Content deleted Content added
GreenMeansGo (talk | contribs) →Other legally recognized same-sex unions: Move. Tweak headers. r/m one unsourced para needlessly duplicating the content of the Kenya and Nigeria subsections |
GreenMeansGo (talk | contribs) →Issues: per talk. move contr. content to main header - delete contr. header - promote all prev contr. headers one level except for religious freedom, which remains under religious views |
||
Line 573:
==Issues==
{{See also|LGBT rights opposition}}▼
While few societies have recognized same-sex unions as marriages, the [[history of same-sex unions|historical and anthropological record]] reveals a large range of attitudes towards same-sex unions ranging from praise, through full acceptance and integration, sympathetic toleration, indifference, prohibition and discrimination, to persecution and physical annihilation. Opponents of same-sex marriages have argued that same-sex marriage, while doing good for the couples that participate in them and the children they are raising,<ref name="Laurie"/> undermines a right of children to be raised by their biological mother and father.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-blankenhorn19-2008sep19,0,6057126.story|title=Protecting marriage to protect children|last=Blankenhorn|first=David|date=19 September 2008|work=Los Angeles Times|accessdate=6 October 2009}}</ref> Some supporters of same-sex marriages take the view that the government should have no role in regulating personal relationships,<ref name="findlaw1">{{cite web|url= http://family.findlaw.com/marriage/marriage-agreements/|title=See discussion of prenuptial and postmarital agreements at Findlaw|publisher=Family.findlaw.com|accessdate=5 November 2010}}</ref> while others argue that same-sex marriages would provide social benefits to same-sex couples.<ref name="indegayforum1">Dale Carpenter is a prominent spokesman for this view. For a better understanding of this view, see Carpenter's writings at http://www.indegayforum.org/staff/show/91.html.</ref> The debate regarding same-sex marriages includes debate based upon social viewpoints as well as debate based on majority rules, religious convictions, economic arguments, health-related concerns, and a variety of other issues.▼
===Parenting===
Line 616 ⟶ 618:
In the United States of America, before the case of Obergefell v. Hodges couples in same-sex marriages could only obtain a divorce in jurisdictions that recognized same-sex marriages, with some exceptions.<ref>{{cite web|author1=Matthew S. Coleman, Esq.|title=Obergefell v. Hodges|url=http://www.einhornharris.com/familylawblog/obergefell-v-hodges/|publisher=Einhorn Harris|accessdate=8 November 2015|date=16 September 2015}}</ref>
===
▲{{See also|LGBT rights opposition}}
▲While few societies have recognized same-sex unions as marriages, the [[history of same-sex unions|historical and anthropological record]] reveals a large range of attitudes towards same-sex unions ranging from praise, through full acceptance and integration, sympathetic toleration, indifference, prohibition and discrimination, to persecution and physical annihilation. Opponents of same-sex marriages have argued that same-sex marriage, while doing good for the couples that participate in them and the children they are raising,<ref name="Laurie"/> undermines a right of children to be raised by their biological mother and father.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-blankenhorn19-2008sep19,0,6057126.story|title=Protecting marriage to protect children|last=Blankenhorn|first=David|date=19 September 2008|work=Los Angeles Times|accessdate=6 October 2009}}</ref> Some supporters of same-sex marriages take the view that the government should have no role in regulating personal relationships,<ref name="findlaw1">{{cite web|url= http://family.findlaw.com/marriage/marriage-agreements/|title=See discussion of prenuptial and postmarital agreements at Findlaw|publisher=Family.findlaw.com|accessdate=5 November 2010}}</ref> while others argue that same-sex marriages would provide social benefits to same-sex couples.<ref name="indegayforum1">Dale Carpenter is a prominent spokesman for this view. For a better understanding of this view, see Carpenter's writings at http://www.indegayforum.org/staff/show/91.html.</ref> The debate regarding same-sex marriages includes debate based upon social viewpoints as well as debate based on majority rules, religious convictions, economic arguments, health-related concerns, and a variety of other issues.
{{Further|Religious views on same-sex marriage|Blessing of same-sex marriages and same-sex unions in Christian churches}}
Line 641 ⟶ 639:
One source of controversy is whether same-sex marriage affects [[freedom of religion]].<ref name=BannedInBoston>{{cite news|url= http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/191kgwgh.asp|title=Banned in Boston|work=[[The Weekly Standard]]|date=5 May 2006|accessdate=5 November 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/samesexrights/beforethecourt.html |title=The Supreme Court decision |work=CBC News |location=Toronto |accessdate=5 November 2010 |deadurl=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/20101014072006/http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/samesexrights/beforethecourt.html |archivedate=14 October 2010 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author1=Wilson, Robin J. |author2=Laycock, Douglas |author3=Picarello, Anthony R. |title=Same-sex marriage and religious liberty: emerging conflicts|publisher=Beckett Fund for Religious Liberty|location=Washington, D.C.|year=2008|isbn=0-7425-6326-X }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|url=http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?aid=1991700|title=The Civil Partnership Act 2004, Same-Sex Marriage and the Church of England|author=Humphreys, J.|journal=Ecclesiastical Law Journal|date=July 2006|issue=8|pages=289–306|doi=10.1017/S0956618X0000644X|volume=8 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2013/02/20/registrars-must-perform-gay-marriage-says-government/ |title=Minister: No conscience clause for registrars opposed to same-sex marriage|date=20 February 2013}}</ref> Some religious organizations may refuse to provide employment, public accommodations, adoption services, and other benefits to same-sex couples.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91486340|title=Gay Rights, Religious Liberties: A Three-Act Story|publisher=NPR|location=Washington DC|accessdate=5 November 2010}}</ref> Some governments include freedom of religion provisions in marriage equality laws.<ref>{{cite news|first=Peter|last=Steinfels|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/23/us/23beliefs.html|title=Same-Sex Marriage Laws Pose Protection Quandary|work=The New York Times|date=22 May 2009}}</ref>
{{Main article|Conflict of marriage laws#Same-sex marriage}}
There are differing positions regarding the manner in which same-sex marriage has been introduced into democratic jurisdictions. A "[[direct democracy|majority rules]]" position holds that same-sex marriage is valid, or void and illegal, based upon whether it has been accepted by a simple majority of voters or of their elected representatives.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2008-12-04-gay-poll_N.htm|title=Poll: Calif. gay marriage ban driven by religion|author=Leff, Lisa|agency=Associated Press|date=4 December 2008|work=USA Today}} archived here [http://www.webcitation.org/68OwEop7Y].</ref> In contrast, a [[civil rights]] view holds that the institution can be validly created through the ruling of an impartial judiciary carefully examining the questioning and finding that the right to marry regardless of the gender of the participants is guaranteed under the civil rights laws of the jurisdiction.<ref>{{cite news|url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7723645.stm|title= Divisions persist over gay marriage ban|author=Mirchandani, Rajesh|publisher=BBC News|date=12 November 2008}}</ref>
| |||