Talk:Same-sex marriage

Australia

The Hight Court of Australia has said that they will overrule the ACT law and that same sex marriages will be annuled in five days.

Wording of lead re England and Wales

The time has come where we once again have to confront the question of how to talk about England & Wales in the lead. The main parts of the act came into force at midnight; foreign same-sex marriages are recognized as marriages from today, while the celebration of new marriages is delayed until the 29th because of the required notice period.

Including it in the list of countries is not entirely satisfactory, because same-sex marriage is not legal in the whole of the UK. But on the other hand, treating it as a subnational jurisdiction is not entirely satisfactory either, because the law was passed by the sovereign UK Parliament, not by a subnational legislature. I suppose we could dodge the issue by saying that England and Wales are countries (in the sense of constituent countries) and therefore go in the countries list. - htonl (talk) 00:19, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

- Wouldn't it actually be 17 countries, not 16? 'United Kingdom' isn't a singular country, and since it's only England and Wales, why not mention them individually? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.57.171.137 (talk) 10:17, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

The United Kingdom is the ONLY country, since the use of country in the article is synonymous with sovereign state. The fact we use the term "country" for the subnational components is rooted in political history, which has no formal meaning, but they most certainly should not be confused with sovereign states. They are subnational jurisdictions, and are treated as such by international organisations.

We should not try and fudge things just because it might be "convenient" for a list; listing the United Kingdom confuses the nature of the law, and it also confuses the nature of the United Kingdom ChiZeroOne (talk) 13:14, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

However, the law was passed by the national legislature and does not apply in parts of the country because those parts have autonomous legislatures. In that respect it is more like the way Denmark passed a marriage equality law but it did not apply in Greenland or the Faroes. - htonl (talk) 15:35, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Not quite. It does not apply in parts of the country, not because those parts have devolved (n.b. not "autonomous") legislatures, but because Section 20 explicitly states which parts apply where. In the absence of such clauses, a UK law automatically applies to all four of England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, even if the devolved assemblies (something that England alone does not enjoy) have the power to legislate in those matters. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:49, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Chile

Should Chile's status on the map be changed since Michelle Bachelet came to power on 11 March 2014 which a commitment to legalise same sex marriage? http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/chile-expected-legalize-gay-marriage120314 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.254.158.172 (talk) 11:07, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

On the actual marriage and wedding

This article talks immensely about the politics of same-sex marriagebut it talks very little about the unique aspects of the ceremony which is actually what I came to this article for.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 06:05, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

What unique aspects of the ceremony are you referring to, that only apply to marriages of people of the same sex? The form actual weddings take varies with culture/tradition. ChiZeroOne (talk) 16:06, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

This article is about efforts for legal recognition of same-sex marriage; the lede does a pretty good job of explaining that, but I can see room for improvement if it is not clear. Legal recognition, and the fact that it is being worked out in courts and legislative assemblies, makes same-sex marriage a political issue, so that is the focus of the article. Beyond those legal issues, marriage is marriage, and same-sex marriage ceremonies take the same dizzying array of forms as different-sex marriage ceremonies. Why would you expect something different? TechBear | Talk | Contributions 17:02, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

It would not at all surprise me if there were trends particular to same-sex weddings, and that we were to see an article on same. However, until one pulls that up, we have nothing to add (and even if one were to be found, I suspect it would be a localized item, and perhaps fit better in one of the localized same-sex marriage articles.) --Nat Gertler (talk) 17:11, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

That's what I'm saying like what if one guy/gal wants to wear white and the other guy/girl wears black or what about a pride themed wedding or a drag wedding? Or what unique traditions would apply depending on culture or religion? How do they make the ceremony less gendered? I mean I understand how politicized this topic is but people don't go to the ant article to find out what people think about ants. They come to research information about the ants themselves. There should at least be a small discussion describing actual ceremony practices.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 21:59, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

This is an encyclopaedia, we make specific statements based on reliable sources. What makes you think gay couples in general do try to make their ceremonies "less gendered" (whatever that means)? And do you realistically think there are reliable sources that have concluded this? This is not the place to make up stereotypical generalisations of what clearly are going to be choices unique to any particular couple.

Really the only encyclopaedic information related to the wedding may be, as you mention, things like the specifics of any particular faith group's policy on how same-sex marriages are celebrated, if different to opposite-sex ones. ChiZeroOne (talk) 01:44, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you ChiZeroOne, my thoughts exactly.--Mark Miller (talk) 01:49, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm not trying to stereotype if that whats you mean. What I'm saying is that if two men or two women stand up in front of a preacher and he read's the original gendered version of the ceremony someone would've have to have been the husband and someone the wife "Will you take this woman to be your lawfully wedded wife. Do you promise to cherish her in good times and bad times, in sickness and in health till death do you part." Obviously that part has to be edited for a male-male wedding. Not to mention the statues on the cake, and when you dance at the reception both sides would be dancing with different grooms. That is what I mean by gendered weddings which is why those who do perform same-sex weddings create a more gender-neutral wedding ceremony. Aside from that for example Who gets led down the aisle? Who stands at the alter? Who gets given away? In Judaism who breaks the glass? In Greek tradition who throws the vase? Some LGBT people might want to have a different wedding theme. I know I do I want to have a pride theme where me and my partner and the groomsmen and bridemaids outfits each represent one of the pride colors. I'm not trying to sound like I'm stereotyping. It is just a fact that their will be some differences. Not to mention LGBT people might want to make small cultural differences as a refusal to assimilate.-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 05:59, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

It probably does vary by culture (and, of course, by individual). In order to have any meaningful progress in this discussion, you would need to present sources that discuss the topic rather than your speculation. Even if you do find a source, some (not all) of the details you list above seem too trivial to merit mention in the article. VQuakr (talk) 06:56, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

I saw a wedding video a few months ago - I think that it was performed in California - which concluded "I now pronounce you spouses for life" instead of the traditional "I now pronounce you husband and wife". In countries/states/territories where the wording of the marriage ceremony is laid down in law, the law which permits same-sex marriage will have specified the appropriate amendments to the wording of the marriage ceremony. But where it is not laid down in law, the official has the freedom to vary the traditional wording as appropriate. For example, the Marriage (Scotland) Act 1977 gives, in section 9 subsection (3) an indication of the required declarations. It does not specify exact words, but the meanings of the two declarations:

(3) For the purposes of subsection (2)(b) above, a marriage ceremony is of an appropriate form if it includes, and is in no way inconsistent with—

(a) a declaration by the parties, in the presence of each other, the celebrant and two witnesses, that they accept each other as husband and wife; and

(b) a declaration by the celebrant, after the declaration mentioned in paragraph (a) of this subsection, that the parties are then husband and wife,

and the Registrar General may, before deciding whether to accept or reject a nomination, require the nominating body to produce to him in writing the form of words used at its marriage ceremonies.

This is amended by the recently-passed Marriage and Civil Partnership (Scotland) Act 2014, where, in section 13 subsections (2)(f) and (2)(g), we find some amendments to the 1977 Act, the effect of which is to produce the following wording:

(3) For the purposes of subsection (2)(b) above, a marriage ceremony for marriage between persons of different sexes is of an appropriate form if it includes, and is in no way inconsistent with—

(a) a declaration by the parties, in the presence of each other, the celebrant and two witnesses—

(i) that they accept each other as husband and wife;

(ii) that they accept each other in marriage; or

(iii) either or both of sub-paragraphs (i) and (ii); and

(b) a declaration by the celebrant, after the declaration mentioned in paragraph (a) of this subsection—

(i) that the parties are then husband and wife;

(ii) that the parties are then married; or

(iii) either or both of sub-paragraphs (i) and (ii),

and the Registrar General may, before deciding whether to accept or reject a nomination, require the nominating body to produce to him in writing the form of words used at its marriage ceremonies for marriage between persons of different sexes.

(3A) For the purposes of subsection (2)(b) above, a marriage ceremony for marriage between persons of the same sex is of an appropriate form if it includes, and is in no way inconsistent with—

(a) a declaration by the parties, in the presence of each other, the celebrant and two witnesses, that they accept each other in marriage;

(b) a declaration by the celebrant, after the declaration mentioned in paragraph (a), that the parties are then married,

and the Registrar General may, before deciding whether to accept or reject a nomination, require the nominating body to produce in writing the form of words used at its marriage ceremonies for marriage between persons of the same sex.

So the precise text is still not laid down in law, but the law recognises the need to amend the wording. Of note is that for same-sex marriage, the gender-neutral form is required; but for different-sex marriage, either the gender-specific or the gender-neutral forms may be used. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:51, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Same-sex marriage

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Same-sex marriage's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "BBC News":

• From The Simpsons: "Bart's voice tells all". BBC News Online. November 10, 2000. Retrieved May 16, 2007.
• From Same-sex marriage in the United Kingdom: "Scotland's same-sex marriage bill is passed". BBC News. 4 February 2014.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 18:44, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Fixed. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 19:21, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

New Zealand

Cooks Islands and Niue are not "New Zealand territories" but self-governing states in free association with New Zealand.

Semi-protected edit request on 1 April 2014

National debates

Russia

In an Washington Post op-ed published 31 March 2014, Masha Gessen wrote on Putin's December 2013 speech to the State Duma in which he expressed concern over the acceptance "the equality of good and evil" and the "destruction of traditional values". Gessen saw in his phrase "so-called tolerance, neutered and barren" an allusion to homosexuality, and thought Russia saw itself as protector of the "unsuspecting citizens (from the) homosexuals marching in from Brussels."

69.60.247.253 (talk) 02:13, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Not done: No clear request. EvergreenFir (talk) 02:56, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Italy

http://www.thelocal.it/20140410/italian-court-recognizes-gay-marriage-for-first-time Italy now has some legal recognition of same sex marriages performed abroad.