Jump to content

Talk:Same-sex marriage in Taiwan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cat12zu3 (talk | contribs) at 08:59, 6 July 2024 (→‎Re recent WP:NONRS WP:OR). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Same-sex marriage in Taiwan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:34, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Same-sex marriage in Taiwan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:06, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Marriage or civil union?

The article reports: "On 20 February 2019, the Executive Yuan published a draft bill, entitled The Enforcement Act of Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 748 ,which allows two persons of the same sex to create a permanent union of intimate and exclusive nature for the committed purpose of managing a life together to realise the equal protection of the freedom of marriage. It covers topics such as inheritance rights, medical rights, and adoption of the biological children of their partner. The draft bill will also set penalties for adultery and bigamy, similar to opposite-sex marriages. Due to the Referendum, the bill does not amend the Civil Code, but rather creates a separate law.[110] The bill was approved by the Executive Yuan on 21 February 2019 and then sent to the Legislative Yuan for passage, before taking effect by 24 May."

I am unsure that this is gender-neutral marriage. This sounds more like an Italian civil union or a formerly German life partnership giving all the rights of marriage but the name. Shouldn't marriage be in the marriage part of the civil code to say that we are talking about same-sex marriage? Any other opinions? Thanks Finedelledanze (talk) 15:04, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

-- I'm coloring Taiwan blue on the map, but this is s.t. you should bring up again if you have RS's. — kwami (talk) 08:38, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Media seem to be making a big thing of the fact that parliamentarians chose the option which allows for marriage, over the ones that didn't.. [1] - "Lawmakers on Friday comfortably passed part of a bill that would allow gay couples to enter into “exclusive permanent unions” and apply for marriage registration with government agencies." Jdcooper (talk) 11:45, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The law dodges the word "marriage" as much as possible. However the law lets same-sex couples conduct "marriage registration" just like hetro marriage, and gives same-sex couples the exact same rights and responsibilities given to hetero marriage (except adoption). --Yel D'ohan (talk) 20:01, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Legal?

Hi @Ecpiandy:. Do you have any WP:RS that says the law has already gone into effect? Everything I've read in English and Chinese sources say that it will only go into effect on 24 May. I know the "first" same sex wedding was held on 18 May, but according to the sources I've read (e.g. [2][3]), it was only ceremonial and 24 May is still the date when it will become legal. Bennv3771 (talk) 19:48, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Re recent WP:NONRS WP:OR

Cyanmax added a unreliable source, not neutral (not WP:NPOV) and factually wrong info at Special:Diff/1230404681.
There's supposed to be no WP:BATTLEGROUND.

international-divorce.com is a private commercial company website, a law firm website, so it's 3rd party rather than authoritative ones such as primary sources government website or secondary sources Law journals. It seemed not only not-in-source/original research and WP:POV but also it's factually wrong about introduced a separate bill in the hopes that this would appease homophobic protesters

It's actually because Judicial Yuan (constitutional/supreme court) said every legal institutions cannot infringe/hurt on each other, Legislative Yuan can't ignore the referendum passed largely due to Christian groups lobbying, the passed referendum to ban/disallow same-sex marriage can't violate constitutional judicial review 748 (2017 1st order) to allow same-sex marriage. Here at zh:臺灣同性婚姻 全國性公民投票，其第10、12案通過，同性婚姻會以修改民法以外的其他立法形式讓釋字第748號釋憲案得以實現。司法院聲明依此立法原則所審議完成之法律，仍屬法律位階，不得牴觸憲法，亦不得牴觸具有相當憲法位階效力之司法院解釋。.

There is this JY (SC of Taiwan) mentioning aboved [4]. The only way is to pass a separate same-sex marriage law.

So it's actually to comply with the 2018 JY judicial review (2018 2nd order), not the not-in-source / WP:OR / WP:POV introduced a separate bill in the hopes that this would appease homophobic protesters

Ohh...just happened to see in Main article Same-sex marriage in Taiwan#2018 referendums there's existing statement with cited English Taipei Times source, On 29 November, the Judicial Yuan Secretary-General stated that the referendum results could not override the 2017 court ruling with cited source here [5].

Panda2024 was right to revert and remove the wrong source Cyanmax added Special:Diff/1230404681 in the main section, which is not-in-source / WP:OR / WP:POV. Except that, before that, Panda2024 re-introduce the same wrong source in the WP:LEDE lede section Special:Diff/1231636327, perhaps too much to focus. Other than this overlook, Panda2024 was right to change from Cyanmax WP:UNDUE WP:POV with WP:NONRS back into WP:NPOV (I tried to see again and again even though I'm total retinal detachment right eye bilnd and corneal erosion not-so-good vision on my left eye) --- Cat12zu3 (talk) 19:27, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Same-sex_marriage_in_Taiwan&oldid=1232915940"