| Revision as of 03:53, 14 June 2019 editBobRoberts14 (talk | contribs)562 edits →Same-Sex couples' Children do not "fare better" than Opposite-Sex Ones← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 12:31, 9 January 2025 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,302,438 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Same-sex marriage/Archive 32) (bot |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
|
{{Round in circles|search=no}} |
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|1= |
|
|
|
{{Article history |
|
{{WikiProject Family and relationships|class=B|importance=mid}} |
|
|
|
|action1=AFD |
|
{{WikiProject Human rights|class=B |importance=mid }} |
|
|
|
|action1date=07:37, 30 December 2006 (UTC) |
|
{{WikiProject Law|class=B|importance=Top}} |
|
|
|
|action1link=Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Same-sex marriage |
|
{{WikiProject LGBT studies|class=B}} |
|
|
|
|action1result=speedily kept |
|
{{WikiProject Politics|class=B|importance=mid}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Sexuality|class=B|importance=mid}} |
|
|
|
|action2=FAC |
|
|
|action2date=22:56 24 Jun 2003 |
|
|
|action2link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Same-sex marriage |
|
|
|action2result=promoted |
|
|
|action2oldid=1126501 |
|
|
|
|
|
|action3=FAR |
|
|
|action3date=01:37, 1 Mar 2004 |
|
|
|action3link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article removal candidates/Same-sex marriage |
|
|
|action3result=demoted |
|
|
|action3oldid=2586072 |
|
|
|
|
|
|action4=GAN |
|
|
|action4date=00:49, 21 November 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|action4link=Talk:Same-sex marriage/GA1 |
|
|
|action4result=not listed |
|
|
|action4oldid=397962475 |
|
|
|
|
|
|currentstatus=FFA |
|
|
|topic=Culture and society |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=B|vital=yes|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Family and relationships}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Genealogy|importance=mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Human rights|importance=mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Law|importance=Top}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Sexology and sexuality|importance=mid}} |
|
|
{{Wiki Loves Pride talk|2016}} |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
{{contentious topics/talk notice|gg}} |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
| algo = old(30d) |
|
| algo = old(180d) |
|
| archive = Talk:Same-sex marriage/Archive %(counter)d |
|
| archive = Talk:Same-sex marriage/Archive %(counter)d |
|
| counter = 26 |
|
| counter = 32 |
|
| maxarchivesize = 100K |
|
| maxarchivesize = 100K |
|
| archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}} |
|
| archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}} |
|
| minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
| minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
| minthreadsleft = 2 |
|
| minthreadsleft = 3 |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
{{Annual readership}} |
|
{{Vital article|topic=Life|level=5|class=B}} |
|
|
|
{{Xreadership}} |
|
{{Article history |
|
|
|action1=FAC |
|
|
|action1date=22:56 24 Jun 2003 |
|
|
|action1link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Same-sex marriage |
|
|
|action1result=promoted |
|
|
|action1oldid=1126501 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Nepal (V) == |
|
|action2=FAR |
|
|
|action2date=01:37, 1 Mar 2004 |
|
|
|action2link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article removal candidates/Same-sex marriage |
|
|
|action2result=demoted |
|
|
|action2oldid=2586072 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is a mistake in the article. Same sex marriages are legal in Nepal. People of the same sex can marry because same sex marriages are recognized. Temporaily but they are ] (]) 14:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|action3=GAN |
|
|
|action3date=00:49, 21 November 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|action3link=Talk:Same-sex marriage/GA1 |
|
|
|action3result=not listed |
|
|
|action3oldid=397962475 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Some of the reasoning as to why Nepal should not be classified as having same-sex marriage under common definitions: |
|
|currentstatus=FFA |
|
|
|
:* There's nothing authoritive and official from the Government of Nepal stating clearly that same-sex marriage is legal. There's no guidance or process available for the registration of same-sex marriage either AFAIK. |
|
|topic=Culture and society |
|
|
|
:* The marriage laws are still limited to "bride" and "bridegroom". This can also be seen in the marriage certificate that had been used in the three same-sex weddings. They do not use homosexual or gender-neutral wording. |
|
}} |
|
|
|
:* Two of the same-sex weddings involve transgender couples, whereas one involved a lesbian couple where one is clearly more masculine than the other. There has yet to be a same-sex wedding between to cis-men. |
|
{{Annual readership}} |
|
|
|
:* If it is the case that same-sex marriage is legal, there does not seem to be any evidence of same-sex marriages happening outside those three cases, all three of which faced significant hurdles to get recognised. It appears to be similar to the situation with same-sex foreign spousal visas, where supreme court cases are announced saying that same-sex spousal visas will be issued, but how can there be another supreme court case announcing the same thing if spousal visas were already being issued? i.e. there are not being issued despite an order saying to do so. We are hearing about sporadic cased where people fought to have their same-sex weddings be recognised by some authority, but it does not seem to be systematic. |
|
{{Wiki Loves Pride 2016}} |
|
|
|
:* There does not appear to be any benefits or rights conferred by the registration. It might be less useful than the partnership certificates issued by Japan, or the unregistered cohabitation possible in Indian law. If anything it seems to be akin to registered cohabitation without any benefits or rights. |
|
|
:* There seems to be some legal movement aimed at legalising same-sex marriage, from which we can infer that it isn't really legalised yet. |
|
|
:] (]) 15:53, 9 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::The reports have indicated multiple couples have registered their marriages. That should be enough to classify Nepal as a same-sex marriage country already. |
|
|
::But also, the government issued a circular in April 2024 directing all local registers to allow same-sex marriages: https://pahichan.com/en/?p=13225 |
|
|
::The lack of the entire constellation of rights is different from the marriage issue itself; otherwise, we would have had to not count Portugal when it legalized same-sex marriage because the law at the time still prohibited adoption (it's since changed). |
|
|
::The movement at "legalizing" same-sex marriage would be similar to the movement to codify same-sex marriage, which is still taking place across the United states (three states are voting on it in November). That doesn't make the US a non-same-sex-marriage country. |
|
|
::The fact is, couples are getting married in Nepal. We have evidence of at least three. Nepal should be counted as a same-sex marriage country until such time as the courts/government say otherwise. ] (]) 21:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I completely agree. This article is titled "Same-sex Marriage," not "Marriage Equality." A footnote would suffice one Nepal is listed. ] (]) 21:17, 16 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I would have to disagree. Not being able to adopt — as was the case of Portugal — is one thing, but lacking many basic spousal benefits is completely different. If a country issues marriage certificates to same-sex couples but apparently they come with few rights (possibly less than Japanese partnership certificates provide?) and misgender one of the spouses, I'd say it's not enough. Plus, same-sex couples are entered into a "separate and temporary register" which sounds discriminatory and not very reassuring. The whole thing looks more like a symbolic marriage made official. So I think we should wait for further developments from the supreme court or other government branches or try to get more information directly from the LGBT community in Nepal. --] (]) 01:04, 24 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::In September 2024, Manisha Dhakal, executive director of the ], told ] that '''"the temporary registration falls short of offering full marriage rights, including those related to property, adoption, and tax exemptions. So far, only around five couples have registered, and many couples are hesitant to do so. The LGBTQIA+ community continues to feel cheated of true equality."'''<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://kathmandupost.com/interviews/2024/09/09/there-is-disconnect-between-nepal-s-lgbtqia-rights-image-and-reality|title=There is disconnect between Nepal’s LGBTQIA+ rights image and reality|website=kathmandupost.com|access-date=2024-09-09}}</ref> |
|
|
:::I guess I was right after all. Some wiki users have been lying to us the whole time. The same disinformation techniques have been used about ] from 2017 to 2023. ] (]) 13:32, 11 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Why do you always assume nefarious intentions for what looks to be reading too much into limited sources? Being wrong isn't "lying". ] (]) 01:44, 13 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::'''"Just consulted with activists from the organization Pink Armenia. There are cases of same-sex marriages, but they don't make it to the news."''' - DaddyCell, 10:30, 4 August 2022. |
|
|
:::::So what is this, if not a blatant lie? and this is only one example out of many deliberately misleading claims. ] (]) 05:06, 13 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::I have no idea. Perhaps more than one person misunderstood the vague and partial reporting, and they replied the best they were able. People do often misunderstand things, misinterpret things, misremember things. That's one reason we want sources, so we can check they got their facts right. ] (]) 05:21, 13 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
{{reflist-talk}} |
|
|
|
|
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 29 July 2024 == |
|
|
|
|
|
{{edit semi-protected|Same-sex marriage|answered=yes}} |
|
|
Same-sex marriage is not “known as gay marriage”. gay marriage is the marriage of two people with penises marrying one another. As Lesbians - the L in Lgb - are not gay because by definition Lesbians are Female and gays are male, this statement is incorrect. One could include a qualifier such as “often misogynistically referred to as gay marriage (sic) wherein the term is incorrect when referring to Lesbians in same sex marriages and erases Lesbians.” <ref>Science. Biology. Lesbian History. Women’s History. Patriarchy. Misogyny.</ref> ] (]) 19:39, 29 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:] '''Not done:'''<!-- Template:ESp --> Like many English terms where the masculine term applies to all people, "gay" has also used as the neutral descriptor. ] ] 19:43, 29 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:I would draw your attention to the ] article, where the term gay is used in relation to many things other than gay men specifically. To name a few: gay rights, gay neighborhoods, and gay history. I'd say about 50% of the time on that page, "gay" refers to something other than gay men. Misplaced Pages is descriptive, not prescriptive. The term gay marriage is often used, commonly enough to warrant inclusion in the lead. Changing the lead to call the term misoynistic and incorrect is not adhering to ], as only a small minority of sources would allege that. The emphasis would be ]. ''']]]''' 20:03, 29 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
{{reflist-talk}} |
|
|
|
|
|
== The no of countries that legally allow Same sex marriage needs attention == |
|
|
|
|
|
it is different in different places of the article, Also there are many recent updates that need to be put. for eg) Thailand allows same sex marriage and it is no more "likely" ] (]) 13:31, 30 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Wrong status of Poland on map == |
|
|
|
|
|
Poland has wrong status on the map of constitutional bans. It was ruled by Supreme Administrative Court (Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny) in November 2022, that the Constitution of Poland does not prevent from introducing same-sex marriages. ] (]) 08:25, 24 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Thailand legalisation date == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey, so I have seen two dates about Thailands ssm bill being legalised. One on the 22nd of Jan and one on the 23rd of Jan. I'm rather confused on this. Since it was singed into the Royal Gazette on the 24th, 120 days from then would land on the 22nd, but I've heard "new information" has appeared which claims it is the day later. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is there anything that can clear this confusion up since theres both 22nd and 23rd being used. ] (]) 07:29, 27 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
== Taiwan == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Thailand is not the only country with a confusing legalization date: |
|
Several edits have been made to add Taiwan to the list of countries where same-sex marriage is now legal. Although a bill to legalize SSM was approved on 17 May, media reports say that it won't go into effect until 24 May. Unless this changes, it would be premature to say that it is legal in Taiwan before 24 May 2019. ] (]) 12:29, 17 May 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:'''France''': 18 May 2013 or 19 May 2013? |
|
|
:'''Slovenia''': 8 July 2022 or 9 July 2022? |
|
|
:'''Mexico (nationwide)''': 31 December 2022 (unsouced date) or 17 May 2023? |
|
|
:'''Nepal''': 28 June 2023, 29 November 2023 or 24 April 2024... is it even a "legalization"? (no marriage rights, interim order, "separate and temporary", "bride and groom" etc.) ] (]) 13:58, 27 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::I think if it's only a matter of a day , then we can give both dates with 'or' and leave it to future editors to figure out. Guerrero is the more concerning problem. It was in the news at the time, so I suspect our date is correct, but would be good to find durably archived confirmation. ] (]) 17:11, 4 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Guanajuato marriage equality expired == |
|
== Methods == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apparently, as a new governor took office in Guanajuato, the decree that had legalized same-sex marriage expired, meaning couples will need an amparo to get married, as it was before legalization. Until a new one is issued (if at all), I think Mexico (nationwide) has lost its status as a marriage equality country. |
|
How about we include a table or a map to note the avenues each political entity has taken to legalize same-sex marriage (e.g., court decision, legislation, referendum, initiative, etc?). ] (]) 02:34, 22 May 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
https://www.homosensual.com/lgbt/guanajuato-matrimonio-igualitario-riesgo-libia-garcia-gobernadora-lgbt-decreto-diego-sinhue-vigencia-2024/ ] (]) 09:24, 29 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
== Same-Sex couples' Children do not "fare better" than Opposite-Sex Ones == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I believe that first we need to see more information if same sex couples are being denied. The new governor was the one that issue the decree after being signed by the governor so I honestly think that she is not going to stop ss couples. Its like in Chihuahua when the new governor took office and she didnt stop ss couples from being married. Hopefully we can get clarity soon. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 21:59, 30 September 2024 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
{{ping|Guycn2}} Seen that gay and lesbian couples are discriminated/persecuted, it seems odd that their children grow healthier and happier than the children of other couples. So that implies at least ]. ] (]) 21:35, 13 June 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
:I agree with what he said, since those research articles only have "some" people arguing that same-sex couples have "better off" children. Most researchers do not believe that. You could also find research stating that straight couples have children who "fare better" than those of same-sex parents. ] (]) 21:43, 13 June 2019 (UTC)BobRoberts14 |
|
|
:Freshacconci and Sander000 also agree that this claim is not sourced and should not be included in the article, since they reverted Guycn2's edits. ] (]) 21:46, 13 June 2019 (UTC)BobRoberts14 |
|
|
:If we were to deal with dictatorial countries where gay and lesbian couples are discriminated against and persecuted, this indeed would be odd to assume that their children grow healthier and happier. But in this article we are not dealing with counties like Russia or Iran where homosexuals are persecuted. We are dealing with the western world, where both same-sex marriage and same-sex adoption are permitted by law. Countries where same-sex marriage and same-sex adoption are illegal are not relevant for this article; it is obvious that children to same-sex couples in Russia will not grow healthier and happier. |
|
|
:In my opinion it completely makes sense that children to same-sex couples are ''more likely'' to grow happier. Since same-sex couples experience many difficulties in bringing a child into the world, it is far less likely that they will neglect their children, for example. They are also far less likely abuse or mistreat their child, since adoption agencies check the petitioners' qualification before placing children in their home. Adoption agencies also check the petitioners' financial status before letting them adopt a child, so children to same-sex couples are also less likely to grow without basic living needs. That's why researches that have found that children to same-sex couple are more likely to be healthy and happy are not odd at all. They make perfect sense. |
|
|
:Also, note that these findings are not rare. Many researches throughout the last decade have found similar findings. ] · ] 21:56, 13 June 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
::You're not citing any sources, you're just making unlikely claims. It is far more likely that for children of same-sex parents, they are worse off. They are far more likely to be bullied in school because of the sexual orientation of their parents. I'll add more later but have to go for now. ] (]) 22:04, 13 June 2019 (UTC)BObRoberts14 |
|
|
::That's a ], so the claim is not generalizable. Also, being lawful does not mean that discrimination has stopped. ] (]) 22:06, 13 June 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
:::{{ping|Freshacconci}} and {{ping|Sander000}} both made the same edit as I did, and they agreed that your claim of same-sex couples' children being "better off" is highly contentious and needs proper sourcing. ] (]) 22:29, 13 June 2019 (UTC)BobRoberts14 |
|
|
::::Nobody claims that they are "better off". Most researches have found that children to same-sex couples grow just as well, while a few other researches have found that they are likely to grow even better. Whether it's true or not, that's what researches have found. And whether you agree with the researches' findings or not, the article should still reflect them. Your claims, however, are completely unsourced. "They are far more likely to be bullied in school because of the sexual orientation of their parents" – where did you get this misleading data from? This is your own speculation. This is not based on any research or statistics, as far as I know. ] · ] 22:36, 13 June 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
::::: "Fare better" and "better off" mean the same thing, since you said it is because of their same-sex parents. Now you are going to say that you never made edits saying that they "fare better"? And my "claims" are not in the article, they are just in the talk page, and they don't need to be sourced for anyone who knows LGBTQ parents. I have met multiple, and from my experience, their children are bullied more often than their peers. Your claims are the ones in the article, and they are the ones that need to be sourced. LGBTQ children, even if their parents are very well off, still are disadvantaged because of their parent's sexual orientation. "Some researchers" found that the Holocaust never happened. That doesn't make their "research" true, since the '''majority of researchers did not find that.''' ] (]) 22:41, 13 June 2019 (UTC)BobRoberts14 |
|
|
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/07/07/children-of-same-sex-couples-are-happier-and-healthier-than-peers-research-shows/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.d38aea66c7cb that is the only source cited saying that they "fare better off". The other ones say they are "just as well", which is what should be in the article. The one source cited is of a small sample study of a few hundred people in Australia. That is not statistically significant, or applicable to the entire rest of the world. ] (]) 22:48, 13 June 2019 (UTC)BobRoberts14 |
|
|
::::::You use the false argument that children to LGBT parents are more likely to be bullied at school as a justification for your edit. Therefore, of course this argument must be sourced if you want it to be taken into account. The sentence that you have modified in the article was: ''These claims are refuted by science which shows that homosexuality is a natural and normal variation in human sexuality, that sexual orientation is not a choice, and that the children of same-sex couples fare just as well or even better than the children of opposite-sex couples.'' Unlike what you are trying to suggest, the paragraph does not try to make any research "true". It just reflects the science's stance on this topic. It is up for the reader to decide which research to rely on. But we must reflect the science's stance as is: some claim that children to same-sex couples fare just as well, some claim they fare even better. But instead, just because you do not agree with the science's stance, you decided to distort it to make it conform to your own view on same-sex parents. ] · ] 22:54, 13 June 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::: For starters, it is well known that children are more likely to be bullied if there is something that is disliked by many people about their parents. Second, what you are calling "science" is a single study that does not reflect what the majority have determined. ] (]) 23:02, 13 June 2019 (UTC)BobRoberts14 |
|
|
{{od}}Some findings are not controlled for income, social class, education, etc., so such findings are not representative for the whole LGBT population, compared to the rest of the population (apples and oranges). Otherwise, I did not claim that the finding would be false, I just claimed that it is apparently an ] claim and therefore needs rock-solid evidence. ] (]) 22:58, 13 June 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
:As he said, making such an unlikely claim requires far more evidence than a few sources. It makes it seem like children should want to have LGBTQ parents because they are more likely to have a better future, which it contentious to say the least. You can cite all the sources you want, but '''you have to prove that the majority of research supports your claim'''. ] (]) 23:05, 13 June 2019 (UTC)BobRoberts14 |
|
|
::There is the ] proviso. But that was his/her argument: LGBT parents were cherrypicked, the rest weren't. ] (]) 23:09, 13 June 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
{{u|MrX}} This is currently being discussed, don't revert it back to Guycn2's edit yet until it is resolved. ] (]) 00:18, 14 June 2019 (UTC)BobRoberts14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Mexico has never been a marriage-equality state. ] (]) 11:20, 1 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
I know children being raised by a same-sex married couple at my church. They were married in a church and they are raising the kids great and are growing up with values. I had the honor to be at the service where one of the sons *chose* to be baptized and told the church he wanted to be baptized because he loves Jesus. Children being raised by same-sex couples are being raised with values just like other children. Marriage only strengthens relationships and children of same-sex couples do better when their parents are able to get married. |
|
|
|
::Not true, see ]. ] (]) 14:40, 1 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
In terms of the text written under discussion, it is deeply and extremely well-sourced. It is from scholarly sources that are trustworthy. Beyond anecdote and study, furthermore, it is simply common sense. Some parents are amazing parents and some may need to be better parents. This has nothing to do with sexual orientation. It makes perfect sense to keep the "as well as or better" text. If someone told you that you were incapable of being a parent, wouldn't you want to know that you can raise a child as well as or better? I know when I learned this it helped me continue to aspire to my deep commitment to family values as an LGBTQ person. -] (]) 03:04, 14 June 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:::Yes, that proves my point. ] (]) 04:53, 2 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
:You don't make much sense. You are saying that same-sex couples' children are better off, but in the same paragraph said that "Children being raised by same-sex couples are being raised with values just like other children," the key words being '''just like other children'''. You also said that "This has nothing to do with sexual orientation." Have you been paying literally any attention to this at all? This is only about sexual orientation. Your statements aren't backed up by sources, you just say " it is deeply and extremely well-sourced. It is from scholarly sources that are trustworthy. Beyond anecdote and study, furthermore, it is simply common sense," but then provide no evidence to back up your claim. Again, the whole reason for this argument is that the claim "same-sex couples' children fare better than opposite-sex ones", which is not well enough sourced and does not make any logical sense. Your personal opinions on the matter are irrelevant, all that matters is actually sourced information. '''There are far more sources stating that same-sex couples have children who do not "fare better" than opposite-sex children than there are sources stating that they do "fare better".''' I can cite numerous ones, and they outnumber the ones that support your argument. |
|
|
|
::By all respects Mexico is a marriage equality state, all states so far are issuing same sex marriage licenses, just because joint adoption for example it's not given in all states doesn't mean we cannot count it, by that reason Ecuador shouldnt be include either. ] (]) 05:20, 2 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Correct. Ecuador and Israel don't have marriage equality either. That's not the same thing as not having same-sex marriage, which all three have: Israel's just a more extreme version of some Mexican states. Taiwan just nixed the last major inequality, of cross-strait marriages. Of course, many states have minor legal inequalities that are going to take years to iron out (there was just a lawsuit in the US to overrule one such), so it's a matter of how equal is 'equal'. ] (]) 05:27, 2 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::I see your point. But I think we can all agree that, should it be confirmed that Guanajuato is requiring couples to go before a court in order to get married, then we would need to remove Mexico (as a whole) from the list of countries that perform same-sex marriages, as this would bring it back to where it was in 2022. ] (]) 14:34, 4 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Agreed. ] (]) 16:41, 4 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:We don't have anything about Chihuahua continuing under our Chihuahua article. That's worth at least a mention. ] (]) 17:00, 4 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 30 December 2024 == |
|
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/oct/23/children-raised-by-same-sex-parents-do-as-well-as-their-peers-study-shows, https://www.mother.ly/news/lesbian-parents-impact-kids-mental-health, |
|
|
https://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/yet-another-study-finds-children-samesex-parents-fare-just-well-others/, and many others, all say that same-sex couples' children do "just as well", not "better". Most of the articles that show up prove you wrong. Only a select number, which are in the minority, say that same-sex couples' children "fare better". ] 03:53, 14 June 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{edit semi-protected|Same-sex marriage|answered=yes}} |
|
== Removal of long standing content == |
|
|
|
Dead link: https://www.gaystarnews.com/article/sweden-ends-forced-sterilization-trans110113/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Live: https://news.lgbti.org/sweden-ends-forced-sterilization-of-trans/ ] (]) 00:13, 30 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
I object to the of {{tq|"These claims are refuted by science, which shows that homosexuality is natural and normal,..."}} The claims being refuted are: |
|
|
|
:Fixed with change to url-status parameter, to default to archive link. ] (]) 01:14, 30 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
#homosexuality is unnatural and abnormal |
|
|
#the recognition of same-sex unions will promote homosexuality in society |
|
|
Both of these claims are pseudoscientific nonsense promoted by the religious far-right. The removed material must be restored until there is consensus to remove it.- ]] 🖋 00:38, 14 June 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
:The claims just don't make sense at all, I agree. I was saying that the "homosexuality is normal" part doesn't make much sense, since only 5% of the US is homosexual. I agree that the other claims are false though. ] (]) 00:42, 14 June 2019 (UTC)BobRoberts14 |
|
|
:@MrX I think your newest edit works and makes sense. I just think we should discuse the word "normal" that is used to describe LGBTQ+ people. I don't think that is a word that can be used to describe them, since they only comprise 5% of the population, and many people (I think they are just as good as other people) think they are weird (again, I think they are fine). ] (]) 00:51, 14 June 2019 (UTC)BobRoberts14 |
|
|
::"Homosexuality is normal" means it is clinically normal, i.e. according to psychologists and MDs. ] (]) 00:57, 14 June 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Ahh okay, thanks for telling me. I just wanted to know further because it confused me and wasn't sourced. ] (]) 01:02, 14 June 2019 (UTC)BobRoberts14 |
|
|
::This is why we use sources, and not what editors believe or conclude. 5% of people have hazel eyes. No reasonable person would dispute that having hazel eyes is normal. At one time in this article's history there were more than 20 sources supporting the scientific consensus that homosexuality is a normal variation.- ]] 🖋 01:02, 14 June 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I mean I would say that people who have hazel eyes are not normal, because that is much less than average... ] 01:05, 14 June 2019 (UTC)BobRoberts14 |
|
|
:::Abnormal doesn't mean bad, but to me it means differentiating from most people (below the 20th percentile or something). ] 01:10, 14 June 2019 (UTC)BobRoberts14 |
|
There is a mistake in the article. Same sex marriages are legal in Nepal. People of the same sex can marry because same sex marriages are recognized. Temporaily but they are Zetarti01 (talk) 14:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Same-sex marriage is not “known as gay marriage”. gay marriage is the marriage of two people with penises marrying one another. As Lesbians - the L in Lgb - are not gay because by definition Lesbians are Female and gays are male, this statement is incorrect. One could include a qualifier such as “often misogynistically referred to as gay marriage (sic) wherein the term is incorrect when referring to Lesbians in same sex marriages and erases Lesbians.” 71.64.138.41 (talk) 19:39, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
it is different in different places of the article, Also there are many recent updates that need to be put. for eg) Thailand allows same sex marriage and it is no more "likely" 223.178.211.171 (talk) 13:31, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Poland has wrong status on the map of constitutional bans. It was ruled by Supreme Administrative Court (Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny) in November 2022, that the Constitution of Poland does not prevent from introducing same-sex marriages. Bartek1234678 (talk) 08:25, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
Hey, so I have seen two dates about Thailands ssm bill being legalised. One on the 22nd of Jan and one on the 23rd of Jan. I'm rather confused on this. Since it was singed into the Royal Gazette on the 24th, 120 days from then would land on the 22nd, but I've heard "new information" has appeared which claims it is the day later.
Apparently, as a new governor took office in Guanajuato, the decree that had legalized same-sex marriage expired, meaning couples will need an amparo to get married, as it was before legalization. Until a new one is issued (if at all), I think Mexico (nationwide) has lost its status as a marriage equality country.
I believe that first we need to see more information if same sex couples are being denied. The new governor was the one that issue the decree after being signed by the governor so I honestly think that she is not going to stop ss couples. Its like in Chihuahua when the new governor took office and she didnt stop ss couples from being married. Hopefully we can get clarity soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allancalderini12 (talk • contribs) 21:59, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
.svg){kind=small}
Not done: Like many English terms where the masculine term applies to all people, "gay" has also used as the neutral descriptor. EvergreenFir (talk) 19:43, 29 July 2024 (UTC)