Template talk:Same-sex unions

Armenia

@Kwamikagami and Buidhe: The claim that Armenia offers minimal recognition doesn't seem quite right. We should have evidence before we make the claim. Due weight here is questionable. Same-sex marriages are not actually legal. That dubious information was reported in July 2017. It's been 5 years. That was never confirmed by the government. On 26 August 2019, the Minister of Justice Rustam Badasyan, actually refuted those dubious claims, stating that Armenia does not recognize same-sex marriages. No case had so far occurred in practice. 212.97.4.68 (talk) 11:19, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Regardless if its been 5, 10, or 15 years is irrelevant. The MoJ confirmed that foreign marriages are recognized in Armenia- with no mention of gender. This article also makes it very clear that no same sex foreign marriage has been registered in Armenia to date. Therefore, your concern is already addressed in the notes. Archives908 (talk) 15:19, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

@Kwamikagami and Kaleetan:

Do you have sources that anyone registered their foreign same-sex marriages in Armenia? Not just generic statements that they can be, but that the practice being used? I wouldn't be surprised, just think we should have RS's to back up our claims. I think it's misleading to include Armenia for "minimal recognition" if no-one's actually registered their foreign same-sex marriage. Zero evidence for same-sex couples being actually registered, means we shouldn't include Armenia. It's been 5 years with no evidence presented. It's time to remove Armenia from the "minimal recognition" list.

@Kwamikagami and Kaleetan: The situation is kind of similar to Romania. For a long time, we believed that Romania recognizes foreign same-sex marriages. However, we were wrong the whole time.

IP user- read the notes. Your concern is already addressed, the notes state that none have yet to be registered. Archives908 (talk) 14:13, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

I agree the situation is dubious. But that's why we have a big question mark on the map. It would be interesting to see what would happen if an Armenian citizen tried to register their spouse, but until that happens or the govt reverts itself, we're left with the last official statement. — kwami (talk) 03:55, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

This is where we left off, for all those who seem to have forgotten. The consensus reached back in December 2021 was that we should defer to the last official statement made by the Ministry of Justice. Which is that the Government of Armenia recognizes foreign marriages, regardless of sex. Just because a foreign marriage of a same-sex couple has not yet been registered, it does not mean that the MoJ announcement is invalid. It is WP:CRYSTAL if we assume the MoJ has changed their stance to only registering opposite-sex foreign marriages. And that is precisely why we have notes explaining this peculiar case for Armenia. Yes- it is slightly vague and ambiguous. However, until more updated information/reliable sources become available- the last official statement is what we should defer too (at least for now). Archives908 (talk) 14:49, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

According to this source, foreign same-sex marriages are not recognized in Armenia.

@Kwamikagami, Robsalerno, Trystan, and Buidhe: What do you think? Dustssics (talk) 14:52, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

On 26 August 2019, the Minister of Justice Rustam Badasyan, stated that Armenia does not recognize same-sex marriages. That is the last official statement made by the Ministry of Justice. Dustssics (talk) 14:55, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Nothing in that source comes directly from the Ministry of Justice. According to Article 143 of the Armenian Family Code, it states that Armenia recognizes foreign marriages as long as they conform with the legality of the territory where they were celebrated, not excluding people of the same sex. This has been confirmed by the last official statement from the MoJ on 3 July 2017, which states Marriage certificates registering the union between two people of the same sex abroad are valid in Armenia. Archives908 (talk) 15:06, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Dustssics, where are you seeing that? I'm not finding anything that corresponds to your statements -- the name, the date, nothing apart from a ref to RA Family Code, Article 152, that "where foreign country norms in relation to family rights contradict the legal framework of Armenia, the legislation of the Republic of Armenia is applied", which they interpret as meaning foreign SSM will not be recognized. But they're not trained in Armenian constitutional law, so who knows? — kwami (talk) 15:16, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

I think @Dustssics' source is from 2009 and shouldn't be considered up to date. However, ILGA-Europe publishes an annual report tracking these issues every year and it has never once reported that Armenia offers any recognition whatsoever for same-sex couples, foreign or domestic. ILGA-E works with LGBT organizations on the ground in Armenia, so they would know what the actual legal situation is. https://rainbow-europe.org/#8620/0/0

I've been clear in the past. I do not think we should take this one dubious report that Armenia recognizes foreign same-sex marriages at face value, absent any actual examples of same-sex marriage recognition, and absent any corroboration by local LGBT groups. Armenia should be colored to reflect that same-sex marriage is banned by statute, there is no foreign recognition, and that none of this is in doubt. Robsalerno (talk) 21:54, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

3.2. Same-sex partnerships/marriage

According to the Family Code, marriages between the citizens of the Republic of Armenia and those of other countries, once legally in order, will be recognized. However, where foreign country norms in relation to family rights contradict the legal framework of Armenia, the legislation of the Republic of Armenia is applied. In short, this means that same-sex marriages recognized in Belgium or elsewhere will not be recognized in Armenia. Dustssics (talk) 15:22, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunately, your interpretation is not a WP:RS. You need to provide a valid source from the Ministry of Justice retracting their earlier statement from 2017. Otherwise, the consensus from December 2021 should remain in place. Archives908 (talk) 15:28, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

The template implies that foreign marriages are available or recognized in Armenia. That's clearly not the case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dustssics (talk • contribs) 15:32, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Not true- read the notes. Archives908 (talk) 15:35, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

How does that support your claim that "On 26 August 2019, the Minister of Justice Rustam Badasyan, stated that Armenia does not recognize same-sex marriages. That is the last official statement made by the Ministry of Justice." I expect that when you provide a ref for a claim, that the ref supports that claim. — kwami (talk) 15:36, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

— kwami can you please ping or name who you are referring to when you respond, since there are multiple people in this conversation its hard to keep track. This is the last source that I found coming from the MoJ. It confirms that Marriage certificates registering the union between two people of the same sex abroad are valid in Armenia. If you have found something else from 2019, please link it in your response. This source does not cite anything from Minister Rustam Badasyan as far as I see. Archives908 (talk) 15:42, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

I was responding to Dustssics. Yeah, it's hard to see what lines up with what. — kwami (talk) 15:46, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Yes, that would appear to be a RS, at least as of 2017. — kwami (talk) 15:47, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

haha all good :) thanks for the clarification! Archives908 (talk)

1.

Use translator

2. Dustssics (talk) 15:48, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

I've read both these sources, Dustssics. Neither bring any validity to this discussion. The first article referrers to marriages taking place within Armenia, not foreign marriages. The second article, again, makes zero mention of foreign same sex marriage. As far as I can see, the 2017 MoJ statement is the last official announcement we have regarding foreign same-sex marriage. Archives908 (talk) 15:53, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Therefore, the consensus reached in December 2021 should be maintained until additional information becomes available. Until then, the notes section provides readers with clarification of this ambiguous case. Archives908 (talk) 15:55, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Isn't that WP:CRYSTAL if we assume Armenia "recognizes" foreign same-sex marriages? Dustssics (talk) 15:58, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Nope. Because we have a valid source. Archives908 (talk) 15:58, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Are there any other sources except panarmenia.net? Dustssics (talk) 16:01, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Some coverage- but panarmenia is the most reliable out of the lot. If you find any that contradict the source(s) we do have available, please share. Archives908 (talk) 16:08, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Is it actually "recognized" in practice? Dustssics (talk) 16:05, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Again, a same-sex couple would have to register first. That is why we have notes for Armenia, as this is a peculiar case. Archives908 (talk) 16:10, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, this is a doubtful case. Well, anyway, we'll see what happens. Maybe something like in neighboring Georgia. Dustssics (talk) 16:26, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

I agree- the best thing we can do for now is wait. Cheers, Archives908 (talk) 16:28, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

References

Mexico, listing the ones remaining in the Notes?

At this point, Mexico has 5 states left without state-wide Marriage Equality: Durango, Guerrero, México (state), Tabasco, and Tamaulipas. At *some* point, I think it will be appropriate to have a note that looks like (All states except Tabasco) or something like that. Are we there now, or how many states should be left before we list them specifically in the Notes?Naraht (talk) 13:49, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

You could see how it looks now. Marriage for 40% of pop of Guerrero, per last estimate we have (haven't heard anything recently). — kwami (talk) 20:05, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

I would support this. It's a manageable list to include, and is slightly simpler to update. As for stats within states, I think as long as we specify state-wide, that's enough detail I would say. Interested readers can always delve deeper if they wish. Jdcooper (talk) 23:22, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Made the change. Moved Mexico City to the front because otherwise it became unclear whether it was part of the except grouping or not. Removed the parts of Guerrero clause. Not sure it is the best phrasing, feel free to change to what you think is better. It is a *little* longer (2 more characters), but OTOH, gives information on *which* 5 states (and will be shorter than the original concept when Marriage Equality comes to one more state).Naraht (talk) 01:33, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Kwamikagami Yeah, the nationwide recognition is the key thing and I agree should be first, though given nothing up in the main section about subnational parts, it might be expected. And from what I can tell, there is no possibility of the number of states not allowing increasing barring a *complete* shakeup of the Mexican Supreme Court.

Slovenia

Definitely confirmed. https://www.total-slovenia-news.com/politics/10254-slovenia-legalises-same-sex-marriage-adoptions . I have put in for a move of the current Recognition of same-sex unions in Slovenia to the current redirect Same-sex marriage in Slovenia. The redirect actually has a history, so it will be a technical move. We'll need a redirect in the other direction when we are done.Naraht (talk) 18:53, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

If I can point it out, it's a similar situation to Andorra. The ruling is effective now, but it needs to pass via Parliament, which can probably deliver not full marriage equality, but a parallel legislation (spoiler: i study law, so while I'm not an expert in Slovenia, as I read the articles the situation is a bit ambiguous.) Touyats (talk) 15:49, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

I don't think it's similar to Andorra at all. The Andorran law has not yet finished its legislative process, and will not take effect (ie. marriages be allowed) until six months later. Whereas Slovenia, the govt has been instructed to update its legislation, but (from the article cited above): Announcing the news on Friday, the court gave the National Assembly six months to amend the law accordingly, but until the law is amended its ruling stands as the law and means that marriage is a union between two persons regardless of gender, and same-sex partners living in a civil partnership may adopt a child together under the same conditions as married spouses. So the government's mandated actions are a constitutional obligation, but the law is already in effect either way. Jdcooper (talk) 16:03, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Andorra

The bill in Andorra has passed the legislature and does not come into effect for 6 months *AFTER* it is signed by one of the co-princes. Given that Bishop of Urgell is *not* going to sign this, it should not be added to the template until French President Macron signs the bill. Note, I think the chance of Macron *not* signing it is fairly small, but I think that it is non-zero, especially considering that the approved bill is not quite just "allow same sex marriage". (and there is no override for both princes refusing to sign, so even though the entire bill was approved unanimously, it doesn't matter ) Naraht (talk) 19:38, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

I agree, per CRYSTAL, we shouldn't add it until Macron signs off, then leave an asterisk until it takes effect.

There actually is an override if both princes refuse: Andorra could declare itself a republic and treat it as enacted law. About as likely as Macron refusing to sign. — kwami (talk) 22:55, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Agreed.Naraht (talk) 03:39, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

I think the chance of Macron not signing is zero, but that's not the point. IIRC, by long-standing practice we don't say that the law is passed until it has completed every part of the legislative process. Jdcooper (talk) 14:05, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Jdcooper I agree that that is the point. The Note is less important.Naraht (talk) 14:33, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Definitions of same-sex marriage, civil unions, cohabitations, and/or differentiating between real marriage equality and non-quite-equal marriage equality.

I asked this on Help Desk, but I was referred to as here.

A couple of days go Andorra reformed its family law to define "matrimoni" (marriage) as either the (already existing) Roman Catholic canonical marriage or a new "casament" legal instrument that is said to be open to both opposite-sex and same-sex couples, and fully equal to Roman Catholic canonical marriage. Except, as I pointed out in the discussion pages of the article, the use of a different term for religious and secular "marriage" may point to the fact that indeed what Andorra just passed is a form of civil-unions law which just happens to be extremely similar to marriage. The page is being renamed to **Same-sex marriage in Andorra**, and the Same-sex union map that is often found in LGBT and Europe related articles will probably be changed to portray Andorra.

Likewise, the Slovenian high court recently declared limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples inconsistent with the equality clause in Slovenia's constitution, and "legalized same-sex marriage". The ruling is said to be immediately executive, but then the Parliament has to pass law to amend the family code, and it's not entirely impossibile IMHO that the Parliament may chose to go the path of further making already existing same-sex civil unions closer to opposite-sex marriage, while keeping the two things separate. The same-sex unions map of Europe has already been changed to portray Slovenia as a country with same-sex marriage. All the sources for this news seem to be copied from one single source (perhaps a press-release from the consititutional court itself).

A similar case happens with Italy where the same-sex civil-union law passed in 2016 is meant to create a legal device that is 80% equivalent to marriage, but is not marriage itself. Wikipedia correctly describe this case as a civil-union case.

So we are having a bit of inconsistencies here, both because of how the laws of each country are made, and/or because we assume that still in-fieri legislation is being finalized when editing.

1. How do we define Civil Union? Is there a need to differentiate Civil Unions in two grades, one for civil unions that are "almost" like marriage but not, and another grade for civil unions that are weaker in rights given?

2. How do we define Same-sex Marriage? Only as full Marriage Equality (same law, same terms, just the code is update to remove rules or wording that requires people to be of opposite sex) or for "parallel" legislations that may be in different law than where marriage is definied, or with suspicious wording that may point to same-sex and opposite-sex marriage to be different or meant to diverge over time?

3. Likewise, how do we define lesser forms of recognition of same-sex unions?

4. What are the watersheds?

5. What do we do for Andorra and Slovenia, until it's clear the legal status of same-sex "marriage" in those two countries? Touyats (talk) 15:41, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Last point being discussed in the previous section, for what it matters for Andorra. Touyats (talk) 15:45, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

@Touyats: Years ago we tried two grades of CU's, i.e. almost-marriage and clearly-less-than-marriage, but found the distinction to be unworkable.

Normally if there are two separate laws, one for straights and one for LGBT, we count the second as CUs. But we don't mark a distinction for religious exemptions from performing SSM. In the US, for example, the Catholic church is not forced to perform marriages, but that's irrelevant because Catholic marriages have no legal force. What matters to the state is whether you file with the county clerk, and all that requires is that you declare yourselves married. In many Latin countries, we have an apparently intermediate situation, where religious marriages have legal force but you can also get a secular marriage. Since secular marriage is available to both straights and LGBT, I believe that counts as marriage equality. But you're right, there's the possibility that casaments may not be legally equivalent to matrimonis. But if so, are they less or more? I think we'd need more info.

IMO, marriage inequality may enter in other ways. There may be a single marriage law, so marriage looks to be equal, but those marriages are only accepted by certain institutions if you're opposite-sex. In Ecuador and I believe multiple states in Mexico, 'married' couples can adopt, but SSM couples are not accepted for adoption, so although there is a single marriage law, they don't have marriage equality. In Taiwan there's been a lot of debate over their SSM not granting marriage equality, and they're chipping away at the differences, but not there yet. I've tried making that distinction on the maps but have been overruled.

(Looks like by my def above, Taiwan should be colored as CU rather than SSM, but all our sources call it 'marriage'.) — kwami (talk) 22:46, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I doubt we will ever find a cathegorization that works for each and every country. However, I can't understand why religious marriages are brought into the discussion every time. The pages on Wikipedia about the recognition of same-sex unions are *by country* aka they describe what a State allows or not. If we want to document what a particular religion/religious movement/sect allows or not for same-sex couples, I would rather create pages like "Same-sex unions in Judaism/Christianity/Islam/Shintoism". So I would keep the relationship between what religions and a (secular) State as the last thing to worry (in general).

Likewise, I would ignore adoption in deciding about the specific flavour of a marriage as there are still too many different ways adoption for same-sex couples are codified in law and their limits (for example: at least in the EU it looks like there are very few legal problems ussually to extend adoption to lesbian couples since that does not involve surrogancy, so you'll probably have even the most equal of marriage laws that still discriminate gay male couples vs. gay female couples). Also, often (existing, non-equal) adoption law does not even require people to be married, and I think this is another reason not to focus on adoption when defining

I would rather focus and patrimonial, fiscal, and kinship aspects (who "comes first" in the family hierarchy), since in secular countries secular/civil/common-law marriage is (mostly) a patrimonial agreement between two people and the ancillary benfits the two people get from being married (inheritance, survivor's pension, ability to tend to/take time off job for a sick spouse etc...) and marginally perhaps what happens at the dissolution of marrige (alimony, etcc... are they the same in the case of opposite-sex vs. same-sex?).

Andorra's case indeed is a very tricky one, because the if indeed Andorra did not have civil/secular marriages up to now, the news here isn't that Andorra introduced marriage equality, more like that finally in 2202 two non-Catholics can marry in Andorra too :) (the marriage of a Catholic with a non-Catholic was probably always possible even in Church via Canonical's Law "dispensation"), AKA, a secular form of something that "should be marriage" is introduced, and that it just happens that the newly adopted secular legal instrument is equal.

(To answer your part "But you're right, there's the possibility that casaments may not be legally equivalent to matrimonis. But if so, are they less or more?": I think we can be pretty sure that if the two legal flavors will indeed diverge, 'casament's will become the lesser sibling of the twos... )

Compared to years ago, it's now clear that CU's are usually the first step to eventually legalize full marriage equality. But it looks like that States will still occasionally play some tricks when "opening marriage to LGBT people" (...I'm concerned of what Slovenia's parliament will do). So I'd design the grades as (again: adoption is not considered; relationship with religion neither):

1) Full Equal Marriage: two men or two women can marry, and their marriage is completely the same when it comes to rights and obligations between the two and society at large . Legal instrument is the same, and it would require the legislator to introduce text in law that is explicitly discriminatory to undo the equality.

2) Almost Equal Marriage: two men or two women can marry, and their marriage is completely the same when it comes to rights and obligations between the two and society at large; the legal instrument is the same, however there is suspicious wording that points to the fact a divergence may easily be introduced if wanted, and other laws can easily ignore the equality between LGBT and straight people (however: still ignoring adoption and religious matters, i.e. it can be an Almost Equal Marriage even if adoption and religious issues are not equal).

3) Civil Union Almost Like Marriage: a man and a woman can marry, two men or two woman cannot but can enter in an "agreement" that binds them. Legal instruments is different from marriage. Rights and obligations are the same of marriage, especially in relation to the rest of society/third parties, but lack some major aspects of rights and obligations given by (straight) marriage that clearly make them different to marriage (for example: a civil union does not create a "family" under civil law). (This is the case of Italy).

4) Civil Union Clearly Less than Marriage: a man and a woman can marry, two men or two woman cannot but can enter in an "agreement" that binds them. Legal instruments is different from marriage. Rights and obligations are mostly the same of marriage, but there are notable differences compared to marriage, especially in relation to the rest of society/third parties. For example: kinship between the two families of the spouses is not established.

5) Registered Partnership/Cohabitation: mundane rights and no obligations are given to two people; they must however "register" for this to happen.

6) Unregistered Partnership/Cohabitation: very mundane rights and no obligations are given to two people; rights happen automatically by merely living together. Touyats (talk) 16:34, 30 July 2022 (UTC)