomplished through a legislative change to marriage laws, a court ruling based on constitutional guarantees of equality, or by direct popular vote (via a ballot initiative or a referendum). The recognition of same-sex marriage is a political, social, human rights and civil rights issue, as well as a religious issue in many nations and around the world, and debates continue to arise over whether same-sex couples should be allowed marriage, or instead be allowed to hold a different status (a civil union), or be denied such rights.[10][11][12] Same-sex marriage can provide same-sex couples who pay their taxes with government services and make financial demands on them comparable to those afforded to and required of opposite-sex married couples. Same-sex marriage also gives them legal protections such as inheritance and hospital visitation rights.[13] Some analysts state that financial, psychological and physical well-being are enhanced by marriage, and that children of same-sex couples benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally recognized union supported by society's institutions.[14][15][16][17][18] Court documents filed by American scientific associations also state that singling out gay men and women as ineligible for marriage both stigmatizes and invites public discrimination against them.[19] The American Anthropological Association avers that social science research does not support the view that either civilization or viable social orders depend upon not recognizing same-sex marriage.[20] Same-sex marriages can be performed in a secular civil ceremony or in a religious setting. Various faith communities around the world support allowing same-sex couples to marry or conduct same-sex marriage ceremonies; for example: Buddhism in Australia,[21] Church of Sweden,[22] Conservative Judaism, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, U.S. Episcopalians, Humanistic Judaism, Native American religions with a two-spirit tradition, Druids, the Metropolitan Community Church, Quakers, Reconstructionist Judaism, Reform Judaism, Unitarian Universalists, the United Church of Canada, the United Church of Christ, and Wiccans. |
About us|Jobs|Help|Disclaimer|Advertising services|Contact us|Sign in|Website map|Search|
GMT+8, 2015-9-11 20:30 , Processed in 0.139508 second(s), 16 queries .
