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 17:17, 8 November 2017 view source166.224.16.227 (talk)No edit summaryTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit← 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:
{{redirect|Marriage equality}} {{short description|Marriage of persons of the same sex or gender}}
{{redirect2|Marriage equality|gay marriage|other uses|marriage equality (disambiguation)|and|gay marriage (disambiguation)}}
{{redirect|Gay Marriage|the 2004 book|Gay Marriage (book)}}
{{pp-move-indef}} {{pp-semi-indef}}
{{pp-move}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=September 2013}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=March 2019}}
{{LGBT sidebar}}
{{Same-sex unions}} {{Same-sex unions}}
{{LGBTQ sidebar|rights}}
<!--- *** Please do not edit the introduction without achieving consensus on the talk (discussion) page first. *** --->
<!--- *** Please consider achieving consensus on the talk (discussion) page first before editing the introduction. *** --->{{Discrimination sidebar}}
'''Same-sexy marriage''', also known as '''gay marriage''', is ] between ], either as a secular ] or in a religious setting. The term '''marriage equality''' refers to a political status in which same-sex marriage and opposite-sex marriage are considered legally equal.


'''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.
In the late 20th century, rites of marriage for same-sex couples without legal recognition became increasingly common. The first law providing for marriage of people of the same sex in modern times was enacted in 2001 in the ]. {{Ass
of|2017|10|01|df=y}}, same-sex marriage is legally recognized (nationwide or in some parts) in the following countries: ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ],<ref group="nb" name="Mexico">Same-sex marriage is legal in the states of ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ] and ] as well as in some municipalities in ]. Same-sex marriages performed in these jurisdictions are recognized throughout Mexico.</ref> the ],<ref group="nb" name="Netherlands">Same-sex marriage is legal in ]. Same-sex marriages performed there are recognized in ].</ref> ],<ref group="nb" name="New Zealand">Same-sex marriage is legal in ], though is not legal in ], the ] and ], which together make up the ].</ref> ], ], <!-- *** Please check discussion on talk page before adding Slovenia! *** -->], ], ], the ],<ref group="nb" name="United Kingdom">Same-sex marriage is legal in ] and ]; though is notably not legal in ]. Same-sex marriage is legal in the overseas territories of ], ], ], the ], the ], the ], ], the ] and ] and in the Crown dependencies of ] and the ].</ref> the ]<ref group="nb" name="United States">Same-sex marriage is legal in all 50 states, the ], ], the ], ], the ] and ]. Some tribal jurisdictions do not recognize same-sex marriage. Congress (not the federal courts) has legal authority over Indian country. Thus, unless Congress passes a law regarding same-sex marriage for Indian tribes, federally recognized American Indian tribes have the legal right to form their own marriage laws. ] is the only unincorporated territory of the United States not to have legalized same-sex marriage.</ref> and ]. Same-sex marriage is likely to soon become legal in ], after a ] ruling in May 2017.<ref name="BBC News">{{Cite news|url=http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-40012047|title=Taiwan's top court rules in favour of same-sex marriage|date=2017-05-24|work=BBC News|access-date=2017-05-24|language=en-GB}}</ref> Polls show rising support for legally recognizing same-sex marriage in ], ] and most of ].<ref>{{cite web|title=Poll shows growing support for same-sex marriage|url=http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/poll-shows-growing-support-for-samesex-marriage-20140714-3bxaj.html|publisher=Sydney Morning Herald|accessdate=22 May 2015|date=15 July 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=For several years a majority of Australians have supported marriage equality|url=http://www.australianmarriageequality.org/who-supports-equality/a-majority-of-australians-support-marriage-equality/|publisher=Australian Marriage Equality Incorporated|accessdate=22 May 2015}}</ref><ref>See
* {{cite web|last=Newport|first=Frank|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|publisher=]|accessdate=25 September 2012}}
* {{cite web|title=Support for Same‐Sex Marriage in Latin America|url=http://www.vanderbilt.edu/lapop/insights/I0844.enrevised.pdf|publisher=]|accessdate=25 September 2012}}</ref>
However, as of 2017, South Africa is the only African country where same-sex marriage is recognized. Taiwan would become the first country in Asia to legalize same-sex marriage if the Civil Code is amended. Two other Asian countries, namely ] and ] recognise same-sex marriages performed outside the country for some purposes.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Gross|first1=Aeyal|title=Why Gay Marriage Isn't Coming to Israel Any Time Soon|url=http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.663585|accessdate=29 December 2015|work=] Online|date=30 June 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.panarmenian.net/eng/news/243348/ |title=Same-sex marriages registered abroad are valid in Armenia |website=Panarmenian.Net |date=2017-07-03 |accessdate=2017-07-07}}</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 ].
[[File:World marriage-equality laws.svg|thumb|right|452px|
{{legend|#002255|Marriage open to same-sex couples}}
{{legend|#008080|Recognized when performed in certain other jurisdictions}}
{{legend|#C9AD3B|Government/court legalized or announced intention to legalize marriage}}
{{legend|#0066FF|Civil unions/domestic partnerships}}
{{legend|#E4D69D|Government/court announced intention to legalize civil unions}}
{{legend|#9FCFFF|Unregistered cohabitation}}
{{legend|#DCDCDC|Same-sex unions not legally recognized}}
<br />Colors higher in the list override those lower down.
<br />rings {{=}} individual cases]]


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}}
Introduction of same-sex marriage laws has varied by jurisdiction, being variously accomplished through legislative change to ], a court ruling based on constitutional guarantees of equality, or by direct popular vote (via ] or ]). The recognition of same-sex marriage is a political and social issue, and also a religious issue in many countries, and debates continue to arise over whether people in same-sex relationships should be allowed marriage or some similar status (a ]).<ref name=MuslimWaPo>{{cite news|last=Taylor|first=Pamela K.|title=Marriage: Both Civil and Religious|url=http://www.faithstreet.com/onfaith/2009/07/31/marriage-both-civil-and-religious/3855|accessdate=15 July 2014|newspaper=The Washington Post|date=31 July 2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Smith|first=Susan K.|title=Marriage a Civil Right, not Sacred Rite|url=http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/susan_k_smith/2009/07/marriage_a_civil_right_not_sacred_rite.html|accessdate=20 September 2012|newspaper=]|date=30 July 2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Decision in Perry v. Schwarzenegger|url=https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cand/09cv2292/files/09cv2292-ORDER.pdf|accessdate=6 August 2010}}</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:
Same-sex marriage can provide those in same-sex relationships who pay their taxes with government services and make financial demands on them comparable to those afforded to and required of those in opposite-sex marriages. Same-sex marriage 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> ] around the world support allowing those of the same sex to marry, while many major religions oppose same-sex marriage. Opponents of same-sex marriages have argued that recognition of same-sex marriages would erode religious freedoms,<ref name="heritage-f">{{cite web | url=http://www.heritage.org/civil-society/report/same-sex-marriage-and-threats-religious-freedom-how-nondiscrimination-laws | title=Same-Sex Marriage and Threats to Religious Freedom: How Nondiscrimination Laws Factor In | publisher=] | date=29 July 2011 | accessdate=26 September 2017 | author=Messner, Thomas}}</ref> undermine a right of children to be raised by their biological mother and father<ref name="telegraph-anti">{{cite news | url=http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/rendezview/gay-marriage-activists-are-pushing-many-like-me-to-no-column/news-story/8316999b6e1e2c75da7ce542c084d12c | title=Gay marriage activists are pushing many like me to ‘No’ column | work=] | date=14 August 2017 | accessdate=26 September 2017 | author=Marcus, Caroline}}</ref> or erode the institution of marriage itself.<ref name="thoughtco">{{cite web | url=https://www.thoughtco.com/moral-and-religious-arguments-250095 | title=Common Arguments Against Gay Marriage | date=16 July 2017 | accessdate=26 September 2017 | author=Cline, Austin}}</ref>
*{{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}}
Some analysts state that financial, psychological and physical well-being are enhanced by marriage, and that children of same-sex parents or carers benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally recognized union supported by society's institutions.<ref name="psychological">{{cite web|url=http://www.apa.org/about/governance/council/policy/gay-marriage.pdf|title=Resolution on Sexual Orientation and Marriage|year=2004|author=American Psychological Association|accessdate=10 November 2010|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20110511190536/http://www.apa.org/about/governance/council/policy/gay-marriage.pdf |archivedate=11 May 2011}}</ref><ref name="asa">{{cite web|url=http://www2.asanet.org/public/marriage_res.html|author=American Sociological Association|title=American Sociological Association Member Resolution on Proposed U.S. Constitutional Amendment Regarding Marriage|accessdate=10 November 2010|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20070812175917/http://www2.asanet.org/public/marriage_res.html|archivedate=12 August 2007}}</ref><ref name="amici">{{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)|accessdate=5 November 2010}}</ref><ref name=cpa2006>{{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=]|accessdate=28 September 2012|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120707191052/http://www.cpa.ca/cpasite/userfiles/Documents/Practice_Page/Marriage_SameSex_Couples_PositionStatement.pdf|archivedate=7 July 2012}}</ref><ref name=pediatrics>{{Cite journal|vauthors=Pawelski JG, Perrin EC, Foy JM, et al|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|date=July 2006|pmid=16818585|doi=10.1542/peds.2006-1279}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|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 &#124; Special Articles &#124; Pediatrics |website=Pediatrics.aappublications.org |date= |accessdate=2017-07-07}}</ref> Court documents filed by American scientific associations also state that singling out gay men and women as ineligible for marriage both stigmatizes and invites public discrimination against them.<ref name="amici2">{{cite web|url=http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2010/10/27/amicus39.pdf|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)|accessdate=5 November 2010}}</ref>
*{{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}}
The ] asserts that social science research does not support the view that either civilization or viable social orders depend upon marriage as an exclusively heterosexual institution.<ref name="aaa">{{cite web|url=http://www.aaanet.org/issues/policy-advocacy/Statement-on-Marriage-and-the-family.cfm|author=American Anthropological Association|year=2004|title=Statement on Marriage and the Family|accessdate=18 September 2015}}</ref>
*{{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}} {{TOC limit|3}}


==Terminology== ==Terminology==
===Alternative terms=== ===Alternative terms===
], United States on 11 November 2017]]
Some proponents of legal recognition of same-sex marriage, such as ] and ], use the terms ''marriage equality'' and ''equal marriage'' to indicate that they seek equal benefit of marriage laws as opposed to special rights.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gardenstateequality.org/issues/marriageequality/|title=Marriage Equality|publisher=Garden State Equality|accessdate=24 July 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.freedomtomarry.org/pages/marriage-101#faq3|title=Marriage 101|publisher=]|accessdate=28 September 2012}}</ref><ref name="Pratt">{{cite news|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|title=Albany area real estate and the Marriage Equality Act|date=29 May 2012|work=Albany Examiner|accessdate=25 December 2012|author=Pratt, Patricia|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|title=Vote on Illinois marriage equality bill coming in January: sponsors|url=http://chicagophoenix.com/2012/12/13/illinois-marriage-equality-vote-january|accessdate=23 December 2012|newspaper=Chicago Phoenix|date=13 December 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Commission endorses marriage and adoption equality|url=http://www.hrc.co.nz/human-rights-environment/sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity/commission-endorses-marriage-and-adoption-equality|publisher=Human Right Commission New Zealand|accessdate=23 December 2012|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20121202132031/http://www.hrc.co.nz/human-rights-environment/sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity/commission-endorses-marriage-and-adoption-equality|archivedate=2 December 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Mulholland|first=Helene|title=Ed Miliband calls for gay marriage equality|url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/sep/27/ed-miliband-gay-wedding-equality|accessdate=23 December 2012|newspaper=The Guardian|location=London, UK|date=27 September 2012}}</ref><ref name="Ring">{{cite news|url=http://www.advocate.com/politics/marriage-equality/2012/12/20/newt-gingrich-accepts-marriage-equality-inevitable|title=Newt Gingrich: Marriage Equality Inevitable, OK|author=Ring, Trudy|work=The Advocate|location=Los Angeles|date=20 December 2012|quote=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.}}</ref>
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>

Opponents of the legalization of same-sex marriage sometimes characterize it as ''redefining marriage'' or ''redefined marriage'', especially in the ].<ref name="auto">{{cite web|title=State lacks authority to redefine marriage, says bishop|url=http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/state-lacks-authority-to-redefine-marriage-says-bishop/|work=Catholic News Agency|publisher=CNA|accessdate=20 December 2013|date=7 June 2013}}</ref><ref name="auto1">{{cite news|title=Redefining marriage, one dictionary at a time|url=http://www.msnbc.com/hardball/redefining-marriage-one-dictionary-time|accessdate=20 December 2013|newspaper=MSNBC|date=18 July 2013|author=Will Rabbe}}</ref> The term ''homosexual marriage'' is generally used by organisations opposed to same-sex marriage such as the ] in the United States;<ref name="ssm concerns">{{cite web|title=Ten Arguments From Social Science Against Same-Sex Marriage|url=http://www.frc.org/issuebrief/ten-arguments-from-social-science-against-same-sex-marriage|website=FRC.org|publisher=]|accessdate=4 January 2016|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20150928075625/http://www.frc.org/issuebrief/ten-arguments-from-social-science-against-same-sex-marriage|archivedate=28 September 2015|deadurl=no|quote=...it is unlikely that homosexual marriage would domesticate men in the way that heterosexual marriage does.}}</ref> that term is rarely used in the mainstream press.<ref name=scarequotes/>

] recommends the usages ''marriage for gays and lesbians'' or in space-limited headlines ''gay marriage'' with no hyphen and no scare quotes. The Associated Press warns that the construct ''gay marriage'' can imply that marriages of same-sex couples are somehow legally different from those of mixed-sex couples.<ref>{{cite news|last=Harper|first=Robyn|title=When I Get Married, Will It Be a 'Gay Marriage'?|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robyn-harper/marriage-equality_b_1572611.html|accessdate=28 September 2012|newspaper=]|date=6 June 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Harper |first=Robyn |title=My Marriage Won't Be a 'Gay Marriage' |url=http://voices.yahoo.com/my-marriage-wont-gay-marriage-11514384.html?cat=41|accessdate=28 September 2012|publisher=Yahoo!|date=30 June 2012|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120928202736/http://voices.yahoo.com/my-marriage-wont-gay-marriage-11514384.html?cat=41|archivedate=28 September 2012}}</ref>


===Use of the term ''marriage''=== ===Use of the term ''marriage''===
Anthropologists have struggled to determine a definition of marriage that absorbs commonalities of the ] across cultures around the world.<ref name=Fedorak>{{cite book|last=Fedorak|first=Shirley A.|title=Anthropology matters!|year=2008|publisher=]|location=, Ont.|isbn=1442601086|pages=Ch. 11; p. 174}}</ref><ref name=Gough>{{cite journal|last=Gough|first=Kathleen E.|title=The Nayars and the Definition of Marriage|journal=The Journal of the ]|date=Jan–Jun 1959 |volume=89|issue=1|pages=23–34|url=https://www.jstor.org/pss/2844434|accessdate=28 September 2012|doi=10.2307/2844434}}</ref> Many proposed definitions have been criticized for failing to recognize the existence of same-sex marriage in some cultures, including in more than 30 ], such as the ] and ].<ref name=Gough/><ref name=Africa>{{cite book|last=Murray|first=Stephen O.|title=Boy-wives and female husbands : studies of African homosexualities|year=2001|publisher=St. Martin's|location=New York|isbn=0312238290|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZjbESL6YWU0C&lpg=PA255&ots=WdlOOaKAAq&dq=%22Woman-woman%20marriage%20in%20Africa%22&pg=PA255#v=onepage&q=%22Woman-woman%20marriage%20in%20Africa%22&f=false|edition=1st pbk.|author2=Roscoe, Will}}</ref><ref name=Kikuyu>{{cite journal|last=Njambi|first=Wairimu|author2=O'Brien, William|title=Revisiting "Woman-Woman Marriage": Notes on Gikuyu Women|journal=]|date=Spring 2001|volume=12|issue=1|pages=1–23|url=http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/nwsa_journal/v012/12.1njambi.html|accessdate=28 September 2012|doi=10.1353/nwsa.2000.0015}}</ref> 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|title=Dictionaries take lead in redefining modern marriage|url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/may/24/20040524-103201-1169r|accessdate=25 September 2012|newspaper=]|date=24 May 2004}}</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|publisher=]|accessdate=28 September 2012}}</ref> The '']'' has recognized same-sex marriage since 2000.<ref name=slate>{{cite news|last=Redman|first=Daniel|title=Noah Webster Gives His Blessing: Dictionaries recognize same-sex marriage—who knew?|url=http://www.slate.com/id/2215628|accessdate=28 September 2012|newspaper=]|date=7 April 2009}}</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>


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>
] 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 ].<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.rossde.com/editorials/Dershowitz_marriage.html|title=Government Should Quit the Marriage Business|work=Los Angeles Times|author=Dershowitz, Alan M.|authorlink=Alan Dershowitz|date=3 December 2003|accessdate=8 March 2007}}</ref> ], the president of the anti-same-sex marriage group ]'s Ruth Institute project,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ruthinstitute.org/pages/boardMembers.html|title=Board of Advisors|publisher=Ruth Institute|accessdate=6 October 2009|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20091004193603/http://ruthinstitute.org/pages/boardMembers.html|archivedate=4 October 2009}}</ref> claims that the conflation of marriage with contractual agreements is a threat to marriage.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/morse200405200926.asp|title=''Not'' a Social Contract|work=]|author=Morse, Jennifer Roback|authorlink=Jennifer Roback Morse|date=20 May 2004|accessdate=8 March 2007|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20061029161345/http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/morse200405200926.asp|archivedate=29 October 2006}}</ref>

Some publications that oppose same-sex marriage, such as '']'' and ], have an editorial style policy of placing the word ''marriage'' in ] ("marriage") when it is used in reference to same-sex couples.{{citation needed|date=March 2013}} In the United States, the mainstream press has generally abandoned this practice.<ref name=scarequotes>{{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|work=Washington City Paper|author=Wemple, Erik|date=25 February 2008|accessdate=28 July 2008}}</ref> Cliff Kincaid of the conservative ] argued for use of quotation marks on the grounds that marriage was a legal status denied same-sex couples by most U.S. state governments.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.aim.org/media-monitor/honest-versus-slanted-journalism/|title=Honest Versus Slanted Journalism|publisher=]|author=Kincaid, Cliff|date=26 February 2004|accessdate=8 March 2007}}</ref> Same-sex marriage supporters argue that the use of scare quotes 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=Cline, Austin|accessdate=8 March 2007}}</ref>

Opponents of same-sex marriage such as ], the ], and the ] use the term ''traditional marriage'' to mean marriages between one man and one woman.<ref>{{cite web|title=The Divine Institution of Marriage|url=http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/the-divine-institution-of-marriage|publisher=]|accessdate=28 September 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Bishops discuss religious liberty, marriage, finances at annual meeting|url=http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1104473.htm|archive-url=http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20120513011821/http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1104473.htm|dead-url=yes|archive-date=13 May 2012|work=Catholic New Service|location=Baltimore|accessdate=24 July 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?id=23282 |work=Baptist Press|title=Marriage Protection Sunday: Churches encouraged to address 'gay marriage'|date=19 May 2006|accessdate=30 September 2011}}</ref>

==Studies==
The ] stated on February 26, 2004:<ref name="aaa"/><blockquote>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.</blockquote>

Research findings from 1998–2015 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|title=Same-sex marriage and children’s well-being: Research roundup|url=http://journalistsresource.org/studies/society/gender-society/same-sex-marriage-children-well-being-research-roundup|accessdate=29 December 2015|work=Journalist's Resource|date=26 June 2015}}</ref>

===Health===
]
In 2010, a ] ] study examining the effects of institutional discrimination on the psychiatric health of lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) individuals found an increase in psychiatric disorders, including a more than doubling of ], among the LGB population living in states that instituted bans on same-sex marriage. According to the author, the study highlighted the importance of abolishing institutional forms of discrimination, including those leading to disparities in the mental health and well-being of LGB individuals. Institutional discrimination is characterized by societal-level conditions that limit the opportunities and access to resources by socially disadvantaged groups.<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|publisher=]|accessdate=20 September 2012}}</ref><ref name="psychtoday">{{cite news|title=New study suggests bans on gay marriage hurt mental health of LGB people|url=http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-sexual-continuum/201003/new-study-suggests-bans-gay-marriage-hurt-mental-health-lgb-people|accessdate=8 November 2010|newspaper=]|date=22 March 2010|author= Brian Mustanski}}</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>{{cite web|last=Rauch|first=Jonathan|title=For Better or Worse? The Case for Gay (and Straight) Marriage|url=http://www.jonathanrauch.com/jrauch_articles/gay_marriage_1_the_case_for_marriage/|publisher=The New Republic via jonathanrauch.com|accessdate=20 September 2012}}</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> 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>

The ] stated in 2004: "...Denial of access to marriage to same-sex couples may especially harm people who also experience discrimination based on age, race, ethnicity, disability, gender and gender identity, religion, socioeconomic status and so on." It has also averred that same-sex couples who may only enter into a civil union, as opposed to a marriage, "are denied equal access to all the benefits, rights, and privileges provided by federal law to those of married couples," which has adverse effects on the well-being of same-sex partners.<ref name="psychological"/>

In 2009, a pair of economists at ] tied the passage of state bans on same-sex marriage in the US to an increase in the rates of HIV infection.<ref>{{cite web|author=Contact: Elaine Justice: 404.727.0643|url=http://www.emory.edu/home/news/releases/2009/06/study-links-gay-marriage-bans-to-rise-in-hiv-rate.html|title=Study Links Gay Marriage Bans to Rise in HIV infections|publisher=Emory University|accessdate=5 November 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=Peng|first=Handie|title= The Effect of Same-Sex Marriage Laws on Public Health and Welfare|url=http://emory.academia.edu/HandiePeng/Papers/430809/The_Effects_of_Same-Sex_Marriage_Laws_on_Public_Health_and_Welfare|publisher=academia.edu|accessdate=11 February 2012}}</ref> The study linked the passage of a same-sex marriage ban in a state to an increase in the annual HIV rate within that state of roughly 4 cases per 100,000 population.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Francis|first1=AM|last2=Mialon|first2=HM|author8=Andrew M. Francis, Hugo M. Mialon|title=Tolerance and HIV|journal=Journal of Health Economics|volume=29|issue=2|date=March 2010|pages=250–267|pmid=20036431|doi=10.1016/j.jhealeco.2009.11.016|url=http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~hmialon/Tolerance_and_HIV.pdf|accessdate=19 July 2010}}</ref>

===Parenting===
Many psychologist organizations have concluded that children stand to benefit from the well-being that results when their parents' relationship is recognized and supported by society's institutions, e.g. civil marriage. For example, the ] stated in 2006 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 /> The CPA stated in 2003 the stressors encountered by gay and lesbian parents and their children are more likely the result of the way society treats them than because of any deficiencies in fitness to parent.<ref name=cpa2006 />

The ] concluded in 2006, in an analysis published in the journal '']'':<ref name="aap2006"/>
{{quote|There is ample evidence to show that children raised by same-gender parents fare as well as those raised by heterosexual parents. More than 25 years of research have documented that there is no relationship between parents' sexual orientation and any measure of a child's emotional, psychosocial, and behavioral adjustment. These data have demonstrated no risk to children as a result of growing up in a family with 1 or more gay parents. Conscientious and nurturing adults, whether they are men or women, heterosexual or homosexual, can be excellent parents. The rights, benefits, and protections of civil marriage can further strengthen these families.}}

===Opinion polling===
]]]
Numerous polls and studies on the issue have been conducted, including those that were completed throughout the first decade of the 21st century. A consistent trend of increasing support for same-sex marriage has been revealed across the world. Much of the research that was conducted in developed countries in the first decade of the 21st century shows a majority of people in support of same-sex marriage. Support for legal same-sex marriage has increased across every age group, political ideology, religion, gender, race and region of various developed countries in the world.<ref name=Gallup2011>{{cite web|last=Newport|first=Frank|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|publisher=]|accessdate=25 September 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Public Opinion: Nationally|url=http://www.australianmarriageequality.com/wp/who-supports-equality/a-majority-of-australians-support-marriage-equality|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110303043929/http://www.australianmarriageequality.com/wp/who-supports-equality/a-majority-of-australians-support-marriage-equality/|dead-url=yes|archive-date=3 March 2011|publisher=australianmarriageequality.com|accessdate=25 September 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Gay Life in Estonia|url=http://www.globalgayz.com/europe/estonia/gay-life-in-estonia|publisher=globalgayz.com |accessdate=25 September 2012|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120716100828/http://www.globalgayz.com/europe/estonia/gay-life-in-estonia|archivedate=16 July 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Jowit|first=Juliette|title=Gay marriage gets ministerial approval|url=https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/jun/12/gay-marriage-receive-ministerial-approval|accessdate=25 September 2012|newspaper=]|date=12 June 2012|location=London}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Most Irish people support gay marriage, poll says|url=http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2011/02/24/most-irish-people-support-gay-marriage-poll-says|accessdate=25 September 2012|newspaper=PinkNews|date=24 February 2011|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130926032112/http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2011/02/24/most-irish-people-support-gay-marriage-poll-says|archivedate=26 September 2013}}</ref>

Recent polling in the ] has shown a further increase in public support for same-sex marriage. When adults were asked in 2005 if they thought "marriages between homosexuals should or should not be recognized by the law as valid, with the same rights as traditional marriages", 28 percent replied in the affirmative, while 68 percent replied in the negative (the remaining 4 percent stated that they were unsure). When adults were asked in March 2013 if they supported or opposed same-sex marriage, 50 percent said they supported same-sex marriage, while 41 percent were opposed, and the remaining 9 percent stated that they were unsure.<ref>{{cite web|title=Law and Civil Rights|url=http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm|work=PollingReport.com|publisher=POLLING REPORT, INC|accessdate=27 April 2013|year=2013}}</ref> Various detailed polls and studies on same-sex marriage that were conducted in several countries show that support for same-sex marriage generally increases with higher levels of education and decreases with age.<ref>{{cite web|title=Survey&nbsp;– Generations at Odds: The Millennial Generation and the Future of Gay and Lesbian Rights|url=http://publicreligion.org/research/2011/08/generations-at-odds|publisher=] |accessdate=25 September 2012|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20121025004814/http://publicreligion.org/research/2011/08/generations-at-odds|archivedate=25 October 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Pew Forum: Part 2: Gay Marriage|url=http://www.pewforum.org/PublicationPage.aspx?id=647|publisher=]|accessdate=25 September 2012|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120910053311/http://www.pewforum.org/PublicationPage.aspx?id=647|archivedate=10 September 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=Poirier|first=Justine|title=Same-Sex Marriage: Let's Make a Change|url=http://www.montrealites.ca/justice/same-sex-marriage-lets-make-a-change.html|publisher=Montréalités Justice|accessdate=25 September 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Data Points: Support for Legal Same-Sex Marriage|url=http://chronicle.com/article/Chart-Support-for-Legal/64683/|accessdate=25 September 2012|newspaper=The Chronicle of Higher Education|date=16 March 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Support for Same‐Sex Marriage in Latin America|url=http://www.vanderbilt.edu/lapop/insights/I0844.enrevised.pdf|publisher=]|accessdate=25 September 2012}}</ref>

{{Same-sex marriage opinion polls worldwide}}


==History== ==History==
{{Main article|History of same-sex unions|Timeline of same-sex marriage|History of homosexuality}} {{Main|History of same-sex unions}}
{{For timeline}}
{{Broader|History of homosexuality}}


===Ancient=== ===Ancient===
{{further|Homosexuality in ancient Rome}}
A reference to same-sex marriage (by the Egyptians and Canaanites) exists in the Talmud. The Old Testament prohibited homosexual relations (Lev. 18:22, 20:13), and the Jewish sages provide the reason for this as being that the Hebrews were warned not to "follow the acts of the land of Egypt or the acts of the land of Canaan." The sages explicitly state: "what did do? A man would marry a man and a woman a woman."<ref>Rabbi Joel Roth. ''rabbinicalassembly.org'' 1992.</ref>
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"/>
What is arguably the first historical mention of the performance of same-sex marriages occurred during the early ] according to controversial<ref name="Shaw">Shaw criticises Boswell's methodology and conclusions as disingenuous {{cite journal|last=Shaw|first=Brent|authorlink=Brent Shaw|date=July 1994|title=A Groom of One's Own?|journal=]|pages=43–48|url=http://www.learnedhand.com/shaw_boswell.htm|accessdate=25 June 2009|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20060507014622/http://www.learnedhand.com/shaw_boswell.htm|archivedate=7 May 2006}}</ref> historian ].<ref name=boswell>{{cite book|last=Boswell|first=John|title=Same-sex unions in premodern Europe|year=1995|publisher=Vintage Books|location=New York|isbn=0-679-75164-5|pages=80–85|url=https://books.google.com/books/about/Same_sex_unions_in_premodern_Europe.html?id=iRL9cXA1m1IC}}</ref> These were usually reported in a critical or satirical manner.<ref>{{cite web|last=Frier|first=Bruce|title=Roman Same-Sex Weddings from the Legal Perspective|url=http://www.umich.edu/~classics/news/newsletter/winter2004/weddings.html|publisher=]|accessdate=25 September 2012|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20111230041201/http://www.umich.edu/~classics/news/newsletter/winter2004/weddings.html|archivedate=30 December 2011}}</ref>


===Contemporary===
Child emperor ] referred to his ] driver, a blond slave from ] named ], as his husband.<ref>Bunson, M., ''Encyclopedia of the Roman Empire'', Infobase Publishing, 2009, p. 259.</ref> He also married an athlete named Zoticus in a lavish public ceremony in Rome amidst the rejoicings of the citizens.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/80*.html |title=Cassius Dio — Epitome of Book 80 |website=Penelope.uchicago.edu |date= |accessdate=2017-07-07}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|author=Herodian |url=http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/herodian_05_book5.htm |title=Herodian of Antioch, History of the Roman Empire (1961) pp.135-152. Book 5 |website=Tertullian.org |date= |accessdate=2017-07-07}}</ref><ref name=scarre>{{cite book|last=Scarre|first=Chris|title=Chronicles of the Roman Emperors|year=1995|publisher=Thames and Hudson Ltd|location=London|isbn=0-500-05077-5|page=151|url=https://books.google.com/books/about/Chronicle_of_the_Roman_Emperors.html?id=s1tspwAACAAJ}}</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>


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>
The first Roman emperor to have married a man was ], who is reported to have married two other males on different occasions. The first was with one of Nero's own ], ], with whom Nero took the role of the bride.<ref>Williams, CA., ''Roman Homosexuality: Second Edition'', Oxford University Press, 2009, p. 284.</ref> Later, as a groom, Nero married ], a young boy, to replace the adolescent female concubine he had killed<ref name="dio-history-LXII-28">Nero missed her so greatly that, on learning of a woman who resembled her, he sent for her and kept her; but later he caused a boy of the freedmen, whom he used to call Sporus, ... "he formally "married" Sporus, and assigned the boy a regular dowry according to contract;" q.v., Suetonius ''Nero'' 28; Dio Cassius '' Epitome '' 62.28</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/62.html |title=Bill Thayer's Web Site |website=Penelope.uchicago.edu |date= |accessdate=2017-07-07}}</ref> and married him in a very public ceremony with all the solemnities of matrimony, after which Sporus was forced to pretend to be the female concubine that Nero had killed and act as though they were really married.<ref name="dio-history-LXII-28"/> A friend gave the "bride" away as required by law. The marriage was celebrated in both Greece and Rome in extravagant public ceremonies.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/62*.html |title=Cassius Dio — Epitome of Book 62 |website=Penelope.uchicago.edu |date= |accessdate=2017-07-07}}</ref>
<!---Please add references in the main article before or after adding information to this table--->


==Timeline==
It should be noted, however, that ''conubium'' existed only between a ''civis Romanus'' and a ''civis Romana'' (that is, between a male Roman citizen and a female Roman citizen), so that a marriage between two Roman males (or with a slave) would have no legal standing in Roman law (apart, presumably, from the arbitrary will of the emperor in the two aforementioned cases).<ref>Corbett, ''The Roman Law of Marriage'' (Oxford, 1969), pp. 24–28; Treggiari, ''Roman Marriage'' (Oxford, 1991), pp. 43–49.; "Marriages where the partners had ''conubium'' were marriages valid in Roman law (''iusta matrimonia'')" . Compare Ulpian (''Tituli Ulpiani'') 5.3–5: "''Conubium'' is the capacity to marry a wife in Roman law. Roman citizens have ''conubium'' with Roman citizens, but with Latins and foreigners only if the privilege was granted. There is no ''conubium'' with slaves"; compare also Gaius (''Institutionum'' 1:55–56, 67, 76–80).</ref> Furthermore, according to Susan Treggiari, "''matrimonium'' was then an institution involving a mother, ''mater''. The idea implicit in the word is that a man took a woman in marriage, ''in matrimonium ducere'', so that he might have children by her."<ref>Treggiari, ''Roman Marriage'' (Oxford, 1991), p. 5.</ref>
{{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.
In 342 AD, Christian emperors ] and ] issued a law in the ] (''C. Th.'' 9.7.3) prohibiting ] and ordering execution for those so married.<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|issue=4}}</ref>


{| class="wikitable"
===Contemporary===
Writing in '']'' in 2013, legal historian ] wrote that while there was a growth of gay rights activism in the 1970s United States, "Marriage equality was not then a priority." He argued that many gay people were not initially interested in marriage, deeming it to be a traditionalist institution, and that the search for legal recognition of same-sex relationships began in the late 1980s.<ref>{{cite web|title=How Same-Sex Marriage Came to Be|url=http://harvardmagazine.com/2013/03/how-same-sex-marriage-came-to-be|date=March–April 2013|accessdate=28 March 2015}}</ref> Others, such as Faramerz Dabhoiwala writing for '']'', say that the modern movement began in the 1990s.<ref>{{cite news|title=The secret history of same-sex marriage|url=https://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/jan/23/-sp-secret-history-same-sex-marriage|accessdate=26 July 2015|work=]|date=23 January 2015}}</ref>

Denmark was the first country to recognize a legal relationship for same-sex couples, establishing "registered partnerships" in 1989. This 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|title=Rights for Gay Couples in Denmark|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1989/10/02/world/rights-for-gay-couples-in-denmark.html|accessdate=19 August 2013|newspaper=New York Times|date=2 October 1989}}</ref> In 2001, the ]<ref group="nb" name="Netherlands"/> became the first country to permit ].<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/05/26/f-same-sex-timeline.html|title=Same-sex marriage around the world|work=CBC News|location=Toronto|date=26 May 2009|accessdate=6 October 2009}}</ref> Since then same-sex marriages have been permitted and mutually recognized by ] (2003), ] (2005), ] (2005), ] (2006), ] (2009), ] (2009), ] (2010), ] (2010), ] (2010), ] (2012), ] (2013), ] (2013), ] (2013), ]<ref group="nb" name="New Zealand"/> (2013), ] (2015), the ]<ref group="nb" name="United States"/> (2015), ] (2015), ] (2016), ] (2017), ] (2017) and ] (2017). In Mexico, same-sex marriages are performed in a number of states and recognised in all thirty-one states. In ] and ], their recognition has been judicially mandated but not yet legislated.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?sectionName=NLetter&id=7c190914-f498-427c-ad0b-97559a3aae71&Headline=Nepal+SC+approves+same-sex+marriage|title=Nepal approves same-sex marriage|work=Hindustan Times|location=New Delhi|date=19 November 2008|accessdate=5 November 2010}}</ref> Furthermore, most jurisdictions of the ]<ref group="nb" name="United Kingdom"/> have also legalised same-sex marriage, with the first being ] and ] in March 2014, followed by ] in December of the same year. Same sex marriage is not legal in ].

====Timeline====
{{main article|Timeline of same-sex marriage}}
{| class="wikitable hlist"
|- |-
!2001 !2001
|{{flagicon|Netherlands}} ''']''' (1 April)
|
* {{flagicon|Netherlands}} ''']''' (1 April)
|- |-
!2002 !2002
| |
''none''
|- |-
!2003 !2003
|{{flatlist}}
|
* {{flagicon|Belgium}} ''']''' (1 June) * {{flagicon|Belgium}} ''']''' (1 June)
* ] (10 June) * ] (10 June)
* ] (8 July) * ] (8 July)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2004 !2004
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ] (19 March) * ] (19 March)
* ] (17 May) * ] (17 May)
Line 130: Line 99:
* ] (5 November) * ] (5 November)
* ] (21 December) * ] (21 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2005 !2005
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ] (23 June) * ] (23 June)
* {{flagicon|Spain}} ''']''' (3 July) * {{flagicon|Spain}} ''']''' (3 July)
* {{flagicon|Canada}} ''']''' (20 July) * {{flagicon|Canada}} ''']''' (20 July)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2006 !2006
|{{flagicon|South Africa}} ''']''' (30 November)
|
* {{flagicon|South Africa}} ''']''' (30 November)
|- |-
!2007 !2007
| |
''none''
|- |-
!2008 !2008
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ] (12 November) *] (June 16, repealed November 5)
*] (12 November)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2009 !2009
|{{flatlist}}
|
* {{flagicon|Norway}} ''']''' (1 January) * {{flagicon|Norway}} ''']''' (1 January)
* ] (27 April) * ] (27 April)
* {{flagicon|Sweden}} ''']''' (1 May) * {{flagicon|Sweden}} ''']''' (1 May)
* ] (20 May) * ] (20 May)
* ] (1 September) * ] (1 September)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2010 !2010
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ] (1 January) * ] (1 January)
* ] (3 March) * ] (3 March)
* ] (4 March) * ] (4 March)
* ] (29 April) * ] (29 April)
* {{flagicon|Portugal}} ''']''' (5 June) * {{flagicon|Portugal}} ''']''' (5 June)
* {{flagicon|Iceland}} ''']''' (27 June) * {{flagicon|Iceland}} ''']''' (27 June)
* {{flagicon|Argentina}} ''']''' (22 July) * {{flagicon|Argentina}} ''']''' (22 July)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2011 !2011
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ] (24 July) * ] (24 July)
* ] (1 August) * ] (1 August)
* ] (7 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2012 !2012
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ] (6 January)
* ] (3 May) * ] (3 May)
* {{flagicon|Denmark}} ''']''' (15 June) * {{flagicon|Denmark}} ''']''' (15 June)
* ] (5 July)
* ] (11 July) * ] (11 July)
* ] (15 July) * ] (15 August)
* ] (15 August) * ] (10 October)
* ] (10 October) * ] (26 November)
* ] (26 November) * ] (1 December)
* ] (1 December) * ] (6 December)
* ] (6 December) * ] (9 December)
* ] (9 December) * ] (15 December)
* ] (15 December)
* ] (29 December) * ] (29 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2013 !2013
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ] (1 January) * ] (1 January)
* ] (16 February) * ] (16 February)
* ] (15 March) * ] (15 March)
* ] (15 March) * ] (15 March)
* ] (26 March) * ] (26 March)
* ] (2 April) * ] (2 April)
* ] (26 April) * ] (26 April)
* ] (29 April) * ] (29 April)
* ] (29 April) * ] (29 April)
* ] (8 May) * ] (8 May)
* {{flagicon|Brazil}} ''']''' (16 May) * {{flagicon|Brazil}} ''']''' (16 May)
* {{flagicon|France}} ''']''' (18 May) * {{flagicon|France}} ''']''' (18 May)
* ] (24 June) * ] (24 June)
* ] (28 June) * ] (28 June)
* ] (1 July) * ] (1 July)
* ] (1 August) * ] (1 August)
* ] (1 August) * ] (1 August)
* ] (1 August) * ] (1 August)
* {{flagicon|Uruguay}} ''']''' (5 August) * {{flagicon|Uruguay}} ''']''' (5 August)
* {{flagicon|New Zealand}} ''']''' (19 August) * {{flagicon|New Zealand}} ''']''' (19 August)
Line 217: Line 192:
* ] (28 August) * ] (28 August)
* ] (4 September) * ] (4 September)
* ] (5 September) * ] (5 September)
* ] (9 September) * ] (9 September)
* ] (18 October<!--3rd license since repeal of DOMA, first public marriage-->) * ] (18 October<!--3rd license since repeal of DOMA, first public marriage-->)
* ] (21 October) * ] (21 October)
* ] (15 November) * ] (1 November)
* ] (15 November)
* ] (2 December) * ] (2 December)
* ] (19 December) * ] (19 December)
* ] (20 December, repealed 6 January 2014)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2014 !2014
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ] (21 February) * ] (21 February)
* ] (13 March) * {{flagicon|England}} {{flagicon|Wales}} ] (13 March)
* ] (13 March)
* ] (19 May) * ] (19 May)
* ] (20 May) * ] (20 May)
* ] (1 June) * ] (1 June)
* ] (3 June) * ] (3 June)
* ] (3 June)' * ] (3 June)
* ] (9 July) * ] (9 July)
* ] (16 July) * ] (16 July)
* ] (10 August) * ] (10 August)
* ] (17 September) * ] (17 September)
* ] (6 October) * ] (6 October)
Line 243: Line 222:
* ] (6 October) * ] (6 October)
* ] (6 October) * ] (6 October)
* ] (6 October) * ] (6 October)
* ] (7 October) * ] (7 October)
* ] (9 October) * ] (9 October)
* ] (9 October) * ] (9 October)
* ] (9 October) * ] (9 October)
* ] (10 October) * ] (10 October)
* ] (12 October) * ] (12 October)
* ] (15 October) * ] (15 October)
* ] (17 October) * ] (17 October)
* ] (17 October) * ] (17 October)
* ] (17 October) * ] (17 October)
* ] (17 October) * ] (17 October)
* ] (17 October) * ] (17 October)
* ] (17 October) * ] (17 October)
* ] (21 October) * ] (21 October)
* ] (5 November) * ] (5 November)
Line 263: Line 242:
* ] (12 November) * ] (12 November)
* ] (12 November) * ] (12 November)
* ] (14 November) * ] (14 November)
* ] (14 November) * ] (14 November)
* ] (19 November) * ] (19 November)
* ] (19 November) * ] (19 November)
* ] (20 November) * ] (20 November)
* ] (13 December) * ] (13 December)
* ] (16 December) * {{flagicon|Scotland}} ] (16 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2015 !2015
|{{flatlist}}
|
* {{flagicon|Luxembourg}} ''']''' (1 January) * {{flagicon|Luxembourg}} ''']''' (1 January)
* ] (5 January) * ] (5 January)
* ] (6 January)'' * ] (6 January)
* ] (24 February) * ] (24 February)
* ] (14 May) * ] (14 May)
* ] (15 May) * ] (15 May)
* ] (9 June) * ] (9 June)
* ] (10 June) * ] (10 June)
* ] (12 June) * ] (12 June)
* {{flagicon|United States}} ''']''' (26 June) * {{flagicon|United States}} ''']''' (26 June)
* ] (30 June) * ] (30 June)
* ] (7 July) * ] (7 July)
* ] (9 July) * ] (9 July)
* ] (13 July) * ] (13 July)
* ] (21 July) * ] (21 July)
* ] (3 August)
* ] (9 September)
* {{flagicon|Ireland}} ''']''' (16 November) * {{flagicon|Ireland}} ''']''' (16 November)
* ] (18 November) * ] (18 November)
* ] (23 December) * ] (23 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2016 !2016
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ] (25 January) * ] (2 February)
* {{flagicon|Greenland}} ] (1 April)
* ] (2 February)
* ] (1 April)
* {{flagicon|Colombia}} ''']''' (28 April) * {{flagicon|Colombia}} ''']''' (28 April)
* ] (6 May) * ] (6 May)
* ] (12 May) * ] (12 May)
* ] (20 May) * ] (20 May)
Line 307: Line 289:
* ] (18 September) * ] (18 September)
* ] (13 October) * ] (13 October)
* ] (3 November) * ] (3 November)
* ] (9 December) * ] (9 December)
* ] (15 December) * ] (15 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2017 !2017
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ] (1 January) * ] (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! *** --> <!-- *** Please check discussion on talk page before adding Slovenia! *** -->
* {{flagicon|Finland}} ''']''' (1 March) * {{flagicon|Finland}} ''']''' (1 March)
* ] (20 March) * ] (20 March)
* ] (22 March) * ] (22 March)
* ] (29 April) * ] (29 April)
* ] (2 May) * ] (2 May)
* ] (5 May) * ] (5 May, repealed 1 June 2018)
* ] (5 June) * ] (5 June)
* ] (1 July) * {{flagicon|Faroe Islands}} ] (1 July)
* ] (11 July) * ] (4 August)
* ] (1 August)
* ] (4 August)
* {{flagicon|Malta}} ''']''' (1 September) * {{flagicon|Malta}} ''']''' (1 September)
* {{flagicon|Germany}} ''']''' (1 October) * {{flagicon|Germany}} ''']''' (1 October)
* ] (25 October) * ] (25 October)
* ] (3 November) * ] (3 November)
* {{flagicon|Australia}} ''']''' (9 December)
* ] (20 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2018
!TBD
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ''] (awaiting royal assent)'' * ] (16 February)
* ''] (after spring 2018)'' * ] (11 May)
* {{flagicon|Taiwan}} ''''']''''' ''(before 24 May 2019)'' * ] (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}}
|} |}

====International organisations====

=====European Court of Human Rights=====
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|url=http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-99605|title=HUDOC - European Court of Human Rights|accessdate=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|title=Strasbourg court rules that states are not obliged to allow gay marriage|url=https://www.theguardian.com/law/2010/jun/24/european-court-of-human-rights-civil-partnerships|accessdate=8 November 2013|newspaper=The Guardian|date=24 June 2010|author=Antoine Buyse}}</ref>

British Judge Sir ], then head of the European Court of Human Rights, delivered a speech in 2012 that signaled the court was ready to declare same-sex marriage a "human right", as soon as enough countries fell into line.<ref>{{cite news|title=Gay marriage: the French connection|url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/9859036/Gay-marriage-the-French-connection.html|accessdate=8 November 2013|newspaper=The Telegraph|date=9 February 2013|author=Christopher Booker|location=London}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Gay marriage politically, rather than ethically motivated|url=http://www.sosogay.co.uk/2013/gay-marriage-politically-rather-than-ethically-motivated|work=So So Gay|publisher=So So Gay Ltd|accessdate=8 November 2013|author=Jamie Clarke|date=6 June 2013|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20131006084549/http://sosogay.co.uk/2013/gay-marriage-politically-rather-than-ethically-motivated|archivedate=6 October 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Sir Nicholas Bratza|url=http://www.pcc.org.uk/news/index.html?article=ODYzMQ==|archive-url=https://archive.is/20131108001904/http://www.pcc.org.uk/news/index.html?article=ODYzMQ==|dead-url=yes|archive-date=8 November 2013|work=Press Complaints Commission|publisher=Press Complaints Commission|accessdate=8 November 2013|year=2013}}</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|website=ECHR.coe.int|publisher=European Court of Human Rights|accessdate=25 July 2015|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20140703060501/http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf|archivedate=3 July 2014|format=PDF|deadurl=yes}}</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"/>

=====European Union=====
On 12 March 2015, the European Parliament passed a non-binding resolution recognising the right to marry for those of the same sex as a human and civil rights issue.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/03/13/ukip-and-tories-abstain-on-eu-motion-to-recognise-same-sex-marriage/|title=UKIP and Tories abstain on EU motion to recognise same-sex marriage|work=PinkNews|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P8-TA-2015-0076+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN&language=EN|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 - P8_TA-PROV(2015)0076|publisher=|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.votewatch.eu/en/term8-annual-report-on-human-rights-and-democracy-in-the-world-2013-and-the-eu-policy-on-the-matter-motion-8.html|title=Annual report on human rights and democracy in the world 2013 and the EU policy on the matter|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref>


==Same-sex marriage around the world== ==Same-sex marriage around the world==
{{Main article|Status of same-sex marriage|Same-sex union legislation}} {{Main|Legal status of same-sex marriage|Same-sex union legislation|Recognition of same-sex unions by country }}
{{World homosexuality laws map|align=right|size=400px}}
Same-sex marriage has been legalized (nationwide or in some parts) in ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ],<ref group="nb" name="Mexico"/> the ],<ref group="nb" name="Netherlands"/> ],<ref group="nb" name="New Zealand"/> ], ], ], ], ], the ]<ref group="nb" name="United Kingdom"/> the ],<ref group="nb" name="United States"/> and ].


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 status of same-sex marriage is a complicated matter in a number of other nations. In Mexico marriages are recognized by all sub-national jurisdictions and by the federal government.<ref>{{cite news|last=Wall|first=Allan|title=Mexican Supreme Court Advances Gay Marriage Agenda|url=http://www.newswithviews.com/Wall/allan132.htm|work=News With Views|quote="The ruling 5 August 2010, upheld the Mexico City same-sex marriage law as being constitutional. (The vote on that ruling was 8 to 2). Five days late...the Supreme Court...decreed that same-sex marriages performed in Mexico City are valid marriages throughout all of Mexico."|accessdate=9 February 2012}}</ref> On 3 June 2015, Mexico's ] released a "jurisprudential thesis" declaring the current purpose of marriage, which is procreation, as unconstitutional and discriminatory towards same-sex relationships. Courts nationwide must now authorize marriages between people of the same-sex through injunctions, a process slower and more expensive than opposite-sex marriage.<ref name="Randal C. Archibold and Paulina Villegas">{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/15/world/americas/with-little-fanfare-mexican-supreme-court-effectively-legalizes-same-sex-marriage.html?_r=0|title=With Little Fanfare, Mexican Supreme Court Legalizes Same-Sex Marriage|publisher=New York Times|date=14 June 2015|accessdate=16 June 2015|author1=Randal C. Archibold |author2=Paulina Villegas |lastauthoramp=yes }}</ref> ] does not recognize same-sex marriages performed in its territory, but same-sex marriages performed in foreign jurisdictions are recorded strictly "for statistical purposes", thereby avoiding official recognition of same-sex marriages by the state.<ref name="court2006">{{cite web|title=Israeli Minister backs down on definition of marriage|url=http://365gay.com/Newscon07/09/091007israel.htm|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20070914013259/http://365gay.com/Newscon07/09/091007israel.htm|archivedate=2007-09-14}}</ref>


[[File:World marriage-equality laws.svg|thumb|center|upright=3|
=== Legal recognition ===
{{legend|#025|Marriage open to same-sex couples}}
====Argentina====
{{Main article|Same-sex marriage in Argentina}} {{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}}
On 15 July 2010, the Argentine Senate approved a bill extending marriage rights to same-sex couples. It was supported by the Government of ] ] and opposed by the Catholic Church.<ref>{{cite news|last=Barrionuevo|first=Alexei|title=Argentina Approves Gay Marriage, in a First for Region|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/16/world/americas/16argentina.html|work=The New York Times|accessdate=9 February 2012|date=16 July 2010}}</ref> Polls showed that nearly 70% of Argentines supported giving gay people the same marital rights as heterosexuals.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/14/world/americas/14argentina.html|work=The New York Times|title=Argentina Senate to Vote on Gay Marriage|first=Alexei|last=Barrionuevo|date=13 July 2010}}</ref> The law came into effect on 22 July 2010 upon promulgation by the Argentine President.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.mercopress.com/2010/07/22/cristina-kirchner-signs-bill-legalizing-same-sex-couples-marriage|title=Cristina Kirchner signs bill legalizing same-sex couples’ marriage|work=mercopress.com}}</ref>
{{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>
====Belgium====
{{Main article|Same-sex marriage in Belgium}}
], Willy Demeyer, officiating at the wedding of a gay couple]]


]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>
Belgium became the second country in the world to legally recognize same-sex marriages when a bill passed by the ] took effect on 1 June 2003.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2003/01/31/Belgium-legalizes-gay-marriage/UPI-46741044012415/|title=Belgium legalizes gay marriage|publisher=UPI|date=31 January 2003}}</ref> Originally, Belgium allowed the marriages of foreign same-sex couples only if their country of origin also allowed these unions, however legislation enacted in October 2004 permits any couple to marry if at least one of the spouses has lived in the country for a minimum of three months. A 2006 statute legalized ].<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.euronews.net/2005/12/02/belgium-moves-to-allow-gay-adoption/|title=Belgium moves to allow gay adoption|publisher=Euronews|date=2 December 2005}}</ref>


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>
====Brazil====
{{Main article|Same-sex marriage in Brazil}}
{{Same-sex marriage map South America|align=left}}
] ruled in May 2011 that same-sex couples are legally entitled to legal recognition of cohabitation (known as {{lang|pt|''união estável''}}, one of the two possible ''family entities'' in Brazilian legislation, it includes all family and married couple rights in Brazil – besides automatic opt-in for one of four systems of property share and automatic right to inheritance –, and was available for all same-sex couples since the same date), turning same-sex marriage legally possible as a consequence, and just stopping short of equalization of same-sex marriage (potentially confusing, a civil marriage or {{lang|pt|''casamento civil''}} is often rendered as {{lang|pt|''união civil''}} in legal Brazilian Portuguese; a same-sex marriage is a {{lang|pt|''casamento civil homoafetivo''}} or an {{lang|pt|''união civil homoafetiva''}}).<ref>{{cite news|title=Brazil's supreme court recognizes gay partnerships|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/06/us-brazil-gayrights-idUSTRE74503V20110506|accessdate=16 February 2012|agency=Reuters|date=5 May 2011}}</ref>


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.
Between mid-2011 and May 2013, same-sex couples had their cohabitation issues converted into marriages in several Brazil states with the approval of a state judge. All legal Brazilian marriages were always recognized all over Brazil.<ref name="WPost">{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/americas/brazil-judge-approves-what-appears-to-be-countrys-first-gay-marriage-between-2-men/2011/06/27/AGYN2znH_story.html|title=Brazilian judge gives male couple approval for what court says is country's first gay marriage|date=27 June 2011|work=The Washington Post|archiveurl=https://www.webcitation.org/5zsXujTvb?url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/americas/brazil-judge-approves-what-appears-to-be-countrys-first-gay-marriage-between-2-men/2011/06/27/AGYN2znH_story.html|archivedate=2 July 2011|deadurl=no}}</ref>


[[File:Constitutional bans on same-sex unions by country.svg|thumb|center|upright=3|
In November 2012, the Court of Bahia equalized marriage in the state of ].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www5.tjba.jus.br/corregedoria/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=420:uniaohomoafetiva&catid=31:noticias&Itemid=142 |title=Provimento Conjunto trata de união homoafetiva |work=Tribunal de Justiça do Estado da Bahia (official web site of the state supreme court) |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130927065759/http://www5.tjba.jus.br/corregedoria/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=420%3Auniaohomoafetiva&catid=31%3Anoticias&Itemid=142|archivedate=27 September 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.brasil247.com/pt/247/bahia247/86361/Bahia-já-pode-oficializar-casamento-homoafetivo.htm|language=Portuguese|date=27 November 2012|title=Bahia já pode oficializar casamento homoafetivo|work=brasil247.com|accessdate=27 November 2012}}</ref>
{{legend|#D40000|Same-sex marriage ] by secular constitution}}

{{legend|#800000|Same-sex marriage banned by constitutionally mandated religious law}}
In December 2012, the state of ] likewise had same-sex marriage allowed in demand by court order.<ref>{{cite news|title=Norma do TJ obriga cartórios de SP a registrar casamento gay|url=http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/cotidiano/1203680-norma-do-tj-obriga-cartorios-de-sp-a-registrar-casamento-gay.shtml|newspaper=Folha de S. Paulo|date=19 December 2012}}</ref> Same-sex marriages also became equalized in relation to opposite-sex ones between January 2012 and April 2013 by court order in Alagoas, Ceará, Espírito Santo, the Federal District, Mato Grosso do Sul, Paraíba, Paraná, Piauí, Rondônia, Santa Catarina and Sergipe, and in Santa Rita do Sapucaí, a municipality in Minas Gerais; in Rio de Janeiro, the State Court facilitated its realization by district judges in agreement with the equalization (instead of ordering notaries to accept same-sex marriages in demand as all others).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://virgula.uol.com.br/ver/noticia/lifestyle/2013/04/20/324152-rio-de-janeiro-retira-impedimentos-a-casamento-entre-gays|title=Rio de Janeiro state legalizes gay marriage|date=17 April 2013|accessdate= 22 April 2013}}</ref>
{{legend|#CCCCCC|No constitutional ban}}

On 14 May 2013, the Justice's ] issued a ruling requiring all civil registers of the country to perform same-sex marriages by a 14–1 vote, thus legalizing same-sex marriage in the entire country.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.estadao.com.br/noticias/cidades,cnj-obriga-cartorios-a-celebrar-casamento-entre-homossexuais,1031678,0.htm |title=CNJ obriga cartórios a celebrar casamento entre homossexuais |publisher=Estadao.com.br |date=14 May 2013 |accessdate=5 April 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://g1.globo.com/politica/noticia/2013/05/apos-uniao-estavel-gay-podera-casar-em-cartorio-decide-cnj.html|title=G1 - Decisão do CNJ obriga cartórios a fazer casamento homossexual - notícias em Política|work=Política|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.jb.com.br/pais/noticias/2013/05/14/cnj-obriga-cartorios-a-converterem-uniao-estavel-gay-em-casamento/|title=Jornal do Brasil|work=Jornal do Brasil|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref> The resolution came into effect on 16 May 2013.<ref>{{pt icon}} </ref><ref>{{pt icon}} </ref>

In March 2013, polls suggested that 47% of Brazilians supported marriage equalization and 57% supported adoption equalization for same-sex couples.<ref>, christianpost.com; accessed 5 July 2017. {{pt icon}}</ref>

Polls in June 2013 also supported the conclusion that the division of opinion between acceptance and rejection of same-sex marriage is in about equal halves. When the distinction between same-sex unions that are not termed marriages in relation to same-sex marriage is made, the difference in the numbers of approval and disapproval is still insignificant, below 1%; the most frequent reason for disapproval is a supposed 'unnaturalness' of same-sex relationships, followed by religious beliefs.<ref> {{pt icon}}</ref><ref> {{pt icon}}</ref>

====Canada====
{{Main article|Same-sex marriage in Canada}}
Legal recognition of same-sex marriage in Canada followed a series of constitutional challenges based on the ] of the ]. In the first such case, '']'', same-sex marriage ceremonies performed in ] on 14 January 2001 were subsequently validated when the ], mixed-sex definition of marriage was held to be unconstitutional. Similar rulings had legalized same-sex marriage in eight provinces and one territory when the ''2005 ]'' defined marriage throughout Canada as "the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others."

====Colombia====
{{Main article|Same-sex marriage in Colombia}}
Same-sex marriage has been legal in Colombia since April 2016. The country's ] ruled, on 28 April 2016 that same-sex couples are allowed to enter into civil marriages in the country and that judges and notaries are barred from refusing to perform same-sex weddings.<ref name="April 28, 2016 ruling">{{cite web|url=http://www.eltiempo.com/politica/justicia/matrimonio-gay-corte-constitucional-le-daria-el-si-definitivo/16575865|title=Corte Constitucional da el sí definitivo y avala el matrimonio gay - Justicia - El Tiempo|first=Casa Editorial El|last=Tiempo|work=eltiempo.com}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.dw.com/en/colombia-legalizes-same-sex-marriage/a-19223822|title=Colombia legalizes same-sex marriage|work=Deutsche Welle|date=28 April 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wradio.com.co/noticias/actualidad/corte-legaliza-el-matrimonio-entre-parejas-del-mismo-sexo/20160428/nota/3119179.aspx|title=Corte legaliza el matrimonio entre parejas del mismo sexo|date=28 April 2016|work=W Radio}}</ref> On 7 April 2016, the Court ruled that marriage doesn't only apply to opposite-sex couples.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.eltiempo.com/politica/justicia/corte-aprueba-matrimonio-homosexual/16557410|title=Histórico: Colombia tiene matrimonio homosexual|work=El Tiempo|date=7 April 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://thecitypaperbogota.com/news/colombia-says-yes-to-gay-marriage/10653|title=Colombia says 'I do' to gay marriage|date=7 April 2016|work=The City Paper Bogota}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.washingtonblade.com/2016/04/07/colombia-high-court-rules-in-favor-of-same-sex-marriage/|title=Colombia high court rules in favor of same-sex marriage|work=Washington Blade|date=7 April 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Colombia-Legalizes-Gay-Marriage-Huge-Victory-for-LGBTI-Rights-20160407-0041.html|title=Colombia Legalizes Gay Marriage, Huge Victory for LGBTI Rights|date=7 April 2016|work=TeleSur (English)}}</ref> Almost all advances in relationship recognition rights for same-sex couples has come from sweeping rulings of the Court. A series of rulings by the court that started in February 2007 meant that same-sex couples could apply for all the rights that heterosexual couples have in de facto unions (''uniones de hecho'').<ref name="2009 ruling">{{cite web|url=http://english.corteconstitucional.gov.co/sentences/C-029-2009.pdf|title=Decision C-029 of 2009|publisher=|accessdate=7 July 2017}}</ref><ref>, Pink News, 30 January 2009</ref>

On 26 July 2011, the Constitutional Court of Colombia ordered the Congress to pass the legislation giving same-sex couples similar rights to marriage by 20 June 2013. If such a law were not passed by then, same-sex couples would be granted these rights automatically.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://english.corteconstitucional.gov.co/sentences/C-577-2011.pdf|title=DECISION C-577/11 The homosexuals have the right to form a family|publisher=|accessdate=7 July 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/americas/07/27/colombia.gay.marriage/|work=CNN| title=Colombian court says Congress must decide on gay marriage|date=27 July 2011}}</ref>

In October 2012, Senator ] introduced a bill legalizing same-sex marriage. It initially only allowed for civil unions, but he amended the text.<ref>{{es icon}} </ref> The Senate's First Committee approved the bill on 4 December 2012.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.colombia-politics.com/gay-marriage-bill-passes-first-hurdle/|title=Gay marriage bill passes first hurdle - Colombia Politics|work=Colombia Politics|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref><ref>{{es icon}} </ref> On 24 April 2013, the bill was defeated in the full Senate on a 51–17 vote.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/04/24/uk-colombia-gaymarriage-idUKBRE93N1EJ20130424|publisher=Reuters |title=Colombia lawmakers reject controversial gay marriage bill | date=24 April 2013}}</ref>

On 24 July 2013, a civil court judge in Bogotá declared a male same-sex couple legally married, after a ruling on 11 July 2013 accepting the petition. This was the first same-sex couple married in Colombia.<ref>{{es}} . Retrieved 12 July 2013.</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.rcnradio.com/noticias/jueza-toma-decision-historica-declara-civilmente-casados-primera-pareja-gay-79665 |title=Carlos y Gonzalo, la primera pareja gay "civilmente casada", pero sin matrimonio |language=es |publisher=RCN Radio |date=2013-07-24 |accessdate=2014-04-05 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20140407093356/http://www.rcnradio.com/noticias/jueza-toma-decision-historica-declara-civilmente-casados-primera-pareja-gay-79665 |archivedate=7 April 2014 |df= }}</ref>

In September 2013, two civil court judges married two same-sex couples.<ref>{{cite web|author=Andrew Potts |url=http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/judges-allow-first-same-sex-marriages-colombia011013 |title=Judges allow first same-sex marriages in Colombia |publisher=Gay Star News |date=2013-10-01 |accessdate=2014-04-05}}</ref> The first marriage was challenged by a conservative group, and it was initially annulled. Nevertheless, in October a High Court (Tribunal Supremo de Bogotá) maintained the validity of that marriage.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.eltiempo.com/justicia/tribunal-superior-de-bogota-rechaza-tutela-contra-matrimonio-gay_13142227-4 |title=Rechazan tutela que tumbaba primer matrimonio gay en el país |publisher=Eltiempo.Com |date=2013-10-24 |accessdate=2014-04-05}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cmi.com.co/?n=118476 |title=CM& la noticia |publisher= |accessdate=26 July 2015 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20151016144837/http://www.cmi.com.co/?n=118476 |archivedate=16 October 2015 |df= }}</ref>

====Denmark====
{{Main article|Same-sex marriage in Denmark}}
On 7 June 2012, the ] (Danish Parliament) approved new laws regarding same-sex civil and religious marriage. These laws permit same-sex couples to get married in the ]. The bills received ] on 12 June and took effect on 15 June 2012.<ref>{{cite news|last=Sanners |first=Peter |title=Gay marriage legalised |url=http://cphpost.dk/news/national/updated-gay-marriage-legalised |accessdate=25 September 2012 |newspaper=The Copenhagen Post |date=7 June 2012 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120818162542/http://cphpost.dk/news/national/updated-gay-marriage-legalised |archivedate=18 August 2012 }}</ref> Denmark was previously the first country in the world to legally recognize same-sex couples through registered partnerships in 1989.<ref> {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140930123537/http://users.cybercity.dk/~dko12530/s2.htm|date=30 September 2014}}</ref><ref>Rule, Sheila (2 October 1989). . ''The New York Times''; retrieved 7 June 2012.</ref>

On 26 May 2015, ], one of Denmark's two other constituent countries in the ], unanimously passed a law legalising same-sex marriage.<ref>{{da icon}} {{cite web|url=http://www.inatsisartut.gl/samlingerhome/oversigt-over-samlinger/samling/dagsordener/dagsorden.aspx?day%3D26-05-2015%26dagsorden%3D29656|title=Archived copy|accessdate=3 April 2016|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160313091931/http://inatsisartut.gl/samlingerhome/oversigt-over-samlinger/samling/dagsordener/dagsorden.aspx?dagsorden=29656&day=26-05-2015|archivedate=13 March 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/05/27/parliament-in-greenland-unanimously-approves-same-sex-marriage/|title=Parliament in Greenland unanimously approves same-sex marriage|publisher=Pink News|date=27 May 2015}}</ref> The first same-sex couple to marry in Greenland married on 1 April 2016, the day the law went into effect.<ref name="Greenland3">{{cite web|url=http://knr.gl/da/nyheder/første-homoseksuelle-par-viet-i-kirken|title=Første homoseksuelle par viet i kirken|date=1 April 2016|work=Greenlandic Broadcasting Corporation|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160402023341/http://knr.gl/da/nyheder/f%C3%B8rste-homoseksuelle-par-viet-i-kirken|archivedate=2 April 2016|deadurl=yes}}</ref>

On 17 November 2015, in the ] (the realm's other constituent country), a same-sex marriage bill entered Parliament ('']''). The bill passed its second reading on 26 April and was approved at its third reading on 29 April 2016 by 19 votes to 14.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://cphpost.dk/news/faroe-islands-says-yes-to-same-sex-marriage.html|title=Faroe Islands says yes to same-sex marriage|work=The Copenhagen Post|first=Shifa|last=Rahaman|date=1 May 2016|accessdate=2 May 2016|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160502022015/http://cphpost.dk/news/faroe-islands-says-yes-to-same-sex-marriage.html|archivedate=2 May 2016}}</ref> The law required ratification in the ], which provided it on 25 April 2017.<ref name=Overview101>{{cite web|url=http://www.ft.dk/samling/20161/lovforslag/L129/index.htm |title=L 129 Forslag til lov om ændring af lov for Færøerne om rettens pleje|publisher=]|date=8 February 2017|language=Danish|accessdate=5 March 2017|archiveurl=https://archive.is/20170507091032/http://www.ft.dk/samling/20161/lovforslag/L129/index.htm|archivedate=7 May 2017|deadurl=yes}}</ref> The Faroese law allows civil marriages for same-sex couples and exempts the ] from being required to officiate same-sex weddings. The law took effect on 1 July 2017.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://portal.fo/nu+kunnu+samkynd+giftast.html|title=1. juli 2017: Nú kunnu samkynd giftast|date=1 July 2017|work=portal.fo|archivedate=2 July 2017|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20170702004423/http://portal.fo/nu%2Bkunnu%2Bsamkynd%2Bgiftast.html|deadurl=yes|df=dmy-all}}</ref>
{{Same-sex marriage map Europe|align=right|size=320px}}

====Finland====
{{main article|Same-sex marriage in Finland}}
] have been legal in Finland since 2002.<ref name="Yle Uutiset"/> In 2010, ] ] said her Ministry was preparing to amend the ''Marriage Act'' to allow same-sex marriage by 2012.<ref name="yle.fi">{{cite news|url=http://www.yle.fi/uutiset/news/2010/07/gender-neutral_marriage_law_possible_by_2012_1804013.html|title=Gender-Neutral Marriage Law Possible by 2012|work=]|accessdate=1 October 2010}}</ref> On 27 February 2013, the bill was rejected by the Legal Affairs Committee of the Finnish Parliament on a vote of 9&ndash;8. A ] was launched to put the issue before the ].<ref name="McCormick">{{cite web|publisher=PinkNews.co.uk web|url=http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/03/01/finland-parliamentary-committee-narrowly-rejects-equal-marriage-bill|title=Finland: Parliamentary committee narrowly rejects equal marriage bill|first=Joseph Patrick|last=McCormick|date=1 March 2013|accessdate=10 August 2013}}</ref> The initiative gathered the required 50,000 signatures of Finnish citizens in one day and exceeded 107,000 signatures by the time the media reported the figures.<ref name="ReferenceA">{{cite web|url=http://yle.fi/uutiset/petitioners_take_gay_marriage_bill_to_parliament/6544701|title=Petitioners take gay marriage bill to Parliament|publisher=Yle|accessdate=11 April 2013}}</ref> The campaign collected 166,000 signatures and the initiative was presented to the Parliament in December 2013.{{r|Finland Dec 2014}} The initiative went to introductory debate on 20 February 2014 and was sent again to the Legal Affairs Committee.{{r|Finland introdebate 2014}}{{r|Finland parl procedure}} On 25 June, the bill was rejected by the Legal Affairs Committee on a vote of 10&ndash;6 and the third time on 20 November 2014, by 9&ndash;8.<ref name="Finland Legal Committee 3rd">{{cite news|url=http://www.iltasanomat.fi/kotimaa/art-1288775946186.html|title=Lakivaliokunta hylkäsi tasa-arvoisen avioliittolain äänin 9-8: Näin äänestettiin|work=Iltasanomat|agency=Suomen Tietotoimisto|publisher=Sanoma News|language=Finnish|date=20 November 2014|accessdate=10 December 2014}}</ref> It faced the first vote in full session on 28 November 2014,<ref name="ReferenceB">{{cite news|url=http://yle.fi/uutiset/legal_committee_votes_against_gay_marriage/7318809|title=Legal committee votes against gay marriage|publisher=Yle|date=25 June 2014}}</ref> which passed the bill 105&ndash;92. The bill passed the second and final vote by 101&ndash;90 on 12 December 2014,<ref name="Yle Uutiset2">{{cite news|url=http://yle.fi/uutiset/second_vote_approval_of_gender-neutral_marriage_bill/7685185|title=Second vote approval of gender-neutral marriage bill|publisher=Yle|date=12 December 2014}}</ref> and was signed by the President on 20 February 2015.

The law took effect on 1 March 2017.<ref name="Yle Uutiset3">{{cite web|title=President signs gender-neutral marriage law|url=http://yle.fi/uutiset/president_signs_gender-neutral_marriage_law/7818157|publisher=Yle|date=20 February 2015|accessdate=24 February 2015}}</ref> It was the first time a citizens' initiative has been approved by the Finnish Parliament.<ref name="Yle Uutiset">{{cite web|title=Finnish Parliament approves same-sex marriage|url=http://yle.fi/uutiset/finnish_parliament_approves_same-sex_marriage/7657759|publisher=]|date=28 November 2014|accessdate=28 November 2014}}</ref>

====France====
{{main article|Same-sex marriage in France}}
Since November 1999, France has a ] law that is open to both opposite-sex and same-sex couples. Following the election of ] as President of France in May 2012 and the subsequent legislative election in which the Socialist Party took a majority of seats in the French National Assembly, the new Prime Minister ] stated that a same-sex marriage bill had been drafted and would be passed.<ref>{{cite web|title=Gay Marriage Will Soon Become Legal in France, Big Win for LGBT Rights in Europe|url=https://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iCHjEwL13Lmoqv92kvpq7ADOWPlw|publisher=AFP|accessdate=3 August 2013|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20121228011837/https://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iCHjEwL13Lmoqv92kvpq7ADOWPlw|archivedate=28 December 2012}}</ref>

The French Government introduced a bill to legalize same-sex marriage, '']'', in the National Assembly on 17 November 2012. Article 1 of the bill defining marriage as an agreement between two people was passed on 2 February 2013 in its first reading by a 249–97 vote. On 12 February 2013, the National Assembly approved the entire bill in a 329–229 vote.<ref>{{cite news|title=France's parliament passes gay marriage bill|url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2013/02/12/france-gay-marriage-adoption.html|accessdate=24 April 2013|publisher=]|date=12 February 2013}}</ref>

On 12 April 2013, the upper house of the French Parliament voted to legalise same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite news|title=French senate votes to legalise gay marriage|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22126437|accessdate=24 April 2013|newspaper=BBC News|date=12 April 2013}}</ref> On 23 April 2013, the law was approved by the National Assembly in a 331–225 vote.<ref name="Same-sex marriage: France">{{cite news|title=Same-sex marriage: French parliament approves new law|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22261494|publisher=BBC News Europe|accessdate=23 April 2013|date=23 April 2013}}</ref> ''Law No.2013-404'' grants same-sex couples living in France, including foreigners provided at least one of the partners has their domicile or residence in France, the legal right to get married. The law also allows the recognition in France of same-sex couples' marriages that occurred abroad before the bill's enactment.<ref>{{cite news|last=Lesur|first=Lionel|title=France Allows Same-Sex Marriages|url=http://www.natlawreview.com/article/france-allows-same-sex-marriages|accessdate=20 June 2013|newspaper=The National Law Review|date=13 June 2013|author2=Lisa A. Linsky|author3=McDermott Will & Emery}}</ref>

Following the announcement of the French Parliament's vote results, those in opposition to the legalisation of same-sex marriage in France participated in public protests. In both ] and ], violence erupted as protesters clashed with police; the issue has mobilised right-wing forces in the country, including neo-Nazis.<ref>{{cite news |title=Hollande calls for calm as gay marriage opponents vow to fight on in France |url=http://www.euronews.com/2013/04/24/hollande-calls-for-calm-as-gay-marriage-opponents-vow-to-fight-on-in-france/ |accessdate=25 April 2013 |newspaper=Euronews|date=24 April 2013}}</ref>

The main right-wing opposition party UMP challenged the law in the ], which had one month to rule on whether the law conformed to the Constitution. The Constitutional Council had previously ruled that the issue of same-sex marriage was one for the Parliament to decide and there was only little hope for UMP to overturn the Parliament's vote.<ref>{{cite web|title=Décision n° 2010–92 QPC du 28 janvier 2011|url=http://www.conseil-constitutionnel.fr/decision/2011/2010-92-qpc/decision-n-2010-92-qpc-du-28-janvier-2011.52612.html|work=Les décisions|publisher=Conseil Constitutionel|accessdate=24 April 2013|language=fr}}</ref>

On 17 May 2013, the ] declared the bill legal in its entire redaction. President Hollande signed it into law on 18 May 2013.<ref>, ]; retrieved 17 May 2013.{{fr icon}}</ref>

====Germany====
{{main article|Same-sex marriage in Germany}}
Same-sex marriage has been legal in Germany since 1 October 2017. A bill recognising marriages and adoption rights for same-sex couples passed the ] on 30 June 2017 after the ruling ] Coalition Government, led by ] ], allowed parliamentarians a ] on the legislation.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/30/world/europe/germany-gay-marriage.html|title=Parliament in Germany Approves Same-Sex Marriage|last=Smale|first=Alison|date=30 June 2017|work=]|access-date=30 June 2017|last2=Shimer|first2=David|language=en-US|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20170703142747/https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/30/world/europe/germany-gay-marriage.html|archivedate=3 July 2017}}</ref> Previous attempts by smaller parties to introduce same-sex marriage were blocked by the CDU/CSU over several years. The bill was signed into law by ] ] on 20 July and came into effect on 1 October 2017.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-germany-equalmarriage/germanys-first-same-sex-i-dos-as-marriage-equality-dawns-idUKKCN1C50TA|title=Germany's first same-sex "I do"'s as marriage equality dawns|work=]|date=1 October 2017}}</ref>

Prior to the legalisation of same-sex marriage, Germany was one of the first countries to legislate ] (''Eingetragene Lebenspartnerschaft'') for same-sex couples, which provided most though not all the rights of marriage. The law came into effect on 1 August 2001, and the act was progressively amended on subsequent occasions to reflect ] rulings expanding the rights of registered partners.

====Iceland====
{{Main article|Same-sex marriage in Iceland}}
Same-sex marriage was introduced in Iceland through legislation establishing a gender-neutral definition of marriage introduced by the Coalition Government of the ] and ]. The legislation was passed unanimously by the Icelandic ] on 11 June 2010, and took effect on 27 June 2010, replacing an earlier system of registered partnerships for same-sex couples.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65A3V020100611|title=Iceland passes gay marriage law in unanimous vote|agency=Reuters|date= 11 June 2010|accessdate=16 July 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.icenews.is/index.php/2010/06/28/new-gay-marriage-law-in-iceland-comes-into-force/|title=New gay marriage law in Iceland comes into force|work=Icenews|date= 28 June 2010|accessdate=16 July 2010}}</ref> Prime Minister ] and her partner were among the first married same-sex couples in the country.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/iceland/7858150/Iceland-PM-weds-as-gay-marriage-legalised.html|location=London|work=The Daily Telegraph|title=Iceland PM weds as gay marriage legalised|date=28 June 2010}}</ref>

====Ireland====
{{Main article|Same-sex marriage in the Republic of Ireland}}
Ireland held a ] on 22 May 2015. The referendum proposed to add to the ]: "marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction as to their sex". The proposal approved; with 62% of voters supporting same-sex marriage. On 29 August 2015, the Irish President, ], signed the result of the May referendum into law,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/president-signs-same-sex-marriage-into-constitution-1.2333882|title=President signs same-sex marriage into Constitution|date=29 August 2015|work=The Irish Times|accessdate=22 September 2015}}</ref> which made Ireland the first country in the world to approve same-sex marriage at a nationwide referendum.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.rte.ie/news/vote2015/2015/0523/703205-referendum-byelection/|title=Ireland says Yes to same-sex marriage|publisher=RTE|date=23 May 2015}}</ref> Same-sex marriage became formally legally recognised in Ireland on 16 November 2015.<ref name="legal123">{{cite web|url=http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34810598|title=Same-sex marriage is now legal in Republic of Ireland|work=BBC News|date=16 November 2015}}</ref> Prior to this, the ''Civil Partnership and Certain Rights and Obligations of Cohabitants Act 2010'' allowed same sex couples to enter civil partnerships. The Act came into force on 1 January 2011 and gave same-sex couples rights and responsibilities similar to, but not equal to, those of civil marriage.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.irishtimes.com/news/partnership-laws-come-into-force-1.869456 |title=Partnership laws come into force |publisher=The Irish Times |date=1 January 2011}}</ref>

====Luxembourg====
{{main article|Same-sex marriage in Luxembourg}}
The Parliament approved a bill to legalise same-sex marriage on 18 June 2014.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.chd.lu/wps/portal/public/!ut/p/b1/rZFba4NAEIV_UdnZ0ej66GU1a82W1c1FX4KWEhJNLKTUuL--WygUAiUvnXk4DHznnIchDanRQbbAwKNkR5pL-3k8tB_H8dIO33fj7RNMNqVwETJfuYA5z_11JR2WeBaoLYCMVWUWrngQrCMQENOKqwhB4CP_ltTRTwj8MSE8Cqkt4P8CrIgYoAzDyl8KB5IF0WQH7r46ze_C9KY8GTVJI2bJGaU9oO46JTV3dJBaucbX-qb7EVeFMtqkBX29wSZVGZt4MtyXZYXwAVN4iZ6pAsjov5blpDkMY2c_sY2JXI7nN3JuhmJ-au120xfIHKbP/dl4/d5/L2dBISEvZ0FBIS9nQSEh|title=Feu vert pour le mariage gay au Luxembourg|publisher=Chamber of Deputies (Luxembourg)|date=18 June 2014|accessdate=18 June 2014}}</ref> The law was published in the official gazette on 17 July and took effect on 1 January 2015.<ref>{{fr icon}} </ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wort.lu/en/politics/save-the-date-same-sex-marriages-from-january-1-53c77b26b9b398870804667d|title=Luxemburger Wort|work=Wort.lu|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.chronicle.lu/categoriesluxembourgathome/item/7947-same-sex-marriage-in-luxembourg-from-1-january-2015|title=Chronicle.lu|publisher=|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref> On 15 May 2015, Luxembourg became the first country in the European Union to have a prime minister who is in a same sex marriage, and the second one in Europe. Prime Minister ] married Gauthier Destenay, with whom he had been in a civil partnership since 2010.

====Malta====
{{Main article|Same-sex marriage in Malta}}
Malta has recognized same-sex unions since April 2014, following the enactment of the ''Civil Unions Act'', first introduced in September 2013. It established civil unions with same rights, responsibilities, and obligations as marriage, including the right of joint adoption and recognition of foreign same sex marriage.<ref name="tvm.com.mt">{{cite web|url=http://www.tvm.com.mt/news/aggornat-ryan-u-jamie-jirregistraw-l-ewwel-zwieg-gay-fmalta|title=Aġġornat: Ryan u Jaime jirreġistraw l-ewwel żwieġ gay f'Malta - TVM|work=TVM|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref> The ] gave final approval to the legislation on 14 April 2014 by a vote of 37 in favour and 30 abstentions. President ] signed it into law on 16 April. The first foreign same sex marriage was registered on 29 April 2014 and the first civil union was performed on 14 June 2014.<ref name="tvm.com.mt"/>

On 21 February 2017, Minister for Social Dialogue, Consumer Affairs and Civil Liberties ] said that she is preparing a bill to legalise same-sex marriage.<ref>, timesofmalta.com; accessed 5 July 2017.</ref> The bill was presented to Parliament on 5 July 2017, with no alteration.<ref>, timesofmalta.com; accessed 5 July 2017.</ref> The bill's last reading took place in Parliament on 12 July 2017, where it was approved 66-1. It was signed into law and published in the Government Gazette on 1 August 2017.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://gov.mt/en/Government/Government%20Gazette/Documents/2017/08/Government%20Gazette%20-%201st%20August.pdf|title=Government Gazette - 1 August 2017|last=|first=|date=|website=|access-date=}}</ref> Malta became the 14th country in Europe to legalise same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite news|last=Borg|first=Bertrand|date=10 July 2017|url=https://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20170710/local/valletta-prepares-for-silent-protest-celebrations-as-marriage-bill.652960|title=Valletta prepares for silent protest, celebrations as marriage bill nears finish line|work=Times of Malta}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Dirett: Jiccelebraw il-vot favur il-ligi taz-zwieg indaqs fi Piazza Kastilja|url=http://www.tvm.com.mt/mt/news/dirett-jiccelebraw-il-vot-favur-il-ligi-taz-zwieg-indaqs-fi-pjazza-kastilja/|work=Television Malta|date=12 July 2017}}</ref>

====Mexico====
{{Main article|Same-sex marriage in Mexico}}
[[File:Map of Mexico, gay rights.svg|thumb|200px|right|'''State recognition of same-sex relationships in Mexico''' {{legend|#000080|Same-sex marriage}}
{{legend|#CC9933|Legalization not implemented, though required by 5+ court orders supporting SSM}}
{{legend|#E4D69D|Partial precedent of 1–4 court orders supporting SSM}}]]

Same-sex couples can marry in ] and in the states of ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ] and ] as well as in some municipalities in ]. In individual cases, same-sex couples have been given judicial approval to marry in all other states. Since August 2010, same-sex marriages performed within Mexico are recognized by the 31 states without exception.

On 21 December 2009, ]'s ] legalized same-sex marriages and ]. The law was enacted eight days later and became effective in early March 2010.<ref>{{cite news|agency=Associated Press|publisher=MSNBC|title=Mexico City's gay marriage law takes effect|date=4 March 2010|url= http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35714490/ns/world_news-americas/|accessdate=6 March 2010}}</ref> On 10 August 2010, the ] ruled that while not every state must grant same-sex marriages, they must all recognize those performed where they are legal.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-10932748|publisher=BBC News|title=Supreme court rules gay weddings valid in all Mexico|date=10 August 2010}}</ref>

On 28 November 2011, the first two same-sex marriages occurred in Quintana Roo after it was discovered that Quintana Roo's Civil Code did not explicitly prohibit same-sex marriage,<ref name="QR marriages legal">{{cite news|author=Brisa Muñoz|publisher=CNN México|title=Dos matrimonios homosexuales se casaron en un municipio conservador|date=2 December 2011|url=http://mexico.cnn.com/nacional/2011/12/02/los-matrimonios-del-mismo-sexo-despiertan-polemica-en-quintana-roo|language=Spanish| accessdate=2 January 2012}}</ref> but these marriages were later annulled by the ] in April 2012.<ref name="QR marriages annulled">{{cite web|url=http://www.proceso.com.mx/?p=304595|work=]|publisher=Comunicación e Información, S.A. de C.V|title=Anula gobernador de Quintana Roo dos bodas gay; lo acusan de homofóbico|language=Spanish|date=17 April 2012|accessdate=20 April 2012|first=Rosa|last=Santana}}</ref> In May 2012, the Secretary of State of Quintana Roo reversed the annulments and allowed for future same-sex marriages to be performed in the state.<ref name="QR marriages reinstated">{{cite news|url=http://www.eluniversal.com.mx/notas/845171.html|language=Spanish|title=Revocan anulación de bodas gay en QRoo|first=Adriana|last=Varillas|work=]|date=3 May 2012|accessdate=13 June 2012}}</ref>

On 11 February 2014, the Congress of Coahuila approved adoptions by same-sex couples and a bill legalizing same-sex marriages passed on 1 September 2014 making Coahuila the second state to reform its Civil Code to allow for legal same-sex marriages.<ref>{{cite news|title=Aprueban matrimonios gay en Coahuila|date=1 September 2014|url=http://www.vanguardia.com.mx/apruebanmatrimoniosgayencoahuila-2155742.html|publisher=Vangardia.com.mx}}</ref> It took effect on 17 September, and the first couple married on 20 September.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.ontopmag.com/article.aspx?id=19500&MediaType=1&Category=24|title=First Gay Couple Marries In Coahuila, Mexico|date=21 September 2014|publisher=On Top Magazine}}</ref>

On 12 June 2015, the Governor of Chihuahua announced that his administration would no longer oppose same-sex marriages within the state. The order was effective immediately, thus making Chihuahua the third state to legalize such unions.<ref>{{citation|title=Mexico state of Chihuahua officially approves same-sex marriage|date=2015-06-12|url=http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/mexico-state-chihuahua-officially-approves-same-sex-marriage120615}}</ref><ref>{{citation|title=Mexican state to allow same-sex marriage| date=2015-06-12|url=http://www.washingtonblade.com/2015/06/12/mexican-state-to-allow-same-sex-marriage/}}</ref>

On 3 June 2015, the ] released a "jurisprudential thesis" which deems the state-laws defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman unconstitutional. The ruling standardized court procedures across Mexico to authorize same-sex marriages. However, the process is still lengthy and more expensive than that for an opposite-sex marriage, as<ref name="Randal C. Archibold and Paulina Villegas"/> the ruling did not invalidate any state laws, meaning gay couples will be denied the right to wed and will have to turn to the courts for individual injunctions. However, given the nature of the ruling, judges and courts throughout Mexico must approve any application for a same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.startribune.com/mexico-supreme-court-opens-door-to-gay-marriage-nationwide/307197801|title=Mexico supreme court says state laws limiting marriage to man and woman unconstitutional|publisher=Minneapolis Star Tribune|date=12 June 2015|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20150614004959/http://www.startribune.com/mexico-supreme-court-opens-door-to-gay-marriage-nationwide/307197801|archivedate=14 June 2015}}</ref> The official release of the thesis was on 19 June 2015, which took effect on 22 June 2015.<ref>{{citation|title=Mexico avalara matrimonio gay partir lunes|date=2015-06-19|url=http://www.eluniverso.com/noticias/2015/06/19/nota/4972027/mexico-avalara-matrimonio-gay-partir-lunes|accessdate=5 July 2017}}</ref>

On 25 June 2015, following the Supreme Court's ruling striking down district same-sex marriage bans, the Civil Registry of Guerrero announced that they had planned a collective same-sex marriage ceremony for 10 July 2015 and indicated that there would have to be a change to the law to allow gender-neutral marriage, passed through the state Legislature before the official commencement.<ref name="La Jornada">{{cite web|author=La Jornada |url=http://www.lajornadaguerrero.com.mx/2015/06/26/index.php?section=sociedad&article=008n1soc|title=A partir de julio, en Guerrero se permitirá casarse a parejas del mismo sexo|publisher=Lajornadaguerrero.com.mx|accessdate=3 July 2015}}</ref> The registry announced more details of their plan, advising that only select registration offices in the state would be able to participate in the collective marriage event.<ref name="collective marriage">{{cite news|last1=Trujillo|first1=Javier|title=Invitan a boda colectiva del mismo sexo en Acapulco|url=http://www.milenio.com/estados/Invitan_a_boda_colectiva_del_mismo_sexo_en_Acapulco_0_545345734.html|accessdate=30 June 2015|publisher=Milenio|date=29 June 2015|location=Acapulco, Mexico|language=Spanish}}</ref>

The state Governor instructed civil agencies to approve same-sex ]s. On 10 July 2015, 20 same-sex couples were married by Governor Rogelio Ortega in Acapulco.<ref name="marriages accompished!">{{cite news|title=Se casan 20 parejas en boda colectiva de personas del mismo sexo en Guerrero |url=http://suracapulco.mx/archivos/289751 |accessdate=11 July 2015 |publisher=El Sur |date=11 July 2015 |location=Acapulco, Mexico |language=Spanish |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20150711134150/http://suracapulco.mx/archivos/289751 |archivedate=11 July 2015 |df= }}</ref> On 13 January 2016, the head of the Civil Registry of Acapulco announced that all marriages that took place on 10 July 2015 by the Governor and his wife were void and not legal as same-sex marriage is not legal in Guerrero, unless couples are granted amparo beforehand.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://elbigdata.mx/diversidad/invalidos-20-matrimonios-gays-en-acapulco-registro-civil/|title=Inválidos 20 matrimonios gays en Acapulco: Registro Civil - El Big Data|work=elbigdata.mx}}</ref> On 13 February 2016, however, the head of Guerrero's State Civil Registry department announced that same-sex couples could marry in any of the jurisdictions that want to marry the couples and criticised Acapulco's Civil Registry and other civil registries throughout the state for not allowing these kinds of weddings.<ref>{{sp icon}} </ref>

On 17 December 2015, the Congress of Nayarit approved a bill legalizing same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.jornada.unam.mx/ultimas/2015/12/17/aprueban-el-congreso-de-nayarit-los-matrimonios-gay-5165.html|title=Aprueba el Congreso de Nayarit los matrimonios gay|publisher=La Jornada|date=17 December 2015|accessdate=18 December 2015|language=es}}</ref> In January 2016, the Mexican Supreme Court declared Jalisco's Civil Code unconstitutional for limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples, effectively legalizing same-sex marriage in the state.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.joemygod.com/2016/01/26/mexico-same-sex-marriage-legalized-in-jalisco-state-after-unanimous-ruling-by-supreme-court/|title=MEXICO: Same-Sex Marriage Legalized In Jalisco State After Unanimous Ruling By Supreme Court|first=Joe|last=Jervis|date=26 January 2016|work=joemygod.com}}</ref> On 10 May 2016, the Congress of Campeche passed a same-sex marriage bill.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://theperchybird.wordpress.com/2016/05/10/mexico-campeche-becomes-7th-state-with-same-sex-marriage/|title=Mexico: Campeche Becomes 7th Mexican State with Same-Sex Marriage|date=10 May 2016|work=The Perchy Bird Blog}}</ref> On 18 May 2016, both Michoacán and Morelos passed bills allowing for same-sex marriage to be legal.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cronica.com.mx/notas/2016/961695.html|title=Aprueban en el Congreso de Michoacán el matrimonio igualitario|work=cronica.com.mx}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.reforma.com/aplicacioneslibre/preacceso/articulo/default.aspx?id=847187|title=Aprueba Morelos matrimonio igualitario|work=reforma.com}}</ref> On 25 May 2016, a bill to legalize same-sex marriage in Colima was approved by the state Congress.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.periodicooficial.col.gob.mx/p/11062016/sup02/26061104.pdf |format=PDF|title=DECRETO No. 103 Colima, Col., Sábado 11 de Junio del año 2016|website=Periodicooficial.col.gob.mx|accessdate=2017-07-07}}</ref> In July and August 2017, respectively, the Mexican Supreme Court invalidated same-sex marriage bans in the states of Chiapas and Puebla.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Reyes|first1=Juan Pablo|title=Suprema Corte avala el matrimonio igualitario en Chiapas|url=http://www.excelsior.com.mx/nacional/2017/07/11/1175019|accessdate=11 July 2017|publisher='']''|date=11 July 2017|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20170711211747/http://www.excelsior.com.mx/nacional/2017/07/11/1175019|archivedate=11 July 2017|location=Mexico City, Mexico|language=Spanish}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=SCJN avala los matrimonios homosexuales en Puebla|url=http://amp.noticiasmvs.com/amp/noticias/scjn-avala-los-matrimonios-homosexuales-en-puebla-190|accessdate= 1 August 2017|agency=Noticias MVS|date=1 August 2017}}</ref>

On 17 May 2016, the President of Mexico, ], signed an initiative to change the country's Constitution, which would legalize same-sex marriage throughout Mexico.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/17/world/mexico-same-sex-marriage/index.html|title=Mexico President Backs Same-Sex Marriage Nationwide|publisher=CNN|date=18 May 2016|accessdate=18 May 2016}}</ref> On 9 November 2016, the Committee on Constitutional Issues of the Chamber of Deputies rejected the initiative 19 votes to 8.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mexico-gaymarriage-idUSKBN1350DJ|title=Mexican congressional committee rejects Pena Nieto's bid to legalize gay marriage|date=10 November 2016|publisher=Reuters}}</ref>

====Netherlands====
{{Main article|Same-sex marriage in the Netherlands}}
The Netherlands was the first country to extend marriage laws to include same-sex couples, following the recommendation of a special commission appointed to investigate the issue in 1995. A same-sex marriage bill passed the ] and the ] in 2000, taking effect on 1 April 2001.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2000/12/20/world/same-sex-dutch-couples-gain-marriage-and-adoption-rights.html|title=Same-Sex Dutch Couples Gain Marriage and Adoption Rights|work=The New York Times|date=20 December 2000|accessdate=30 September 2011}}</ref>

In the ] of ], ] and ], marriage is open to same-sex couples. A law enabling same-sex couples to marry in these municipalities passed and came into effect on 10 October 2012.<ref>{{cite web|accessdate=18 December 2010|url=http://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0028129/geldigheidsdatum_18-12-2010|publisher=]| title=Aanpassingswet openbare lichamen Bonaire, Sint Eustatius en Saba|date=1 September 2010|language=nl}}</ref> The Caribbean countries ], forming the remainder of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, do not perform same-sex marriages, but must recognize those performed in the Netherlands proper.

====New Zealand====
{{main article|Same-sex marriage in New Zealand}}

[[File:Same-sex marriage map Oceania.svg|thumb|'''Recognition of same-sex relationships in Oceania'''
{{legend|#002255|Same-sex marriage}}
{{legend|#0066FF|Other type of partnership}}
{{legend|#b3b3b3|No recognition}}
{{legend|#ff6600|Homosexuality illegal}}]]

On 14 May 2012, ] MP ] stated that she would introduce a ], the ''Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill'', allowing same-sex couples to marry.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6915784/MP-drafting-gay-marriage-bill|title=MP drafting gay marriage bill|first1=John|last1=Hartevelt|first2=Dayna|last2=Levy|publisher=Fairfax media (via Stuff.co.nz)|date=14 May 2012|accessdate=19 April 2013}}</ref> The bill was submitted to the members' bill ballot on 30 May 2012.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Legislation/ProposedBills/8/f/4/50HOH_MEMBILL074_1-Marriage-Definition-of-Marriage-Amendment-Bill.htm |title=Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Amendment Bill – Proposed Members' Bills – Legislation |publisher=New Zealand Parliament |date=30 May 2012 |accessdate=19 April 2013 }}{{dead link|date=June 2016|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}}</ref> It was drawn from the ballot and passed the first and second readings on 29 August 2012 and 13 March 2013, respectively.<ref>{{cite news|title=Marriage bill passes first reading|first1=Kate|last1=Shuttleworth|first2=Audrey|last2=Young|url=http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10830345|newspaper=The New Zealand Herald|date=29 August 2012|accessdate=19 April 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/8422263/Passions-fly-as-MPs-vote-on-gay-marriage|publisher =Fairfax Media (via Stuff.co.nz)|title=Passions fly as MPs vote on gay marriage|first=Tracy|last=Watkins|date=14 March 2013|accessdate=19 April 2013}}</ref> The final reading passed on 17 April 2013 by 77 votes to 44.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-04-17/nz-legalises-same-sex-marriage/4635086|title=NZ legalises same-sex marriage|work=ABC News|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/gay-marriage-bill-passed-5409720|title=Gay marriage bill passed|publisher=|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref> The bill received ] from the Governor-General on 19 April and took effect on 19 August 2013.<ref name="Radio NZ">{{cite web|url=http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/133170/marriage-legislation-becomes-law|title=Marriage legislation becomes law|date=19 April 2013|work=Radio New Zealand|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/auckland/news/nbnat/2103707089-the-country-s-first-gay-marriages-will-be-held-today|publisher=Newstalk ZB|title= Gay marriage becomes a reality| date= 19 August 2013 |accessdate= 19 August 2013}}</ref>

New Zealand marriage law only applies to New Zealand proper and the ] in Antarctica. Other New Zealand territories, including ], ] and ], have their own marriage law and do not perform nor recognise same-sex marriage.<ref></ref>

====Norway====
{{Main article|Same-sex marriage in Norway}}
Same-sex marriage became legal in Norway on 1 January 2009 when a gender-neutral marriage bill was enacted after being passed by the Norwegian Parliament in June 2008.<ref>{{cite news|title=Norway adopts gay marriage law|url=http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jko_BIHizUFFqUtmEaUrAEoPXFWw|accessdate=25 September 2012|newspaper=] via ]|date=11 June 2008|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120913230714/http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jko_BIHizUFFqUtmEaUrAEoPXFWw |archivedate=13 September 2012 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-06-17-gaymarriage_N.htm|title=New law in Norway grants gay couples marriage rights|work=USA Today|location =Washington DC|date=17 June 2008|accessdate=30 September 2011}}</ref> Norway became the first ]n country and the sixth country in the world to legalize same-sex marriage. Gender-neutral marriage replaced Norway's previous system of registered partnerships for same-sex couples. Couples in registered partnerships are able to retain that status or convert their registered partnership to a marriage. No new registered partnerships may be created.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article2313762.ece|title=Gays to win marriage rights|first=Nina|last=Berglund|work=Aftenposten|date=14 March 2008|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20080618014019/http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article2313762.ece|archivedate= 18 June 2008}}</ref>

====Portugal====
{{Main article|Same-sex marriage in Portugal}}
{{See also|De facto union in Portugal}}
Portugal created de facto unions ({{lang|pt|''união de facto''}} in legal European Portuguese) similar to common-law marriage for cohabiting opposite-sex partners in 1999, and extended these unions to same-sex couples in 2001. However, the 2001 extension did not allow for same-sex adoption, either jointly or of stepchildren.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.lahistoriaconmapas.com/war-maps/Same-sex-marriage-Legal-recognition-War-Maps.htm|title=Historia con Mapas|accessdate=26 July 2015|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20150518082229/http://www.lahistoriaconmapas.com/war-maps/Same-sex-marriage-Legal-recognition-War-Maps.htm|archivedate=18 May 2015}}</ref>

On 11 February 2010, Parliament approved a bill legalizing same-sex marriage. The Portuguese President promulgated the law on 8 April 2010 and the law was effective on 5 June 2010, making Portugal the eighth country to legalize nationwide same-sex marriage; however, adoption was still denied for same-sex couples.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.57883.com/en/wiki/people/201502/Same-sex_marriage0_en.57883.com.html|title=Same-sex marriage in Portugal|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref>

On 24 February 2012, Parliament rejected two bills allowing same-sex couples to adopt children.<ref>{{cite web|title=GAY RIGHTS: LAWMAKERS DEFEAT ADOPTION BILL FOR COUPLES|url=http://www.portugaldailyview.com/whats-new/gay-rights-lawmakers-defeat-adoption-bill-for-couples|work=Portugal Daily View|publisher=Portugal Daily View|accessdate=24 October 2013|author=Lusa News|date=24 February 2012}}</ref> On 17 May 2013, the Portuguese Parliament approved a bill to recognise some adoption rights for same-sex couples in its first reading,<ref>, '']'', '']'', 17 May 2013</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Portugal allows limited adoption rights for same-sex gay couples|url=http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2013/05/portugal-grants-limited-adoption-rights-for-same-sex-gay-couples/|publisher=LGBTQ Nation|agency=Associated Press|accessdate=25 July 2015|date=17 May 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Same-sex couples win adoption rights for partners' children in Portugal|url=http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/same-sex-couples-win-adoption-rights-partners-children-portugal170513|accessdate=25 July 2015|work=GayStarNews|date=17 May 2013}}</ref> though it was later rejected. A bill granting adoption rights to same-sex parents and carers, as well as in-vitro fertilisation for lesbian relationships, was introduced in Parliament by then opposition Socialist and Left Block parties on 16 January 2015.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Duffy|first1=Nick|title=Portugal: Opposition party to table same-sex adoption bill|url=http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/01/11/portugal-opposition-party-to-table-same-sex-adoption-bill|accessdate=25 July 2015|work=]|date=11 January 2015}}</ref> On 22 January, Parliament rejected the proposals.<ref>{{cite news|title=Portuguese parliament votes against gay couples adopting|url=http://www.msn.com/en-ph/news/newsworld/portuguese-parliament-votes-against-gay-couples-adopting/ar-AA8ubKM|accessdate=25 July 2015|work=Agence France-Presse|publisher=MSN News|date=22 January 2015}}</ref>

In December 2015, the Portuguese Parliament approved a bill to recognise adoptions rights for same-sex couples.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/portugal-sex-adoption-artificial-insemination-35322018|title=International News: Latest Headlines, Video and Photographs from Around the World|first=ABC|last=News|work=go.com}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://uk.news.yahoo.com/portuguese-parliament-backs-adoption-gay-couples-182121858.html|title=Portuguese parliament backs adoption by gay couples|work=yahoo.com}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/11/20/portugal-just-equalised-its-adoption-laws-for-gay-couples|title=Portugal just equalised its adoption laws for gay couples|work=pinknews.co.uk}}</ref> It came into effect in March 2016.
]

====South Africa====
{{Main article|Same-sex marriage in South Africa}}
Legal recognition of same-sex marriages in South Africa came about as a result of the ]'s decision in the case of '']''. The court ruled on 1 December 2005 that the existing marriage laws violated the ] of the '']'' because they discriminated on the basis of sexual orientation. The court gave ] one year to rectify the inequality.

The '']'' was passed by the ] on 14 November 2006, by a vote of 230 to 41. It became law on 30 November 2006. South Africa is the fifth country, the first in Africa, and the second outside Europe, to legalize same-sex marriage.

====Spain====
{{Main article|Same-sex marriage in Spain}}
] was the third country in the world to legalize same-sex marriage, which has been legal since 3 July 2005, and was supported by the majority of the Spanish people.<ref name="SPTimes">{{cite news|title=Spain approves liberal gay marriage law|publisher=]|date=1 July 2005|url=http://www.sptimes.com/2005/07/01/Worldandnation/Spain_approves_libera.shtml|accessdate=8 January 2007}}</ref><ref name=PlanOut>{{cite web|last=Giles|first=Ciaran|title=Spain: Gay marriage bill clears hurdle|publisher=Planetout.com|date=21 April 2005|url=http://www.planetout.com/news/article.html?2005/04/21/5|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20071227125726/http://www.planetout.com/news/article.html?2005%2F04%2F21%2F5|archivedate=27 December 2007|accessdate=22 December 2006|deadurl=yes}}</ref>

In 2004, the nation's newly elected ] Government, led by ] ], began a campaign for its legalization, including the right of ].<ref name="SOD">{{cite news|title=Spain's new government to legalize gay marriage|agency=Reuters |publisher=SignonSanDiego.com|date=15 April 2004|url=http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/20040415-0750-spain-marriage.html|archiveurl=https://www.webcitation.org/5kV80Iu9U?url=http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/20040415-0750-spain-marriage.html|archivedate=13 October 2009|accessdate=14 December 2009|deadurl=no}}</ref> After much debate, the law permitting same-sex marriage was passed by the '']'' (Spain's ]) on 30 June 2005. ] ], who by law has up to 30 days to decide whether to grant ] to laws, indirectly showed his approval by ] on 1 July 2005, the same day it reached his desk. The law was published on 2 July 2005.<ref>{{cite web|title=Disposiciones Generales|publisher=Boletin Oficial del Estado|date=2 June 2005|url=http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2005/07/02/pdfs/A23632-23634.pdf|format=PDF|accessdate=8 January 2007|language=es}}</ref> In 2013, ] declared Spain the most tolerant country of the world with homosexuality.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pewglobal.org/2013/06/04/the-global-divide-on-homosexuality/|title=The Global Divide on Homosexuality|date=4 June 2013|work=Pew Research Center's Global Attitudes Project|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.dazeddigital.com/artsandculture/article/19631/1/spain-is-the-worlds-most-lgbt-friendly-country-pew-research-centre-poll-finds|title=Spain is the world's most LGBT-friendly country|author=Dazed|work=Dazed|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref> However, the studies did not include the Benelux or Scandinavian countries.

====Sweden====
{{Main article|Same-sex marriage in Sweden}}
Same-sex marriage in Sweden has been legal since 1 May 2009, following the adoption of a new gender-neutral law on marriage by the ] on 1 April 2009, making Sweden the seventh country in the world to open marriage to same-sex couples nationwide. Marriage replaced Sweden's registered partnerships for same-sex couples. Existing registered partnerships between same-sex couples remained in force with an option to convert them into marriages.<ref name="swedishmarriagerights">{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7978495.stm|title=Sweden allows same-sex marriage|publisher=BBC News|date=2 April 2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Church of Sweden says yes to gay marriage|url=http://www.thelocal.se/22810/20091022|accessdate=24 July 2012|newspaper=The Local|date=22 October 2009|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120111080159/http://www.thelocal.se/22810/20091022|archivedate=11 January 2012}}</ref> Same-sex marriages have been performed by the ] since 2009.<ref></ref>

====United Kingdom====
]'''
{{legend|#000080|Same-sex marriage performed}}
{{legend|#00ffff|Same-sex marriage recognized}}
{{legend|#0066ff|Other type of partnership}}
{{legend|#cccccc|Unrecognized or unknown}}
{{legend|#f9dc36|Same-sex sexual activity illegal but no longer enforced}}
{{legend|#ff6600|Same-sex sexual activity illegal}}
]] ]]


===International court rulings===
{{main article|Same-sex marriage in the United Kingdom}}


==== European Court of Human Rights ====
Since 2005, same-sex couples have been allowed to enter into ], a separate union providing the ]. In 2006, the ] rejected a legal bid by a British ] who had ] in Canada to have their union recognised as a marriage in the UK rather than a civil partnership. In September 2011, the Coalition Government announced its intention to introduce same-sex civil marriage in England and Wales by the ].<ref>{{cite news|last=Green|first=Jessica|title=Government proposes introducing gay marriage after Cameron intervention|url=http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2011/09/16/government-proposes-introduction-of-full-gay-marriage-after-cameron-intervention/|accessdate=28 September 2012|newspaper=]|date=16 September 2011}}</ref> However, unlike the Scottish Government's consultation, the UK Government's consultation for England and Wales did not include provision for religious ceremonies. In May 2012, three religious groups (Quakers, Liberal Judaism and Unitarians) sent a letter to David Cameron, asking that they be allowed to solemnise same-sex weddings.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2012/05/29/religious-groups-urge-david-cameron-to-maintain-equal-marriage-support/|title=Religious groups urge David Cameron to maintain equal marriage support|work=PinkNews|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref>
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>


] 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>
In June 2012, the UK Government completed the consultation to allow civil marriage for same-sex couples in ].<ref name="grauni1127">{{cite news|title=Gay marriages and heterosexual civil partnerships may soon be welcomed|first=Alan|last=Travis|url=https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2011/feb/17/civil-partnerships-marriage|newspaper=The Guardian|location=London|date=17 February 2011|accessdate=18 February 2011}}</ref> In its response to the consultation, the Government said that it also intended "...to enable those religious organisations that wish to conduct same-sex marriage ceremonies to do so, on a permissive basis only."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/equal-marriage-consultation|title=Equal marriage consultation|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref>
In December 2012, the Prime Minister, ], announced that, whilst he favoured allowing same-sex marriage within a religious context, provision would be made guaranteeing no religious institution would be required to perform such ceremonies.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20642428|title=Gay marriage: David Cameron backs church role|work=BBC News|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref> On 5 February 2013, the ] debated the '']'', approving it in a 400–175 vote at the second ].<ref>{{cite news|author=Andrew Sparrow|url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/2013/feb/05/gay-marriage-debate-politics-live-blog|title=MPs vote overwhelmingly in favour of gay marriage|publisher=Guardian|accessdate=5 February 2013|location=London, UK|date=5 February 2013}}</ref> The third reading took place on 21 May 2013, and was approved by 366 votes to 161.<ref>{{cite news|title=Gay marriage: Commons passes Cameron's plan|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22605011|accessdate=21 May 2013|date=21 May 2013|work=BBC News}}</ref>


==== European Union ====
On 4 June 2013, the bill received its second reading in the ], after a blocking amendment was defeated by 390 votes to 148.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201314/ldhansrd/text/130604-0002.htm |title=Lords Hansard text for 4 Jun 201304 Jun 2013 (pt 0002)|publisher=Publications.parliament.uk|date=4 June 2013|accessdate=6 January 2014}}</ref> On 15 July 2013, the bill was given a third reading by the House of Lords, meaning that it had been passed, and so it was then returned to Commons for the consideration of the Lords' amendments. On 16 July 2013, the Commons accepted all of the Lords' amendments.<ref name=BBC23338279>{{cite news|work=BBC News|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23338279|title=Same-sex marriage becomes law in England and Wales|date=17 July 2013|accessdate=5 July 2017}}</ref> On 17 July 2013, the bill received ] becoming the '']'', which came into force on 13 March 2014.<ref name="BBC23338279"/> The first same-sex marriages took place on 29 March 2014.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26793127|title=Same-sex marriage now legal as first couples wed|work=BBC News|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref>
{{further|Coman and Others v General Inspectorate for Immigration and Ministry of the Interior}}
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>


==== Inter-American Court of Human Rights ====
The ] conducted a three-month-long consultation which ended on 9 December 2011 and the analysis was published in July 2012.<ref>{{cite news|title=Consultation sees 50,000 responses|work=The Scotsman|location=Edinburgh|url=http://www.scotsman.com/the-scotsman/politics/consultation_sees_50_000_responses_1_2001639|accessdate=9 February 2012|date=10 December 2011}}</ref> Unlike the consultation held in England and Wales, Scotland considered both civil and religious same-sex marriage. Whilst the Scottish Government is in favour of same-sex marriage, it stated that no religious body would be forced to hold such ceremonies once legislation is enacted.<ref>{{cite web|title=Scottish Parliament Website|url=http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2011/09/05153328/1|publisher=Scottish Government|accessdate=9 February 2012}}</ref> The Scottish consultation received more than 77,000 responses, and on 27 June 2013 the Government published the bill.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2013/06/same-sex-marriage-27062013|title=Same sex marriage|publisher=|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref> In order to preserve the freedom of both religious groups and individual clergy, the Scottish Government believed it necessary for changes to be made to the ''Equality Act 2010'' and communicated with the UK Government on this matter; thus, the first same-sex marriages in Scotland did not occur until this had taken place.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-23067324|title=Scotland's gay marriage bill published at Holyrood|work=BBC News|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref> Although the Scottish bill concerning same-sex marriage had been published, the 'Australian' reported that LGBT rights campaigners, celebrating outside the UK Parliament on 15 July 2013 for the clearance of the ''Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill'' in the House of Lords, declared that they would continue the campaign to extend same-sex marriage rights to both Scotland and Northern Ireland,<ref name="Wood">{{cite news|title=Gay marriage moves a step closer in UK|url=http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/gay-marriage-moves-a-step-closer-in-uk/story-fn3dxix6-1226679898796?net_sub_uid=44933799|accessdate=16 July 2013|newspaper=The Australian|date=16 July 2013|author=Andrew Woodcock}}</ref> rather than solely Northern Ireland, where there are no plans to introduce such legislation. On 4 February 2014, the Scottish Parliament overwhelmingly passed legislation legalising same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-25960225|title=Scotland's same-sex marriage bill is passed|work=BBC News|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref> The bill received royal assent as the '']'' on 12 March 2014.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/BusinessBulletin/74320.aspx|title=Thursday 13 March 2014 – Announcements – Scottish Parliament|publisher=scottish.parliament.uk|date=13 March 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Scotland's same-sex marriage bill is passed |accessdate=14 March 2014|date=4 February 2014|url=http://m.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-25960225|publisher=BBC News}}</ref> The law took effect on 16 December 2014, with the first same-sex weddings occurring for those converting their civil partnerships into marriage.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.scotsman.com/news/scotland/top-stories/same-sex-marriage-becomes-legal-in-scotland-1-3635305|title=Same-sex marriage becomes legal in Scotland|publisher=Scotsman|date=16 December 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterson/first-same-sex-marriages-to-take-place-in-scotland-on-hogman|title=Scotland's First Same-Sex Marriages To Take Place On Hogmanay|work=BuzzFeed|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref> Malcolm Brown and Joe Schofield from ] were scheduled to be the first to be declared husband and husband just after midnight on 31 December, following a Humanist ceremony, but they were superseded by couples marrying on 16 December. Nonetheless, Brown and Schofield were married on ].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.stv.tv/stirling-central/298476-malcolm-brown-and-joe-schofield-will-be-first-married-gay-couple/|title=Malcolm Brown and Joe Schofield will be first married gay couple - Stirling & Central - News|work=STV News|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref>
]

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>
The Northern Ireland Executive has stated that it does not intend to introduce legislation allowing for same-sex marriage in Northern Ireland. Same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions are treated as civil partnerships.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-37791366|title=Same-sex marriage: Arlene Foster criticised for 'childish' online abuse comments|work=BBC News|date=28 October 2016|quote=] ] said the DUP would use a petition of concern to block any change to the law over the next five years.}}</ref>

Of the fourteen ], same-sex marriage has been legal in ] and the ] (for UK military personnel) since 3 June 2014, the ] since 14 May 2015, the ] since 13 October 2016, ] since 15 December 2016, ] since 1 January 2017, the ] since 29 April 2017, ] since 5 May 2017, and ] since 4 August 2017. Of the three ], same-sex marriage has been legal in the ] since 22 July 2016 and in ] since 2 May 2017.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gbc.gi/news/command-paper-published-same-sex-marriage-31191|title=Command Paper published on same sex marriage|work=]|date=22 December 2015|accessdate=29 March 2016|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20151223071507/http://www.gbc.gi/news/command-paper-published-same-sex-marriage-31191|archivedate=23 December 2015}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.royalgazette.com/news/article/20170505/victory-for-gay-couple|title=Gay couple win right to marry {{!}} The Royal Gazette:Bermuda News|work=The Royal Gazette|access-date=2017-05-05|language=en-US}}</ref>

====United States====
{{Main article|Same-sex marriage in the United States|Same-sex marriage legislation in the United States}}
] reacts to the Court's decision.]]
The movement to obtain ] and benefits for same-sex couples in the United States began in the 1970s.<ref>{{cite web|last=Gumbel|first=Andrew|title=The Great Undoing?|url=http://www.advocate.com/news/2009/06/20/great-undoing|work=]|accessdate=9 July 2012}}</ref> and in 1971 the ] dismissed a case, '']'' claiming such right on appeal, establishing it as a ] as it came from mandatory appellate review. The issue did not become prominent in U.S. politics until the 1993 ] decision in '']'' that declared that state's prohibition to be unconstitutional.<ref>{{cite web|title=Same Sex Marriage Laws – History|url=http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/human-services/same-sex-marriage-laws.aspx|publisher=National Conference of State Legislatures|accessdate=1 August 2012}}</ref> During the 21st century, public support for same-sex marriage has grown considerably,<ref name="columbia.edu">{{cite journal|url=http://www.columbia.edu/~jrl2124/Lax_Phillips_Gay_Policy_Responsiveness_2009.pdf|title=Gay Rights in the States: Public Opinion and Policy Responsiveness|format=PDF|pages=67–86|doi=10.1017/S0003055409990050|date=August 2009|journal=American Political Science Review|volume=103|issue=3|accessdate=20 December 2011|first=JEFFREY R.|last=LAX}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Silver|first=Nate|title=Support for Gay Marriage Outweighs Opposition in Polls |url=http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/09/support-for-gay-marriage-outweighs-opposition-in-polls/ |accessdate=28 October 2012|newspaper=New York Times|date=9 May 2012}}</ref> and national polls conducted since 2011 show that a majority of Americans support legalizing it. On 17 May 2004, ] became the first U.S. state and the sixth jurisdiction in the world to legalize same-sex marriage following the ]'s decision in '']'' six months earlier.<ref name="festive">{{cite news|last=Belluck|first=Oam|title=With Festive Mood, Gay Weddings Begin in Massachusetts |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/17/national/17CND-GAYS.html |accessdate=11 January 2014|newspaper=New York Times|date=17 May 2004}}</ref>

Before the legalization of same-sex marriage in any U.S. jurisdiction, the ] passed the '']'' (DOMA) in 1996, attempting to define marriage for the first time solely as a union between a man and a woman for all federal purposes, and allowing states to refuse to recognize such marriages created in other states.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/1/7.html|title=US CODE: Title 1,7. Definition of "marriage" and "spouse"|publisher=Cornell University|date=7 April 2010|accessdate=5 November 2010}}</ref>

President ] announced on 9 May 2012, that "I think same-sex couples should be able to get married".<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/9255744/Barack-Obama-endorses-gay-marriage.html|title=Barack Obama endorses gay marriage|date=9 May 2012|accessdate=9 April 2013|location=London|work=The Daily Telegraph|first=Jon|last=Swaine}}</ref><ref name="ABC News">{{cite web|url=http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/obama-sex-marriage-legal-16312904|title=Obama Affirms Support for Same-Sex Marriage|date=9 May 2012|publisher=ABC News}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/09/politics/obama-same-sex-marriage/index.html|title=Obama announces he supports same-sex marriage|last=Gast|first=Phil|date=9 May 2012|publisher=CNN|accessdate=10 May 2012}}</ref> Obama also supported the full ],<ref>{{cite news|last1=Nakamura|first1=David|title=Obama backs bill to repeal Defense of Marriage Act|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-backs-bill-to-repeal-defense-of-marriage-act/2011/07/19/gIQA03eQOI_story.html|accessdate=25 July 2015|work=The Washington Post|date=19 July 2011}}</ref> and called the state constitutional bans on same-sex marriage in ] (2008)<ref>{{cite web|last=Harris|first=Chris |url =http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1598407/20081101/story.jhtml |title=Did Barack Obama Answer Your Question?|publisher=MTV |date=1 November 2008|accessdate=1 February 2010}}</ref> and ] (2012) unnecessary.<ref>{{cite news |title= North Carolina Gay Marriage Ban: Obama Says He's 'Disappointed' |url= http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/08/gay-marriage-obama-north-carolina_n_1501766.html|accessdate=23 July 2012|newspaper=The Huffington Post|agency=Associated Press|date=8 May 2012}}</ref> In 2011, the ] concluded that DOMA was unconstitutional and directed the ] (DOJ) to stop defending the law in court.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/24/us/24marriage.html?pagewanted=all|work=The New York Times|first1=Charlie|last1=Savage|title=Obama Shifts Course on Defense of Marriage Act|date=23 February 2011}}</ref> Subsequently, ], ] majority leader in the ], announced that the House would defend DOMA. The law firm hired to represent the House soon withdrew from defending the law, requiring the House to retain replacement counsel.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/25/law-firm-backs-out-of-defending-marriage-act-partner-resigns|work=The Caucus (New York Times blog)|first=Michael D.|last=Shear|title=Law Firm Backs Out of Defending Marriage Act|date=25 April 2011}}</ref>

In the past two decades, ] for same-sex marriage has steadily increased,<ref name=Gallup2011/> and polls indicate that more than half of Americans support same-sex marriage.<ref name=Gallup2011/><ref name=ABC2012>{{cite web|url=http://www.langerresearch.com/uploads/1137a2GayMarriage.pdf|title=ABC News/Washington Post poll: Strong Support for Gay Marriage Now Exceeds Strong Opposition|date=23 May 2012|format=PDF|accessdate=16 September 2012}}</ref><ref name=CNN2012>{{cite web|url=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/06/06/rel5e.pdf|title=CNN Opinion Research&nbsp;– May 29–31, 2012|format=PDF|accessdate=16 September 2012}}</ref> Voters in ], ] and ] approved same-sex marriage by referendum on 6 November 2012.<ref name="forbes1">{{cite news|author=Jacobs, Deborah L.|url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/deborahljacobs/2012/11/07/gay-marriage-scores-victories-in-all-four-states-that-considered-it-but-tough-road-lies-ahead/|title=Gay Marriage Scores Victories In All Four States That Considered It, But Tough Road Lies Ahead|publisher=Forbes|date=7 November 2012|accessdate=23 December 2012}}</ref>

On 26 June 2013, the ] ruled in '']'' Section 3 of DOMA was unconstitutional for allowing the Federal Government of the United States to deny federal recognition of same-sex marriage licenses, if it is recognized or performed in a state that allows same-sex marriage.<ref name="scotusblog.com">{{cite web|url=http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/06/opinions-recap-giant-step-for-gay-marriage/ |title=Opinions recap: Giant step for gay marriage |publisher=SCOTUSblog |date=26 June 2013 |accessdate=6 January 2014}}</ref> Two years later on the same day, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in '']'' that state level bans on same-sex marriage to be unconstitutional as well, legalizing same-sex marriage throughout the entire U.S. proper and all incorporated territories.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://edition.cnn.com/videos/us/2015/06/26/supreme-court-same-sex-marriage-ruling-brown-dnt-tsr.cnn|title=U.S. 21st country to allow same-sex marriage nationwide|date=26 June 2015|work=CNN}}</ref>

On 6 October 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court denied review of five writ petitions from decisions of appellate courts finding constitutional right to same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/100614zor.pdf |format=PDF |title=APPEAL -- SUMMARY DISPOSITION : 13-1461 : BACKUS, VANDROTH, ET AL. V. SOUTH CAROLINA, ET AL. |website=Supremecourt.gov |accessdate=2017-07-07}}</ref> The immediate effect was to increase to 25 the number of states allowing same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite news|author=Liptak, Adam|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/07/us/denying-review-justices-clear-way-for-gay-marriage-in-5-states.html|title=Supreme Court Clears Way for Gay Marriage in 5 States|work=New York Times|date=6 October 2014|accessdate=5 July 2017}}</ref>

On 26 June 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5–4 in '']'' that states cannot prohibit the issuing of marriage licenses to same-sex couples, or to deny recognition of lawfully performed out-of-state marriage licenses to same-sex couples. This ruling invalidated same-sex marriage bans in any U.S. State and certain territories.<ref>{{cite news|title=Supreme Court strikes down bans on same-sex marriage|url=https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/06/26/supreme-court-gay-lesbian-marriage/28649319/|newspaper=USA Today|last=Wolf|first=Richard|date=26 June 2015|accessdate=26 June 2015}}</ref><ref name="NYT story">{{Cite news|last=Liptak|first=Adam|date=26 June 2015|title=Gay Marriage Backers Win Supreme Court Victory|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/27/us/supreme-court-same-sex-marriage.html|website=nytimes.com|accessdate=26 June 2015}}</ref> Prior to this ruling, same-sex marriages were legally performed in 37 U.S. states, the District of Columbia, Guam as well as some Native American tribes.<ref name="Cheyenne1">, ''Al Jazeera,'' 22 October 2013</ref><ref name="Cheyenne2">{{cite news|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/22/gay-couple-married-in-oklahoma-jason-pickel-darren-black-bear_n_4142700.html?ir=Politics |title=Gay Couple Married In Oklahoma: Jason Pickel, Darren Black Bear Tie The Knot Despite State Ban |publisher=Huffingtonpost.com |date=22 October 2013 |accessdate=6 January 2014 |first=Hunter |last=Stuart}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/06/24/same-sex-marriage-timeline/29173703/ |author=Wolf, Richard |title=Timeline: Same-sex marriage through the years |publisher=USA TODAY |date=26 June 2015}}</ref>

Supreme Court Justice ] officiated at a same-sex wedding during the 2013 ] weekend in what is believed to be a first for a member of the Supreme Court.<ref>{{cite news|title=Justice Ginsburg to Officiate at Same-Sex Wedding |url=http://bigstory.ap.org/article/justice-ginsburg-officiate-same-sex-wedding |work=Associated Press |accessdate=30 August 2013 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130903120451/http://bigstory.ap.org/article/justice-ginsburg-officiate-same-sex-wedding |archivedate=3 September 2013 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.washingtonian.com/blogs/capitalcomment/local-news/michael-kaisernewly-married-by-justice-ginsburgon-love-marriage-and-whats-coming-up-for-the-kennedy.php|title=Michael Kaiser—Newly Married by Justice Ginsburg—on Love, Marriage, and What’s Coming Up for the Kennedy Center|date=4 September 2013}}</ref>

A poll conducted in 2014 showed 59% of the American people supporting legal recognition for same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite news| url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/support-for-same-sex-marriage-hits-new-high-half-say-constitution-guarantees-right/2014/03/04/f737e87e-a3e5-11e3-a5fa-55f0c77bf39c_story.html |title=Support for same-sex marriage hits new high; half say Constitution guarantees right |work=The Washington Post |date=5 March 2014 |accessdate=5 April 2014}}</ref> This increased to 60% in 2015, and 61% in 2016: a record high.<ref>{{cite web|last=Newport |first=Frank |url=http://www.gallup.com/poll/191645/americans-support-gay-marriage-remains-high.aspx |title=Americans' Support for Gay Marriage Remains High, at 61% |publisher=] |date= |accessdate=2017-07-07}}</ref>

====Uruguay====
{{main article|Same-sex marriage in Uruguay}}
Uruguay's ] passed a bill on 12 December 2012, to extend marriage rights to same-sex couples.<ref>{{cite web|title=Diputados aprobó el matrimonio igualitario Pasada la mediano|url=http://www.unoticias.com.uy/2012/12/12/informacion_nacional/diputados_aprobo_el_matrimonio_igualitario/|work=Noticias|publisher=Diario UNoticias|accessdate=31 July 2013|language=Spanish|date=12 December 2012}}</ref> The ] passed the bill on 2 April 2013, but with minor amendments. On 10 April 2013, the Chamber of Deputies passed the amended bill by a two-thirds majority (71–22). The president promulgated the law on 3 May 2013 and it took effect on 5 August.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-23571197|title=Same-sex marriage bill comes into force in Uruguay|work=BBC News|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref>

===National debates===
====Armenia====
{{Main|Recognition of same-sex unions in Armenia}}
Armenia has historically had few protections or recognition in law of same-sex couples. This changed in July 2017, when the Ministry of Justice revealed that all marriages performed abroad are valid in Armenia, including marriages between people of the same sex.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.panarmenian.net/m/eng/news/243348 |title=Mobile |website=Panarmenian.Net |date=2017-07-03|accessdate=2017-07-07}}</ref> That makes Armenia the second country of the former ], after
], to recognise same-sex marriages performed abroad.

====Australia====
{{Main article|Recognition of same-sex unions in Australia}}
Australian federal law currently bans recognition of same-sex marriages. Civil unions/partnerships are available in the ] and ], while domestic registered partnerships are available in ], ], ] and ]. ] and the ] both only offer ] unions for same-sex couples, and committed same-sex couples in all states and territories are recognised as de facto unions (which provide most of the benefits and recognition of marriage) under federal law. On 22 October 2013, a bill was passed by the ] (ACT) legalising same-sex marriage in the ACT. However, the ] found that the change was never valid and an official reversal of the bill was announced on 12 December 2013. The High Court established that such a change to ACT legislation could not operate concurrently with the federal Marriage Act.<ref>{{cite news|title=Australia: Gay marriage law reversed by high court less than a week after first weddings|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/australia-gay-marriage-law-reversed-less-than-a-week-after-first-weddings-8999422.html|accessdate=15 December 2013|newspaper=The Independent|date=12 December 2013|author=Adam Withnall|location=London}}</ref>

Up to September 2016, 21 same-sex marriage related bills had been introduced in the ],<ref>{{cite web|last1=McKeown|first1=Deirdre|title=Chronology of same-sex marriage bills introduced into the federal parliament: a quick guide|url=http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1617/Quick_Guides/SSMarriageBills|website=www.aph.gov.au|publisher=Parliamentary Library (Australia)|accessdate=27 December 2016|location=Canberra|language=en-AU|date=21 July 2016}}</ref> none of which passed. The ], narrowly re-elected at the ], pledged to hold a ] on the issue in early 2017, with the question being put to the Australian people, rather than being resolved by the parliament. The opposition ] supports same-sex marriage but lobbies for a parliamentary ] on same-sex marriage legislation. This created a ], with Labor refusing to back a plebiscite and the Coalition refusing to allow a parliamentary conscience vote.<ref name=SenateRejects>{{cite web|url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-07/same-sex-marriage-plebiscite-bill-blocked-by-senate/8003430|title=Same-sex marriage plebiscite bill blocked by Senate|work=ABC News|date=7 November 2016|author=Francis Keany}}</ref>

The stalemate was broken when the Government announced the ], which Labor was unable to block. The survey, which is being held between 12 September and 7 November 2017, is non-binding and voluntary. The results of the survey will be released on 15 November 2017, and if the survey returns a majority 'yes' verdict, the Government has pledged to facilitate the passage of a ] legalising same-sex marriage in the ] before the end of the year.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.buzzfeed.com/lanesainty/email-me-your-questions-please|title=We Tried To Answer Literally Every Question About The Same-Sex Marriage Postal Survey|work=BuzzFeed|date=14 August 2017}}</ref>

====Austria====
{{Main article|Recognition of same-sex unions in Austria}}
On 20 November 2013, the Greens introduced a bill in ] that would legalise same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.thinkoutsideyourbox.net/?p=33177|title=Nationalrat: Grüne bringen Antrag zur Ehe-Öffnung für Lesben und Schwule ein|publisher=Thinkoutsideyourbox.net|date=20 November 2013}}</ref> It was sent to the Judiciary Committee on 17 December 2013.<ref>{{de icon}} </ref> The bill was supposed to be debated in Autumn 2014,<ref>{{de icon}} </ref> but was delayed by the ruling coalition.

In December 2015, the Vienna Administrative Court dismissed a case challenging the same-sex marriage ban. The plaintiffs appealed to the Constitutional Court.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.thelocal.at/20160323/families-fight-austrias-gay-marriage-ban|title=Families fight Austria's gay marriage ban|date=23 March 2016|publisher=}}</ref>

====Chile====
{{Main article|Recognition of same-sex unions in Chile}}

], the President of Chile, who was elected to a second term in March 2014, has promised to work for the implementation of same-sex marriage and has a majority in both houses of ]. Previously, she said, "Marriage equality, I believe we have to make it happen."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/chile-expected-legalize-gay-marriage120314|title=Chile expected to legalize gay marriage|work=Gay Star News|first=Joe|last=Morgan|date=12 March 2014|accessdate=10 April 2014}}</ref> Polling shows majority support for same-sex marriage among Chileans.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cepchile.cl/dms/lang_1/doc_4844.html|title=Estudio Nacional de Opinión Pública, Junio–Julio 2011. Tema especial: Educación|publisher=Cepchile.cl|accessdate=11 April 2014|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20140116230706/http://www.cepchile.cl/dms/lang_1/doc_4844.html|archivedate=16 January 2014}}</ref>

On 10 December 2014, a group of ], from various parties, joined LGBT rights group ] (Homosexual Movement of Integration and Liberation) in presenting a bill to allow same-sex marriage and adoption to Congress. MOVILH has been in talks with the Chilean Government to seek an amiable solution to the pending marriage lawsuit brought against the state before the ]. MOVILH has suggested that they would drop the case if Bachelet's Congress keeps their promise to legislate same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.cascaraamarga.es/politica-lgtb/lgtb-internacional/10299-el-proyecto-de-ley-de-matrimonio-igualitario-llega-al-parlamento-de-chile.html|title=El proyecto de ley de matrimonio igualitario llega al Parlamento de Chile|publisher=Cáscara Amarga|accessdate=11 December 2014}}</ref>

President Bachelet stated before a United Nations General Assembly panel in September 2016 that the Chilean Government would submit a same-sex marriage bill to Congress in the first half of 2017.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.voanews.com/a/chile-bachelet-gay-marriage-bill/3520246.html|title=Chile's President Plans to Send Gay Marriage Bill to Congress in 2017|work=VOA & Reuters|date=21 September 2016}}</ref> A same-sex marriage bill was finally submitted in September 2017.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.camara.cl/pley/pley_detalle.aspx?prmID=11934&prmBoletin=11422-07|title=Modifica diversos cuerpos legales para regular, en igualdad de condiciones, el matrimonio de parejas del mismo sexo|publisher=]|accessdate=8 September 2017}}</ref> On 28 January 2015, the National Congress approved a bill recognizing civil unions for same-sex and opposite-sex couples offering some of the rights of marriage. Bachelet signed the bill on 14 April, and it came into effect on 22 October.<ref>{{cite web|title=Chile recognises same-sex civil unions|url=http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-32296246|website=BBC.com|publisher=BBC News}}</ref><ref name=Reuters-bill-pass>{{cite news|last1=Esposito|first1=Anthony|title=Socially-conservative Chile approves civil unions|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/28/chile-civilunions-idUSL1N0V71X020150128|accessdate=28 January 2015|agency=Reuters}}</ref>

A poll carried out during September 2015 by the pollster Cadem Plaza Pública found that 60% of Chileans support same-sex marriage, whilst 36% are against it.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://plazapublica.cl/wp-content/uploads/658799.pdf |format=PDF |title=Track semanal de Opinion Publica |website=Plazapublica.cl |accessdate=2017-07-07}}</ref>

====China====
{{Main article|Recognition of same-sex unions in China}}
The ''Marriage Law of the People's Republic of China'' explicitly defines marriage as the union between one man and one woman. No other form of civil union is recognized. The attitude of the Chinese Government towards homosexuality is believed to be "three nos": "No approval; no disapproval; no promotion." The Ministry of Health officially removed homosexuality from its list of mental illnesses in 2001.

], a sociologist and sexologist well known in the Chinese gay community, has tried to legalize same-sex marriage several times, including during the National People's Congress in 2000 and 2004 (''Legalization for Same-Sex Marriage'' 《中国同性婚姻合法化》 in 2000 and the ''Same-Sex Marriage Bill'' 《中国同性婚姻提案》 in 2004). According to Chinese law, 35 delegates' signatures are needed to make an issue a bill to be discussed in the Congress. Her efforts failed due to lack of support from the delegates. CPPCC National Committee spokesman ]
when asked about Li Yinhe's proposal, said that same-sex marriage was still too "ahead of its time" for China. He argued that same-sex marriage was not recognized even in many Western countries, which are considered much more liberal in social issues than China.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.sina.com.cn/c/2006-03-05/10278364854s.shtml|title=政协发言人称同性婚姻太超前 李银河提案再受挫_新闻中心_新浪网|publisher=News.sina.com.cn|accessdate=22 May 2012}}</ref> This statement is understood as an implication that the Government may consider recognition of same-sex marriage in the long run, but not in the near future.

On 5 January 2016, a court in ], southern ], agreed to hear the lawsuit of 26-year-old Sun Wenlin filed in December 2015 against the Bureau of Civil Affairs of Furong District for its June 2015 refusal to let him marry his 36-year-old male partner, Hu Mingliang. On 13 April 2016, with hundreds of same-sex marriage supporters outside, the Changsha court ruled against Sun, who vowed to appeal, citing the importance of his case for LGBT progress in China.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/04/13/474065742/chinese-court-rules-against-gay-couple-seeking-to-get-married|title=Chinese Court Rules Against Gay Couple Seeking To Get Married|publisher=The Two-Way|date=13 April 2016}}</ref>

====Costa Rica====
{{main article|Recognition of same-sex unions in Costa Rica}}
On 19 March 2015, a bill to legalize same-sex marriage was introduced to the Legislative Assembly by Deputy Ligia Elena Fallas Rodríguez from the ].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.asamblea.go.cr/Centro_de_Informacion/Consultas_SIL/Pginas/Detalle%20Proyectos%20de%20Ley.aspx?Numero_Proyecto=19508 |title=Páginas - Detalle Proyectos de Ley |website=Asamblea.go.cr |date= |accessdate=2017-07-07}}</ref> On 10 December 2015, the organization Front for Equal Rights (''Frente Por los Derechos Igualitarios'') and a group of deputies presented another bill.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.elpais.cr/2015/12/10/proyecto-de-organizaciones-sociales-para-matrimonio-igualitario-ya-esta-en-la-asamblea-legislativa/ |title=Proyecto de organizaciones sociales para Matrimonio Igualitario ya está en la Asamblea Legislativa – Diario Digital Nuestro País |website=Elpais.cr |date=2015-12-10 |accessdate=2017-07-07}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|author=www.diarioextra.com |url=http://www.diarioextra.com/Noticia/detalle/278377/12-diputados-respaldan-proyecto-de-ley-para-permitir-matrimonio-gay |title=12 Diputados respaldan proyecto de ley para permitir matrimonio gay |publisher=Diario Extra |date= |accessdate=2017-07-07}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://issuu.com/fdicr/docs/proyectoleymatrimonioigualitario_20 |title=Proyecto de Ley Matrimonio Igualitario by Frente por los Derechos Igualitarios |website=Issuu.com |date=2013-06-27 |accessdate=2017-07-07}}</ref>

On 10 February 2016, the Constitutional Court of Costa Rica announced it would hear a case seeking to legalize same-sex marriage in Costa Rica and declare the country's same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ameliarueda.com/nota/sala-estudio-recursos-de-inconsticuionalidad-prohibicion-matrimonio-gay|title=Sala IV admite para estudio 2 recursos de inconstitucionalidad contra prohibición de matrimonio gay - AmeliaRueda.com|work=ameliarueda.com}}</ref>

====El Salvador====
{{Main article|Recognition of same-sex unions in El Salvador}}
In August 2016, a lawyer in El Salvador filed a lawsuit before the country's Supreme Court asking for the nullification of Article 11 of the Family Code which defines marriage as a heterosexual union. Labeling the law as discriminatory and explaining the lack of gendered terms used in Article 34 of the Constitution’s summary of a marriage, the lawsuit seeks to allow same-sex couples the right to wed.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://theperchybird.wordpress.com/2016/08/18/same-sex-marriage-lawsuit-filed-in-el-salvador|title=Same-sex Marriage Lawsuit Filed in El Salvador|first=The Perchy|last=Bird|date=19 August 2016|work=wordpress.com}}</ref> The Court dismissed the lawsuit in December 2016.<ref>{{es icon}} </ref> A second lawsuit was filed in November 2016.

====Estonia====
{{Main article|Recognition of same-sex unions in Estonia}}
In October 2014, the Estonian Parliament approved a civil union law open to both opposite-sex and same-sex couples.<ref>, independent.co.uk; accessed 5 July 2017.</ref>

In December 2016, the Tallinn Circuit Court ruled that same-sex marriages concluded in another country must be recognised as such in Estonia.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/estonia-taken-big-step-marriage-equality|title=Gay couple to be married in Estonia|work=Gay Star News|date=30 January 2017}}</ref>

====Georgia====
{{Main article|LGBT rights in Georgia (country)}}
In 2016, a man filed a challenge against Georgia's same-sex marriage ban, arguing that while the Civil Code of Georgia states that marriage is explicitly between a man and a woman; the Constitution does not reference gender in its section on marriage.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.eurasianet.org/node/77221|title=Gay Marriage Lawsuit Launched in Georgia|first=Giorgi|last=Lomsadze|date=8 February 2016|publisher=|via=EurasiaNet}}</ref>

====India====
{{Main article|Recognition of same-sex unions in India}}
Same-sex marriage is not explicitly prohibited under Indian law and at least one couple has had their marriage recognised by the courts.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.despardes.com/lifestyle/feb05/lesbian-marriages.htm|title=Lesbian marriages in India|publisher=despardes.com|accessdate=11 April 2014|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20140203064928/http://www.despardes.com/lifestyle/feb05/lesbian-marriages.htm|archivedate=3 February 2014}}</ref>

In April 2014, ] of the ] stated that her party supports the legalisation of same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite web|author=Joe Morgan |url=http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/india-party-people-promises-legalize-gay-sex-marriage110414|title=India ‘party of the people’ promises to legalize gay sex, marriage|publisher=Gay Star News|date=11 April 2014|accessdate=5 July 2017}}</ref>

====Israel====
{{Main article|Same-sex marriage in Israel}}
Israel's High Court of Justice ruled to recognize foreign same-sex marriages for the limited purpose of registration with the Administration of Border Crossings, Population and Immigration, however this is merely for statistical purposes and grants no state-level rights; Israel does not recognize civil marriages performed under its own jurisdiction. 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. A bill to legalize same-sex and interfaith civil marriages was defeated in the Knesset, 39–11, on 16 May 2012.<ref>{{cite news|work=The Jerusalem Post|url=http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=270221|title=Knesset rejects marriage equality bill|date=16 May 2012|author=Harkov, Lahav|accessdate=28 May 2012}}</ref>

In November 2015, the National LGBT Taskforce of Israel petitioned the ] to allow same-sex marriage in the country, arguing that the refusal of the rabbinical court to recognise same-sex marriage should not prevent civil courts from performing same-sex marriages. The court did not immediately rule against the validity of the petition.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://m.jpost.com/Israel-News/NGO-The-Aguda-petitions-Supreme-Court-to-allow-same-sex-marriage-Israel-431733#article=6017RkIwRTRGQ0UyQzlCNUYxOUM3OUI5QTc1RTJGQkVGMkU=|title=NGO petitions High Court to allow same-sex marriage in Israel|work=The Jerusalem Post|date=2 November 2015}}</ref>

====Italy====
{{main article|Recognition of same-sex unions in Italy}}

The cities of ], ] and ] began recognizing same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions in July 2014,<ref>{{cite news|title=Nozze gay all'estero, c'è la firma del sindaco: saranno trascritte in Comune | work =La Repubblica| date = 22 July 2014| url = http://bologna.repubblica.it/cronaca/2014/07/22/news/nozze_gay_c_la_firma_del_sindaco_potranno_essere_trascritte-92118610/ | accessdate = 22 July 2014|language=it}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title = Matrimoni gay, via alle trascrizioni: Roberto e Miguel la prima coppia | work =La Repubblica| date = 25 June 2014| url = http://napoli.repubblica.it/cronaca/2014/06/25/news/matrimoni_gay_via_alle_trascrizioni_roberto_e_manuel_la_prima_coppia-89937623/ | accessdate = 25 June 2014|language=it}}</ref> followed by ], ], ] and ] in September,<ref>{{cite news|title = Via libera del sindaco Barnini ai matrimoni gay. Emanata una direttiva | publisher = ''Gonews.it''| date = 15 September 2014| url = http://www.gonews.it/2014/09/15/empoli-via-libera-del-sindaco-barnini-ai-matrimoni-gay-emanata-una-direttiva/ | accessdate = 15 September 2014|language=it}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title = Matrimoni gay presto possibili a Pordenone | work =Messaggero Veneto| date = 15 September 2014| url = http://messaggeroveneto.gelocal.it/udine/cronaca/2014/09/15/news/matrimonio-gay-pedrotti-faremo-la-registrazione-1.9936875 | accessdate = 15 September 2014|language=it}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title = Udine dice sì alla trascrizione dei matrimoni gay | publisher =IlFriuli.it| date = 29 September 2014| url = http://www.ilfriuli.it/articolo/Cronaca/Udine_dice_s%C3%AC_alla_trascrizione_dei_matrimoni_gay/2/136322 | accessdate = 29 September 2014|language=it}}</ref> and ], ], ] and ] in October,<ref>{{cite news|title = Primo sì al registro delle nozze gay | work =Corriere Fiorentino | date = 2 October 2014| url = http://corrierefiorentino.corriere.it/firenze/notizie/cronaca/2014/2-ottobre-2014/primo-si-registro-nozze-gay-230260453079.shtml|accessdate=2 October 2014|language=it}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Matrimoni gay, c'è l'ok del consiglio comunale di Piombino|publisher=Il Tirreno|date=2 October 2014|url=http://iltirreno.gelocal.it/piombino/cronaca/2014/10/02/news/matrimoni-gay-c-e-l-ok-del-consiglio-comunale-1.10034602|accessdate=2 October 2014|language=it}}</ref> and by ] in November.<ref>{{cite news|title=è festa a Bagheria: trascritto il primo matrimonio gay|work=Palermo Today|date=13 November 2014|url=http://www.palermotoday.it/cronaca/bagheria-matrimonio-gay-registro.html|accessdate=13 November 2014|language=it}}</ref> Other cities that are considering similar laws include Cagliari, Livorno, Syracuse, Pompei and Treviso.<ref>{{cite news|title=Nozze gay all'estero, prime richieste di trascrizione a Milano: 'Pisapia, basta chiacchiere'|work=La Repubblica|date=22 September 2014|url=http://milano.repubblica.it/cronaca/2014/09/22/news/nozze_gay_estero_trascrizione_appello_milano_pisapia-96323003|accessdate=22 September 2014|language=it}}</ref>

A January 2013 Datamonitor poll found that 54.1% of respondents were in favour of same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite news|title=Nozze gay: il 54% degli italiani è favorevole, sondaggio Datamonitor|publisher=''L'Huffington Post''|date=7 January 2013|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.it/2013/01/07/nozze-gay-il-54-degli-italiani-favorevole_n_2424464.html|accessdate=7 January 2013|language=it}}</ref> A May 2013 Ipsos poll found that 42% of Italians supported allowing same-sex couples to marry and adopt children.<ref>{{fr icon}} {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160201082402/http://www.ifop.com/media/poll/2255-1-study_file.pdf|date=1 February 2016}}</ref> An October 2014 Demos poll found that 55% of respondents were in favour of same-sex marriage, with 42% against.<ref>{{cite web|title=Nozze gay, per la prima volta oltre la metà degli italiani dice sì|url=http://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2014/10/12/news/nozze_gay_per_la_prima_volta_oltre_la_met_degli_italiani_dice_s-97902620|date=12 October 2014|publisher=La Repubblica|language=it}}</ref>

On 25 February 2016, the Italian Senate passed a bill allowing civil unions with 173 senators in favour and 73 against. That same bill was approved by the Chamber of Deputies on 11 May 2016 with 372 deputies in favour and 51 against.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.repubblica.it/politica/2016/05/11/news/unioni_civili_voto_fiducia_camera-139563931/?ref=HREA-1|title=Unioni civili, Camera approva: è legge. Renzi: "Battaglia da fare senza contare voti"|date=11 May 2016|accessdate=5 July 2017|publisher=La Repubblica|language=it}}</ref> The ] signed the bill into law on 22 May 2016 and the law went into effect on 5 June 2016.

On 31 January 2017, the Italian ] ruled that same-sex marriages performed abroad can be fully recognized by court order, when at least one of the two spouses is a citizen of a ] country where same-sex marriage is legal,<ref></ref> thus making same-sex marriage ] legal under certain circumstances.

====Japan====
{{Main article|Same-sex marriage in Japan}}
Same-sex marriage is not legal in Japan. Article 24 of the Japanese Constitution states that "Marriage shall be based only on the mutual consent of both sexes and it shall be maintained through mutual cooperation with the equal rights of husband and wife as a basis."<ref>{{cite book|title=The Constitution of Japan|date=3 November 1946|location=Tokyo|url=http://japan.kantei.go.jp/constitution_and_government_of_japan/constitution_e.html|accessdate=4 June 2015}}</ref> Article 24 was created to establish the equality of both sexes in marriage, in opposition to the pre-war legal situation whereby the husband/father was legally defined as the head of household and marriage require permission from the male head of the family.

51% of the Japanese population supports same-sex marriage, according to the latest poll carried out in 2015.<ref>{{cite web|url= https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-11-29/majority-of-japanese-support-same-sex-marriage-poll-shows|title=Majority of Japanese Support Same-Sex Marriage, Poll Shows|publisher=Bloomberg|date=29 November 2015}}</ref>

====Latvia====
{{Main article|Recognition of same-sex unions in Latvia}}
On 27 May 2016, the ] overturned an administrative court decision which refused an application to register a same-sex marriage in the country. A Supreme Court press spokeswoman said that the court agrees with the administrative court that current regulations do not allow for same-sex marriages to be legally performed in Latvia. However, the matter should have been considered in a context not of marriage, but of registering familial partnership. Furthermore, it would have been impossible to conclude whether the applicants' rights were violated or not unless their claim is accepted and reviewed in a proper manner.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.lsm.lv/en/article/societ/society/supreme-court-rules-same-sex-marriage-request-will-be-considered.a184891/ |title=Supreme Court rules same-sex marriage request will be considered |publisher=Public broadcasting of Latvia |date=27 May 2016}}</ref> The Supreme Court will now decide whether the refusal was in breach of the Latvian Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights.

====Nepal====
{{main article|Same-sex marriage in Nepal}}
In November 2008, the ] issued final judgment on matters related to LGBT rights, which included permitting same-sex couples to marry. Same-sex marriage and protection for sexual minorities were to be included in the new Nepalese Constitution required to be completed by 31 May 2012.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/nepal/Nepal-charter-to-grant-gay-rights/Article1-499154.aspx|title=Nepal charter to grant gay rights|work=Hindustan Times|date=19 January 2010|accessdate=1 February 2010|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20100123144431/http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/nepal/Nepal-charter-to-grant-gay-rights/Article1-499154.aspx|archivedate=23 January 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Nelson|first=Dean|url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/nepal/7027736/Nepal-to-stage-gay-weddings-on-Everest.html|title=Nepal 'to stage gay weddings on Everest'|work=The Daily Telegraph|date=19 January 2010|accessdate=1 February 2010|location=London}}</ref> However, the Legislature was unable to agree on the Constitution before the deadline and was dissolved after the Supreme Court ruled that the term could not be extended.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/28/world/asia/nepal-disbands-legislature-as-talks-on-constitution-fail.html|title=Legislature in Nepal Disbands in Failure|work=The New York Times|date=31 May 2012|accessdate=1 June 2012|first1=Kiran|last1=Chapagain|first2=Jim|last2=Yardley}}</ref>

In October 2016, the Ministry of Women, Children and Social Welfare constituted a committee for the purpose of preparing a draft bill to legalize same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://pahichan.com/all-set-to-get-legal-status|title=All set to get legal status|date=21 October 2016|publisher=pahichan.com|accessdate=5 July 2017}}</ref>

====Panama====
{{Main article|LGBT rights in Panama}}
On 17 October 2016, a married same-sex couple filed an action of unconstitutionality seeking to recognise same-sex marriages performed abroad.<ref>{{es icon}} , Telemetro.com; accessed 5 July 2017.</ref> In early November, the case was admitted to the Supreme Court.<ref>{{sp icon}} , Prensa.com; accessed 5 July 2017.</ref> A challenge seeking to legalize same-sex marriage in Panama was introduced before the Supreme Court in March 2017.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/panama-activists-start-new-push-marriage-equality/ |title=Same-sex marriage could come to Panama if activists win legal fight |website=Gaystarnews.com |date=2017-04-04 |accessdate=2017-07-07}}</ref> The Supreme Court heard arguments on both cases in summer 2017.<ref></ref>

====Peru====
{{Main article|LGBT rights in Peru}}
In a ruling published on 9 January 2017, the 7th Constitutional Court of Lima ordered the ] to recognize and register the marriage of a same-sex couple who had previously wed in ].<ref>{{es icon}} , Peru21.pe; accessed 5 July 2017.{{es icon}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/peru-same-sex-marriage-oscar-galarza|title=Court orders Peru to recognize its first same-sex marriage|work=Gay Star News|date=10 January 2017}}</ref> RENIEC later appealed the ruling.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/article-4107036/Peru-takes-step-recognizing-sex-marriage.html|title=Peru takes step toward recognizing same-sex marriage|work=AP Wires|publisher=Daily Mail UK|date=11 January 2017}}</ref>

On 14 February 2017, a bill legalizing same-sex marriage was introduced in the Peruvian Congress.<ref>{{es icon}} , Blogdelimagay.blogspot.ch, February 2017; accessed 5 July 2017.</ref>

====Philippines====
Same-sex marriages and civil unions are currently not recognized by the state, the illegal insurgent ] performs ] since 2005.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/796671/love-is-love-in-communist-movement|title=‘Love is love in communist movement’|work=Inquirer.net|accessdate=19 July 2016}}</ref>

In October 2016, Speaker of the ] ] announced he will file a civil union bill in ].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://asianjournal.com/news/same-sex-marriage-legalization-eyed-in-ph|title=Same-sex marriage legalization eyed in PH - News|work=asianjournal.com|accessdate=5 July 2017}}</ref>

====Romania====
{{Main article|Recognition of same-sex unions in Romania}}
As of October 2016, a lawsuit initiated by a Romanian man seeking to have his marriage to an American man recognised is ongoing. The ] is hearing the case and is consulting with the ] on the matter. A hearing in the case took place in late March 2017.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/romania-consult-european-court-over-same-sex-marriage-case-n689551|title=Romania to consult with European court over same-sex marriage case|publisher=}}</ref>

====Slovenia====
{{Main article|Recognition of same-sex unions in Slovenia}}
Slovenia recognises registered partnerships for same-sex couples.

In December 2014, the eco-socialist ] party introduced a bill amending expansion of the definition of marriage in the 1976 ''Marriage and Family Relations Act'' to include same-sex couples. In January 2015, the Government expressed no opposition to the bill. In February 2015, the bill was passed with 11 votes to 2. In March, the Assembly passed the bill in a 51–28 vote. On 10 March 2015, the National Council rejected a motion to require the Assembly to vote on the bill again, in a 14–23 vote. Opponents of the bill launched a petition for a referendum and managed to collect 40,000 signatures. Then Parliament voted to block the referendum with a clarification that it would be against the Slovenian Constitution to vote about matters concerning human rights. Finally the Constitutional Court ruled against the banning of the referendum (5–4) and ] was to be held on 20 December 2015.

In the referendum, 63.4% of the voters voted against the law, rendering Parliament's same-sex marriage act invalid.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.rtvslo.si/slovenija/referendum/pobudniki-referenduma-uspeli-novela-zakona-o-zakonski-zvezi-zavrnjena/381559 |title=Pobudniki referenduma uspeli, sprememba zakona o zakonski zvezi zavrnjena |language=Slovenian|date=20 December 2015 |access-date=20 December 2015}}</ref>

====South Korea====
{{Main article|Recognition of same-sex unions in South Korea}}
In July 2015, ] and his partner, Kim Seung-Hwan, filed a lawsuit seeking legal status for their marriage after their marriage registration form was rejected by the local authorities in ]. On 25 May 2016, a South Korean district court ruled against the couple and argued that without clear legislation a same-sex union can not be recognized as a marriage.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/may/25/south-korea-rejects-film-director-kim-jho-gwang-so-same-sex-marriage-case|title=South Korean court rejects film director’s same-sex marriage case|publisher=The Guardian|date=25 May 2016}}</ref> The couple quickly filed an appeal against the district court ruling. Their lawyer, Ryu Min-Hee, announced that two more same-sex couples had filed separate lawsuits in order to be allowed to wed.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2016/05/26/south-korea-set-for-more-court-battles-over-same-sex-marriage-ban|author=Duffy, Nick|title=South Korea set for more court battles over same-sex marriage ban|publisher=Pink News|date=26 May 2016}}</ref>

In December 2016, a South Korean appeals court upheld the district court ruling. The couple vowed to bring the case to the ].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2016/12/06/52/0302000000AEN20161206010400315F.html|title=S. Korean court rejects gay couple's appeal over same-sex marriage|publisher=yonhapnews.co.kr|date=6 December 2016}}</ref>

====Switzerland====
{{Main article|Registered partnership in Switzerland}}
A same-sex marriage bill is pending in Parliament after the ],<ref>{{fr icon}} , ]; retrieved 18 June 2014.</ref> introduced a constitutional initiative to legalize same-sex marriage in December 2013, in opposition to a ] initiative banning same-sex marriage. The Committee for Legal Affairs of the ] approved the Green Liberal initiative by 12-9 and 1 abstention on 20 February 2015.<ref>{{fr}} , ], retrieved 20 February 2015</ref> On 1 September 2015, the upper house's Legal Affairs Committee voted 7 to 5 to proceed with the initiative.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.blick.ch/news/politik/ehe-fuer-alle-staenderat-sagt-ja-zur-homo-ehe-id4126745.html|title=Ständerat sagt Ja zur Homo-Ehe|publisher=Blick.ch|date=1 September 2015}}</ref> The National Council's Legal Affairs Committee can now draft an act.

In a poll in June 2013 for ], 63% approved same-sex marriage.<ref>{{fr icon}} {{cite web|url=http://www.ifop.com/media/poll/2255-1-study_file.pdf |title=Archived copy |accessdate=2015-05-26 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160201082402/http://www.ifop.com/media/poll/2255-1-study_file.pdf |archivedate=1 February 2016 |df= }}, ], retrieved 18 June 2014</ref> After the ]'s Committee of Law Affairs' decision to approve same-sex marriage, two opinion polls released on 22 February 2015 showed a support of 54% (] for ]<ref>{{de icon}} , Blick.ch, retrieved on 22 February 2015</ref>) and 71% (GfS Zürich for ]<ref>{{de icon}} , Sonntagszeitung.ch, retrieved on 22 February 20152015</ref>) allowing same-sex couples to marry and adopt children. Additionally, in November 2016, voters in the ] overwhelmingly rejected an initiative seeking to ban same-sex marriage in the cantonal Constitution, with 81% voting against.<ref>, Srf.ch; accessed 5 July 2017.{{de icon}}</ref>

In March 2015, the ] released a governmental report about marriage and new rights for families. It opens the possibility to introduce registered partnerships for different-sex couples as well as same-sex marriage for same-sex couples.<ref>{{fr}} , ]; retrieved 27 May 2015.{{fr icon}}</ref> The ] ] in charge of the ] also stated she hoped personally that same-sex couples would soon be allowed to marry.<ref>, ]; retrieved 27 May 2015.{{fr icon}}</ref>

The ] (CVP/PDC) started in 2011 with gathering signatures for a ] entitled "For the couple and the family - No to the penalty of marriage". This initiative would change article 14 of the ] and aimed to put equal fiscal rights and equal social security benefits between married couples and unmarried cohabiting couples. However, the text aimed to introduce as well in the Constitution for the first time ever the definition of marriage, which would be the sole "union between a man and a woman".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.admin.ch/ch/d/pore/vi/vis404t.html|title=Eidgenössische Volksinitiative 'Für Ehe und Familie - gegen die Heiratsstrafe'|work=admin.ch}}</ref> On 19 June 2015, the Parliament recommended that voters reject the initiative.<ref>, Admin.ch; accessed 5 January 2017.{{fr icon}}</ref> The ] also recommended rejecting the initiative.<ref>, Queer.ch, 18 November 2015; accessed 5 January 2017.{{de icon}}</ref><ref>, 17 November 2015, admin.ch</ref> The Swiss people voted on the Christian Democrats' proposal in a referendum on 28 February 2016<ref>, NZZ.ch, 7 October 2014.{{de icon}}</ref> and rejected it by 50.8% of the votes.<ref>, Swissinfo.ch, 28 February 2016.</ref>

====Taiwan====
{{main article|Same-sex marriage in Taiwan}}
On 22 December 2014, a proposed amendment to the Civil Code which would legalize same-sex marriage was due to go under review by the Judiciary Committee. If the amendment passes the committee stage it will then be voted on at the plenary session of the ] in 2015. The amendment, called the marriage equality amendment, would insert neutral terms into the Civil Code replacing ones that imply heterosexual marriage, effectively legalizing same-sex marriage. It would also allow same-sex couples to adopt children.

] of the ] (DPP), who is the convener of the current legislative session, has expressed support for the amendment as have more than 20 other DPP lawmakers as well as two from the ] and one each from the ] and the ].<ref>{{cite web|author=Lii Wen|url=http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2014/12/21/2003607251|title=Gay marriage proposal set for review|work=Taipei Times|date=21 December 2014|accessdate=5 July 2017}}</ref> Taiwan would become the first country in Asia to legalize same-sex marriage if the Civil Code is amended.

A poll carried out between August and October 2015 found that 71% of the Taiwanese population supports same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/11/30/nearly-two-thirds-of-taiwan-supports-marriage-equality-survey-finds/ |title=Nearly two thirds of Taiwan supports marriage equality, survey finds |publisher=PinkNews |date=30 November 2015}}</ref> ], the President of Taiwan since May 2016, announced her support of same-sex marriage in November 2015.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/watch-taiwan-presidential-frontrunner-officially-endorses-marriage-equality/|title=Watch: Taiwan presidential frontrunner officially endorses marriage equality|date=2 November 2015|work=gaystarnews.com}}</ref>

In October 2016, two same-sex marriage bills were introduced before the ]. Subsequently, protests have been staged by groups opposing and by groups supporting legalization.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2016/12/04/2003660533 |title=Thousands protest gay marriage in Taipei |author=Gerber, Abraham|date=4 December 2016|work=]|accessdate=7 December 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2016/12/11/2003660976|title=Thousands rally to support equal marriage rights - Taipei Times|publisher=}}</ref>

On 24 May 2017, the Constitutional Court ruled that same-sex couples have the right to marry, and gave the Government two years to amend the law to that effect. If the law is not amended after two years, same-sex couples will be able to register a valid marriage application in Taiwan.<ref name="BBC News"/>

====Venezuela====
{{Main article|Recognition of same-sex unions in Venezuela}}
In April 2016, the Supreme Court announced it would hear a lawsuit which seeks to declare Article 44 of the Civil Code unconstitutional for outlawing same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/11963|title=The Struggle isn't Over": Venezuela Moves Towards Marriage Equality|publisher=Venezuelanalysis.com|date=5 May 2016}}</ref>

====Vietnam====
{{main article|Same-sex marriage in Vietnam}}
In Vietnam, currently only a marriage between a man and a woman is recognized. Vietnam's Ministry of Justice began seeking advice on legalizing same-sex marriage from other governmental and non-governmental organizations in April and May 2012, and planned to further discuss the issue at the National Assembly in Spring 2013.<ref>{{cite news|title=Vietnam government consults on same-sex marriage|url=http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/vietnam-government-consults-same-sex-marriage200612|accessdate=26 January 2013|date=20 June 2012}}</ref> However, in February 2013, the Ministry of Justice requested that the National Assembly avoid action until 2014.<ref>{{cite news|title=Vote on same-sex marriage in Vietnam likely to be delayed until 2014|url=http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/vote-same-sex-marriage-vietnam-likely-be-delayed-until-2014200213}}</ref> At a hearing to discuss marriage law reforms in April 2013, deputy minister of health Nguyen Viet Tien proposed that same-sex marriage be made legal immediately.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/04/vietnam-flawed-on-human-rights-but-a-leader-in-gay-rights/275413|title=Vietnam: Flawed on Human Rights, but a Leader in Gay Rights|author=Thomas Maresca|date=30 April 2013|publisher=The Atlantic|accessdate=12 May 2013}}</ref>

The Vietnamese Government abolished an administrative fine imposed on same-sex weddings in 2013.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bangkokpost.com/breakingnews/345169/vietnam-ends-same-sex-marriage-fines|title=Vietnam ends same-sex marriage fines|publisher=Bangkok Post|accessdate=6 January 2014}}</ref> The policy was enacted on 11 November 2013. The 100,000–500,000 ] ($24]) fine will be abolished. Although same-sex marriages are not permitted in Vietnam, the policy will decriminalize the relationship, habitual privileges such as household registry, property, child raising, and co-habitual partnerships are recognized.<ref>S. Sarkar, "It's final Gay wedding fines to go in Vietnam", ''Gay Star News'', 13 October 2013. {{cite web|url=http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/it%E2%80%99s-final-gay-wedding-fines-go-vietnam131013|title=Archived copy|accessdate=14 October 2013|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20131013233248/http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/it%E2%80%99s-final-gay-wedding-fines-go-vietnam131013|archivedate=13 October 2013}}</ref>

In June 2013, the National Assembly began formal debate on a proposal to establish legal recognition for same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://gaynewsnetwork.com.au/news/world/11253-vietnam-national-assembly-begins-debate-on-marriage-equality.html|title=The latest entertainment news for Australia's LGBTIQ community|publisher=Gay News Network|accessdate=6 January 2014}}</ref> On 24 September 2013, the Government issued the decree abolishing the fines on same-sex marriages. The decree took effect on 11 November 2013.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://tuoitrenews.vn/society/13750/vietnam-to-remove-fines-on-samesex-marriage|title=Vietnam to remove fines on same-sex marriage|author=Tuoi Tre Newspaper|publisher=|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://thuvienphapluat.vn/archive/Nghi-dinh-110-2013-ND-CP-xu-phat-vi-pham-hanh-chinh-bo-tro-tu-phap-hanh-chinh-tu-phap-vb208274.aspx |title=Nghị định 110/2013/NĐ-CP xử phạt vi phạm hành chính bổ trợ tư pháp hành chính tư pháp - bản lưu trữ |website=Thuvienphapluat.vn |date=2013-09-24 |accessdate=2017-07-07}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://conganhatinh.gov.vn/web/guest/9/-/vcmsview/qvgy/1506/1506/6374 |title=Cổng thông tin điện tử Công an Tỉnh Hà Tĩnh |website=Web.archive.org |date=2014-05-17 |accessdate=2017-07-07 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20140517121108/http://conganhatinh.gov.vn/web/guest/9/-/vcmsview/qvgy/1506/1506/6374 |archivedate=17 May 2014 |df=dmy-all }}</ref>

On 27 May 2014, the National Assembly's Committee for Social Affairs removed the provision giving legal status and some rights to cohabiting same-sex couples from the Government's bill to amend the ''Law on Marriage and Family''.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/vietnamese-lawmakers-back-down-giving-rights-same-sex-couples300514|title=Vietnamese lawmakers back down on giving rights to same-sex couples|date=|work=Gay Star News}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.voanews.com/content/vietnams-proposed-marriage-law-disappoints-lgbt-activists-/1925916.html|title=Vietnam’s Proposed Marriage Law Disappoints LGBT Activists|work=VOA|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref> The bill was approved by the National Assembly on 19 June 2014.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://thanhniennews.com/politics/vietnam-allows-surrogacy-within-families-denies-samesex-marriage-27502.html|title=Vietnam allows surrogacy within families, denies same-sex marriage|work=Thanh Nien Daily|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://tuoitrenews.vn/society/20478/vietnam-removes-ban-on-same-sex-marriage|title=Vietnam removes ban on same sex marriage|author=Tuoi Tre Newspaper|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref>

On 1 January 2015, the ''2014 Law on Marriage and Family'' officially went into effect. It states that while Vietnam allows same-sex weddings, it will not offer legal recognition or protection to unions between people of the same sex.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.marilynstowe.co.uk/2014/12/29/vietnam-set-to-lift-gay-marriage-ban/|title=Vietnam set to lift gay marriage ban|work=Marilyn Stowe Blog|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref>

===International organizations===
The terms of employment of the staff of ] (not ]) in most cases are not governed by the laws of the country where their offices are located. Agreements with the host country safeguard these organizations' impartiality.

Despite their relative independence, few organizations recognize same-sex partnerships without condition. The agencies of the United Nations recognize same-sex marriages if and only if the country of citizenship of the employees in question recognizes the marriage.<ref>{{cite web|title=UN Secretary-General Bulletin|url=http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N04/522/40/PDF/N0452240.pdf|publisher=United Nations|accessdate=25 September 2012}}</ref> In some cases, these organizations do offer a limited selection of the benefits normally provided to mixed-sex married couples to de facto partners or ]s of their staff, but even individuals who have entered into a mixed-sex civil union in their home country are not guaranteed full recognition of this union in all organizations. However, the ] does recognize domestic partners.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTHRJOBS/0,,contentMDK:20522360~menuPK:1353209~pagePK:64262408~piPK:64262191~theSitePK:1058433,00.html|title=Jobs&nbsp;— Compensation & Benefits|publisher=The World Bank Group|accessdate=8 March 2007}}</ref>


==Other arrangements== ==Other arrangements==
===Civil unions=== ===Civil unions===
{{Main article|Civil union}} {{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|title=NYC Protest and Civil Rights March Opposing Proposition 8|url=http://www.towleroad.com/2008/11/we-did-it.html|publisher=]|accessdate=28 September 2012}}</ref>]] ] 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 March 2017, countries that have an alternative form of legal recognition other than marriage on a national level are: ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], the ], ], ], ], ] and the ] (Northern Ireland 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|publisher=christiangays.com|accessdate=20 February 2012}}</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|publisher=Care2.com (news.bbc.co.uk as source)|accessdate=20 February 2012}}</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.


Additionally, thirteen countries which have legalized same-sex marriage still have an alternative form of legal recognition for same-sex couples, usually available to heterosexual couples as well: ], ], ], ], ], ], ], the ], ], ], ], the ] and ].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://eli.legilux.public.lu/eli/etat/leg/loi/2004/07/09/n3 |title=Loi du 9 juillet 2004 relative aux effets légaux de certains partenariats. - Legilux |website=Eli.legilux.public.lu |date= |accessdate=2017-07-07}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do;jsessionid=0F15B99854A4FE47659F950BE42DF000.tpdjo05v_3?cidTexte=LEGITEXT000005628705&dateTexte=vig |title=Loi n° 99-944 du 15 novembre 1999 relative au pacte civil de solidarité |language=fr |website=Legifrance.gouv.fr |date=2007-03-12 |accessdate=2017-07-07}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/mopdf/2000/03/02_1.pdf |format=PDF |title=WETTEN, DECRETEN, ORDONNANTIES EN VERORDENINGEN LOIS, DECRETS, ORDONNANCES ET REGLEMENTS |website=Ejustice.jkust.fgov.be |accessdate=2017-07-07}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/33/contents|title=Civil Partnership Act 2004|work=Legislation.gov.uk|accessdate=5 July 2017}}</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>


They are also available in parts of the United States (], ], ], ], ], ] and ]).<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|publisher=National Conference of State Legislatures|accessdate=20 February 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7017501996?Congress%20Considers%20Outcome%20of%20D.C.%20Gay%20Marriage%20Legislation|title= Congress Considers Outcome of D.C. Gay Marriage Legislation|work=AHN|author=Ramstack, Tom|date=11 January 2010}}</ref> 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>


===Non-sexual same-sex marriage=== ===Non-sexual same-sex marriage===
====Kenya==== ====Kenya====
{{main article|LGBT rights in Kenya}} {{main|LGBT rights in Kenya}}
Female same-sex marriage is practiced among the ], ], ], ], and to a lesser extent neighboring peoples. Approximately 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> The laws criminalizing homosexuality are generally specific to men, though in 2010 the prime minister called for women to be arrested as well.{{citation needed|date=July 2017}} 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==== ====Nigeria====
{{main article|Same-sex marriage in Nigeria}} {{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>
In Nigeria, homosexual activity between men, but not between women, is illegal. In 2006, Nigerian President ] introduced legislation that prohibits same-sex marriages and criminalizes anyone who "performs, witnesses, aids or abets" such ceremonies.<ref name=UN>{{cite web|last=Fleshman|first=Michael|title=African gays and lesbians combat bias: An 'invisible' minority seeks legal safeguards, acceptance|url=https://www.un.org/ecosocdev/geninfo/afrec/vol21no1/211-gays-lesbians-combat-bias.html|publisher=United Nations|accessdate=28 September 2012|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120212183121/http://www.un.org/ecosocdev/geninfo/afrec/vol21no1/211-gays-lesbians-combat-bias.html|archivedate=12 February 2012}}</ref>


== Studies ==
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|url=http://www.tribune.com.ng/19062009/opinion.html|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20100111010506/http://www.tribune.com.ng/19062009/opinion.html|archivedate=11 January 2010|title=Tradition of same gender marriage in Igboland|first=Leo|last=Igwe|work=Nigerian Tribune|date=19 June 2009}}</ref>
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}}

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.

===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.<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>


==Issues== ==Issues==
{{See also|LGBT rights opposition}} {{See also|LGBT rights opposition}}
While few societies have recognized same-sex unions as marriages, 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. 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"/> undermines a right of children to be raised by their biological mother and father.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-blankenhorn19-2008sep19,0,6057126.story|title=Protecting marriage to protect children|last=Blankenhorn|first=David|date=19 September 2008|work=Los Angeles Times|accessdate=6 October 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|url=http://family.findlaw.com/marriage/marriage-agreements|title=See discussion of prenuptial and postmarital agreements at Findlaw|publisher=Family.findlaw.com|accessdate=5 November 2010}}</ref> while others argue that same-sex marriages would provide social benefits to same-sex couples.<ref name="indegayforum1">Dale Carpenter is a prominent spokesman for this view. For a better understanding of this view, see Carpenter's writings at {{cite web|url=http://www.indegayforum.org/staff/show/91.html |title=Archived copy|accessdate=31 October 2006|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20061117201231/http://www.indegayforum.org/staff/show/91.html|archivedate=17 November 2006}}</ref> 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}} 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=== ===Parenting===
{{Main article|LGBT parenting|Same-sex marriage and the family}} {{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"/><ref name=cpa2006/><ref name=pediatrics/><ref name=lamb>{{cite web|last=Lamb, Ph.D.|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|publisher=Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders|accessdate=24 July 2012}}</ref><ref name="AAP-Discovery">{{cite web|url=http://news.discovery.com/human/health/pediatricians-gay-marriage-is-good-for-kids-health-130322.htm|title=Pediatricians: Gay Marriage Good for Kids' Health|publisher=news.discovery.com|date=22 March 2013|accessdate=11 April 2013}}</ref>
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|url=http://www.psychology.org.au/Assets/Files/LGBT-Families-Lit-Review.pdf|title=Elizabeth Short, Damien W. Riggs, Amaryll Perlesz, Rhonda Brown, Graeme Kane: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) Parented Families&nbsp;– A Literature Review prepared for The Australian Psychological Society|accessdate=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|publisher=]|accessdate=28 September 2012}}</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.|title=The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children|doi=10.1542/peds.2006-1279|journal=Pediatrics|volume=118|issue=1|pages=349–64|year=2006|pmid=16818585}}</ref><ref name="herek2006">{{cite journal|author=Herek GM|title=Legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the United States: a social science perspective|journal=The American Psychologist|volume=61|issue=6|pages=607–21|date=September 2006|pmid=16953748|doi=10.1037/0003-066X.61.6.607|url=http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/AP_06_pre.PDF|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20100610164736/http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/AP_06_pre.PDF|archivedate=10 June 2010}}</ref><ref name="How Does the Gender of Parents Matter?">{{cite journal|url=http://www.famigliearcobaleno.org/public/documenti/file/How-Does-the-Gender-of-Parents-Matter.pdf|title=How Does the Gender of Parents Matter?|author1=Biblarz, Timothy J.|author2=Stacey, Judith|journal=Journal of Marriage and Family|date=February 2010|volume=72|issue=1|pages=3–22|doi=10.1111/j.1741-3737.2009.00678.x|deadurl=yes|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130512111336/http://www.famigliearcobaleno.org/public/documenti/file/How-Does-the-Gender-of-Parents-Matter.pdf|archivedate=12 May 2013}}</ref><ref name=cpa2005>{{cite web|title=Brief presented to the Legislative House of Commons Committee on Bill C38|url=http://www.cpa.ca/cpasite/userfiles/Documents/advocacy/brief.pdf|publisher=]|accessdate=28 September 2012}}</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}}

[[File:World same-sex adoption laws.svg|right|thumb|300px|Legal status of adoption by same-sex couples around the world: {{legend|#800080|Joint adoption allowed<sup>1</sup>}}
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>
{{legend|#ba75ff|Second-parent adoption allowed<sup>2</sup>}}
{{legend|#e0e0e0|No laws allowing adoption by same-sex couples}}]]


====Adoption==== ====Adoption====
{{main article|LGBT adoption}} {{main|LGBT adoption}}
[[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}}
All states that allow same-sex marriage also allow the joint ] of children by people of the same sex, with the exceptions of Guerrero, Jalisco, Nayarit, Puebla and Quintana Roo in Mexico. In addition, ], ] and ] as well as several subnational jurisdictions which do not recognize same-sex marriage nonetheless permit joint adoption by unmarried same-sex couples: the Australian Capital Territory, New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, Victoria and Western Australia in Australia, Querétaro and Veracruz in Mexico as well as Northern Ireland and Jersey in the United Kingdom. Some additional states allow stepchild adoption by those who are in a same-sex relationship but are unmarried: ], ], ] (on a case-by-case basis), ] and ].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://euroclashblog.wordpress.com/2015/01/16/austrian-court-rules-to-allow-same-sex-adoptions/|title=Austrian court rules to allow same-sex adoptions|work=The Privateer|date=16 January 2016|accessdate=8 October 2017}}</ref>
{{legend|#ba75ff|Second-parent (stepchild) adoption allowed}}

{{legend|#CCCCCC|No laws allowing adoption by same-sex couples and no same-sex marriage}}
More than 16,000 same-sex couples are raising an estimated 22,000 adopted children in the United States.<ref>{{cite web|title=LGBT Adoption Statistics|url=http://www.lifelongadoptions.com/lgbt-adoption/lgbt-adoption-statistics|website=lifelongadoptions.com|access-date=13 February 2016}}</ref> Same-sex couples are raising 4% of all adopted children in the United States.<ref>{{cite web|title=Families are created with love.|url=http://gayadoption.org/facts-supporting-gay-adoption|website=gayadoption.org|access-date=13 February 2016}}</ref>
{{legend|#E4D69D|Same-sex marriage but adoption by married same-sex couples not allowed}}

]]
====Surrogacy and IVF treatment====
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}}
{{main article|Assisted reproductive technology}}
A gay or bisexual man has the option of ], the process in which a woman bears a child for another person through ] or carries another woman's surgically implanted ] to birth. A lesbian or bisexual woman has the option of artificial insemination.<ref>The Fertility Sourcebook, Third Edition&nbsp;– Page 245, M. Sara Rosenthal&nbsp;– 2002</ref><ref>An Introduction to Family Social Work&nbsp;– Page 348, Donald Collins, Catheleen Jordan, Heather Coleman&nbsp;– 2009</ref>


===Transgender and intersex people=== ===Transgender and intersex people===
{{synthesis|date=May 2017}} {{synthesis|date=May 2017}}
{{See also|Transgender|Legal aspects of transsexualism|Intersex|Intersex human rights}} {{See also|Transgender rights|Intersex human rights}}
When sex is defined legally, it may be defined by any one of several criteria: the ], the type of ]s, the type of external sexual features, or the person's social identification.{{citation needed|date=May 2017}} Consequently, both ] and ] 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 legal distinctions.{{citation needed|date=May 2017}} This could result in long-term marriages, as well as recent same-sex marriages, being overturned.{{citation needed|date=May 2017}} 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>
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.{{citation needed|date=May 2017}} Estimates run as high as one percent of live ] exhibiting some degree of sexual ambiguity,<ref name="Laurie">{{citation |last=Laurie|first=Timothy|url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-03/laurie-bigotry-or-biology/6514156|title=Bigotry or biology: the hard choice for an opponent of marriage equality|publisher=The Drum|date=3 June 2015}}</ref><ref>(Fausto-Sterling ''et al.'', 2000)</ref> and between 0.1% and 0.2% of live births being ambiguous enough to become the subject of specialist medical attention, including sometimes involuntary surgery 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=8 March 2007}}</ref>


===Divorce===
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>
{{Main|Divorce of same-sex couples}}
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>


===Judicial and legislative===
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 must dissolve his/her 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.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.365gay.com/Newscon06/07/070506austria.htm|title=Austria gets first same-sex marriage|publisher=365gay.com|date=5 July 2006|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20071017161302/http://365gay.com/Newscon06/07/070506austria.htm|archivedate=17 October 2007|accessdate=20 July 2008}}</ref>
{{Main|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 "]" 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>


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>
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></ref>


==Public opinion==
In the United States, transgender and intersex marriages typically run into similar complications.{{citation needed|date=May 2017}} 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|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/19/us/19brfs-USDEFENDSMAR_BRF.html|title=U.S. Defends Marriage Law|work=The New York Times|date=18 September 2009|accessdate=29 September 2009}}</ref> as some of them prohibit legal changes of gender.{{citation needed|date=May 2017}}
{{See also|Public opinion of same-sex marriage in the United States|Public opinion of same-sex marriage in Australia}}
[[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>
{{col-begin}}
{{col-break}}
{{legend|#58006e|5⁄6+}}
{{legend|#b000dc|2⁄3+}}
{{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}}
===Divorce===
{{Main article|Divorce of same-sex couples}}
In the United States of America 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.<ref>{{cite web|author1=Matthew S. Coleman, Esq.|title=Obergefell v. Hodges|url=http://www.einhornharris.com/familylawblog/obergefell-v-hodges|publisher=Einhorn Harris|accessdate=8 November 2015|date=16 September 2015}}</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>
===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 "]" 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>{{cite news|url=https://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2008-12-04-gay-poll_N.htm|title=Poll: Calif. gay marriage ban driven by religion|author=Leff, Lisa|agency=Associated Press|date=4 December 2008|work=USA Today|deadurl=bot: unknown|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20081208080418/http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2008-12-04-gay-poll_N.htm|archivedate=8 December 2008}} archived here.</ref>


;Greater support with youth
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>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7723645.stm|title= Divisions persist over gay marriage ban|author=Mirchandani, Rajesh|publisher=BBC News|date=12 November 2008}}</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">
==Opposition==
{{ #invoke:Chart | bar-chart
{{See also|LGBT rights opposition}}
| 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>
===Religious views===
{{Further information|Religious views on same-sex marriage}}


{{ #invoke:Chart | bar-chart
Religion plays a prominent role in discourse about same-sex marriage,{{citation needed|date=September 2016}} and several religious organizations and churches have expressed a range of official positions. Religious views on same-sex marriage are closely related to religious views on homosexuality.{{citation needed|date=September 2016}} While the majority of world religions stand in opposition, the number of denominations accepting and conducting same-sex marriages has increased in the 2000s and 2010s.{{citation needed|date=September 2016}} Some religious arguments for supporting same-sex marriage are beginning to emerge.<ref>https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3049650</ref>
| height = 300
| 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.)
Among ], the ],<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2010-05-13-pope-abortion-gays_N.htm|website=USA Today|title=Pope: Abortion, Gay Marriage among World's Greatest Threats|date=May 14, 2010}}</ref> ],<ref name="assembly">{{cite web|url=http://assemblyofbishops.org/about/documents/2013-assembly-statement-on-marriage-and-sexuality|title=2013 Assembly Statement on Marriage and Sexuality|work=assemblyofbishops.org|accessdate=24 July 2015}}</ref> and various ] denominations, such as ], take official positions opposing same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite web|work=Annual Council of the General Conference Executive Committee|title=Position Statement on Homosexuality|series=Seventh-day Adventist Church Statements|date=3 October 1999|url=http://adventist.org/beliefs/statements/main-stat46.html|accessdate=6 April 2012}}</ref> The ] are also officially opposed to same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite journal|title=Does God Approve of Same-Sex Marriage?|journal=''Awake!''|date=April 8, 2005|page=27|url=http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102005250}}</ref> Some Protestant groups, like the ], the ], and the ], and some Catholic ones, such as the ] (US Province), support allowing those of the same sex to marry or conduct same-sex marriage ceremonies.<ref>
* {{cite news|title=Sweden Allows Gay Weddings|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8321502.stm|accessdate=February 28, 2015|website=BBC News|date=October 22, 2009}}
* {{cite web|url=http://cphpost.dk/news14/national-news14/you-may-now-kiss-the-groom.html|title=You May Now Kiss the Groom|website=CPH Post Online|date=June 14, 2012|accessdate=July 26, 2015}}
* {{cite web|url=http://www.hrc.org/resources/stances-of-faiths-on-lgbt-issues-alliance-of-baptists|title=Stances of Faiths on LGBT Issues: Alliance of Baptists|website=Human Rights Campaign|accessdate=May 14, 2016}}
* {{cite news|title=United Church Endorses Gay Marriage|url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/united-church-endorses-gay-marriage-1.357106|accessdate=February 28, 2015|website=CBC News Canada|date=14 August 2003}}
* {{cite web|url=http://www.ucc.org/lgbt_issues_marriage-equality_index|title=Marriage Equality|website=United Church of Christ|accessdate=5 July 2017}}
* {{cite web|first=Stoyan|last=Zaimov|url=http://www.christianpost.com/news/church-norway-votes-gay-marriage-christian-denomination-148979|title=Church of Norway Votes in Favor of Gay Marriage|website=The Christian Post|date=2 November 2015}}
* {{cite web|first=Jerry L.|last=Van Marter|url=https://www.pcusa.org/news/2014/6/19/assembly-approves-allowing-pastors-perform-same-ge/|title=Assembly Approves Allowing Pastors to Perform Same-Gender Marriage Where Legal, Sends Proposed Constitutional Amendment Changing Marriage Definition|website=Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)|date=19 June 2014|accessdate=26 July 2015}}
* {{cite web|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/07/01/why-the-episcopal-church-is-still-debating-gay-marriage/|last=Conger|first=George|title=The Episcopal Church Approves Religious Weddings for Gay Couples after Controversial Debate|website=]|date=5 July 2017}}
* {{cite web|url=https://www.premier.org.uk/News/UK/Steve-Chalke-s-Oasis-church-to-offer-gay-marriages|title=Steve Chalke's Oasis Church to Offer Gay Marriages|website=Premier|first=Antony|last=Bushfield|date=5 May 2016}}
* {{it icon}} {{cite web|url=http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2010/08/27/i-valdesi-riconoscono-le-coppie-gay-primo-si-in-italia/53688|title=Coppie gay, storica apertura della Chiesa valdese, ma si aspetta ancora una legge|first=Gaetano|last=Pecoraro|website=Il Fatto Quotidiano|date=27 August 2010}}
* {{Nl icon}} {{cite web|url=http://www.trouw.nl/tr/nl/4324/Nieuws/article/detail/1086030/2010/01/25/Remonstranten-en-Boomsma-krijgen-homo-emancipatieprijs.dhtml|title=Remonstranten en Boomsma krijgen homo-emancipatieprijs|website=]|date=25 January 2010|accessdate=4 April 2016|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160105104850/http://www.trouw.nl/tr/nl/4324/Nieuws/article/detail/1086030/2010/01/25/Remonstranten-en-Boomsma-krijgen-homo-emancipatieprijs.dhtml|archivedate=5 January 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://toccusa.org|title=The Old Catholic Church: Province of the United States}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.netministries.org/see/churches/ch04614|title=The Eucharistic Catholic Church/Eglise Catholique Euch|publisher=Net Ministries Network}}</ref> Some individual churches have committed to marriage equality in opposition to their denominations' stances.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wmcactionnews5.com/story/30959706/first-baptist-church-memphis-approves-gay-marriage-and-ordination|title=First Baptist Church Memphis Approves Gay Marriage and Ordination|first=Amelia|last=Carlson|website=WMC Action News 5|date=14 January 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/2015/11/23/after-pastor-weds-same-sex-couple-baptists-vote-sever-ties-greenville-church/76011420|title=After Same-Sex Wedding, Baptists Sever Ties with Greenville Church|first=Eric|last=Connor|website=Greenville Online|date=24 November 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wndu.com/content/news/Goshen-church-passes-vote-to-allow-same-sex-marriages-380426541.html|title=Goshen Church Passes Vote to Allow Same-Sex Marriages|website=WNDU 16 |first=Fiorela|last=Kola|date=23 May 2016}}</ref> In 2016, a survey found that 64% of white mainline Protestants in the United States favor allowing gays and lesbians to legally wed.<ref>{{cite web|title=Changing Attitudes on Gay Marriage|url=http://www.pewforum.org/2016/05/12/changing-attitudes-on-gay-marriage|website=Pew Research Center|date=12 May 2016|accessdate=18 August 2016}}</ref>


{{Same-sex marriage opinion polls worldwide}}
The vast majority of traditional ] scholars believe Shariah law opposes same-sex marriage and condemns same-sex sex. This is also the dominant view in modern Muslim societies. Some Muslims in the West now argue that homosexuality is allowed by Shariah law.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.patheos.com/Resources/Additional-Resources/Homosexuality-and-Same-Sex-Marriage-in-Islam.html|title=Homosexuality and Same-Sex Marriage in Islam|website=Patheos|first=Jonathan|last=Brown|date=7 July 2009|accessdate=26 July 2015}} {{dead link|date=September 2017}}</ref> Most ] Jewish leaders oppose same-sex marriage, while Conservative, Reform, and Reconstructionist Jewish rabbinical groups affirm its validity.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.jta.org/2012/06/04/life-religion/conservative-rabbinic-group-issues-guidelines-for-same-sex-wedding-rituals|last=Sales|first=Ben|title=Conservative Rabbinic Group Issues Guidelines for Same-Sex Wedding Rituals|website=JTA: Jewish Telegraphic Agency|date=4 June 2012}}</ref> Although ] is considered to be ambivalent on the subject as a whole,<ref>{{cite web|first=Mettanando|last=Bhikkhu|date=July 13, 2005|url=http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=70,1429,0,0,1,0|title=Religion and Same-Sex Marriage|website=The Buddhist Channel}}</ref>{{failed verification|date=September 2016}} particular Buddhists have supported same-sex marriage,<ref name=ausbuddhists>{{cite web|last1=Potts|first1=Andrew M.|title=Buddhists Come Out for Equality|url=http://www.starobserver.com.au/news/buddhists-come-out-for-equality/75906|accessdate=28 February 2015|website=Star Observer|date=19 April 2012}}</ref><ref>Wilson, Jeff. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160910202204/http://www.globalbuddhism.org/13/wilson12.pdf |date=10 September 2016 }}, ''Journal of Global Buddhism'' 13 (2012): 31-59; accessed 14 May 2016.</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://buddhism.about.com/od/Living-A-Buddhist-Life/fl/Same-Sex-Marriage-and-Buddhism.htm|last=O'Brien|first=Barbara|title=Same-Sex Marriage and Buddhism|website=About.com|date=30 June 2015}}</ref> as do a variety of other religious traditions.<ref name=PewR>{{cite web|first1=David|last1= Masci|first2=Michael|last2=Lipka|title=Where Christian Churches, Other Religions Stand on Gay Marriage|url=http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/12/21/where-christian-churches-stand-on-gay-marriage|website=Pew Research Center|date=21 December 2015}}</ref>

===Religious freedom===
One source of controversy is whether same-sex marriage affects ].<ref name=BannedInBoston>{{cite news|url= http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/191kgwgh.asp|title=Banned in Boston|work=]|date=5 May 2006|accessdate=5 November 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/samesexrights/beforethecourt.html |title=The Supreme Court decision |work=CBC News |location=Toronto |accessdate=5 November 2010 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20101014072006/http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/samesexrights/beforethecourt.html |archivedate=14 October 2010 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author1=Wilson, Robin J. |author2=Laycock, Douglas |author3=Picarello, Anthony R. |title=Same-sex marriage and religious liberty: emerging conflicts|publisher=Beckett Fund for Religious Liberty|location=Washington, D.C.|year=2008|isbn=0-7425-6326-X }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|url=http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?aid=1991700|title=The Civil Partnership Act 2004, Same-Sex Marriage and the Church of England|author=Humphreys, J.|journal=Ecclesiastical Law Journal|date=July 2006|issue=8|pages=289–306|doi=10.1017/S0956618X0000644X|volume=8 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2013/02/20/registrars-must-perform-gay-marriage-says-government/ |title=Minister: No conscience clause for registrars opposed to same-sex marriage|date=20 February 2013}}</ref> Some religious organizations may refuse to provide employment, public accommodations, adoption services, and other benefits to same-sex couples.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91486340|title=Gay Rights, Religious Liberties: A Three-Act Story|publisher=NPR|location=Washington DC|accessdate=5 November 2010}}</ref> Some jurisdictions include religion accommodation provisions in marriage equality laws.<ref>{{cite news|first=Peter|last=Steinfels|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/23/us/23beliefs.html|title=Same-Sex Marriage Laws Pose Protection Quandary|work=The New York Times|date=22 May 2009}}</ref>

Following the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of '']'' in June 2015, a ] in Kentucky, ], who objects to same-sex marriage on religious grounds, was named as defendant in six lawsuits after refusing to issue marriage licenses to opposite-sex and same-sex couples. Some prominent Americans, including politician ], expressed support for her.<ref>{{cite news|last=Zezima |first=Katie |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/09/08/ted-cruz-travels-to-kentucky-to-support-kim-davis |title=Ted Cruz travels to Kentucky to support Kim Davis |newspaper=] |date=2015-09-08 |accessdate=2017-07-07}}</ref>


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

;Documentaries and literature
* '']''
* '']''
* '']''
* '']''
* '']''
* '']''
* '']''
* '']''

;History
* ] ("brother-making")
* ]
* ]

{{Portal bar|LGBT|Sexuality}}

{{clear}} {{clear}}


==Notes== ==Notes==
{{Reflist|group=nb}} {{notelist|35em}}


==References== ==References==
{{reflist|colwidth=30em}}

{{Reflist|30em|refs=

<ref name="Finland Dec 2014">{{cite news|url=http://www.helsinkitimes.fi/finland/finland-news/domestic/8709-initiative-for-equal-marriage-act-presented-to-parliament.html|title= Initiative for equal Marriage Act presented to Parliament|publisher=Helsinki Times|date=13 December 2013}}</ref>

<ref name="Finland introdebate 2014">{{cite web|url=http://web.eduskunta.fi/Resource.phx/pubman/templates/1.htx?id=6367|title=Torstain täysitunnossa kansalaisaloite tasa-arvoisesta avioliittolaista|trans_title=Thursday's plenary session debates initiative on marriage equality|publisher=Parliament of Finland|date=20 February 2014|language=Finnish|accessdate=20 February 2014}}</ref>

<ref name="Finland parl procedure">{{cite web|url=http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/ajantasa/2000/20000040|title=Eduskunnan työjärjestys|publisher=Ministry of Justice of Finland|language=Finnish|accessdate=20 February 2014}}</ref>
}}


==Bibliography== ==Bibliography==
{{refbegin}} {{refbegin|30em}}
* {{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 (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 |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=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=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=Brownson|first=James V.|title=Bible, Gender, Sexuality: Reforming the Church’s Debate on Same-Sex Relationships|year=2013|publisher=]|isbn=978-0-8028-6863-3}} * {{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=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=Calò|first=Emanuele|title=Matrimonio à la carte&nbsp;— Matrimoni, convivenze registrate e divorzi dopo l'intervento comunitario|location=Milano|publisher=Giuffrè|year=2009}}
* {{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=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=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 |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=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=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=Dobson|first=James C.|authorlink=James Dobson|year=2004|title=Marriage Under Fire|publisher=Multnomah|location=Sisters, Or.|isbn=1-59052-431-4}}
* {{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|editor1-last=George |editor1-first=Robert P. |editor2-link=Jean Bethke Elshtain |editor2-last=Elshtain |editor2-first=Jean Bethke |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 |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|editor1-link=Robert Goss |editor1-last=Goss |editor1-first=Robert E. |editor2-last=Strongheart |editor2-first=Amy Adams Squire |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=Larocque|first=Sylvain|year=2006|title=Gay Marriage: The Story of a Canadian Social Revolution |publisher=James Lorimer & Company|location=Toronto|isbn=1-55028-927-6}} * {{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|editor1-last=Laycock |editor1-first=Douglas |editor1-link=Douglas Laycock |editor2-last=Picarello |editor2-first=Anthony Jr. |editor3-last=Wilson |editor3-first=Robin Fretwell |year=2008|title=Same-Sex Marriage and Religious Liberty: Emerging Conflicts|publisher=Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.|location=Lanham, MD|isbn=0-7425-6326-X}} * {{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|editor1-last=López |editor1-first=Robert Oscar|editor2-last=Edelman |editor2-first= Rivka|title=Jephthas's Daughters. Innocent casualities in the war for "family equality"|publisher= CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform|year=2015|isbn=978-1-5058-1078-3}} * {{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 |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|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=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=Oliver|first=Marilyn Tower|year=1998|title=Gay and lesbian rights: a struggle|publisher=Enslow Publishers|isbn=978-0-89490-958-0|url=https://books.google.com/?id=XXIFAAAACAAJ}}
* {{cite book|last=Rauch|first=Jonathan|authorlink=Jonathan Rauch|year=2004|title=]|publisher=Henry Holt and Company, LLC|location=New York, NY|isbn=0-8050-7815-0}} * {{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 | last1 = Smart | first1 = Carol | last2 = Heaphy | first2 = Brian | last3 = Einarsdottir | first3 = Anna | title = Same sex marriages: new generations, new relationships. Genders and sexualities in the social sciences. | publisher = Palgrave Macmillan | location = Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire | year = 2013 | isbn = 9780230300231 }} * {{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=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 |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}}
* {{cite book|editor-link=Andrew Sullivan |editor-last=Sullivan |editor-first=Andrew |year=2004|title=Same-Sex Marriage: Pro and Con&nbsp;— A Reader, Revised Updated Edition|publisher=Vintage Books, a division of Random House, Inc.|location=New York, NY|isbn=1-4000-7866-0}} * {{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.|authorlink=Rembert S. Truluck|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=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|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=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}} {{refend}}


==External links== ==External links==
{{sister project links|auto=yes}}

{{Wikimedia}}
* {{DMOZ|Society/Gay,_Lesbian,_and_Bisexual/Law/Marriage_and_Domestic_Partnership}}
<!--======================== {{No more links}} ============================ <!--======================== {{No more links}} ============================
| PLEASE BE CAUTIOUS IN ADDING MORE LINKS TO THIS ARTICLE. Misplaced Pages | | PLEASE BE CAUTIOUS IN ADDING MORE LINKS TO THIS ARTICLE. Misplaced Pages |
Line 937: Line 636:
| and link back to that category using the {{dmoz}} template. | | and link back to that category using the {{dmoz}} template. |
==={{No more links}}=========--> ==={{No more links}}=========-->

* {{NYTtopic|subjects/s/same_sex_marriage|Same-Sex Marriage, Civil Unions, and Domestic Partnerships}}
* {{JURISTtopic|samesex.php}}
*
* , Emily Doskow, NOLO.
*
* A Selective Bibliography of the Legal Literature
{{Status of same-sex unions}} {{Status of same-sex unions}}
{{Marriage amendments}} {{Marriage amendments}}
{{Types of marriages}}
{{LGBT|state=collapsed|rights=expanded}}
{{LGBTQ|state=collapsed|rights=expanded}}

{{Discrimination}}
{{Authority control}} {{Authority control}}


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

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: