Misplaced Pages

Same-sex marriage: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 23:43, 13 September 2009 view sourceHistoryguy1965 (talk | contribs)701 edits Undid revision 313684364 by TheFix63 (talk) these are not arguments, they're just WHAT it also refers as, we can add sources← Previous edit Latest revision as of 05:16, 4 January 2025 view source Cyanmax (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,133 edits →TimelineTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{short description|Marriage of persons of the same sex or gender}}
{{SSM}}
{{redirect2|Marriage equality|gay marriage|other uses|marriage equality (disambiguation)|and|gay marriage (disambiguation)}}
'''Same-sex marriage''' is a term used to describe a ] or ]ly recognized ] between two persons of the same ] or ]. Other terms used to describe this type of recognition include '''gay marriage''', '''gender-neutral marriage''', or '''marriage equality'''.
{{pp-semi-indef}}
{{pp-move}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=March 2019}}
{{Same-sex unions}}
{{LGBTQ sidebar|rights}}
<!--- *** Please consider achieving consensus on the talk (discussion) page first before editing the introduction. *** --->{{Discrimination sidebar}}


'''Same-sex marriage''', also known as '''gay marriage''', is the ] of two people of the same legal ]. {{As of|2025|post=,}} marriage between same-sex couples is legally performed and recognized in 37 countries, with a total population of 1.5<!--counting 1,532.722 M, including Nepal and Thailand but not Israel, 2023 UN data, out of 7,795.311M world (deducting 250M for systemic over-count in China) --> billion people (20%<!--19.66% including Nepal and Thailand--> of the world's population). The most recent jurisdiction to legalize same-sex marriage is ]. ] is set to begin performing same-sex marriages in January 2025.
Same-sex marriage is a civil rights, political, social, and/or religious issue in many western nations. The conflict arises from the term "]" being used to include same-sex relationships as well as an often-overlapping government-endorsed civil status with legal benefits.<ref name=MuslimWaPo>, Pamela Taylor, '']'', July 31, 2009.</ref><ref name=SmithWapo>, Susan Smith, '']'', July 30, 2009; accessed 9/12/2009.</ref>


Same-sex marriage is legally recognized in a large majority of the world's ]; notable exceptions are ], ], ] and the ]. ] are not necessarily covered, though most states with same-sex marriage allow those couples to jointly adopt as other married couples can. Some countries, such as ] and ], restrict advocacy for same-sex marriage.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=VERPOEST |first=LIEN |date=2017 |title=The End of Rhetorics: LGBT policies in Russia and the European Union |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/26531664 |journal=Studia Diplomatica |volume=68 |issue=4 |pages=3–20 |jstor=26531664 |issn=0770-2965}}</ref> A few of these are among the 35 countries (as of 2023) that constitutionally define marriage to prevent marriage between couples of the same sex, with most of those provisions enacted in recent decades as a preventative measure. Other countries have constitutionally mandated ], which is generally interpreted as prohibiting marriage between same-sex couples.{{citation needed|date=June 2024}} In six of the former and most of the latter, homosexuality itself ].
Support for same-sex marriage is often based upon what is regarded as a ] issue, equality under the law, and the goal of ] ] relationships.<ref>{{cite journal| last = Abraham| first = Julie| title = Public Relations: Why the Rush to Same-Sex Marriage? And Who Stands to Benefit?| journal = The Women's Review of Books| volume = 17| issue = 8| pages = 12-14| quote = its most vocal advocates want gay marriage because marriage stands at the center of a system of legitimazation .| date = May| year = 2000| url = | doi = | id = }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last= Azzolina|first= David|authorlink= |coauthors= |year= 2003|month= February|title= The End of Gay (and the Death of Heterosexuality).(Book Review)|trans_title= |journal= Library Journal|volume= |issue= |page= 288|id= |url= |accessdate= |quote= }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |title= The Trouble with Normal|last= Warner|first= Michael|authorlink= |coauthors= |year= 1999|publisher= The Free Press|location= |isbn= |page= 80|pages= |url= |accessdate=}}</ref> Supporters may also use the term '''marriage equality''' to denote support for same-sex marriage.


There are records of marriage between men dating back to the ].<ref name="WilliamsRoman2">Williams, CA., ''Roman Homosexuality: Second Edition'', Oxford University Press, 2009, p. 280, p. 284.</ref> ]<ref name="auto">{{Cite news|last1=Padnani|first1=Amisha|author1-link=Amy Padnani|last2=Fang|first2=Celina|date=June 26, 2015|title=Same-Sex Marriage: Landmark Decisions and Precedents|language=en-US|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/06/26/us/samesex-marriage-landmarks.html|access-date=|issn=}}</ref><ref name="auto1">{{Cite web|last=Baume|first=Matt|date=March 1, 2019|title=Meet the Gay Men Whose 1971 Marriage Was Finally Recognized|url=https://www.advocate.com/people/2019/3/01/meet-gay-men-whose-1971-marriage-was-finally-recognized|access-date=|website=The Advocate|language=en}}</ref> are the first same sex couple in modern recorded history<ref name="auto2">] Archive (September 12, 2017). {{Cite web|url=https://archive.storycorps.org/interviews/dda002648/|title=Michael McConnell, Jack Baker, and Lisa Vecoli}}
Opposition to same-sex marriage is often based upon concerns about direct and indirect social consequences of same-sex marriages, ] concerns, ]<ref name=Pew>, The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, May 21, 2009; accessed September 11, 2009.</ref>, tradition, and/or ].<ref name=SoVO>, ], Dyana Bagby, January 27, 2006.</ref><ref name=Scalia>, CNN, March 25, 2009. Retrieved September 9, 2009.</ref><ref name=Reuters>, Sylvia Westall, ], March 31, 2009</ref><ref>{{citebook|quote=Clearly homophobia is at the heart of blanket opposition to gay rights policies.|title=The politics of same-sex marriage|author1=Craig A. Rimmerman|author2=Clyde Wilcox|pages=234|date=2007|ISBN=9780226720012|publisher=University of Chicago Press}}</ref><ref>{{citebook|title=Same-sex marriage and the Constitution|author=Evan Gerstmann|pages=56|quote=Keeping marriage heterosexual and dual gendered clearly has more widespread support than other homophobic policies.|publisher=Cambridge University Press|date=2004|ISBN=9780521009522}}</ref>
* Michael McConnell (75) and husband Jack Baker (75) talk with friend Lisa Vecoli (55) about having the first same-sex marriage legally recognized by a U.S. civil government in 1971, why they chose to get married, and what the response to their marriage was like.
* JB describes the decades-long (46-year) process from the denial of their marriage license in 1971 until a second request that same year in ], ], was "declared to be in all respects valid" by Order of Gregory J. Anderson, Judge of District Court.</ref> known to obtain a ],<ref name="National Archives">Newsletter, "Hidden Treasures from the Stacks", ''The National Archives at Kansas City'', p.&nbsp;6 (September&nbsp;2013).
* </ref> have their marriage solemnized, which occurred on September 3, 1971, in ],<ref name="3Sept1971">Source: Blue Earth County
* Certificate 434960:
:* Applicants: James Michael McConnell and Pat Lyn McConnell
:* Date of Marriage: September 3, 1971
* Certified Copy: </ref> and have it legally recognized by any form of government.<ref name=ruling>"The September&nbsp;3, 1971 marriage of James Michael McConnell and Pat Lyn McConnell, a/k/a Richard John Baker, has never been dissolved or annulled by judicial decree and no grounds currently exist on which to invalidate the marriage."
* Sources: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW by Assistant Chief Judge Gregory Anderson, Fifth Judicial District, (page&nbsp;4);
* Copy: , File Number 07-CV-16-4559, "Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order for Partial Summary Judgment" from Blue Earth County District Court in re James Michael McConnell et al. v. Blue Earth County et al. (September 18, 2018);
* from ''U of M Libraries'';
* McConnell Files, "America’s First Gay Marriage" (binder&nbsp;#4), Tretter Collection in GLBT Studies, ''U&nbsp;of&nbsp;M&nbsp;Libraries''.</ref><ref name="epilogue">Michael McConnell, with Jack Baker, as told to Gail Langer Karwoski, " {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150826235010/https://www.upress.umn.edu/book-division/books/the-wedding-heard-around-the-world |date=August 26, 2015 }}". University of Minnesota Press (2016). Reprint, "With A New Epilogue" (2020).</ref> The first law providing for marriage equality between same-sex and opposite-sex couples was ] in 2000 and took effect on 1 April 2001.<ref name="bloomberg-2014-12-04">{{Cite web |last=Winter |first=Caroline |date=December 4, 2014 |title=In 14 years, same-sex marriage has spread round the world |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-12-04/gay-marriage-same-sex-partners-can-wed-in-many-countries |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220113164339/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-12-04/gay-marriage-same-sex-partners-can-wed-in-many-countries |archive-date=13 January 2022 |access-date=2022-02-20 |publisher=Bloomberg}}</ref> The application of ] equally to same-sex and opposite-sex couples has varied by jurisdiction, and has come about through legislative change to marriage law, court rulings based on constitutional guarantees of equality, recognition that marriage of same-sex couples is allowed by existing marriage law, and by direct popular vote, such as through ]s and ]s.<ref>{{Cite web |date=26 September 2013 |title=Same-sex Oklahoma couple marries legally under tribal law |url=http://www.koco.com/news/oklahomanews/around-oklahoma/samesex-oklahoma-couple-marries-legally-under-tribal-law/-/12530084/22553184/-/101ihp0z/-/index.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131022022830/http://www.koco.com/news/oklahomanews/around-oklahoma/samesex-oklahoma-couple-marries-legally-under-tribal-law/-/12530084/22553184/-/101ihp0z/-/index.html |archive-date=22 October 2013 |access-date=22 October 2013 |publisher=KOCO}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=19 June 2022 |title=Clela Rorex, former Boulder County Clerk who issued first same-sex marriage license in 1975 dies at 78 |url=https://www.coloradodaily.com/2022/06/19/former-boulder-county-clerk-who-issued-first-same-sex-marriage-license-in-1975-dies-at-78/}}</ref> The most prominent supporters of same-sex marriage are the world's major medical and ],<ref name="science" /><ref name="amici" /><ref name="cpa2006" /> along with ] and ] organizations,<ref name="bbc" /> while its most prominent opponents are ] groups.<ref name="religion" /> ] continually rising support for the recognition of same-sex marriage in all developed democracies and in many developing countries.


Scientific studies show that the financial, psychological, and physical well-being of gay people is enhanced by marriage, and that the children of same-sex parents benefit from being raised by married same-sex couples within a marital union that is recognized by law and supported by societal institutions. At the same time, no harm is done to the institution of marriage among heterosexuals.<ref>Molly Ball, 2024 May 13, ''Wall Street Journal'', </ref> Social science research indicates that the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage stigmatizes and invites public discrimination against gay and lesbian people, with research repudiating the notion that either civilization or viable social orders depend upon restricting marriage to heterosexuals.<ref>Multiple sources:
<!--- Please do not edit this section without using the talk (discussion) page first. Any changes WILL be reverted if a talk page consensus has not been reached. Thanks --->
*{{Cite web |publisher=] |year=2004 |title=Resolution on Sexual Orientation and Marriage |url=http://www.apa.org/about/governance/council/policy/gay-marriage.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110511190536/http://www.apa.org/about/governance/council/policy/gay-marriage.pdf |archive-date=11 May 2011 |access-date=10 November 2010}}
*{{cite web|url=http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2010/10/27/amicus29.pdf|title=Brief of the American Psychological Association, The California Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy as amici curiae in support of plaintiff-appellees&nbsp;– Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of California Civil Case No. 09-CV-2292 VRW (Honorable Vaughn R. Walker)|access-date=5 November 2010|archive-date=13 April 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150413160709/http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2010/10/27/amicus29.pdf|url-status=live}}
*{{cite web|title=Marriage of Same-Sex Couples &nbsp;– 2006 Position Statement |url=http://www.cpa.ca/cpasite/userfiles/Documents/Practice_Page/Marriage_SameSex_Couples_PositionStatement.pdf|publisher=]|access-date=28 September 2012|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120707191052/http://www.cpa.ca/cpasite/userfiles/Documents/Practice_Page/Marriage_SameSex_Couples_PositionStatement.pdf|archive-date=7 July 2012}}
*{{Cite journal|vauthors=Pawelski JG, Perrin EC, Foy JM |display-authors=etal |title=The effects of marriage, civil union, and domestic partnership laws on the health and well-being of children|journal=]|volume=118|issue=1|pages=349–64|date=July 2006|pmid=16818585|doi=10.1542/peds.2006-1279|s2cid=219194821 |doi-access= |issn=0031-4005}}
*{{Cite journal |url=http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/118/1/349 |title=The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children |journal=Pediatrics |volume=118 |issue=1 |pages=349–364 |access-date=7 July 2017 |doi=10.1542/peds.2006-1279 |pmid=16818585 |year=2006 |last1=Pawelski |first1=J. G. |last2=Perrin |first2=E. C. |last3=Foy |first3=J. M. |last4=Allen |first4=C. E. |last5=Crawford |first5=J. E. |last6=Del Monte |first6=M. |last7=Kaufman |first7=M. |last8=Klein |first8=J. D. |last9=Smith |first9=K. |last10=Springer |first10=S. |last11=Tanner |first11=J. L. |last12=Vickers |first12=D. L. |s2cid=219194821 |doi-access= |archive-date=1 May 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110501125053/http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/118/1/349 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Brief of Amici Curiae American Anthropological Association et al., supporting plaintiffs-appellees and urging affirmance&nbsp;– Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of California Civil Case No. 09-CV-2292 VRW (Honorable Vaughn R. Walker) |url=http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2010/10/27/amicus39.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101226182234/http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2010/10/27/amicus39.pdf |archive-date=26 December 2010 |access-date=5 November 2010}}</ref><ref name="aaa" /> Same-sex marriage can provide those in committed same-sex relationships with relevant government services and make financial demands on them comparable to that required of those in opposite-sex marriages, and also gives them legal protections such as inheritance and hospital visitation rights.<ref>Handbook of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Administration and Policy&nbsp;— Page 13, Wallace Swan – 2004</ref> Opposition is based on claims such as that homosexuality is unnatural and abnormal, that the recognition of same-sex unions will promote homosexuality in society, and that children are better off when raised by opposite-sex couples. These claims are refuted by ], which show that homosexuality is a natural and normal variation in human sexuality, that ] is not a choice, and that children of same-sex couples fare just as well as the children of opposite-sex couples.<ref name="science">Multiple sources:
*{{Cite web |last=Coghlan |first=Andy |date=16 June 2008 |title=Gay brains structured like those of the opposite sex |url=https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14146-gay-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190429012045/https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14146-gay-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex/ |archive-date=29 April 2019 |access-date=5 April 2018 |website=]}}
*{{cite book|first1=Mary Ann |last1=Lamanna |first2=Agnes |last2=Riedmann |first3=Susan D. |last3=Stewart |title=Marriages, Families, and Relationships: Making Choices in a Diverse Society |publisher=] |isbn=978-1305176898 |year=2014 |page=82 |access-date=11 February 2016 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=fofaAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA82 |quote=he APA says that sexual orientation is not a choice . (], 2010).|archive-date=30 November 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161130141623/https://books.google.com/books?id=fofaAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA82|url-status=live}}
*{{cite journal |url=http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/118/1/349.full |title=The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children |journal=] |year=2006 |doi=10.1542/peds.2006-1279 |access-date=2 November 2013 |last1=Pawelski |first1=J. G. |last2=Perrin |first2=E. C. |last3=Foy |first3=J. M. |last4=Allen |first4=C. E. |last5=Crawford |first5=J. E. |last6=Del Monte |first6=M. |last7=Kaufman |first7=M. |last8=Klein |first8=J. D. |last9=Smith |first9=K. |last10=Springer |first10=S. |last11=Tanner |first11=J. L. |last12=Vickers |first12=D. L. |volume=118 |issue=1 |pages=349–364 |pmid=16818585 |s2cid=219194821 |doi-access=|archive-date=29 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190429011707/https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/118/1/349.full|url-status=live}}
*{{cite web|author1=] |author2=] |author3=] |author4=] |author5=] |author6=] |author7=] |author8=] |display-authors=etal |title=Brief of as ''Amici Curiae'' in Support of Petitioners |website=] |url=https://www.supremecourt.gov/ObergefellHodges/AmicusBriefs/14-556_American_Psychological_Association.pdf |access-date=5 April 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190412074914/https://www.supremecourt.gov/ObergefellHodges/AmicusBriefs/14-556_American_Psychological_Association.pdf|archive-date=12 April 2019|url-status=dead}}
*{{cite news|first=Lindsey|last=Bever|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/07/07/children-of-same-sex-couples-are-happier-and-healthier-than-peers-research-shows|title=Children of same-sex couples are happier and healthier than peers, research shows|newspaper=]|date=7 July 2014|access-date=12 December 2018|archive-date=4 May 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190504054558/https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/07/07/children-of-same-sex-couples-are-happier-and-healthier-than-peers-research-shows/|url-status=live}}
*{{cite journal |url=https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/118/1/349.full |title=The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children |last1=Pawelski |first1=James G. |last2=Perrin |first2=Ellen C. |last3=Foy |first3=Jane M. |last4=Allen |first4=Carole E. |last5=Crawford |first5=James E. |last6=Del Monte |first6=Mark |last7=Kaufman |first7=Miriam |last8=Klein |first8=Jonathan D. |last9=Smith |first9=Karen |last10=Springer |first10=Sarah |last11=Tanner |first11=J. Lane |last12=Vickers |first12=Dennis L. |quote=In fact, growing up with parents who are lesbian or gay may confer some advantages to children. |date=July 2006 |access-date=16 June 2019 |journal=] |publisher=] |volume=118 |issue=1 |pages=349–64 |pmid=16818585 |doi=10.1542/peds.2006-1279 |s2cid=219194821 |doi-access= |archive-date=1 May 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110501125053/http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/118/1/349 |url-status=live }}</ref>
{{TOC limit|3}}


==History== ==Terminology==
===Alternative terms===
{{Main|History of same-sex unions|History of human sexuality|Timeline of same-sex marriage|Homosexuality in China|Homosexuality in ancient Rome}}
], United States on 11 November 2017]]
Some proponents of the legal recognition of same-sex marriage—such as ] (founded in 1998), ] (founded in 2003), ], and ] - used the terms ''marriage equality'' and ''equal marriage'' to signal that their goal was for same-sex marriage to be recognized on equal ground with opposite-sex marriage.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Marriage Equality |url=http://www.gardenstateequality.org/issues/marriageequality/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141018065055/http://www.gardenstateequality.org/issues/marriageequality/ |archive-date=18 October 2014 |access-date=24 July 2012 |publisher=Garden State Equality}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Marriage 101 |url=http://www.freedomtomarry.org/pages/marriage-101#faq3 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100216021129/http://www.freedomtomarry.org/pages/marriage-101#faq3 |archive-date=16 February 2010 |access-date=28 September 2012 |publisher=]}}</ref><ref name="Pratt">{{Cite news |last=Pratt, Patricia |date=29 May 2012 |title=Albany area real estate and the Marriage Equality Act |work=Albany Examiner |url=http://docs.newsbank.com/openurl?ctx_ver=z39.88-2004&rft_id=info:sid/iw.newsbank.com:AWNB:AENN&rft_val_format=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rft_dat=13F21B414EDA8168&svc_dat=InfoWeb:aggregated5&req_dat=0FB3382EE6AD1E46 |access-date=25 December 2012 |quote=On July 24, 2011 the Marriage Equality Act became a law in New York State forever changing the state's legal view of what a married couple is.}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=13 December 2012 |title=Vote on Illinois marriage equality bill coming in January: sponsors |work=Chicago Phoenix |url=http://chicagophoenix.com/2012/12/13/illinois-marriage-equality-vote-january |url-status=live |access-date=23 December 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121226111510/http://chicagophoenix.com/2012/12/13/illinois-marriage-equality-vote-january/ |archive-date=26 December 2012}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Mulholland |first=Helene |date=27 September 2012 |title=Ed Miliband calls for gay marriage equality |work=The Guardian |location=London, UK |url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/sep/27/ed-miliband-gay-wedding-equality |url-status=live |access-date=23 December 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130928234116/http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/sep/27/ed-miliband-gay-wedding-equality |archive-date=28 September 2013}}</ref><ref name="Ring">{{Cite news |last=Ring, Trudy |date=20 December 2012 |title=Newt Gingrich: Marriage Equality Inevitable, OK |work=The Advocate |location=Los Angeles |url=http://www.advocate.com/politics/marriage-equality/2012/12/20/newt-gingrich-accepts-marriage-equality-inevitable |url-status=live |access-date=25 December 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121223062417/http://www.advocate.com/politics/marriage-equality/2012/12/20/newt-gingrich-accepts-marriage-equality-inevitable |archive-date=23 December 2012 |quote=He noted to HuffPo that he not only has a lesbian half-sister, LGBT rights activist ], but has gay friends who've gotten married in Iowa, where their unions are legal. Public opinion has shifted in favor of marriage equality, he said, and the Republican Party could end up on the wrong side of history if it continues to go against the tide.}}</ref> The ] recommends the use of ''same-sex marriage'' over ''gay marriage''.<ref>{{Cite tweet |number=1095408455479902211 |user=APStylebook |title=The term same-sex marriage is preferred over gay marriage. In places where it's legal, same-sex marriage is no different from other marriages, so the term should be used only when germane and needed to distinguish from marriages between heterosexual couples. #APStyleChat |author=APStylebook |date=12 February 2019 |access-date=13 December 2022 |language=en |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221019190133/https://twitter.com/apstylebook/status/1095408455479902211 |archive-date=19 October 2022 |url-status=live}}</ref> In deciding whether to use the term ''gay marriage'', it may also be noted that not everyone in a same-sex marriage is gay &ndash; for example, some are bisexual &ndash; and therefore using the term ''gay marriage'' is sometimes considered erasure of such people.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://news.gallup.com/poll/329975/one-lgbt-americans-married-sex-spouse.aspx|title=One in 10 LGBT Americans Married to Same-Sex Spouse|date=24 February 2021|website=Gallup }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=https://consciousstyleguide.com/when-bisexual-people-marry/|title=When Bisexual People Marry|first=Karen|last=Yin|date=8 March 2016 |website=Conscious Style Guide}}</ref>


===Use of the term ''marriage''===
Various types of same-sex unions have existed, ranging from informal, unsanctioned relationships to highly ritualized unions.
Anthropologists have struggled to determine a definition of ] that absorbs commonalities of the ] across cultures around the world.<ref name="Fedorak">{{Cite book |last=Fedorak |first=Shirley A. |title=Anthropology matters! |publisher=] |year=2008 |isbn=978-1442601086 |location=, Ont. |pages=Ch. 11; p. 174}}</ref><ref name="Gough">{{Cite journal |last=Gough |first=Kathleen E. |date=Jan–Jun 1959 |title=The Nayars and the Definition of Marriage |journal=The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland |volume=89 |issue=1 |pages=23–34 |doi=10.2307/2844434 |jstor=2844434}}</ref> Many proposed definitions have been criticized for failing to recognize the existence of same-sex marriage in some cultures, including those of more than 30 ], such as the ] and ].<ref name=Gough/><ref name="Africa">{{Cite book |last1=Murray |first1=Stephen O. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZjbESL6YWU0C&q=%22Woman-woman+marriage+in+Africa%22&pg=PA255 |title=Boy-wives and female husbands : studies of African homosexualities |last2=Roscoe, Will |publisher=St. Martin's |year=2001 |isbn=978-0312238292 |edition=1st pbk. |location=New York |access-date=28 October 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210204174244/https://books.google.com/books?id=ZjbESL6YWU0C&q=%22Woman-woman+marriage+in+Africa%22&pg=PA255 |archive-date=4 February 2021 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="Kikuyu">{{Cite journal |last1=Njambi |first1=Wairimu |last2=O'Brien, William |date=Spring 2001 |title=Revisiting "Woman-Woman Marriage": Notes on Gikuyu Women |url=http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/nwsa_journal/v012/12.1njambi.html |url-status=live |journal=] |volume=12 |issue=1 |pages=1–23 |doi=10.1353/nwsa.2000.0015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120113015023/http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=%2Fjournals%2Fnwsa_journal%2Fv012%2F12.1njambi.html |archive-date=13 January 2012 |access-date=28 September 2012 |s2cid=144520611}}</ref>


With several countries revising their marriage laws to recognize same-sex couples in the 21st century, all major English dictionaries have revised their definition of the word marriage to either drop gender specifications or supplement them with secondary definitions to include gender-neutral language or explicit recognition of same-sex unions.<ref>{{Cite news |date=24 May 2004 |title=Dictionaries take lead in redefining modern marriage |work=] |url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/may/24/20040524-103201-1169r |url-status=live |access-date=25 September 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120918034452/http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/may/24/20040524-103201-1169r/ |archive-date=18 September 2012}}</ref><ref name="ABA">{{Cite web |title=Webster Makes It Official: Definition of Marriage Has Changed |url=http://www.abajournal.com/news/webster_makes_it_official_definition_of_marriage_has_changed |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150427004101/http://www.abajournal.com/news/webster_makes_it_official_definition_of_marriage_has_changed |archive-date=27 April 2015 |access-date=28 September 2012 |publisher=]}}</ref> The '']'' has recognized same-sex marriage since 2000.<ref name="slate">{{Cite news |last=Redman |first=Daniel |date=7 April 2009 |title=Noah Webster Gives His Blessing: Dictionaries recognize same-sex marriage—who knew? |work=] |url=http://www.slate.com/id/2215628 |url-status=live |access-date=28 September 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110917032021/http://www.slate.com/id/2215628/ |archive-date=17 September 2011}}</ref>
In the southern ] province of ], through the ] period, females would bind themselves in contracts to younger females in elaborate ceremonies.<ref name="Shen Defu">Defu, Shen (1578-1642) Bizhouzhai Yutan</ref> Males also entered similar arrangements. This type of arrangement was also similar in ancient European history.<ref>{{cite Book
|last=Hinsch
|first=Bret
|authorlink = Bret Hinsch
|title=Passions of the Cut Sleeve: The Male Homosexual Tradition in China
|year=1990
|publisher = ]
|isbn = 0520078691}}</ref> A law in the ] (''C. Th.'' 9.7.3) issued in 342 AD prohibited same-sex marriage in ancient Rome, but the exact intent of the law and its relation to social practice is unclear, as only a few examples of same-sex marriage in that culture exist.<ref>{{cite journal
|last=Kuefler
|first=Mathew
|year=2007
|title=The Marriage Revolution in Late Antiquity: The Theodosian Code and Later Roman Marriage Law
|journal=Journal of Family History
|volume=32
|pages=343–370
|url=http://jfh.sagepub.com/cgi/content/short/32/4/343
|doi=10.1177/0363199007304424
}}</ref> It has been suggested that same-sex marriages between men in ancient Rome were not granted the same social and/or legal standing as heterosexual marriages.<ref>{{cite journal |last= Eskridge|first= William N.|authorlink= |coauthors= |year= 1993|month= Oct|title= A History of Same-Sex Marriage |journal= Virginia Law Review |volume= 79|issue= 7|pages= |id= |url= |accessdate= |quote= }}</ref>


Opponents of same-sex marriage who want marriage to be restricted to pairings of a man and a woman, such as ], the ], and the ], use the term ''traditional marriage'' to mean opposite-sex marriage.<ref name="religion">{{Cite web |date=13 August 2008 |title=The Divine Institution of Marriage |url=https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/the-divine-institution-of-marriage |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190611071837/https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/the-divine-institution-of-marriage |archive-date=11 June 2019 |access-date=28 September 2012 |publisher=]}}</ref>
In 1970, Jack Baker and James Michael McConnell applied for a marriage license in ]. They were denied and sued. The state won and the case, '']'', was appealed to the ], which in 1972 refused to hear it. In December 1984, ] extended benefits created for married employees to unmarried couples regardless of gender. ] recognized domestic partnership in 1985. In October 1989, ] became the first nation to recognize same sex unions in the form of "registered partnerships."


==Current status== ==History==
{{Main|Status of same-sex marriages}} {{Main|History of same-sex unions}}
{{For timeline}}
{{See also|Same-sex marriage in the United States}}
{{Broader|History of homosexuality}}
{{further|]}}
{{Same-sex marriage map Europe|align=left|size=200px}}
{{Samesex marriage in USA map|align=left|size=200px}}


===Ancient===
In 2001, the ] became the first modern nation to grant same-sex marriages.
{{further|Homosexuality in ancient Rome}}
A reference to marriage between same-sex couples appears in the ], which was written in the 3rd century CE. The ] prohibited homosexual relations, and the Hebrews were warned not to "follow the acts of the land of Egypt or the acts of the land of Canaan" (Lev. 18:22, 20:13). The Sifra clarifies what these ambiguous "acts" were, and that they included marriage between same-sex couples: "A man would marry a man and a woman a woman, a man would marry a woman and her daughter, and a woman would be married to two men."<ref>Rabbi Joel Roth. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170824192248/https://www.rabbinicalassembly.org/sites/default/files/assets/public/halakhah/teshuvot/19912000/roth_homosexual.pdf |date=24 August 2017 }} ''rabbinicalassembly.org'' 1992.</ref>


A few scholars believe that in the early ] some male couples were celebrating ] in the presence of friends. Male–male weddings are reported by sources that mock them; the feelings of the participants are not recorded.<ref>Martial 1.24 and 12.42; Juvenal 2.117–42. Williams, ''Roman Homosexuality'', pp. 28, 280; Karen K. Hersh, ''The Roman Wedding: Ritual and Meaning in Antiquity'' (Cambridge University Press, 2010), p. 36; ], ''Power and Eroticism in Imperial Rome'' (Cambridge University Press, 2007), pp. 151ff.</ref> Various ancient sources state that the emperor ] celebrated two public weddings with males, once taking the role of the bride (with a ] ]), and once the groom (with ]); there may have been a third in which he was the bride.<ref>], ], ], and ] are the sources cited by Williams, ''Roman Homosexuality'', p. 279.</ref> In the early 3rd century AD, the emperor ] is reported to have been the bride in a wedding to his male partner. Other mature men at his court had husbands, or said they had husbands in imitation of the emperor.<ref>Williams, ''Roman Homosexuality'', pp. 278–279, citing Dio Cassius and ].</ref> ] did not recognize marriage between males, but one of the grounds for disapproval expressed in Juvenal's satire is that celebrating the rites would lead to expectations for such marriages to be registered officially.<ref name="auto4">Williams, ''Roman Homosexuality'', p. 280.</ref> As the empire was becoming Christianized in the 4th century, legal prohibitions against marriage between males began to appear.<ref name="auto4"/>
Same-sex marriages are also granted and mutually recognized by ] (2003),<ref> and , by the Belgian Senate.</ref> ] (2005), ] (2005), ] (2006), ] (2009), and ] (2009). In ], their recognition has been judicially mandated but not yet legislated.<ref></ref>


===Contemporary===
The ] approved the granting and recognition of same-sex marriages by defining marriage as “the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others” in July 2005. A Conservative Government motion inviting MPs to request repeal of ] failed in December 2006, so same-sex marriages continue to be honored throughout the nation.<ref></ref>
] shortly after the federal legalization of ], 2015]]
]<ref name="auto"/><ref name="auto1"/> are the first same sex couple in modern recorded history<ref name="auto2"/> known to obtain a ],<ref name="National Archives"/> have their marriage solemnized, which occurred on September 3, 1971, in ],<ref name="3Sept1971"/> and have it legally recognized by any form of government.<ref name="ruling" /><ref name="epilogue"/> Historians variously trace the beginning of the modern movement in support of same-sex marriage to anywhere from around the 1980s to the 1990s. During the 1980s in the ], the ] led to increased attention on the legal aspects of same-sex relationships.<ref>{{Cite news |date=March–April 2013 |title=How Same-Sex Marriage Came to Be |url=http://harvardmagazine.com/2013/03/how-same-sex-marriage-came-to-be |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190502173822/https://harvardmagazine.com/2013/03/how-same-sex-marriage-came-to-be |archive-date=2 May 2019 |access-date=28 March 2015 |website=]}}</ref> ] made the first case for same sex marriage in a major American journal in 1989,<ref name=intelligent>{{cite web|url=http://www.moreintelligentlife.com/story/andrew-sullivan-thinking-out-loud|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090425202254/http://www.moreintelligentlife.com/story/andrew-sullivan-thinking-out-loud|archive-date=25 April 2009 |title=Andrew Sullivan: Thinking. Out. Loud. |newspaper=Intelligent Life |date=Spring 2009 |access-date=24 October 2013|first=Johann |last=Hari}}</ref> published in ''The New Republic''.<ref name="groom">{{cite news|last=Sullivan|first=Andrew|title=Here Comes the Groom|url=http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/11/gay_marriage_votes_and_andrew_sullivan_his_landmark_1989_essay_making_a.html|access-date=24 October 2013|newspaper=Slate|date=9 November 2012}}</ref>
] bans recognition of same-sex marriages at the federal level, but the current ] government favors synchronized state and territory ] legislation (as in ] and ]). The ] has ].


In 1989, Denmark became the first country to legally recognize a relationship for same-sex couples, establishing ]s, which gave those in same-sex relationships "most rights of married heterosexuals, but not the right to adopt or obtain joint custody of a child".<ref>{{Cite news |last=Rule |first=Sheila |date=2 October 1989 |title=Rights for Gay Couples in Denmark |work=] |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1989/10/02/world/rights-for-gay-couples-in-denmark.html |url-status=live |access-date=19 August 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304080523/http://www.nytimes.com/1989/10/02/world/rights-for-gay-couples-in-denmark.html |archive-date=4 March 2016}}</ref> In 2001, the ] became the first country to broaden marriage laws to include same-sex couples.<ref name="bloomberg-2014-12-04" /><ref>{{Cite news |date=26 May 2009 |title=Same-sex marriage around the world |work=CBC News |location=Toronto |url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/same-sex-marriage-around-the-world-1.799137 |url-status=live |access-date=6 October 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101125125134/http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/05/26/f-same-sex-timeline.html |archive-date=25 November 2010}}</ref> Since then, same-sex marriage has been established by law in 34 other countries, including most of the ] and ]. Yet its spread has been uneven — ] is the only country in ] to take the step; ] and ] are the only ones in ].<ref>{{Cite web |date=28 April 2021 |title=The Dutch went first in 2001; who has same-sex marriage now? |url=https://apnews.com/article/europe-africa-netherlands-job-cohen-western-europe-e08b053af367028737c9c41c492cc568 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210821101311/https://apnews.com/article/europe-africa-netherlands-job-cohen-western-europe-e08b053af367028737c9c41c492cc568 |archive-date=21 August 2021 |access-date=21 August 2021 |website=]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Sangwongwanich |first=Pathom |date=June 18, 2024 |title=Thai Same-Sex Marriage Bill Clears Final Hurdle With Senate Nod |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-06-18/thai-same-sex-marriage-bill-clears-final-hurdle-with-senate-nod?srnd=all |access-date=2024-06-18 |website=www.bloomberg.com}}</ref>
]'s Parliament rejected a bill that would have prohibited the recognition ] in December 2005. However, New Zealand's Marriage Act 1955 still only recognizes marriage rights for opposite-sex couples. New Zealand's marriage laws consider ] who have undergone ] as having changed sex for legal purposes, following ] and ] decisions in 1995.
<!---Please add references in the main article before or after adding information to this table--->


==Timeline==
{{World homosexuality laws map|size=300px}}
{{main|Timeline of same-sex marriage}}
The summary table below lists in chronological order the sovereign states (the ] and ]) that have legalized same-sex marriage. As of 2025, 37 states have legalized in some capacity.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Theil |first1=Michele |title=This map shows you where same-sex marriage is legal around the world – and there's a long way to go |url=https://www.thepinknews.com/2024/02/16/this-map-shows-you-where-same-sex-marriage-is-legal-around-the-world-and-theres-a-long-way-to-go/ |website=PinkNews |date=16 February 2024 |access-date=16 February 2024}}</ref>


Dates are when marriages between same-sex couples began to be officially certified, or when local laws were passed if marriages were already legal under higher authority.
]'s High Court of Justice ruled to honor same-sex marriages granted in other countries even though Israel itself does not issue such licenses. A bill was raised in the ] (parliament) to rescind the High Court's ruling, but the Knesset has not advanced the bill since December 2006.


{| class="wikitable"
In France, in 2006, a 30-member non] parliamentary commission of the ] National Assembly published a 453-page Report on the Family and the rights of Children, which rejected same-sex marriages.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006_docs/Francesummary.pdf|format=PDF|title=Executive summary of "Report on the Family and the Rights of Children" prepared by the French National Assembly, Paris, January 25, 2006|date=2006-01-25|accessdate=2008-10-24}}</ref>
|-
!2001
|{{flagicon|Netherlands}} ''']''' (1 April)
|-
!2002
|
|-
!2003
|{{flatlist}}
* {{flagicon|Belgium}} ''']''' (1 June)
* ] (10 June)
* ] (8 July)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2004
|{{flatlist}}
* ] (19 March)
* ] (17 May)
* ] (14 July)
* ] (16 September)
* ] (24 September)
* ] (5 November)
* ] (21 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2005
|{{flatlist}}
* ] (23 June)
* {{flagicon|Spain}} ''']''' (3 July)
* {{flagicon|Canada}} ''']''' (20 July)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2006
|{{flagicon|South Africa}} ''']''' (30 November)
|-
!2007
|
|-
!2008
|{{flatlist}}
*] (June 16, repealed November 5)
*] (12 November)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2009
|{{flatlist}}
* {{flagicon|Norway}} ''']''' (1 January)
* ] (27 April)
* {{flagicon|Sweden}} ''']''' (1 May)
* ] (20 May)
* ] (1 September)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2010
|{{flatlist}}
* ] (1 January)
* ] (3 March)
* ] (4 March)
* ] (29 April)
* {{flagicon|Portugal}} ''']''' (5 June)
* {{flagicon|Iceland}} ''']''' (27 June)
* {{flagicon|Argentina}} ''']''' (22 July)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2011
|{{flatlist}}
* ] (24 July)
* ] (1 August)
* ] (7 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2012
|{{flatlist}}
* ] (3 May)
* {{flagicon|Denmark}} ''']''' (15 June)
* ] (5 July)
* ] (11 July)
* ] (15 August)
* ] (10 October)
* ] (26 November)
* ] (1 December)
* ] (6 December)
* ] (9 December)
* ] (15 December)
* ] (29 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2013
|{{flatlist}}
* ] (1 January)
* ] (16 February)
* ] (15 March)
* ] (15 March)
* ] (26 March)
* ] (2 April)
* ] (26 April)
* ] (29 April)
* ] (29 April)
* ] (8 May)
* {{flagicon|Brazil}} ''']''' (16 May)
* {{flagicon|France}} ''']''' (18 May)
* ] (24 June)
* ] (28 June)
* ] (1 July)
* ] (1 August)
* ] (1 August)
* ] (1 August)
* {{flagicon|Uruguay}} ''']''' (5 August)
* {{flagicon|New Zealand}} ''']''' (19 August)
* ] (21 August)
* ] (23 August)
* ] (26 August)
* ] (27 August)
* ] (27 August)
* ] (28 August)
* ] (4 September)
* ] (5 September)
* ] (9 September)
* ] (18 October<!--3rd license since repeal of DOMA, first public marriage-->)
* ] (21 October)
* ] (1 November)
* ] (15 November)
* ] (2 December)
* ] (19 December)
* ] (20 December, repealed 6 January 2014)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2014
|{{flatlist}}
* ] (21 February)
* {{flagicon|England}} {{flagicon|Wales}} ] (13 March)
* ] (13 March)
* ] (19 May)
* ] (20 May)
* ] (1 June)
* ] (3 June)
* ] (3 June)
* ] (9 July)
* ] (16 July)
* ] (10 August)
* ] (17 September)
* ] (6 October)
* ] (6 October)
* ] (6 October)
* ] (6 October)
* ] (6 October)
* ] (6 October)
* ] (7 October)
* ] (9 October)
* ] (9 October)
* ] (9 October)
* ] (10 October)
* ] (12 October)
* ] (15 October)
* ] (17 October)
* ] (17 October)
* ] (17 October)
* ] (17 October)
* ] (17 October)
* ] (17 October)
* ] (21 October)
* ] (5 November)
* ] (6 November)
* ] (7 November)
* ] (12 November)
* ] (12 November)
* ] (14 November)
* ] (14 November)
* ] (19 November)
* ] (19 November)
* ] (20 November)
* ] (13 December)
* {{flagicon|Scotland}} ] (16 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2015
|{{flatlist}}
* {{flagicon|Luxembourg}} ''']''' (1 January)
* ] (5 January)
* ] (6 January)
* ] (24 February)
* ] (14 May)
* ] (15 May)
* ] (9 June)
* ] (10 June)
* ] (12 June)
* {{flagicon|United States}} ''']''' (26 June)
* ] (30 June)
* ] (7 July)
* ] (9 July)
* ] (13 July)
* ] (21 July)
* ] (3 August)
* ] (9 September)
* {{flagicon|Ireland}} ''']''' (16 November)
* ] (18 November)
* ] (23 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2016
|{{flatlist}}
* ] (2 February)
* {{flagicon|Greenland}} ] (1 April)
* {{flagicon|Colombia}} ''']''' (28 April)
* ] (6 May)
* ] (12 May)
* ] (20 May)
* ] (12 June)
* ] (23 June)
* ] (5 July)
* ] (22 July)
* ] (18 September)
* ] (13 October)
* ] (3 November)
* ] (9 December)
* ] (15 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2017
|{{flatlist}}
* ] (1 January)
* ] (4 January)
* ] (4 January)
* ] (4 January)
* ] (4 January)
* ] (4 January)
* ] (4 January)
* ] (4 January)
<!-- *** Please check discussion on talk page before adding Slovenia! *** -->
* {{flagicon|Finland}} ''']''' (1 March)
* ] (20 March)
* ] (22 March)
* ] (29 April)
* ] (2 May)
* ] (5 May, repealed 1 June 2018)
* ] (5 June)
* {{flagicon|Faroe Islands}} ] (1 July)
* ] (4 August)
* {{flagicon|Malta}} ''']''' (1 September)
* {{flagicon|Germany}} ''']''' (1 October)
* ] (25 October)
* ] (3 November)
* {{flagicon|Australia}} ''']''' (9 December)
* ] (20 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2018
|{{flatlist}}
* ] (16 February)
* ] (11 May)
* ] (14 June)
* ] (1 July)
* ] (26 August)
* ] (27 August)
* ] (23 November, repealed 14 March 2022)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2019
|{{flatlist}}
* {{flagicon|Austria}} ''']''' (1 January)
* ] (14 February)
* ] (1 March)
* ] (20 May)
* ] (21 May)
* {{flagicon|Taiwan}} ''']''' (24 May)
* ] (31 May)
* ] (11 June)
* ] (29 June)
* ] (by 5 July)
* {{flagicon|Ecuador}} ''']''' (8 July)
* ] (8 July)
* ] (8 July)
* ] (8 August)
* ] (16 August)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2020
|{{flatlist}}
* ] ]'''] (13 January)
* ] (23 April)
* {{flagicon|Costa Rica}} ''']''' (26 May)
* ] (3 July)
* ] (6 August)
* ] (25 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2021
|{{flatlist}}
* ] (30 June)
* ] (22 October)
* ] (13 November)
* ] (20 December)
* ] (30 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2022
|{{flatlist}}
* ] (4 March)
* {{flagicon|Chile}} ''']''' (10 March)
* ] (11 April)
* ] (18 April)
* ] (25 May)
* ] (13 June)
* {{flagicon|Switzerland}} ''']''' (1 July)
* {{flagicon|Slovenia}} ''']''' (8 or 9 July)
* ] (19 September)
* {{flagicon|Cuba}} ''']''' (27 September)
* ] (27 October)
* ] (2 November)
* ] (19 November)
* ] (21 December)
* ] ]'''] (31 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2023
|{{flatlist}}
* {{flagicon|Andorra}} ''']''' (17 February)
* ] (16 March)
* ] (23 May)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2024
|{{flatlist}}
* {{flagicon|Estonia}} ''']''' (1 January)
* {{flagicon|Greece}} ''']''' (16 February)
* {{flagicon|Aruba}} ] (12 July)
* {{flagicon|Curacao}} ] (12 July)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2025
|{{flatlist}}
* '''{{flagicon|Liechtenstein}} ] '''(1 January)
* ''''' {{Flagicon|Thailand}} ]''' (23 January)''
{{endflatlist}}
|}


==Same-sex marriage around the world==
], ], ], ], ], and ] are the only countries in which the legal status of same-sex marriages are exactly the same as that of opposite-sex marriages, though ] is due to fully harmonize its marriage laws. ] highest court, in November 2008, issued final judgment on matters related to LGBT rights. Based on the court recommendation the government announced its intention to introduce a same-sex marriage bill by 2010.<ref></ref><ref></ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.365gay.com/news/nepal-supreme-court-orders-full-lgbt-rights/|title=Nepal Supreme Court orders full LGBT rights}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?sectionName=&id=7c190914-f498-427c-ad0b-97559a3aae71&&Headline=Nepal+SC+approves+same-sex+marriage|title=Nepal SC approves same-sex marriage}}</ref><ref></ref>
{{Main|Legal status of same-sex marriage|Same-sex union legislation|Recognition of same-sex unions by country }}


Same-sex marriage is legally performed and recognized in 37 countries: ], ], ],{{efn|name=australia|text=Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in continental Australia and in the non-self-governing possessions of ], ] and the ], which follow Australian law.}} ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ],{{efn|name=denmark|text=Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in continental Denmark, the ] and ], which together make up the ].}} ],{{efn|name=ecuador|text=Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized throughout Ecuador, but such couples are not considered married for purposes of adoption and may not adopt children.}} ], ], ],{{efn|name=france|text=Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in metropolitan France and in all ], which follow a single legal code.}} ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ],{{efn|name=mexico|text=Same-sex marriage is available in all jurisdictions, though the process is not everywhere as straightforward as it is for opposite-sex marriage and does not always include adoption rights.}} the ],{{efn|name=netherlands|text=Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in ], the Caribbean municipalities of ], and the constituent countries of ], but not yet in Sint Maarten.}} ],{{efn|name=nz|text=Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in ], but not in its possession of ], nor in the ] and ], which make up the ].}} ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], the ],{{efn|name=uk|text= Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in all parts of the United Kingdom and in ], but not in its Caribbean possessions, namely ], ], the ], the ], ] and the ].}} the ],{{efn|name=usa|text=Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in all ] of the US and in the ], in all overseas territories except ] (recognition only), and in all ] that do not have their own marriage laws, as well as in most nations that do. The largest of the dozen or so known exceptions among the federal reservations are ] and ], and the largest among the shared-sovereignty Oklahoma Tribal Statistical Areas are the ] and ]. These polities ban same-sex marriage and do not recognize marriages from other jurisdictions, though members may still marry under state law and be accorded all the rights of marriage under state and federal law.}} and ].<ref name="HRC">{{cite web |title=Marriage Equality Around the World |url=https://www.hrc.org/resources/marriage-equality-around-the-world |website=] |access-date=3 February 2024}}</ref> Same-sex marriage performed remotely or abroad is recognized with full marital rights by ].<ref>{{Cite web |date=2018 |title=Information for couples marrying outside the Rabbinate |url=http://rackmancenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Marriage-Outside-the-Rabbinate-Halperin-Kaddari-et-al-Rackman-Study-2018.pdf |access-date=November 10, 2023 |website=Rackman Center}}</ref>
The granting and honoring of same-sex marriages is also currently being considered by several countries, such as in ]<ref name="diario.iol.pt"></ref> and ],<ref></ref> where the recognition same-sex marriages is officially on the platforms of the political parties currently leading in the polls.<ref name="diario.iol.pt"/><ref></ref><ref></ref> Additional South American nations have taken up such proposals, with the ] of ] working to submit a gender neutral law draft before the Congress,<ref></ref> while the Parliament of ] debates a same-sex marriage bill.<ref></ref> In Europe, the current governing party of ] has also recently hinted that it intends to reconstruct its marriage laws, thereby making them gender neutral.<ref></ref> In early July, the minister of ] announced that the country would likely legalize same-sex marriages in the near future after the government agreed that same-sex couples deserve to be entitled to all of the same benefits of opposite-sex couples.<ref></ref> The new government of ] has also announced its intention to legalize same-sex marriage.<ref></ref>


[[File:World marriage-equality laws.svg|thumb|center|upright=3|
In the ], although same-sex marriages are not recognized federally, same-sex couples can marry in six states.<ref></ref><ref></ref> Additionally, several states offer civil unions or domestic partnerships, granting all or part of the state-level rights and responsibilities of marriage.<ref></ref><ref></ref> In 1996, the ] passed the ] (DOMA) defining marriage solely as a union between a couple of the opposite sex for all federal purposes and allowing for the nonrecognition amongst the states.<ref></ref> President ]'s ] includes full repeal of the DOMA.<ref></ref>
{{legend|#025|Marriage open to same-sex couples}}
{{legend|#90C|Same-sex marriage recognized with full rights when performed remotely or abroad}}
{{legend|#71C837|Legislation or binding domestic court ruling establishing same-sex marriage, but marriage is not yet provided for}}
{{legend|#06F|Civil unions or domestic partnerships}}
{{legend|#9CF|Unregistered cohabitation or legal guardianship}}
{{legend striped|#9CF|#EEE|Nonbinding certification|up=yes}}
{{legend|#CAF|Limited recognition of marriage performed in certain other jurisdictions (residency rights for spouses)}}
{{legend|#EEE|No legal recognition of same-sex unions}}
]]


Same-sex marriage will begin to be performed by ] in January 2025, and is under ] or the courts in ],<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.elsalvador.com/noticias/nacional/sala-de-lo-constitucional-resolveria-demanda-sobre-matrimonio-igualitario-en-los-primeros-tres-meses-de-2020/674550/2020/|title=Sala de lo Constitucional resolvería demanda sobre matrimonio igualitario en los primeros tres messes de 2020|work=elsalvador.com|date=6 January 2020|language=es}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url= https://observador.cr/bukele-busca-que-se-apruebe-el-aborto-terapeutico-y-la-union-homosexual/|title= Bukele busca que se apruebe el aborto terapéutico y la unión homosexual|work=El Observador|date=18 August 2021|language=es}}</ref> ],<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://tg.la7.it/politica/diritti-matrimonio-egualitario-opinioni-a-confronto-scalfarotto-vs-bonaldi-vs-centinaio-09-03-2023-180977|title=Diritti: matrimonio "egualitario". Opinioni a confronto: Scalfarotto vs Bonaldi vs Centinaio|date=9 March 2023|access-date=10 March 2023|archive-date=10 March 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230310113805/https://tg.la7.it/politica/diritti-matrimonio-egualitario-opinioni-a-confronto-scalfarotto-vs-bonaldi-vs-centinaio-09-03-2023-180977|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.corriere.it/politica/23_marzo_10/da-zaia-centinaio-cosi-lega-cambia-diritti-lgbt-perche-pesa-l-effetto-francesca-a2e451f8-bf1b-11ed-a204-070182f2d425.shtml|title=Da Zaia a Centinaio: la Lega ora cambia sui diritti lgbt (e c'entra "l'effetto Francesca")|date=10 March 2023|access-date=10 March 2023|archive-date=10 March 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230310104916/https://www.corriere.it/politica/23_marzo_10/da-zaia-centinaio-cosi-lega-cambia-diritti-lgbt-perche-pesa-l-effetto-francesca-a2e451f8-bf1b-11ed-a204-070182f2d425.shtml|url-status=live}}</ref> ],<ref>{{cite web |title=Japan opposition party submits bill for same-sex marriage |url=https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2023/03/61f05630333c-japan-opposition-party-submits-bill-for-same-sex-marriage.html|publisher=]|date=6 March 2023|accessdate=31 May 2023}}</ref> ],{{efn|name=nepal|text=Nepal is waiting for a final decision by its supreme court, but meanwhile all local governments are ordered to temporarily register same-sex marriages in a separate record. In April 2024 the National ID and Civil Registration Department issued a circular to all local governments that they register such marriages. However, simply being registered does not grant same-sex couples the legal rights of marriage, and registered same-sex couples cannot inherit property, get tax subsidies, make spousal medical decisions, adopt children etc.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.dw.com/en/nepal-same-sex-couples-face-hurdles-on-road-to-recognition/a-69620274|title=Nepal: Same-sex couples face hurdles on road to recognition|work=DW|date=2024-07-10|first=Swechhya|last=Raut}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://kathmandupost.com/national/2023/12/03/how-court-laid-the-ground-for-same-sex-marriage-in-nepal|title=How court laid the ground for same-sex marriage in Nepal|first=Binod|last=Ghimire|date=2023-12-03|work=The Kathmandu Post}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.apcom.org/long-road-lasting-marriage-equality-nepal/|title=The Long Road to Lasting Marriage Equality in Nepal|work=APCOM|first=Manisha|last=Dhakal}}</ref>}} and ].<ref>{{Cite web |date=24 February 2022 |title=Diputada plantea iniciativa para el matrimonio civil igualitario en la Asamblea Nacional |url=https://elacarigueno.com/ini/diputada-plantea-iniciativa-para-el-matrimonio-civil-igualitario-en-la-asamblea-nacional/ |website=El Acarigueño |language=es |access-date=17 April 2022 |archive-date=20 May 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220520104213/https://elacarigueno.com/ini/diputada-plantea-iniciativa-para-el-matrimonio-civil-igualitario-en-la-asamblea-nacional/ |url-status=dead }}</ref>
===Civil unions and partnerships===
{{Main|Civil union}}


]s are being considered in a number of countries, including ],<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/news/kosovo-promises-to-introduce-same-sex-unions-in-may/|title=Kosovo promises to introduce same-sex unions in May|first1=Alice|last1=Taylor|first2=Nick|last2=Alipour|date=26 April 2024|website=www.euractiv.com}}</ref> ],<ref>{{Cite news |date=23 October 2021 |title=Presentan proyecto de ley sobre el matrimonio igualitario entre personas del mismo sexo |newspaper=El Comercio |url=https://elcomercio.pe/politica/congreso/congreso-de-la-republica-presentan-proyecto-de-ley-sobre-el-matrimonio-igualitario-entre-personas-del-mismo-sexo-juntos-por-el-peru-somos-peru-partido-morado-nndc-noticia/?ref=ecr |access-date=2022-06-28 |publisher=elcomercio.pe}}</ref> ],<ref>{{Cite web|title=Padilla wants same-sex unions institutionalized |url=https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/topstories/nation/841251/padilla-wants-same-sex-unions-institutionalized/story/ |first=Hana|last=Bordey|website=GMA News Online|date=11 August 2022}}</ref> and ].<ref></ref>
The first same-sex union to be sanctioned by a state in modern history was in ] in 1989.


On 12 March 2015, the ] passed a non-binding resolution encouraging EU institutions and member states to " on the recognition of same-sex marriage or same-sex civil union as a political, social and human and civil rights issue".<ref>{{Cite web |last=Duffy |first=Nick |date=13 March 2015 |title=UKIP and Tories abstain on EU motion to recognise same-sex marriage |url=http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/03/13/ukip-and-tories-abstain-on-eu-motion-to-recognise-same-sex-marriage/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150809064225/http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/03/13/ukip-and-tories-abstain-on-eu-motion-to-recognise-same-sex-marriage/ |archive-date=9 August 2015 |access-date=26 July 2015 |website=PinkNews}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Texts adopted – Thursday, 12 March 2015 – Annual report on human rights and democracy in the world 2013 and the EU policy on the matter |url=http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P8-TA-2015-0076+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN&language=EN |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150807122729/http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2F%2FEP%2F%2FTEXT+TA+P8-TA-2015-0076+0+DOC+XML+V0%2F%2FEN&language=EN |archive-date=7 August 2015 |access-date=26 July 2015 |publisher=European Parliament}}</ref>
]s, ]s, ]s, and unregistered partnership/unregistered co-habitation or ]s offer varying amounts of the benefits of marriage and are available in: ], ], ], ], the ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], the ], and ]. They are also available in '''some parts''' of ] (Villa Carlos Paz, Río Cuarto, Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Río Negro), ] (Coahuila and the Federal District), and the ] (including; ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ] and ], and the federal ]).
], reject the notion of ].<ref name=Towleroad>, ], Towelroad.com, November 13, 2008. Retrieved November 14, 2008.</ref> U.S. Same-sex marriage movement founder ] does not feel civil unions are a replacement for full ].<ref>], David Shankbone, '']'', September 30, 2007.</ref>]] A multitude of countries have adopted ], ] and ] for ] couples, while few have granted couples the right to being called 'married'. Such statuses are seen as conflicting views, while some people it enshrines a ] status others have viewed it as effective alternative of marriage


In response to the international spread of same-sex marriage, a number of countries have enacted preventative ], with the most recent being ] in 2023, and ] in 2024. In other countries, such restrictions and limitations are effected through legislation. Even before same-sex marriage was first legislated, some countries had constitutions that specified that marriage was between a man and a woman.
In the ], ] were introduced in 2005. The law gives civil partners identical legal status to a marriage, and partners gain all the same benefits and associated legal rights; ranging from tax exemptions and joint property rights, to ] status and shared parenting responsibilities. Partnership ceremonies are performed by a marriage registrar in exactly the same manner as a ] ]. In the first year, 16,100 ceremonies took place.<ref></ref> ] are identical to British civil partnerships in their association with equivalent spousal rights and responsibilities to full-fledged opposite-sex marriage.


[[File:Constitutional bans on same-sex unions by country.svg|thumb|center|upright=3|
In ], Commonwealth law prohibits the recognition of same-sex marriage. However, all states and territories provide a range of rights to same-sex cohabiting couples, equal to those afforded to opposite-sex ''de facto'' couples. These rights are gained without registration. Furthermore, formal domestic partnership registries exist in ], ], and the ]. Since November 2008, same-sex couples are recognized as ''de facto'' partners in a wide range of Commonwealth legislation, including superannuation, social security, health care and taxation.<ref></ref> In 2007, Grace Abrams and Fiona Power became Australia's first legally recognized same-sex married couple after Grace Abrams had gender-modification surgery and was later officially granted a passport with female status.<ref></ref>
{{legend|#D40000|Same-sex marriage ] by secular constitution}}
{{legend|#800000|Same-sex marriage banned by constitutionally mandated religious law}}
{{legend|#CCCCCC|No constitutional ban}}
]]


===International court rulings===
] and ] did have ]s, but got rid of them and then turned them into full civil marriage. In ], ], and ], a ] is "nearly" equal to marriage, including legal joint adoption rights in ] and ]. ] and ] have biological adoption only (no joint adoption). These partnership laws are short laws that state that wherever the word "marriage" appears in the country's law, it will now also be construed to mean "registered partnership", and wherever the word "spouse" appears, it will now also be construed to mean "registered partner" — thereby transferring the body of marriage laws onto same-sex couples in registered partnerships.


==== European Court of Human Rights ====
In some countries with legal recognition the actual benefits are minimal. Many people consider civil unions, even those which grant equal rights, inadequate, as they create a separate status, and think they should be replaced by gender-neutral marriage.<ref>{{cite web
In 2010, the ] (ECHR) ruled in '']'', a case involving an Austrian same-sex couple who were denied the right to marry.<ref name="CASE OF SCHALK AND KOPF v. AUSTRIA">{{Cite web |title=HUDOC – European Court of Human Rights |url=http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-99605 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150911221342/http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-99605 |archive-date=11 September 2015 |access-date=26 July 2015}}</ref> The court found, by a vote of 4 to 3, that their human rights had not been violated.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Buyse |first=Antoine |date=24 June 2010 |title=Strasbourg court rules that states are not obliged to allow gay marriage |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/law/2010/jun/24/european-court-of-human-rights-civil-partnerships |url-status=live |access-date=8 November 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131213205714/http://www.theguardian.com/law/2010/jun/24/european-court-of-human-rights-civil-partnerships |archive-date=13 December 2013}}</ref> The court further stated that same-sex unions are not protected under art. 12 of ECHR ("Right to marry"), which exclusively protects the right to marry of opposite-sex couples (without regard if the sex of the partners is the result of birth or of sex change), but they are protected under art. 8 of ECHR ("Right to respect for private and family life") and art. 14 ("Prohibition of discrimination").<ref>{{Cite book |last=Avram |first=Marieta |title=Drept civil Familia |date=2016 |publisher=Editura Hamangiu |isbn=978-606-27-0609-8 |location=Bucharest |language=Romanian |trans-title=Civil law Family}}</ref>
|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-bohrer/nj-civil-unions-nothing-_b_36351.html
|title=NJ Civil Unions: Nothing to Celebrate
|publisher=The Huffington Post
|author=John R. Bohrer
|date=2006-12-14
|accessdate=
}}</ref>


] 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",<ref>{{Cite web |title=European Convention on Human Rights |url=http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140703060501/http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf |archive-date=3 July 2014 |access-date=25 July 2015 |website=ECHR.coe.int |publisher=European Court of Human Rights}}</ref> not limiting marriage to those in a heterosexual relationship. However, the ECHR stated in ''Schalk and Kopf v Austria'' that this provision was intended to limit marriage to heterosexual relationships, as it used the term "men and women" instead of "everyone".<ref name="CASE OF SCHALK AND KOPF v. AUSTRIA" /> Nevertheless, the court accepted and is considering cases concerning same-sex marriage recognition, e.g. ''Andersen v Poland''.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-218104 |website=ECHR |access-date=21 July 2022 |language=English|title=HUDOC - European Court of Human Rights }}</ref> In 2021, the court ruled in '']''—followed by later judgements concerning other member states—that countries must provide some sort of legal recognition to same-sex couples, although not necessarily marriage.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Palazzo |first1=Nausica |title=Fedotova and Others v. Russia : Dawn of a new era for European LGBTQ families? |journal=Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law |date=April 2023 |volume=30 |issue=2 |pages=216–228 |doi=10.1177/1023263X231195455|s2cid=261655476 }}</ref>
===International organizations===
The terms of employment of the staff of ] (not businesses) are not, in most cases, governed by the laws of the country in which their offices are located. Agreements with the host country safeguard these organizations' impartiality with regard to the host and member countries. ] and ] practices, ] and environment, ] time, ] plans, ] and ], ], expatriation benefits and general conditions of employment are managed according to rules and regulations proper to each organization. The independence of these organizations gives them the freedom to implement human resource policies which are even contrary to the laws of their host and member countries. A person who is otherwise eligible for employment in ] may not become an employee of the ] civilian secretariat in ] unless he or she is a citizen of a NATO member state.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.nato.int/structur/recruit/info.htm
|archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20070323212828/http://www.nato.int/structur/recruit/info.htm
|archivedate=2007-03-23
|title=NATO Recruitment service
|publisher=NATO
|date=2006-12-07
|accessdate=2007-03-08
}}</ref> The ] has recently banned the recruitment of cigarette smokers.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.who.int/employment/recruitment/en/
|title=What are we looking for?
|publisher=World Health Organization
|accessdate=2007-03-08
}}</ref> Agencies of the ] coordinate some human resource policies amongst themselves.


==== European Union ====
Despite their relative independence, few organizations currently recognize same-sex partnerships without condition. The ] (OECD) and the agencies of the ] voluntarily ] between opposite-sex marriages and same-sex marriages, as well as discriminating between employees on the basis of nationality. These organizations recognize same-sex marriages only if the country of citizenship of the employees in question recognizes the marriage. In some cases, these organizations do offer a limited selection of the benefits normally provided to opposite-sex married couples to de facto partners or ]s of their staff, but even individuals who have entered into an opposite-sex ] in their home country are not guaranteed full recognition of this union in all organizations. However, the ] does recognize domestic partners.<ref>{{cite web
{{further|Coman and Others v General Inspectorate for Immigration and Ministry of the Interior}}
|url=http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTHRJOBS/0,,contentMDK:20522360~menuPK:1353209~pagePK:64262408~piPK:64262191~theSitePK:1058433,00.html
On 5 June 2018, the ] ruled, in a case from ], that, under the specific conditions of the couple in question, married same-sex couples have the same residency rights as other married couples in an EU country, even if that country does not permit or recognize same-sex marriage.<ref>{{Cite web |title=EU court backs residency rights for gay couple in Romania |url=https://apnews.com/561b1bb4ecff48b598eb1c2c20db2735 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180612142617/https://apnews.com/561b1bb4ecff48b598eb1c2c20db2735 |archive-date=12 June 2018 |access-date=6 June 2018 |website=]|date=5 June 2018 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=5 June 2018 |title=Same-sex spouses have EU residence rights, top court rules – BBC |work=BBC News |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44366898 |url-status=live |access-date=6 June 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190508223531/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44366898 |archive-date=8 May 2019}}</ref> However, the ruling was not implemented in Romania and on 14 September 2021 the ] passed a resolution calling on the ] to ensure that the ruling is respected across the EU.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Texts adopted – LGBTIQ rights in the EU – Tuesday, 14 September 2021 |url=https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2021-0366_EN.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210916211040/https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2021-0366_EN.html |archive-date=16 September 2021 |access-date=16 September 2021 |website=European Parliament |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=14 September 2021 |title=MEPs condemn failure to respect rights of same-sex partners in EU |language=en |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/14/meps-condemn-failure-respect-rights-same-sex-partners-eu |url-status=live |access-date=16 September 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210914132153/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/14/meps-condemn-failure-respect-rights-same-sex-partners-eu |archive-date=14 September 2021}}</ref>
|title=Jobs - Compensation & Benefits
|publisher=The World Bank Group
|accessdate=2007-03-08
}}</ref>


==== Inter-American Court of Human Rights ====
===Transgender and intersex persons===
]
{{Refimprovesect|date=December 2008}}
On 8 January 2018, the ] (IACHR) issued an advisory opinion that states party to the American Convention on Human Rights should grant same-sex couples accession to all existing domestic legal systems of family registration, including marriage, along with all rights that derive from marriage. The Court recommended that governments issue temporary decrees recognizing same-sex marriage until new legislation is brought in. They also said that it was inadmissible and discriminatory for a separate legal provision to be established (such as ]s) instead of same-sex marriage.<ref>{{Cite web |date=25 January 2018 |title=Major Advance for Marriage Equality and Gender Identity Rights in Latin America |work=San Francisco Bay Times |url=http://sfbaytimes.com/major-advance-marriage-equality-gender-identity-rights-latin-america/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180129141726/http://sfbaytimes.com/major-advance-marriage-equality-gender-identity-rights-latin-america/ |archive-date=29 January 2018 |access-date=13 April 2018 |publisher=Sfbaytimes.com}}</ref>
{{Main|Legal aspects of transsexualism}}


==Other arrangements==
When sex is defined legally, it may be defined by any one of several criteria: the ], the type of ]s, or the type of external sexual features. Consequently, both ]s and ]ed individuals may be legally categorized into confusing gray areas, and could be prohibited from marrying partners of the "opposite" sex or permitted to marry partners of the "same" sex due to arbitrary legal distinctions. This could result in long-term marriages, as well as recent same-sex marriages, being overturned.
===Civil unions===
{{Main|Civil union}}
] against ], reject the notion of ], describing them as inferior to the legal recognition of same-sex marriage.<ref name="Towleroad">{{Cite web |last=Towle |first=Andy |date=13 November 2008 |title=NYC Protest and Civil Rights March Opposing Proposition 8 |url=http://www.towleroad.com/2008/11/we-did-it.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090213224331/http://www.towleroad.com/2008/11/we-did-it.html |archive-date=13 February 2009 |access-date=28 September 2012 |publisher=]}}</ref>]]


Civil union, ], ], ], unregistered partnership, and unregistered cohabitation statuses offer varying legal benefits of marriage. As of {{date}}, countries that have an alternative form of legal recognition other than marriage on a national level are: ], ], ], the ], ], ], ], ], ], ] and ].<ref name="countries and states legal">{{Cite web |last=Pearson |first=Mary |title=Where is Gay Marriage Legal? |url=http://christiangays.com/marriage/legal.shtml |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120301004148/http://christiangays.com/marriage/legal.shtml |archive-date=1 March 2012 |access-date=20 February 2012 |publisher=christiangays.com}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Williams |first=Steve |title=Which Countries Have Legalized Gay Marriage? |url=http://www.care2.com/causes/which-countries-have-legalized-gay-marriage.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190429011118/https://www.care2.com/causes/which-countries-have-legalized-gay-marriage.html |archive-date=29 April 2019 |access-date=20 February 2012 |publisher=Care2.com (news.bbc.co.uk as source)}}</ref> Same-sex marriage performed remotely or abroad is recognized with full marital rights by ]. ] offers more limited rights. Additionally, various cities and counties in ] and ] offer same-sex couples varying levels of benefits, which include hospital visitation rights and others.
The problems of defining gender by the existence/non-existence of gonads or certain sexual features is complicated by the existence of ] to alter these features. These complications are probably more likely than one would think at first glance; according to the highest estimates (Fausto-Sterling et al., 2000) perhaps 1 percent of live ]s exhibit some degree of sexual ambiguity, and between 0.1% and 0.2% of live births are ambiguous enough to become the subject of specialist medical attention, including sometimes involuntary ] to address their sexual ambiguity.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.isna.org/faq/frequency
|title=How common is intersex?
|publisher=Intersex Society of North America
|accessdate=2007-03-08
}}</ref>


Additionally, eighteen countries that have legally recognized same-sex marriage also have an alternative form of recognition for same-sex couples, usually available to heterosexual couples as well: ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], the ], ], ], ], the ] and ].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Loi du 9 juillet 2004 relative aux effets légaux de certains partenariats. – Legilux |url=http://eli.legilux.public.lu/eli/etat/leg/loi/2004/07/09/n3 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160911061405/http://eli.legilux.public.lu/eli/etat/leg/loi/2004/07/09/n3 |archive-date=11 September 2016 |access-date=7 July 2017 |website=Eli.legilux.public.lu}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=12 March 2007 |title=Loi n° 99-944 du 15 novembre 1999 relative au pacte civil de solidarité |url=http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do;jsessionid=0F15B99854A4FE47659F950BE42DF000.tpdjo05v_3?cidTexte=LEGITEXT000005628705&dateTexte=vig |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190816215959/https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do;jsessionid=0F15B99854A4FE47659F950BE42DF000.tpdjo05v_3?cidTexte=LEGITEXT000005628705&dateTexte=vig |archive-date=16 August 2019 |access-date=7 July 2017 |website=Legifrance.gouv.fr |language=fr}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=WETTEN, DECRETEN, ORDONNANTIES EN VERORDENINGEN LOIS, DECRETS, ORDONNANCES ET REGLEMENTS |url=http://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/mopdf/2000/03/02_1.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190429011144/http://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/mopdf/2000/03/02_1.pdf |archive-date=29 April 2019 |access-date=7 July 2017 |website=Ejustice.jkust.fgov.be}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Civil Partnership Act 2004 |url=http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/33/contents |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190429011336/http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/33/contents |archive-date=29 April 2019 |access-date=5 July 2017 |website=Legislation.gov.uk}}</ref>
In any legal jurisdiction where marriages are defined without distinction of a requirement of a male and female, these complications do not occur. In addition, some legal jurisdictions may recognize a legal and official change of gender, which would allow a transsexual to be legally married in accordance with his or her adopted gender identity.


They are also available in parts of the United States (],{{efn|Legally available in the Arizona municipalities of Bisbee, Clarkdale, Cottonwood, Jerome, Sedona and Tucson.}} ], ], ], ], ], ] and ]) and Canada.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Same-Sex Marriage, Civil Unions and Domestic Partnerships |url=http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/human-services/same-sex-marriage-overview.aspx |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130610003023/http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/human-services/same-sex-marriage-overview.aspx |archive-date=10 June 2013 |access-date=20 February 2012 |publisher=National Conference of State Legislatures}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Ramstack, Tom |date=11 January 2010 |title=Congress Considers Outcome of D.C. Gay Marriage Legislation |work=AHN |url=http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7017501996?Congress%20Considers%20Outcome%20of%20D.C.%20Gay%20Marriage%20Legislation |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100620042439/http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7017501996?Congress%20Considers%20Outcome%20of%20D.C.%20Gay%20Marriage%20Legislation |archive-date=20 June 2010}}</ref>
In the ], the ] allows a person who has lived in their chosen gender for at least two years to receive a gender recognition certificate officially recognizing their new gender. Because in the UK marriages are for mixed-sex couples and civil partnerships are for same-sex couples, a person must dissolve his/her marriage or civil partnership before obtaining a gender recognition certificate. Such persons are then free to enter or re-enter civil partnerships or marriages in accordance with their newly recognized gender identity.


===Non-sexual same-sex marriage===
In the ], transsexual and intersexual marriages typically run into the complications detailed above. As definitions and enforcement of marriage are defined by the states, these complications vary from state to state.
====Kenya====
{{main|LGBT rights in Kenya}}
Female same-sex marriage is practiced among the ], ], ], ], and to a lesser extent neighboring peoples. About 5–10% of women are in such marriages. However, this is not seen as homosexual, but is instead a way for families without sons to keep their inheritance within the family.<ref>''Gender and Language in Sub-Saharan Africa,'' 2013:35</ref>


====Nigeria====
{{wikinews|Interview with gay marriage movement founder Evan Wolfson}}
{{main|Recognition of same-sex unions in Nigeria}}
Among the ] and probably other peoples in the south of the country, there are circumstances where a marriage between women is considered appropriate, such as when a woman has no child and her husband dies, and she takes a wife to perpetuate her inheritance and family lineage.<ref name="NigeriaTribune">{{Cite web |last=Igwe |first=Leo |date=19 June 2009 |title=Tradition of same gender marriage in Igboland |url=http://www.tribune.com.ng/19062009/opinion.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100111010506/http://www.tribune.com.ng/19062009/opinion.html |archive-date=11 January 2010 |website=Nigerian Tribune}}</ref>


== Studies ==
==Debates over terminology==
The ] stated on 26 February 2004:{{blockquote|text=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.<ref name="aaa">{{Cite web |last=American Anthropological Association |author-link=American Anthropological Association |year=2004 |title=Statement on Marriage and the Family |url=http://www.aaanet.org/issues/policy-advocacy/Statement-on-Marriage-and-the-family.cfm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150912104755/http://www.aaanet.org/issues/policy-advocacy/Statement-on-Marriage-and-the-Family.cfm |archive-date=12 September 2015 |access-date=18 September 2015}}</ref>}}


Research findings from 1998 to 2015 from the ], ], ], the ], the ], ], the ], the ], ], ], the Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health, and independent researchers also support the findings of this study.<ref>{{Cite news |date=26 June 2015 |title=Same-sex marriage and children's well-being: Research roundup |work=Journalist's Resource |url=http://journalistsresource.org/studies/society/gender-society/same-sex-marriage-children-well-being-research-roundup |url-status=live |access-date=29 December 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160102172415/http://journalistsresource.org/studies/society/gender-society/same-sex-marriage-children-well-being-research-roundup |archive-date=2 January 2016}}</ref>{{vague|date=February 2021}}
Some proponents of same-sex marriages use the term "marriage equality" to stress that they seek equality as opposed to special rights.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.samesexmarriage.ca/
|title=Equal Marriage for Same-Sex Couples
|publisher=Kevin Bourassa and Joe Varnell
}}</ref> Some opponents argue that equating same-sex and opposite-sex marriages changes the meaning of marriage and its traditions.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://atheism.about.com/od/gaymarriage/a/MarriageSacred.htm
|title=Arguments Against Gay Marriage: Marriage is a Sacred Religious Sacrament
|publisher=About.com
|author=]
|accessdate=2007-03-08
}}</ref>
] and others have suggested reserving the word "marriage" for religious contexts as part of ], and in civil and legal contexts using a uniform concept of ]s, in part to strengthen the separation between church and state.<ref>{{cite news
|url=http://www.rossde.com/editorials/Dershowitz_marriage.html
|title=Government Should Quit the Marriage Business
|publisher=Los Angeles Times
|author=Dershowitz, Alan M.
|date=2003-12-03
|accessdate=2007-03-08
}}</ref> In the United States, one libertarian economist claims that the conflation of marriage with contractual agreements is itself a threat to marriage.<ref>{{cite news
|url=http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/morse200405200926.asp
|title=''Not'' a Social Contract
|publisher=National Review
|author=Morse, Jennifer Roback
|date=2004-05-20
|accessdate=2007-03-08
}}</ref>


The overall socio-economic and health effects of legal access to same-sex marriage around the world have been summarized by Badgett and co-authors.<ref>{{Cite journal |doi = 10.1002/pam.22587|title = A review of the effects of legal access to same-sex marriage |journal = Journal of Policy Analysis and Management|year = 2024|last1=Badgett|first1=M.V. Lee|last2=Carpenter|first2=Christopher S.|last3=Lee|first3=Maxine J.|last4=Sansone|first4 = Dario|doi-access=free|hdl=10871/135707|hdl-access=free}}</ref> The review found that sexual minority individuals took-up legal marriage when it became available to them (but at lower rates than different-sex couples). There is instead no evidence that same-sex marriage legalization affected different-sex marriages. On the health side, same-sex marriage legalization increased health insurance coverage for individuals in same-sex couples (in the US), and it led to improvements in sexual health among men who have sex with men, while there is mixed evidence on mental health effects among sexual minorities. In addition, the study found mixed evidence on a range of downstream social outcomes such as attitudes toward LGBTQ+ people and employment choices of sexual minorities.
===Use of scare quotes in print and online media===
Some publications that oppose same-sex marriages adopt an editorial style policy of placing the word ''marriage'' in ] ("marriage") when it is used in reference to same-sex couples. In the United States, the mainstream press has generally abandoned this practice.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2008/02/25/washington-times-scare-quotes-are-history/|title=Washington Times Scare Quotes Are History|publisher=Washington City Paper|author=Erik Wemple|date=2008-02-25|accessdate=2008-07-28}}</ref> Some online publications, such as ] and ], still follow the practice. ] argues for use of scare quotes on the grounds that marriage is a legal status denied same-sex couples by most state governments.<ref>{{cite news
|url=http://www.aim.org/media-monitor/honest-versus-slanted-journalism/
|title=Honest Versus Slanted Journalism
|publisher=Accuracy In Media
|author=Kincaid, Cliff
|date=2004-02-26
|accessdate=2007-03-08
}}</ref> Same-sex marriage supporters argue that the use of ] is an editorialization that implies illegitimacy.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://atheism.about.com/b/2004/05/21/washington-times-dismisses-gay-marriages.htm
|title=Washington Times Dismisses Gay “Marriages”
|publisher=About.com
|author=Austin Cline
|accessdate=2007-03-08
}}</ref>


===Health===
] recommends the usages ''marriage for gays and lesbians'' or in space-limited headlines ''gay marriage'' with no hyphen and no scare quotes. AP warns that the construct ''gay marriage'' can imply that marriage licenses offered to gay and lesbian couples are somehow legally different, as such it should be avoided as much as possible in favor of ''marriage for gays and lesbians''.


{{as of|2006}}, 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 parents and carers 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.<ref name="aap2006" /><ref name="autogenerated4">Herek, Gregory M. "Legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the United States: A social science perspective." ''American Psychologist,'' Vol 61(6), September 2006, pp. 607–21.</ref>{{update inline|date=December 2023}} Studies in the United States have correlated legalization of same-sex marriage to lower rates of HIV infection,<ref>{{Cite web |author=Elaine Justice |title=Study Links Gay Marriage Bans to Rise in HIV infections |url=http://www.emory.edu/home/news/releases/2009/06/study-links-gay-marriage-bans-to-rise-in-hiv-rate.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100409072056/http://www.emory.edu/home/news/releases/2009/06/study-links-gay-marriage-bans-to-rise-in-hiv-rate.html |archive-date=9 April 2010 |access-date=5 November 2010 |publisher=Emory University}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Peng |first=Handie |title=The Effect of Same-Sex Marriage Laws on Public Health and Welfare |journal=Userwww.service.emory.edu |url=https://emory.academia.edu/HandiePeng/Papers/430809/The_Effects_of_Same-Sex_Marriage_Laws_on_Public_Health_and_Welfare |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120220025915/http://emory.academia.edu/HandiePeng/Papers/430809/The_Effects_of_Same-Sex_Marriage_Laws_on_Public_Health_and_Welfare |archive-date=20 February 2012 |access-date=11 February 2012}}</ref> psychiatric disorders,<ref>{{Cite web |last=Hasin |first=Deborah |title=Lesbian, gay, bisexual individuals risk psychiatric disorders from discriminatory policies |url=http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-03/cums-lgb030210.php |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130227012518/http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-03/cums-lgb030210.php |archive-date=27 February 2013 |access-date=20 September 2012 |publisher=]}}</ref><ref name="psychtoday">{{Cite news |last=Mustanski |first=Brian |date=22 March 2010 |title=New study suggests bans on gay marriage hurt mental health of LGB people |work=] |url=http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-sexual-continuum/201003/new-study-suggests-bans-gay-marriage-hurt-mental-health-lgb-people |access-date=8 November 2010}}</ref> and ].<ref name="JAMA">{{Cite journal |last1=Raifman |first1=Julia |last2=Moscoe |first2=Ellen |last3=Austin |first3=S. Bryn |last4=McConnell |first4=Margaret |year=2017 |title=Difference-in-Differences Analysis of the Association Between State Same-Sex Marriage Policies and Adolescent Suicide Attempts|journal=JAMA Pediatrics |volume=171 |issue=4 |pages=350–356 |doi=10.1001/jamapediatrics.2016.4529 |pmc=5848493 |pmid=28241285}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=20 February 2017 |title=Same-Sex Marriage Legalization Linked to Reduction in Suicide Attempts Among High School Students |url=https://www.jhsph.edu/news/news-releases/2017/same-sex-marriage-legalization-linked-to-reduction-in-suicide-attempts-among-high-school-students.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190429010934/https://www.jhsph.edu/news/news-releases/2017/same-sex-marriage-legalization-linked-to-reduction-in-suicide-attempts-among-high-school-students.html |archive-date=29 April 2019 |access-date=8 June 2018 |website=]}}</ref>
==Controversy==
While few societies have recognized same-sex unions as marriages, the ] reveals a large range of attitudes towards same-sex unions ranging from praise, to sympathetic toleration, to indifference, to prohibition. Organizations opposed to same-sex marriages have argued that same-sex marriages are not marriages,<ref name="savemarriageny1">http://www.savemarriageny.org/The%20Case%20Against%20Same-Sex%20Marriage%20and%20Civil%20Unions.pdf</ref> that legalization of same-sex marriages will open the door for the legalization of polygamy,<ref>http://www.nationformarriage.org/atf/cf/%7B39D8B5C1-F9FE-48C0-ABE6-1029BA77854C%7D/CatholicEnglish.pdf</ref> that recognition of same-sex marriages would erode religious freedoms,<ref name=BannedInBoston></ref> and that same-sex marriages deprive children of either a mother or a father.<ref></ref> Other opponents of gay marriages hold that same-sex marriages are unnatural.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE0DE1731F937A35753C1A964958260|title=Anti-Gay Backlashes Are on 3 States' Ballots|date=1992-10-04|accessdate=2008-06-06|publisher=The New York Times}}</ref>


==Issues==
Some supporters of same-sex marriages take the view that the government should have no role in regulating personal relationships,<ref name="findlaw1"></ref> while others argue that same-sex marriages would provide social benefits to same-sex couples.<ref name="indegayforum1">Professor Dale Carpenter is a prominent spokesman for this view. For a better understanding of this view, see Professor Carpenter's writings at http://www.indegayforum.org/staff/show/91.html.</ref> A 2004 Statement by the ] states that there is no evidence that society needs to maintain "marriage as an exclusively heterosexual institution", and, further, that same-sex unions can "contribute to stable and humane societies."<ref></ref> The ], ], and ] state: "There is no scientific basis for distinguishing between same-sex couples and heterosexual couples with respect to the legal rights, obligations, benefits, and burdens conferred by civil marriage.... Empirical research has consistently shown that lesbian and gay parents do not differ from heterosexuals in their parenting skills, and their children do not show any deficits compared to children raised by heterosexual parents.... f their parents are allowed to marry, the children of same-sex couples will benefit not only from the legal stability and other familial benefits that marriage provides, but also from elimination of state-sponsored stigmatization of their families."<ref name=amici></ref>
{{See also|LGBT rights opposition}}
While few societies have recognized same-sex unions as marriages,{{update inline|date=January 2024}} the ] reveals a large range of attitudes towards same-sex unions ranging from praise, through full acceptance and integration, sympathetic toleration, indifference, prohibition and discrimination, to persecution and physical annihilation.{{citation needed|date=June 2018}} Opponents of same-sex marriages have argued that same-sex marriage, while doing good for the couples that participate in them and the children they are raising,<ref name="Laurie">{{Cite web |last=Laurie |first=Timothy |date=3 June 2015 |title=Bigotry or biology: the hard choice for an opponent of marriage equality |url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-03/laurie-bigotry-or-biology/6514156 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150604151718/http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-03/laurie-bigotry-or-biology/6514156 |archive-date=4 June 2015 |access-date=4 June 2015 |publisher=The Drum}}</ref> undermines a right of children to be raised by their biological mother and father.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Blankenhorn |first=David |date=19 September 2008 |title=Protecting marriage to protect children |work=Los Angeles Times |url=https://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-blankenhorn19-2008sep19,0,6057126.story |url-status=live |access-date=6 October 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090904154130/http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-blankenhorn19-2008sep19,0,6057126.story |archive-date=4 September 2009}}</ref> Some supporters of same-sex marriages take the view that the government should have no role in regulating personal relationships,<ref name="findlaw1">{{Cite web |title=See discussion of prenuptial and postmarital agreements at Findlaw |url=http://family.findlaw.com/marriage/marriage-agreements |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101025170627/http://family.findlaw.com/marriage/marriage-agreements/ |archive-date=25 October 2010 |access-date=5 November 2010 |publisher=Family.findlaw.com}}</ref> while others argue that same-sex marriages would provide social benefits to same-sex couples.{{efn|1=Dale Carpenter is a prominent spokesman for this view. For a better understanding of this view, see Carpenter's writings at {{Cite web |title=Dale Carpenter |url=http://www.indegayforum.org/staff/show/91.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061117201231/http://www.indegayforum.org/staff/show/91.html |archive-date=17 November 2006 |access-date=31 October 2006 |website=Independent Gay Forum}} }} The debate regarding same-sex marriages includes debate based upon social viewpoints as well as debate based on majority rules, religious convictions, economic arguments, health-related concerns, and a variety of other issues.{{citation needed|date=July 2017}}


===Parenting===
The debate regarding same-sex marriages includes debate based upon social viewpoints as well as debate based on majority rules, religious convictions, economic arguments, health-related concerns, and a variety of other issues.
{{Main|LGBT parenting|Same-sex marriage and the family}}
]
Scientific literature 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 (either a mixed-sex or same-sex union). As a result, professional scientific associations have argued for same-sex marriage to be legally recognized as it will be beneficial to the children of same-sex parents or carers.<ref name="amici">{{Cite web |title=Brief of the American Psychological Association, The California Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy as amici curiae in support of plaintiff-appellees&nbsp;– Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of California Civil Case No. 09-CV-2292 VRW (Honorable Vaughn R. Walker) |url=http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2010/10/27/amicus29.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150413160709/http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2010/10/27/amicus29.pdf |archive-date=13 April 2015 |access-date=5 November 2010}}</ref><ref name="cpa2006">{{Cite web |year=2006 |title=Marriage of Same-Sex Couples – 2006 Position Statement Canadian Psychological Association |url=http://www.cpa.ca/cpasite/userfiles/Documents/Marriage%20of%20Same-Sex%20Couples%20Position%20Statement%20-%20October%202006%20(1).pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090419195945/http://www.cpa.ca/cpasite/userfiles/Documents/Marriage%20of%20Same-Sex%20Couples%20Position%20Statement%20-%20October%202006%20%281%29.pdf |archive-date=19 April 2009}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |display-authors=etal |vauthors=Pawelski JG, Perrin EC, Foy JM |date=July 2006 |title=The effects of marriage, civil union, and domestic partnership laws on the health and well-being of children |journal=] |volume=118 |issue=1 |pages=349–64 |doi=10.1542/peds.2006-1279 |pmid=16818585 |s2cid=219194821 |doi-access=}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Lamb |first=Michael |title=Expert Affidavit for U.S. District Court (D. Mass. 2009) |url=http://www.glad.org/uploads/docs/cases/pedersen-v-opm/2011-09-14-pedersen-lamb-rebuttal-afffidavit.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150924022457/http://www.glad.org/uploads/docs/cases/pedersen-v-opm/2011-09-14-pedersen-lamb-rebuttal-afffidavit.pdf |archive-date=24 September 2015 |access-date=24 July 2012 |publisher=Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders}}</ref><ref name="AAP-Discovery">{{Cite web |date=22 March 2013 |title=Pediatricians: Gay Marriage Good for Kids' Health |url=http://news.discovery.com/human/health/pediatricians-gay-marriage-is-good-for-kids-health-130322.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141112053402/http://news.discovery.com/human/health/pediatricians-gay-marriage-is-good-for-kids-health-130322.htm |archive-date=12 November 2014 |access-date=11 April 2013 |publisher=news.discovery.com}}</ref>


Scientific research has been generally consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents.<ref name=cpa2006/><ref name="AAP-Discovery" /><ref name="apsp">{{Cite web |title=Elizabeth Short, Damien W. Riggs, Amaryll Perlesz, Rhonda Brown, Graeme Kane: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) Parented Families – A Literature Review prepared for The Australian Psychological Society |url=http://www.psychology.org.au/Assets/Files/LGBT-Families-Lit-Review.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110304014530/http://www.psychology.org.au/Assets/Files/LGBT-Families-Lit-Review.pdf |archive-date=4 March 2011 |access-date=5 November 2010}}</ref><ref name="amici2010">{{Cite web |title=Brief of the American Psychological Association, The California Psychological Association, The American Psychiatric Association, and The American Association of Marriage and Family Therapy as Amici Curiae in Support of Plaintiff-Appellees |url=http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2010/10/27/amicus29.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150413160709/http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2010/10/27/amicus29.pdf |archive-date=13 April 2015 |access-date=28 September 2012 |publisher=]}}</ref> According to scientific literature reviews, there is no evidence to the contrary.<ref name="aap2006">{{Cite journal |last1=Pawelski |first1=J.G. |last2=Perrin |first2=E.C. |last3=Foy |first3=J.M. |last4=Allen |first4=C.E. |last5=Crawford |first5=J.E. |last6=Del Monte |first6=M. |last7=Kaufman |first7=M. |last8=Klein |first8=J.D. |last9=Smith |first9=K. |last10=Springer |first10=S. |last11=Tanner |first11=J.L. |last12=Vickers |first12=D.L. |year=2006 |title=The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children |journal=Pediatrics |volume=118 |issue=1 |pages=349–64 |doi=10.1542/peds.2006-1279 |pmid=16818585 |s2cid=219194821 |doi-access=}}</ref><ref name="herek">{{Cite journal |last=Herek, GM |date=September 2006 |title=Legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the United States: a social science perspective |url=http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/AP_06_pre.PDF |url-status=dead |journal=The American Psychologist |volume=61 |issue=6 |pages=607–21 |doi=10.1037/0003-066X.61.6.607 |pmid=16953748 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100610164736/http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/AP_06_pre.PDF |archive-date=10 June 2010}}</ref><ref name="How Does the Gender of Parents Matter?">{{Cite journal |last1=Biblarz, Timothy J. |last2=Stacey, Judith |date=February 2010 |title=How Does the Gender of Parents Matter? |url=http://www.famigliearcobaleno.org/public/documenti/file/How-Does-the-Gender-of-Parents-Matter.pdf |url-status=dead |journal=Journal of Marriage and Family |volume=72 |issue=1 |pages=3–22 |citeseerx=10.1.1.593.4963 |doi=10.1111/j.1741-3737.2009.00678.x |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130512111336/http://www.famigliearcobaleno.org/public/documenti/file/How-Does-the-Gender-of-Parents-Matter.pdf |archive-date=12 May 2013}}</ref><ref name="cpa2005">{{Cite web |title=Brief presented to the Legislative House of Commons Committee on Bill C38 by the Canadian Psychological Association – 2 June 2005. |url=http://www.cpa.ca/cpasite/UserFiles/Documents/advocacy/brief.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121013225547/http://www.cpa.ca/cpasite/userfiles/Documents/advocacy/brief.pdf |archive-date=13 October 2012 |access-date=7 August 2018}}</ref>{{update inline|date=December 2023}}
===Judicial versus legislative===
A "majority rules" position regards same-sex marriage as void and illegal unless it has been accepted by a simple majority of voters or of their elected representatives.<ref>
"" By LISA LEFF, Associated Press Writer. Thursday, December 4, 2008.</ref> In contrast, a civil-rights view holds that, after carefully studying both sides of the controversy, an impartial judiciary, in upholding its constitutional duties, should decide whether the right to marry regardless of the gender of the participants is constitutionally guaranteed.<ref>
By Rajesh Mirchandani, BBC News, Los Angeles. Wednesday, 12 November 2008.</ref>


Compared to heterosexual couples, same-sex couples have a greater need for ] or ] to become parents. Lesbian couples often use ] to achieve pregnancy, and ] (where one woman provides the egg and the other gestates the child) is becoming more popular in the 2020s, although many couples cannot afford it. ] is an option for wealthier gay male couples, but the cost is prohibitive. Other same-sex couples adopt children or raise the children from earlier opposite-sex relationships.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Goldberg |first1=Abbie E. |title=LGBTQ-parent families: Diversity, intersectionality, and social context |journal=Current Opinion in Psychology |date=February 2023 |volume=49 |pages=101517 |doi=10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101517|pmid=36502588 |s2cid=253665001 |url=https://commons.clarku.edu/faculty_psychology/4 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Leal |first1=Daniela |last2=Gato |first2=Jorge |last3=Coimbra |first3=Susana |last4=Freitas |first4=Daniela |last5=Tasker |first5=Fiona |title=Social Support in the Transition to Parenthood Among Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Persons: A Systematic Review |journal=Sexuality Research and Social Policy |date=December 2021 |volume=18 |issue=4 |pages=1165–1179 |doi=10.1007/s13178-020-00517-y|hdl=10216/132451 |hdl-access=free }}</ref>
In May 2008, in what would come to be called the '']'', the ] found the state's opposite-sex definition of marriage to be unconstitutional, reasoning that certain fundamental rights should be placed "beyond the reach" of popular votes and elected officials.<ref>In the Supreme Court of California: ]. May 15, 2008. Pages 113-116. Ct. App. 1/3 Nos. A110449, A110450, A110451, A110463, 1 ) A110651, A110652, San Francisco County, JCCP No. 4365</ref> In November 2008, the court's decision was later overturned in part by the passage of ]. After a court challenge was filed, California's Attorney General, ], urged the state supreme court to overturn Proposition 8 as unconstitutional, due to the "fundamental liberty interest" cited in the state Constitution as well as due to the manner it was ratified.<ref>Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer in ''The San Francisco Chronicle.'' Friday, December 19, 2008. </ref><ref>Lisa Leff, Associated Press Writer. in ''The Associated Press.'' Friday, December 19, 2008. </ref> On Tuesday, May 26, 2009, the state supreme court upheld the manner in which Proposition 8 was ratified and its immediate effect on the laws of the State of California as constitutionally valid. The court also held that since the common-law precedent did not warrant nor did the language of the proposition explicitly proscribed, retroactive application could not stand; hence, the 18,000 same-sex marriages legally granted by the state<ref></ref> (and potentially marriages granted by other jurisdictions<ref></ref>) before the measure passage remain valid. The governor of California ] has announced that his administration will not defend ] in federal court citing his adherence to the civil rights stance on the issue.<ref></ref>


===Religious arguments=== ====Adoption====
{{main|LGBT adoption}}
{{Main|Religious arguments about same-sex marriage}}
[[File:World same-sex adoption laws.svg|center|thumb|upright=3|Legal status of adoption by same-sex couples around the world: {{legend|#800080|Joint adoption allowed}}
{{legend|#ba75ff|Second-parent (stepchild) adoption allowed}}
{{legend|#CCCCCC|No laws allowing adoption by same-sex couples and no same-sex marriage}}
{{legend|#E4D69D|Same-sex marriage but adoption by married same-sex couples not allowed}}
]]
All states that allow same-sex marriage also allow the joint ] of children by those couples with the exception of Ecuador and a third of states in Mexico, though such restrictions have been ruled unconstitutional in Mexico. In addition, Bolivia, Croatia, Israel and Liechtenstein, which do not recognize same-sex marriage, nonetheless permit joint adoption by same-sex couples. Some additional states do not recognize same-sex marriage but allow stepchild adoption by couples in civil unions, namely the Czech Republic and San Marino.{{citation needed|date=December 2023}}


===Transgender and intersex people===
Arguments both in opposition to and in favor of same-sex marriages are often made on religious grounds and/or formulated in terms of religious doctrine.
{{synthesis|date=May 2017}}
{{See also|Transgender rights|Intersex human rights}}
The legal status of same-sex marriage may have implications for the marriages of couples in which one or both parties are ], depending on how sex is defined within a jurisdiction. Transgender and ] individuals may be prohibited from marrying partners of the "opposite" sex or permitted to marry partners of the "same" sex due to legal distinctions.{{citation needed|date=February 2021}} In any legal jurisdiction where marriages are defined without distinction of a requirement of a male and female, these complications do not occur. In addition, some legal jurisdictions recognize a legal and official change of gender, which would allow a transgender male or female to be legally married in accordance with an adopted gender identity.<ref>Bockting, Walter, Autumn Benner, and Eli Coleman. "Gay and Bisexual Identity Development Among Female-to-Male Transsexuals in North America: Emergence of a Transgender Sexuality." ''Archives of Sexual Behavior'' 38.5 (October 2009): 688–701. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. 29 September 2009</ref>


In the United Kingdom, the '']'' allows a person who has lived in their chosen gender for at least two years to receive a gender recognition certificate officially recognizing their new gender. Because in the United Kingdom marriages were until recently only for mixed-sex couples and civil partnerships are only for same-sex couples, a person had to dissolve their civil partnership before obtaining a gender recognition certificate{{citation needed|date=February 2020}}, and the same was formerly true for marriages in England and Wales, and still is in other territories. Such people are then free to enter or re-enter civil partnerships or marriages in accordance with their newly recognized gender identity. In Austria, a similar provision requiring transsexual people to divorce before having their ] marker corrected was found to be unconstitutional in 2006.<ref>{{Cite web |date=5 July 2006 |title=Austria gets first same-sex marriage |url=http://www.365gay.com/Newscon06/07/070506austria.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071017161302/http://365gay.com/Newscon06/07/070506austria.htm |archive-date=17 October 2007 |access-date=20 July 2008 |publisher=365gay.com}}</ref> In Quebec, prior to the legalization of same-sex marriage, only unmarried people could apply for legal change of gender. With the advent of same-sex marriage, this restriction was dropped. A similar provision including sterilization also existed in Sweden, but was phased out in 2013.<ref>{{Cite web |date=11 January 2013 |title=Sweden ends forced sterilization of trans |url=http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/sweden-ends-forced-sterilization-trans110113 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180612234631/https://www.gaystarnews.com/article/sweden-ends-forced-sterilization-trans110113/ |archive-date=12 June 2018 |access-date=10 October 2017 |website=gaystarnews.com}}</ref> In the United States, transgender and intersex marriages was subject to legal complications.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Deborah |first=Anthony |date=Spring 2012 |title=CAUGHT IN THE MIDDLE: TRANSSEXUAL MARRIAGE AND THE DISCONNECT BETWEEN SEX AND LEGAL SEX. |journal=Texas Journal of Women & the Law |volume=21 |issue=2}}</ref> As definitions and enforcement of marriage are defined by the states, these complications vary from state to state,<ref>{{Cite news |last=Schwartz |first=John |date=18 September 2009 |title=U.S. Defends Marriage Law |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/19/us/19brfs-USDEFENDSMAR_BRF.html |url-status=live |access-date=29 September 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140714172436/http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/19/us/19brfs-USDEFENDSMAR_BRF.html |archive-date=14 July 2014}}</ref> as some of them prohibit legal changes of gender.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Movement Advancement Project {{!}} Equality Maps |url=http://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-maps |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190422164047/http://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-maps |archive-date=22 April 2019 |access-date=2019-04-19 |website=www.lgbtmap.org |language=en}}</ref>
Many objections to same-sex marriages are based upon ]. Religious opponents of same-sex marriages sometimes claim that extending marriage rights to same-sex couples could undercut the conventional purpose of marriage, or would be contrary to God's will.<ref>See e.g., Southern Baptist Convention, ''On Same-Sex Marriage'' (adopted 2003) http://www.sbc.net/resolutions/amResolution.asp?ID=1128 (visited January 20, 2008).</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://hatecrime.org/subpages/hatespeech/robertson.html|archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20021219203548/http://hatecrime.org/subpages/hatespeech/robertson.html|archivedate=2002-12-19|title=The Religious Right and Anti-Gay Speech: Messengers of Love or Purveyors of Hate?|publisher=Matthew Shepard Online Resources}}</ref><ref name=autogenerated1>http://www.apacny.net/The%20Christian%20Case%20Against%20Same-Sex%20Marriage.pdf</ref> Some religious advocates of "traditional marriage" contend that to call same-sex relationships "marriages" is a ], because marriage necessarily involves the uniting of two members of the opposite sex.<ref></ref><ref>http://www.apacny.net/APACBiblicalPerspectiveSSMCU.pdf</ref><ref></ref> Other religious opponents argue that same-sex marriages would encourage individuals to act upon homosexual urges, rather than seeking help to overcome ].<ref name=autogenerated1 />
Faith traditions based upon the ] may have religious objections to same-sex marriages based on ] passages such as ] 19:5, ] 18:22, and Leviticus 20:13. Faith traditions based upon the ] may have religious objections based on biblical passages such as ] 1, ] 6:8-10, and ] 1:7. Religious groups that have been vocal and or active in their opposition to same-sex marriages include the ],<ref></ref> ],<ref>{{dead link|date=September 2009}}] (also known as Mormons),<ref>{{cite web|url=http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/commentary/the-divine-institution-of-marriage|title=The Divine Institution of Marriage|accessdate=2008-09-23}}</ref> the ],<ref></ref> the ],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://cmcrosedale.org/about/homosexuality.shtml|title=CMC Statement on Homosexuality|publisher=Conservative Mennonite Conference|accessdate=2006-07-05}}</ref> the
], the
],<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/02/17/hutterite-050217.html|archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20071220172609/http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/02/17/hutterite-050217.html|archivedate=2007-12-20|title=Hutterites take rare political stand against gay marriage|publisher=CBC News|date=]|accessdate=2006-07-05}}</ref> the ],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.oca.org/DOCmarriage.asp?SID=12&ID=26|title=On Marriage, Family, Sexuality, and the Sanctity of Life|publisher=Orthodox Church in America|accessdate=2006-07-05}}</ref> the ], the ],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_sda.htm|title=The Seventh-Day Adventist Church and Homosexuality}}</ref> the ],<ref></ref> the
] (OU),<ref name="orthjew">''''</ref> and the United Pentecostal Church International.


===Divorce===
Support and affirmation of marriage rights for same-sex couples increasingly come from those who practice ]. Some examples of religious organizations that are vocal supporters of ] include the ], the ] {{cite web|url=http://www.ucc.org/lgbt/issues/marriage-equality/|title=Marriage Equality and the UCC}} and numerous progressive congregations within the mainline christian denominations<ref>http://www.mlp.org/</ref>. Some who hold to a more progressive Christian view claim that the word "homosexual" as found in many versions of the Bible used today is a transliteration and is not found in the original biblical texts<ref>http://www.stjohnsmcc.org/new/BibleAbuse/</ref>, and that if the Bible does not reference 'homosexuals' it therefore cannot specifically ban marriage rights for them. <ref>http://www.gaychurch.org/Gay_and_Christian_YES/the_bible_christianity_and_homosexuality_justin_cannon.htm</ref> Some progressive Christian churches also believe that biblical texts interpreted by some to discuss homosexuality refer only to specific sex acts and idolatrous worship which lack relevance to contemporary same-sex relationships.<ref>{{cite paper
{{Main|Divorce of same-sex couples}}
|url=http://www.mccchurch.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Sexuality_Spirituality&Template=/CM/HTMLDisplay.cfm&ContentID=629#Part2
In the United States before the case of '']'', couples in same-sex marriages could only obtain a divorce in jurisdictions that recognized same-sex marriages, with some exceptions.<ref>{{Cite web |author=Matthew S. Coleman |date=16 September 2015 |title=Obergefell v. Hodges |url=http://www.einhornharris.com/familylawblog/obergefell-v-hodges |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151224103921/http://www.einhornharris.com/familylawblog/obergefell-v-hodges/ |archive-date=24 December 2015 |access-date=8 November 2015 |publisher=Einhorn Harris}}</ref>
|title=Homosexuality: Not A Sin, Not A Sickness – What The Bible Does and Does Not Say
|publisher=Metropolitan Community Church
|author=Rev. Elder Don Eastman
|year=1990
|accessdate=2008-11-23
}}
</ref> Some ] support religious and legal recognition of same-sex marriages based on their belief that it is a biblical moral imperative or their belief that it follows a Christ-like commitment to the equality and dignity of all persons.<ref>http://www.gaychurch.org/Gay_and_Christian_YES/Other%20articles/justified_through_Christ.htm</ref> <ref>http://www.gc2009.org/ViewLegislation/view_leg_detail.aspx?id=986&type=Final</ref><ref>http://www.wouldjesusdiscriminate.com/</ref> It is believed by some that, "human sexual orientations, whether heterosexual, bisexual or homosexual, are a gift from God."<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.united-church.ca/humanrights/equal/chronology
|title=Equality Rights
|publisher=United Church of Canada
|year=2007
|accessdate=2008-11-09
}}</ref> Several ] denominations support same-sex marriages and perform same-sex weddings. The three largest in North America are the ],<ref></ref> the ] and the ].<ref></ref> In August of 2009 the ], the United States' largest Lutheran church, adopted a {{cite web|url=http://www.elca.org/What-We-Believe/Social-Issues/Social-Statements-in-Process/JTF-Human-Sexuality/cwafaqs.aspx|title=Social Statement On Human Sexuality }}supporting the full inclusion of "publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same gender relationships" of both laypersons and clergy. The resolution, which will take effect in November, allows congregations to fully recognize same-sex relationships as marriages.


===Judicial and legislative===
Religious arguments for and against marriage rights for same-sex couples are not always an issue of conservative faiths vs. progressive faiths. Some within self-identified conservative faith organizations such as the ] (Quakers), the ] churches, and the ] hold to views favorable to, if not wholly inclusive of, same-sex marriage. {{cite web
{{Main|Conflict of marriage laws#Same-sex marriage}}
|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/31/quakers-gay-marriage
There are differing positions regarding the manner in which same-sex marriage has been introduced into democratic jurisdictions. A "]" position holds that same-sex marriage is valid, or void and illegal, based upon whether it has been accepted by a simple majority of voters or of their elected representatives.<ref name="USA Today">{{Cite news |last=Leff |first=Lisa |date=4 December 2008 |title=Poll: Calif. gay marriage ban driven by religion |work=USA Today |agency=Associated Press |url=https://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2008-12-04-gay-poll_N.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081208080418/http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2008-12-04-gay-poll_N.htm |archive-date=8 December 2008}} archived here.</ref>
|title=Quakers Support Same-Sex Marriage}} <ref> King, Michael A. Fractured Dance: Gadamer and a Mennonite Conflict over Homosexuality. C. Henry Smith Series, no. 3. Foreword by Herbert Simons. Telford, Pa.: Pandora Press, 2001.</ref>


In contrast, a ] view holds that the institution can be validly created through the ruling of an impartial judiciary carefully examining the questioning and finding that the right to marry regardless of the gender of the participants is guaranteed under the civil rights laws of the jurisdiction.<ref name="bbc">{{Cite news |last=Mirchandani, Rajesh |date=12 November 2008 |title=Divisions persist over gay marriage ban |work=BBC News |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7723645.stm |url-status=live |access-date=18 December 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140428173747/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7723645.stm |archive-date=28 April 2014}}</ref>
Some self-identified conservative leaders among traditionally conservative Orthodox church traditions such as the ] <ref>http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/front/Church_agrees_to_bless_gay_partnerships.html?siteSect=105&sid=6817696&cKey=1150533957000&ty=st</ref>, the ] <ref>http://www.thelocal.se/8899/20071025/</ref>, and the ] <ref>http://www.heraldscotland.com/church-of-scotland-general-assembly-upholds-appointment-of-gay-minister-1.910855</ref> also hold to views favorable to, if not wholly inclusive of same-sex marriage.


==Public opinion==
], like ], contains varying views on the issue of marriage rights, both politically and religiously, for same-sex couples.] maintains the traditional Jewish bans on both sexual acts and marriages amongst members of the same sex.<ref> Rabbi Tzvi Hersh Weinreb, Orthodox Response to Same-Sex Marriage, NY Jewish Week (Mar. 26, 2004) http://www.ou.org/public_affairs/article/ou_resp_same_sex_marriage/ (visited January 20, 2008); Rabbinical Council of America, Joining with Three Other Orthodox Organizations, RCA Opposes Redefinition of Marriage in New York State (June 21, 2007) http://www.rabbis.org/news/index.cfm?type=policies (visited January 20, 2008).</ref> Some ] reject recognition of same-sex unions as marriages, but permit celebration of commitment ceremonies, while others recognize same-sex marriage.<ref>Committee on Jewish Law and Standards, Homosexuality, Human Dignity, & Halakhah: A Combined Responsum for the ] (approved by a majority of the Committee on Dec. 6, 2006) at http://www.rabbinicalassembly.org/docs/Dorff_Nevins_Reisner_Final.pdf (visited January 20, 2008)</ref> Members of ] support the inclusion of same-sex unions within the definition of marriage.<ref>Union of American Hebrew Congregations, Civil Marriage for Gay and Lesbian Jewish Couples (adopted by the General Assembly 1997) http://urj.org/Articles/index.cfm?id=7214&pge_prg_id=29601&pge_id=4590 (visited January 20, 2008).</ref> The ] leaves the choice to individual rabbis.<ref>{{cite web
{{See also|Public opinion of same-sex marriage in the United States|Public opinion of same-sex marriage in Australia}}
|url=http://www.jrf.org/showres&rid=487
[[File:Public Support of Same-Sex Marriage.svg|center|thumb|upright=3|Public opinion of same-sex marriage. Fraction in favor:<ref>For ease of comparison, only 'yes' and 'no' responses are counted. For old polling data, support figures have been adjusted upward @1%/year.</ref>
|title=FAQ's on Reconstructionist Approaches to Jewish ideas and Practices
{{col-begin}}
|publisher=Jewish Reconstructionist Federation
{{col-break}}
|year=2008
{{legend|#58006e|5⁄6+}}
|accessdate=2008-05-17
{{legend|#b000dc|2⁄3+}}
}}</ref>
{{col-break}}
{{legend|#dd55ff|1⁄2+}}
{{legend|#f5cdff|1⁄3+}}
{{col-break}}
{{legend|#fcefff|1⁄6+}}
{{legend|#e0e0e0|<1⁄6}}
{{col-break}}
{{legend|#f0f0f0|no polls}}
{{col-end}}
]]


Numerous polls and studies on the issue have been conducted. A trend of increasing support for same-sex marriage has been revealed across many countries of the world, often driven in large part by a generational difference in support. Polling that was conducted in developed democracies in this century shows a majority of people in support of same-sex marriage. Support for same-sex marriage has increased across every age group, political ideology, religion, gender, race and region of various developed countries in the world.<ref name="Gallup2011">{{Cite web |last=Newport |first=Frank |date=20 May 2011 |title=For First Time, Majority of Americans Favor Legal Gay Marriage |url=http://www.gallup.com/poll/147662/First-Time-Majority-Americans-Favor-Legal-Gay-Marriage.aspx |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140729043935/http://www.gallup.com/poll/147662/First-Time-Majority-Americans-Favor-Legal-Gay-Marriage.aspx |archive-date=29 July 2014 |access-date=25 September 2012 |publisher=]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Public Opinion: Nationally |url=http://www.australianmarriageequality.com/wp/who-supports-equality/a-majority-of-australians-support-marriage-equality |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110303043929/http://www.australianmarriageequality.com/wp/who-supports-equality/a-majority-of-australians-support-marriage-equality/ |archive-date=3 March 2011 |access-date=25 September 2012 |publisher=australianmarriageequality.com}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Gay Life in Estonia |url=http://www.globalgayz.com/europe/estonia/gay-life-in-estonia |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120716100828/http://www.globalgayz.com/europe/estonia/gay-life-in-estonia |archive-date=16 July 2012 |access-date=25 September 2012 |publisher=globalgayz.com}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Jowit |first=Juliette |date=12 June 2012 |title=Gay marriage gets ministerial approval |work=] |location=London |url=https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/jun/12/gay-marriage-receive-ministerial-approval |url-status=live |access-date=25 September 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190506173542/https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/jun/12/gay-marriage-receive-ministerial-approval |archive-date=6 May 2019}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=24 February 2011 |title=Most Irish people support gay marriage, poll says |work=PinkNews |url=http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2011/02/24/most-irish-people-support-gay-marriage-poll-says |url-status=dead |access-date=25 September 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130926032112/http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2011/02/24/most-irish-people-support-gay-marriage-poll-says |archive-date=26 September 2013}}</ref>{{update inline|date=December 2021}}
] support same-sex marriage,<ref>
{{cite web
|url=http://www.uua.org/socialjustice/socialjustice/statements/14251.shtml
|title=UUA: Support of the Right to Marry for Same-Sex Couples
|publisher=www.uua.org
|accessdate=2009-04-07
|last=
|first=
}}
</ref> and the church has long been active in supporting the cause of legalization.<ref></ref>


Various detailed polls and studies on same-sex marriage that were conducted in several countries show that support for same-sex marriage significantly increases with higher levels of education and is also significantly stronger among younger generations, with a clear trend of continually increasing support.<ref name="Pew Survey 2023">{{cite web|url=https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/06/13/how-people-in-24-countries-view-same-sex-marriage/|title=How people in 24 countries view same-sex marriage|access-date=12 December 2023}}</ref>
Due to the ambivalent language about homosexuality in ] teachings, there has been no official stance put forth regarding the issue of same-sex marriage.<ref>''The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life: Issues. (May 20, 2008. .</ref>


;Greater support with youth
Some same-sex married couples have challenged religious organizations that exclude them from access to public facilities maintained by those organizations, such as schools, health care centers, social service agencies, summer camps, homeless shelters, nursing homes, orphanages, retreat houses, community centers, and athletic programs.<ref></ref> Opponents of same-sex marriages have expressed concerns that this limits their religious freedoms.<ref name=BannedInBoston /><ref></ref> For example, conservatives worry that a Christian college would risk its tax-exempt status by refusing to admit a legally married gay couple to married-student housing.<ref></ref> Some legal analysts suggest that failure to reflect gay rights within their organizations may cost some religious groups their tax-exempt status.<ref></ref>
] polling results from 32 countries found 21 with statistically higher support for same-sex marriage among those under 35 than among those over 35 in 2022–2023. Countries with the greatest absolute difference are placed to the left in the following chart. Countries without a significant generational difference are placed to the right.<ref name="Pew Survey 2023"/>


<div style="overflow:auto">
] argue that by defining marriage as an opposite-sex institution, the state infringes upon the constitutional right to freedom of religion.<ref name=Glassman>Glassman, Anthony. (July 15, 2005). in ''The Gay People's Chronicle.''</ref><ref name=Dix>David Dix (April, 2004). in ''Southside Pride: Phillips/Powderhorn/Nokomis/Riverside.''</ref><ref>Cline, A. </ref>
{{ #invoke:Chart | bar-chart
| height = 400
| width = 1200
| stack = 1
| group 1 = 33 : 52 : 37 : 34 : 52 : 43 : 35 : 57 : 54 : 64 : 48 : 47 : 59 : 62 : 71 : 73 : 34 : 20 : 5 : 90 : 15 : 89 : 87 : 82 : 80 : 79 : 74 : 53 : 36 : 31 : 5 : 2
| group 2 = 42 : 29 : 28 : 27 : 26 : 24 : 24 : 22 : 22 : 20 : 19 : 17 : 15 : 13 : 11 : 8 : 8 : 7 : 7 : 6 : 5 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0
| x legends = <small>Taiw</small> : <small>Mex</small> : <small>Sing</small> : <small>ROK</small> : <small>HK</small> : <small>Gre</small> : <small>Pol</small> : <small>Viet</small> : <small>Thai</small> : <small>Jap</small> : <small>Cam</small> : <small>Braz</small> : <small>USA</small> : <small>Arg</small> : <small>Ital</small> : <small>Oz</small> : <small>S. Af.</small> : <small>Sri Lanka</small> : <small>Keny</small> : <small>Swed</small> : <small>Malay</small> : <small>Neth</small> : <small>Spa</small> : <small>Fran</small> : <small>Germ</small> : <small>Cana</small> : <small>UK</small> : <small>India</small> : <small>Isra</small> : <small>Hung</small> : <small>Indo</small> : <small>Nigeria</small>
| colors = navy : blue
| group names = over 35 : additional support from those under 35
}}
</div>


A 2016 survey by the ] found similarly high support of same-sex marriage (63%) among 18–21-year-olds in an online survey of 18 countries around the world.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.varkeyfoundation.org/media/4487/global-young-people-report-single-pages-new.pdf|title=What the world's young people think and feel.}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://aifs.gov.au/research/family-matters/no-100/who-supports-equal-rights-same-sex-couples|title=Who supports equal rights for same-sex couples? |website=Australian Institute of Family Studies}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=Jun 2, 2015 |title=Age is decisive factor when it comes to supporting same-sex marriage: LAPOP |url=https://news.vanderbilt.edu/2015/06/02/age-is-decisive-factor-when-it-comes-to-supporting-same-sex-marriage-lapop/ |access-date=2023-12-26 |website=Vanderbilt University |language=en-US}}</ref>
===Arguments concerning children and the family===


{{ #invoke:Chart | bar-chart
{{Main|LGBT parenting}}
| height = 300
{{POV-section|date=September 2008}}
| width = 800
| stack = 1
| group 1 = 82 : 81 : 77 : 77 : 74 : 74 : 73 : 73 : 71 : 59 : 54 : 54 : 53 : 53 : 50 : 47 : 33 : 16
| x legends = <small>Germ</small> : <small>Cana</small> : <small>Oz</small> : <small>UK</small> : <small>NZ</small> : <small>Fran</small> : <small>Ital</small> : <small>Arg</small> : <small>USA</small> : <small>Braz</small> : <small>Chin</small> : <small>S. Af.</small> : <small>India</small> : <small>Jap</small> : <small>Isra</small> : <small>ROK</small> : <small>Turk</small> : <small>Nigeria</small>
| colors = navy
| group names = 18&ndash;21 year-olds
}}


(The sampling error is approx. 4% for Nigeria and 3% for the other countries. Because of legal constraints, the question on same-sex marriage was not asked in the survey countries of Russia and Indonesia.)
Opponents of same-sex marriages claim that children (orphan or not) do best with both a ] and a ],<ref>]''], interview with Dr. James Dobson, March 7, 2002.</ref><ref></ref> and that therefore the state should encourage the traditional family structure by discouraging others. Proponents argue that legal marriage is a way of encouraging monogamy and commitment by those who may create children through their sexual coupling.<ref name="savemarriageny2"></ref> ] from the ] contends that same-sex marriages separate the ideas of marriage and parenthood, thereby accelerating marital decline by citing studies showing a substantial rise in the out-of-wedlock birthrates, for both firstborn and subsequent children in areas where same-sex unions are legal.<ref>{{cite web|
url=http://www.boston.com/news/specials/gay_marriage/articles/2004/03/10/death_of_marriage_in_scandinavia/
|title=Death of Marriage in Scandinavia
|first=Stanley
|last=Kurtz
|date=2004-03-10
|accessdate=2008-10-07
|publisher=Boston Globe}}</ref> ] points to academic studies which state that children raised with both parents, as opposed to children raised by single mothers, increase students' cognitive and verbal skills, academic performance, involvement in or avoidance of high-risk behaviors and crime, and emotional and psychological health.<ref></ref><ref>Pruett, K. "Fatherneed: Why father care is as essential as mother care for your child," New York: Free Press, 2000.</ref><ref>"The Effects of Father Involvement: A Summary of the Research Evidence," Father Involvement Initiative Ontario Network, Fall 2002 newsletter.</ref><ref>Anderson Moore, K. "Family Structure and Child Well-being" Washington, DC: Child Trends, 2003.</ref><ref>United States. National Center for Fathering, Kansas City, MO. Partnership for Family Involvement in Education. . June, 2000</ref>


{{Same-sex marriage opinion polls worldwide}}
In ''Conaway v. Deane,'' the Maryland Supreme Court ruled (2003) that the State has a legitimate interest in encouraging the traditional family structure in which children are born. The court then refrained from deciding whether this interest was served by status quo leaving it to the other branches to decide.<ref name="MDCourtofAppealsOpinion" /> The ] concluded in ] that even if it were the case that children fare better within a traditional family, the argument against same-sex marriage is ] because the state failed to show how banning same-sex marriages discouraged gay and lesbian individuals from forming families or how restricting marriage to heterosexual couples discouraged heterosexual individuals from having nonmarital children.<ref name="news.findlaw.com"> - text of Massachusetts decision authorizing same-sex marriage </ref>


== See also ==
{{Portal|LGBTQ|Human sexuality|Law}}
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
{{clear}}


==Notes==
In 2005, the American Academy of Pediatrics stated in ]: "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."<ref name=pediatrics>Pawelski, James G., Perrin, Ellen C., Foy, Jane M., Allen, Carole E., Crawford, James E., Del Monte, Mark, Kaufman, Miriam, Klein, Jonathan D., Smith, Karen, Springer, Sarah, Tanner, J. Lane, Vickers, Dennis L. The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children ] 2006 118: 349-364; available online: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/118/1/349</ref>
{{notelist|35em}}


==References==
In 2006, the ], ] and ] stated in an ] presented to the Supreme Court of the State of California: "When comparing the outcomes of different forms of parenting, it is critically important to make appropriate comparisons. For example, differences resulting from the number of parents in a household cannot be attributed to the parents’ gender or sexual orientation. Research in households with heterosexual parents generally indicates that – all else being equal – children do better with two parenting figures rather than just one. The specific research studies typically cited in this regard do not address parents’ sexual orientation, however, and therefore do not permit any conclusions to be drawn about the consequences of having heterosexual versus nonheterosexual parents, or two parents who are of the same versus different genders. Indeed, the scientific research that has directly compared outcomes for children with gay and lesbian parents with outcomes for children with heterosexual parents has been remarkably consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are every bit as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents. Amici emphasize that the abilities of gay and lesbian persons as parents and the positive outcomes for their children are not areas where credible scientific researchers disagree. Statements by the leading associations of experts in this area reflect professional consensus that children raised by lesbian or gay parents do not differ in any important respects from those raised by heterosexual parents. No credible empirical research suggests otherwise. Allowing same-sex couples to legally marry will not have any detrimental effect on children raised in heterosexual households, but it will benefit children being raised by same-sex couples."<ref name="amici"/>
{{reflist|colwidth=30em}}

In 2006, the ] stated: "A review of the psychological research into the well-being of children raised by same-sex and opposite-sex parents continues to indicate that there are no reliable differences in their mental health or social adjustment and that lesbian mothers and gay fathers are not less fit as parents than are their heterosexual counterparts. 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."<ref name=cpa2006></ref>

In 2007, the ] stated: "the family studies literature indicates that it is family processes (such as the quality of parenting and relationships within the family) that contribute to determining children’s wellbeing and ‘outcomes’, rather than family structures, per se, such as the number, gender, sexuality and co-habitation status of parents. The research indicates that parenting practices and children’s outcomes in families parented by lesbian and gay parents are likely to be at least as favourable as those in families of heterosexual parents, despite the reality that considerable legal discrimination and inequity remain significant challenges for these families."<ref name=apsp></ref>

As noted by Professor Judith Stacey, of New York University: “Rarely is there as much consensus in any area of social science as in the case of gay parenting, which is why the American Academy of Pediatrics and all of the major professional organizations with expertise in child welfare have issued reports and resolutions in support of gay and lesbian parental rights”.<ref>cited in Cooper & Cates, 2006, p. 36; citation available on http://www.psychology.org.au/Assets/Files/LGBT-Families-Lit-Review.pdf</ref> Among these mainstream organizations are in the United States the ], the ], ], the ], the North American Council on Adoptable Children, the ], the ], the ],<ref name=hrc>{{cite web|title=Professional Organizations on GLBT Parenting|url=http://www.hrc.org/issues/parenting/professional-opinion.asp}}</ref> in the United Kingdom, the ],<ref></ref> and in Canada, the ].<ref name="cpa2006"/> The ] supports adoption and parenting by same-sex couples, citing social prejudice as harming the psychological health of lesbians and gays while noting there is no empiric evidence that their parenting causes harm.<ref>Paige, R. U. (2005). Proceedings of the American Psychological Association, Incorporated, for the legislative year 2004. Minutes of the meeting of the Council of Representatives July 28 & 30, 2004, Honolulu, HI. Retrieved November 18, 2004, from the World Wide Web http://www.apa.org/governance/. (To be published in Volume 60, Issue Number 5 of the American Psychologist.)</ref><ref> , Study finds gay moms equally-good parents, July 2004.</ref><ref> , American Psychological Association, November 2002.</ref> The ] has issued a similar position supporting same-sex adoption, stating that while there is little evidence against LGBT parenting, lack of formal recognition can cause health-care disparities for children of same-sex parents.<ref>{{dead link|date=September 2009}}</ref>

Many opponents of same-sex marriage argue that mainstream health and mental health organizations have, in many cases, taken public positions on homosexuality<ref></ref><ref></ref> and same-sex marriage<ref></ref><ref></ref> that are based on their own social and political views rather than the available science. On the other hand, the ] "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."<ref name="cpa2006"/>

====Argument concerning reproduction====
{{Globalize}}
{{Refimprovesect|date=September 2009}}
{{Original research|date=September 2009}}
{{See also|Same-sex marriage and procreation}}
Those who advocate that marriage should be defined exclusively as the union of one woman and one man argue that opposite-sex couples provide the procreative foundation that is the chief building block of civilization. Social conservatives and others may see marriage not as a legal construct of the state, but as a naturally occurring "pre-political institution" that the state must recognize just as the government recognizes employment relationships; one such conservative voice reasons that "government does not create marriages any more than government creates jobs."<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.hoover.org/publications/policyreview/2939396.html
|title=Marriage and the Limits of Contract
|publisher=the Hoover Institution
|author=Jennifer Morse
|month=May|year=2005
|accessdate=2007-03-08
}}</ref> They argue that the definition proposed by same-sex marriage advocates changes the social importance of marriage from its natural function of reproduction into a mere legality or freedom to have sex. Liberals contend that by expanding marriage to gay and lesbian individuals the state actually protects the rights of all married couples and, if they had any, of their children without discrimination while in no way affecting the rights of opposite sex married couples and their children, natural or adopted. They also counterclaim that the historic definition of marriage as a license to intercourse and as a license to the treating of a ] of her husband has already been changed by social progress reminding us that the legal equality men and women enjoy in modern marriage and that, in civilized society, it is no longer illegal to ].
In the ], a common argument raised in the courts against the recognition of same-sex marriages in ] cases has been the ] the state claims it has to foster the state's interest in human reproduction which, if rational only, legally justifies statutes that facially discriminates. Rational basis does not apply if the affect group is ], or if it involves a ]. In that case ] a much higher standard is applied. The fundamental right to marry one of one's own choice has become federally recognized after the Supreme Court decided ] as was the right to procreate irrespective of marital status, but the court has never directly ruled on same-sex marriages. While ] is not considered a suspect class at the federal level, in some states it is. In California for example, sexual orientation is considered a ], hence any state action affecting such group is reviewed under ]. This standard shifts the burden of proof and requires that the state to not only show that the intent of the law challenged is not discriminatory but also show that the purpose the state wants to achieve with the law in question is narrowly tailored to that purpose and no other feasible plan could achieve the same purpose. The ] rejected the state's argument that the legislation served a narrowly permissible purpose to promote marital procreation because the court was not convinced anyone in California who is deciding to propose marriage, accept such a proposal, or begect a child ever considers whether their gay or lesbian neighbors had their unions recognized by the state as marriage; the majority also pointed out the state had in fact less questionable ways to encourage marriage and procreation in marriage (such as vouchers for infant needs or lower tax rates for married couple with children).<ref></ref>
Even though the legal meaning of marriage between opposite-sex couples had not been upset by the court's decision, the majority of voters subsequently amended their state's constitution to redefine marriage, in effect restoring the previous statutory definition.<ref name="latimes.com"></ref><ref>{{dead link|date=September 2009}}</ref> In '']'', a case that challenged ]'s ], the ] ruled 5 to 4 that the law survive constitutional attack. The majority concluded that the legislature had rational basis, that is, it was entitled to believe, and to act on such belief, that only allowing opposite-sex marriages "furthers procreation."<ref></ref> In response, a group of marriage advocates filed what became ] which, if passed, would have made procreation a legal requirement for marriage in Washington State. The ] used similar grounds to rule that it was permissible to confer the benefits of marriage only on opposite-sex couples.<ref name="MDCourtofAppealsOpinion" />
Some proponents of same-sex marriages argue that restrictive laws are underinclusive because they do not prohibit marriages between sterile opposite-sex couples or to women past ], the procreation argument cannot reasonably be used against same-sex marriages.<ref>For example, Jonathan Rauch in "For Better or Worse?" in ]. May 6, 1996. Reprinted in a book by Andrew Sullivan (editor) in 1997. ''Same-Sex Marriage: Pro and Con - A Reader.'' Vintage Books, a division of Random House, Inc., New York, and in Canada by Random House of Canada Limited, Toronto. Pages 175-176.</ref> Proponents also consider these laws restricting marriage to be unconstitutionally overinclusive, as gay and lesbian couples can have children either through natural or artificial means or by adoption.<ref>For example, {{cite web |first= Brian |last=Cavner |url=http://familyfairness.org/article/marriage-is-for-procreation-myth-marriage-exclusionist-studies-statistics/ |title=The ‘Marriage is for Procreation’ Myth: The Futility of Marriage Exclusionist Studies and Statistics |accessdate=April 4, 2009}}</ref>

====Arguments concerning divorce rates====
] 2006.]]
Internationally, the most comprehensive study{{Citation needed|date=January 2009}} to date on the effect of same-sex marriages / partnerships on opposite-sex marriage and divorce rates was conducted looking at over 15 years of data from the ]. The study by researcher ] found that 15 years after ] had granted same-sex couples the rights of marriage, rates of opposite-sex marriage in those countries had gone up, and rates of opposite-sex divorce had gone down – contradicting the concept that same-sex marriages would have a negative effect on traditional marriages.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Eskridge|first=William N. Jr.|coauthors=]; and Ytterberg, Hans|title=Nordic Bliss? Scandinavian Registered Partnerships and the Same-Sex Marriage Debate|journal=Journals of Legal Scholarship: Issues in Legal Scholarship|issue=5|pages=article 4|publisher=The Berkeley Electronic Press|month=January|year=2004|url=http://www.svgla.org/index.php?module=documents&JAS_DocumentManager_op=downloadFile&JAS_File_id=5&2f8d38d14523aa8f4042065cde1a5216=964e204e9824d505541efa48eb2208b5|format=PDF|accessdate=2008-09-23|nopp=true}} (see pgs.29-31)</ref>

However, a study on short-term same-sex marriages/partnerships in ] and ] found that divorce risks are higher in same-sex marriages than in opposite-sex marriages, and that unions of lesbians are considerably less stable, or more dynamic, than unions of gay men.<ref name="The Demographics of Same-Se">{{cite journal
|title=The Demographics of Same-Sex „Marriages“ in Norway and Sweden
|last=Andersson
|first=Gunnar
|url=http://www-same-sex.ined.fr/WWW/04Doc124Gunnar.pdf
|publisher=Demography
|volume=43
|number=1
|month=February|year=2006
|pages=79–98|format=PDF}} .</ref> The authors cited that this may be due to same-sex couples' "non-
involvement in joint parenthood," "lower exposure to normative pressure about the necessity of life-long unions," and differing motivations for getting married.<ref name="The Demographics of Same-Se"/> Another study regarding ] same-sex couples found that same-sex unions – even when legally recognized – tended to be of shorter duration than opposite-sex unions.<ref>http://www.marriagedebate.com/pdf/SSdivorcerisk.pdf</ref>

A multi-method, multi-informant comparison of community samples of committed gay male and lesbian (30 participants each) couples with both committed (50 young engaged and 40 older married participants) and non-committed (109 exclusively dating) opposite-sex pairs was conducted in 2008.<ref>Roisman, Glenn I.; Clausell, Eric; Holland, Ashley; Fortuna, Keren; Elieff, Chryle. "Adult romantic relationships as contexts of human development: A multi-method comparison of same-sex couples with opposite-sex dating, engaged, and married dyads." ''Developmental Psychology,'' Vol 44(1), Jan 2008, 91-101.</ref> Specifically, in this study the quality of same- and opposite-sex relationships was examined at multiple levels of analysis via self-reports and partner reports, laboratory observations, and measures of physiological reactivity during dyadic interactions. Additionally, individuals in same-sex, engaged, and marital relationships were compared with one another on adult attachment security as assessed through the coherence of participants' narratives about their childhood experiences. Results indicated that individuals in committed same-sex relationships were generally not distinguishable from their committed opposite-sex counterparts.

===Argument concerning marriage privatization===

A libertarian argument for ] holds that the state has no role in defining the terms whereby individuals contract to arrange their personal relationships, regardless of sexual orientation.<ref name=Lindenberger>Lindenberger, M., "A Gay-Marriage Solution: End Marriage?" in ''Newsweek'', Mar. 16, 2009. </ref><ref name=Kinsella>Kinsella, S. "Libertarian View on Gay Marriage" in ''LewRockwell.com'', June 6, 2006. </ref><ref name=Boaz></ref> People holding this viewpoint argue that the state should have a limited role or no role in defining marriage, only in enforcing those contracts people construct themselves and willfully enter. Those following this line of reasoning believe that efforts to "legitimize" same-sex marriages as a state institution are backwards-looking, and will have the effect of expanding state influence into personal affairs where state influence already does not belong. People opposing same-sex marriages on these grounds, also support scaling back the definition by the state of contractual obligations between opposite sex partners to a same or similar degree.

===Arguments concerning equality===
]

Some opponents of same-sex marriage (including a number of ] organizations) argue that the opposite-sex definition of marriage is not unequal, unjust, or exclusionary because they think that homosexuality is not genetic or unchangeable.<ref name=autogenerated1 /><ref></ref><ref></ref><ref></ref> Same-sex marriage opponents (including NARTH) support this position with their research as well as anecdotal evidence regarding efforts to overcome unwanted same-sex attractions.<ref></ref><ref name="Psych">{{cite web
|url=http://www.aglp.org/pages/cfactsheets.html#Anchor-Gay-14210
|title=Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Issues
|author=]
|publisher=Association of Gay and Lesbian Psychiatrics
|month=May|year=2000}}</ref> The ], ] and ] stated in an ] presented to the Supreme Court of the State of California: "Sexual orientation has proved to be generally impervious to interventions intended to change it, which are sometimes referred to as “reparative therapy.” No scientifically adequate research has shown that such interventions are effective or safe. Moreover, because homosexuality is a normal variant of human sexuality, national mental health organizations do not encourage individuals to try to change their sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual. Therefore, all major national mental health organizations have adopted policy statements cautioning the profession and the public about treatments that purport to change sexual orientation."<ref name=amici /> The ] stated that it "shares the concern of both the American Psychiatric Association and the American Psychological Association that positions espoused by bodies like the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) in the United States are not supported by science. There is no sound scientific evidence that sexual orientation can be changed. Furthermore so-called treatments of homosexuality as recommended by NARTH create a setting in which prejudice and discrimination can flourish,"<ref>Royal College of Psychiatrists: </ref> and added that "The best evidence for efficacy of any treatment comes from ] and no such trial has been carried out in this field."<ref name=rcppalp>Royal College of Psychiatrists: </ref>

For the purposes of U.S. ], the state cannot discriminate against a person that belongs to a class even when the individual has the ability not to belong to such a class.{{Citation needed|date=September 2009}} For example, a non-Christian person has the legal ability to become a Christian. Few would argue that the chosen nature of one's religious affiliation would allow the state to discriminate against non-Christians.{{Citation needed|date=September 2009}} Whether a group belongs to a ] is only used in determining the methodology, namely ], ] or ] , courts must use to review the constitutionality of a given ] on equal protection challenge grounds.{{Citation needed|date=September 2009}}

] of the ] argues that same-sex unions are fundamentally different from opposite-sex unions.<ref name="rightwingnews1"></ref> In Gallagher's view, this fundamental difference justifies a difference in the way same-sex unions and opposite-sex unions are treated under the law: "t's not discrimination to treat different things differently."<ref name="rightwingnews1"/>

Only a few U.S. state courts ever considered constitutional challenges to laws defining marriage as an opposite-sex institution.{{dubious|date=September 2009}} Among them, the ]<ref>http://www2.law.columbia.edu/faculty_franke/Gender_Justice/Hernandez_Robles.pdf</ref> and the ]<ref name=autogenerated2>Md. Ban On Gay Marriage Is Upheld; Law Does Not Deny Basic Rights, Is Not Biased, Court Rules;The Washington Post; By Lisa Rein and Mary Otto - Washington Post Staff Writers; Wednesday, September 19, 2007; Page A01</ref> have held an opposite-sex definition of marriage to be constitutional with regards to these states constitutions; in these cases the majorities declined to interpret the ]. The Maryland Supreme Court ruled that discrimination does not take place nor are constitutional rights denied in their laws that prohibit same-gender marriages; the court held that these state laws protect that state's interest to have and protect children<ref name=autogenerated2 />
and that in Maryland "there is no fundamental right to marry a person of your own sex".<ref name="MDCourtofAppealsOpinion">{{cite web
|url=http://mdcourts.gov/opinions/coa/2007/44a06.pdf
|title=Court of Appeals of Maryland Opinion on ''Frank Conaway, et al. v. Gitanjali Deane, et al., No. 44, Sept. Term 2006''
|accessdate=2008-01-25
|last=Harrell
|first=Raker
|coauthors=
|date=2007-09-18
|work=
|format=
PDF|publisher=
}}</ref>

Others argue that an opposite-sex definition of marriage is inherently unequal because it denies two consenting adults the right to marry the person they love, simply because of their sexual orientation.{{Citation needed|date=September 2009}} According to this argument, for the state to determine who a consenting adult can or cannot choose to marry infringes on a fundamental liberty interest.{{Citation needed|date=September 2009}} For instance, a heterosexual U.S. citizen who marries a foreign partner immediately qualifies to bring that person to the ], while long-term gay and lesbian binational partners are denied the same rights, forcing foreign gay partners to seek expensive temporary employer or school-sponsored visas or face separation.<ref>See and </ref> In the court cases leading up to the legalization of same-sex marriages in ], the restriction of legal marriage to opposite-sex couples was overturned because it was found to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, in violation of the equality guarantees of ] of the ].

].]]

Some opponents of extending marriage to same-sex couples claim that equality can be achieved with ]s or other forms of legal recognition that do not go as far as to use the word "marriage" that is used for opposite-sex couples. The ] in '']'' held, in contrast, that there is a fundamental dissimilitude between "civil marriage" and "civil union" indicated in the very choice of language.<ref name="news.findlaw.com"/>

In 2006, the ], ] and ] stated in an ] presented to the Supreme Court of the State of California: "Gay men and lesbians form stable, committed relationships that are equivalent to heterosexual relationships in essential respects. The institution of marriage offers social, psychological, and health benefits that are denied to same-sex couples. By denying same-sex couples the right to marry, the state reinforces and perpetuates the stigma historically associated with homosexuality. Homosexuality remains stigmatized, and this stigma has negative consequences. California’s prohibition on marriage for same-sex couples reflects and reinforces this stigma". They concluded: "There is no scientific basis for distinguishing between same-sex couples and heterosexual couples with respect to the legal rights, obligations, benefits, and burdens conferred by civil marriage."<ref name=amici />

The following state supreme courts have held that an opposite-sex definition of marriage is unconstitutional and discriminatory being contrary to their state constitutions: ] (28-Oct-2008),<ref></ref> ] (3-Apr-2009),<ref></ref> ] (later reversed by constitutional amendment<ref name="latimes.com"/>), ] (later reversed by constitutional amendment), ] (18-Nov-2003),<ref></ref> ] (25-Oct-2006),<ref></ref> and ] (21-Dec-1999)<ref></ref> (see ], ], ], and ]).<ref></ref>

====Parallels to interracial marriage====
Proponents of same-sex marriages make a comparison between ] and segregation of homosexual and heterosexual marriage classifications in civil family law.<ref>{{cite news
|url=http://hnn.us/articles/4708.html
|title=Why the Ugly Rhetoric Against Gay Marriage Is Familiar to this Historian of Miscegenation
|publisher=History News Network of George Mason University
|author=Peggy Pascoe
|date=2004-04-19
|accessdate=2007-03-08
}} </ref> They argue that dividing the concept of same-sex marriage and different-sex marriage is tantamount to "]" policies (like that overturned in the ] case '']''), or ] that were also overturned by the Supreme Court in 1967 in '']''.

Opponents of same-sex marriages argue that women and men are fundamentally different from one another, whereas interracial couples still fit within the "one woman and one man" definition of marriage.<ref name="mmarriage">{{cite video
|url=http://www.secureminnesotaformarriage.org/ss/live/index.php?action=viewprod&sid=64&pid=149&pageid=258
|title=The Battle for Marriage in Minnesota
|publisher=Minnesota for Marriage
|medium=Video
|format=MPEG-4; WM9
|accessdate=2007-03-08
}}</ref> ] law professor Katherine Spaht holds that there is an inherent difference between most interracial marriages and all same-sex marriages because same-sex couples cannot procreate whereas interracial couples most of the time can; Spaht characterizes the debate as follows: “The fundamental understanding of marriage has always been, by definition, a man and a woman. Never did Webster’s Dictionary define the term marriage in terms of the races."<ref></ref>

In 1972, after the ]'s ruling in '']'' specifically distinguished ''Loving'' as not being applicable to the same-sex marriage debate, the United States Supreme Court dismissed the appeal "for want of a substantial ]." This type of dismissal may constitute a decision ] of the case or constitute a matter not concerning Federal constitutional jurisdiction; as such, it is debatable whether ''Baker'' should be a binding precedent on all lower federal courts.

===Legal effect on same sex couples===
{{See also|Rights and responsibilities of marriages in the United States}}
In general, the legal effect marriage has on same sex couples when marriage licenses are issued to them and honored by the states in which they live is indistinguishable from any other legal effect marriage has on any other couple under state law.

In the United States of America, same-sex marriages issued and honored by a state lack all of the same federal legal protections automatically bestowed upon heterosexual marriages under federal law.

===Economic effects on same sex couples===
{{Refimprovesect|date=December 2008}}
Dr. M. V. Lee Badgett, an economist and associate professor at the ], has studied the impact of same-sex legal marriage on four groups.

'''Impact on same-sex couples:''' Badgett finds that exclusion from legal marriage has an economic impact on same-sex couples. According to a 1997 ] study requested by Rep. ] (R), at least 1,049 U.S. Federal laws and regulations include reference to marital status. A later 2004 study by the ] finds 1,138 statutory provisions "in which marital status is a factor in determining or receiving 'benefits, rights, and privileges.'"<ref name=cbo1>{{cite paper
|url=http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=5559
|title=The Potential Budgetary Impact of Recognizing Same-Sex Marriages
|publisher=Congressional Budget Office
|format=.HTML; .PDF
|date=2004-06-21
|accessdate=2007-03-08
}}</ref> Many of these laws govern property rights, benefits, and taxation. Same-sex couples are ineligible for spousal and survivor ] benefits. Badgett's research finds the resulting difference in Social Security income for same-sex couples compared to opposite-sex married couples is US$5,588 per year. The federal ban on same-sex marriage and benefits through the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) extends to federal government employee benefits. According to Badgett's work, same-sex couples face other financial challenges against which legal marriage at least partially shields opposite-sex couples:

* potential loss of couple's home from medical expenses of one partner caring for another gravely ill one
* costs of supporting two households, travel, or emigration out of the U.S. for an American citizen unable to legally marry a non-U.S. citizen
* higher cost of purchasing private insurance for partner and children if company is not one of 18% that offer domestic partner benefits
* higher taxes: unlike a company's contribution to an employee's spouse's health insurance, domestic partner benefits are taxed as additional compensation
* legal costs associated with obtaining domestic partner documents to gain some of the power of attorney, health care decision-making, and inheritance rights granted through legal marriage
* higher health costs associated with lack of insurance and preventative care: 20% of same-sex couples have a member who is uninsured compared to 10% of married opposite-sex couples
* current tax law allows a spouse to inherit an unlimited amount from the deceased without incurring an estate tax but an unmarried partner would have to pay the estate tax on the inheritance from her/his partner
* same-sex couples are not eligible to file jointly or separately as a married couple and thus cannot take the advantages of lower tax rates when the individual income of the partners differs significantly

While state laws grant full marriage rights (], ], ], ], ] and ]) or some or all of the benefits under another name (], ], etc.), these state laws do not extend the benefits of marriage on the Federal level, and most states do not currently recognize same-sex marriages or civil unions from other states.

One often overlooked aspect of same-sex marriage are the potential ''negative'' effects on same-sex couples. While the legal benefits of marriage are numerous, same-sex couples would face the same financial constraints of legal marriage as opposite-sex married couples. Such potential effects include the ] in taxation. Similarly, while social service providers usually do not count one partner's assets toward the income means test for welfare and disability assistance for the other partner, a legally married couple's joint assets are normally used in calculating whether a married individual qualifies for assistance.

===Economic effects on the economy as a whole===
'''Impact on businesses:''' Dr. M. V. Lee Badgett's research estimates the potential impact on businesses of same-sex marriage legalization to be $2 billion to the wedding industry alone. Badgett derives this estimate by calculating the amount spent on weddings if a) half of same-sex couples marry and b) each couple spends 1/4 the average amount spent on a opposite-sex wedding (US$27,600 average wedding cost / 4=US$6,900 per same-sex couple).

'''Impact on employers''': In terms of employers where marriage opponents fear higher benefit costs, Badgett and Mercer Human Resources Consulting separately find less than 1% of employees with a same-sex partner sign up for domestic partner benefits when a company offers them. Badgett finds less than 0.3% of ] firms' employees signed up for spousal benefits when that state legalized same-sex marriage.

'''Impact on governments''': A 2004 ] (CBO) report examines the impact of allowing the 1.2 million Americans in same-sex domestic partnerships in the 2000 Census to marry and finds the impact to be comparatively small in terms of the huge Federal budget. While some spending on Federal programs would increase, these outlays would be offset by savings in other spending areas. The report predicts that if same-sex marriage was legalized in all 50 states and on the Federal level, the U.S. government would bring in a net surplus of US$1 billion per year over the next 10 years.<ref name=cbo1/>

Opposing Viewpoints research indicates that allowing marriage for same sex couples would stimulate the economy by increasing business activity, and thus increase sales tax revenues for the states where such marriages are permitted.<ref></ref> The Williams Institute of ] has conducted several studies which indicated allowing same sex marriage would increase business activity in relevant industries and also boost state income tax revenues.<ref></ref>

===Impacts on mental health===
Recently, several psychological studies<ref name=autogenerated5>Price, M. "UPFRONT - Research uncovers the stress created by same-sex marriage bans" in ''Monitor on Psychology'', Volume 40, No. 1, page 10, January 2009. Washington DC: American Psychological Association. </ref><ref>Potoczniak, Daniel J.; Aldea, Mirela A.; DeBlaere, Cirleen"Ego identity, social anxiety, social support, and self​-​concealment in lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals." ''Journal of Counseling Psychology,'' Vol 54(4), Oct 2007, 447-457.</ref><ref>
Balsam, Kimberly F.; Mohr, Jonathan J. "Adaptation to sexual orientation stigma: A comparison of bisexual and lesbian/gay adults." ''Journal of Counseling Psychology,'' Vol 54(3), Jul 2007, 306-319.
</ref> have shown that an increase in exposure to negative conversations and media messages about same-sex marriage creates a harmful environment for the LGBT population that may affect their health and well-being.

One study surveyed more than 1,500 lesbian, gay and bisexual adults across the nation and found that respondents from the 25 states that have outlawed same-sex marriage had the highest reports of "minority stress" — the chronic social stress that results from minority-group stigmatization — as well as general psychological distress. According to the study, the negative campaigning that comes with a ban is directly responsible for the increased stress. Past research has shown that minority stress is linked to health risks such as risky sexual behavior and substance abuse.<ref name=autogenerated4>Rostosky, Sharon Scales; Riggle, Ellen D. B.; Gray, Barry E.; Hatton, Roxanna L. "Minority stress experiences in committed same​-​sex couple relationships." ''Professional Psychology: Research and Practice,'' Vol 38(4), Aug 2007, 392-400.</ref>

Two other studies examined personal reports from LGBT adults and their families living in ], immediately after a successful 2006 ballot campaign banned same-sex marriage. Most respondents reported feeling alienated from their communities, afraid that they would lose custody of their children and that they might become victims of violence. The studies also found that families experienced a kind of secondary minority stress, says Jennifer Arm, a counseling graduate student at the ].<ref>Szymanski, Dawn M.; Carr, Erika R. "The roles of gender role conflict and internalized heterosexism in gay and bisexual men's psychological distress: Testing two mediation models." ''Psychology of Men & Masculinity,'' Vol 9(1), Jan 2008, 40-54.</ref>

Gay activist ] 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.<ref>Rauch, Jonathan. "For Better or Worse?" The case for gay (and straight) marriage. ''The New Republic'', May 6, 1996. </ref><ref>Rauch, Jonathan (2004). ''Gay Marriage: Why It Is Good for Gays, Good for Straights, and Good for America.'' New York, NY: Henry Holt and Company, LLC.</ref> After reviewing current psychological and other social science studies on same-sex marriage in comparison to opposite-sex marriage, ] claims that the data <ref name=autogenerated3>Herek, Gregory M. "Legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the United States: A social science perspective." ''American Psychologist,'' Vol 61(6), Sep 2006, 607-621.</ref> indicate that same-sex and opposite-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. Herek concludes that 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.<ref name=autogenerated3 />

==See also==
{{Col-begin}}
{{Col-2}}
*] (''"brother-making"'')
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
{{Col-2}}
{{Portal|LGBT|Portal LGBT.svg}}
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
{{Col-end}}
===Documentaries and literature===
*'']''
*'']''
*'']''
*'']''
*'']''
*MTV's True Life: '']''

==Footnotes==
{{Reflist|2}}


==Bibliography== ==Bibliography==
{{refbegin|30em}}
<div class="references-small">
*{{cite book|last=Boswell|first=John|authorlink=John Boswell (historian)|year=1995|title=The Marriage of Likeness: Same-sex Unions in Pre-modern Europe|publisher=Simon Harper and Collins|location=New York|isbn=0-00-255508-5}} * {{Cite book |last=Boswell |first=John |title=The Marriage of Likeness: Same-sex Unions in Pre-modern Europe |publisher=Simon Harper and Collins |year=1995 |isbn=978-0-00-255508-1 |location=New York |author-link=John Boswell (historian)}}
*{{cite book|last=Boswell|first=John|authorlink=John Boswell|year=1994|title=Same-sex Unions in Premodern Europe|publisher=Villard Books|location=New York|isbn=0-679-43228-0}} * {{Cite book |last=Boswell |first=John |url=https://archive.org/details/samesexunionsinp00bosw |title=Same-sex Unions in Premodern Europe |publisher=Villard Books |year=1994 |isbn=978-0-679-43228-9 |location=New York |author-link=John Boswell}}
*{{cite book|last=Caramagno|first=Thomas C.|year=2002|title=Irreconcilable Differences? Intellectual Stalemate in the Gay Rights Debate|publisher=Praeger|location=Westport, CT|isbn=0-275-97721-8}} * {{Cite book |last=Brownson |first=James V. |url=https://archive.org/details/biblegendersexua0000brow |title=Bible, Gender, Sexuality: Reforming the Church's Debate on Same-Sex Relationships |publisher=] |year=2013 |isbn=978-0-8028-6863-3 |url-access=registration}}
* {{Cite book |last=Calò |first=Emanuele |title=Matrimonio à la carte&nbsp;— Matrimoni, convivenze registrate e divorzi dopo l'intervento comunitario |publisher=Giuffrè |year=2009 |location=Milano}}
*{{cite book|last=Cere|first=Daniel|authorlink=Daniel Cere|year=2004|title=Divorcing Marriage: Unveiling the Dangers in Canada's New Social Experiment|publisher=McGill-Queen's University Press|location=Montreal|isbn=0-7735-2895-4}}
*{{cite book|last=Chauncey|first=George|authorlink=George Chauncey|year=2004|title=Why Marriage?: The History Shaping Today's Debate over Gay Equality|publisher=Basic Books|location=New York|isbn=0-465-00957-3}} * {{Cite book |last=Caramagno |first=Thomas C. |title=Irreconcilable Differences? Intellectual Stalemate in the Gay Rights Debate |publisher=Praeger |year=2002 |isbn=978-0-275-97721-4 |location=Westport, CT}}
* {{Cite book |last=Cere |first=Daniel |url=https://archive.org/details/divorcingmarriag0000unse |title=Divorcing Marriage: Unveiling the Dangers in Canada's New Social Experiment |publisher=McGill-Queen's University Press |year=2004 |isbn=978-0-7735-2895-6 |location=Montreal |author-link=Daniel Cere |url-access=registration}}
*{{cite book|last=Dobson|first=James C.|authorlink=James Dobson|year=2004|title=Marriage Under Fire|publisher=Multnomah|location=Sisters, Or.|isbn=1-59052-431-4|unused_data=|Marriage under Fire: Why We Must Win This War}}
*{{cite book|last=Larocque|first=Sylvain|year=2006|title=]|publisher=James Lorimer & Company|location=Toronto|isbn=1-55028-927-6}} * {{Cite book |last=Chauncey |first=George |url=https://archive.org/details/whymarriagehisto0000chau |title=Why Marriage?: The History Shaping Today's Debate over Gay Equality |publisher=Basic Books |year=2004 |isbn=978-0-465-00957-2 |location=New York |author-link=George Chauncey |url-access=registration}}
*{{cite book|last=Moats|first=David|year=2004|title=Civil Wars: A Battle For Gay Marriage|publisher=Harcourt, Inc.|location=New York, NY|isbn=0-15-101017-X}} * {{Cite book |last=Dobson |first=James C. |url=https://archive.org/details/marriageunderfir00dobs |title=Marriage Under Fire |publisher=Multnomah |year=2004 |isbn=978-1-59052-431-2 |location=Sisters, Or. |author-link=James Dobson}}
* {{Cite book |title=The Meaning of Marriage: Family, State, Market, And Morals |publisher=Spence Publishing Company |year=2006 |isbn=978-1-890626-64-8 |editor-last=George |editor-first=Robert P. |location=Dallas |editor-last2=Elshtain |editor-first2=Jean Bethke |editor-link2=Jean Bethke Elshtain}}
*{{cite book|last=Rauch|first=Jonathan|authorlink=Jonathan Rauch|year=2004|title=Gay Marriage: Why It Is Good for Gays, Good for Straights, and Good for America|publisher=Henry Holt and Company, LLC|location=New York, NY|isbn=0-80507-815-0}}
* {{Cite book |title=Our Families, Our Values: Snapshots of Queer Kinship |publisher=The Harrington Park Press, An Imprint of the Haworth Press, Inc. |year=2008 |isbn=978-1-56023-910-9 |editor-last=Goss |editor-first=Robert E. |editor-link=Robert Goss |location=New York, NY |editor-last2=Strongheart |editor-first2=Amy Adams Squire}}
*{{cite book|last=Spedale|first=Darren|authorlink=Darren Spedale|year=2006|title=Gay Marriage: For Better or For Worse? What We've Learned From the Evidence|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=New York|isbn=0-19-518751-2}}
* {{Cite book |last1=Greenwich, Alex |title=Yes Yes Yes: Australia's Journey to Marriage Equality |last2=Robinson, Shirleene |publisher=NewSouth Books |year=2018 |isbn=9781742235998 |location=Australia}}
*{{cite book|last=Truluck|first=Rembert S.|year=2000|title=Steps to Recovery from Bible Abuse|publisher=Chi Rho Press, Inc.|location=Gaithersburg, MD|isbn=1-888493-16-X}}
*{{cite book|last=Wolfson|first=Evan|authorlink=Evan Wolfson|year=2004|title=Why Marriage Matters: America, Equality, and Gay People's Right to Marry|publisher=Simon & Schuster|location=New York|isbn=0-7432-6459-2}} * {{Cite book |last=Larocque |first=Sylvain |title=Gay Marriage: The Story of a Canadian Social Revolution |publisher=James Lorimer & Company |year=2006 |isbn=978-1-55028-927-5 |location=Toronto}}
* {{Cite book |title=Same-Sex Marriage and Religious Liberty: Emerging Conflicts |publisher=Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. |year=2008 |isbn=978-0-7425-6326-1 |editor-last=Laycock |editor-first=Douglas |editor-link=Douglas Laycock |location=Lanham, MD |editor-last2=Picarello |editor-first2=Anthony Jr. |editor-last3=Wilson |editor-first3=Robin Fretwell}}
*{{cite book|editor=Robert P. George, ] (Eds.)|year=2006|title=The Meaning of Marriage: Family, State, Market, And Morals|publisher=Spence Publishing Company|location=Dallas|isbn=1-890626-64-3}}
* {{Cite book |last=Moats |first=David |url=https://archive.org/details/civilwarsbattlef00moat |title=Civil Wars: A Battle For Gay Marriage |publisher=Harcourt, Inc. |year=2004 |isbn=978-0-15-101017-2 |location=New York, NY}}
*{{cite book|editor=Robert E. Goss, Amy Adams Squire Strongheart (Eds.)|year=2008|title=Our Families, Our Values: Snapshots of Queer Kinship|publisher=The Harrington Park Press, An Imprint of the Haworth Press, Inc.|location=New York, NY|isbn=1-56023-910-7}}
* {{Cite book |last=Oliver |first=Marilyn Tower |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=XXIFAAAACAAJ |title=Gay and lesbian rights: a struggle |publisher=Enslow Publishers |year=1998 |isbn=978-0-89490-958-0 |access-date=28 October 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210204174006/https://books.google.com/books?id=XXIFAAAACAAJ |archive-date=4 February 2021 |url-status=live}}
*{{cite book|editor=Douglas Laycock, Anthony Picarello, Jr., Robin Fretwell Wilson (Eds.)|year=2008|title=Same-Sex Marriage and Religious Liberty: Emerging Conflicts|publisher=Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.|location=Lanham, MD|isbn=0-74256-326-X}}
*{{cite book|editor=] (Editor)|year=2004|title=Same-Sex Marriage: Pro and Con - A Reader, Revised Updated Edition|publisher=Vintage Books, a division of Random House, Inc.|location=New York, NY|isbn=1-40007-866-0}} * {{Cite book |last=Rauch |first=Jonathan |title=Gay Marriage: Why It Is Good for Gays, Good for Straights, and Good for America |title-link=Gay Marriage: Why It Is Good for Gays, Good for Straights, and Good for America |publisher=Henry Holt and Company, LLC |year=2004 |isbn=978-0-8050-7815-2 |location=New York, NY |author-link=Jonathan Rauch}}
* {{Cite book |last=Rugg, Sally |title=How Powerful We Are : Behind the scenes with one of Australia's leading activists |publisher=Hachette Australia |year=2019 |isbn=9780733642227 |location=Australia |oclc=1103918151}}
*{{cite book|last=Oliver|first=Marylin Tower|authorlink=Marylin Tower Oliver|year=1998|title=Gay and Lesbian Rights, A Struggle|publisher=Enslow|location=Springfield, NJ}}
* {{Cite book |last1=Smart |first1=Carol |title=Same sex marriages: new generations, new relationships. Genders and sexualities in the social sciences |last2=Heaphy |first2=Brian |last3=Einarsdottir |first3=Anna |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan |year=2013 |isbn=9780230300231 |location=Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire}}
*{{cite book|last=Wedgewood|first=Ralpbh|authorlink=Ralph Wedgewood|year=1999|title=Homosexuality: Opposing Viewpoints|publisher=Spence Publishing Company|location=Dallas}}
* {{Cite book |last=Spedale |first=Darren |url=https://archive.org/details/gaymarriageforbe0000eskr |title=Gay Marriage: For Better or For Worse? What We've Learned From the Evidence |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2006 |isbn=978-0-19-518751-9 |location=New York |author-link=Darren Spedale}}
</div>
* {{Cite book |title=Same-Sex Marriage: Pro and Con&nbsp;— A Reader, Revised Updated Edition |publisher=Vintage Books, a division of Random House, Inc. |year=2004 |isbn=978-1-4000-7866-0 |editor-last=Sullivan |editor-first=Andrew |editor-link=Andrew Sullivan |location=New York, NY}}
* {{Cite book |last=Truluck |first=Rembert S. |title=Steps to Recovery from Bible Abuse |publisher=Chi Rho Press, Inc. |year=2000 |isbn=978-1-888493-16-0 |location=Gaithersburg, MD |author-link=Rembert S. Truluck}}
* {{Cite book |last=Wolfson |first=Evan |url=https://archive.org/details/whymarriagematte00wolf |title=Why Marriage Matters: America, Equality, and Gay People's Right to Marry |publisher=Simon & Schuster |year=2004 |isbn=978-0-7432-6459-4 |location=New York |author-link=Evan Wolfson |url-access=registration}}
{{refend}}


==External links== ==External links==
{{External links|date=August 2009}} {{sister project links|auto=yes}}
<!--======================== {{No more links}} ============================
{{Commons category|Same-sex marriage}}
| PLEASE BE CAUTIOUS IN ADDING MORE LINKS TO THIS ARTICLE. Misplaced Pages |
*
| is not a collection of links nor should it be used for advertising. |
* topic page from ]
| |
* in a May 2009 interactive debate from NOW on PBS Online
| Excessive or inappropriate links WILL BE DELETED. |
*
| See ] & ] for details. |
*
| |
*, Evan Wolfson, '']'', February 12, 2008.
| If there are already plentiful links, please propose additions or |
* California Supreme Court Opinion overturning ban on same-sex unions, May 15, 2008
| replacements on this article's discussion page, or submit your link |
*, Joshua Baker, ], May 2008.
| to the relevant category at the Open Directory Project (dmoz.org) |
*, Emily Doskow, NOLO, 2008.
| and link back to that category using the {{dmoz}} template. |
* Newsweek Web Exclusive, December 16, 2008.
==={{No more links}}=========-->
* by David Blankenhorn and ]
*
* Iowa Supreme Court Opinion Overturns Ban on Gay Marriage 3Apr2009.
* - Essay on public opinion, religion, & the law


{{Status of same-sex unions}} {{Status of same-sex unions}}
{{Same-sex marriage}}
{{Marriage amendments}} {{Marriage amendments}}
{{Types of marriages}}
{{LGBT|state=collapsed|rights=expanded}}
{{LGBTQ|state=collapsed|rights=expanded}}
{{Discrimination}}
{{Authority control}}


{{DEFAULTSORT:Same-Sex Marriage}}
] ]
] ]

<!--Other languages-->

]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]

Latest revision as of 05:16, 4 January 2025

Marriage of persons of the same sex or gender "Marriage equality" and "gay marriage" redirect here. For other uses, see marriage equality (disambiguation) and gay marriage (disambiguation).

Part of the LGBTQ rights series
Legal status of
same-sex unions
Marriage

Recognized

Civil unions or registered partnerships but not marriage
Minimal recognition
See also
Notes
  1. ^ Performed in the Netherlands proper (including the Caribbean Netherlands), as well as in Aruba and Curaçao. May be registered in Sint Maarten in such cases, but the rights of marriage are not guaranteed.
  2. Neither performed nor recognized in Niue, Tokelau, or the Cook Islands.
  3. Neither performed nor recognized in six British Overseas Territories.
  4. ^ Neither performed nor recognized in some tribal nations of the US. Recognized but not performed in several other tribal nations and American Samoa.
  5. Registered foreign marriages confer all marriage rights in Israel. Domestic common-law marriages confer most rights of marriage. Domestic civil marriage recognized by some cities.
  6. ^ The Coman v. Romania ruling of the European Court of Justice obliges the state to provide residency rights for the foreign spouses of EU citizens. Some member states, including Romania, do not follow the ruling.
  7. A "declaration of family relationship" is available in several of Cambodia's communes which may be useful in matters such as housing, but is not legally binding.
  8. Guardianship agreements confer some limited legal benefits in China, including decisions about medical and personal care.
  9. Hong Kong provides inheritance, guardianship rights, and residency rights for foreign spouses of legal residents.
  10. Indian courts have recognised guru–shishya, nata pratha or maitri karar–type contractual relationships, but they are not legally binding.
  11. Most Japanese cities and prefectures issue partnership certificates, but they are not legally binding.
  12. Marriages conducted abroad between a Namibian national and a foreign spouse provide residency rights in Namibia.
  13. Romania provides hospital visitation rights through a "legal representative" status.
  1. Not yet in effect.
LGBTQ portal
Part of a series on
LGBTQ topics
      
Sexual orientation and gender
History
General
Identities
Culture
Rights
Health
Social attitudes
Issues
Academic fields and discourse
LGBTQ portal
Part of a series on
Discrimination
Forms
Attributes
Social
Religious
Ethnic/national
Manifestations
Policies
Countermeasures
Related topics

Same-sex marriage, also known as gay marriage, is the marriage of two people of the same legal sex. As of 2025, marriage between same-sex couples is legally performed and recognized in 37 countries, with a total population of 1.5 billion people (20% of the world's population). The most recent jurisdiction to legalize same-sex marriage is Liechtenstein. Thailand is set to begin performing same-sex marriages in January 2025.

Same-sex marriage is legally recognized in a large majority of the world's developed countries; notable exceptions are Italy, Japan, South Korea and the Czech Republic. Adoption rights are not necessarily covered, though most states with same-sex marriage allow those couples to jointly adopt as other married couples can. Some countries, such as Nigeria and Russia, restrict advocacy for same-sex marriage. A few of these are among the 35 countries (as of 2023) that constitutionally define marriage to prevent marriage between couples of the same sex, with most of those provisions enacted in recent decades as a preventative measure. Other countries have constitutionally mandated Islamic law, which is generally interpreted as prohibiting marriage between same-sex couples. In six of the former and most of the latter, homosexuality itself is criminalized.

There are records of marriage between men dating back to the first century. Michael McConnell and Jack Baker are the first same sex couple in modern recorded history known to obtain a marriage license, have their marriage solemnized, which occurred on September 3, 1971, in Minnesota, and have it legally recognized by any form of government. The first law providing for marriage equality between same-sex and opposite-sex couples was passed in the continental Netherlands in 2000 and took effect on 1 April 2001. The application of marriage law equally to same-sex and opposite-sex couples has varied by jurisdiction, and has come about through legislative change to marriage law, court rulings based on constitutional guarantees of equality, recognition that marriage of same-sex couples is allowed by existing marriage law, and by direct popular vote, such as through referendums and initiatives. The most prominent supporters of same-sex marriage are the world's major medical and scientific communities, along with human rights and civil rights organizations, while its most prominent opponents are religious fundamentalist groups. Polls consistently show continually rising support for the recognition of same-sex marriage in all developed democracies and in many developing countries.

Scientific studies show that the financial, psychological, and physical well-being of gay people is enhanced by marriage, and that the children of same-sex parents benefit from being raised by married same-sex couples within a marital union that is recognized by law and supported by societal institutions. At the same time, no harm is done to the institution of marriage among heterosexuals. Social science research indicates that the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage stigmatizes and invites public discrimination against gay and lesbian people, with research repudiating the notion that either civilization or viable social orders depend upon restricting marriage to heterosexuals. Same-sex marriage can provide those in committed same-sex relationships with relevant government services and make financial demands on them comparable to that required of those in opposite-sex marriages, and also gives them legal protections such as inheritance and hospital visitation rights. Opposition is based on claims such as that homosexuality is unnatural and abnormal, that the recognition of same-sex unions will promote homosexuality in society, and that children are better off when raised by opposite-sex couples. These claims are refuted by scientific studies, which show that homosexuality is a natural and normal variation in human sexuality, that sexual orientation is not a choice, and that children of same-sex couples fare just as well as the children of opposite-sex couples.

Terminology

Alternative terms

Two men marry, surrounded by wedding party, in New Orleans, United States on 11 November 2017

Some proponents of the legal recognition of same-sex marriage—such as Marriage Equality USA (founded in 1998), Freedom to Marry (founded in 2003), Canadians for Equal Marriage, and Marriage for All Japan - used the terms marriage equality and equal marriage to signal that their goal was for same-sex marriage to be recognized on equal ground with opposite-sex marriage. The Associated Press recommends the use of same-sex marriage over gay marriage. In deciding whether to use the term gay marriage, it may also be noted that not everyone in a same-sex marriage is gay – for example, some are bisexual – and therefore using the term gay marriage is sometimes considered erasure of such people.

Use of the term marriage

Anthropologists have struggled to determine a definition of marriage that absorbs commonalities of the social construct across cultures around the world. Many proposed definitions have been criticized for failing to recognize the existence of same-sex marriage in some cultures, including those of more than 30 African peoples, such as the Kikuyu and Nuer.

With several countries revising their marriage laws to recognize same-sex couples in the 21st century, all major English dictionaries have revised their definition of the word marriage to either drop gender specifications or supplement them with secondary definitions to include gender-neutral language or explicit recognition of same-sex unions. The Oxford English Dictionary has recognized same-sex marriage since 2000.

Opponents of same-sex marriage who want marriage to be restricted to pairings of a man and a woman, such as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Catholic Church, and the Southern Baptist Convention, use the term traditional marriage to mean opposite-sex marriage.

History

Main article: History of same-sex unions For a chronological guide, see Timeline of same-sex marriage. For broader coverage of this topic, see History of homosexuality.

Ancient

Further information: Homosexuality in ancient Rome

A reference to marriage between same-sex couples appears in the Sifra, which was written in the 3rd century CE. The Book of Leviticus prohibited homosexual relations, and the Hebrews were warned not to "follow the acts of the land of Egypt or the acts of the land of Canaan" (Lev. 18:22, 20:13). The Sifra clarifies what these ambiguous "acts" were, and that they included marriage between same-sex couples: "A man would marry a man and a woman a woman, a man would marry a woman and her daughter, and a woman would be married to two men."

A few scholars believe that in the early Roman Empire some male couples were celebrating traditional marriage rites in the presence of friends. Male–male weddings are reported by sources that mock them; the feelings of the participants are not recorded. Various ancient sources state that the emperor Nero celebrated two public weddings with males, once taking the role of the bride (with a freedman Pythagoras), and once the groom (with Sporus); there may have been a third in which he was the bride. In the early 3rd century AD, the emperor Elagabalus is reported to have been the bride in a wedding to his male partner. Other mature men at his court had husbands, or said they had husbands in imitation of the emperor. Roman law did not recognize marriage between males, but one of the grounds for disapproval expressed in Juvenal's satire is that celebrating the rites would lead to expectations for such marriages to be registered officially. As the empire was becoming Christianized in the 4th century, legal prohibitions against marriage between males began to appear.

Contemporary

Newly married couple in Minnesota shortly after the federal legalization of same-sex marriage in the United States, 2015

Michael McConnell and Jack Baker are the first same sex couple in modern recorded history known to obtain a marriage license, have their marriage solemnized, which occurred on September 3, 1971, in Minnesota, and have it legally recognized by any form of government. Historians variously trace the beginning of the modern movement in support of same-sex marriage to anywhere from around the 1980s to the 1990s. During the 1980s in the United States, the AIDS epidemic led to increased attention on the legal aspects of same-sex relationships. Andrew Sullivan made the first case for same sex marriage in a major American journal in 1989, published in The New Republic.

In 1989, Denmark became the first country to legally recognize a relationship for same-sex couples, establishing registered partnerships, which gave those in same-sex relationships "most rights of married heterosexuals, but not the right to adopt or obtain joint custody of a child". In 2001, the continental Netherlands became the first country to broaden marriage laws to include same-sex couples. Since then, same-sex marriage has been established by law in 34 other countries, including most of the Americas and Western Europe. Yet its spread has been uneven — South Africa is the only country in Africa to take the step; Taiwan and Thailand are the only ones in Asia.

Timeline

Main article: Timeline of same-sex marriage

The summary table below lists in chronological order the sovereign states (the United Nations member states and Taiwan) that have legalized same-sex marriage. As of 2025, 37 states have legalized in some capacity.

Dates are when marriages between same-sex couples began to be officially certified, or when local laws were passed if marriages were already legal under higher authority.

2001 Netherlands Netherlands (1 April)
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006 South Africa South Africa (30 November)
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025

Same-sex marriage around the world

Main articles: Legal status of same-sex marriage, Same-sex union legislation, and Recognition of same-sex unions by country

Same-sex marriage is legally performed and recognized in 37 countries: Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Denmark, Ecuador, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Uruguay. Same-sex marriage performed remotely or abroad is recognized with full marital rights by Israel.

  Marriage open to same-sex couples   Same-sex marriage recognized with full rights when performed remotely or abroad   Legislation or binding domestic court ruling establishing same-sex marriage, but marriage is not yet provided for   Civil unions or domestic partnerships   Unregistered cohabitation or legal guardianship   Nonbinding certification   Limited recognition of marriage performed in certain other jurisdictions (residency rights for spouses)   No legal recognition of same-sex unions

Same-sex marriage will begin to be performed by Thailand in January 2025, and is under consideration by the legislature or the courts in El Salvador, Italy, Japan, Nepal, and Venezuela.

Civil unions are being considered in a number of countries, including Kosovo, Peru, the Philippines, and Poland.

On 12 March 2015, the European Parliament passed a non-binding resolution encouraging EU institutions and member states to " on the recognition of same-sex marriage or same-sex civil union as a political, social and human and civil rights issue".

In response to the international spread of same-sex marriage, a number of countries have enacted preventative constitutional bans, with the most recent being Mali in 2023, and Gabon in 2024. In other countries, such restrictions and limitations are effected through legislation. Even before same-sex marriage was first legislated, some countries had constitutions that specified that marriage was between a man and a woman.

  Same-sex marriage banned by secular constitution   Same-sex marriage banned by constitutionally mandated religious law   No constitutional ban

International court rulings

European Court of Human Rights

In 2010, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled in Schalk and Kopf v Austria, a case involving an Austrian same-sex couple who were denied the right to marry. The court found, by a vote of 4 to 3, that their human rights had not been violated. The court further stated that same-sex unions are not protected under art. 12 of ECHR ("Right to marry"), which exclusively protects the right to marry of opposite-sex couples (without regard if the sex of the partners is the result of birth or of sex change), but they are protected under art. 8 of ECHR ("Right to respect for private and family life") and art. 14 ("Prohibition of discrimination").

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", not limiting marriage to those in a heterosexual relationship. However, the ECHR stated in Schalk and Kopf v Austria that this provision was intended to limit marriage to heterosexual relationships, as it used the term "men and women" instead of "everyone". Nevertheless, the court accepted and is considering cases concerning same-sex marriage recognition, e.g. Andersen v Poland. In 2021, the court ruled in Fedotova and Others v. Russia—followed by later judgements concerning other member states—that countries must provide some sort of legal recognition to same-sex couples, although not necessarily marriage.

European Union

Further information: Coman and Others v General Inspectorate for Immigration and Ministry of the Interior

On 5 June 2018, the European Court of Justice ruled, in a case from Romania, that, under the specific conditions of the couple in question, married same-sex couples have the same residency rights as other married couples in an EU country, even if that country does not permit or recognize same-sex marriage. However, the ruling was not implemented in Romania and on 14 September 2021 the European Parliament passed a resolution calling on the European Commission to ensure that the ruling is respected across the EU.

Inter-American Court of Human Rights

Alexandra Chávez and Michelle Avilés, the first same-sex couple to marry in Ecuador

On 8 January 2018, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) issued an advisory opinion that states party to the American Convention on Human Rights should grant same-sex couples accession to all existing domestic legal systems of family registration, including marriage, along with all rights that derive from marriage. The Court recommended that governments issue temporary decrees recognizing same-sex marriage until new legislation is brought in. They also said that it was inadmissible and discriminatory for a separate legal provision to be established (such as civil unions) instead of same-sex marriage.

Other arrangements

Civil unions

Main article: Civil union
Many advocates, such as this November 2008 protester at a demonstration in New York City against California Proposition 8, reject the notion of civil unions, describing them as inferior to the legal recognition of same-sex marriage.

Civil union, civil partnership, domestic partnership, registered partnership, unregistered partnership, and unregistered cohabitation statuses offer varying legal benefits of marriage. As of 7 January 2025, countries that have an alternative form of legal recognition other than marriage on a national level are: Bolivia, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Montenegro and San Marino. Same-sex marriage performed remotely or abroad is recognized with full marital rights by Israel. Poland offers more limited rights. Additionally, various cities and counties in Cambodia and Japan offer same-sex couples varying levels of benefits, which include hospital visitation rights and others.

Additionally, eighteen countries that have legally recognized same-sex marriage also have an alternative form of recognition for same-sex couples, usually available to heterosexual couples as well: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, France, Greece, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal, South Africa, Spain, the United Kingdom and Uruguay.

They are also available in parts of the United States (Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, Nevada and Oregon) and Canada.

Non-sexual same-sex marriage

Kenya

Main article: LGBT rights in Kenya

Female same-sex marriage is practiced among the Gikuyu, Nandi, Kamba, Kipsigis, and to a lesser extent neighboring peoples. About 5–10% of women are in such marriages. However, this is not seen as homosexual, but is instead a way for families without sons to keep their inheritance within the family.

Nigeria

Main article: Recognition of same-sex unions in Nigeria

Among the Igbo people and probably other peoples in the south of the country, there are circumstances where a marriage between women is considered appropriate, such as when a woman has no child and her husband dies, and she takes a wife to perpetuate her inheritance and family lineage.

Studies

The American Anthropological Association stated on 26 February 2004:

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.

Research findings from 1998 to 2015 from the University of Virginia, Michigan State University, Florida State University, the University of Amsterdam, the New York State Psychiatric Institute, Stanford University, the University of California-San Francisco, the University of California-Los Angeles, Tufts University, Boston Medical Center, the Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health, and independent researchers also support the findings of this study.

The overall socio-economic and health effects of legal access to same-sex marriage around the world have been summarized by Badgett and co-authors. The review found that sexual minority individuals took-up legal marriage when it became available to them (but at lower rates than different-sex couples). There is instead no evidence that same-sex marriage legalization affected different-sex marriages. On the health side, same-sex marriage legalization increased health insurance coverage for individuals in same-sex couples (in the US), and it led to improvements in sexual health among men who have sex with men, while there is mixed evidence on mental health effects among sexual minorities. In addition, the study found mixed evidence on a range of downstream social outcomes such as attitudes toward LGBTQ+ people and employment choices of sexual minorities.

Health

As of 2006, 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 parents and carers 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. Studies in the United States have correlated legalization of same-sex marriage to lower rates of HIV infection, psychiatric disorders, and suicide rate in the LGBT population.

Issues

See also: LGBT rights opposition

While few societies have recognized same-sex unions as marriages, the historical and anthropological record reveals a large range of attitudes towards same-sex unions ranging from praise, through full acceptance and integration, sympathetic toleration, indifference, prohibition and discrimination, to persecution and physical annihilation. Opponents of same-sex marriages have argued that same-sex marriage, while doing good for the couples that participate in them and the children they are raising, undermines a right of children to be raised by their biological mother and father. Some supporters of same-sex marriages take the view that the government should have no role in regulating personal relationships, while others argue that same-sex marriages would provide social benefits to same-sex couples. The debate regarding same-sex marriages includes debate based upon social viewpoints as well as debate based on majority rules, religious convictions, economic arguments, health-related concerns, and a variety of other issues.

Parenting

Main articles: LGBT parenting and Same-sex marriage and the family
Gay couple with a child

Scientific literature 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 (either a mixed-sex or same-sex union). As a result, professional scientific associations have argued for same-sex marriage to be legally recognized as it will be beneficial to the children of same-sex parents or carers.

Scientific research has been generally consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents. According to scientific literature reviews, there is no evidence to the contrary.

Compared to heterosexual couples, same-sex couples have a greater need for adoption or assisted reproductive technology to become parents. Lesbian couples often use artificial insemination to achieve pregnancy, and reciprocal in vitro fertilization (where one woman provides the egg and the other gestates the child) is becoming more popular in the 2020s, although many couples cannot afford it. Surrogacy is an option for wealthier gay male couples, but the cost is prohibitive. Other same-sex couples adopt children or raise the children from earlier opposite-sex relationships.

Adoption

Main article: LGBT adoption
Legal status of adoption by same-sex couples around the world:   Joint adoption allowed   Second-parent (stepchild) adoption allowed   No laws allowing adoption by same-sex couples and no same-sex marriage   Same-sex marriage but adoption by married same-sex couples not allowed

All states that allow same-sex marriage also allow the joint adoption of children by those couples with the exception of Ecuador and a third of states in Mexico, though such restrictions have been ruled unconstitutional in Mexico. In addition, Bolivia, Croatia, Israel and Liechtenstein, which do not recognize same-sex marriage, nonetheless permit joint adoption by same-sex couples. Some additional states do not recognize same-sex marriage but allow stepchild adoption by couples in civil unions, namely the Czech Republic and San Marino.

Transgender and intersex people

This article or section possibly contains synthesis of material that does not verifiably mention or relate to the main topic. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. (May 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
See also: Transgender rights and Intersex human rights

The legal status of same-sex marriage may have implications for the marriages of couples in which one or both parties are transgender, depending on how sex is defined within a jurisdiction. Transgender and intersex individuals may be prohibited from marrying partners of the "opposite" sex or permitted to marry partners of the "same" sex due to legal distinctions. In any legal jurisdiction where marriages are defined without distinction of a requirement of a male and female, these complications do not occur. In addition, some legal jurisdictions recognize a legal and official change of gender, which would allow a transgender male or female to be legally married in accordance with an adopted gender identity.

In the United Kingdom, the Gender Recognition Act 2004 allows a person who has lived in their chosen gender for at least two years to receive a gender recognition certificate officially recognizing their new gender. Because in the United Kingdom marriages were until recently only for mixed-sex couples and civil partnerships are only for same-sex couples, a person had to dissolve their civil partnership before obtaining a gender recognition certificate, and the same was formerly true for marriages in England and Wales, and still is in other territories. Such people are then free to enter or re-enter civil partnerships or marriages in accordance with their newly recognized gender identity. In Austria, a similar provision requiring transsexual people to divorce before having their legal sex marker corrected was found to be unconstitutional in 2006. In Quebec, prior to the legalization of same-sex marriage, only unmarried people could apply for legal change of gender. With the advent of same-sex marriage, this restriction was dropped. A similar provision including sterilization also existed in Sweden, but was phased out in 2013. In the United States, transgender and intersex marriages was subject to legal complications. As definitions and enforcement of marriage are defined by the states, these complications vary from state to state, as some of them prohibit legal changes of gender.

Divorce

Main article: Divorce of same-sex couples

In the United States before the case of Obergefell v. Hodges, couples in same-sex marriages could only obtain a divorce in jurisdictions that recognized same-sex marriages, with some exceptions.

Judicial and legislative

Main article: Conflict of marriage laws § Same-sex marriage

There are differing positions regarding the manner in which same-sex marriage has been introduced into democratic jurisdictions. A "majority rules" position holds that same-sex marriage is valid, or void and illegal, based upon whether it has been accepted by a simple majority of voters or of their elected representatives.

In contrast, a civil rights view holds that the institution can be validly created through the ruling of an impartial judiciary carefully examining the questioning and finding that the right to marry regardless of the gender of the participants is guaranteed under the civil rights laws of the jurisdiction.

Public opinion

See also: Public opinion of same-sex marriage in the United States and Public opinion of same-sex marriage in Australia
Public opinion of same-sex marriage. Fraction in favor:
  5⁄6+   2⁄3+   1⁄2+   1⁄3+   1⁄6+   <1⁄6   no polls

Numerous polls and studies on the issue have been conducted. A trend of increasing support for same-sex marriage has been revealed across many countries of the world, often driven in large part by a generational difference in support. Polling that was conducted in developed democracies in this century shows a majority of people in support of same-sex marriage. Support for same-sex marriage has increased across every age group, political ideology, religion, gender, race and region of various developed countries in the world.

Various detailed polls and studies on same-sex marriage that were conducted in several countries show that support for same-sex marriage significantly increases with higher levels of education and is also significantly stronger among younger generations, with a clear trend of continually increasing support.

Greater support with youth

Pew Research polling results from 32 countries found 21 with statistically higher support for same-sex marriage among those under 35 than among those over 35 in 2022–2023. Countries with the greatest absolute difference are placed to the left in the following chart. Countries without a significant generational difference are placed to the right.

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Taiw Mex Sing ROK HK Gre Pol Viet Thai Jap Cam Braz USA Arg Ital Oz S. Af. Sri Lanka Keny Swed Malay Neth Spa Fran Germ Cana UK India Isra Hung Indo Nigeria
  •   over 35
  •   additional support from those under 35

A 2016 survey by the Varkey Foundation found similarly high support of same-sex marriage (63%) among 18–21-year-olds in an online survey of 18 countries around the world.

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Germ Cana Oz UK NZ Fran Ital Arg USA Braz Chin S. Af. India Jap Isra ROK Turk Nigeria

(The sampling error is approx. 4% for Nigeria and 3% for the other countries. Because of legal constraints, the question on same-sex marriage was not asked in the survey countries of Russia and Indonesia.)

Opinion polls for same-sex marriage by country
  Same-sex marriage performed nationwide   Same-sex marriage performed in some parts of the country   Civil unions or registered partnerships nationwide   Civil unions or registered partnerships pending   Same-sex marriage rights pending   Same-sex sexual activity is illegal
Country Pollster Year For Against Neither Margin
of error 		Ref.
Albania Albania IPSOS 2023 26%
 73%
(74%) 		1%
Andorra Andorra Institut d'Estudis Andorrans 2013 70%
(79%) 		19%
(21%) 		11%
Antigua and Barbuda Antigua and Barbuda AmericasBarometer 2017 12% – –
Argentina Argentina Ipsos 2024 69%
(81%) 		16%
(19%) 		15% not sure ±5%
Pew Research Center 2023 67%
(72%) 		26%
(28%) 		7% ±3.6%
Armenia Armenia Pew Research Center 2015 3%
(3%) 		96%
(97%) 		1% ±3%
Aruba Aruba 2021 46%
Australia Australia Ipsos 2024 64%
(73%) 		25%
(28%) 		12% not sure ±3.5%
Pew Research Center 2023 75%
(77%) 		23% 2% ±3.6%
Austria Austria Eurobarometer 2023 65%
(68%) 		30%
(32%) 		5%
The Bahamas Bahamas AmericasBarometer 2015 11% – –
Belarus Belarus Pew Research Center 2015 16%
(16%) 		81%
(84%) 		3% ±4%
Belgium Belgium Ipsos 2024 69%
(78%) 		19%
(22%) 		12% not sure ±5%
Eurobarometer 2023 79% 19% 2% not sure
Belize Belize AmericasBarometer 2014 8% – –
Bolivia Bolivia AmericasBarometer 2017 35% 65% – ±1.0%
Bosnia and Herzegovina Bosnia and Herzegovina IPSOS 2023 26%
(27%) 		71%
(73%) 		3%
Brazil Brazil Ipsos (more urban/educated than representative) 2024 51%
(62%) 		31%
(38%) 		18% not sure ±3.5%
Pew Research Center 2023 52%
(57%) 		40%
(43%) 		8% ±3.6%
Bulgaria Bulgaria Eurobarometer 2023 17%
(18%) 		75%
(82%) 		8%
Cambodia Cambodia Pew Research Center 2023 57%
(58%) 		42% 1%
Canada Canada Ipsos 2024 65%
(75%) 		22%
(25%) 		13% not sure ±3.5%
Pew Research Center 2023 79%
(84%) 		15%
(16%) 		6% ±3.6%
Chile Chile Cadem 2024 77%
(82%) 		22%
(18%) 		2% ±3.6%
China China Ipsos (more urban/educated than representative) 2021 43%
(52%) 		39%
(48%) 		18% not sure ±3.5%
Colombia Colombia Ipsos (more urban/educated than representative) 2024 46%
(58%) 		33%
(42%) 		21% ±5%
Costa Rica Costa Rica CIEP 2018 35% 64% 1%
Croatia Croatia Eurobarometer 2023 42%
(45%) 		51%
(55%) 		7%
Cuba Cuba Apretaste 2019 63% 37% –
Cyprus Cyprus Eurobarometer 2023 50%
(53%) 		44%
(47%) 		6%
Czech Republic Czech Republic Eurobarometer 2023 60% 34% 6%
Denmark Denmark Eurobarometer 2023 93% 5% 2%
Dominica Dominica AmericasBarometer 2017 10% 90% – ±1.1%
Dominican Republic Dominican Republic CDN 37 2018 45% 55% -
Ecuador Ecuador AmericasBarometer 2019 23%
(31%) 		51%
(69%) 		26%
El Salvador El Salvador Universidad Francisco Gavidia 2021 82.5% –
Estonia Estonia Eurobarometer 2023 41%
(45%) 		51%
(55%) 		8%
Finland Finland Eurobarometer 2023 76%
(81%) 		18%
(19%) 		6%
France France Ipsos 2024 62%
(70%) 		26%
(30%) 		12% not sure ±3.5%
Pew Research Center 2023 82%
(85%) 		14%
(15%) 		4% ±3.6%
Eurobarometer 2023 79%
(85%) 		14
(%)
(15%) 		7%
Georgia (country) Georgia Women's Initiatives Supporting Group 2021 10%
(12%) 		75%
(88%) 		15%
Germany Germany Ipsos 2024 73%
(83%) 		18%
(20%) 		12% not sure ±3.5%
Pew Research Center 2023 80%
(82%) 		18% 2% ±3.6%
Eurobarometer 2023 84%
(87%) 		13%< 3%
Greece Greece Pew Research Center 2023 48%
(49%) 		49%
(51%) 		3% ±3.6%
Eurobarometer 2023 57%
(59%) 		40%
(41%) 		3%
Grenada Grenada AmericasBarometer 2017 12% 88% – ±1.4%c
Guatemala Guatemala AmericasBarometer 2017 23% 77% – ±1.1%
Guyana Guyana AmericasBarometer 2017 21% 79% – ±1.3%
Haiti Haiti AmericasBarometer 2017 5% 95% – ±0.3%
Honduras Honduras CID Gallup 2018 17%
(18%) 		75%
(82%) 		8%
Hong Kong Hong Kong Pew Research Center 2023 58%
(59%) 		40%
(41%) 		2%
Hungary Hungary Ipsos 2024 44%
(56%) 		35%
(44%) 		21% not sure ±5%
Pew Research Center 2023 31%
(33%) 		64%
(67%) 		5% ±3.6%
Eurobarometer 2023 42%
(45%) 		52%
(55%) 		6%
Iceland Iceland Gallup 2006 89% 11% –
India India Pew Research Center 2023 53%
(55%) 		43%
(45%) 		4% ±3.6%
Indonesia Indonesia Pew Research Center 2023 5% 92%
(95%) 		3% ±3.6%
Republic of Ireland Ireland Ipsos (more urban/educated than representative) 2024 68%
(76%) 		21%
(23%) 		10% ±5%
Eurobarometer 2023 86%
(91%) 		9% 5%
Israel Israel Pew Research Center 2023 36%
(39%) 		56%
(61%) 		8% ±3.6%
Italy Italy Ipsos 2024 58%
(66%) 		29%
(33%) 		12% not sure ±3.5%
Pew Research Center 2023 73%
(75%) 		25% 2% ±3.6%
Eurobarometer 2023 69%
(72%) 		27%
(28%) 		4%
Jamaica Jamaica AmericasBarometer 2017 16% 84% – ±1.0%
Japan Japan Kyodo News 2023 64%
(72%) 		25%
(28%) 		11%
Asahi Shimbun 2023 72%
(80%) 		18%
(20%) 		10%
Ipsos 2024 42%
(54%) 		31%
(40%) 		22% not sure ±3.5%
Pew Research Center 2023 68%
(72%) 		26%
(28%) 		6% ±2.75%
Kazakhstan Kazakhstan Pew Research Center 2016 7%
(7%) 		89%
(93%) 		4%
Kenya Kenya Pew Research Center 2023 9% 90%
(91%) 		1% ±3.6%
Kosovo Kosovo IPSOS 2023 20%
(21%) 		77%
(79%) 		3%
Latvia Latvia Eurobarometer 2023 36% 59% 5%
Liechtenstein Liechtenstein Liechtenstein Institut 2021 72% 28% 0%
Lithuania Lithuania Eurobarometer 2023 39% 55% 6%
Luxembourg Luxembourg Eurobarometer 2023 84% 13% 3%

Malaysia Malaysia

Pew Research Center 2023 17% 82%
(83%) 		1%
Malta Malta Eurobarometer 2023 74% 24% 2%
Mexico Mexico Ipsos (more urban/educated than representative) 2024 55% 29% 17% not sure ±3.5%
Pew Research Center 2023 63%
(66%) 		32%
(34%) 		5% ±3.6%
Moldova Moldova Europa Libera Moldova 2022 14% 86%
Montenegro Montenegro IPSOS 2023 36%
(37%) 		61%
(63%) 		3%
Mozambique Mozambique (3 cities) Lambda 2017 28%
(32%) 		60%
(68%) 		12%
Netherlands Netherlands Ipsos 2024 77% 15% 8% not sure ±5%
Pew Research Center 2023 89%
(90%) 		10% 1% ±3.6%
Eurobarometer 2023 94% 5% 2%
New Zealand New Zealand Ipsos 2023 70%
(78%) 		20%
(22%) 		9% ±3.5%
Nicaragua Nicaragua AmericasBarometer 2017 25% 75% – ±1.0%
Nigeria Nigeria Pew Research Center 2023 2% 97%
(98%) 		1% ±3.6%
North Macedonia North Macedonia IPSOS 2023 20%
(21%) 		78%
(80%) 		2%
Norway Norway Pew Research Center 2017 72%
(79%) 		19%
(21%) 		9%
Panama Panama AmericasBarometer 2017 22% 78% – ±1.1%
Paraguay Paraguay AmericasBarometer 2017 26% 74% – ±0.9%
Peru Peru Ipsos (more urban/educated than representative) 2024 36%
 44% 20% ±5%
Philippines Philippines SWS 2018 22%
(26%) 		61%
(73%) 		16%
Poland Poland Ipsos 2024 51%
(54%) 		43%
(46%) 		6%
Pew Research Center 2023 41%
(43%) 		54%
(57%) 		5% ±3.6%
United Surveys by IBRiS 2024 50%
(55%) 		41%
(45%) 		9%
Eurobarometer 2023 50% 45% 5%
Portugal Portugal Ipsos 2023 80%
(84%) 		15%
(16%) 		5%
Eurobarometer 2023 81% 14% 5%
Romania Romania Ipsos 2023 25%
(30%) 		59%
(70%) 		17% ±3.5%
Eurobarometer 2023 25% 69% 6%
Russia Russia Ipsos (more urban/educated than representative) 2021 17%
(21%) 		64%
(79%) 		20% not sure ±4.8%
FOM 2019 7%
(8%) 		85%
(92%) 		8% ±3.6%
Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Kitts and Nevis AmericasBarometer 2017 9% 91% – ±1.0%
Saint Lucia Saint Lucia AmericasBarometer 2017 11% 89% – ±0.9%
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Saint Vincent and the Grenadines AmericasBarometer 2017 4% 96% – ±0.6%
Serbia Serbia IPSOS 2023 24%
(25%) 		73%
(75%) 		3%
Singapore Singapore Ipsos (more urban/educated than representative) 2024 33% 46% 21% ±5%
Pew Research Center 2023 45%
(47%) 		51%
(53%) 		4%
Slovakia Slovakia Focus 2024 36%
(38%) 		60%
(62%) 		4%
Eurobarometer 2023 37% 56% 7%
Slovenia Slovenia Eurobarometer 2023 62%
(64%) 		37%
(36%) 		2%
South Africa South Africa Ipsos (more urban/educated than representative) 2024 53% 32% 13% ±5%
Pew Research Center 2023 38%
(39%) 		59%
(61%) 		3% ±3.6%
South Korea South Korea Ipsos 2024 36% 37% 27% not sure ±5%
Pew Research Center 2023 41%
(42%) 		56%
(58%) 		3%
Spain Spain Ipsos 2024 73%
(80%) 		19%
(21%) 		9% not sure ±3.5%
Pew Research Center 2023 87%
(90%) 		10% 3% ±3.6%
Eurobarometer 2023 88%
(91%) 		9%
(10%) 		3%
Sri Lanka Sri Lanka Pew Research Center 2023 23%
(25%) 		69%
(75%) 		8%
Suriname Suriname AmericasBarometer 2014 18% – –
Sweden Sweden Ipsos 2024 78%
(84%) 		15%
(16%) 		7% not sure ±5%
Pew Research Center 2023 92%
(94%) 		6% 2% ±3.6%
Eurobarometer 2023 94% 5% 1%
Switzerland Switzerland Ipsos 2023 54%
(61%) 		34%
(39%) 		13% not sure ±3.5%
Taiwan Taiwan CNA 2023 63% 37%
Pew Research Center 2023 45%
(51%) 		43%
(49%) 		12%
Thailand Thailand Ipsos (more urban/educated than representative) 2024 58% 29% 12% not sure ±5%
Pew Research Center 2023 60%
(65%) 		32%
(35%) 		8%
Trinidad and Tobago Trinidad and Tobago AmericasBarometer 2014 16% – –
Turkey Turkey Ipsos (more urban/educated than representative) 2024 18%
(26%) 		52%
(74%) 		30% not sure ±5%
Ukraine Ukraine Rating 2023 37%
(47%) 		42%
(53%) 		22% ±1.5%
United Kingdom United Kingdom YouGov 2023 77%
(84%) 		15%
(16%) 		8%
Ipsos 2024 66%
(73%) 		24%
(27%) 		10% not sure ±3.5%
Pew Research Center 2023 74%
(77%) 		22%
(23%) 		4% ±3.6%
United States United States Ipsos 2024 51%
(62%) 		32%
(39%) 		18% not sure ±3.5%
Pew Research Center 2023 63%
(65%) 		34%
(35%) 		3% ±3.6%
Uruguay Uruguay LatinoBarómetro 2023 78%
(80%) 		20% 2%
Venezuela Venezuela Equilibrium Cende 2023 55%
(63%) 		32%
(37%) 		13%
Vietnam Vietnam Pew Research Center 2023 65%
(68%) 		30%
(32%) 		5%

See also

Notes

  1. Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in continental Australia and in the non-self-governing possessions of Norfolk Island, Christmas Island and the Cocos Islands, which follow Australian law.
  2. Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in continental Denmark, the Faroe Islands and Greenland, which together make up the Realm of Denmark.
  3. Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized throughout Ecuador, but such couples are not considered married for purposes of adoption and may not adopt children.
  4. Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in metropolitan France and in all French overseas regions and possessions, which follow a single legal code.
  5. Same-sex marriage is available in all jurisdictions, though the process is not everywhere as straightforward as it is for opposite-sex marriage and does not always include adoption rights.
  6. Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in the continental Netherlands, the Caribbean municipalities of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba, and the constituent countries of Aruba and Curaçao, but not yet in Sint Maarten.
  7. Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in New Zealand proper, but not in its possession of Tokelau, nor in the Cook Islands and Niue, which make up the Realm of New Zealand.
  8. Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in all parts of the United Kingdom and in its non-Caribbean possessions, but not in its Caribbean possessions, namely Anguilla, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, Montserrat and the Turks and Caicos Islands.
  9. Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in all fifty states of the US and in the District of Columbia, in all overseas territories except American Samoa (recognition only), and in all tribal nations that do not have their own marriage laws, as well as in most nations that do. The largest of the dozen or so known exceptions among the federal reservations are Navajo and Gila River, and the largest among the shared-sovereignty Oklahoma Tribal Statistical Areas are the Creek and Citizen Potawatomi. These polities ban same-sex marriage and do not recognize marriages from other jurisdictions, though members may still marry under state law and be accorded all the rights of marriage under state and federal law.
  10. Nepal is waiting for a final decision by its supreme court, but meanwhile all local governments are ordered to temporarily register same-sex marriages in a separate record. In April 2024 the National ID and Civil Registration Department issued a circular to all local governments that they register such marriages. However, simply being registered does not grant same-sex couples the legal rights of marriage, and registered same-sex couples cannot inherit property, get tax subsidies, make spousal medical decisions, adopt children etc.
  11. Legally available in the Arizona municipalities of Bisbee, Clarkdale, Cottonwood, Jerome, Sedona and Tucson.
  12. Dale Carpenter is a prominent spokesman for this view. For a better understanding of this view, see Carpenter's writings at "Dale Carpenter". Independent Gay Forum. Archived from the original on 17 November 2006. Retrieved 31 October 2006.
  13. ^ Because some polls do not report 'neither', those that do are listed with simple yes/no percentages in parentheses, so their figures can be compared.
  14. Comprises: Neutral; Don't know; No answer; Other; Refused.
  15. ^

References

  1. VERPOEST, LIEN (2017). "The End of Rhetorics: LGBT policies in Russia and the European Union". Studia Diplomatica. 68 (4): 3–20. ISSN 0770-2965. JSTOR 26531664.
  2. Williams, CA., Roman Homosexuality: Second Edition, Oxford University Press, 2009, p. 280, p. 284.
  3. ^ Padnani, Amisha; Fang, Celina (26 June 2015). "Same-Sex Marriage: Landmark Decisions and Precedents". The New York Times.
  4. ^ Baume, Matt (1 March 2019). "Meet the Gay Men Whose 1971 Marriage Was Finally Recognized". The Advocate.
  5. ^ StoryCorps Archive (September 12, 2017). "Michael McConnell, Jack Baker, and Lisa Vecoli".
    • Michael McConnell (75) and husband Jack Baker (75) talk with friend Lisa Vecoli (55) about having the first same-sex marriage legally recognized by a U.S. civil government in 1971, why they chose to get married, and what the response to their marriage was like.
    • JB describes the decades-long (46-year) process from the denial of their marriage license in 1971 until a second request that same year in Blue Earth County, Minnesota, was "declared to be in all respects valid" by Order of Gregory J. Anderson, Judge of District Court.
  6. ^ Newsletter, "Hidden Treasures from the Stacks", The National Archives at Kansas City, p. 6 (September 2013).
  7. ^ Source: Blue Earth County
    • Applicants: James Michael McConnell and Pat Lyn McConnell
    • Date of Marriage: September 3, 1971
  8. ^ "The September 3, 1971 marriage of James Michael McConnell and Pat Lyn McConnell, a/k/a Richard John Baker, has never been dissolved or annulled by judicial decree and no grounds currently exist on which to invalidate the marriage."
    • Sources: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW by Assistant Chief Judge Gregory Anderson, Fifth Judicial District, (page 4);
    • Copy: Minnesota Judicial Branch, File Number 07-CV-16-4559, "Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order for Partial Summary Judgment" from Blue Earth County District Court in re James Michael McConnell et al. v. Blue Earth County et al. (September 18, 2018);
    • Available online from U of M Libraries;
    • McConnell Files, "America’s First Gay Marriage" (binder #4), Tretter Collection in GLBT Studies, U of M Libraries.
  9. ^ Michael McConnell, with Jack Baker, as told to Gail Langer Karwoski, "The Wedding Heard Heard 'Round the World: America's First Gay Marriage Archived August 26, 2015, at the Wayback Machine". University of Minnesota Press (2016). Reprint, "With A New Epilogue" (2020).
  10. ^ Winter, Caroline (4 December 2014). "In 14 years, same-sex marriage has spread round the world". Bloomberg. Archived from the original on 13 January 2022. Retrieved 20 February 2022.
  11. "Same-sex Oklahoma couple marries legally under tribal law". KOCO. 26 September 2013. Archived from the original on 22 October 2013. Retrieved 22 October 2013.
  12. "Clela Rorex, former Boulder County Clerk who issued first same-sex marriage license in 1975 dies at 78". 19 June 2022.
  13. ^ Multiple sources:
  14. ^ "Brief of the American Psychological Association, The California Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy as amici curiae in support of plaintiff-appellees – Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of California Civil Case No. 09-CV-2292 VRW (Honorable Vaughn R. Walker)" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 13 April 2015. Retrieved 5 November 2010.
  15. ^ "Marriage of Same-Sex Couples – 2006 Position Statement Canadian Psychological Association" (PDF). 2006. Archived from the original (PDF) on 19 April 2009.
  16. ^ Mirchandani, Rajesh (12 November 2008). "Divisions persist over gay marriage ban". BBC News. Archived from the original on 28 April 2014. Retrieved 18 December 2008.
  17. ^ "The Divine Institution of Marriage". The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 13 August 2008. Archived from the original on 11 June 2019. Retrieved 28 September 2012.
  18. Molly Ball, 2024 May 13, Wall Street Journal, How 20 Years of Same-Sex Marriage Changed America
  19. Multiple sources:
  20. "Brief of Amici Curiae American Anthropological Association et al., supporting plaintiffs-appellees and urging affirmance – Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of California Civil Case No. 09-CV-2292 VRW (Honorable Vaughn R. Walker)" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 26 December 2010. Retrieved 5 November 2010.
  21. ^ American Anthropological Association (2004). "Statement on Marriage and the Family". Archived from the original on 12 September 2015. Retrieved 18 September 2015.
  22. Handbook of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Administration and Policy — Page 13, Wallace Swan – 2004
  23. "Marriage Equality". Garden State Equality. Archived from the original on 18 October 2014. Retrieved 24 July 2012.
  24. "Marriage 101". Freedom to Marry. Archived from the original on 16 February 2010. Retrieved 28 September 2012.
  25. Pratt, Patricia (29 May 2012). "Albany area real estate and the Marriage Equality Act". Albany Examiner. Retrieved 25 December 2012. On July 24, 2011 the Marriage Equality Act became a law in New York State forever changing the state's legal view of what a married couple is.
  26. "Vote on Illinois marriage equality bill coming in January: sponsors". Chicago Phoenix. 13 December 2012. Archived from the original on 26 December 2012. Retrieved 23 December 2012.
  27. Mulholland, Helene (27 September 2012). "Ed Miliband calls for gay marriage equality". The Guardian. London, UK. Archived from the original on 28 September 2013. Retrieved 23 December 2012.
  28. Ring, Trudy (20 December 2012). "Newt Gingrich: Marriage Equality Inevitable, OK". The Advocate. Los Angeles. Archived from the original on 23 December 2012. Retrieved 25 December 2012. He noted to HuffPo that he not only has a lesbian half-sister, LGBT rights activist Candace Gingrich, but has gay friends who've gotten married in Iowa, where their unions are legal. Public opinion has shifted in favor of marriage equality, he said, and the Republican Party could end up on the wrong side of history if it continues to go against the tide.
  29. APStylebook (12 February 2019). "The term same-sex marriage is preferred over gay marriage. In places where it's legal, same-sex marriage is no different from other marriages, so the term should be used only when germane and needed to distinguish from marriages between heterosexual couples. #APStyleChat" (Tweet). Archived from the original on 19 October 2022. Retrieved 13 December 2022 – via Twitter.
  30. "One in 10 LGBT Americans Married to Same-Sex Spouse". Gallup. 24 February 2021.
  31. Yin, Karen (8 March 2016). "When Bisexual People Marry". Conscious Style Guide.
  32. Fedorak, Shirley A. (2008). Anthropology matters!. , Ont.: University of Toronto Press. pp. Ch. 11, p. 174. ISBN 978-1442601086.
  33. ^ Gough, Kathleen E. (January–June 1959). "The Nayars and the Definition of Marriage". The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. 89 (1): 23–34. doi:10.2307/2844434. JSTOR 2844434.
  34. Murray, Stephen O.; Roscoe, Will (2001). Boy-wives and female husbands : studies of African homosexualities (1st pbk. ed.). New York: St. Martin's. ISBN 978-0312238292. Archived from the original on 4 February 2021. Retrieved 28 October 2020.
  35. Njambi, Wairimu; O'Brien, William (Spring 2001). "Revisiting "Woman-Woman Marriage": Notes on Gikuyu Women". NWSA Journal. 12 (1): 1–23. doi:10.1353/nwsa.2000.0015. S2CID 144520611. Archived from the original on 13 January 2012. Retrieved 28 September 2012.
  36. "Dictionaries take lead in redefining modern marriage". The Washington Times. 24 May 2004. Archived from the original on 18 September 2012. Retrieved 25 September 2012.
  37. "Webster Makes It Official: Definition of Marriage Has Changed". American Bar Association. Archived from the original on 27 April 2015. Retrieved 28 September 2012.
  38. Redman, Daniel (7 April 2009). "Noah Webster Gives His Blessing: Dictionaries recognize same-sex marriage—who knew?". Slate. Archived from the original on 17 September 2011. Retrieved 28 September 2012.
  39. Rabbi Joel Roth. Homosexuality Archived 24 August 2017 at the Wayback Machine rabbinicalassembly.org 1992.
  40. Martial 1.24 and 12.42; Juvenal 2.117–42. Williams, Roman Homosexuality, pp. 28, 280; Karen K. Hersh, The Roman Wedding: Ritual and Meaning in Antiquity (Cambridge University Press, 2010), p. 36; Caroline Vout, Power and Eroticism in Imperial Rome (Cambridge University Press, 2007), pp. 151ff.
  41. Suetonius, Tacitus, Dio Cassius, and Aurelius Victor are the sources cited by Williams, Roman Homosexuality, p. 279.
  42. Williams, Roman Homosexuality, pp. 278–279, citing Dio Cassius and Aelius Lampridius.
  43. ^ Williams, Roman Homosexuality, p. 280.
  44. "How Same-Sex Marriage Came to Be". Harvard Magazine. March–April 2013. Archived from the original on 2 May 2019. Retrieved 28 March 2015.
  45. Hari, Johann (Spring 2009). "Andrew Sullivan: Thinking. Out. Loud". Intelligent Life. Archived from the original on 25 April 2009. Retrieved 24 October 2013.
  46. Sullivan, Andrew (9 November 2012). "Here Comes the Groom". Slate. Retrieved 24 October 2013.
  47. Rule, Sheila (2 October 1989). "Rights for Gay Couples in Denmark". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 19 August 2013.
  48. "Same-sex marriage around the world". CBC News. Toronto. 26 May 2009. Archived from the original on 25 November 2010. Retrieved 6 October 2009.
  49. "The Dutch went first in 2001; who has same-sex marriage now?". Associated Press. 28 April 2021. Archived from the original on 21 August 2021. Retrieved 21 August 2021.
  50. Sangwongwanich, Pathom (18 June 2024). "Thai Same-Sex Marriage Bill Clears Final Hurdle With Senate Nod". www.bloomberg.com. Retrieved 18 June 2024.
  51. Theil, Michele (16 February 2024). "This map shows you where same-sex marriage is legal around the world – and there's a long way to go". PinkNews. Retrieved 16 February 2024.
  52. "Marriage Equality Around the World". Human Rights Campaign. Retrieved 3 February 2024.
  53. "Information for couples marrying outside the Rabbinate" (PDF). Rackman Center. 2018. Retrieved 10 November 2023.
  54. "Sala de lo Constitucional resolvería demanda sobre matrimonio igualitario en los primeros tres messes de 2020". elsalvador.com (in Spanish). 6 January 2020.
  55. "Bukele busca que se apruebe el aborto terapéutico y la unión homosexual". El Observador (in Spanish). 18 August 2021.
  56. "Diritti: matrimonio "egualitario". Opinioni a confronto: Scalfarotto vs Bonaldi vs Centinaio". 9 March 2023. Archived from the original on 10 March 2023. Retrieved 10 March 2023.
  57. "Da Zaia a Centinaio: la Lega ora cambia sui diritti lgbt (e c'entra "l'effetto Francesca")". 10 March 2023. Archived from the original on 10 March 2023. Retrieved 10 March 2023.
  58. "Japan opposition party submits bill for same-sex marriage". Kyodo News. 6 March 2023. Retrieved 31 May 2023.
  59. Raut, Swechhya (10 July 2024). "Nepal: Same-sex couples face hurdles on road to recognition". DW.
  60. Ghimire, Binod (3 December 2023). "How court laid the ground for same-sex marriage in Nepal". The Kathmandu Post.
  61. Dhakal, Manisha. "The Long Road to Lasting Marriage Equality in Nepal". APCOM.
  62. "Diputada plantea iniciativa para el matrimonio civil igualitario en la Asamblea Nacional". El Acarigueño (in Spanish). 24 February 2022. Archived from the original on 20 May 2022. Retrieved 17 April 2022.
  63. Taylor, Alice; Alipour, Nick (26 April 2024). "Kosovo promises to introduce same-sex unions in May". www.euractiv.com.
  64. "Presentan proyecto de ley sobre el matrimonio igualitario entre personas del mismo sexo". El Comercio. elcomercio.pe. 23 October 2021. Retrieved 28 June 2022.
  65. Bordey, Hana (11 August 2022). "Padilla wants same-sex unions institutionalized". GMA News Online.
  67. Duffy, Nick (13 March 2015). "UKIP and Tories abstain on EU motion to recognise same-sex marriage". PinkNews. Archived from the original on 9 August 2015. Retrieved 26 July 2015.
  68. "Texts adopted – Thursday, 12 March 2015 – Annual report on human rights and democracy in the world 2013 and the EU policy on the matter". European Parliament. Archived from the original on 7 August 2015. Retrieved 26 July 2015.
  69. ^ "HUDOC – European Court of Human Rights". Archived from the original on 11 September 2015. Retrieved 26 July 2015.
  70. Buyse, Antoine (24 June 2010). "Strasbourg court rules that states are not obliged to allow gay marriage". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 13 December 2013. Retrieved 8 November 2013.
  71. Avram, Marieta (2016). Drept civil Familia [Civil law Family] (in Romanian). Bucharest: Editura Hamangiu. ISBN 978-606-27-0609-8.
  72. "European Convention on Human Rights" (PDF). ECHR.coe.int. European Court of Human Rights. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 July 2014. Retrieved 25 July 2015.
  73. "HUDOC - European Court of Human Rights". ECHR. Retrieved 21 July 2022.
  74. Palazzo, Nausica (April 2023). "Fedotova and Others v. Russia : Dawn of a new era for European LGBTQ families?". Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law. 30 (2): 216–228. doi:10.1177/1023263X231195455. S2CID 261655476.
  75. "EU court backs residency rights for gay couple in Romania". Associated Press. 5 June 2018. Archived from the original on 12 June 2018. Retrieved 6 June 2018.
  76. "Same-sex spouses have EU residence rights, top court rules – BBC". BBC News. 5 June 2018. Archived from the original on 8 May 2019. Retrieved 6 June 2018.
  77. "Texts adopted – LGBTIQ rights in the EU – Tuesday, 14 September 2021". European Parliament. Archived from the original on 16 September 2021. Retrieved 16 September 2021.
  78. "MEPs condemn failure to respect rights of same-sex partners in EU". The Guardian. 14 September 2021. Archived from the original on 14 September 2021. Retrieved 16 September 2021.
  79. "Major Advance for Marriage Equality and Gender Identity Rights in Latin America". San Francisco Bay Times. Sfbaytimes.com. 25 January 2018. Archived from the original on 29 January 2018. Retrieved 13 April 2018.
  80. Towle, Andy (13 November 2008). "NYC Protest and Civil Rights March Opposing Proposition 8". Towleroad. Archived from the original on 13 February 2009. Retrieved 28 September 2012.
  81. Pearson, Mary. "Where is Gay Marriage Legal?". christiangays.com. Archived from the original on 1 March 2012. Retrieved 20 February 2012.
  82. Williams, Steve. "Which Countries Have Legalized Gay Marriage?". Care2.com (news.bbc.co.uk as source). Archived from the original on 29 April 2019. Retrieved 20 February 2012.
  83. "Loi du 9 juillet 2004 relative aux effets légaux de certains partenariats. – Legilux". Eli.legilux.public.lu. Archived from the original on 11 September 2016. Retrieved 7 July 2017.
  84. "Loi n° 99-944 du 15 novembre 1999 relative au pacte civil de solidarité". Legifrance.gouv.fr (in French). 12 March 2007. Archived from the original on 16 August 2019. Retrieved 7 July 2017.
  85. "WETTEN, DECRETEN, ORDONNANTIES EN VERORDENINGEN LOIS, DECRETS, ORDONNANCES ET REGLEMENTS" (PDF). Ejustice.jkust.fgov.be. Archived (PDF) from the original on 29 April 2019. Retrieved 7 July 2017.
  86. "Civil Partnership Act 2004". Legislation.gov.uk. Archived from the original on 29 April 2019. Retrieved 5 July 2017.
  87. "Same-Sex Marriage, Civil Unions and Domestic Partnerships". National Conference of State Legislatures. Archived from the original on 10 June 2013. Retrieved 20 February 2012.
  88. Ramstack, Tom (11 January 2010). "Congress Considers Outcome of D.C. Gay Marriage Legislation". AHN. Archived from the original on 20 June 2010.
  89. Gender and Language in Sub-Saharan Africa, 2013:35
  90. Igwe, Leo (19 June 2009). "Tradition of same gender marriage in Igboland". Nigerian Tribune. Archived from the original on 11 January 2010.
  91. "Same-sex marriage and children's well-being: Research roundup". Journalist's Resource. 26 June 2015. Archived from the original on 2 January 2016. Retrieved 29 December 2015.
  92. Badgett, M.V. Lee; Carpenter, Christopher S.; Lee, Maxine J.; Sansone, Dario (2024). "A review of the effects of legal access to same-sex marriage". Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. doi:10.1002/pam.22587. hdl:10871/135707.
  93. ^ Pawelski, J.G.; Perrin, E.C.; Foy, J.M.; Allen, C.E.; Crawford, J.E.; Del Monte, M.; Kaufman, M.; Klein, J.D.; Smith, K.; Springer, S.; Tanner, J.L.; Vickers, D.L. (2006). "The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children". Pediatrics. 118 (1): 349–64. doi:10.1542/peds.2006-1279. PMID 16818585. S2CID 219194821.
  94. Herek, Gregory M. "Legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the United States: A social science perspective." American Psychologist, Vol 61(6), September 2006, pp. 607–21.
  95. Elaine Justice. "Study Links Gay Marriage Bans to Rise in HIV infections". Emory University. Archived from the original on 9 April 2010. Retrieved 5 November 2010.
  96. Peng, Handie. "The Effect of Same-Sex Marriage Laws on Public Health and Welfare". Userwww.service.emory.edu. Archived from the original on 20 February 2012. Retrieved 11 February 2012.
  97. Hasin, Deborah. "Lesbian, gay, bisexual individuals risk psychiatric disorders from discriminatory policies". Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health. Archived from the original on 27 February 2013. Retrieved 20 September 2012.
  98. Mustanski, Brian (22 March 2010). "New study suggests bans on gay marriage hurt mental health of LGB people". Psychology Today. Retrieved 8 November 2010.
  99. Raifman, Julia; Moscoe, Ellen; Austin, S. Bryn; McConnell, Margaret (2017). "Difference-in-Differences Analysis of the Association Between State Same-Sex Marriage Policies and Adolescent Suicide Attempts". JAMA Pediatrics. 171 (4): 350–356. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2016.4529. PMC 5848493. PMID 28241285.
  100. "Same-Sex Marriage Legalization Linked to Reduction in Suicide Attempts Among High School Students". Johns Hopkins University. 20 February 2017. Archived from the original on 29 April 2019. Retrieved 8 June 2018.
  101. Laurie, Timothy (3 June 2015). "Bigotry or biology: the hard choice for an opponent of marriage equality". The Drum. Archived from the original on 4 June 2015. Retrieved 4 June 2015.
  102. Blankenhorn, David (19 September 2008). "Protecting marriage to protect children". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on 4 September 2009. Retrieved 6 October 2009.
  103. "See discussion of prenuptial and postmarital agreements at Findlaw". Family.findlaw.com. Archived from the original on 25 October 2010. Retrieved 5 November 2010.
  104. Pawelski JG, Perrin EC, Foy JM, et al. (July 2006). "The effects of marriage, civil union, and domestic partnership laws on the health and well-being of children". Pediatrics. 118 (1): 349–64. doi:10.1542/peds.2006-1279. PMID 16818585. S2CID 219194821.
  105. Lamb, Michael. "Expert Affidavit for U.S. District Court (D. Mass. 2009)" (PDF). Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders. Archived (PDF) from the original on 24 September 2015. Retrieved 24 July 2012.
  106. ^ "Pediatricians: Gay Marriage Good for Kids' Health". news.discovery.com. 22 March 2013. Archived from the original on 12 November 2014. Retrieved 11 April 2013.
  107. "Elizabeth Short, Damien W. Riggs, Amaryll Perlesz, Rhonda Brown, Graeme Kane: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) Parented Families – A Literature Review prepared for The Australian Psychological Society" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 March 2011. Retrieved 5 November 2010.
  108. "Brief of the American Psychological Association, The California Psychological Association, The American Psychiatric Association, and The American Association of Marriage and Family Therapy as Amici Curiae in Support of Plaintiff-Appellees" (PDF). United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Archived (PDF) from the original on 13 April 2015. Retrieved 28 September 2012.
  109. Herek, GM (September 2006). "Legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the United States: a social science perspective" (PDF). The American Psychologist. 61 (6): 607–21. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.61.6.607. PMID 16953748. Archived from the original (PDF) on 10 June 2010.
  110. Biblarz, Timothy J.; Stacey, Judith (February 2010). "How Does the Gender of Parents Matter?" (PDF). Journal of Marriage and Family. 72 (1): 3–22. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.593.4963. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2009.00678.x. Archived from the original (PDF) on 12 May 2013.
  111. "Brief presented to the Legislative House of Commons Committee on Bill C38 by the Canadian Psychological Association – 2 June 2005" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 13 October 2012. Retrieved 7 August 2018.
  112. Goldberg, Abbie E. (February 2023). "LGBTQ-parent families: Diversity, intersectionality, and social context". Current Opinion in Psychology. 49: 101517. doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101517. PMID 36502588. S2CID 253665001.
  113. Leal, Daniela; Gato, Jorge; Coimbra, Susana; Freitas, Daniela; Tasker, Fiona (December 2021). "Social Support in the Transition to Parenthood Among Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Persons: A Systematic Review". Sexuality Research and Social Policy. 18 (4): 1165–1179. doi:10.1007/s13178-020-00517-y. hdl:10216/132451.
  114. Bockting, Walter, Autumn Benner, and Eli Coleman. "Gay and Bisexual Identity Development Among Female-to-Male Transsexuals in North America: Emergence of a Transgender Sexuality." Archives of Sexual Behavior 38.5 (October 2009): 688–701. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. 29 September 2009
  115. "Austria gets first same-sex marriage". 365gay.com. 5 July 2006. Archived from the original on 17 October 2007. Retrieved 20 July 2008.
  116. "Sweden ends forced sterilization of trans". gaystarnews.com. 11 January 2013. Archived from the original on 12 June 2018. Retrieved 10 October 2017.
  117. Deborah, Anthony (Spring 2012). "CAUGHT IN THE MIDDLE: TRANSSEXUAL MARRIAGE AND THE DISCONNECT BETWEEN SEX AND LEGAL SEX". Texas Journal of Women & the Law. 21 (2).
  118. Schwartz, John (18 September 2009). "U.S. Defends Marriage Law". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 14 July 2014. Retrieved 29 September 2009.
  119. "Movement Advancement Project | Equality Maps". www.lgbtmap.org. Archived from the original on 22 April 2019. Retrieved 19 April 2019.
  120. Matthew S. Coleman (16 September 2015). "Obergefell v. Hodges". Einhorn Harris. Archived from the original on 24 December 2015. Retrieved 8 November 2015.
  121. Leff, Lisa (4 December 2008). "Poll: Calif. gay marriage ban driven by religion". USA Today. Associated Press. Archived from the original on 8 December 2008. archived here.
  122. For ease of comparison, only 'yes' and 'no' responses are counted. For old polling data, support figures have been adjusted upward @1%/year.
  123. Newport, Frank (20 May 2011). "For First Time, Majority of Americans Favor Legal Gay Marriage". Gallup. Archived from the original on 29 July 2014. Retrieved 25 September 2012.
  124. "Public Opinion: Nationally". australianmarriageequality.com. Archived from the original on 3 March 2011. Retrieved 25 September 2012.
  125. "Gay Life in Estonia". globalgayz.com. Archived from the original on 16 July 2012. Retrieved 25 September 2012.
  126. Jowit, Juliette (12 June 2012). "Gay marriage gets ministerial approval". The Guardian. London. Archived from the original on 6 May 2019. Retrieved 25 September 2012.
  127. "Most Irish people support gay marriage, poll says". PinkNews. 24 February 2011. Archived from the original on 26 September 2013. Retrieved 25 September 2012.
  128. ^ "How people in 24 countries view same-sex marriage". Retrieved 12 December 2023.
  129. "What the world's young people think and feel" (PDF).
  130. "Who supports equal rights for same-sex couples?". Australian Institute of Family Studies.
  131. "Age is decisive factor when it comes to supporting same-sex marriage: LAPOP". Vanderbilt University. 2 June 2015. Retrieved 26 December 2023.
  132. ^ "Attitudes towards LGBTIQ+ people in the Western Balkans" (PDF). ERA – LGBTI Equal Rights Association for the Western Balkans and Turke. June 2023. Archived (PDF) from the original on 7 December 2024.
  133. "Un 70% d'andorrans aprova el matrimoni homosexual". Diari d'Andorra (in Catalan). 7 July 2013. Archived from the original on 27 February 2024.
  134. ^ "Cultura polítical de la democracia en la República Dominicana y en las Américas, 2016/17" (PDF). Vanderbilt University (in Spanish). 13 November 2017. p. 132. Archived (PDF) from the original on 13 December 2024.
  135. ^ LGBT+ PRIDE 2024 (PDF). Ipsos. 1 May 2024. Archived from the original (PDF) on 7 June 2024. Retrieved 8 June 2024.
  136. ^ Gubbala, Sneha; Poushter, Jacob; Huang, Christine (27 November 2023). "How people in 24 countries view same-sex marriage". Pew Research Center. Archived from the original on 13 December 2024. Retrieved 12 December 2023.
  137. ^ "Religious Belief and National Belonging in Central and Eastern Europe" (PDF). Pew. Archived (PDF) from the original on 12 December 2024. Retrieved 11 May 2017.
  138. ^ "Religious belief and national belonging in Central and Eastern Europe - Appendix A: Methodology". Pew Research Center. 10 May 2017. Archived from the original on 28 November 2024. Retrieved 26 August 2017.
  139. "Bevolking Aruba pro geregistreerd partnerschap zelfde geslacht". Antiliaans Dagblad (in Dutch). 26 February 2021. Archived from the original on 10 December 2024.
  140. ^ "Discrimination in the European Union". TNS. European Commission. Archived from the original on 3 December 2024. Retrieved 8 June 2024. The question was whether same-sex marriage should be allowed throughout Europe.
  141. ^ "Barómetro de las Américas: Actualidad – 2 de junio de 2015" (PDF). Vanderbilt University. 2 July 2015.
  142. "63% está de acuerdo con la creación de una AFP Estatal que compita con las actuales AFPs privadas" (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 10 June 2024. Retrieved 10 June 2024.
  143. ^ LGBT+ PRIDE 2021 GLOBAL SURVEY (PDF). Ipsos. 16 June 2021. Archived (PDF) from the original on 3 December 2024. Retrieved 12 June 2023.
  144. https://www.ciep.ucr.ac.cr/images/INFORMESUOP/EncuestaEnero/Informe-encuesta-ENERO-2018.pdf
  145. "Encuesta: Un 63,1% de los cubanos quiere matrimonio igualitario en la Isla". Diario de Cuba (in Spanish). 18 July 2019. Archived from the original on 21 July 2019.
  146. Guzman, Samuel (5 February 2018). "Encuesta de CDN sobre matrimonio homosexual en RD recibe más de 300 mil votos - CDN - El Canal de Noticias de los Dominicanos" [CDN survey on homosexual marriage in DR receives more than 300 thousand votes] (in Spanish).
  147. America's Barometer Topical Brief #034, Disapproval of Same-Sex Marriage in Ecuador: A Clash of Generations?, 23 July 2019. Counting ratings 1–3 as 'disapprove', 8–10 as 'approve', and 4–7 as neither.
  148. "Partido de Bukele se "consolida" en preferencias electorales en El Salvador". 21 January 2021.
  149. "წინარწმენიდან თანასწორობამდე (From Prejudice to Equality), part 2" (PDF). WISG. 2022.
  150. "Más del 70% de los hondureños rechaza el matrimonio homosexual". Diario La Prensa (in Spanish). 17 May 2018.
  151. "Litlar breytingar á viðhorfi til giftinga samkynhneigðra" (PDF) (in Icelandic). Gallup. September 2006.
  152. Staff (13 February 2023). "64% favor recognizing same-sex marriage in Japan: Kyodo poll". Kyodo News. Retrieved 13 February 2023.
  153. Isoda, Kazuaki (21 February 2023). "Survey: 72% of voters in favor of legalizing gay marriages". The Asahi Shimbun. Retrieved 27 February 2023.
  154. Vogt, Desiree (March 2021). "Rückhalt für gleichgeschlechtliche Paare". Liechtensteiner Vaterland (in German).
  155. "Sondaj: chișinăuienii au devenit mai toleranți față de comunitatea LGBT". Radio Europa Liberă Moldova (in Romanian). 18 May 2022.
  156. "Most Mozambicans against homosexual violence, study finds". MambaOnline - Gay South Africa online. 4 June 2018., (full report)
  157. ^ LGBT+ PRIDE 2023 GLOBAL SURVEY (PDF). Ipsos. 1 June 2023. Archived (PDF) from the original on 30 November 2024. Retrieved 12 June 2023.
  158. "First Quarter 2018 Social Weather Survey: 61% of Pinoys oppose, and 22% support, a law that will allow the civil union of two men or two women". 29 June 2018. Retrieved 6 January 2019.
  159. "(Nie)dzielące związki: Polki i Polacy o prawach par jednopłciowych". More in Common. Retrieved 27 September 2024.
  160. Mikołajczyk, Marek (24 April 2024). "Tak dla związków partnerskich, nie dla adopcji [SONDAŻ DGP]". Dziennik Gazeta Prawna. Retrieved 25 April 2024.
  161. "Отношение к сексменьшинствам" (in Russian). ФОМ. June 2019.
  162. "Polovici slovenských občanov neprekážajú registrované partnerstvá pre páry rovnakého pohlavia". 27 March 2024.
  163. Strong, Matthew (19 May 2023). "Support for gay marriage surges in Taiwan 4 years after legalization". Taiwan News. Retrieved 19 May 2023.
  164. "Соціологічне дослідження до Дня Незалежності: УЯВЛЕННЯ ПРО ПАТРІОТИЗМ ТА МАЙБУТНЄ УКРАЇНИ (16-20 серпня 2023) Назад до списку" (in Ukrainian). 24 August 2023. Archived from the original on 13 December 2024.
  165. Simons, Ned (4 February 2023). "It's Ten Years Since MPs Voted For Gay Marriage, But Is There A 'Backlash'?". The Huffington Post. Archived from the original on 13 December 2024. Retrieved 5 February 2023.
  166. "Opinión sobre el matrimonio igualitario" [Opinion on equal marriage]. LatinoBarómetro. 10 June 2024.
  167. Antolínez, Héctor (2 March 2023). "Encuesta refleja que mayoría de venezolanos apoya igualdad de derechos para la población LGBTIQ". Crónica Uno (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2 December 2024. Retrieved 13 December 2024.

Bibliography

External links

Status of same-sex unions around the world
Africa
Americas
Asia
Europe
Oceania
Antarctica
Gay pride flag Constitutional amendments banning civil unions or same-sex marriages around the world Globe
Same-sex marriage prohibited by
constitutional amendment
Same-sex marriage and civil unions
prohibited by constitutional amendment
Types of marriages
Legal scenarios
Religious
Age
Arranged
Ceremonial
Circumstantial
basis
Death
Financial
Convenience
Other
De facto
Endogamy
Exogamy
Non-monogamous
Sexless
Other
LGBTQ topics
Symbols
Pride flags
Gender identity
Third sex / Third gender
Sexual identities
Sexual orientations
Related
History
LGBTQ history
Pre-modern era
16th to 19th century
20th century
21st century
LGBTQ rights by country or territory
LGBTQ rights topics
LGBTQ rights movements
Sexual orientation — Medicine, science and sexology
Societal attitudes
Prejudice and discrimination
Violence against LGBTQ people
Discrimination
Forms
Attributes
Social
Religious
Ethnic/National
Manifestations
Discriminatory
policies
Countermeasures
Related topics
Categories: