Gay Marriage

Same-sex marriage
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Legal recognition of same-sex couples
Same-sex marriage
Argentina Belgium Canada Iceland Netherlands Norway Portugal South Africa Spain Sweden

Performed in some jurisdictions

Mexico: DF United States: CT, DC, IA, MA, NH, VT,Coquille Recognized, not performed

Aruba (Dutch only) Israel Netherlands Antilles (Dutch only) United States: CA (conditional), MD,NY, RI

Civil unions and registered partnerships
Andorra Austria Colombia Czech Republic Denmark Ecuador Hungary Ireland Luxembourg New Caledonia New Zealand Slovenia

Finland France Germany Greenland

Switzerland Wallis and Futuna United Kingdom Uruguay

Performed in some jurisdictions

Australia: ACT, NSW, TAS, VIC Mexico: COA United States: CA, CO, HI, ME, NJ,NV, OR, WA, WI Venezuela: ME Recognized, not performed Isle of Man (UK only)

Unregistered co-habitation
Australia Brazil Croatia Israel In some regions

United States: MD, RI

Jurisdictions with current or recent debates on SSUs
Albania Belarus Bolivia Bulgaria Burundi Cambodia Chile China (PRC) ROC (Taiwan) Congo (DRC) Costa Rica Liechtenstein Lithuania Malta Moldova Montenegro Nepal Nigeria Panama Paraguay Peru Poland

Cuba Cyprus Dominican Republic El Salvador Estonia Greece Honduras Italy Jamaica Jersey Latvia United

Romania Russia Rwanda Serbia Slovakia Uganda Ukraine Venezuela Vietnam Zambia

States: AL, AS, AZ, DE, FL, GU,IL, IN, LA, MI, MN, MT, NM, NC, OH,PA, PR, SC, UT, WV, WY, Native Americans

See also

Same-sex marriage Same-sex marriage legislation Timeline of same-sex marriage Recognition of same-sex unions in Europe Civil union Domestic partnership Listings by country

LGBT portal
v‡d‡e

Same-sex marriage (also called gay marriage)[1] is a legally or socially recognized marriage between two persons of the same sex. Same-sex marriage is a civil rights, political, social, moral, and religious issue in many nations. The conflict arises over whether same-sex couples should be allowed to enter into marriage, be required to use a different status (such as a civil union, which either grant equal rights as marriage, or limited rights in comparison to marriage), or not have any such rights. A related issue is whether the term "marriage" should be applied.[2][3]

Financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and children of same-sex couples benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally-recognized union supported by society¶s institutions.[4][5][6] Support for same-sex marriage is often based upon what is regarded as a universal human rights issue, mental and physical health concerns,equality before the law,[7] and the goal of normalizing LGBT relationships.[8][9][10] Opposition to same-sex marriage arises from a rejection of the use of the word "marriage" as applied to same-sex couples or objections about the legal and social status of marriage itself being applied under any terminology. Other stated reasons include direct and indirect social consequences of same-sex marriages, parenting concerns, religious grounds,[11] and tradition. Supporters of same-sex marriage often attribute opposition to it as coming from homophobia[12][13][14][15] orheterosexism and liken prohibitions on same-sex marriage to past prohibitions on interracial marriage.[16]
Contents
[hide]

1 Etymology and terminological usage

o

1.1 Use in print and online media

2 History

o o

2.1 Ancient 2.2 Modern

3 Current status

o o

3.1 Country-wide recognition 3.2 Subject debated

       o

3.2.1 Nepal 3.2.2 Europe 3.2.3 Latin America 3.2.4 Oceania 3.2.5 Israel 3.2.6 Africa 3.2.7 United States

3.3 International organizations

4 Other legally recognized same-sex unions

o o

4.1 Australia 4.2 Europe

5 Transgender and intersex persons 6 Controversy

o o o

6.1 Judicial and legislative 6.2 Religion 6.3 Children and the family

7 Parenting

o

7.1 Education controversy

8 Effects of same-sex marriage

o

8.1 Health issues

9 Marriage privatization 10 See also

o

10.1 Documentaries and literature

11 Footnotes 12 Bibliography 13 External links

[edit]Etymology

and terminological usage

The word "marriage" comes from Old French mariage, from marier (³µto marry¶´), from Latin maritare (³µto marry", literally ³give in marriage¶´), frommaritus (³µlover", "nuptial¶´), from mas (³µmale", "masculine", "of the male sex¶´).[17] Anthropologists have struggled to come up with a definition of marriage that absorbs commonalities of the social construct across cultures.[18][19]Edvard Westermarck defined marriage in the 1922 edition of The History of Human Marriage as "a relation of one or more men to one or more women which is recognized as custom or law and involves certain rights and duties" to the individuals who enter into it, and any children born from it.[20] Such definitions failed to recognize same-sex marriages that have been documented around the world, including in more than 30 African cultures, such as the Kikuyu and Nuer.[19][21][22] In lexicography, words have changed and expanded in accordance to the status quo. In the last 10 years, in the English-speaking world, all major dictionaries have either dropped gender specifications, or supplemented them with secondary definitions to include gender-neutral language or same-sex unions.[23][24] The Oxford English Dictionary has recognized same-sex marriage since 2000.[25] Many proponents of same-sex marriages use the term marriage equality[26][27] to stress that they seek equality as opposed to special rights. Opponents argue that equating same-sex and opposite-sex marriages changes

the meaning of marriage and its traditions,[28] and use the termtraditional marriage to mean marriages between one man and one woman.[29] Alan Dershowitz and others have suggested reserving the word "marriage" for religious contexts as part of privatizing marriage, and in civil and legal contexts using a uniform concept of civil unions, in part to strengthen the separation between church and state.[30] Jennifer Roback Morse, the president of the anti-samesex marriage group National Organization for Marriage's Ruth Institute project,[31] claims that the conflation of marriage with contractual agreements is itself a threat to marriage.[32]

[edit]Use

in print and online media

Some publications that oppose same-sex marriages adopt an editorial style policy of placing the word marriage in quotation marks ("marriage") when it is used in reference to same-sex couples. In the United States, the mainstream press has generally abandoned this practice.[33] Some socially conservative online publications, such as WorldNetDaily and Baptist Press, still follow the practice. Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Mediaargues for use of quotation marks on the grounds that marriage is a legal status denied same-sex couples by most state governments.[34] Same-sex marriage supporters argue that the use of scare quotes is an editorialization that implies illegitimacy.[35] Associated Press style 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 marriage licenses offered to gay and lesbian couples are somehow legally different.

[edit]History
Main articles: History of same-sex unions and Timeline of same-sex marriage

[edit]Ancient
Various types of same-sex marriages have existed,[36] ranging from informal, unsanctioned relationships to highly ritualized unions.[37] In the southern Chinese province of Fujian, through the Ming dynasty period, females would bind themselves in contracts to younger females in elaborate ceremonies.[citation needed]Males also entered similar arrangements. This type of arrangement was also similar in ancient European history.[38] An example of egalitarian male domestic partnership from the early Zhou Dynasty period of China is recorded in the story of Pan Zhang & Wang Zhongxian. While the relationship was clearly approved by the wider community, and was compared to heterosexual marriage, it did not involve a religious ceremony binding the couple.[39]

The first historical mention of the performance of same-sex marriages occurred during the early Roman Empire.[40] For instance, Emperor Nero is said to have married one of his males slaves. Emperor Elagabalus married a Carian slave named Hierocles.[41] While there is a consensus among modern historians that same-sex relationships existed in ancient Rome, the exact frequency and nature of same-sex unions during that period has been obscured.[42] In 342 AD Christian emperors Constantius II and Constans issued a law in the Theodosian Code(C. Th. 9.7.3) prohibiting same-sex marriage in Rome and ordering execution for those so married.[43]

[edit]Modern
In October 1989, Denmark became the first country to recognize same-sex unions in the form of "registered partnerships". In 2001, the Netherlands became the first nation to grant same-sex marriages.[44] Same-sex marriages are granted and mutually recognized by Belgium (2003),[45] Spain (2005), Canada (2005), South Africa (2006), Norway (2009), Sweden(2009), Portugal (2010)[46], Iceland (2010) and Argentina (2010). In Nepal, their recognition has been judicially mandated but not yet legislated.[47] 250 million people (or 4% of the world population) currently live in areas that recognise same sex marriage.[48]

[edit]Current

status

Main articles: Status of same-sex marriage and Same-sex marriage legislation around the world

Same-sex sexual activity legal
unregistered cohabitation) sex couples

Same-sex marriage Other type of partnership (or Same-sex sexual activity illegal Minimal Foreign same-sex marriages recognized No recognition of same- penalty Large penalty Life in prison Death penalty

v‡d‡e

[edit]Country-wide

recognition

Same-sex marriage currently is legal in Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Canada, South Africa, Norway, Sweden,Portugal, Iceland and Argentina.

[edit]Subject [edit]Nepal

debated

In November 2008, Nepal's highest court issued final judgment on matters related to LGBT rights. Based on the court recommendation the government announced its intention to introduce a same-sex marriage bill by 2010.[49][50][51][52][53] Same-sex marriage and protection for sexual minorities will be included in the new Nepalese constitution currently being drafted.[54][55]

[edit]Europe
Main article: Recognition of same-sex unions in Europe The granting and honoring of same-sex marriages is also currently being considered by several countries inEurope. In early July 2009, the Slovenian minister of interior announced that it is likely that Slovenia will legalize samesex marriage in the near future, following government agreement that same-sex couples deserve to be entitled to all of the same benefits of opposite-sex couples.[56] In December 2009, the government approved a bill allowing same-sex marriage and adoption and sent it to parliament.[57] The new government of Luxembourg has also announced its intention to legalize same-sex marriage.[58] In Francein 2006, a 30member non-quorum parliamentary commission of the French National Assembly published a 453-page Report on the Family and the Rights of Children, which rejected same-sex marriages.[59]

[edit]Latin America
Some Latin American nations have taken up such proposals, Justice Minister of Argentina worked to submit a gender neutral law draft before the Congress.[60]. On July 14, 2010 the Argentine Senate prepared to vote on a bill granting the broadest marital protections to gay people in Latin America. It was supported by the Government of President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner and opposed by the hierarchy of the Catholic Church. Polls showed that nearly 70 percent of Argentines support giving gay people the same marital rights as heterosexuals.[61] Same-sex marriage became a nationwide law after the Senate approved it on July 15, 2010.[62] On 21 December 2009, Mexico City's Legislative Assembly legalized same-sex marriages and adoption by same-sex couples. The law was enacted eight days later and became effective in early March 2010.[63] Since then, same-sex marriage bills have been proposed in other Mexican states such as Morelos,[64] Puebla,[65] and Sonora.[66] Michoacán,[67]Tabasco,[68] and Tamaulipas[69] are expected to follow later in 2010.

[edit]Oceania

Australia bans recognition of same-sex marriages at the federal level, but the current Labor Party government favors synchronized state and territory registered partnership legislation (as in Tasmania and Victoria). The Australian Capital Territory offers civil partnerships. New Zealand's Parliament rejected a bill that would have prohibited the recognition of same-sex marriage in New Zealand in December 2005. However, New Zealand's Marriage Act 1955 still only recognizes marriage rights for opposite-sex couples. The marriage laws considertranssexuals who have undergone reassignment surgery as having changed sex for legal purposes, following Family Court and High Court of New Zealand decisions in 1995.

[edit]Israel
Israel's High Court of Justice ruled to honor same-sex marriages granted in other countries even though Israel itself does not issue such licenses. A bill was raised in the Knesset(parliament) to rescind the High Court's ruling, but the Knesset has not advanced the bill since December 2006.

[edit]Africa
Same-sex marriage became legal in South Africa on 30 November 2006 when the Civil Unions Bill was enacted after having been passed by the South African Parliament earlier that month. A ruling by the Constitutional Court on 1 December 2005 had imposed a deadline of 1 December 2006 to make same-sex marriage legal. South Africa became the fifth country, the first in Africa, and the second outside Europe, to legalize same-sex marriage. In 2006, Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo introduced legislation that prohibits same-sex marriages and criminalizes anyone who "performs, witnesses, aids or abets" such ceremonies.[70] Among the Igbo people of Nigeria, there are circumstances where a marriage between two women is allowed, such as when a woman has no child and the husband dies.[71]

[edit]United States
Main article: Same-sex marriage in the United States In the United States, although same-sex marriages are not recognized federally, same-sex couples can currently marry in five states (New Hampshire, Iowa, Massachusetts, Vermontand Connecticut) and the District of Columbia and receive state level benefits.[72] Additionally, several states offer civil unions or domestic partnerships, granting all or part of the state-level rights and responsibilities of marriage.[73][74] Thirty-one states have put same-sex marriage on the ballot, but none have passed.[75] In 1996, the United States Congress passed theDefense of Marriage Act (DOMA) defining marriage solely as a union between a couple of the opposite sex for all federal purposes and allowing for the non-recognition amongst the states.[76] President Barack Obama is opposed to same-sex marriage,[77] while he "supports full civil unions and federal rights for LGBT couples",[78] a full repeal of DOMA,[79] and calledCalifornia's Proposition 8 "unnecessary".[80] The validity of Proposition 8 under the United States Constitution is currently being

challenged in a federal court case, Perry v. Schwarzenegger, which could potentially have an effect on all same-sex marriage bans nationwide.[81]

[edit]International

organizations

The terms of employment of the staff of international organizations (not commercial) in most cases are not governed by the laws of the country in which their offices are located. Agreements with the host country safeguard these organizations' impartiality. Despite their relative independence, few organizations currently 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.[82] In some cases, these organizations do offer a limited selection of the benefits normally provided to opposite-sex married couples to de facto partners or domestic partners of their staff, but even individuals who have entered into an opposite-sex civil union in their home country are not guaranteed full recognition of this union in all organizations. However, the World Bank does recognize domestic partners.[83]

[edit]Other

legally recognized same-sex unions

Main article: Civil union Civil unions, civil partnerships, domestic partnerships, registered partnerships, or unregistered partnership/unregistered co-habitation legal status offer varying portions of the legal benefits of marriage and are available to same-sex couples in: Andorra, Australia, Colombia, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Israel,Luxembourg, New Zealand, Slovenia, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and Uruguay. They are also available in parts of Mexico (Coahuila and the Federal District) and the United States(California, Hawai'i, Maine, New Jersey, New York, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Washington and the federal District of Columbia)[84]

Many advocates, such as this protester at a demonstration in New York City againstCalifornia Proposition 8, reject the notion ofcivil unions.[85] U.S. Same-sex marriage movement activist Evan Wolfson does not feel civil unions are a replacement for full marriage equality.[86]

In some countries with legal recognition the actual benefits are minimal. Many people consider civil unions, even those that grant equal rights, inadequate, as they create a separate status, and think they should be replaced by gender-neutral marriage.[87]

[edit]Australia
In Australia, Commonwealth law prohibits the recognition of same-sex marriage under the Marriage Act 1961. However, every Australian government jurisdiction provides to de facto same-sex couples a wide range of rights equal to those afforded to de facto opposite-sex couples. These rights are gained without registration, under a status called "unregistered cohabitation". Furthermore, formal domestic partnership registries exist in New South Wales, Tasmania, Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory. Since 1 July 2009, same-sex couples are recognised as de facto partners in a wide range of legislation in every Australian government jurisdiction, including superannuation, social security, health care and taxation.[88] In 2007, Grace Abrams and Fiona Power became Australia's first legally recognized same-sex married couple after Grace Abrams had gender-modification surgery and was later officially granted a passport with female status.[89]

[edit]Europe

Laws regarding same-sex partnerships in Europe
cohabitation Issue under political consideration

Same-sex marriage

Other type of partnership

Unregistered

Unrecognized

Constitution limits marriage to man±woman

v‡d‡e

In Denmark, Finland and Hungary, a registered partnership provides nearly all of the rights of marriage, including joint adoption rights in Denmark. Finland and Greenland have biological adoption only (no joint adoption). These partnership laws are short laws that state that wherever the word "marriage" appears in the country's law, it will now also be construed to mean "registered partnership", and wherever the word "spouse" appears, it will now also be construed to mean "registered partner" ² thereby transferring the body of marriage laws onto same-sex couples in registered partnerships. In the United Kingdom, civil partnerships were introduced in 2005. The law gives civil partners the same benefits and associated legal rights of marriage; ranging from tax exemptions and joint property rights, to nextof-kin status and shared parenting responsibilities. The one notable exception is the use ofcourtesy titles by the partner of a male peer or knight. In the first year, 16,100 ceremonies took place.[90] Civil unions in New Zealand are identical to British civil partnerships in their association with equivalent spousal rights and responsibilities to marriage.

[edit]Transgender

and intersex persons
This section needs additional citations for verification.
Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.(December 2008)

See also: Transsexualism, Legal aspects of transsexualism, and Gender identity When sex is defined legally, it may be defined by any one of several criteria: the XY sex-determination system, the type of gonads, or the type of external sexual features. Consequently, both transsexuals and intersexed 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. This could result in long-term marriages, as well as recent same-sex marriages, being overturned. The problems of defining gender by the existence/non-existence of gonads or certain sexual features is complicated by the existence of surgical methods to alter these features. Estimates[91] run as high as 1 percent of live births exhibiting some degree of sexual ambiguity, 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.[92] 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 transsexual to be legally married in accordance with an adopted gender identity.[93] 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 UK marriages are for mixed-sex couples and civil partnerships are for same-sex couples, a person must dissolve his/her marriage or civil partnership before obtaining a gender recognition certificate. Such persons are then free to enter or re-enter civil partnerships or marriages in accordance with their newly recognized gender identity. In the United States, transsexual and intersexual marriages typically run into the complications detailed above. As definitions and enforcement of marriage are defined by the states, these complications vary from state to state.[94]

[edit]Controversy This section may stray from the topic of the article. Please help improve this section or discuss this issue on the talk page. (April 2010)
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, to sympathetic toleration, to indifference, to prohibition. Opponents of same-sex marriages have argued that recognition of same-sex marriages would erode religious freedoms,[95]and 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 biologicalmother and father.[96] Some supporters of same-sex marriages take the view that the government should have no role in regulating personal relationships,[97] while others argue that same-sex marriages would provide social benefits to samesex couples.[98] A 2004 Statement by the American Anthropological Association states that there is no evidence

that society needs to maintain "marriage as an exclusively heterosexual institution", and, further, that same-sex unions can "contribute to stable and humane societies."[99] The American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, and National Association of Social Workers state: "There is no scientific basis for distinguishing between same-sex couples and heterosexual couples with respect to the legal rights, obligations, benefits, and burdens conferred by civil marriage.... Empirical research has consistently shown that lesbian and gay parents do not differ from heterosexuals in their parenting skills, and their children do not show any deficits compared to children raised by heterosexual parents.... [I]f their parents are allowed to marry, the children of same-sex couples will benefit not only from the legal stability and other familial benefits that marriage provides, but also from elimination of state-sponsored stigmatization of their families."[5] 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.

[edit]Judicial

and legislative

Main article: Marriage (conflict)#Same-sex marriage A "majority rules" position regards same-sex marriage as void and illegal unless it has been accepted by a simple majority of voters or of their elected representatives.[100] In contrast, a civil-rights view holds that, after carefully studying both sides of the controversy, an impartial judiciary, in upholding its constitutional duties, should decide whether the right to marry regardless of the gender of the participants is constitutionally guaranteed.[101] In general, the legal effect marriage has on same-sex couples when marriage licenses are issued to them and honored by the states in which they live is indistinguishable from any other legal effect marriage has on any other couple under state law. The United States has developed extensive case law and legislation addressing the nuance of American legal conceptions of equality before the law.

[edit]Religion
Main article: Religious arguments about same-sex marriage Arguments on both sides of the same-sex marriage debate are often made on religious grounds and/or formulated in terms of religious doctrine. One source of controversy is how same-sex marriage affects freedom of religion.[95][102][103][104][105][106][107] Many religious organizations (citing their religious beliefs) refuse to provide employment, public accommodations, adoption services and other benefits to same-sex couples.[108][109] Some areas have made special provisions for religious protections.[110] Many Christian groups have been vocal and politically active in opposing same-sex marriage laws in the United States. Christians opposed to same-sex marriage have claimed that extending marriage rights to same-sex couples could undercut the conventional purpose of marriage, or would be contrary to God's

will.[111][112][113][114][115][116] Christian opposition to same-sex marriage also comes from the belief that same-sex marriage normalizes homosexual behavior and would encourage it, instead of encouraging resistance to samesex attraction.[113] Christian supporters of same-sex marriage have claimed that marriage rights for same-sex couples strengthens the institution of marriage and provides legal protection for children of gay and lesbian parents. Bible-based arguments for same-sex marriage rights include that the word "homosexual", as found in modern versions of the Bible, is an inaccurate translation of the original texts.[117][118] Neither Vine's Expository Dictionary nor Strong's Concordance (two significant bible reference works) contains the word "homosexual". There also is no direct biblical prohibition of marriage rights for same-sex couples. Certain biblical texts used by non-affirming Christian organizations to condemn homosexuality, and by extension same-sex marriage, may refer only to specific sex acts and idolatrous worship lacking any relevance to contemporary same-sex relationships.[119] Supporting marriage rights for gays and lesbians is viewed by affirming Christians as a Christlike commitment to the equality and dignity of all persons.[120][121][122] The United Church of Canada asserts that "human sexual orientations, whether heterosexual, bisexual or homosexual, are a gift from God"[123], whilst the Yearly Meeting of Quakers in the United Kingdom decided to offer same-sex marriages, though national law permits only Civil Partnerships. On July 4, 2005 the United Church of Christ (UCC), at their 25th General Synod, voted to support full legal and religious marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples making it the first mainline Christian denomination in the United States to support and promote same sex marriage equality. The UCC is a liberal Christian denomination with a long history of supporting gay rights, women's rights, African-American civil rights and other issues of social justice. Unitarian Universalism, a liberal faith tradition, supports marriage equality for same-sex couples. It has taken an active role advocating for LGBT rights and same-sex marriages are often performed in UU congregations. Judaism, like Christianity, contains varying views on the issue of marriage rights, both politically and religiously, for same-sex couples. Many Orthodox Jews maintain the traditional Jewish bans on both sexual acts and marriages amongst members of the same sex,[124] but other orthodox rabbis, such as Steven Greenberg, disagree. Some Conservative Jews reject recognition of same-sex unions as marriages, but permit celebration of commitment ceremonies, while others recognize same-sex marriage.[125] The Union for Reform Judaism (formerly known as the Union of American Hebrew Congregations) supports the inclusion of same-sex unions within the definition of marriage.[126] The Jewish Reconstructionist Federation leaves the choice to individual rabbis.[127] From the Islamic perspective, a majority of Muslim legal scholars cite the rulings of Muhammad and the story of Lot in Sodom as condemnation of homosexuality. Given that Islam views marriage as an exchange between

two parties of protection and security for exclusive sexual and reproductive rights, same-sex marriages cannot be considered legal within the constrains of a Muslim marriage. [128] Buddhist scripture and teachings do not take a consistent stance against homosexuality, and do not specifically proscribe nor endorse same-sex marriage; thus, there is no unified stance for or against the practice.[129] Wiccan communities are often supportive of same-sex marriages.[citation needed]

[edit]Children

and the family

Main article: Same-sex marriage and the family

[edit]Parenting
See also: LGBT parenting LGBT parenting is when lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people are parents to one or more children, either as biological or non-biological parents. Gay men face options which include: "foster care, variations of domestic and international adoption, diverse forms of surrogacy (whether "traditional" or gestational), and kinship arrangements, wherein they might coparent with a woman or women with whom they are intimately but not sexually involved."[130][131][132][133][134] LGBT parents can also include single people who are parenting; to a lesser extent, the term sometimes refers to families with LGBT children. In the 2000 U.S. Census, 33 percent of female same-sex couple households and 22 percent of male same-sex couple households reported at least one child under eighteen living in their home.[135] Some children do not know they have an LGB parent; coming out issues vary and some parents may never come out to their children.[136][137] LGBT parenting in general, andadoption by LGBT couples may be controversial in some countries. In January 2008, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that same-sex couples have the right to adopt a child.[138][139] In the U.S., LGB people can legally adopt in all states except for Florida.[140] There is a consensus among credible scientific researchers which confirms the abilities of gay and lesbian persons as parents, and finds positive outcomes for their children. Statements by the leading associations of experts in this area reflect professional consensus that children raised by lesbian or gay parents do not differ in any important respects from those raised by heterosexual parents. No credible empirical research suggests otherwise.[141][4] If gay, lesbian, or bisexual parents were inherently less capable than otherwise comparable heterosexual parents, their children would evidence problems regardless of the type of sample. This pattern clearly has not been observed. Given the consistent failures in this research literature to disprove the null hypothesis, the burden of empirical proof is on those who argue that the children of sexual minority parents fare worse than the children of heterosexual parents.[142]

[edit]Education

controversy

The subject of how the legalization of same-sex marriage affects public education is a source of controversy.[143][144] An argument sometimes used by supporters is that teaching about same-sex marriage in schools will help children to be more open minded by exposing them to different types of families.[145] There is concern from opponents of same-sex marriage that it will undermine parental rights over their children's education.[146][147] There is also concern that the information being presented might not be accurate,[148][149] omits medical, psychological and legal impacts of homosexuality,[150] and might not be appropriate for the age group.[151] There has also been controversy that educators who disagree may be punished.[150][152][153]

[edit]Effects

of same-sex marriage

The American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association and National Association of Social Workers have stated in an Amicus curiae brief presented to the California Supreme Court[5]: Homosexuality is neither a disorder nor a disease, but rather a normal variant of human sexual orientation. The vast majority of gay and lesbian individuals lead happy, healthy, well-adjusted, and productive lives. Many gay and lesbian people are in a committed same-sex relationship. In their essential psychological respects, these relationships are equivalent to heterosexual relationships. The institution of marriage affords individuals a variety of benefits that have a favorable impact on their physical and psychological well-being. A large number of children are currently being raised by lesbians and gay men, both in same-sex couples and as single parents. Empirical research has consistently shown that lesbian and gay parents do not differ from heterosexuals in their parenting skills, and their children do not show any deficits compared to children raised by heterosexual parents. State policies that bar same-sex couples from marrying are based solely on sexual orientation. As such, they are both a consequence of the stigma historically attached to homosexuality, and a structural manifestation of that stigma. By allowing same-sex couples to marry, the Court would end the antigay stigma imposed by the State of California through its ban on marriage rights for same-sex couples. In addition, allowing same-sex couples to marry would give them access to the social support that already facilitates and strengthens heterosexual marriages, with all of the psychological and physical health benefits associated with that support. In addition, if their parents are allowed to marry, the children of same-sex couples will benefit not only from the legal stability and other familial benefits that marriage provides, but also from elimination of statesponsored stigmatization of their families. There is no scientific basis for distinguishing between same-sex couples and heterosexual couples with respect to the legal rights, obligations, benefits, and burdens conferred by civil marriage. The Canadian Psychological Association has stated in 2006[4]: The literature (including the literature on which opponents to marriage of same-sex couples appear to rely) indicates that parents¶ financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that

children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally-recognized union. As the CPA stated in 2003, the stressors encountered by gay and lesbian parents and their children are more likely the result of the way in which society treats them than because of any deficiencies in fitness to parent. The CPA recognizes and appreciates that persons and institutions are entitled to their opinions and positions on this issue. However, CPA is concerned that some are mis-interpreting the findings of psychological research to support their positions, when their positions are more accurately based on other systems of belief or values. CPA asserts that children stand to benefit from the well-being that results when their parents¶ relationship is recognized and supported by society¶s institutions.

[edit]Health

issues

Recently, several psychological studies[154][155][156] have shown that an increase in exposure to negative conversations and media messages about same-sex marriage creates a harmful environment for the LGBT population that may affect their health and well-being. In 2010, a Mailman School of Public Health study examining the effects of institutional discrimination on the psychiatric health of lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) individuals found an increase in psychiatric disorders 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.[157] Gay activist Jonathan Rauch 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.[158][159] After reviewing current psychological and other social science studies on same-sex marriage in comparison to opposite-sex marriage, Gregory M. Herek claims that the data[160] indicate that same-sex and opposite-sex relationships do not differ in their essential psychosocial dimensions; that a parent's sexual orientation is unrelated to their ability to provide a healthy and nurturing family environment; and that marriage bestows substantial psychological, social, and health benefits. Herek concludes that same-sex couples and their children are likely to benefit in numerous ways from legal recognition of their families, and providing such recognition through marriage will bestow greater benefit than civil unions or domestic partnerships.[160] In 2009, a pair of economists at Emory University tied the passage of state bans on same-sex marriage in the US to an increase in the rates of HIV infection.[161][162] The study linked the passage of 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.[163]

[edit]Marriage

privatization

Main article: Marriage privatization

A libertarian argument for marriage privatization holds that the state has no role in defining the terms whereby individuals contract to arrange their personal relationships, regardless of sexual orientation.[164][165][166] People holding this viewpoint argue that the state should have a limited role or no role in defining marriage, only in enforcing those contracts people construct themselves and willfully enter. The rights granted to a married couple exceed those that can be mutually granted by two people to each other contractually, and also involve rights granted by the state.[167][168][169]

[edit]See           

also
LGBT portal

Adelphopoiesis ("brother-making") Adoption by same-sex couples Blessing of same-sex unions in Christian churches Defense of Marriage Act Divorce of same-sex couples Heterosexism Homosexuality LGBT rights in the United States LGBT rights in Europe List of LGBT couples Marriage gap          

Marriage rights and obligat Marriage, unions and partn Religion and sexuality Religious arguments about Same-sex controversy in th Same-sex marriage and pro Status of same-sex marriag The Leveret Spirit Timeline of same-sex marr Uniting American Families

[edit]Documentaries

and literature
      
A Union in Wait Freedom to Marry Marriage Under Fire Pursuit of Equality Marriage Equality USA The Gay Marriage Thing MTV's True Life: I'm Gay and I'm Getting Married

[edit]Footnotes
1. ^ "gay marriage". Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford University Press. 2nd ed. 1989. 2. ^ Marriage: Both Civil and Religious, Pamela Taylor, The Washington Post, July 31, 2009.

3.

^ Marriage a Civil Right, not Sacred Rite, Susan Smith, The Washington Post, July 30, 2009; accessed 9/12/2009.

4.

^

a b c

Marriage of Same-Sex Couples ± 2006 Position Statement Canadian

Psychological Association 5. ^ a b c Case No. S147999 in the Supreme Court of the State of California, In re Marriage Cases Judicial Council Coordination Proceeding No. 4365(«) 6. ^ Pawelski JG, Perrin EC, Foy JM, et al. (July 2006). "The effects of marriage, civil union, and domestic partnership laws on the health and wellbeing of children". Pediatrics 118 (1): 349±64.doi:10.1542/peds.20061279. PMID 16818585. available online: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/118/1/349 7. ^ Prop. 8 Challenged in Federal Court, American Foundation for Equal Rights, May 27, 2009. 8. ^ Abraham, Julie (May). "Public Relations: Why the Rush to Same-Sex Marriage? And Who Stands to Benefit?". The Women's Review of Books 17 (8): 12±14. doi:10.2307/4023418. "its most vocal advocates want gay marriage because marriage stands at the center of a system of legitimization [...].". 9. ^ Azzolina, David (February 2003). "The End of Gay (and the Death of Heterosexuality).(Book Review)". Library Journal: 288. 10. ^ Warner, Michael (1999). The Trouble with Normal. The Free Press. p. 80. 11. ^ Church in Ukraine calls Elton John a Sinner In Adoption Inquiry, Joshua Cinelli, New York Daily News, September 16, 2009. 12. ^ Sharpton chides black churches over homophobia, gay marriage, Southern Voice, Dyana Bagby, January 27, 2006. 13. ^ Frank: Scalia's legal opinions reveal his homophobia, CNN, March 25, 2009. Retrieved September 9, 2009. 14. ^ Craig A. Rimmerman; Clyde Wilcox (2007). The politics of same-sex marriage. University of Chicago Press. pp. 234. ISBN 9780226720012. "Clearly homophobia is at the heart of blanket opposition to gay rights policies." 15. ^ Evan Gerstmann (2004). Same-sex marriage and the Constitution. Cambridge University Press. pp. 56. ISBN 9780521009522. "Keeping marriage heterosexual and dual gendered clearly has more widespread support than other homophobic policies."

16. ^ Mathabane, Gail (2004-01-25). "Gays face same battle interracial couples fought". Usatoday.Com. Retrieved 2010-02-01. 17. ^ "English etymology of marriage". myEtymology.com. Retrieved 2010-02-01. 18. ^ Anthropology Matters!, Shirley Fedorak, Broadview Press, 2007, Chapter 11, Page 174 19. ^
a b

The Nayars and the Definition of Marriage, Kathleen Gough, The

Journals of Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 1959. 20. ^ This History of Human Marriage, Volume 1, Edvard Westermarck, Oxford University Press, Chapter 1, Page 26; 1922 edition. 21. ^ Boy-wives and female husbands: studies of African homosexualities, Stephen O. Murray, Will Roscoe 22. ^ Revisiting "Woman-Woman Marriage": Notes on Gikuyu Women, Wairimu Ngaruiya Njambi and William O'Brien, William E. NWSA Journal - Volume 12, Number 1, Spring 2000, pp. 1-23 23. ^ Dictionaries take lead in redefining modern marriage, Washington Times, May 24, 2004. 24. ^ Webster Makes It Official: Definition of Marriage Has Changed, Martha Neil, American Bar Association, March 23, 2009. 25. ^ Dictionaries recognize same-sex marriage²who knew?, Daniel Redman, Slate, April 7, 2009; accessed 9/19/2009 26. ^ "MARRIAGE EQUALITY". Garden State Equality. Retrieved 14 March 2010. 27. ^ "Marriage 101". Freedom to Marry. Retrieved 14 March 2010. 28. ^ Gallagher, Maggie. "Traditional Marriage Trifecta in the Making?." Human Events 64.36 (20 October 2008): 17-17. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. 30 September 2009 29. ^ HARRY R. JACKSON JR. (2009-05-10). "One Man, One Woman -- Only". The Washington Post Company. Retrieved 27 September 2009. 30. ^ Dershowitz, Alan M. (3 December 2003). "Government Should Quit the Marriage Business". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 8 March 2007. 31. ^ "Board of Advisors". Ruth Institute. Retrieved 6 October 2009. 32. ^ Morse, Jennifer Roback (20 May 2004). "Not a Social Contract". National Review. Retrieved 8 March 2007.

33. ^ Erik Wemple (25 February 2008). "Washington Times Scare Quotes Are History". Washington City Paper. Retrieved 28 July 2008. 34. ^ Kincaid, Cliff (26 February 2004). "Honest Versus Slanted Journalism". Accuracy In Media. Retrieved 8 March 2007. 35. ^ Austin Cline. "Washington Times Dismisses Gay ³Marriages´". About.com. Retrieved 8 March 2007. 36. ^ Neill, James (2008). The origins and role of same-sex relations in human societies. McFarland. ISBN 9780786435135. 37. ^ Herdt, Gilbert H. (1993). Ritualized Homosexuality in Melanesia. University of California Press. ISBN 9780520080966. 38. ^ Hinsch, Bret (1990). Passions of the Cut Sleeve: The Male Homosexual Tradition in China. Reed Business Information, Inc. ISBN 0520078691. 39. ^ Hinsch, Bret. (1990). Passions of the Cut Sleeve. University of California Press. pp. 24-25 40. ^ John Boswell, "Same Sex Unions in Pre-Modern Europe." (New York: Random House, 1995). Pages 80-85. 41. ^ Chris Scarre "Chronicles of the Roman Emperors" (London: Thames and Hudson Ltd, 1995). Page 151. 42. ^ Eskridge, William N. (Oct 1993). "A History of Same-Sex Marriage". Virginia Law Review 79 (7). "The Romans may have accorded some same-sex unions the legal or cultural status of marriage.". 43. ^ Kuefler, Mathew (2007). "The Marriage Revolution in Late Antiquity: The Theodosian Code and Later Roman Marriage Law". Journal of Family History 32: 343±370.doi:10.1177/0363199007304424. 44. ^ "Same-sex marriage around the world". CBC News. Retrieved 6 October 2009. 45. ^ Legislative record of the same-sex marriage bill in Dutch and in French, by the Belgian Senate. 46. ^ Portugal's president signs gay marriage bill 47. ^ "Hindustan Times" (a news outlet in India) Article dated November 19, 2008 48. ^ http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/07/gay-marriage-chart-of-day.html 49. ^ "Nepal's highest court confirms full rights for LGBT people". Pink News. 17 November 2008. Retrieved 6 October 2009.

50. ^ Tears of Joy as Nepali Gays Transgender Persons at Supreme Court Decision 51. ^ "Nepal Supreme Court orders full LGBT rights". 52. ^ "Nepal SC approves same-sex marriage". Hindustan Times. 19 November 2008. Retrieved 6 October 2009. 53. ^ Nepal apex court okays same-sex marriage : iGovernment 54. ^ "Nepal charter to grant gay rights". Hindustan Times. 2010-01-19. Retrieved 2010-02-01. 55. ^ Nelson, Dean (2010-01-19). "Nepal 'to stage gay weddings on Everest'". London: Telegraph. Retrieved 2010-02-01. 56. ^ Slovenia to legalize same-sex marriage soon: minister 57. ^ Family Law Bill Ready for Parliament 58. ^ The Station Network 59. ^ "Executive summary of "Report on the Family and the Rights of Children" prepared by the French National Assembly, Paris, January 25, 2006" (PDF). 25 January 2006. Retrieved 24 October 2008. 60. ^ Aníbal Fernández supports parliamentary debate on same-sex marriages 61. ^ http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/14/world/americas/14argentina.html?_r=1 &partner=rss&emc=rss 62. ^ Argentina legalizes Gay Marriage, NY Times. Retrieved 15 July 2010 63. ^ Associated Press (4 March 2010). "Mexico City¶s gay marriage law takes effect". MSNBC. Retrieved 6 March 2010. 64. ^ (Spanish) José Luis Garcitapia and Dulce Maya (22 January 2010). "Iniciativa del PT a favor de los matrimonios gay". La Jornada Morelos. Retrieved 2 February 2010. 65. ^ (Spanish) Notimex (28 January 2010). "PT presenta iniciativa sobre bodas gay en Puebla". El Universal. Retrieved 2 February 2010. 66. ^ (Spanish) Ulises Gutiérrez (13 January 2010). "Proponen matrimonio homosexual en Sonora". La Jornada. Retrieved 16 January 2010. 67. ^ (Spanish) Nicolás Casimiro (25 December 2009). "Matrimonios gay y despenalización del aborto, en la agenda del PRD para 2010". Quadratín. Retrieved 26 December 2009.

68. ^ (Spanish) Fernando Hernández (15 January 2010). "A favor PRI y PRD del aborto y matrimonios gays". El Heraldo de Tabasco. Retrieved 21 January 2010. 69. ^ (Spanish) Roberto Aguilar (1 February 2010). "Buscan firmas para bodas gay en Tamaulipas". El Universal. Retrieved 2. 70. ^ African gays and lesbians combat bias, Michael Fleshman, Africa Renewal, Vol.21 #1 (April 2007), page 12. 71. ^ Tradition of same gender marriage in Igboland, Leo Igwe, Nigerian Tribune, June 19, 2009. Retrieved September 30, 2009. 72. ^ [1][dead link] 73. ^ HRC: LGBT Laws of NJ 74. ^ HRC: LGBT Laws of Maryland 75. ^ Terrence Dopp (December 3, 2009). "New Jersey May Provide Next Gay Marriage Test After N.Y. Loss". Bloomberg. Retrieved 2010-07-15. 76. ^ US CODE: Title 1,7. Definition of ³marriage´ and ³spouse´ 77. ^ "ElectionCenter2008". CNN. Retrieved October 3, 2009. 78. ^ "the WHITE HOUSE PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: Civil Rights". Retrieved October 3, 2009. 79. ^ Barack Obama on LBGT Rights 80. ^ Harris, Chris (2008-11-01). "Did Barack Obama Answer Your Question? THINK MTV". Mtv.com. Retrieved 2010-02-01. 81. ^ Gay marriage trial to begin in California, could set legal precedent for generations to come 82. ^ UN Secretary-General Bulletin ST/SGB/2004/13, 2004 83. ^ "Jobs ² Compensation & Benefits". The World Bank Group. Retrieved 8 March 2007. 84. ^ Tom Ramstack (11 January 2010). "Congress Considers Outcome of D.C. Gay Marriage Legislation". AHN. 85. ^ NYC Protest and Civil Rights March Opposing Proposition 8, Andy Towle, Towelroad.com, November 13, 2008. Retrieved November 14, 2008. 86. ^ Interview with Evan Wolfson, David Shankbone, Wikinews, September 30, 2007. 87. ^ John R. Bohrer (14 December 2006). "NJ Civil Unions: Nothing to Celebrate". The Huffington Post.

88. ^ Sweeping gay law reform finally passes 89. ^ Limited govt equals freedom for same-sex couples 90. ^ Honeymoon is over for gay weddings 91. ^ (Fausto-Sterling et al., 2000) 92. ^ "How common is intersex?". Intersex Society of North America. Retrieved 8 March 2007. 93. ^ 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 (Oct. 2009): 688-701. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. 29 September 2009 94. ^ SCHWARTZ, JOHN. "U.S. Defends Marriage Law." New York Times (19 September 2009): 12. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. 29 September 2009 95. ^ a b Banned in Boston 96. ^ Blankenhorn, David (19 September 2008). "Protecting marriage to protect children". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 6 October 2009. 97. ^ See discussion of prenuptial and postmarital agreements at Findlaw 98. ^ Dale Carpenter is a prominent spokesman for this view. For a better understanding of this view, see Carpenter's writings at http://www.indegayforum.org/staff/show/91.html. 99. ^ Statement on Marriage and the Family from the American Anthropological Association 100. ^ "Poll: Calif. gay marriage ban driven by religion." By LISA LEFF, Associated Press Writer. Thursday, December 4, 2008. 101. ^ "Divisions persist over gay marriage ban" By Rajesh Mirchandani, BBC News, Los Angeles. Wednesday, 12 November 2008. 102. ^ Government¶s response 103. ^ Same-Sex Marriage and Freedom of Religion 104. ^ The Supreme Court decision 105. ^ Same-Sex Marriage and Religious Liberty: Emerging Conflicts 106. ^ The Civil Partnership Act 2004, Same-Sex Marriage and the Church of England 107. ^ Gay Marriage: Conflict Between Equal Rights and Religious Freedom?

108. ^ Gay Rights, Religious Liberties: A Three-Act Story 109. ^ Religious Freedom Concerns are Real with Same-Sex Marriage 110. ^ Same-Sex Marriage Laws Pose Protection Quandary 111. ^ See e.g., Southern Baptist Convention, On Same-Sex Marriage (adopted 2003) http://www.sbc.net/resolutions/amResolution.asp?ID=1128 (visited January 20, 2008). 112. ^ "The Religious Right and Anti-Gay Speech: Messengers of Love or Purveyors of Hate?". Matthew Shepard Online Resources. Archived from the original on 2002-12-19. 113. ^
a b

"The Christian Case Against Same-Sex Marriage". Association of

Politically Active Christians. January 2008. Retrieved 7 October 2009. 114. ^ Gay Marriage Questions 115. ^ "A Biblical Perspective on Same-Sex "Marriage" and Civil Unions". Association of Politically Active Christians. January 2009. Retrieved 7 October 2009. 116. ^ America's Rabbi | Once Again Democrats Bow to ³Unions´ 117. ^ White, Mel. "What the Bible Says ² And Doesn't Say ² About Homosexuality". Soulforce. Retrieved 7 October 2009. 118. ^ "The "Clobber" Passages". gaychurch.org. Retrieved 7 October 2009. 119. ^ "Resources". Metropolitan Community Church. Retrieved 6 October 2009. 120. ^ Davis, Richard. "Before you Begin Studying the "Clobber" Passages". Freedom In Christ. Retrieved 6 October 2009. 121. ^ "D025 - Anglican Communion: Commitment and Witness to Anglican Communion". Retrieved 6 October 2009. 122. ^ "Would Jesus Discriminate?". Metropolitan Community Church. Retrieved 6 October 2009. 123. ^ "Equality Rights". United Church of Canada. 2007. Retrieved 9 November 2008. 124. ^ Rabbi Tzvi Hersh Weinreb, Orthodox Response to Same-Sex Marriage, NY Jewish Week (Mar. 26, 2004) http://www.ou.org/public_affairs/article/ou_resp_same_sex_marriage/ ( visited January 20, 2008); Rabbinical Council of America, Joining with Three Other Orthodox Organizations, RCA Opposes Redefinition of Marriage in New York State (June 21,

2007)http://www.rabbis.org/news/index.cfm?type=policies (visited January 20, 2008) 125. ^ Committee on Jewish Law and Standards, Homosexuality, Human Dignity, & Halakhah: A Combined Responsum for the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards (approved by a majority of the Committee on Dec. 6, 2006) at http://www.rabbinicalassembly.org/docs/Dorff_Nevins_Reisner_Final.pdf (v isited January 20, 2008) 126. ^ "Civil Marriage for Gay and Lesbian Jewish Couples". Union for Reform Judaism. Retrieved 6 October 2009. 127. ^ "FAQ's on Reconstructionist Approaches to Jewish ideas and Practices". Jewish Reconstructionist Federation. 2008. Retrieved 17 May 2008. 128. ^ Homosexuality and Same-Sex Marriage in Islam on Patheos 129. ^ Bhikkhu, Mettanando (13 July 2005). "Will gay marriage be allowed by Buddhists in Thailand?". Bangkok Post. Buddhist Channel. Retrieved 6 October 2009. 130. ^ Berkowitz, D & Marsiglio, W (2007). Gay Men: Negotiating Procreative, Father, and Family Identities. Journal of Marriage and Family 69 (May 2007): 366±381 131. ^ Butler, Katy (March 7, 2006). "Many Couples Must Negotiate Terms of 'Brokeback' Marriages". New York Times. 132. ^ The Married Lesbian 133. ^ Gay fathers in straight marriages 134. ^ Bozett, Frederick W. (1987-08-19). "The Heterosexually Married Gay and Lesbian Parent". Gay and Lesbian Parents. p. 138. ISBN 9780275925413. 135. ^ APA Policy Statement on Sexual Orientation, Parents & Children, American Psychological Association, July 28 & 30, 2004. Retrieved on 2007-04-06. 136. ^ Helping gay fathers come out to their children 137. ^ A Family Matter: When a Spouse Comes Out as Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual 138. ^ EMRK is for the LGBT adoption 139. ^ Euronews: Gleichgeschlechtliche Adoptiveltern - Gerichtshof rügt Frankreich (german)
[dead link]

140. ^ "Adoption Laws: State by State". Human Rights Campaign. Retrieved 200807-09.

141. ^ Case No. S147999 in the Supreme Court of the State of California, In re Marriage Cases Judicial Council Coordination Proceeding No. 4365, Application for leave to file brief amici curiaein support of the parties challenging the marriage exclusion, and brief amici curiae of the American Psychological Association, California Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, National Association of Social Workers, and National Association of Social Workers, California Chapter in support of the parties challenging the marriage exclusion 142. ^ Legal Recognition of Same-Sex Relationships in the United States by Gregory M. Herek 143. ^ Gay marriage opponents put California schools in centre of debate: Adverts claim public schools will teach same-sex marriage if measure fails to overturn state supreme court decision 144. ^ España: 18 argumentos contra la ley del "matrimonio" homosexual 145. ^ Same-sex marriage and Mass. education 146. ^ Marriage Rights and Parental Rights: Parents, the State, and Proposition 8 147. ^ Parents face court action for removing children from gay history lessons 148. ^ Same-Sex ³Marriage´ and Schools: Critical Review of the GLSEN SameSex ³Marriage´ Curriculum 149. ^ Experts On Homosexuality Critique GLSEN's Same-Sex Marriage Curriculum 150. ^ a b SAME-SEX MARRIAGE HAS CHANGED CANADA 151. ^ Gay literature in schools 152. ^ Teacher who complained about training day 'promoting gay rights' is cleared 153. ^ School counselor targeted for supporting Maine¶s pro-marriage Question 1 154. ^ Price, M. "UPFRONT ² Research uncovers the stress created by samesex marriage bans" in Monitor on Psychology, Volume 40, No. 1, page 10, January 2009. Washington DC: American Psychological Association. [2] 155. ^ Potoczniak, Daniel J.; Aldea, Mirela A.; DeBlaere, Cirleen"Ego identity, social anxiety, social support, and self-concealment in lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals." Journal of Counseling Psychology, Vol 54(4), October 2007, 447-457.

156. ^ Balsam, Kimberly F.; Mohr, Jonathan J. "Adaptation to sexual orientation stigma: A comparison of bisexual and lesbian/gay adults." Journal of Counseling Psychology, Vol 54(3), July 2007, 306-319. 157. ^ Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health: Lesbian, gay, bisexual individuals risk psychiatric disorders from discriminatory policies 158. ^ Rauch, Jonathan. "For Better or Worse?" The case for gay (and straight) marriage. The New Republic, May 6, 1996. [3] 159. ^ 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.[4] 160. ^
a b

Herek, Gregory M. "Legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the

United States: A social science perspective." American Psychologist, Vol 61(6), September 2006, 607-621. 161. ^ Emory researchers: Gay marriage bans increase HIV infections 162. ^ Study Links Gay Marriage Bans to Rise in HIV infections 163. ^ Andrew M. Francis, Hugo M. Mialon (March 2010). "Tolerance and HIV". Journal of Health Economics 29 (2): 250± 267. doi:10.1016/j.jhealeco.2009.11.016. Retrieved 2010-07-19. 164. ^ Lindenberger, M., "A Gay-Marriage Solution: End Marriage?" in Newsweek, Mar. 16, 2009. 165. ^ Kinsella, S. "Libertarian View on Gay Marriage" in LewRockwell.com, June 6, 2006. 166. ^ Boaz, D., speech to Commonwealth Club of California 167. ^ A Modest (Marriage) Proposal 168. ^ The Libertarian Argument For Gay Marriage 169. ^ Privatize Marriage

[edit]Bibliography This article's further reading may not follow Wikipedia's content policies or guidelines. Please improve this article by removing excessive, less relevant or many publications with the same point of view; or by incorporating the relevant publications into the body of the article through appropriate citations.
Sources : Boswell, John (1995). The Marriage of Likeness: Same-sex Unions in Pre-modern Europe. New York: Simon Harper and Collins. ISBN 0002555085.





Boswell, John (1994). Same-sex Unions in Premodern Europe. New York: Villard Books. ISBN 0679432280.



Emanuele Calò, Matrimonio à la carte ² Matrimoni, convivenze registrate e divorzi dopo l'intervento comunitario, Milano, Giuffrè, 2009



Caramagno, Thomas C. (2002). Irreconcilable Differences? Intellectual Stalemate in the Gay Rights Debate. Westport, CT: Praeger. ISBN 0275977218.



Cere, Daniel (2004). Divorcing Marriage: Unveiling the Dangers in Canada's New Social Experiment. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press. ISBN 0773528954.



Chauncey, George (2004). Why Marriage?: The History Shaping Today's Debate over Gay Equality. New York: Basic Books. ISBN 0465009573.



Dobson, James C. (2004). Marriage Under Fire. Sisters, Or.: Multnomah. ISBN 1590524314.



Larocque, Sylvain (2006). Gay Marriage: The Story of a Canadian Social Revolution. Toronto: James Lorimer & Company. ISBN 1550289276.



Moats, David (2004). Civil Wars: A Battle For Gay Marriage. New York, NY: Harcourt, Inc.. ISBN 015101017X.



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. ISBN 0805078150.



Spedale, Darren (2006). Gay Marriage: For Better or For Worse? What We've Learned From the Evidence. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0195187512.



Truluck, Rembert S. (2000). Steps to Recovery from Bible Abuse. Gaithersburg, MD: Chi Rho Press, Inc.. ISBN 188849316X.



Wolfson, Evan (2004). Why Marriage Matters: America, Equality, and Gay People's Right to Marry. New York: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 0743264592.



Robert P. George, Jean Bethke Elshtain (Eds.), ed (2006). The Meaning of Marriage: Family, State, Market, And Morals. Dallas: Spence Publishing Company. ISBN 1890626643.



Robert E. Goss, Amy Adams Squire Strongheart (Eds.), ed (2008). Our Families, Our Values: Snapshots of Queer Kinship. New York, NY: The Harrington Park Press, An Imprint of the Haworth Press, Inc.. ISBN 1560239107.



Douglas Laycock, Anthony Picarello, Jr., Robin Fretwell Wilson (Eds.), ed (2008). Same-Sex Marriage and Religious Liberty: Emerging Conflicts. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.. ISBN 074256326X.



Andrew Sullivan (Editor), ed (2004). Same-Sex Marriage: Pro and Con ² A Reader, Revised Updated Edition. New York, NY: Vintage Books, a division of Random House, Inc.. ISBN 1400078660.

 [edit]External

Oliver, Marilyn Tower (1998). Gay and lesbian rights: a struggle. Enslow Publishers. ISBN 9780894909580.

links
This article's use of external links may not follow Wikipedia's policies or guidelines. Please improve this article by removing excessive and inappropriate external links or by converting links into footnote references. (August 2009)

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Same-sex marriage

  

Same-sex marriage at the Open Directory Project Google Map of "World homosexuality laws" Same-Sex Marriage, Civil Unions, and Domestic Partnerships topic page from The New York Times



Maggie Gallagher debates Gavin Newsom on gay marriage in a May 2009 interactive debate from NOW on PBS Online



Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons



LA Weekly feature, "California Supreme Court Set to Consider Gay Marriage," Feb. 2008 by Matthew Fleischer



Today is Freedom to Marry Day - Just Don't Say "Gay Marriage"!, Evan Wolfson, Huffington Post, February 12, 2008.



Lockyer v. City and County of San Francisco California Supreme Court Opinion overturning ban on same-sex unions, May 15, 2008



American Courts on Marriage: Is Marriage Discriminatory? 1998-2008, Joshua Baker, Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, May 2008.

 

Same-Sex Marriage: Developments in the Law", Emily Doskow, NOLO, 2008. "The Debate: The Bible and Gay Marriage" in Newsweek Religion Newsweek Web Exclusive, December 16, 2008.



"A Reconciliation on Gay Marriage" by David Blankenhorn and Jonathan Rauch

 

"Reactions to Raunch/Blankenhorn compromise" Varnum Et. Al. v Brien Polk County Iowa Iowa Supreme Court Opinion Overturns Ban on Gay Marriage 3Apr2009.



* The Lame Case Against Gay Marriage - Essay on public opinion, religion, & the law
[show]

v‡d‡e

Status of same-sex unions around the world
[show]
v‡d‡e

Marriage Amendments around the world
[show]
v‡d‡e

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) topics

Categories: Same-sex marriage

y y

This page was last modified on 28 July 2010 at 11:11. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of Use for details. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.

10 lý do t i sao GAY không

c l y nhau h p pháp!!!

01) Là ng

i

ng tính thì không theo t

nhiên. thành

02) K t hôn ng tính s khuy n khích ng i ta tr ng i ng tính h n => i ng c v i t nhiên?!! 03) Lu t k t hôn n tính s t o c h i cho nh d c không theo quy lu t c a nhân lo i t ng lên.

ng hành vi tình

04) Có th làm cho k t hôn d tính có nh ng xáo tr ng v th a k , tài s n thu c v ph n , da tr ng không th k t hôn v i da en... 05) Làm gi m gí tr c a lòng chung th y trong quan h d gi i, vì gay có th quan h v i Trai th t. Theo th ng kê trong quan h d gi i ch thu hút nhau trong 55 gi !!!

06) K t hôn d gi i có th khong bao gi sinh con, ng t a t ng lên. 07) Gia ình là ng b ng tính. 08) Gi 09) Nh m th i i

sinh con cái, k t hôn ng gi i già côn n, không n i n

i là ng

ng tính thì ch

a ch

ch

nuôi con không

ng tính không

c các tôn giáo nh s

ng h ng thi

. u cha ho c

ng tr em l n lên v i hoàn c ng g p nhi u khó kh n.

10) K t hôn ng tính làm thay i xã h i r t l n; không th nào gi i quy t n i nh ng mâu thu n phát sinh cho c d tính và ng tính.
Trích t : 10 Reasons Why Gay Marriage Should be Illegal

01)Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning. 02) Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall. 03) Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract. 04) Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can't marry whites, and divorce is still illegal. 05) Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Britany Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed. 06) Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren't full yet, and the world needs more children. 07) Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children. 08) Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That's why we have only one religion in America. 09) Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children. 10) Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven't adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans. Re-post this if you believe love makes a marriage

B

tr

ng Anh k t hôn

ng tính ngay t i tr

s

ngh vi n

TP - Ông Chris Bryant, k t hôn tr ng th v i ng chính c a lâu

ng kim B

tr

ng Anh ph

trách các v n s

châu Âu,

ãt

ch c l

i b n trai Jared Cranney ngay t i tr

Ngh vi n, t i phòng n

ài Westminster nhìn ra sông Thames.

ôi tân lang (có l ph i g i nh th ) n m c gi ng nhau, cùng m c b complet màu en và eo cà v t màu tím, c nhi u chính khách cao c p n chúc m ng, trong ó có B tr ng v ph n và công b ng kiêm Th l nh nhóm Ngh s Công ng t i Ngh vi n Harriet Harman. Sau khi k t thúc ph n nghi l chính th c, m t b a ti c tr ng th dành riêng cho c p tân lang c t ch c nhân danh Ch t ch Ngh vi n John Bercow. Ông John Bercow chính là ng i ã ích thân cho phép hôn l ng

gi i c ti n hành t i tr s Ngh vi n. Trong b n tuyên b sau hôn l , c p tân lang ã bày t lòng bi t n sâu s c Ch t ch Ngh vi n và Th l nh nhóm Ngh s Công ng t i Ngh vi n.

M t ám c i ng tính Argentina. nh minh h a

B n tuyên b nh n m nh: ³Chúng tôi ch a bao gi dám ngh ngày h nh phúc c a chúng tôi r i s n và chúng tôi r i s ph i lo n chuy n bánh gatô, hoa và nh n c i. V y mà ngày h nh phúc ó ã tr thành hi n th c. Th t k di u là bi t bao nhiêu th ã thay i trong kho ng th i gian ng n ng i nh th ´. ây không ph i l n u tiên m t nam B tr ng Anh k t hôn v i ban trai. H i tháng 7 n m 2006, B tr ng B o v môi tr ng kiêm Ngh s Ngh vi n Anh là ông Ben Bradshaw ã k t hôn v i b n trai là nhà báo Neal Dalgleish thu c Hãng Thông t n BBC. Tr c ó, vào tháng 12 n m 2005, o lu t v vi c chính th c th a nh n các gia ình ng gi i b t u có hi u l c t i Anh. Theo o lu t này, các cu c hôn nhân ng gi i có m i quy n bình ng nh ng ký là khác. K t ó ã có g n 40 nghìn

các cu c hôn nhân truy n th ng, ch có tên g i và n i c p ng gi i Anh k t hôn v i nhau. Ông Chris Bryant n m nay 48 tu i. Tr

c kia, ông ã t ng là Giám m c Nhà th Anh. T n m 2001,

ông c b u làm Ngh s và sau ó tr thành B tr ng ph trách m i quan h v i các n c châu Âu. Ông làm quen v i ng i b n trai Jared Cranney h i tháng 4 n m ngoái trong th i gian di n ra chi n d ch b u c các c p chính quy n a ph ng. Ng c Thoa Theo báo Nga

Th t

ng

ng tính c a Iceland k t hôn

Th t ng Iceland Johanna Sigurdardottir ã c i ng i tình lâu n m hôm qua, ngay sau khi lu t th a nh n hôn nhân ng tính t i n c này có hi u l c.

Bà Sigurdardottir, 68 tu i, tr thành v ch ng v i bà Jonina Leosdottir - m t nhà v n - sau khi hai ng i n p b n yêu c u chuy n m i quan h c a h tr thành hôn nhân. Qu c h i Iceland hôm 12/6 ã th ng nh t thông qua ngh nh th a nh n hôn nhân ng tính và lu t này i vào hi u l c hôm 27/6.

Th t ng Iceland Johanna Sigurdardottir. nh: SheWired.

Tr c ó, nh ng c p ng tính có th ng ký xác nh n quan h dân s và c h ng các quy n nh nh ng c p v ch ng khác, nh ng v n không c coi là hôn nhân chính th ng. Bà Sigurdardottir, sinh n m 1942, lên n m quy n vào tháng 2/2009. Bà ã s ng v i Ledsdottir ngoài 50 tu i - trong 7 n m nay. Th t ng Iceland là lãnh o u tiên trên th gi i công khai quan h ng tính.

Có 150,000 c p Ch :
y

ng tính ã k t hôn

Tin LGBT Th Gi i
Ngày 24/09/09

5167a - (Washington) Theo báo cáo c a S tính, có g n 150,000 c p k t h p dân s . V n phòng S

Th ng kê Dân s Hoa k v a công b v hôn nhân

ng

ng gi i ã k t hôn trong n m qua, cao h n r t nhi u so v i s th c s k t hôn và

Th ng kê Dân s cung c p cho h ng thông t n The Associated Press, ch ng 27% trong s ng tính t i Hoa k khai r ng h có liên h v i nhau trong hình th c "v ch ng", so

t ng c ng 564,743 c p

v i 91% trên t ng s 61.3 tri u c p d tính k t hôn.

Chuyên gia t

v n S Th ng kê

c tính kho ng 100,000 v k t hôn

ng tính, k t h p dân s

và ph i ng u

chung thân chính th c chính th c trong n m 2008. Nh ng nhà phân tích cho r ng s khác bi t có th do ph n nh nh ng c p u cho quy n k t hôn ng tính trong quan h h a c ghi trên th ng

nguy n v i nhau h s k t hôn n u t i ti u bang h kê n m 2010, và nó s d y lên cu c tranh quy n pháp

ang s ng cho phép. Con s trên s

ng tính, quy n nh n con nuôi và các

nh khác xuyên su t t ng ti u bang m t. ng tính c th ng kê n m ngoái là các

Trên toàn qu c, có kho ng 56% trên t ng s 149,956 v k t hôn c p ng tính n . Ph i ng u c. ng tính ch a th có ngay

c báo cáo hi n di n t i m i ti u bang, nh ng con s chính xác thì

Nhà Nhân kh u h c t i "Dù ch có vài ti u bang nh ng c p "Nh ng c p

i h c UCLA (University of California, Los Angeles). ông Gary Gates nói: c phép k t hôn ng tính h p pháp trong n m 2008, nh ng còn m t ph n l n

ng tính mu n k t hôn ho c mu n l a ch n chính danh cho h ". Ông ti p: ng tính ang k t hôn ho c có quan h th g n bó v i nhau, chúng ta ph i b c ra v i h ". c:

Con s không chính th c mà h ng AP cung c p còn cao h n nhi u trong nh ng 3 n m tr N m 2007, có 341,000 trong t ng s 753,618 c p thú 390,000 c p k t hôn

ng tính k t hôn, m c dù chính th c ch có 11,000 gi y hôn ng tính c ghi nh n.

c c p phát trên toàn qu c. Con s còn cao h n trong hai n m 2005 và 2006, m i n m có kho ng ng tính trên t ng s 780,000 c p

(L

© c thu t theo The Associated Press)

"Bình ng hôn nhân" không là vi c c a lãnh Ch :
y

o Úc

Tin LGBT Th Gi i
Ngày 29/07/10

7930a - Ch c . phát qua

"hôn nhân sóng truy n

ng tính" không kh i d y quan tâm trong cu c tranh lu n vào chi u Ch ng Julia Gillard và lãnh t toàn qu c tr c i l p Tony Abbott tr c di n tranh lu n b u c ngày 21-8 s p t i. hình cu c

nh t c a nh ng nhà lãnh t

Uc. Th t

N Th t
Trong lúc h u h t ch u c thác thu v và giáo d c, thì v n "hôn nhân á

ng Úc, Julia Gillard
i t n n, không khí thay c p i, khai ng tính" không ng t i m t l i. ban báo chí v i nhà i u khi n c n ch ng nh ng b i các nhà

a ra ánh sáng, k c vi c c a ng

phát bi u tranh lu n c a ôi bên mà ngay c ban báo chí g m 3 phóng viên chuy n câu h i và tr l i c a các thành ph n trong cu c tranh lu n c ng ch

Phóng viên chính tr , Malcolm Farr, Laura Tingle và Chris Uhlmann ng i ch ng trình tranh lu n, David Speers. c 94 khán giã thành viên, t ng h p c Canberra. Thính giã

Nh ng lãnh t phát bi u tr Câu l c b Báo chí Qu c gia khi n. Theo k t qu , n Gillard d n gi i

tri c a hai àng Lao

ng và T

do, t i

a ý ki n v m i l nh t trên màn hình qua m t nút i u

a thích Gillard, trong lúc nam gi i chu ng Abbott, theo nh y

ph t

ng th c mà C li u". Th t ng

quan Nghiên c u Roy Morgan g i là "cu c tranh lu n tích c c, thich áng và u v i 53% ng h so v i 47% nghiêng v theo Abbott.

Nguy n H i (DNA) ©

Argentina v i v Ch :
y

i u "Gay Tango"

Tin LGBT Th Gi i
Ngày 28/07/10

9738a - Argentina ch ng nh ng là n mà nó còn là c Theo t mu n . ac al h iV i u Tango

c duy nh t vùng châu M -Latin cho phép hôn nhân ng tính.

ng tính,

ng thu t c a h ng tin Reuters, Buenos Aires ch tái nh ngh a nam phái và n

trì l h i cu i tu n r i, nh m vào nh ng fans phái trong k n ng khiêu v .

V V

i u "Gay Tango" ng nh ngôn ng v y, và tango ng tính làm

công Gustavo Aciar nói: "Tango c ng c n ph i thích

phong phú thêm ngôn ng tango". Nh ng nhà t ch c sáng l p ra l h i "Argentina Gay Tango" sau thành công c a "The International Queer Tango Festival", (L h i Tango ng tính Qu c t )

Nguy n H i (Reuters) ©

Scotland kêu g i "Hôn nhân Ch :
y

ng tính"

Tin tiêu i m

y

Tin LGBT Th Gi i
Ngày 26/07/10

7902a - Theo t "K t h p Dân s " t .

ng thu t cùa báo The Herald, t i n n m 2005, nh ng nay nhi u t

c Scotland, nh ng c p

ng tính có th

ng ký

ch c

ang kêu g i tình tr ng hôn nhân tr n v n.

. Phong trào Bình tính. ng Xanh c a Scotland th c hi n cu c th m dò v i 1,000 ng 58% ng h h p pháp hoá hôn nhân K t h p Dân s i tr ng thành tham d cho th y k t qu ng Hôn nhân, nh ng lãnh t tôn giáo và liên oàn các u cu c v n ng ti n t i bình ng phái chính tr thành viên c a i ng qu c h i Scotland ang b t ng hôn nhân tr n v n cho nh ng ng

ng tính trong lúc ch có 19% ch ng l i. nh c ng nh trách nhi m h t ng gi ng nh

c a Scotland cung c p t t c quy n pháp

hôn nhân nh ng ch khác nhau tên g i. Áp l c ti n t i bình s ch p nh n cho ng hôn nhân tr n v n kh i ngu n sau khi chính tr gia Anh qu c tiên oán là Anh qu c ng tính nam n c quy n k t hôn.

V S n (365Gay) ©

EU lên k ho ch Ch :
y

u tranh cho quy n LGBT toàn c u

Tin LGBT Th Gi i
Ngày 24/07/10

7891a - H i

ng Liên minh châu Âu ngày 30 tháng 6 ã thông qua m t b lu t " Thúc i c a Lesbian, Gay, l ng tính và ng i chuy n

y vi c th c

hi n và B o v t t c các quy n con ng

i gi i tính."

Các chi ti t nh ng gì mà EU c n ph i làm g i các nhà ngo i giao châu Âu và các n gi i . tính, và h tr

b o v quy n con ng ix

i gi i LGBT các qu c gia khác. Nó kêu nh h m i ng và b n s c qu c gia.

c thành viên tích c c làm vi c cho decriminalization quan h trên c s c a tình d c quy n trong b o v nhân

ng tính trên toàn th gi i, ti p t c t cáo phân bi t

Liên hi p Âu châu "H i ng làm vi c c a t ch c v quy n con ng i cho nh ng ng i là bi u hi n m t s lãnh o trong khu v c ng h các ng ch t ch Ngh y ban, H i

quy n con ng

i LGBT, mà tôi hoan nghênh ", ông Ulrike Lunacek, us d ng s m và càng th

vi n châu Âu gi a các nhóm v LGBT . " ây là m t b lu t r t hoan nghênh, và m t trong ó ng, và ngoài châu Âu nên b t con ng i LGBT b o v quy n Moscow và St Petersburg. " u tiên, H i ng ã

ng xuyên càng t t, ví d b ng cách h tr

Ch t ch Michael Cashman nói thêm: "L n cho LGBT v quy n con ng i c a ng i dân

a ra m t sáng ki n tuy t v i và lâu dài EU ng."

EU . Chúng tôi mong mu n b lu t này s dc th c hi n u v i châu Phi, Caribê và Thái Bình D

và các t ch c ngoài châu Âu th c hi n theo - b t

Redog (GayToday)

Láng gi ng Argentina, Uruguay và Paraguay, tranh lu n v hôn nhân tính Ch :
y

ng

Tin LGBT Th Gi i
Ngày 23/07/10

7872a -

c di n t nh

th tr n liên hoàn domino t i vùng Châu M -Latin, hai n ng tính.

c láng gi ng c a

Argentina s nghiên c u v lu t hôn nhân

Lu t hôn nhân mã tr .

ng tính ã

c th

ng vi n Argentina thông qua và T ng th ng Cristina Fernandez de tn c thu n thành v i Thiên Chúa giáo La ng tính. Tr c ó , khi lu t

Kirchner c ng phê chu n ch c h

ngày có hi u l c ã khi n cho c ng

thành qu c gia tiên phong vùng châu M -Latin h p pháp hôn nhân vi n thông qua g p ph i s

i mãnh li t c a giáo h i THiên Chúa giáo.

T ng th ng Uruguay, Jose Mujica Và nay hai n c láng gi ng Uruguay và Paraguay d ng tính hai n ng nh ang trên ng n i gót.

Nh ng t ch c quy n cho phép nh ng c p

c Uruguay và Paraguay ang thúc gi c qu c h i s m xem xét lu t ng hôn nhân. là m t trong hai n c trên s ch p nh n quy n bình ng hôn

ng gi i quy n bình

Theo thông tin cho bi t, Uruguay g n nh nhân. N c công khai tính d c khi gia nh p quân i gi i h p pháp.

c này ã cho phép k t h p dân s , v i quy n nh n con nuôi c a nh ng c p i, và c ng cho phép nh ng ng

ng tính, quy n

i chuy n gi i tính c h i thay

T ch c Diego Sempol t i Ovejas Negras nói v i báo Telam Argenda là nhóm c a ông n m trong t m h a h n th o lu n v i nh ng lãnh t chính tr . Còn n c Paraguay thì ít c h i thay i h n v i nh ng lãnh t giáo h i lên ti ng tr c này, Somosgay, tuyên b s v n c khi lu t lu t. c

gi i thi u. T ch c quy n

ng tính c a n

ng hành lang cho

Giám m c Thiên Chúa giáo La Mã, Adalberto Martinez, t i San Pedo h a h n "v n xây d ng gia ình.

ng giáo d c ráo ri t" v c sáng t o

giá tr c a con chiên, trong lúc Phó t ng th ng Federico Franco phát bi u àn ông và àn bà

LangThang (PinkNews) ©

Liên hi p qu c công nh n v trí t Ch :
y

v n c a U ban

ng tính

Tin tiêu i m

y

Tin LGBT Th Gi i
Ngày 20/07/10

7861a - Sau 3 n m n p ch p . thu n t

n và ch c u xét, U ban Qu c t Nhân quy n Ng cH i ngh cách t v n t i tr ng

i

ng tính (International hi p qu c.

Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission, IGLHRC),

ng Kinh t và Xã h i c a Liên hi p qu c Liên

Tr s Liên hi p qu c
Ngh quy t v IGLHRC do Hoa k d n 23-13, 13 phi u không tham d b : "Quy t nh ngày hôm nay xác nh n r ng ti ng nói c a nh ng ng i ng gi i tính, l ng gi i tính và ng". u cH i ng Kinh t và Xã h i, LHQ, thông qua v i t s phi u y h i IGLHRC nói trong b n tuyên và 5 phi u v ng m t. Ch t ch i u hành

chuy n gi i tính phát bi u t i Liên hi p qu c là m t ph n c a c ng 23 n c b

ng xã h i dân s s ng

phi u thu n g m có: Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Estonia, Finland,

France, Germany, Guatemala, Italy, Japan, Liechtenstein, Malta, Norway, Peru, Poland, Rep. of Korea, Slovenia, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay. 13 n c b phi u ch ng g m có: Bangladesh, China, Comoros, Egypt, Malaysia, Morocco, Namibia, Niger,

Pakistan, Russian Fed., Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Zambia. 13 n c không b phi u g m có: Bahamas, Cote D'Ivoire, Ghana, India, Mauritius, Mongolia, Mozambique,

Philippines, Rep. of Moldova, Rwanda, Saint Kitts & Nevis, Turkey, Ukraine. 5n c v ng m t g m có: Cameroon, Congo, Guinea-Bissau, Iraq, Saint Lucia.

V y là k t áng giá

nay ti ng nói c a c ng ti ng nói c a h

ng LGBT s không r i vào im l ng nh cung b c cao nh t c a c ng

tr

c n a, mà là m t c

h i

c vang lên

ng nhân lo i.

LangThang (IGLHRC) ©

Nh ng n Ch :
y

c nào cho phép hôn nhân

ng gi i?

Tin LGBT Th Gi i
Ngày 20/07/10

7857a - Ngày 15/7 v a qua, Argentina tr ng tính luy n ái y

thành qu c gia

u tiên

M La-tinh cho phép nh ng ng

i

các quy n l i h p pháp, trách nhi m và s b o v mà hôn nhân mang l i cho h . châu Âu, ã ban hành các lu t t ng t , cho phép nh ng

M t s nh các qu c gia trên th gi i, a ph n là ng i

ng gi i có nhi u quy n l i h n, trong ó có quy n c

c nh n con nuôi và th a k tài s n. ng gi i n m 2001. un m

N i ti ng v i quan i m ti n b , Hà Lan là n nay, Iceland c ng hành D . 1. Hà Lan i ây là nh ng n ng t ng t . i

u tiên công nh n hôn nhân

c cho phép ng

ng gi i k t hôn.

. 2. B

. 3. Tây Ban Nha

. 4. Canada

. 5. Nam Phi

. 6. Na Uy

. 7. Th y i n

. 8. B ào Nha

. 9. Iceland

Thanh H o (Theo Huffington Post)

n Ch
y

: Ti m sách :

ng tính

u tiên m c a

Tin LGBT Th Gi i
Ngày 09/07/10

7756a - Theo t chuyên v tài ngo i ô Mumbai. Ch nhân là ng in

ng thu t c a t

th i báo Hindustan Times,

n

gi

có

c ti m sách

u tiên

ng tính. Trang web Queer-Ink.com. m t ti m sách online, hi n

c trình làng t i Malad,

ng tính tên Shobhma Kumar, làm vi c nh là m t chuyên gia t v n, nhà ho t ti m sách nh là m t tr

ng, n tay

tuyên truy n ch ng lây nhi m HIV, trình bày lý do m khách hàng vì là lo i nh y c m tu n hàng m i Cô t . b t i v i xã h i n

ng h p ph c v t ng cá n , nh ng ph i m t vài

nhân: "Tôi không th ti p c n nh ng sách này và Amazone c ng không giao hàng. Tôi ngh nó khó . Có vài ti m sách online t i ng h p." c giao. Tôi th y ng i khác c ng cùng m t tr

u và có s n h n 200 ch

s n trong kho, có th

giao hàng ch trong vòng 2 ngày.

Ti m sách sách Queer-Ink.com có sách gi t quan h cha m và con cái không có. Kuma gi i thích, ng

ng tính online Queer-Ink.com ng, sách ch m sóc s c kho ph n , sách d y v

ng, sách o t gi i th i nam

ng tính, sách dành cho tr em và hàng lo t t p chí. Sách báo khiêu dâm thì ng tính thích nh ng vai trò ki u m u ti m sách bình th nhìn th y b n thân trong ng, nên tôi m ti m online". ng, y l ch trình các s ki n do

nh ng câu chuy n. Tôi ngh h e ng i mua Queer-Ink.com c ng ph c v nh LGBT t ch c trên kh p n khuy n khích m i ng i "nói v

là m t c ng thông tin c a c ng ki n tài ng tính". Cô nói: " V i tôi.

c. Nhi u s

c loan trên di n àn

th o lu n nh

Kumar hy v ng c bi t v tình d c

ng tính không ch

mà còn v c n b n n i tâm n a". Cô c ng khuy n khích nh ng nhà v n g i tác ph m nh là "nuôi d ng môi tr không gian ph i có cho h ". n Queer-Ink's Corner, m t trang web c di n t

ng". Trang web "h a s gi i thi u nh ng ti ng nói m i vì h x ng áng v i

Nguy n-v-H i (HindustanTimes) ©

C ng hòa SEC ã có g n 1000 c p Ch :
y

ng tính ang ký k t hôn

Tin LGBT Th Gi i
Ngày 07/07/10

7771a - Kho ng m t ngàn c p Có 704 c p nam và 291 c p n .

ng tính nam và n

ã

ng ký k t hôn

Séc trong vòng 4 n m l i ây.

Lu t Séc ã cho phép
nhi u h n ôi nam (20 c p). T i Praha có nhi u c p n là (27). Trong s c p ng in ng tính

ng ký hôn nhân

ng tính t n m 2006.
áng ng c nhiên là s c p n (25 c p) ly d

Theo th ng kê cho th y, trong h n 4 n m có 45 c p ã ly d .

ng ký k t hôn nh t v i 28 c p, c l i, vùng ít nh t là

ng th

hai là

Brno v i 19 c p, ti p

Kladno vùng trung Séc v i 102 c p. Ng

Vyso ina (13), Zlín (16) và Olomouc

ng tính k t hôn ã có các c p có 1 ng

i là ng

i n

c ngoài. Trong 106 c p nh

v y,

c ngoài ông nh t là Slovakia, ti p

n là Brazil, Ucraina và Úc.

HanhPhucCuoi (Secviet.cz)