Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:35, 21 January 2010

Part of the LGBTQ rights series
Legal status of same-sex unions
Marriage Andorra Argentina Australia Austria Belgium Brazil Canada Chile Colombia Costa Rica Cuba Denmark Ecuador Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Iceland Ireland Liechtenstein Luxembourg Malta Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Portugal Slovenia South Africa Spain Sweden Switzerland Taiwan Thailand United Kingdom United States Uruguay Recognized Israel United States:  • American Samoa
Civil unions or registered partnerships but not marriage Bolivia Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Hungary Italy Latvia Monaco Montenegro San Marino United Kingdom:  • Bermuda  • Cayman Islands
Minimal recognition Bulgaria Cambodia China  • Hong Kong India Japan Lithuania Namibia Nepal Netherlands:  • Sint Maarten Poland Romania Slovakia
See also Same-sex union legislation Same-sex union court cases Timeline of same-sex marriage Recognition of same-sex unions in Africa Recognition of same-sex unions in Asia Recognition of same-sex unions in Europe Recognition of same-sex unions in the Americas Recognition of same-sex unions in Oceania Marriage privatization Divorce of same-sex couples Domestic partnership Military policy Adoption Listings by country LGBTQ rights by country or territory
Notes ^ Performed in the Netherlands proper (including the Caribbean Netherlands), as well as in Aruba and Curaçao. May be registered in Sint Maarten in such cases, but the rights of marriage are not guaranteed. Neither performed nor recognized in Niue, Tokelau, or the Cook Islands. Neither performed nor recognized in six British Overseas Territories. ^ Neither performed nor recognized in some tribal nations. Recognized but not performed in several other tribal nations and American Samoa. Registered foreign marriages confer all marriage rights. Domestic common-law marriages confer most rights of marriage. Domestic civil marriage recognized by some cities. ^ The Coman v. Romania ruling of the European Court of Justice obliges the state to provide residency rights for the foreign spouses of EU citizens. Some member states, including Romania, do not follow the ruling. A "declaration of family relationship" is available in several of Cambodia's communes which may be useful in matters such as housing, but is not legally binding. Guardianship agreements, conferring some limited legal benefits, including decisions about medical and personal care. Inheritance, guardianship rights, and residency rights for foreign spouses of legal residents. Courts have recognised guru–shishya, nata pratha or maitri karar–type contractual relationships, but they are not legally binding. Some cities and prefectures issue partnership certificates, but they are not legally binding. Marriages conducted abroad between a Namibian national and a foreign spouse recognized for residency rights. Hospital visitation rights through a "legal representative" status. ^ Not yet in effect.
LGBTQ portal
v t e

Same-sex marriage (also called gay marriage) is a legally or socially recognized marriage between two persons of the same biological sex or social gender.

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 is usually more limited, or not have any such rights. A related issue is whether the term "marriage" should be applied.

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, and the goal of normalizing LGBT relationships.

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, and tradition. Many supporters of same-sex marriage attribute opposition to it as coming from homophobia or heterosexism and liken prohibitions on same-sex marriage to past prohibitions on interracial marriage.

Etymology and terminological usage

The word "marriage" comes from Old French mariage, from marier (“‘to marry’”), from Latin maritare (“‘to marry", literally “give in marriage’”), from maritus (“‘lover", "nuptial’”), from mas (“‘male", "masculine", "of the male sex’”).

Anthropologists have struggled to come up with a definition of marriage that absorbs commonalities of the social construct across cultures. 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. 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.

In lexicography, words have changed and expanded in accordance to the status quo. In the last ten 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. The Oxford English Dictionary has recognized same-sex marriage since 2000.

Some proponents of same-sex marriages use the term marriage equality or gender-neutral marriage to stress that they seek equality as opposed to special rights. Some opponents argue that equating same-sex and opposite-sex marriages changes the meaning of marriage and its traditions, and some use the term traditional marriage to mean marriages between one man and one woman.

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. Jennifer Roback Morse, the president of the anti-same-sex marriage group National Organization for Marriage's Ruth Institute project, claims that the conflation of marriage with contractual agreements is itself a threat to marriage.

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. Some socially conservative online publications, such as WorldNetDaily and Baptist Press, still follow the practice. Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media argues for use of quotation marks on the grounds that marriage is a legal status denied same-sex couples by most state governments. Same-sex marriage supporters argue that the use of scare quotes is an editorialization that implies illegitimacy.

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. AP warns that the construct gay marriage can imply that marriage licenses offered to gay and lesbian couples are somehow legally different, as such it should be avoided as much as possible in favor of marriage for gays and lesbians.

History

Ancient

Various types of same-sex marriages have existed, ranging from informal, unsanctioned relationships to highly ritualized unions.

In the southern Chinese province of Fujian, through the Ming dynasty period, females would bind themselves in contracts to younger females in elaborate ceremonies. Males also entered similar arrangements. This type of arrangement was also similar in ancient European history.

The first recorded mention of the performance of same-sex marriages occurred during the early Roman Empire. While there is a consensus among modern historians that same-sex relationships were tolerated in ancient Rome, the frequency and nature of same-sex unions during that period is unclear. 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.

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. Same-sex marriages are granted and mutually recognized by Belgium (2003), Spain (2005), Canada (2005), South Africa (2006), Norway (2009) and Sweden (2009). In Nepal, their recognition has been judicially mandated but not yet legislated. On January 8, 2010, the Parliament of Portugal passed legislation legalizing same-sex marriage. The bill is expected to be ratified by Conservative President Anibal Cavaco.

The Canadian Parliament approved the granting and recognition of same-sex marriages by defining marriage as “the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others” in July 2005. A Conservative Government motion inviting MPs to request repeal of same-sex marriage in Canada failed in December 2006, so same-sex marriages continue to be honored throughout the nation.

Current status

The Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Canada, Norway, Sweden and South Africa are the only countries in which the legal status of same-sex marriages are exactly the same as that of opposite-sex marriages. Nepal's highest court, in November 2008, issued final judgment on matters related to LGBT rights. Based on the court recommendation the government announced its intention to introduce a same-sex marriage bill by 2010.

The granting and honoring of same-sex marriages is also currently being considered by several countries in Europe. On January 8, 2010, the Portuguese Parliament passed a bill backing same-sex marriage. The bill will now be reviewed in committee before coming back to parliament for a final vote. The current governing party of Iceland has also recently hinted that it intends to reconstruct its marriage laws, thereby making them gender neutral. In early July 2009, the minister of Slovenia announced that the country would likely legalize same-sex marriages in the near future after the government agreed that same-sex couples deserve to be entitled to all of the same benefits of opposite-sex couples. In December 2009 the government approved a bill allowing same-sex marriage and adoption and sent it to parliament. The new government of Luxembourg has also announced its intention to legalize same-sex marriage.

Some Latin American nations have taken up such proposals, with the Justice Minister of Argentina working to submit a gender neutral law draft before the Congress. 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 will become effective in March 2010. In January 2010, in the northwestern Mexican state of Sonora, a same-sex marriage bill has been proposed. In the western Mexican state of Michoacán, the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD) has announced it will propose bills concerning civil unions, same-sex marriage and adoption by same-sex couples in 2010.

Australia bans recognition of same-sex marriages at the federal level, but the current Australian Labor Party government favors synchronized state and territory registered partnership legislation (as in Tasmania and Victoria). The Australian Capital Territory offers civil partnerships, which provide the same legal right and obligations as marriage. 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 consider transsexuals who have undergone reassignment surgery as having changed sex for legal purposes, following Family Court and High Court of New Zealand decisions in 1995.

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.

In France, in 2006, a 30-member 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.

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. Amongst 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.

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, Vermont and Connecticut) and receive state level benefits. They will soon be allowed in Washington D.C. (starting around March 2010). Additionally, several states offer civil unions or domestic partnerships, granting all or part of the state-level rights and responsibilities of marriage. Thirty-one states have put same-sex marriage on the ballot, but it has yet to win the popular vote. In 1996, the United States Congress passed the Defense 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. President Barack Obama is opposed to same-sex marriage, while he "supports full civil unions and federal rights for LGBT couples", a full repeal of DOMA, and called Proposition 8 "unnecessary".

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 voluntarily discriminate between opposite-sex marriages and same-sex marriages, as well as discriminating between employees on the basis of nationality. These organizations recognize same-sex marriages only if the country of citizenship of the employees in question recognizes the marriage. In some cases, these organizations do offer a limited selection of the benefits normally provided to opposite-sex married couples to de facto partners or 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.

Other legally recognized same-sex unions

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, Iceland, Israel, Luxembourg, New Zealand, Portugal, Slovenia, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and Uruguay. They are also available in parts of Argentina (Villa Carlos Paz, Río Cuarto, Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Río Negro), Mexico (Coahuila and the Federal District) and the United States (California, Connecticut, Hawai'i, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Wisconsin, Washington and the federal District of Columbia)

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.

Australia

In Australia, Commonwealth law prohibits the recognition of same-sex marriage. However, all states and territories provide a range of rights to same-sex couples cohabiting, equal to those afforded to opposite-sex de facto couples. These rights are gained without registration. Furthermore, formal domestic partnership registries exist in 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 both Commonwealth and state legislation, including superannuation, social security, health care and taxation. 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.

Europe

In Denmark, Finland, Hungary and Iceland, a registered partnership is "nearly" equal to marriage, including legal joint adoption rights in Denmark and Iceland. 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" — 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 next-of-kin status and shared parenting responsibilities. The one notable exception is the use of courtesy titles by the partner of a male peer or knight. In the first year, 16,100 ceremonies took place. Civil unions in New Zealand are identical to British civil partnerships in their association with equivalent spousal rights and responsibilities to marriage.

Transgender and intersex persons

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2008) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

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 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.

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.

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.

Controversy

This section may contain material not related to the topic of the article. Please help improve this section or discuss this issue on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove this message)

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, 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 biological mother and father.

Some supporters of same-sex marriages take the view that the government should have no role in regulating personal relationships, while others argue that same-sex marriages would provide social benefits to same-sex couples. 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." 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.... 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."

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.

Judicial and legislative

A "majority rules" position regards same-sex marriage as void and illegal unless it has been accepted by a simple majority of voters or of their elected representatives. 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.

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.

Religion

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. Many churches (citing their religious beliefs) refuse to provide employment, public accommodations, adoption services and other benefits to same-sex couples. Some areas have made special provisions for religious protections.

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. In many cases, this conventional purpose of marriage is seen as procreation, with the sodomy involved in homosexuality therefore being extraneous. 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 same-sex attraction.

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. Biblical apologetics for same-sex marriage rights include arguments that the word "homosexual", as found in many modern versions of the Bible, is an inaccurate translation of what is found in the original biblical texts. Vines or Strong's biblical concordances do not contain 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. Supporting marriage rights for gays and lesbians is viewed by affirming Christians as a Christ-like commitment to the equality and dignity of all persons. The United Church of Canada asserts that "human sexual orientations, whether heterosexual, bisexual or homosexual, are a gift from God."

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, 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. 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. The Jewish Reconstructionist Federation leaves the choice to individual rabbis.

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.

Pagan and Wiccan communities are often supportive of same-sex marriages.

Children and the family

Opponents of same-sex marriage claim that children do best with both a mother and a father, and that therefore the state should encourage the traditional family structure by granting it a special status. They say that children should have a right to be raised by both a father and a mother and that the government should not support a marriage that cannot offer that. Same-sex marriage opponent Maggie Gallagher claims that legal marriage is a way of encouraging monogamy and commitment by those who may create children through their sexual coupling. Some groups believe that children raised by homosexual parents also develop homosexual or bisexual preferences or are more likely to have a same-sex relationship.

The social science literature, however, currently supports the notion that there is no optimal gender mix of parents; no developmental disadvantages are found for children and adolescents with same-sex parents when compared to those with two opposite-sex parents. The professionals and the major associations now agree there is a well-established and accepted consensus in the field that there is no optimal gender combination of parents.

As noted by Judith Stacey, of New York University: “Rarely is there as much consensus in any area of social science as in the case of gay parenting, which is why the American Academy of Pediatrics and all of the major professional organizations with expertise in child welfare have issued reports and resolutions in support of gay and lesbian parental rights”. The American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association and National Association of Social Workers have stated in an amicus curiae brief presented to the Supreme Court of the State of California:

Although it is sometimes asserted in policy debates that heterosexual couples are inherently better parents than same-sex couples, or that the children of lesbian or gay parents fare worse than children raised by heterosexual parents, those assertions find no support in the scientific research literature. When comparing the outcomes of different forms of parenting, it is critically important to make appropriate comparisons. For example, differences resulting from the number of parents in a household cannot be attributed to the parents’ gender or sexual orientation. Research in households with heterosexual parents generally indicates that – all else being equal – children do better with two parenting figures rather than just one. The specific research studies typically cited in this regard do not address parents’ sexual orientation, however, and therefore do not permit any conclusions to be drawn about the consequences of having heterosexual versus nonheterosexual parents, or two parents who are of the same versus different genders. Indeed, the scientific research that has directly compared outcomes for children with gay and lesbian parents with outcomes for children with heterosexual parents has been remarkably consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are every bit as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents. Amici emphasize that the abilities of gay and lesbian persons as parents and the positive outcomes for their children are not areas where credible scientific researchers disagree. Statements by the leading associations of experts in this area reflect professional consensus that children raised by lesbian or gay parents do not differ in any important respects from those raised by heterosexual parents. No credible empirical research suggests otherwise. Allowing same-sex couples to legally marry will not have any detrimental effect on children raised in heterosexual households, but it will benefit children being raised by same-sex couples.

The American Academy of Pediatrics has stated in Pediatrics, the most-cited journal in the field of pediatrics: "More than 25 years of research have documented that there is no relationship between parents' sexual orientation and any measure of a child's emotional, psychosocial, and behavioral adjustment. These data have demonstrated no risk to children as a result of growing up in a family with 1 or more gay parents. Conscientious and nurturing adults, whether they are men or women, heterosexual or homosexual, can be excellent parents." The Australian Psychological Society has stated: "The family studies literature indicates that it is family processes (such as the quality of parenting and relationships within the family) that contribute to determining children’s wellbeing and ‘outcomes’, rather than family structures, per se, such as the number, gender, sexuality and co-habitation status of parents. The research indicates that parenting practices and children’s outcomes in families parented by lesbian and gay parents are likely to be at least as favourable as those in families of heterosexual parents, despite the reality that considerable legal discrimination and inequity remain significant challenges for these families." The Canadian Psychological Association has issued similar position.

Proponents of same-sex marriage contend that by expanding marriage to LGBT individuals the state actually protects the rights of all married couples and, if they have any, of their children without discrimination while in no way affecting the rights of opposite sex married couples and their children, natural or adopted.

A study on marriage statistics of opposite-sex married couples by researcher Darren Spedale found that 15 years after Denmark had granted same-sex couples marriage-like partnership status, rates of opposite-sex marriage in those countries had gone up, and rates of opposite-sex divorce had gone down. He found the same results in each of Sweden and Norway a decade after they had passed their own such laws. He says this is evidence that same-sex unions do not have a negative effect on traditional marriages, which he says would also apply to same-sex marriages.

However, a study on same-sex partnerships in Norway and Sweden found that short-term divorce risks are higher in same-sex partnerships than in opposite-sex marriages. The authors stated that this may be due to same-sex couples' "non-involvement in joint parenthood" and "lower exposure to normative pressure about the necessity of life-long unions."

A multi-method, multi-informant comparison of community samples of committed gay male and lesbian (30 participants each) couples with both committed (50 young engaged and 40 older married participants) and non-committed (109 exclusively dating) opposite-sex pairs was conducted in 2008. Results indicated that individuals in committed same-sex relationships were generally not distinguishable from their committed opposite-sex counterparts.

Opponents of same-sex marriage respond by pointing to a 1995 journal article that says the above research is "based on small samples of convenience, retrospective data, or self-report instruments subject to social desirability biases," even though most of the studies appeared in rigorously peer-reviewed and highly selective journals, whose standards represent expert consensus on generally accepted social scientific standards for research on child and adolescent development and they constitute the type of research that members of the respective professions consider reliable. Oponnents point out that one researcher's was thrown out by a court due to bias concerns during the 1997 Florida hearing Petitioner v. Floyd P. Johnson. In recent years, seemingly partly on the basis of advances in the robustness of the body of research, reviewers have been more confident to state that not only has research indicated that parenting by same-sex parents is not poorer, but that it appears, in some aspects at least, likely to be somewhat better. Similarly, research has not only indicated that the outcomes of children of same-sex parents are not poorer, but that outcomes would seem to be likely to be at least as favourable.

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. 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.

Those following this line of reasoning believe that efforts to "legitimize" same-sex marriages as a state institution are backwards-looking, and will have the effect of expanding state influence into personal affairs where state influence already does not belong. People opposing same-sex marriages on these grounds, also support scaling back the definition by the state of contractual obligations between opposite sex partners to a same or similar degree.

Education controversy

The subject of how the legalization of same-sex marriage affects public education is a source of controversy. 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. There is concern from opponents of same-sex marriage that it will undermine parental rights over their children's education. They say that schools shouldn't teach that opposite-sex marriage is the same as same-sex marriage, and legalizing same-sex marriage will force them to treat it the same.

There is also concern that the information being presented might not be accurate, omits medical, psychological and legal impacts of homosexuality, and might not be appropriate for the age group. There has also been controversy that educators who disagree may be punished.

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 Supreme Court of the State of California:

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 state-sponsored 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.

Opponents of same-sex marriage, however, assert that various appointed members of American Psychological Association, including Armand Cerbone and Candace McCollough, have conflicts of interest in the LGBT. These opponents assert that APA committee members are themselves homosexual or are involved in LGBT activism.

Mental health

Recently, several psychological studies 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.

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. 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 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.

Physical health

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. 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.

See also

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

Footnotes

1. "gay marriage". Oxford English Dictionary (Online ed.). Oxford University Press. (Subscription or participating institution membership required.)
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. Prop. 8 Challenged in Federal Court, American Foundation for Equal Rights, May 27, 2009.
5. 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. its most vocal advocates want gay marriage because marriage stands at the center of a system of legitimization . {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= and |year= / |date= mismatch (help)
6. Azzolina, David (2003). "The End of Gay (and the Death of Heterosexuality).(Book Review)". Library Journal: 288. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
7. Warner, Michael (1999). The Trouble with Normal. The Free Press. p. 80.
8. Church in Ukraine calls Elton John a Sinner In Adoption Inquiry, Joshua Cinelli, New York Daily News, September 16, 2009.
9. Sharpton chides black churches over homophobia, gay marriage, Southern Voice, Dyana Bagby, January 27, 2006.
10. Frank: Scalia's legal opinions reveal his homophobia, CNN, March 25, 2009. Retrieved September 9, 2009.
11. Craig A. Rimmerman; Clyde Wilcox (2007). The politics of same-sex marriage. University of Chicago Press. p. 234. ISBN 9780226720012. Clearly homophobia is at the heart of blanket opposition to gay rights policies.
12. Evan Gerstmann (2004). Same-sex marriage and the Constitution. Cambridge University Press. p. 56. ISBN 9780521009522. Keeping marriage heterosexual and dual gendered clearly has more widespread support than other homophobic policies.
13. http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2004-01-25-couples_x.htm
14. http://www.myetymology.com/english/marriage.html
15. Anthropology Matters!, Shirley Fedorak, Broadview Press, 2007, Chapter 11, Page 174
16. ^ The Nayars and the Definition of Marriage, Kathleen Gough, The Journals of Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 1959.
17. This History of Human Marriage, Volume 1, Edvard Westermarck, Oxford University Press, Chapter 1, Page 26; 1922 edition.
18. Boy-wives and female husbands: studies of African homosexualities, Stephen O. Murray, Will Roscoe
19. 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
20. Dictionaries take lead in redefining modern marriage, Washington Times, May 24, 2004.
21. Webster Makes It Official: Definition of Marriage Has Changed, Martha Neil, American Bar Association, March 23, 2009.
22. Dictionaries recognize same-sex marriage—who knew?, Daniel Redman, Slate, April 7, 2009; accessed 9/19/2009
23. "Equal Marriage for Same-Sex Couples". Kevin Bourassa and Joe Varnell.
24. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2007/09/08/BAIHS19CJ.DTL&type=politics
25. Gallagher, Maggie. "Traditional Marriage Trifecta in the Making?." Human Events 64.36 (20 Oct. 2008): 17-17. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. 30 Sep. 2009
26. HARRY R. JACKSON JR. "One Man, One Woman -- Only". The Washington Post Company. Retrieved 27 September 2009.
27. Dershowitz, Alan M. (3 December 2003). "Government Should Quit the Marriage Business". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 8 March 2007.
28. "Board of Advisors". Ruth Institute. Retrieved 6 October 2009.
29. Morse, Jennifer Roback (20 May 2004). "Not a Social Contract". National Review. Retrieved 8 March 2007.
30. Erik Wemple (25 February 2008). "Washington Times Scare Quotes Are History". Washington City Paper. Retrieved 28 July 2008.
31. Kincaid, Cliff (26 February 2004). "Honest Versus Slanted Journalism". Accuracy In Media. Retrieved 8 March 2007.
32. Austin Cline. "Washington Times Dismisses Gay "Marriages"". About.com. Retrieved 8 March 2007.
33. http://books.google.com/books?id=1ha9GgWNmy0C&pg=PT267
34. http://books.google.com/books?id=mlFp0nFhvbwC&dq=Ritualized+Homosexuality+Herdt&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=MBbOSvmjIIOa8Aao5PT6Aw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4#v=onepage&q=&f=false
35. Hinsch, Bret (1990). Passions of the Cut Sleeve: The Male Homosexual Tradition in China. Reed Business Information, Inc. ISBN 0520078691.
36. John Boswell, "Same Sex Unions in Pre-Modern Europe." (New York: Random House, 1995). Pages 80-85.
37. Eskridge, William N. (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. {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
38. 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.
39. "Same-sex marriage around the world". CBC News. Retrieved 6 October 2009.
40. Legislative record of the same-sex marriage bill in Dutch and in French, by the Belgian Senate.
41. "Hindustan Times" (a news outlet in India) Article dated November 19, 2008
42. "The New York Times"
43. Canadians for Equal Marriage News Article dates December 7, 2006
44. "Nepal's highest court confirms full rights for LGBT people". Pink News. 17 November 2008. Retrieved 6 October 2009.
45. Tears of Joy as Nepali Gays Transgender Persons at Supreme Court Decision
46. "Nepal Supreme Court orders full LGBT rights".
47. "Nepal SC approves same-sex marriage". Hindustan Times. 19 November 2008. Retrieved 6 October 2009.
48. Nepal apex court okays same-sex marriage : iGovernment
49. "Aprovada Proposta de Lei do casamento entre pessoas do mesmo sexo". Portuguese Government official website. 2010-01-08. Retrieved 2010-01-08. Template:Pt icon
50. "Same-sex marriage law backed in Portugal's parliament". BBC. 2010-01-08. Retrieved 2010-01-08.
51. News and Articles < Prime Minister´s Office
52. Slovenia to legalize same-sex marriage soon: minister
53. Family Law Bill Ready for Parliament
54. The Station Network
55. Aníbal Fernández supports parliamentary debate on same-sex marriages
56. Mark Stevenson (Associated Press) (29 December 2009). "Mexico City enacts region's 1st gay marriage law". MSNBC. Retrieved 30 December 2009.
57. Template:Sp icon Ulises Gutiérrez (13 January 2010). "Proponen matrimonio homosexual en Sonora". La Jornada. Retrieved 16 January 2010.
58. Template:Sp icon Nicolás Casimiro (25 December 2009). "Matrimonios gay y despenalización del aborto, en la agenda del PRD para 2010". Quadratín. Retrieved 26 December 2009.
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. African gays and lesbians combat bias, Michael Fleshman, Africa Renewal, Vol.21 #1 (April 2007), page 12.
61. Tradition of same gender marriage in Igboland, Leo Igwe, Nigerian Tribune, June 19, 2009; accessed September 30, 2009.
62. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iGQ6LMSOvL9rjDHrAmyO9mHoVieAD9BOJN7G1
63. HRC: LGBT Laws of NJ
64. HRC: LGBT Laws of Maryland
65. US CODE: Title 1,7. Definition of “marriage” and “spouse”
66. "ElectionCenter2008". CNN. Retrieved October 3, 2009.
67. "the WHITE HOUSE PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: Civil Rights". Retrieved October 3, 2009.
68. Barack Obama on LBGT Rights
69. http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1598407/20081101/story.jhtml
70. "Jobs - Compensation & Benefits". The World Bank Group. Retrieved 8 March 2007.
71. Tom Ramstack (11 January 2010). "Congress Considers Outcome of D.C. Gay Marriage Legislation". AHN.
72. NYC Protest and Civil Rights March Opposing Proposition 8, Andy Towle, Towelroad.com, November 13, 2008. Retrieved November 14, 2008.
73. Interview with Evan Wolfson, David Shankbone, Wikinews, September 30, 2007.
74. John R. Bohrer (14 December 2006). "NJ Civil Unions: Nothing to Celebrate". The Huffington Post.
75. Sweeping gay law reform finally passes
76. Limited govt equals freedom for same-sex couples
77. Honeymoon is over for gay weddings
78. (Fausto-Sterling et al., 2000)
79. "How common is intersex?". Intersex Society of North America. Retrieved 8 March 2007.
80. 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 Sep. 2009
81. SCHWARTZ, JOHN. "U.S. Defends Marriage Law." New York Times (19 Sep. 2009): 12. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. 29 Sep. 2009
82. ^ Banned in Boston
83. Blankenhorn, David (19 September 2008). "Protecting marriage to protect children". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 6 October 2009.
84. See discussion of prenuptial and postmarital agreements at Findlaw
85. 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.
86. Statement on Marriage and the Family from the American Anthropological Association
87. ^ 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 curiae in 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
88. "Poll: Calif. gay marriage ban driven by religion." By LISA LEFF, Associated Press Writer. Thursday, December 4, 2008.
89. "Divisions persist over gay marriage ban" By Rajesh Mirchandani, BBC News, Los Angeles. Wednesday, 12 November 2008.
90. Government’s response
91. Same-Sex Marriage and Freedom of Religion
92. The Supreme Court decision
93. Same-Sex Marriage and Religious Liberty: Emerging Conflicts
94. The Civil Partnership Act 2004, Same-Sex Marriage and the Church of England
95. Gay Marriage: Conflict Between Equal Rights and Religious Freedom?
96. Gay Rights, Religious Liberties: A Three-Act Story
97. Religious Freedom Concerns are Real with Same-Sex Marriage
98. Same-Sex Marriage Laws Pose Protection Quandary
99. 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).
100. "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.
101. ^ "The Christian Case Against Same-Sex Marriage" (PDF). Association of Politically Active Christians. January 2008. Retrieved 7 October 2009.
102. Gay Marriage Questions
103. "A Biblical Perpective on Same-Sex "Marriage" and Civil Unions" (PDF). Association of Politically Active Christians. January 2009. Retrieved 7 October 2009.
104. America's Rabbi | Once Again Democrats Bow to “Unions”
105. James D. Kennedy and Jerry Newcombe. What's Wrong with Same-Sex Marriage? Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2004. 73.
106. White, Mel. "What the Bible Says - And Doesn't Say - About Homosexuality". Soulforce. Retrieved 7 October 2009.
107. "The "Clobber" Passages". gaychurch.org. Retrieved 7 October 2009.
108. "Resources". Metropolitan Community Church. Retrieved 6 October 2009.
109. Davis, Richard. "Before you Begin Studying the "Clobber" Passages". Freedom In Christ. Retrieved 6 October 2009.
110. "D025 - Anglican Communion: Commitment and Witness to Anglican Communion". Retrieved 6 October 2009.
111. "Would Jesus Discriminate?". Metropolitan Community Church. Retrieved 6 October 2009.
112. "Equality Rights". United Church of Canada. 2007. Retrieved 9 November 2008.
113. 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)
114. 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 (visited January 20, 2008)
115. "Civil Marriage for Gay and Lesbian Jewish Couples". Union for Reform Judaism. Retrieved 6 October 2009.
116. "FAQ's on Reconstructionist Approaches to Jewish ideas and Practices". Jewish Reconstructionist Federation. 2008. Retrieved 17 May 2008.
117. Bhikkhu, Mettanando (13 July 2005). "Will gay marriage be allowed by Buddhists in Thailand?". Buddhist Channel. Bangkok Post. Retrieved 6 October 2009.
118. 38th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION Legislative Committee on Bill C-38
119. "Same Sex Marriage Harms Children's Rights" Marriage Symposium Hears
120. Protecting marriage to protect children
121. Same-Sex Marriage: Not in the Best Interest of Children
122. There's lots of proof same-sex marriage will harm the rights of others
123. (How) Will Gay Marriage Weaken Marriage as a Social Institution
124. , J. M., Bobrow, D., Wolfe, M, & Mikach, S. (1995). Developmental Psychology
125. A Review and Analysis of Research Studies Which Assessed Sexual Preference of Children Raised by Homosexuals
126. Do parents influence the sexual orientation of their children? Findings from a longitudinal study of lesbian families.
127. Why we oppose
128. ^ Michael Lamb, Ph.D.: Affidavit - United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (2009)
129. ^ Elizabeth Short, Damien W. Riggs, Amaryll Perlesz, Rhonda Brown, Graeme Kane: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) Parented Families - A Literature Review prepared for The Australian Psychological Society
130. In The Supreme Court of Iowa No. 07–1499
131. In The Supreme Court of California In re MARRIAGE CASES.
132. cited in Cooper & Cates, 2006, p. 36; citation available on http://www.psychology.org.au/Assets/Files/LGBT-Families-Lit-Review.pdf
133. Pawelski, James G., Perrin, Ellen C., Foy, Jane M., Allen, Carole E., Crawford, James E., Del Monte, Mark, Kaufman, Miriam, Klein, Jonathan D., Smith, Karen, Springer, Sarah, Tanner, J. Lane, Vickers, Dennis L. The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children Pediatrics 2006 118: 349-364; available online: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/118/1/349
134. Marriage of Same-Sex Couples – 2006 Position Statement Canadian Psychological Association
135. Drucker, Peter. "Changing families and communities: an LGBT contribution to an alternative development path." Development in Practice 19.7 (15 Nov. 2009): 825-836. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. 29 Sep. 2009
136. Eskridge, William N. Jr. (2004). "Nordic Bliss? Scandinavian Registered Partnerships and the Same-Sex Marriage Debate" (PDF). Journals of Legal Scholarship: Issues in Legal Scholarship (5). The Berkeley Electronic Press: article 4. Retrieved 23 September 2008. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help); Unknown parameter |nopp= ignored (|no-pp= suggested) (help) (see pgs.29-31)
137. ^ Andersson, Gunnar (2006). "The Demographics of Same-Sex „Marriages" in Norway and Sweden" (PDF). 43 (1). Demography: 79–98. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help) Text version.
138. Roisman, Glenn I.; Clausell, Eric; Holland, Ashley; Fortuna, Keren; Elieff, Chryle. "Adult romantic relationships as contexts of human development: A multi-method comparison of same-sex couples with opposite-sex dating, engaged, and married dyads." Developmental Psychology, Vol 44(1), Jan 2008, 91-101.
139. Baumrind, D. (1995). Commentary on sexual orientation: research and social policy implications. Developmental Psychology, 31 (1), pp. 130-136.
140. 1997, JUNE AMER, Petitioner v Floyd P. Johnson, p. 11
141. Lindenberger, M., "A Gay-Marriage Solution: End Marriage?" in Newsweek, Mar. 16, 2009.
142. Kinsella, S. "Libertarian View on Gay Marriage" in LewRockwell.com, June 6, 2006.
143. Boaz, D., speech to Commonwealth Club of California
144. A Modest (Marriage) Proposal
145. The Libertarian Argument For Gay Marriage
146. Privatize Marriage
147. 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
148. España: 18 argumentos contra la ley del "matrimonio" homosexual
149. Same-sex marriage and Mass. education
150. Marriage Rights and Parental Rights: Parents, the State, and Proposition 8
151. Parents face court action for removing children from gay history lessons
152. Ballot Arguments
153. Same-Sex “Marriage” and Schools: Critical Review of the GLSEN Same-Sex “Marriage” Curriculum
154. Experts On Homosexuality Critique GLSEN's Same-Sex Marriage Curriculum
155. ^ SAME-SEX MARRIAGE HAS CHANGED CANADA
156. Gay literature in schools
157. Teacher who complained about training day 'promoting gay rights' is cleared
158. School counselor targeted for supporting Maine’s pro-marriage Question 1
159. Byrd, D. "When Activism Masquerades as Science: Potential Consequences of Recent APA Resolutions"
160. http://www.narth.com/docs/endorsement.html
161. Price, M. "UPFRONT - Research uncovers the stress created by same-sex marriage bans" in Monitor on Psychology, Volume 40, No. 1, page 10, January 2009. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
162. Potoczniak, Daniel J.; Aldea, Mirela A.; DeBlaere, Cirleen"Ego identity, social anxiety, social support, and self​-​concealment in lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals." Journal of Counseling Psychology, Vol 54(4), Oct 2007, 447-457.
163. Balsam, Kimberly F.; Mohr, Jonathan J. "Adaptation to sexual orientation stigma: A comparison of bisexual and lesbian/gay adults." Journal of Counseling Psychology, Vol 54(3), Jul 2007, 306-319.
164. Rauch, Jonathan. "For Better or Worse?" The case for gay (and straight) marriage. The New Republic, May 6, 1996.
165. 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.
166. ^ Herek, Gregory M. "Legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the United States: A social science perspective." American Psychologist, Vol 61(6), Sep 2006, 607-621.
167. Emory researchers: Gay marriage bans increase HIV infections
168. Study Links Gay Marriage Bans to Rise in HIV infections

Bibliography

This "Further reading" section may need cleanup. Please read the editing guide and help improve the section. (Learn how and when to remove this message)

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 - 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. {{cite book}}: Text "Marriage under Fire: Why We Must Win This War" ignored (help)
• 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.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: editors list (link)
• Andrew Sullivan (Editor), ed. (2004). Same-Sex Marriage: Pro and Con - A Reader, Revised Updated Edition. New York, NY: Vintage Books, a division of Random House, Inc. ISBN 1400078660. {{cite book}}: |editor= has generic name (help)
• Oliver, Marilyn Tower (1998), Gay and lesbian rights: a struggle, Enslow Publishers, ISBN 9780894909580

External links

This article's use of external links may not follow Misplaced Pages's policies or guidelines. Please improve this article by removing excessive or inappropriate external links, and converting useful links where appropriate into footnote references. (August 2009) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

• Template:DMOZ
• 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

v t e Status of same-sex unions around the world
Africa	Angola Botswana Egypt Eswatini Kenya Lesotho Mauritius Mozambique Namibia Nigeria Seychelles South Africa United Kingdom Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha Zimbabwe
Americas	Argentina Barbados Bolivia Brazil Canada Chile Colombia Costa Rica Cuba Denmark Greenland Ecuador El Salvador Honduras Mexico Netherlands Aruba, Curaçao and Sint Maarten Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba Nicaragua Paraguay Suriname United Kingdom Bermuda Cayman Islands Falkland Islands South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands United States Puerto Rico U.S. Virgin Islands U.S. tribal nations Uruguay Venezuela
Asia	Bhutan Cambodia China Hong Kong India Indonesia Israel Japan Myanmar Nepal Philippines Russia Singapore South Korea Taiwan Thailand United Kingdom British Indian Ocean Territory Vietnam
Europe	Albania Andorra Armenia Austria Belgium Bulgaria Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Faroe Islands Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Italy Kosovo Latvia Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Moldova Monaco Montenegro Netherlands North Macedonia Norway Poland Portugal Romania Russia San Marino Serbia Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Ukraine United Kingdom Akrotiri and Dhekelia Gibraltar Guernsey Isle of Man Jersey
Oceania	Australia Fiji Micronesia New Zealand Palau United Kingdom Pitcairn Islands United States American Samoa Guam Northern Mariana Islands Vanuatu
Antarctica	United Kingdom British Antarctic Territory

v t e Constitutional amendments banning civil unions or same-sex marriages around the world
Same-sex marriage prohibited by constitutional amendment	Armenia Belarus Bolivia Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Central African Republic Croatia Democratic Republic of the Congo Dominican Republic Hungary Jamaica Kenya Kyrgyzstan Latvia Lithuania Moldova Mali Mongolia Montenegro Palau Poland Russia Rwanda Serbia Slovakia South Sudan Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine Zimbabwe
Same-sex marriage and civil unions prohibited by constitutional amendment	Honduras Paraguay

• Misplaced Pages external links cleanup from August 2009
• Same-sex marriage