Misplaced Pages

Same-sex marriage: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 17:53, 6 December 2020 view sourceMonkbot (talk | contribs)Bots3,695,952 editsm Task 18 (cosmetic): eval 430 templates: del empty params (47×); hyphenate params (119×); cvt lang vals (13×);Tag: AWB← Previous edit Latest revision as of 06:19, 14 January 2025 view source TenorTwelve (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,293 edits J*p is considered a racial slur and Jpn is an acceptable abbreviation for Japan that is often usedTags: Mobile edit Mobile app edit iOS app edit App section source 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{redirect|Marriage equality}} {{short description|Marriage of persons of the same sex or gender}}
{{redirect2|Marriage equality|gay marriage|other uses|marriage equality (disambiguation)|and|gay marriage (disambiguation)}}
{{redirect|Gay Marriage|the 2004 book|Gay Marriage (book)}}
{{pp-move-indef}} {{pp-semi-indef}}
{{pp-vand|small=yes}} {{pp-move}}
{{short description|Marriage of persons of the same sex or gender identity}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=March 2019}} {{Use dmy dates|date=March 2019}}
]
{{Same-sex unions}} {{Same-sex unions}}
{{LGBT sidebar|rights}} {{LGBTQ sidebar|rights}}
<!--- *** Please consider achieving consensus on the talk (discussion) page first before editing the introduction. *** ---> <!--- *** Please consider achieving consensus on the talk (discussion) page first before editing the introduction. *** --->{{Discrimination sidebar}}
'''Same-sex marriage''', also known as '''gay marriage''', is the ] of two people of the same ] or ], entered into in a civil or religious ceremony. There are records of same-sex marriage dating back to the first century. In the modern era, the first legislation legalizing same-sex marriage took effect in the Netherlands on 1 April 2001.


'''Same-sex marriage''', also known as '''gay marriage''', is the ] of two people of the same legal ]. {{As of|2025|post=,}} marriage between same-sex couples is legally performed and recognized in 37 countries, with a total population of 1.5<!--counting 1,532.722 M, including Nepal and Thailand but not Israel, 2023 UN data, out of 7,795.311M world (deducting 250M for systemic over-count in China) --> billion people (20%<!--19.66% including Nepal and Thailand--> of the world's population). The most recent jurisdiction to legalize same-sex marriage is ]. ] is set to begin performing same-sex marriages in January 2025.
Today, same-sex marriage is legally performed and recognized in 29 countries (nationwide or in some jurisdictions):
{{columns-list|colwidth=10em|
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]{{efn|name=mexico|text=Same-sex marriage is legally performed and recognized in the states of ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], and ] as well as in some municipalities in ], ] and ]. Marriages entered into in these jurisdictions are fully recognized by law throughout Mexico. In other states, same-sex marriage is available by court injunction (]).}}
* ]{{efn|name=netherlands|text=Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in ], including ]. Marriages entered into there have minimal recognition in ].}}
* ]{{efn|name=nz|text=Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in ], but not in ], the ] or ], which together make up the ].}}
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ]{{efn|name=uk|text= Except the British Overseas Territories of ], the ], the ], ] and the ].|group=}}
* ]{{efn|name=usa|text=Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in all ] and the ], all territories except ], and in ].}}
* ]
}}
In addition, the ] has issued a ruling that is expected to facilitate recognition in several countries in the ].{{efn|name=IACHR|text=The IACHR ruling was issued on 9 January 2018, with ] accepting the result in a national ruling by the ] on 8 August 2018. ] became the first country in which the international ruling was implemented, following a national ruling by the ] on 12 June 2019.<br /> The other countries that are signatories to the ] and recognize the binding jurisdiction of the court, and which do not already have same-sex marriage nationally, are ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], Mexico, ], ], ], ] and ].<br /> ], ] and ], which are also signatories to the convention, have not agreed to the court's blanket jurisdiction.}}<ref name="IACHR">{{cite web|url=https://au.news.yahoo.com/world/a/38550305/inter-american-court-endorses-same-sex-marriage/|title=Inter-American Court endorses same-sex marriage|website=]|publisher=]|date=9 January 2018|accessdate=9 January 2018|url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180109235924/https://au.news.yahoo.com/world/a/38550305/inter-american-court-endorses-same-sex-marriage/|archive-date=9 January 2018}}</ref>


Same-sex marriage is legally recognized in a large majority of the world's ]; notable exceptions are ], ], ] and the ]. ] are not necessarily covered, though most states with same-sex marriage allow those couples to jointly adopt as other married couples can. Some countries, such as ] and ], restrict advocacy for same-sex marriage.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=VERPOEST |first=LIEN |date=2017 |title=The End of Rhetorics: LGBT policies in Russia and the European Union |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/26531664 |journal=Studia Diplomatica |volume=68 |issue=4 |pages=3–20 |jstor=26531664 |issn=0770-2965}}</ref> A few of these are among the 35 countries (as of 2023) that constitutionally define marriage to prevent marriage between couples of the same sex, with most of those provisions enacted in recent decades as a preventative measure. Other countries have constitutionally mandated ], which is generally interpreted as prohibiting marriage between same-sex couples.{{citation needed|date=June 2024}} In six of the former and most of the latter, homosexuality itself ].
The introduction of same-sex marriage (also called '''marriage equality''') has varied by jurisdiction, and came about through legislative change to ], court rulings based on constitutional guarantees of equality, recognition that it is allowed by existing marriage law,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.koco.com/news/oklahomanews/around-oklahoma/samesex-oklahoma-couple-marries-legally-under-tribal-law/-/12530084/22553184/-/101ihp0z/-/index.html |title=Same-sex Oklahoma couple marries legally under tribal law |publisher=KOCO |date=26 September 2013 |accessdate=22 October 2013}}</ref> or by direct popular vote (via ]s and ]s). The recognition of same-sex marriage is considered to be a ] and a ] as well as a political, social, and religious issue.<ref>{{Cite newspaper|title=Inter-American Human Rights Court backs same-sex marriage|journal=BBC News|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-42633891|date=10 January 2018|accessdate=6 April 2018}}{{indent}}{{cite web|title=Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. ___ (2015)|url=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/576/14-556/opinion3.html|publisher=]|date=26 June 2015|accessdate=6 April 2018}}{{indent}}{{cite news|last=Smith|first=Susan K.|title=Marriage a Civil Right, not Sacred Rite|url=http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/susan_k_smith/2009/07/marriage_a_civil_right_not_sacred_rite.html|accessdate=20 September 2012|newspaper=]|date=30 July 2009}}{{indent}}{{cite web|title=Decision in Perry v. Schwarzenegger|url=https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cand/09cv2292/files/09cv2292-ORDER.pdf|accessdate=6 August 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130316191210/https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cand/09cv2292/files/09cv2292-ORDER.pdf|archive-date=16 March 2013|url-status=dead}}</ref> The most prominent supporters of same-sex marriage are human rights and civil rights organizations as well as the medical and scientific communities, while the most prominent opponents are ] groups. ] continually rising support for the recognition of same-sex marriage in all developed democracies and in some developing democracies.{{Citation needed|date=October 2020}}


There are records of marriage between men dating back to the ].<ref name="WilliamsRoman2">Williams, CA., ''Roman Homosexuality: Second Edition'', Oxford University Press, 2009, p. 280, p. 284.</ref> ]<ref name="auto">{{Cite news|last1=Padnani|first1=Amisha|author1-link=Amy Padnani|last2=Fang|first2=Celina|date=June 26, 2015|title=Same-Sex Marriage: Landmark Decisions and Precedents|language=en-US|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/06/26/us/samesex-marriage-landmarks.html|access-date=|issn=}}</ref><ref name="auto1">{{Cite web|last=Baume|first=Matt|date=March 1, 2019|title=Meet the Gay Men Whose 1971 Marriage Was Finally Recognized|url=https://www.advocate.com/people/2019/3/01/meet-gay-men-whose-1971-marriage-was-finally-recognized|access-date=|website=The Advocate|language=en}}</ref> are the first same sex couple in modern recorded history<ref name="auto2">] Archive (September 12, 2017). {{Cite web|url=https://archive.storycorps.org/interviews/dda002648/|title=Michael McConnell, Jack Baker, and Lisa Vecoli}}
Scientific studies show that the financial, psychological, and physical well-being of gay people are enhanced by marriage, and that the children of same-sex parents benefit from being raised by married same-sex couples within a marital union that is recognized by law and supported by societal institutions.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.apa.org/about/governance/council/policy/gay-marriage.pdf|title=Resolution on Sexual Orientation and Marriage|year=2004|author=American Psychological Association|accessdate=10 November 2010|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110511190536/http://www.apa.org/about/governance/council/policy/gay-marriage.pdf |archive-date=11 May 2011|author-link=American Psychological Association}}{{indent}}{{cite web|url=http://www2.asanet.org/public/marriage_res.html|author=American Sociological Association|title=American Sociological Association Member Resolution on Proposed U.S. Constitutional Amendment Regarding Marriage|accessdate=10 November 2010|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070812175917/http://www2.asanet.org/public/marriage_res.html|archive-date=12 August 2007|author-link=American Sociological Association}}{{indent}}{{cite web|url=http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2010/10/27/amicus29.pdf|title=Brief of the American Psychological Association, The California Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy as amici curiae in support of plaintiff-appellees&nbsp;– Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of California Civil Case No. 09-CV-2292 VRW (Honorable Vaughn R. Walker)|accessdate=5 November 2010}}{{indent}}{{cite web|title=Marriage of Same-Sex Couples &nbsp;– 2006 Position Statement|url=http://www.cpa.ca/cpasite/userfiles/Documents/Practice_Page/Marriage_SameSex_Couples_PositionStatement.pdf|publisher=]|accessdate=28 September 2012|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120707191052/http://www.cpa.ca/cpasite/userfiles/Documents/Practice_Page/Marriage_SameSex_Couples_PositionStatement.pdf|archive-date=7 July 2012}}{{indent}}{{Cite journal|vauthors=Pawelski JG, Perrin EC, Foy JM |display-authors=etal |title=The effects of marriage, civil union, and domestic partnership laws on the health and well-being of children|journal=]|volume=118|issue=1|pages=349–64|date=July 2006|pmid=16818585|doi=10.1542/peds.2006-1279|doi-access=free}}{{indent}}{{Cite journal|url=http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/118/1/349 |title= The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children|journal=Pediatrics |volume=118 |issue=1 |pages=349–364 |accessdate=7 July 2017|doi=10.1542/peds.2006-1279 |pmid=16818585 |year=2006 |last1=Pawelski |first1=J. G. |last2=Perrin |first2=E. C. |last3=Foy |first3=J. M. |last4=Allen |first4=C. E. |last5=Crawford |first5=J. E. |last6=Del Monte |first6=M. |last7=Kaufman |first7=M. |last8=Klein |first8=J. D. |last9=Smith |first9=K. |last10=Springer |first10=S. |last11=Tanner |first11=J. L. |last12=Vickers |first12=D. L. |doi-access=free }}</ref> Social science research indicates that the exclusion of homosexuals from marriage stigmatizes and invites public discrimination against them, with research also repudiating the notion that either civilization or viable social orders depend upon restricting marriage to heterosexuals.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2010/10/27/amicus39.pdf|title=Brief of Amici Curiae American Anthropological Association et al., supporting plaintiffs-appellees and urging affirmance&nbsp;– Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of California Civil Case No. 09-CV-2292 VRW (Honorable Vaughn R. Walker)|accessdate=5 November 2010}}{{indent}}{{cite web|url=http://www.aaanet.org/issues/policy-advocacy/Statement-on-Marriage-and-the-family.cfm|author=American Anthropological Association|year=2004|title=Statement on Marriage and the Family|accessdate=18 September 2015|author-link=American Anthropological Association}}</ref> Same-sex marriage can provide those in committed same-sex relationships with relevant government services and make financial demands on them comparable to that required of those in opposite-sex marriages, and also gives them legal protections such as inheritance and hospital visitation rights.<ref>Handbook of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Administration and Policy&nbsp;— Page 13, Wallace Swan – 2004</ref> Opposition to same-sex marriage is based on claims such as that homosexuality is unnatural and abnormal, that the recognition of same-sex unions will promote homosexuality in society, and that children are better off when raised by opposite-sex couples.<ref name="thoughtco">{{cite web | url=https://www.thoughtco.com/moral-and-religious-arguments-250095 | title=Common Arguments Against Gay Marriage | date=16 July 2017 | accessdate=26 September 2017 | author=Cline, Austin}}</ref> These claims are refuted by ], which show that homosexuality is a natural and normal variation in human sexuality, and that ] is not a choice. Many studies have shown that children of same-sex couples fare just as well as the children of opposite-sex couples; some studies have shown benefits to being raised by same-sex couples.<ref name="science">{{cite web|first=Andy|last=Coghlan|url=https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14146-gay-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex|title=Gay brains structured like those of the opposite sex|work=]|date=16 June 2008|accessdate=5 April 2018}}{{indent}}{{cite web|url=https://www.americananthro.org/ConnectWithAAA/Content.aspx?ItemNumber=2602|title=Statement on Marriage and the Family|publisher=]|accessdate=9 June 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191228200229/https://www.americananthro.org/ConnectWithAAA/Content.aspx?ItemNumber=2602|archive-date=28 December 2019|url-status=dead}}{{indent}}{{cite book|author1=Mary Ann Lamanna|first2=Agnes|last2=Riedmann|author3=Susan D Stewart|title=Marriages, Families, and Relationships: Making Choices in a Diverse Society|publisher=]|isbn=978-1305176898|year=2014|page=82|accessdate=11 February 2016|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=fofaAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA82|quote=he APA says that sexual orientation is not a choice . (], 2010).}}{{indent}}{{cite journal|url=http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/118/1/349.full|title=The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children|journal=]|accessdate=2 November 2013}}{{indent}}{{cite web|author=], ], ], ], ], ], ], ]|display-authors=etal|url=https://www.supremecourt.gov/ObergefellHodges/AmicusBriefs/14-556_American_Psychological_Association.pdf|title=Brief of as ''Amici Curiae'' in Support of Petitioners|website=]|accessdate=5 April 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190412074914/https://www.supremecourt.gov/ObergefellHodges/AmicusBriefs/14-556_American_Psychological_Association.pdf|archive-date=12 April 2019|url-status=dead}}{{indent}}{{cite news|first=Annie|last=Davis|url=https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/oct/23/children-raised-by-same-sex-parents-do-as-well-as-their-peers-study-shows|title=Children raised by same-sex parents do as well as their peers, study shows|work=]|date=22 October 2017|accessdate=28 March 2018}}{{indent}}{{cite news|first=Lindsey|last=Bever|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/07/07/children-of-same-sex-couples-are-happier-and-healthier-than-peers-research-shows|title=Children of same-sex couples are happier and healthier than peers, research shows|work=]|date=7 July 2014|accessdate=12 December 2018}}{{indent}}{{cite web|url=https://www.aamft.org/Consumer_Updates/Same-sex_Parents_and_Their_Children.aspx|title=Same-sex Parents and Their Children|accessdate=16 June 2019|publisher=]|quote=Most research studies show that children with two moms or two dads fare just as well as children with heterosexual parents... Where research differences have been found, they have sometimes favored same-sex parents.|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190616203540/https://www.aamft.org/Consumer_Updates/Same-sex_Parents_and_Their_Children.aspx|archive-date=16 June 2019|url-status=dead}}{{indent}}{{cite web |url=https://www.mother.ly/news/lesbian-parents-impact-kids-mental-health?rebelltitem=1#rebelltitem1 |title=Major long-term study:Kids with lesbian parents grow up to be happy adults |last=Marcoux |first=Heather |date=23 July 2018 |accessdate=16 June 2019 |quote=The researchers note that the kids in same-sex homes actually reported fewer difficulties than those born to heterosexual couples. }}{{Dead link|date=February 2020 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}{{indent}}{{cite journal |url=https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/118/1/349.full |title=The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children |last1=Pawelski |first1=James G. |last2=Perrin |first2=Ellen C. |last3=Foy |first3=Jane M. |last4=Allen |first4=Carole E. |last5=Crawford |first5=James E. |last6=Del Monte |first6=Mark |last7=Kaufman |first7=Miriam |last8=Klein |first8=Jonathan D. |last9=Smith |first9=Karen |last10=Springer |first10=Sarah |last11=Tanner |first11=J. Lane |last12=Vickers |first12=Dennis L. |quote=In fact, growing up with parents who are lesbian or gay may confer some advantages to children. |date=July 2006 |accessdate=16 June 2019 |journal=] |publisher=] |volume=118 |issue=1 |pages=349–64 |pmid=16818585 |doi=10.1542/peds.2006-1279 |doi-access=free }}</ref>
* Michael McConnell (75) and husband Jack Baker (75) talk with friend Lisa Vecoli (55) about having the first same-sex marriage legally recognized by a U.S. civil government in 1971, why they chose to get married, and what the response to their marriage was like.
* JB describes the decades-long (46-year) process from the denial of their marriage license in 1971 until a second request that same year in ], ], was "declared to be in all respects valid" by Order of Gregory J. Anderson, Judge of District Court.</ref> known to obtain a ],<ref name="National Archives">Newsletter, "Hidden Treasures from the Stacks", ''The National Archives at Kansas City'', p.&nbsp;6 (September&nbsp;2013).
* </ref> have their marriage solemnized, which occurred on September 3, 1971, in ],<ref name="3Sept1971">Source: Blue Earth County
* Certificate 434960:
:* Applicants: James Michael McConnell and Pat Lyn McConnell
:* Date of Marriage: September 3, 1971
* Certified Copy: </ref> and have it legally recognized by any form of government.<ref name=ruling>"The September&nbsp;3, 1971 marriage of James Michael McConnell and Pat Lyn McConnell, a/k/a Richard John Baker, has never been dissolved or annulled by judicial decree and no grounds currently exist on which to invalidate the marriage."
* Sources: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW by Assistant Chief Judge Gregory Anderson, Fifth Judicial District, (page&nbsp;4);
* Copy: , File Number 07-CV-16-4559, "Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order for Partial Summary Judgment" from Blue Earth County District Court in re James Michael McConnell et al. v. Blue Earth County et al. (September 18, 2018);
* from ''U of M Libraries'';
* McConnell Files, "America’s First Gay Marriage" (binder&nbsp;#4), Tretter Collection in GLBT Studies, ''U&nbsp;of&nbsp;M&nbsp;Libraries''.</ref><ref name="epilogue">Michael McConnell, with Jack Baker, as told to Gail Langer Karwoski, " {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150826235010/https://www.upress.umn.edu/book-division/books/the-wedding-heard-around-the-world |date=August 26, 2015 }}". University of Minnesota Press (2016). Reprint, "With A New Epilogue" (2020).</ref> The first law providing for marriage equality between same-sex and opposite-sex couples was ] in 2000 and took effect on 1 April 2001.<ref name="bloomberg-2014-12-04">{{Cite web |last=Winter |first=Caroline |date=December 4, 2014 |title=In 14 years, same-sex marriage has spread round the world |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-12-04/gay-marriage-same-sex-partners-can-wed-in-many-countries |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220113164339/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-12-04/gay-marriage-same-sex-partners-can-wed-in-many-countries |archive-date=13 January 2022 |access-date=2022-02-20 |publisher=Bloomberg}}</ref> The application of ] equally to same-sex and opposite-sex couples has varied by jurisdiction, and has come about through legislative change to marriage law, court rulings based on constitutional guarantees of equality, recognition that marriage of same-sex couples is allowed by existing marriage law, and by direct popular vote, such as through ]s and ]s.<ref>{{Cite web |date=26 September 2013 |title=Same-sex Oklahoma couple marries legally under tribal law |url=http://www.koco.com/news/oklahomanews/around-oklahoma/samesex-oklahoma-couple-marries-legally-under-tribal-law/-/12530084/22553184/-/101ihp0z/-/index.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131022022830/http://www.koco.com/news/oklahomanews/around-oklahoma/samesex-oklahoma-couple-marries-legally-under-tribal-law/-/12530084/22553184/-/101ihp0z/-/index.html |archive-date=22 October 2013 |access-date=22 October 2013 |publisher=KOCO}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=19 June 2022 |title=Clela Rorex, former Boulder County Clerk who issued first same-sex marriage license in 1975 dies at 78 |url=https://www.coloradodaily.com/2022/06/19/former-boulder-county-clerk-who-issued-first-same-sex-marriage-license-in-1975-dies-at-78/}}</ref> The most prominent supporters of same-sex marriage are the world's major medical and ],<ref name="science" /><ref name="amici" /><ref name="cpa2006" /> along with ] and ] organizations,<ref name="bbc" /> while its most prominent opponents are ] groups.<ref name="religion" /> ] continually rising support for the recognition of same-sex marriage in all developed democracies and in many developing countries.


Scientific studies show that the financial, psychological, and physical well-being of gay people is enhanced by marriage, and that the children of same-sex parents benefit from being raised by married same-sex couples within a marital union that is recognized by law and supported by societal institutions. At the same time, no harm is done to the institution of marriage among heterosexuals.<ref>Molly Ball, 2024 May 13, ''Wall Street Journal'', </ref> Social science research indicates that the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage stigmatizes and invites public discrimination against gay and lesbian people, with research repudiating the notion that either civilization or viable social orders depend upon restricting marriage to heterosexuals.<ref>Multiple sources:
A ] revealed that the establishment of same-sex marriage is associated with a significant reduction in the rate of attempted suicide among children, with the effect being concentrated among children of a minority sexual orientation, resulting in about 134,000 fewer children attempting suicide each year in the United States.<ref name=JAMA />
*{{Cite web |publisher=] |year=2004 |title=Resolution on Sexual Orientation and Marriage |url=http://www.apa.org/about/governance/council/policy/gay-marriage.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110511190536/http://www.apa.org/about/governance/council/policy/gay-marriage.pdf |archive-date=11 May 2011 |access-date=10 November 2010}}
*{{cite web|url=http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2010/10/27/amicus29.pdf|title=Brief of the American Psychological Association, The California Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy as amici curiae in support of plaintiff-appellees&nbsp;– Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of California Civil Case No. 09-CV-2292 VRW (Honorable Vaughn R. Walker)|access-date=5 November 2010|archive-date=13 April 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150413160709/http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2010/10/27/amicus29.pdf|url-status=live}}
*{{cite web|title=Marriage of Same-Sex Couples &nbsp;– 2006 Position Statement |url=http://www.cpa.ca/cpasite/userfiles/Documents/Practice_Page/Marriage_SameSex_Couples_PositionStatement.pdf|publisher=]|access-date=28 September 2012|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120707191052/http://www.cpa.ca/cpasite/userfiles/Documents/Practice_Page/Marriage_SameSex_Couples_PositionStatement.pdf|archive-date=7 July 2012}}
*{{Cite journal|vauthors=Pawelski JG, Perrin EC, Foy JM |display-authors=etal |title=The effects of marriage, civil union, and domestic partnership laws on the health and well-being of children|journal=]|volume=118|issue=1|pages=349–64|date=July 2006|pmid=16818585|doi=10.1542/peds.2006-1279|s2cid=219194821 |doi-access= |issn=0031-4005}}
*{{Cite journal |url=http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/118/1/349 |title=The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children |journal=Pediatrics |volume=118 |issue=1 |pages=349–364 |access-date=7 July 2017 |doi=10.1542/peds.2006-1279 |pmid=16818585 |year=2006 |last1=Pawelski |first1=J. G. |last2=Perrin |first2=E. C. |last3=Foy |first3=J. M. |last4=Allen |first4=C. E. |last5=Crawford |first5=J. E. |last6=Del Monte |first6=M. |last7=Kaufman |first7=M. |last8=Klein |first8=J. D. |last9=Smith |first9=K. |last10=Springer |first10=S. |last11=Tanner |first11=J. L. |last12=Vickers |first12=D. L. |s2cid=219194821 |doi-access= |archive-date=1 May 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110501125053/http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/118/1/349 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Brief of Amici Curiae American Anthropological Association et al., supporting plaintiffs-appellees and urging affirmance&nbsp;– Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of California Civil Case No. 09-CV-2292 VRW (Honorable Vaughn R. Walker) |url=http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2010/10/27/amicus39.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101226182234/http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2010/10/27/amicus39.pdf |archive-date=26 December 2010 |access-date=5 November 2010}}</ref><ref name="aaa" /> Same-sex marriage can provide those in committed same-sex relationships with relevant government services and make financial demands on them comparable to that required of those in opposite-sex marriages, and also gives them legal protections such as inheritance and hospital visitation rights.<ref>Handbook of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Administration and Policy&nbsp;— Page 13, Wallace Swan – 2004</ref> Opposition is based on claims such as that homosexuality is unnatural and abnormal, that the recognition of same-sex unions will promote homosexuality in society, and that children are better off when raised by opposite-sex couples. These claims are refuted by ], which show that homosexuality is a natural and normal variation in human sexuality, that ] is not a choice, and that children of same-sex couples fare just as well as the children of opposite-sex couples.<ref name="science">Multiple sources:
*{{Cite web |last=Coghlan |first=Andy |date=16 June 2008 |title=Gay brains structured like those of the opposite sex |url=https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14146-gay-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190429012045/https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14146-gay-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex/ |archive-date=29 April 2019 |access-date=5 April 2018 |website=]}}
*{{cite book|first1=Mary Ann |last1=Lamanna |first2=Agnes |last2=Riedmann |first3=Susan D. |last3=Stewart |title=Marriages, Families, and Relationships: Making Choices in a Diverse Society |publisher=] |isbn=978-1305176898 |year=2014 |page=82 |access-date=11 February 2016 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=fofaAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA82 |quote=he APA says that sexual orientation is not a choice . (], 2010).|archive-date=30 November 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161130141623/https://books.google.com/books?id=fofaAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA82|url-status=live}}
*{{cite journal |url=http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/118/1/349.full |title=The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children |journal=] |year=2006 |doi=10.1542/peds.2006-1279 |access-date=2 November 2013 |last1=Pawelski |first1=J. G. |last2=Perrin |first2=E. C. |last3=Foy |first3=J. M. |last4=Allen |first4=C. E. |last5=Crawford |first5=J. E. |last6=Del Monte |first6=M. |last7=Kaufman |first7=M. |last8=Klein |first8=J. D. |last9=Smith |first9=K. |last10=Springer |first10=S. |last11=Tanner |first11=J. L. |last12=Vickers |first12=D. L. |volume=118 |issue=1 |pages=349–364 |pmid=16818585 |s2cid=219194821 |doi-access=|archive-date=29 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190429011707/https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/118/1/349.full|url-status=live}}
*{{cite web|author1=] |author2=] |author3=] |author4=] |author5=] |author6=] |author7=] |author8=] |display-authors=etal |title=Brief of as ''Amici Curiae'' in Support of Petitioners |website=] |url=https://www.supremecourt.gov/ObergefellHodges/AmicusBriefs/14-556_American_Psychological_Association.pdf |access-date=5 April 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190412074914/https://www.supremecourt.gov/ObergefellHodges/AmicusBriefs/14-556_American_Psychological_Association.pdf|archive-date=12 April 2019|url-status=dead}}
*{{cite news|first=Lindsey|last=Bever|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/07/07/children-of-same-sex-couples-are-happier-and-healthier-than-peers-research-shows|title=Children of same-sex couples are happier and healthier than peers, research shows|newspaper=]|date=7 July 2014|access-date=12 December 2018|archive-date=4 May 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190504054558/https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/07/07/children-of-same-sex-couples-are-happier-and-healthier-than-peers-research-shows/|url-status=live}}
*{{cite journal |url=https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/118/1/349.full |title=The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children |last1=Pawelski |first1=James G. |last2=Perrin |first2=Ellen C. |last3=Foy |first3=Jane M. |last4=Allen |first4=Carole E. |last5=Crawford |first5=James E. |last6=Del Monte |first6=Mark |last7=Kaufman |first7=Miriam |last8=Klein |first8=Jonathan D. |last9=Smith |first9=Karen |last10=Springer |first10=Sarah |last11=Tanner |first11=J. Lane |last12=Vickers |first12=Dennis L. |quote=In fact, growing up with parents who are lesbian or gay may confer some advantages to children. |date=July 2006 |access-date=16 June 2019 |journal=] |publisher=] |volume=118 |issue=1 |pages=349–64 |pmid=16818585 |doi=10.1542/peds.2006-1279 |s2cid=219194821 |doi-access= |archive-date=1 May 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110501125053/http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/118/1/349 |url-status=live }}</ref>
{{TOC limit|3}} {{TOC limit|3}}


==Terminology== ==Terminology==
===Alternative terms=== ===Alternative terms===
], United States on 11 November 2017]]
Some proponents of the legal recognition of same-sex marriage—such as ] (founded in 1998), ] (founded in 2003), and ]—have long used the terms ''marriage equality'' and ''equal marriage'' to signal that their goal was for same-sex marriage to be recognized on equal ground with opposite-sex marriage. Opponents of same-sex marriage, by contrast, characterized gay couples as seeking "]".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gardenstateequality.org/issues/marriageequality/|title=Marriage Equality|publisher=Garden State Equality|accessdate=24 July 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.freedomtomarry.org/pages/marriage-101#faq3|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100216021129/http://www.freedomtomarry.org/pages/marriage-101#faq3|url-status=dead|archive-date=16 February 2010|title=Marriage 101|publisher=]|accessdate=28 September 2012}}</ref><ref name="Pratt">{{cite news|url=http://docs.newsbank.com/openurl?ctx_ver=z39.88-2004&rft_id=info:sid/iw.newsbank.com:AWNB:AENN&rft_val_format=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rft_dat=13F21B414EDA8168&svc_dat=InfoWeb:aggregated5&req_dat=0FB3382EE6AD1E46|title=Albany area real estate and the Marriage Equality Act|date=29 May 2012|work=Albany Examiner|accessdate=25 December 2012|author=Pratt, Patricia|quote=On July 24, 2011 the Marriage Equality Act became a law in New York State forever changing the state's legal view of what a married couple is.}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Vote on Illinois marriage equality bill coming in January: sponsors|url=http://chicagophoenix.com/2012/12/13/illinois-marriage-equality-vote-january|accessdate=23 December 2012|newspaper=Chicago Phoenix|date=13 December 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Commission endorses marriage and adoption equality|url=http://www.hrc.co.nz/human-rights-environment/sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity/commission-endorses-marriage-and-adoption-equality|publisher=Human Right Commission New Zealand|accessdate=23 December 2012|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121202132031/http://www.hrc.co.nz/human-rights-environment/sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity/commission-endorses-marriage-and-adoption-equality|archive-date=2 December 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Mulholland|first=Helene|title=Ed Miliband calls for gay marriage equality|url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/sep/27/ed-miliband-gay-wedding-equality|accessdate=23 December 2012|newspaper=The Guardian|location=London, UK|date=27 September 2012}}</ref><ref name="Ring">{{cite news|url=http://www.advocate.com/politics/marriage-equality/2012/12/20/newt-gingrich-accepts-marriage-equality-inevitable|title=Newt Gingrich: Marriage Equality Inevitable, OK|author=Ring, Trudy|work=The Advocate|location=Los Angeles|date=20 December 2012|quote=He noted to HuffPo that he not only has a lesbian half-sister, LGBT rights activist Candace Gingrich, but has gay friends who've gotten married in Iowa, where their unions are legal. Public opinion has shifted in favor of marriage equality, he said, and the Republican Party could end up on the wrong side of history if it continues to go against the tide.}}</ref>
Some proponents of the legal recognition of same-sex marriage—such as ] (founded in 1998), ] (founded in 2003), ], and ] - used the terms ''marriage equality'' and ''equal marriage'' to signal that their goal was for same-sex marriage to be recognized on equal ground with opposite-sex marriage.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Marriage Equality |url=http://www.gardenstateequality.org/issues/marriageequality/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141018065055/http://www.gardenstateequality.org/issues/marriageequality/ |archive-date=18 October 2014 |access-date=24 July 2012 |publisher=Garden State Equality}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Marriage 101 |url=http://www.freedomtomarry.org/pages/marriage-101#faq3 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100216021129/http://www.freedomtomarry.org/pages/marriage-101#faq3 |archive-date=16 February 2010 |access-date=28 September 2012 |publisher=]}}</ref><ref name="Pratt">{{Cite news |last=Pratt, Patricia |date=29 May 2012 |title=Albany area real estate and the Marriage Equality Act |work=Albany Examiner |url=http://docs.newsbank.com/openurl?ctx_ver=z39.88-2004&rft_id=info:sid/iw.newsbank.com:AWNB:AENN&rft_val_format=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rft_dat=13F21B414EDA8168&svc_dat=InfoWeb:aggregated5&req_dat=0FB3382EE6AD1E46 |access-date=25 December 2012 |quote=On July 24, 2011 the Marriage Equality Act became a law in New York State forever changing the state's legal view of what a married couple is.}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=13 December 2012 |title=Vote on Illinois marriage equality bill coming in January: sponsors |work=Chicago Phoenix |url=http://chicagophoenix.com/2012/12/13/illinois-marriage-equality-vote-january |url-status=live |access-date=23 December 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121226111510/http://chicagophoenix.com/2012/12/13/illinois-marriage-equality-vote-january/ |archive-date=26 December 2012}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Mulholland |first=Helene |date=27 September 2012 |title=Ed Miliband calls for gay marriage equality |work=The Guardian |location=London, UK |url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/sep/27/ed-miliband-gay-wedding-equality |url-status=live |access-date=23 December 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130928234116/http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/sep/27/ed-miliband-gay-wedding-equality |archive-date=28 September 2013}}</ref><ref name="Ring">{{Cite news |last=Ring, Trudy |date=20 December 2012 |title=Newt Gingrich: Marriage Equality Inevitable, OK |work=The Advocate |location=Los Angeles |url=http://www.advocate.com/politics/marriage-equality/2012/12/20/newt-gingrich-accepts-marriage-equality-inevitable |url-status=live |access-date=25 December 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121223062417/http://www.advocate.com/politics/marriage-equality/2012/12/20/newt-gingrich-accepts-marriage-equality-inevitable |archive-date=23 December 2012 |quote=He noted to HuffPo that he not only has a lesbian half-sister, LGBT rights activist ], but has gay friends who've gotten married in Iowa, where their unions are legal. Public opinion has shifted in favor of marriage equality, he said, and the Republican Party could end up on the wrong side of history if it continues to go against the tide.}}</ref> The ] recommends the use of ''same-sex marriage'' over ''gay marriage''.<ref>{{Cite tweet |number=1095408455479902211 |user=APStylebook |title=The term same-sex marriage is preferred over gay marriage. In places where it's legal, same-sex marriage is no different from other marriages, so the term should be used only when germane and needed to distinguish from marriages between heterosexual couples. #APStyleChat |author=APStylebook |date=12 February 2019 |access-date=13 December 2022 |language=en |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221019190133/https://twitter.com/apstylebook/status/1095408455479902211 |archive-date=19 October 2022 |url-status=live}}</ref> In deciding whether to use the term ''gay marriage'', it may also be noted that not everyone in a same-sex marriage is gay &ndash; for example, some are bisexual &ndash; and therefore using the term ''gay marriage'' is sometimes considered erasure of such people.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://news.gallup.com/poll/329975/one-lgbt-americans-married-sex-spouse.aspx|title=One in 10 LGBT Americans Married to Same-Sex Spouse|date=24 February 2021|website=Gallup }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=https://consciousstyleguide.com/when-bisexual-people-marry/|title=When Bisexual People Marry|first=Karen|last=Yin|date=8 March 2016 |website=Conscious Style Guide}}</ref>

The ] recommends the usage of the phrase ''marriage for gays and lesbians'' or the term ''gay marriage'' in space-limited headlines. The ] warns that the construct ''gay marriage'' can imply that the marriages of same-sex couples are somehow different from the marriages of opposite-sex couples.<ref>{{cite news|last=Harper|first=Robyn|title=When I Get Married, Will It Be a 'Gay Marriage'?|url=https://www.huffingtonpost.com/robyn-harper/marriage-equality_b_1572611.html|accessdate=28 September 2012|newspaper=]|date=6 June 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Harper |first=Robyn |title=My Marriage Won't Be a 'Gay Marriage' |url=http://voices.yahoo.com/my-marriage-wont-gay-marriage-11514384.html?cat=41|accessdate=28 September 2012|publisher=Yahoo!|date=30 June 2012|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120928202736/http://voices.yahoo.com/my-marriage-wont-gay-marriage-11514384.html?cat=41|archive-date=28 September 2012}}</ref>


===Use of the term ''marriage''=== ===Use of the term ''marriage''===
Anthropologists have struggled to determine a definition of ] that absorbs commonalities of the ] across cultures around the world.<ref name=Fedorak>{{cite book|last=Fedorak|first=Shirley A.|title=Anthropology matters!|year=2008|publisher=]|location=, Ont.|isbn=978-1442601086|pages=Ch. 11; p. 174}}</ref><ref name=Gough>{{cite journal|last=Gough|first=Kathleen E.|title=The Nayars and the Definition of Marriage|journal=The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland|date=Jan–Jun 1959 |volume=89|issue=1|pages=23–34|doi=10.2307/2844434|jstor=2844434}}</ref> Many proposed definitions have been criticized for failing to recognize the existence of same-sex marriage in some cultures, including in more than 30 ], such as the ] and ].<ref name=Gough/><ref name=Africa>{{cite book|last=Murray|first=Stephen O.|title=Boy-wives and female husbands : studies of African homosexualities|year=2001|publisher=St. Martin's|location=New York|isbn=978-0312238292|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZjbESL6YWU0C&q=%22Woman-woman+marriage+in+Africa%22&pg=PA255|edition=1st pbk.|author2=Roscoe, Will}}</ref><ref name=Kikuyu>{{cite journal|last=Njambi|first=Wairimu|author2=O'Brien, William|title=Revisiting "Woman-Woman Marriage": Notes on Gikuyu Women|journal=]|date=Spring 2001|volume=12|issue=1|pages=1–23|url=http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/nwsa_journal/v012/12.1njambi.html|accessdate=28 September 2012|doi=10.1353/nwsa.2000.0015|s2cid=144520611}}</ref> Anthropologists have struggled to determine a definition of ] that absorbs commonalities of the ] across cultures around the world.<ref name="Fedorak">{{Cite book |last=Fedorak |first=Shirley A. |title=Anthropology matters! |publisher=] |year=2008 |isbn=978-1442601086 |location=, Ont. |pages=Ch. 11; p. 174}}</ref><ref name="Gough">{{Cite journal |last=Gough |first=Kathleen E. |date=Jan–Jun 1959 |title=The Nayars and the Definition of Marriage |journal=The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland |volume=89 |issue=1 |pages=23–34 |doi=10.2307/2844434 |jstor=2844434}}</ref> Many proposed definitions have been criticized for failing to recognize the existence of same-sex marriage in some cultures, including those of more than 30 ], such as the ] and ].<ref name=Gough/><ref name="Africa">{{Cite book |last1=Murray |first1=Stephen O. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZjbESL6YWU0C&q=%22Woman-woman+marriage+in+Africa%22&pg=PA255 |title=Boy-wives and female husbands : studies of African homosexualities |last2=Roscoe, Will |publisher=St. Martin's |year=2001 |isbn=978-0312238292 |edition=1st pbk. |location=New York |access-date=28 October 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210204174244/https://books.google.com/books?id=ZjbESL6YWU0C&q=%22Woman-woman+marriage+in+Africa%22&pg=PA255 |archive-date=4 February 2021 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="Kikuyu">{{Cite journal |last1=Njambi |first1=Wairimu |last2=O'Brien, William |date=Spring 2001 |title=Revisiting "Woman-Woman Marriage": Notes on Gikuyu Women |url=http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/nwsa_journal/v012/12.1njambi.html |url-status=live |journal=] |volume=12 |issue=1 |pages=1–23 |doi=10.1353/nwsa.2000.0015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120113015023/http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=%2Fjournals%2Fnwsa_journal%2Fv012%2F12.1njambi.html |archive-date=13 January 2012 |access-date=28 September 2012 |s2cid=144520611}}</ref>


With several countries revising their marriage laws to recognize same-sex couples in the 21st century, all major English dictionaries have revised their definition of the word marriage to either drop gender specifications or supplement them with secondary definitions to include gender-neutral language or explicit recognition of same-sex unions.<ref>{{cite news|title=Dictionaries take lead in redefining modern marriage|url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/may/24/20040524-103201-1169r|accessdate=25 September 2012|newspaper=]|date=24 May 2004}}</ref><ref name=ABA>{{cite web|title=Webster Makes It Official: Definition of Marriage Has Changed|url=http://www.abajournal.com/news/webster_makes_it_official_definition_of_marriage_has_changed|publisher=]|accessdate=28 September 2012}}</ref> The '']'' has recognized same-sex marriage since 2000.<ref name=slate>{{cite news|last=Redman|first=Daniel|title=Noah Webster Gives His Blessing: Dictionaries recognize same-sex marriage—who knew?|url=http://www.slate.com/id/2215628|accessdate=28 September 2012|newspaper=]|date=7 April 2009}}</ref> With several countries revising their marriage laws to recognize same-sex couples in the 21st century, all major English dictionaries have revised their definition of the word marriage to either drop gender specifications or supplement them with secondary definitions to include gender-neutral language or explicit recognition of same-sex unions.<ref>{{Cite news |date=24 May 2004 |title=Dictionaries take lead in redefining modern marriage |work=] |url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/may/24/20040524-103201-1169r |url-status=live |access-date=25 September 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120918034452/http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/may/24/20040524-103201-1169r/ |archive-date=18 September 2012}}</ref><ref name="ABA">{{Cite web |title=Webster Makes It Official: Definition of Marriage Has Changed |url=http://www.abajournal.com/news/webster_makes_it_official_definition_of_marriage_has_changed |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150427004101/http://www.abajournal.com/news/webster_makes_it_official_definition_of_marriage_has_changed |archive-date=27 April 2015 |access-date=28 September 2012 |publisher=]}}</ref> The '']'' has recognized same-sex marriage since 2000.<ref name="slate">{{Cite news |last=Redman |first=Daniel |date=7 April 2009 |title=Noah Webster Gives His Blessing: Dictionaries recognize same-sex marriage—who knew? |work=] |url=http://www.slate.com/id/2215628 |url-status=live |access-date=28 September 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110917032021/http://www.slate.com/id/2215628/ |archive-date=17 September 2011}}</ref>


Opponents of same-sex marriage who want marriage to be restricted to pairings of a man and a woman, such as ], the ], and the ], use the term ''traditional marriage'' to mean opposite-sex marriage.<ref name="religion">{{cite web|title=The Divine Institution of Marriage|url=https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/the-divine-institution-of-marriage|publisher=]|accessdate=28 September 2012|date=13 August 2008}}{{indent}}{{cite news|url=http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?id=23282 |work=Baptist Press|title=Marriage Protection Sunday: Churches encouraged to address 'gay marriage'|date=19 May 2006|accessdate=30 September 2011}}</ref> Opponents of same-sex marriage who want marriage to be restricted to pairings of a man and a woman, such as ], the ], and the ], use the term ''traditional marriage'' to mean opposite-sex marriage.<ref name="religion">{{Cite web |date=13 August 2008 |title=The Divine Institution of Marriage |url=https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/the-divine-institution-of-marriage |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190611071837/https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/the-divine-institution-of-marriage |archive-date=11 June 2019 |access-date=28 September 2012 |publisher=]}}</ref>

==Studies==
The ] stated on 26 February 2004:{{quote|author=The ]|text=''The results of more than a century of anthropological research on households, kinship relationships, and families, across cultures and through time, provide no support whatsoever for the view that either civilization or viable social orders depend upon marriage as an exclusively heterosexual institution. Rather, anthropological research supports the conclusion that a vast array of family types, including families built upon same-sex partnerships, can contribute to stable and humane societies.''<ref name="aaa">{{cite web|url=http://www.aaanet.org/issues/policy-advocacy/Statement-on-Marriage-and-the-family.cfm|author=American Anthropological Association|year=2004|title=Statement on Marriage and the Family|accessdate=18 September 2015|author-link=American Anthropological Association}}</ref>}}

Research findings from 1998 to 2015 from the ], ], ], the ], the ], ], the ], the ], ], ], the Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health, and independent researchers also support the findings of this study.<ref>{{cite news|title=Same-sex marriage and children's well-being: Research roundup|url=http://journalistsresource.org/studies/society/gender-society/same-sex-marriage-children-well-being-research-roundup|accessdate=29 December 2015|work=Journalist's Resource|date=26 June 2015}}</ref>

===Teenagers ===
A study of nationwide data from across the United States from January 1999 to December 2015 revealed that the rate of attempted suicide among school students in grades 9–12 declined by 7% and the rate of attempted suicide among high schoolers of a minority sexual orientation in grades 9–12 declined by 14% in states that established same-sex marriage, resulting in about 134,000 fewer attempting suicide each year in the United States. The researchers took advantage of the gradual manner in which same-sex marriage was established in the United States (expanding from one state in 2004 to all fifty states in 2015) to compare the rate of attempted suicide among youth in each state over the time period studied. Once same-sex marriage was established in a particular state, the reduction in the rate of attempted suicide among youth in that state became permanent. No reduction in the rate of attempted suicide among teenage youth occurred in a particular state until that state recognized same-sex marriage. The lead researcher of the study observed that "laws that have the greatest impact on gay adults may make gay kids feel more hopeful for the future".<ref name=JAMA>{{Cite journal|title=Difference-in-Differences Analysis of the Association Between State Same-Sex Marriage Policies and Adolescent Suicide Attempts|journal=JAMA Pediatrics|volume=171|issue=4|pages=350–356|doi=10.1001/jamapediatrics.2016.4529|pmid=28241285|pmc=5848493|year=2017|last1=Raifman|first1=Julia|last2=Moscoe|first2=Ellen|last3=Austin|first3=S. Bryn|last4=McConnell|first4=Margaret}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Same-Sex Marriage Legalization Linked to Reduction in Suicide Attempts Among High School Students|url=https://www.jhsph.edu/news/news-releases/2017/same-sex-marriage-legalization-linked-to-reduction-in-suicide-attempts-among-high-school-students.html|website=]|date=20 February 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Study: Teen suicide attempts fell as same-sex marriage was legalized|url=https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/02/20/teen-suicide-down-as-same-sex-marriage-legalized-study/98179684/|website=]|date=20 February 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Same-sex marriage laws linked to fewer youth suicide attempts, new study says|url=https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/same-sex-marriage-fewer-youth-suicide|website=]|date=20 February 2017}}</ref><ref>{{Cite newspaper|title=Same-sex marriage laws tied to fewer teen suicide attempts|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-pediatrics-suicide-lgbt/same-sex-marriage-laws-tied-to-fewer-teen-suicide-attempts-idUSKBN1612SP|journal=Reuters|date=23 February 2017}}</ref>

===Parenting===
{{main|LGBT parenting}}
Professional organizations of psychologists have concluded that children stand to benefit from the well-being that results when their parents' relationship is recognized and supported by society's institutions, e.g. civil marriage. For example, the ] stated in 2006 that "parents' financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally-recognized union."<ref name=cpa2006>{{Cite web|url=http://www.cpa.ca/cpasite/userfiles/Documents/Marriage%20of%20Same-Sex%20Couples%20Position%20Statement%20-%20October%202006%20(1).pdf|title=Marriage of Same-Sex Couples – 2006 Position Statement Canadian Psychological Association|year=2006|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090419195945/http://www.cpa.ca/cpasite/userfiles/Documents/Marriage%20of%20Same-Sex%20Couples%20Position%20Statement%20-%20October%202006%20%281%29.pdf|archive-date=19 April 2009}}</ref> The CPA has stated that the stress encountered by gay and lesbian parents and their children are more likely the result of the way society treats them than because of any deficiencies in fitness to parent.<ref name=cpa2006/>

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

===Health===
]
In 2010, a ] study examining the effects of institutional discrimination on the psychiatric health of lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) individuals found an increase in psychiatric disorders, including a more than doubling of ], among the LGB population living in states that instituted bans on same-sex marriage. According to the author, the study highlighted the importance of abolishing institutional forms of discrimination, including those leading to disparities in the mental health and well-being of LGB individuals. Institutional discrimination is characterized by societal-level conditions that limit the opportunities and access to resources by socially disadvantaged groups.<ref>{{cite web|last=Hasin|first=Deborah|title=Lesbian, gay, bisexual individuals risk psychiatric disorders from discriminatory policies|url=http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-03/cums-lgb030210.php|publisher=]|accessdate=20 September 2012}}</ref><ref name="psychtoday">{{cite news|title=New study suggests bans on gay marriage hurt mental health of LGB people|url=http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-sexual-continuum/201003/new-study-suggests-bans-gay-marriage-hurt-mental-health-lgb-people|accessdate=8 November 2010|newspaper=]|date=22 March 2010|first= Brian|last= Mustanski}}</ref>

Author and journalist ] has argued that marriage is good for all men, whether homosexual or heterosexual, because engaging in its social roles reduces men's aggression and promiscuity.<ref>{{cite web|last=Rauch|first=Jonathan|title=For Better or Worse? The Case for Gay (and Straight) Marriage|url=http://www.jonathanrauch.com/jrauch_articles/gay_marriage_1_the_case_for_marriage/|publisher=The New Republic via jonathanrauch.com|accessdate=20 September 2012}}</ref><ref>Rauch, Jonathan (2004). ''Gay Marriage: Why It Is Good for Gays, Good for Straights, and Good for America.'' New York, NY: Henry Holt and Company, LLC.</ref> The data of current psychological and other social science studies on same-sex marriage in comparison to mixed-sex marriage indicate that same-sex and mixed-sex relationships do not differ in their essential psychosocial dimensions; that a parent's sexual orientation is unrelated to their ability to provide a healthy and nurturing family environment; and that marriage bestows substantial psychological, social, and health benefits. Same-sex parents and carers and their children are likely to benefit in numerous ways from legal recognition of their families, and providing such recognition through marriage will bestow greater benefit than civil unions or domestic partnerships.<ref name="aap2006"/><ref name=autogenerated4>Herek, Gregory M. "Legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the United States: A social science perspective." ''American Psychologist,'' Vol 61(6), September 2006, pp. 607–21.</ref>

The ] stated in 2004: "Denial of access to marriage to same-sex couples may especially harm people who also experience discrimination based on age, race, ethnicity, disability, gender and gender identity, religion, socioeconomic status and so on." It has also averred that same-sex couples who may only enter into a civil union, as opposed to a marriage, "are denied equal access to all the benefits, rights, and privileges provided by federal law to those of married couples", which has adverse effects on the well-being of same-sex partners.<ref name="psychological">{{cite web|url=http://www.apa.org/about/governance/council/policy/gay-marriage.pdf|title=Resolution on Sexual Orientation and Marriage|year=2004|author=American Psychological Association|accessdate=10 November 2010|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110511190536/http://www.apa.org/about/governance/council/policy/gay-marriage.pdf |archive-date=11 May 2011|author-link=American Psychological Association}}</ref>

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

==Public opinion==
[[File:Public Support of Same-Sex Marriage.svg|thumb|Public opinion of same-sex marriage. Fraction in favor:<ref>For old polling data, figures have been adjusted upward @1%/year.</ref>
{{col-begin}}
{{col-break}}
{{legend|#58006e|5⁄6+}}
{{legend|#b000dc|2⁄3+}}
{{legend|#dd55ff|1⁄2+}}
{{col-break}}
{{legend|#f5cdff|1⁄3+}}
{{legend|#fcefff|1⁄6+}}
{{legend|#e0e0e0|<1⁄6}}
{{legend|#f0f0f0|no polls}}
{{col-end}}
]]
{{See also|Public opinion of same-sex marriage in the United States|Public opinion of same-sex marriage in Australia}}

Numerous polls and studies on the issue have been conducted. A trend of increasing support for same-sex marriage has been revealed across many countries of the world, often driven in large part by a generational difference in support. Polling that was conducted in developed democracies in this century shows a majority of people in support of same-sex marriage. Support for legal same-sex marriage has increased across every age group, political ideology, religion, gender, race and region of various developed countries in the world.<ref name=Gallup2011>{{cite web|last=Newport|first=Frank|title=For First Time, Majority of Americans Favor Legal Gay Marriage|url=http://www.gallup.com/poll/147662/First-Time-Majority-Americans-Favor-Legal-Gay-Marriage.aspx|publisher=]|accessdate=25 September 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Public Opinion: Nationally|url=http://www.australianmarriageequality.com/wp/who-supports-equality/a-majority-of-australians-support-marriage-equality|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110303043929/http://www.australianmarriageequality.com/wp/who-supports-equality/a-majority-of-australians-support-marriage-equality/|url-status=dead|archive-date=3 March 2011|publisher=australianmarriageequality.com|accessdate=25 September 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Gay Life in Estonia|url=http://www.globalgayz.com/europe/estonia/gay-life-in-estonia|publisher=globalgayz.com |accessdate=25 September 2012|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120716100828/http://www.globalgayz.com/europe/estonia/gay-life-in-estonia|archive-date=16 July 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Jowit|first=Juliette|title=Gay marriage gets ministerial approval|url=https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/jun/12/gay-marriage-receive-ministerial-approval|accessdate=25 September 2012|newspaper=]|date=12 June 2012|location=London}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Most Irish people support gay marriage, poll says|url=http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2011/02/24/most-irish-people-support-gay-marriage-poll-says|accessdate=25 September 2012|newspaper=PinkNews|date=24 February 2011|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130926032112/http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2011/02/24/most-irish-people-support-gay-marriage-poll-says|archive-date=26 September 2013}}</ref>

Various detailed polls and studies on same-sex marriage that were conducted in several countries show that support for same-sex marriage significantly increases with higher levels of education and is also significantly stronger among younger generations, with a clear trend of continually increasing support.<ref>{{cite web|title=Survey&nbsp;– Generations at Odds: The Millennial Generation and the Future of Gay and Lesbian Rights|url=http://publicreligion.org/research/2011/08/generations-at-odds|publisher=] |accessdate=25 September 2012|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121025004814/http://publicreligion.org/research/2011/08/generations-at-odds|archive-date=25 October 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Pew Forum: Part 2: Gay Marriage|url=http://www.pewforum.org/PublicationPage.aspx?id=647|publisher=]|accessdate=25 September 2012|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120910053311/http://www.pewforum.org/PublicationPage.aspx?id=647|archive-date=10 September 2012|date=18 November 2003}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=Poirier|first=Justine|title=Same-Sex Marriage: Let's Make a Change|url=http://www.montrealites.ca/justice/same-sex-marriage-lets-make-a-change.html|publisher=Montréalités Justice|accessdate=25 September 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Data Points: Support for Legal Same-Sex Marriage|url=http://chronicle.com/article/Chart-Support-for-Legal/64683/|accessdate=25 September 2012|newspaper=The Chronicle of Higher Education|date=16 March 2010}}</ref><ref name="auto">{{cite web|title=Support for Same‐Sex Marriage in Latin America|url=http://www.vanderbilt.edu/lapop/insights/I0844.enrevised.pdf|publisher=]|accessdate=25 September 2012}}</ref>

{{Same-sex marriage opinion polls worldwide}}


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


===Ancient=== ===Ancient===
{{further|Homosexuality in ancient Rome}}
A reference to same-sex marriage appears in the ], which was written in the 3rd century CE. The ] prohibited homosexual relations, and the Hebrews were warned not to "follow the acts of the land of Egypt or the acts of the land of Canaan" (Lev. 18:22, 20:13). The Sifra clarifies what these ambiguous "acts" were, and that they included same-sex marriage: "A man would marry a man and a woman a woman, a man would marry a woman and her daughter, and a woman would be married to two men."<ref>Rabbi Joel Roth. ''rabbinicalassembly.org'' 1992.</ref>
A reference to marriage between same-sex couples appears in the ], which was written in the 3rd century CE. The ] prohibited homosexual relations, and the Hebrews were warned not to "follow the acts of the land of Egypt or the acts of the land of Canaan" (Lev. 18:22, 20:13). The Sifra clarifies what these ambiguous "acts" were, and that they included marriage between same-sex couples: "A man would marry a man and a woman a woman, a man would marry a woman and her daughter, and a woman would be married to two men."<ref>Rabbi Joel Roth. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170824192248/https://www.rabbinicalassembly.org/sites/default/files/assets/public/halakhah/teshuvot/19912000/roth_homosexual.pdf |date=24 August 2017 }} ''rabbinicalassembly.org'' 1992.</ref>


A few scholars believe that in the early ] some male couples were celebrating ] in the presence of friends. Male–male weddings are reported by sources that mock them; the feelings of the participants are not recorded.<ref>Martial 1.24 and 12.42; Juvenal 2.117–42. Williams, ''Roman Homosexuality'', pp. 28, 280; Karen K. Hersh, ''The Roman Wedding: Ritual and Meaning in Antiquity'' (Cambridge University Press, 2010), p. 36; ], ''Power and Eroticism in Imperial Rome'' (Cambridge University Press, 2007), pp. 151ff.</ref> Various ancient sources state that the emperor ] celebrated two public weddings with males, once taking the role of the bride (with a ] ]), and once the groom (with ]); there may have been a third in which he was the bride.<ref>], ], ], and ] are the sources cited by Williams, ''Roman Homosexuality'', p. 279.</ref> In the early 3rd century AD, the emperor ] is reported to have been the bride in a wedding to his male partner. Other mature men at his court had husbands, or said they had husbands in imitation of the emperor.<ref>Williams, ''Roman Homosexuality'', pp. 278–279, citing Dio Cassius and ].</ref> ] did not recognize marriage between males, but one of the grounds for disapproval expressed in Juvenal's satire is that celebrating the rites would lead to expectations for such marriages to be registered officially.<ref name="auto4">Williams, ''Roman Homosexuality'', p. 280.</ref> As the empire was becoming Christianized in the 4th century, legal prohibitions against marriage between males began to appear.<ref name="auto4"/>
What is arguably the first historical mention of the performance of same-sex marriages occurred during the early ] according to controversial<ref name="Shaw">Shaw criticises Boswell's methodology and conclusions as disingenuous {{cite journal|last=Shaw|first=Brent|author-link=Brent Shaw|date=July 1994|title=A Groom of One's Own?|journal=]|pages=43–48|url=http://www.learnedhand.com/shaw_boswell.htm|accessdate=25 June 2009|archive-url=https://archive.today/20060507014622/http://www.learnedhand.com/shaw_boswell.htm|archive-date=7 May 2006}}</ref> historian ].<ref name=boswell>{{cite book|last=Boswell|first=John|title=Same-sex unions in premodern Europe|year=1995|publisher=Vintage Books|location=New York|isbn=978-0-679-75164-9|pages=80–85|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=iRL9cXA1m1IC}}</ref> These were usually reported in a critical or satirical manner.<ref>{{cite web|last=Frier|first=Bruce|title=Roman Same-Sex Weddings from the Legal Perspective|url=http://www.umich.edu/~classics/news/newsletter/winter2004/weddings.html|publisher=]|accessdate=25 September 2012|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111230041201/http://www.umich.edu/~classics/news/newsletter/winter2004/weddings.html|archive-date=30 December 2011}}</ref>


===Contemporary===
Child emperor ] referred to his ] driver, a blond slave from ] named ], as his husband.<ref>Bunson, M., ''Encyclopedia of the Roman Empire'', Infobase Publishing, 2009, p. 259.</ref> He also married an athlete named Zoticus in a lavish public ceremony in Rome amidst the rejoicings of the citizens.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/80*.html |title=Cassius Dio — Epitome of Book 80 |website=Penelope.uchicago.edu |accessdate=7 July 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|author=Herodian |url=http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/herodian_05_book5.htm |title=Herodian of Antioch, History of the Roman Empire (1961) pp.135-152. Book 5 |website=Tertullian.org |accessdate=7 July 2017}}</ref><ref name=scarre>{{cite book|last=Scarre|first=Chris|title=Chronicles of the Roman Emperors|year=1995|publisher=Thames and Hudson Ltd|location=London|isbn=978-0-500-05077-4|page=151|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=s1tspwAACAAJ}}</ref>
] shortly after the federal legalization of ], 2015]]
]<ref name="auto"/><ref name="auto1"/> are the first same sex couple in modern recorded history<ref name="auto2"/> known to obtain a ],<ref name="National Archives"/> have their marriage solemnized, which occurred on September 3, 1971, in ],<ref name="3Sept1971"/> and have it legally recognized by any form of government.<ref name="ruling" /><ref name="epilogue"/> Historians variously trace the beginning of the modern movement in support of same-sex marriage to anywhere from around the 1980s to the 1990s. During the 1980s in the ], the ] led to increased attention on the legal aspects of same-sex relationships.<ref>{{Cite news |date=March–April 2013 |title=How Same-Sex Marriage Came to Be |url=http://harvardmagazine.com/2013/03/how-same-sex-marriage-came-to-be |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190502173822/https://harvardmagazine.com/2013/03/how-same-sex-marriage-came-to-be |archive-date=2 May 2019 |access-date=28 March 2015 |website=]}}</ref> ] made the first case for same sex marriage in a major American journal in 1989,<ref name=intelligent>{{cite web|url=http://www.moreintelligentlife.com/story/andrew-sullivan-thinking-out-loud|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090425202254/http://www.moreintelligentlife.com/story/andrew-sullivan-thinking-out-loud|archive-date=25 April 2009 |title=Andrew Sullivan: Thinking. Out. Loud. |newspaper=Intelligent Life |date=Spring 2009 |access-date=24 October 2013|first=Johann |last=Hari}}</ref> published in ''The New Republic''.<ref name="groom">{{cite news|last=Sullivan|first=Andrew|title=Here Comes the Groom|url=http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/11/gay_marriage_votes_and_andrew_sullivan_his_landmark_1989_essay_making_a.html|access-date=24 October 2013|newspaper=Slate|date=9 November 2012}}</ref>


In 1989, Denmark became the first country to legally recognize a relationship for same-sex couples, establishing ]s, which gave those in same-sex relationships "most rights of married heterosexuals, but not the right to adopt or obtain joint custody of a child".<ref>{{Cite news |last=Rule |first=Sheila |date=2 October 1989 |title=Rights for Gay Couples in Denmark |work=] |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1989/10/02/world/rights-for-gay-couples-in-denmark.html |url-status=live |access-date=19 August 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304080523/http://www.nytimes.com/1989/10/02/world/rights-for-gay-couples-in-denmark.html |archive-date=4 March 2016}}</ref> In 2001, the ] became the first country to broaden marriage laws to include same-sex couples.<ref name="bloomberg-2014-12-04" /><ref>{{Cite news |date=26 May 2009 |title=Same-sex marriage around the world |work=CBC News |location=Toronto |url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/same-sex-marriage-around-the-world-1.799137 |url-status=live |access-date=6 October 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101125125134/http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/05/26/f-same-sex-timeline.html |archive-date=25 November 2010}}</ref> Since then, same-sex marriage has been established by law in 34 other countries, including most of the ] and ]. Yet its spread has been uneven — ] is the only country in ] to take the step; ] and ] are the only ones in ].<ref>{{Cite web |date=28 April 2021 |title=The Dutch went first in 2001; who has same-sex marriage now? |url=https://apnews.com/article/europe-africa-netherlands-job-cohen-western-europe-e08b053af367028737c9c41c492cc568 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210821101311/https://apnews.com/article/europe-africa-netherlands-job-cohen-western-europe-e08b053af367028737c9c41c492cc568 |archive-date=21 August 2021 |access-date=21 August 2021 |website=]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Sangwongwanich |first=Pathom |date=June 18, 2024 |title=Thai Same-Sex Marriage Bill Clears Final Hurdle With Senate Nod |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-06-18/thai-same-sex-marriage-bill-clears-final-hurdle-with-senate-nod?srnd=all |access-date=2024-06-18 |website=www.bloomberg.com}}</ref>
The first Roman emperor to have married a man was ], who is reported to have married two other males on different occasions. The first was with one of Nero's own ], ], with whom Nero took the role of the bride.<ref>Williams, CA., ''Roman Homosexuality: Second Edition'', Oxford University Press, 2009, p. 284.</ref> Later, as a groom, Nero married ], a young boy, to replace the adolescent female concubine he had killed<ref name="dio-history-LXII-28">Nero missed her so greatly that, on learning of a woman who resembled her, he sent for her and kept her; but later he caused a boy of the freedmen, whom he used to call Sporus, ... "he formally "married" Sporus, and assigned the boy a regular dowry according to contract;" q.v., Suetonius ''Nero'' 28; Dio Cassius '' Epitome '' 62.28</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/62.html |title=Bill Thayer's Web Site |website=Penelope.uchicago.edu |accessdate=7 July 2017}}</ref> and married him in a very public ceremony with all the solemnities of matrimony, after which Sporus was forced to pretend to be the female concubine that Nero had killed and act as though they were really married.<ref name="dio-history-LXII-28"/> A friend gave the "bride" away as required by law. The marriage was celebrated in both Greece and Rome in extravagant public ceremonies.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/62*.html |title=Cassius Dio — Epitome of Book 62 |website=Penelope.uchicago.edu |accessdate=7 July 2017}}</ref>
<!---Please add references in the main article before or after adding information to this table--->


==Timeline==
''Conubium'' existed only between a ''civis Romanus'' and a ''civis Romana'' (that is, between a male Roman citizen and a female Roman citizen), so that a marriage between two Roman males (or with a slave) would have no legal standing in Roman law (apart, presumably, from the arbitrary will of the emperor in the two aforementioned cases).<ref>Corbett, ''The Roman Law of Marriage'' (Oxford, 1969), pp. 24–28; Treggiari, ''Roman Marriage'' (Oxford, 1991), pp. 43–49.; "Marriages where the partners had ''conubium'' were marriages valid in Roman law (''iusta matrimonia'')" . Compare Ulpian (''Tituli Ulpiani'') 5.3–5: "''Conubium'' is the capacity to marry a wife in Roman law. Roman citizens have ''conubium'' with Roman citizens, but with Latins and foreigners only if the privilege was granted. There is no ''conubium'' with slaves"; compare also Gaius (''Institutionum'' 1:55–56, 67, 76–80).</ref> Furthermore, according to Susan Treggiari, "''matrimonium'' was then an institution involving a mother, ''mater''. The idea implicit in the word is that a man took a woman in marriage, ''in matrimonium ducere'', so that he might have children by her."<ref>Treggiari, ''Roman Marriage'' (Oxford, 1991), p. 5.</ref>
{{main|Timeline of same-sex marriage}}
The summary table below lists in chronological order the sovereign states (the ] and ]) that have legalized same-sex marriage. As of 2025, 37 states have legalized in some capacity.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Theil |first1=Michele |title=This map shows you where same-sex marriage is legal around the world – and there's a long way to go |url=https://www.thepinknews.com/2024/02/16/this-map-shows-you-where-same-sex-marriage-is-legal-around-the-world-and-theres-a-long-way-to-go/ |website=PinkNews |date=16 February 2024 |access-date=16 February 2024}}</ref>


Dates are when marriages between same-sex couples began to be officially certified, or when local laws were passed if marriages were already legal under higher authority.
In 342 AD, Christian emperors ] and ] issued a law in the ] (''C. Th.'' 9.7.3) prohibiting ] and ordering execution for those so married.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Kuefler|first=Mathew|year=2007|title=The Marriage Revolution in Late Antiquity: The Theodosian Code and Later Roman Marriage Law|journal=Journal of Family History|volume=32|pages=343–370|doi=10.1177/0363199007304424|issue=4|s2cid=143807895}}</ref> Professor Fontaine of Cornell University Classics Department has pointed out that there is not provision for same-sex marriage in Roman Law, and the text from 342 A.D. is corrupt, "marries a woman" might be "goes to bed in a dishonorable manner with a man" as a condemnation of homosexual behavior between men.<ref>Eidolon, 2015, Michael Fontaine, Associate Professor of Classics and Assistant Dean, Cornell University "nubit…"feminam" for "cubit..."infamen," and the Law does not provide for it."</ref>


{| class="wikitable"
===Contemporary===
Historians variously trace the beginning of the modern movement in support of same-sex marriage to anywhere from around the 1970s to the 1990s.<ref>{{cite web|title=How Same-Sex Marriage Came to Be|url=http://harvardmagazine.com/2013/03/how-same-sex-marriage-came-to-be|website=]|date=March–April 2013|accessdate=28 March 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=The secret history of same-sex marriage|url=https://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/jan/23/-sp-secret-history-same-sex-marriage|work=]|accessdate=26 July 2015|date=23 January 2015}}</ref>

In 1989, Denmark became the first country to recognize a legal relationship for same-sex couples, establishing ]s, which gave those in same-sex relationships "most rights of married heterosexuals, but not the right to adopt or obtain joint custody of a child".<ref>{{cite news|last=Rule|first=Sheila|title=Rights for Gay Couples in Denmark|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1989/10/02/world/rights-for-gay-couples-in-denmark.html|accessdate=19 August 2013|newspaper=New York Times|date=2 October 1989}}</ref> In 2001, the ]{{efn|name=netherlands}} became the first country to establish same-sex marriage by law.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/same-sex-marriage-around-the-world-1.799137|title=Same-sex marriage around the world|work=CBC News|location=Toronto|date=26 May 2009|accessdate=6 October 2009}}</ref> Since then same-sex marriage has also been established by law in ] (2003), ] (2005), ] (2005), ] (2006), ] (2009), ] (2009), ] (2010), ] (2010), ] (2010), ] (2012–2017), ] (2013), ] (2013), ] (2013), ]{{efn|name=nz}} (2013), ] (2015), the ]{{efn|name=usa}} (2015), ] (2015), ] (2016), ] (2017), ] (2017), ] (2017), ] (2017), ] (2019), ] (2019), ] (2019), the ]{{efn|name=uk}} (2020), and ] (2020). In ], same-sex marriage is performed in twenty-two states and recognized in all thirty-one states.{{efn|name=mexico}}

====Timeline====
{{main|Timeline of same-sex marriage}}
Note: Countries and territories in which same-sex marriage laws have been repealed are not included on the table.
{| class="wikitable hlist"
|- |-
!2001 !2001
|{{flagicon|Netherlands}} ''']''' (1 April)
|
* {{flagicon|Netherlands}} ''']''' (1 April)
|- |-
!2002 !2002
Line 146: Line 84:
|- |-
!2003 !2003
|{{flatlist}}
|
* {{flagicon|Belgium}} ''']''' (1 June) * {{flagicon|Belgium}} ''']''' (1 June)
* ] (10 June) * ] (10 June)
* ] (8 July) * ] (8 July)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2004 !2004
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ] (19 March) * ] (19 March)
* ] (17 May) * ] (17 May)
Line 160: Line 99:
* ] (5 November) * ] (5 November)
* ] (21 December) * ] (21 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2005 !2005
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ] (23 June) * ] (23 June)
* {{flagicon|Spain}} ''']''' (3 July) * {{flagicon|Spain}} ''']''' (3 July)
* {{flagicon|Canada}} ''']''' (20 July) * {{flagicon|Canada}} ''']''' (20 July)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2006 !2006
|{{flagicon|South Africa}} ''']''' (30 November)
|
* {{flagicon|South Africa}} ''']''' (30 November)
|- |-
!2007 !2007
Line 175: Line 115:
|- |-
!2008 !2008
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ] (12 November) *] (June 16, repealed November 5)
*] (12 November)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2009 !2009
|{{flatlist}}
|
* {{flagicon|Norway}} ''']''' (1 January) * {{flagicon|Norway}} ''']''' (1 January)
* ] (27 April) * ] (27 April)
* {{flagicon|Sweden}} ''']''' (1 May) * {{flagicon|Sweden}} ''']''' (1 May)
* ] (20 May) * ] (20 May)
* ] (1 September) * ] (1 September)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2010 !2010
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ] (1 January) * ] (1 January)
* ] (3 March) * ] (3 March)
* ] (4 March) * ] (4 March)
* ] (29 April) * ] (29 April)
* {{flagicon|Portugal}} ''']''' (5 June) * {{flagicon|Portugal}} ''']''' (5 June)
* {{flagicon|Iceland}} ''']''' (27 June) * {{flagicon|Iceland}} ''']''' (27 June)
* {{flagicon|Argentina}} ''']''' (22 July) * {{flagicon|Argentina}} ''']''' (22 July)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2011 !2011
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ] (24 July) * ] (24 July)
* ] (1 August) * ] (1 August)
* ] (7 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2012 !2012
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ] (6 January)
* ] (3 May) * ] (3 May)
* {{flagicon|Denmark}} ''']''' (15 June) * {{flagicon|Denmark}} ''']''' (15 June)
* ] (5 July) * ] (5 July)
* ] (11 July) * ] (11 July)
* ] (15 August) * ] (15 August)
* ] (10 October) * ] (10 October)
* ] (26 November) * ] (26 November)
* ] (1 December) * ] (1 December)
* ] (6 December) * ] (6 December)
* ] (9 December) * ] (9 December)
* ] (15 December) * ] (15 December)
* ] (29 December) * ] (29 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2013 !2013
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ] (1 January) * ] (1 January)
* ] (16 February) * ] (16 February)
* ] (15 March) * ] (15 March)
* ] (15 March) * ] (15 March)
* ] (26 March) * ] (26 March)
* ] (2 April) * ] (2 April)
* ] (26 April) * ] (26 April)
* ] (29 April) * ] (29 April)
* ] (29 April) * ] (29 April)
* ] (8 May) * ] (8 May)
* {{flagicon|Brazil}} ''']''' (16 May) * {{flagicon|Brazil}} ''']''' (16 May)
* {{flagicon|France}} ''']''' (18 May) * {{flagicon|France}} ''']''' (18 May)
* ] (24 June) * ] (24 June)
* ] (28 June) * ] (28 June)
* ] (1 July) * ] (1 July)
* ] (1 August) * ] (1 August)
* ] (1 August) * ] (1 August)
* ] (1 August) * ] (1 August)
* {{flagicon|Uruguay}} ''']''' (5 August) * {{flagicon|Uruguay}} ''']''' (5 August)
* {{flagicon|New Zealand}} ''']''' (19 August) * {{flagicon|New Zealand}} ''']''' (19 August)
Line 246: Line 192:
* ] (28 August) * ] (28 August)
* ] (4 September) * ] (4 September)
* ] (5 September) * ] (5 September)
* ] (9 September) * ] (9 September)
* ] (18 October<!--3rd license since repeal of DOMA, first public marriage-->) * ] (18 October<!--3rd license since repeal of DOMA, first public marriage-->)
* ] (21 October) * ] (21 October)
* ] (1 November) * ] (1 November)
* ] (15 November) * ] (15 November)
* ] (2 December) * ] (2 December)
* ] (19 December) * ] (19 December)
* ] (20 December, repealed 6 January 2014)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2014 !2014
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ] (21 February) * ] (21 February)
* ] (13 March) * {{flagicon|England}} {{flagicon|Wales}} ] (13 March)
* ] (13 March)
* ] (19 May) * ] (19 May)
* ] (20 May) * ] (20 May)
Line 264: Line 213:
* ] (3 June) * ] (3 June)
* ] (3 June) * ] (3 June)
* ] (9 July) * ] (9 July)
* ] (16 July) * ] (16 July)
* ] (10 August) * ] (10 August)
* ] (17 September) * ] (17 September)
* ] (6 October) * ] (6 October)
Line 273: Line 222:
* ] (6 October) * ] (6 October)
* ] (6 October) * ] (6 October)
* ] (6 October) * ] (6 October)
* ] (7 October) * ] (7 October)
* ] (9 October) * ] (9 October)
* ] (9 October) * ] (9 October)
* ] (9 October) * ] (9 October)
* ] (10 October) * ] (10 October)
* ] (12 October) * ] (12 October)
* ] (15 October) * ] (15 October)
* ] (17 October) * ] (17 October)
* ] (17 October) * ] (17 October)
* ] (17 October) * ] (17 October)
* ] (17 October) * ] (17 October)
* ] (17 October) * ] (17 October)
* ] (17 October) * ] (17 October)
* ] (21 October) * ] (21 October)
* ] (5 November) * ] (5 November)
Line 293: Line 242:
* ] (12 November) * ] (12 November)
* ] (12 November) * ] (12 November)
* ] (14 November) * ] (14 November)
* ] (14 November) * ] (14 November)
* ] (19 November) * ] (19 November)
* ] (19 November) * ] (19 November)
* ] (20 November) * ] (20 November)
* ] (13 December) * ] (13 December)
* ] (16 December) * {{flagicon|Scotland}} ] (16 December)
{{endflatlist}}
* ]
|- |-
!2015 !2015
|{{flatlist}}
|
* {{flagicon|Luxembourg}} ''']''' (1 January) * {{flagicon|Luxembourg}} ''']''' (1 January)
* ] (5 January) * ] (5 January)
* ] (6 January) * ] (6 January)
* ] (24 February) * ] (24 February)
* ] (14 May) * ] (14 May)
* ] (15 May) * ] (15 May)
* ] (9 June) * ] (9 June)
* ] (10 June) * ] (10 June)
* ] (12 June) * ] (12 June)
* {{flagicon|United States}} ''']''' (26 June) * {{flagicon|United States}} ''']''' (26 June)
* ] (30 June) * ] (30 June)
* ] (7 July) * ] (7 July)
* ] (9 July) * ] (9 July)
* ] (13 July) * ] (13 July)
* ] (21 July) * ] (21 July)
* ] (9 September) * ] (3 August)
* ] (9 September)
* {{flagicon|Ireland}} ''']''' (16 November) * {{flagicon|Ireland}} ''']''' (16 November)
* ] (18 November) * ] (18 November)
* ] (23 December) * ] (23 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2016 !2016
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ] (2 February) * ] (2 February)
*] (1 April) * {{flagicon|Greenland}} ] (1 April)
* {{flagicon|Colombia}} ''']''' (28 April) * {{flagicon|Colombia}} ''']''' (28 April)
* ] (6 May) * ] (6 May)
* ] (12 May) * ] (12 May)
* ] (20 May) * ] (20 May)
Line 338: Line 289:
* ] (18 September) * ] (18 September)
* ] (13 October) * ] (13 October)
* ] (3 November) * ] (3 November)
* ] (9 December) * ] (9 December)
* ] (15 December) * ] (15 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2017 !2017
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ] (1 January) * ] (1 January)
* ] (4 January) * ] (4 January)
Line 354: Line 306:
<!-- *** Please check discussion on talk page before adding Slovenia! *** --> <!-- *** Please check discussion on talk page before adding Slovenia! *** -->
* {{flagicon|Finland}} ''']''' (1 March) * {{flagicon|Finland}} ''']''' (1 March)
* ] (20 March) * ] (20 March)
* ] (22 March) * ] (22 March)
* ] (29 April) * ] (29 April)
* ] (2 May) * ] (2 May)
* ] (5 June) * ] (5 May, repealed 1 June 2018)
*] (1 July) * ] (5 June)
* {{flagicon|Faroe Islands}} ] (1 July)
* ] (4 August) * ] (4 August)
* {{flagicon|Malta}} ''']''' (1 September) * {{flagicon|Malta}} ''']''' (1 September)
* {{flagicon|Germany}} ''']''' (1 October) * {{flagicon|Germany}} ''']''' (1 October)
* ] (25 October) * ] (25 October)
* ] (3 November) * ] (3 November)
* {{flagicon|Australia}} ''']''' (9 December) * {{flagicon|Australia}} ''']''' (9 December)
* ] (20 December) * ] (20 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2018 !2018
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ] (16 February) * ] (16 February)
* ] (11 May) * ] (11 May)
Line 375: Line 329:
* ] (1 July) * ] (1 July)
* ] (26 August) * ] (26 August)
* ] (27 August) * ] (27 August)
* ] (23 November) * ] (23 November, repealed 14 March 2022)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2019 !2019
|{{flatlist}}
|
* {{flagicon|Austria}} ''']''' (1 January) * {{flagicon|Austria}} ''']''' (1 January)
* ] (14 February) * ] (14 February)
Line 389: Line 344:
* ] (11 June) * ] (11 June)
* ] (29 June) * ] (29 June)
* ] (by 5 July)
* {{flagicon|Ecuador}} ''']''' (8 July) * {{flagicon|Ecuador}} ''']''' (8 July)
* ] (8 July) * ] (8 July)
* ] (8 July) * ] (8 July)
* ] (8 August) * ] (8 August)
* ] (16 August) * ] (16 August)
{{endflatlist}}
|- |-
!2020 !2020
|{{flatlist}}
|
* ] ]'''] (13 January) * ] ]'''] (13 January)
* ] (23 April) * ] (23 April)
* {{flagicon|Costa Rica}} ''']''' (26 May) * {{flagicon|Costa Rica}} ''']''' (26 May)
* ] (?)
* ] (3 July) * ] (3 July)
* ] (6 August) * ] (6 August)
* ] (25 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2021
|{{flatlist}}
* ] (30 June)
* ] (22 October)
* ] (13 November)
* ] (20 December)
* ] (30 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2022
|{{flatlist}}
* ] (4 March)
* {{flagicon|Chile}} ''']''' (10 March)
* ] (11 April)
* ] (18 April)
* ] (25 May)
* ] (13 June)
* {{flagicon|Switzerland}} ''']''' (1 July)
* {{flagicon|Slovenia}} ''']''' (8 or 9 July)
* ] (19 September)
* {{flagicon|Cuba}} ''']''' (27 September)
* ] (27 October)
* ] (2 November)
* ] (19 November)
* ] (21 December)
* ] ]'''] (31 December)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2023
|{{flatlist}}
* {{flagicon|Andorra}} ''']''' (17 February)
* ] (16 March)
* ] (23 May)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2024
|{{flatlist}}
* {{flagicon|Estonia}} ''']''' (1 January)
* {{flagicon|Greece}} ''']''' (16 February)
* {{flagicon|Aruba}} ] (12 July)
* {{flagicon|Curacao}} ] (12 July)
{{endflatlist}}
|-
!2025
|{{flatlist}}
* '''{{flagicon|Liechtenstein}} ] '''(1 January)
* ''''' {{Flagicon|Thailand}} ]''' (23 January)''
{{endflatlist}}
|} |}


==Same-sex marriage around the world==
====International organisations====
{{Main|Legal status of same-sex marriage|Same-sex union legislation|Recognition of same-sex unions by country }}
=====European Court of Human Rights=====
In 2010, the ] (ECHR) ruled in '']'', a case involving an Austrian same-sex couple who were denied the right to marry.<ref name="CASE OF SCHALK AND KOPF v. AUSTRIA">{{cite web|url=http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-99605|title=HUDOC - European Court of Human Rights|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref> The court found, by a vote of 4 to 3, that their human rights had not been violated.<ref>{{cite news|title=Strasbourg court rules that states are not obliged to allow gay marriage|url=https://www.theguardian.com/law/2010/jun/24/european-court-of-human-rights-civil-partnerships|accessdate=8 November 2013|newspaper=The Guardian|date=24 June 2010|first=Antoine|last=Buyse}}</ref>


Same-sex marriage is legally performed and recognized in 37 countries: ], ], ],{{efn|name=australia|text=Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in continental Australia and in the non-self-governing possessions of ], ] and the ], which follow Australian law.}} ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ],{{efn|name=denmark|text=Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in continental Denmark, the ] and ], which together make up the ].}} ],{{efn|name=ecuador|text=Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized throughout Ecuador, but such couples are not considered married for purposes of adoption and may not adopt children.}} ], ], ],{{efn|name=france|text=Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in metropolitan France and in all ], which follow a single legal code.}} ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ],{{efn|name=mexico|text=Same-sex marriage is available in all jurisdictions, though the process is not everywhere as straightforward as it is for opposite-sex marriage and does not always include adoption rights.}} the ],{{efn|name=netherlands|text=Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in ], the Caribbean municipalities of ], and the constituent countries of ], but not yet in Sint Maarten.}} ],{{efn|name=nz|text=Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in ], but not in its possession of ], nor in the ] and ], which make up the ].}} ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], the ],{{efn|name=uk|text= Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in all parts of the United Kingdom and in ], but not in its Caribbean possessions, namely ], ], the ], the ], ] and the ].}} the ],{{efn|name=usa|text=Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in all ] of the US and in the ], in all overseas territories except ] (recognition only), and in all ] that do not have their own marriage laws, as well as in most nations that do. The largest of the dozen or so known exceptions among the federal reservations are ] and ], and the largest among the shared-sovereignty Oklahoma Tribal Statistical Areas are the ] and ]. These polities ban same-sex marriage and do not recognize marriages from other jurisdictions, though members may still marry under state law and be accorded all the rights of marriage under state and federal law.}} and ].<ref name="HRC">{{cite web |title=Marriage Equality Around the World |url=https://www.hrc.org/resources/marriage-equality-around-the-world |website=] |access-date=3 February 2024}}</ref> Same-sex marriage performed remotely or abroad is recognized with full marital rights by ].<ref>{{Cite web |date=2018 |title=Information for couples marrying outside the Rabbinate |url=http://rackmancenter.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Marriage-Outside-the-Rabbinate-Halperin-Kaddari-et-al-Rackman-Study-2018.pdf |access-date=November 10, 2023 |website=Rackman Center}}</ref>
British Judge Sir ], then head of the European Court of Human Rights, delivered a speech in 2012 that signaled the court was ready to declare same-sex marriage a "human right", as soon as enough countries fell into line.<ref>{{cite news|title=Gay marriage: the French connection|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/9859036/Gay-marriage-the-French-connection.html|accessdate=8 November 2013|newspaper=The Telegraph|date=9 February 2013|first=Christopher|last=Booker|location=London}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Gay marriage politically, rather than ethically motivated|url=http://www.sosogay.co.uk/2013/gay-marriage-politically-rather-than-ethically-motivated|website=So So Gay|publisher=So So Gay Ltd|accessdate=8 November 2013|first=Jamie|last=Clarke|date=6 June 2013|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131006084549/http://sosogay.co.uk/2013/gay-marriage-politically-rather-than-ethically-motivated|archive-date=6 October 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Sir Nicholas Bratza|url=http://www.pcc.org.uk/news/index.html?article=ODYzMQ==|archive-url=https://archive.today/20131108001904/http://www.pcc.org.uk/news/index.html?article=ODYzMQ==|url-status=dead|archive-date=8 November 2013|website=Press Complaints Commission|publisher=Press Complaints Commission|accessdate=8 November 2013|year=2013}}</ref>


[[File:World marriage-equality laws.svg|thumb|center|upright=3|
] states that: "Men and women of marriageable age have the right to marry and to found a family, according to the national laws governing the exercise of this right",<ref>{{cite web|title=European Convention on Human Rights|url=http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf|website=ECHR.coe.int|publisher=European Court of Human Rights|accessdate=25 July 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140703060501/http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf|archive-date=3 July 2014|url-status=dead}}</ref> not limiting marriage to those in a heterosexual relationship. However, the ECHR stated in ''Schalk and Kopf v Austria'' that this provision was intended to limit marriage to heterosexual relationships, as it used the term "men and women" instead of "everyone".<ref name="CASE OF SCHALK AND KOPF v. AUSTRIA"/>
{{legend|#025|Marriage open to same-sex couples}}

{{legend|#90C|Same-sex marriage recognized with full rights when performed remotely or abroad}}
=====European Union=====
On 12 March 2015, the ] passed a non-binding resolution encouraging EU institutions and member states to " on the recognition of same-sex marriage or same-sex civil union as a political, social and human and civil rights issue".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/03/13/ukip-and-tories-abstain-on-eu-motion-to-recognise-same-sex-marriage/|title=UKIP and Tories abstain on EU motion to recognise same-sex marriage|website=PinkNews|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P8-TA-2015-0076+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN&language=EN|title=Texts adopted - Thursday, 12 March 2015 - Annual report on human rights and democracy in the world 2013 and the EU policy on the matter - P8_TA-PROV(2015)0076|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.votewatch.eu/en/term8-annual-report-on-human-rights-and-democracy-in-the-world-2013-and-the-eu-policy-on-the-matter-motion-8.html|title=Annual report on human rights and democracy in the world 2013 and the EU policy on the matter|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref>

On 5 June 2018, the ] ruled, in a case from ], that, under the specific conditions of the couple in question, married same-sex couples have the same residency rights as other married couples in an EU country, even if that country does not permit or recognize same-sex marriage.<ref></ref><ref></ref>

=====Inter-American Court of Human Rights=====
After a motion lodged by Costa Rica, the ] issued a landmark advisory ruling in favour of same-sex marriage on 9 January 2018, which is expected to facilitate legalisation in several countries in the Americas.{{efn|name=IACHR}}

The Court said that governments "must recognise and guarantee all the rights that are derived from a family bond between people of the same sex". They also said that it was inadmissible and discriminatory for a separate legal provision to be established (such as ]s) instead of same-sex marriage. The Court demanded that governments "guarantee access to all existing forms of domestic legal systems, including the right to marriage, in order to ensure the protection of all the rights of families formed by same-sex couples without discrimination". Recognising the difficulty in passing such laws in countries where there is strong opposition to same-sex marriage, it recommended that governments pass temporary decrees until new legislation is brought in.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://sfbaytimes.com/major-advance-marriage-equality-gender-identity-rights-latin-america/ |title="Major Advance for Marriage Equality and Gender Identity Rights in Latin America". ''San Francisco Bay Times'', 2018 January 29 |publisher=Sfbaytimes.com |date= 25 January 2018|accessdate=13 April 2018}}</ref>

The Court issued its ruling in response to a motion brought by Costa Rica in 2016. The Costa Rican Government asked the Court to give its opinion on whether it had an obligation to extend property rights to same-sex couples, and the Court ruled that it did. The Costa Rican Government also wanted to know whether it should allow transgender people to change their name and gender on their identity documents. Again, the Court ruled that it must.

The government of Costa Rica announced that they will fully implement the IACHR ruling.<ref name="panama"/><ref name="panama1"/> Additionally, on 11 January, the president of the ] and chairman of the country's ], Duberlí Rodríguez, stated that Peru should abide by the decision.<ref name="peru">{{in lang|es}} lavanguardia</ref> On 29 January 2018, Housing Minister Carlos Bruce estimated that same-sex marriage will be allowed in Peru within two years, and several former Supreme Court judges and lawmakers, notably Indira Huilca, stated that same-sex marriage will soon be legal in Peru, regardless.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://ojo.pe/actualidad/carlos-bruce-matrimonio-gay-pronto-peru-251881/|title=Carlos Bruce hace anuncio: "Matrimonio gay se dará pronto en Perú"|website=ojo.pe|date=30 January 2018}}</ref><ref>{{in lang|es}} </ref> The Peruvian Government, however, has yet to issue a formal decision on the matter.

On 29 June 2018, two family judges in ] ruled that the Civil Registry must issue same-sex marriage licenses on request, stating that the decision of the IACHR trumped the ]'s definition of marriage. The Registry appealed, but the Constitutional Court ruled in favor of same-sex marriage on 12 June 2019.

On 8 August 2018, the ] declared Costa Rica's same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional, and gave the ] 18 months to reform the law accordingly, otherwise the ban would be abolished automatically. This was in line with the IACHR ruling.<ref name="chinch">{{cite news |last1=Chinchilla |first1=Sofía |title=Sala IV da 18 meses para que entre en vigencia el matrimonio homosexual |url=https://www.nacion.com/el-pais/politica/sala-iv-da-18-meses-para-que-entre-en-vigencia-el/CZK6BUA5GRFSRJMN7H6H25BLNY/story/ |accessdate=9 August 2018 |agency=La Nación |date=9 August 2018}}</ref>

Besides Ecuador and Costa Rica, lawsuits regarding same-sex marriage have been filed in Honduras,<ref></ref> Panama,<ref></ref> Paraguay (to recognize marriages performed abroad),<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.hoy.com.py/nacionales/lgtbi-anuncia-presin-a-corte-para-aceptar-unin-igualitaria-y-habr-guerra|title=LGTBI anuncia presión a Corte para aceptar unión igualitaria y habrá 'guerra'|publisher=Hoy (Paraguay)|date=12 January 2018|accessdate=14 January 2018}}</ref> and Peru,<ref></ref> all of which are under the jurisdiction of the IACHR. In Panama the previous government of ] announced that it would implement the ruling and communicated this to the other branches of government, but under his successor's government the ] approved a constitutional reform banning same-sex marriage. The reform, alongside others, caused massive protests that caused President ] to criticize the lawmakers and a committee was created to analyze the more polemic reforms.<ref>{{cite news |title=https://www.crhoy.com/mundo/un-centenar-de-detenidos-en-protestas-por-reformas-constitucionales-en-panama/ |url=https://www.crhoy.com/mundo/un-centenar-de-detenidos-en-protestas-por-reformas-constitucionales-en-panama |accessdate=2 November 2019 |agency=CRHoy |date=1 November 2019}}</ref>

==Same-sex marriage around the world==
{{Main|Status of same-sex marriage|Same-sex union legislation}}
[[File:World marriage-equality laws (up to date).svg|thumb|center|800px|
{{legend|#025|Marriage open to same-sex couples (rings: individual cases)}}
{{legend|#71C837|Legislation or binding domestic court ruling establishing same-sex marriage, but marriage is not yet provided for}} {{legend|#71C837|Legislation or binding domestic court ruling establishing same-sex marriage, but marriage is not yet provided for}}
{{legend|#90C|Same-sex marriage recognized with full rights when performed in certain other jurisdictions}}
{{legend|#06F|Civil unions or domestic partnerships}} {{legend|#06F|Civil unions or domestic partnerships}}
{{legend|#9CF|Limited legal recognition (registered cohabitation, legal guardianship)}} {{legend|#9CF|Unregistered cohabitation or legal guardianship}}
{{legend striped|#9CF|#EEE|Local certification without legal force|up=yes}} {{legend striped|#9CF|#EEE|Nonbinding certification|up=yes}}
{{legend|#CAF|Limited recognition of marriage performed in certain other jurisdictions (residency rights for spouses)}} {{legend|#CAF|Limited recognition of marriage performed in certain other jurisdictions (residency rights for spouses)}}
{{legend|#C6E9AF|Country subject to an international court ruling to recognize same-sex marriage}} {{legend|#EEE|No legal recognition of same-sex unions}}
{{legend|#EEE|Same-sex unions not legally recognized}}
]]
[[File:Bans on same-sex unions by country.svg|thumb|center|800px|
{{legend|#D40000|Same-sex marriage banned by secular constitution}}
{{legend|#800000|Same-sex marriage banned by constitutionally mandated Islamic law or morality}}
{{legend striped|#800000|#DCDCDC|Same-sex marriage banned for Muslims|up=yes}}
{{legend|#CCCCCC|No constitutional ban}}
]] ]]


Same-sex marriage will begin to be performed by ] in January 2025, and is under ] or the courts in ],<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.elsalvador.com/noticias/nacional/sala-de-lo-constitucional-resolveria-demanda-sobre-matrimonio-igualitario-en-los-primeros-tres-meses-de-2020/674550/2020/|title=Sala de lo Constitucional resolvería demanda sobre matrimonio igualitario en los primeros tres messes de 2020|work=elsalvador.com|date=6 January 2020|language=es}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url= https://observador.cr/bukele-busca-que-se-apruebe-el-aborto-terapeutico-y-la-union-homosexual/|title= Bukele busca que se apruebe el aborto terapéutico y la unión homosexual|work=El Observador|date=18 August 2021|language=es}}</ref> ],<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://tg.la7.it/politica/diritti-matrimonio-egualitario-opinioni-a-confronto-scalfarotto-vs-bonaldi-vs-centinaio-09-03-2023-180977|title=Diritti: matrimonio "egualitario". Opinioni a confronto: Scalfarotto vs Bonaldi vs Centinaio|date=9 March 2023|access-date=10 March 2023|archive-date=10 March 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230310113805/https://tg.la7.it/politica/diritti-matrimonio-egualitario-opinioni-a-confronto-scalfarotto-vs-bonaldi-vs-centinaio-09-03-2023-180977|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.corriere.it/politica/23_marzo_10/da-zaia-centinaio-cosi-lega-cambia-diritti-lgbt-perche-pesa-l-effetto-francesca-a2e451f8-bf1b-11ed-a204-070182f2d425.shtml|title=Da Zaia a Centinaio: la Lega ora cambia sui diritti lgbt (e c'entra "l'effetto Francesca")|date=10 March 2023|access-date=10 March 2023|archive-date=10 March 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230310104916/https://www.corriere.it/politica/23_marzo_10/da-zaia-centinaio-cosi-lega-cambia-diritti-lgbt-perche-pesa-l-effetto-francesca-a2e451f8-bf1b-11ed-a204-070182f2d425.shtml|url-status=live}}</ref> ],<ref>{{cite web |title=Japan opposition party submits bill for same-sex marriage |url=https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2023/03/61f05630333c-japan-opposition-party-submits-bill-for-same-sex-marriage.html|publisher=]|date=6 March 2023|accessdate=31 May 2023}}</ref> ],{{efn|name=nepal|text=Nepal is waiting for a final decision by its supreme court, but meanwhile all local governments are ordered to temporarily register same-sex marriages in a separate record. In April 2024 the National ID and Civil Registration Department issued a circular to all local governments that they register such marriages. However, simply being registered does not grant same-sex couples the legal rights of marriage, and registered same-sex couples cannot inherit property, get tax subsidies, make spousal medical decisions, adopt children etc.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.dw.com/en/nepal-same-sex-couples-face-hurdles-on-road-to-recognition/a-69620274|title=Nepal: Same-sex couples face hurdles on road to recognition|work=DW|date=2024-07-10|first=Swechhya|last=Raut}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://kathmandupost.com/national/2023/12/03/how-court-laid-the-ground-for-same-sex-marriage-in-nepal|title=How court laid the ground for same-sex marriage in Nepal|first=Binod|last=Ghimire|date=2023-12-03|work=The Kathmandu Post}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.apcom.org/long-road-lasting-marriage-equality-nepal/|title=The Long Road to Lasting Marriage Equality in Nepal|work=APCOM|first=Manisha|last=Dhakal}}</ref>}} and ].<ref>{{Cite web |date=24 February 2022 |title=Diputada plantea iniciativa para el matrimonio civil igualitario en la Asamblea Nacional |url=https://elacarigueno.com/ini/diputada-plantea-iniciativa-para-el-matrimonio-civil-igualitario-en-la-asamblea-nacional/ |website=El Acarigueño |language=es |access-date=17 April 2022 |archive-date=20 May 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220520104213/https://elacarigueno.com/ini/diputada-plantea-iniciativa-para-el-matrimonio-civil-igualitario-en-la-asamblea-nacional/ |url-status=dead }}</ref>
Same-sex marriage is legally performed and recognized (nationwide or in some parts) in the following countries: ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ],{{efn|name=mexico}} the ],{{efn|name=netherlands}} ],{{efn|name=nz}} ], ], ], ], ], ], the ],{{efn|name=uk}} the ],{{efn|name=usa}} and ].


]s are being considered in a number of countries, including ],<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/news/kosovo-promises-to-introduce-same-sex-unions-in-may/|title=Kosovo promises to introduce same-sex unions in May|first1=Alice|last1=Taylor|first2=Nick|last2=Alipour|date=26 April 2024|website=www.euractiv.com}}</ref> ],<ref>{{Cite news |date=23 October 2021 |title=Presentan proyecto de ley sobre el matrimonio igualitario entre personas del mismo sexo |newspaper=El Comercio |url=https://elcomercio.pe/politica/congreso/congreso-de-la-republica-presentan-proyecto-de-ley-sobre-el-matrimonio-igualitario-entre-personas-del-mismo-sexo-juntos-por-el-peru-somos-peru-partido-morado-nndc-noticia/?ref=ecr |access-date=2022-06-28 |publisher=elcomercio.pe}}</ref> and ].<ref></ref>
Furthermore, the ] has issued a ruling that is expected to facilitate recognition in the 14 subject countries that ].{{efn|name=IACHR}}<ref name="IACHR"/>


On 12 March 2015, the ] passed a non-binding resolution encouraging EU institutions and member states to " on the recognition of same-sex marriage or same-sex civil union as a political, social and human and civil rights issue".<ref>{{Cite web |last=Duffy |first=Nick |date=13 March 2015 |title=UKIP and Tories abstain on EU motion to recognise same-sex marriage |url=http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/03/13/ukip-and-tories-abstain-on-eu-motion-to-recognise-same-sex-marriage/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150809064225/http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/03/13/ukip-and-tories-abstain-on-eu-motion-to-recognise-same-sex-marriage/ |archive-date=9 August 2015 |access-date=26 July 2015 |website=PinkNews}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Texts adopted – Thursday, 12 March 2015 – Annual report on human rights and democracy in the world 2013 and the EU policy on the matter |url=http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P8-TA-2015-0076+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN&language=EN |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150807122729/http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2F%2FEP%2F%2FTEXT+TA+P8-TA-2015-0076+0+DOC+XML+V0%2F%2FEN&language=EN |archive-date=7 August 2015 |access-date=26 July 2015 |publisher=European Parliament}}</ref>
Same-sex marriage is under consideration by the governments or the courts in ],<ref></ref> ], ],<ref></ref> ],<ref></ref> ],<ref></ref> ], ], ],<ref></ref> ],<ref></ref> ] (at the federal level and in the states of Mexico, Guerrero, Querétaro, Sinaloa<!--2nd attempt-->, Tlaxcala, Veracruz and Yucatán<!--3rd attempt-->), the ], ], ]<ref></ref> and ] (in both assemblies), with recognition of foreign marriages under consideration in ]. Legal cases have been filed in a number of other countries. A ban on same-sex marriage is under consideration in ]; similar proposed bans or draft opinions in El Salvador and Panama were retired after the IACHR ruling,<ref>{{cite web |title= Worldwide Marriage Equality Watch List |date= 23 February 2019 |url= https://wockner.blogspot.com/2018/06/worldwide-marriage-equality-watch-list.html |website= Wockner (wockner.blogspot.com) |accessdate= 23 February 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title= Gay couples from largest Native American tribe call for marriage equality |url= https://www.sbs.com.au/news/gay-couples-from-largest-native-american-tribe-call-for-marriage-equality |website= ] |date= 29 October 2018 |accessdate= 23 February 2019}}</ref>
though Panama would later draft a new ban.


In response to the international spread of same-sex marriage, a number of countries have enacted preventative ], with the most recent being ] in 2023, and ] in 2024. In other countries, such restrictions and limitations are effected through legislation. Even before same-sex marriage was first legislated, some countries had constitutions that specified that marriage was between a man and a woman.
=== Legal recognition ===
====Argentina====
{{Main|Same-sex marriage in Argentina}}
]]]
On 15 July 2010, the ] approved a bill extending marriage rights to same-sex couples. It was supported by the government of ] ] and opposed by the Catholic Church.<ref>{{cite news|last=Barrionuevo|first=Alexei|title=Argentina Approves Gay Marriage, in a First for Region|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/16/world/americas/16argentina.html|work=The New York Times|accessdate=9 February 2012|date=16 July 2010}}</ref> Polls showed that nearly 70% of Argentines supported giving gay people the same marital rights as heterosexuals.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/14/world/americas/14argentina.html|work=The New York Times|title=Argentina Senate to Vote on Gay Marriage|first=Alexei|last=Barrionuevo|date=13 July 2010}}</ref> The law came into effect on 22 July 2010 upon promulgation by the Argentine President.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.mercopress.com/2010/07/22/cristina-kirchner-signs-bill-legalizing-same-sex-couples-marriage|title=Cristina Kirchner signs bill legalizing same-sex couples' marriage|website=mercopress.com}}</ref> Argentina thus became the first country in ] and the tenth in the world to legalize same-sex marriage.


[[File:Constitutional bans on same-sex unions by country.svg|thumb|center|upright=3|
====Australia====
{{Main|Same-sex marriage in Australia}} {{legend|#D40000|Same-sex marriage ] by secular constitution}}
{{legend|#800000|Same-sex marriage banned by constitutionally mandated religious law}}
Australia became the second nation in ] to legalise same-sex marriage when the ] passed a bill on 7 December 2017.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-07/same-sex-marriage-bill-passes-house-of-representatives/9235560|title=Same-sex marriage bill passes House of Representatives, paving way for first gay weddings|website=ABC News|date=7 December 2017}}</ref> The bill received ] on 8 December, and took effect on 9 December 2017.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-08/same-sex-marriage-legal-after-gg-approval/9239334|title=Same-sex marriage signed into law by Governor-General, first weddings to happen from January 9|website=ABC News|date=8 December 2017}}</ref><ref name=Ausleg>{{cite web|url=https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2017A00129|title=Marriage Amendment (Definition and Religious Freedoms) Act 2017|date=9 December 2017|website=Federal Register of Legislation}}</ref> The law removed the ban on same-sex marriage that previously existed and followed a ] held from 12 September to 7 November 2017, which returned a 61.6% ''Yes'' vote for same-sex marriage.<ref>{{Cite newspaper|url=https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/nov/15/australia-says-yes-to-same-sex-marriage-in-historic-postal-survey|title=Australia says yes to same-sex marriage in historic postal survey|date=15 November 2017|journal=The Guardian|last1=Karp|first1=Paul}}</ref> The same legislation also legalised same-sex marriage in all of Australia's ].<ref name=Ausleg/>
{{legend|#CCCCCC|No constitutional ban}}

]]
====Austria====
{{Main|Same-sex marriage in Austria}}
Since 1 January 2010, same-sex couples have been allowed to enter registered partnerships (''Eingetragene Partnerschaft'').<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.bmeia.gv.at/en/austrian-embassy-london/service-for-citizens/civil-status-family/registered-civil-partnerships/|title=Registered (civil) partnerships – Österreichische Botschaft London|first=Außenministerium der Republik|last=Österreich|website=www.bmeia.gv.at}}</ref>

On 20 November 2013, the ] introduced a bill in the ] that would legalise same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.thinkoutsideyourbox.net/?p=33177|title=Nationalrat: Grüne bringen Antrag zur Ehe-Öffnung für Lesben und Schwule ein|publisher=Thinkoutsideyourbox.net|date=20 November 2013|access-date=1 July 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170313150549/http://www.thinkoutsideyourbox.net/?p=33177|archive-date=13 March 2017|url-status=dead}}</ref> It was sent to the Judiciary Committee on 17 December 2013.<ref>{{in lang|de}} </ref> The bill was supposed to be debated in Autumn 2014,<ref>{{in lang|de}} </ref> but was delayed by the ruling coalition.

In December 2015, the Vienna Administrative Court dismissed a case challenging the same-sex marriage ban. The plaintiffs appealed to the Constitutional Court.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.thelocal.at/20160323/families-fight-austrias-gay-marriage-ban|title=Families fight Austria's gay marriage ban|date=23 March 2016}}</ref> On 12 October 2017, the ] agreed to consider one of the cases challenging the law barring same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ggg.at/2017/10/17/verfassungsgerichtshof-koennte-noch-heuer-die-ehe-in-oesterreich-oeffnen/ |title=Verfassungsgerichtshof könnte die Ehe in Österreich noch dieses Jahr öffnen |publisher=Ggg.at |date=17 October 2017 |accessdate=13 April 2018}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://derstandard.at/2000066167782/Verfassungsgericht-prueft-Eheoeffnung-fuer-Homosexuelle |title=Verfassungsgericht prüft Öffnung der Ehe für Homosexuelle |publisher=Derstandard.at |accessdate=13 April 2018}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://kurier.at/politik/inland/vfgh-prueft-eheoeffnung-fuer-gleichgeschlechtliche-paare-in-oesterreich/292.567.898 |title=VfGH prüft Eheöffnung für gleichgeschlechtliche Paare in Österreich |publisher=Kurier.at |date=17 October 2017 |accessdate=13 April 2018}}</ref> On 5 December 2017, the Court struck down the ban on same-sex marriage as ]. Thus, same-sex couples have been allowed to marry since 1 January 2019. The Court also decided that ]s will be open for both same-sex and different-sex couples from that date onwards.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.vfgh.gv.at/downloads/VfGH_G_258-2017_Press_release_same-sex_marriage.pdf|title=Press release from the Austrian constitution court|date=5 December 2017|work=Distinction between marriage and registered partnership violates ban on discrimination}}</ref><ref name="Deutsche Welle">{{cite news|url=http://www.dw.com/en/gay-marriage-in-austria-approved-by-constitutional-court/a-41654156|title=Gay marriage in Austria approved by Constitutional Court|work=]|date=5 December 2017|accessdate=5 December 2017}}</ref>

====Belgium====
{{Main|Same-sex marriage in Belgium}}
], Willy Demeyer, officiating at the wedding of a gay couple]]

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

====Brazil====
{{Main|Same-sex marriage in Brazil}}
{{Same-sex marriage map South America|align=left}}
] ruled in May 2011 that same-sex couples are legally entitled to legal recognition of cohabitation (known as {{lang|pt|união estável}}), one of the two possible family entities in Brazilian legislation. It included almost all of the rights available to married couples in Brazil.<ref>{{cite news|title=Brazil's supreme court recognizes gay partnerships|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/06/us-brazil-gayrights-idUSTRE74503V20110506|accessdate=16 February 2012|agency=Reuters|date=5 May 2011}}</ref>

Between mid-2011 and May 2013, same-sex couples had their cohabitation issues converted into marriages in several Brazil states with the approval of a state judge. All legal Brazilian marriages were always recognized all over Brazil.<ref name="WPost">{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/americas/brazil-judge-approves-what-appears-to-be-countrys-first-gay-marriage-between-2-men/2011/06/27/AGYN2znH_story.html|title=Brazilian judge gives male couple approval for what court says is country's first gay marriage|date=27 June 2011|work=The Washington Post|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160911044643/https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/americas/brazil-judge-approves-what-appears-to-be-countrys-first-gay-marriage-between-2-men/2011/06/27/AGYN2znH_story.html|archive-date=11 September 2016|url-status=live}}</ref>

In November 2012, the Court of Bahia equalized marriage in the state of ].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www5.tjba.jus.br/corregedoria/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=420:uniaohomoafetiva&catid=31:noticias&Itemid=142 |title=Provimento Conjunto trata de união homoafetiva |website=Tribunal de Justiça do Estado da Bahia (official web site of the state supreme court) |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130927065759/http://www5.tjba.jus.br/corregedoria/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=420%3Auniaohomoafetiva&catid=31%3Anoticias&Itemid=142|archive-date=27 September 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.brasil247.com/pt/247/bahia247/86361/Bahia-já-pode-oficializar-casamento-homoafetivo.htm|language=pt|date=27 November 2012|title=Bahia já pode oficializar casamento homoafetivo|work=brasil247.com|accessdate=27 November 2012}}</ref>

In December 2012, the state of ] likewise had same-sex marriage legalized by court order.<ref>{{cite news|title=Norma do TJ obriga cartórios de SP a registrar casamento gay|url=http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/cotidiano/1203680-norma-do-tj-obriga-cartorios-de-sp-a-registrar-casamento-gay.shtml|newspaper=Folha de S. Paulo|date=19 December 2012}}</ref> Same-sex marriages also became equalized in relation to opposite-sex ones between January 2012 and April 2013 by court order in Alagoas, Ceará, Espírito Santo, the Federal District, Mato Grosso do Sul, Paraíba, Paraná, Piauí, Rondônia, Santa Catarina and Sergipe, and in Santa Rita do Sapucaí, a municipality in Minas Gerais. In Rio de Janeiro, the State Court facilitated its realization by district judges in agreement with the equalization (instead of ordering notaries to accept same-sex marriages in demand as all others).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://virgula.uol.com.br/ver/noticia/lifestyle/2013/04/20/324152-rio-de-janeiro-retira-impedimentos-a-casamento-entre-gays|title=Rio de Janeiro state legalizes gay marriage|date=17 April 2013|accessdate= 22 April 2013}}</ref>

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

In March 2013, polls suggested that 47% of Brazilians supported marriage equalization and 57% supported adoption equalization for same-sex couples.<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130926082310/http://portugues.christianpost.com/news/quase-metade-dos-internautas-brasileiros-aprova-o-casamento-gay-15398/ |date=26 September 2013 }}, christianpost.com; accessed 5 July 2017. {{in lang|pt}}</ref>

When the distinction between same-sex unions that are not termed marriages in relation to same-sex marriage is made, the difference in the numbers of approval and disapproval is still insignificant, below 1%; the most frequent reason for disapproval is a supposed 'unnaturalness' of same-sex relationships, followed by religious beliefs.<ref> {{in lang|pt}}</ref><ref> {{in lang|pt}}</ref>

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

====Colombia====
{{Main|Same-sex marriage in Colombia}}

In February 2007, a series of rulings by the ] meant that same-sex couples could apply for all the rights that heterosexual couples have in ''de facto'' unions (''uniones de hecho'').<ref name="2009 ruling">{{cite web|url=http://english.corteconstitucional.gov.co/sentences/C-029-2009.pdf|title=Decision C-029 of 2009|accessdate=7 July 2017}}</ref><ref>, Pink News, 30 January 2009</ref>

On 26 July 2011, the Constitutional Court of Colombia ordered the Congress to pass the legislation giving same-sex couples similar rights to marriage by 20 June 2013. If such a law were not passed by then, same-sex couples would be granted these rights automatically.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://english.corteconstitucional.gov.co/sentences/C-577-2011.pdf|title=DECISION C-577/11 The homosexuals have the right to form a family|accessdate=7 July 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190429010946/http://english.corteconstitucional.gov.co/sentences/C-577-2011.pdf|archive-date=29 April 2019|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/americas/07/27/colombia.gay.marriage/|work=CNN| title=Colombian court says Congress must decide on gay marriage|date=27 July 2011}}</ref>

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

On 24 July 2013, a civil court judge in ] declared a same-sex couple legally married, after a ruling on 11 July 2013 accepting the petition. This was the first same-sex couple married in Colombia.<ref>{{in lang|es}} . Retrieved 12 July 2013.</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.rcnradio.com/noticias/jueza-toma-decision-historica-declara-civilmente-casados-primera-pareja-gay-79665 |title=Carlos y Gonzalo, la primera pareja gay "civilmente casada", pero sin matrimonio |language=es |publisher=RCN Radio |date=24 July 2013 |accessdate=5 April 2014 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140407093356/http://www.rcnradio.com/noticias/jueza-toma-decision-historica-declara-civilmente-casados-primera-pareja-gay-79665 |archive-date=7 April 2014 }}</ref>

In September 2013, two civil court judges married two same-sex couples.<ref>{{cite web|first=Andrew |last=Potts |url=http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/judges-allow-first-same-sex-marriages-colombia011013 |title=Judges allow first same-sex marriages in Colombia |publisher=Gay Star News |date=1 October 2013 |accessdate=5 April 2014}}</ref> The first marriage was challenged by a conservative group, and it was initially annulled. Nevertheless, in October, a High Court (Tribunal Supremo de Bogotá) maintained the validity of that marriage.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.eltiempo.com/justicia/tribunal-superior-de-bogota-rechaza-tutela-contra-matrimonio-gay_13142227-4 |title=Rechazan tutela que tumbaba primer matrimonio gay en el país |publisher=Eltiempo.Com |date=24 October 2013 |accessdate=5 April 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cmi.com.co/?n=118476 |title=CM& la noticia |accessdate=26 July 2015 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151016144837/http://www.cmi.com.co/?n=118476 |archive-date=16 October 2015 }}</ref>

On 7 April 2016, the Court ruled that marriage doesn't exclusively apply to opposite-sex couples.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.eltiempo.com/politica/justicia/corte-aprueba-matrimonio-homosexual/16557410|title=Histórico: Colombia tiene matrimonio homosexual|website=El Tiempo|date=7 April 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://thecitypaperbogota.com/news/colombia-says-yes-to-gay-marriage/10653|title=Colombia says 'I do' to gay marriage|date=7 April 2016|website=The City Paper Bogota}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.washingtonblade.com/2016/04/07/colombia-high-court-rules-in-favor-of-same-sex-marriage/|title=Colombia high court rules in favor of same-sex marriage|website=Washington Blade|date=7 April 2016}}</ref>

On 28 April 2016, the Constitutional Court ruled that same-sex couples are allowed to enter into civil marriages in the country and that judges and notaries are barred from refusing to perform same-sex weddings.<ref name="April 28, 2016 ruling">{{cite web|url=http://www.eltiempo.com/politica/justicia/matrimonio-gay-corte-constitucional-le-daria-el-si-definitivo/16575865|title=Corte Constitucional da el sí definitivo y avala el matrimonio gay - Justicia - El Tiempo|first=Casa Editorial El|last=Tiempo|website=eltiempo.com|date=28 April 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.dw.com/en/colombia-legalizes-same-sex-marriage/a-19223822|title=Colombia legalizes same-sex marriage|website=Deutsche Welle|date=28 April 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wradio.com.co/noticias/actualidad/corte-legaliza-el-matrimonio-entre-parejas-del-mismo-sexo/20160428/nota/3119179.aspx|title=Corte legaliza el matrimonio entre parejas del mismo sexo|date=28 April 2016|website=W Radio}}</ref>

====Costa Rica====
{{Same-sex marriage map Central America}}
{{main|Same-sex marriage in Costa Rica}}

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

In January 2018, the ] (IACHR) issued an Advisory Opinion (AO 24/17) regarding issues related to sexual orientation and gender identity, stating that the ] includes the recognition of same-sex marriage. Costa Rican Vice President ] announced that the Government would implement the ruling "in its totality". Costa Rica's ] (the institution in charge of ], including the issuance of ]s) announced that it will obey the ruling of the ] and will adapt the necessary by-laws once the ] notifies the ruling.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Cerdas|first1=Daniela|title=Registro Civil solo espera notificación del Ejecutivo para adecuar reglas al matrimonio gay|url=http://www.nacion.com/el-pais/gobierno/registro-civil-solo-espera-notificacion-del/2FTLNLISQRCBTEBAMQ6MXYBLQM/story/?rel=none|accessdate=13 January 2018|agency=La Nación}}</ref> The official notification was done on 12 January 2018.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://qcostarica.com/costa-ricas-foreign-ministry-initiates-notification-process-to-execute-court-order-on-gay-marriage/|title=Costa Rica's Foreign Ministry Initiates Notification Process To Execute Court Order On Gay Marriage|publisher=Q Costa Rica|date=12 January 2018|accessdate=13 January 2018}}</ref> On 15 January, a same-sex couple applied for a marriage certificate. Their marriage was set to be performed on 20 January, and would have been the first same-sex marriage in Costa Rica.<ref>{{in lang|es}} </ref> Shortly before the marriage date, however, the Superior Council of Notaries stated that notaries cannot perform same-sex marriages until legislative change or a Supreme Court decision, putting them at odds with the Costa Rican Government and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which stated in its ruling that legislative change is unnecessary and that governments may simply issue an executive decree legalising same-sex marriage.<ref name="IACHR" /><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-costarica-lgbt/costa-ricas-first-gay-marriage-suffers-bureaucratic-hitch-idUSKBN1F82O0|title=Costa Rica's first gay marriage suffers bureaucratic hitch|work=Reuters|first=Enrique Andres|last=Pretel|date=19 January 2018|accessdate=20 January 2018}}</ref>

In the ], the IACHR ruling on same-sex marriage became a prominent issue. ], who supports LGBT rights and favors the implementation of the ruling, won the election with 60.7% of the vote, defeating by wide margin ], a vocal opponent of LGBT rights who was against the implementation of the ruling. On 8 August 2018, the ] ruled that the prohibition of same-sex marriage in the Family Code is unconstitutional, giving Congress 18 months to reform the law or the prohibition will be automatically lifted. As the Congress did not act, same-sex marriage in Costa Rica became legal on 26 May 2020 in line with the court ruling.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-05-25/costa-rica-latest-country-to-legalize-same-sex-marriage|title=Costa Rica is the latest country to legalize same-sex marriage|publisher=Los Angeles Time|date=26 May 2020|accessdate=27 May 2020}}</ref>

====Denmark====
{{Main|Same-sex marriage in Denmark}}
On 25 May 1989, Denmark wrote history as the first country to make it legal to be in a registered partnership with one of the same sex. A registered partnership was the same as a civil marriage, but was not seen as marriage in the eyes of the church. Axel and Eigil Axgil were the first ones to get married this way.<ref name="Sabinsky_5/24/2014">{{cite web | last=SABINSKY | first=SONJA | title=Da Danmark skrev verdenshistorie | website=Jydske Vestkysten | date=24 May 2014 | url=https://www.jv.dk/livsstil/Da-Danmark-skrev-verdenshistorie/artikel/1750195 | language=no | access-date=9 November 2018}}</ref>

On 7 June 2012, the ] (Danish Parliament) approved new laws regarding same-sex civil and religious marriage. These laws permit same-sex couples to get married in the ]. The bills received ] on 12 June and took effect on 15 June 2012.<ref>{{cite news|last=Sanners |first=Peter |title=Gay marriage legalised |url=http://cphpost.dk/news/national/updated-gay-marriage-legalised |accessdate=25 September 2012 |newspaper=The Copenhagen Post |date=7 June 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120818162542/http://cphpost.dk/news/national/updated-gay-marriage-legalised |archive-date=18 August 2012 }}</ref>

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

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

====Ecuador====
{{main|Same-sex marriage in Ecuador}}
The 2018 Inter-American Court of Human Rights ruling regarding the legalisation of same-sex marriage in countries that have ratified the ] applies to Ecuador. In May 2018, the Ecuador Supreme Court ruled, in a lesbian parenting case, that the IACHR ruling is fully binding on Ecuador and that the country must also implement the ruling in due course.<ref>{{Dead link|date=August 2019 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref> In June 2018, two family judges ruled the country's same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional.<ref name="ecuador">{{Cite news|url=https://www.advocate.com/marriage-equality/2018/7/05/ecuadorian-court-rules-marriage-equality|title=Ecuadorian Court Rules for Marriage Equality|date=5 July 2018|access-date=6 July 2018}}</ref> However, the Civil Registry appealed the rulings, preventing their coming into force.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.advocate.com/marriage-equality/2018/7/05/ecuadorian-court-rules-marriage-equality|title=Ecuadorian Court Rules for Marriage Equality|date=5 July 2018|access-date=6 July 2018|language=en}}</ref>

Same sex marriage eventually took effect in Ecuador on 8 July 2019, following the Constitutional Court ruling which was made on 12 June 2019.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://cuencahighlife.com/ecuador-records-first-official-same-sex-marriages-as-court-ruling-goes-into-effect|title=Ecuador records first official same-sex marriages as court ruling goes into effect|work=CuencaHighLife|date=2019-07-09}}</ref>

====Finland====
{{main|Same-sex marriage in Finland}}
] have been legal in Finland since 2002.<ref name="Yle Uutiset"/>

In 2010, ] ] said her Ministry was preparing to amend the ''Marriage Act'' to allow same-sex marriage by 2012.<ref name="yle.fi">{{cite news|url=http://www.yle.fi/uutiset/news/2010/07/gender-neutral_marriage_law_possible_by_2012_1804013.html|title=Gender-Neutral Marriage Law Possible by 2012|work=]|accessdate=1 October 2010}}</ref> On 27 February 2013, the bill was rejected by the Legal Affairs Committee of the Finnish Parliament on a vote of 9–8. A ] was launched to put the issue before the ].<ref name="McCormick">{{cite web|publisher=PinkNews.co.uk web|url=http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/03/01/finland-parliamentary-committee-narrowly-rejects-equal-marriage-bill|title=Finland: Parliamentary committee narrowly rejects equal marriage bill|first=Joseph Patrick|last=McCormick|date=1 March 2013|accessdate=10 August 2013}}</ref> The campaign collected 166,000 signatures and the initiative was presented to the Parliament in December 2013.{{r|Finland Dec 2014}} After being rejected by the Legal Affairs Committee twice,<ref name="Finland Legal Committee 3rd">{{cite news|url=http://www.iltasanomat.fi/kotimaa/art-1288775946186.html|title=Lakivaliokunta hylkäsi tasa-arvoisen avioliittolain äänin 9-8: Näin äänestettiin|work=Iltasanomat|agency=Suomen Tietotoimisto|publisher=Sanoma News|language=fi|date=20 November 2014|accessdate=10 December 2014}}</ref> it faced the first vote in full, session on 28 November 2014,<ref name="ReferenceB">{{cite news|url=http://yle.fi/uutiset/legal_committee_votes_against_gay_marriage/7318809|title=Legal committee votes against gay marriage|publisher=Yle|date=25 June 2014}}</ref> which passed the bill 105–92. The bill passed the second and final vote by 101–90 on 12 December 2014,<ref name="Yle Uutiset2">{{cite news|url=http://yle.fi/uutiset/second_vote_approval_of_gender-neutral_marriage_bill/7685185|title=Second vote approval of gender-neutral marriage bill|publisher=Yle|date=12 December 2014}}</ref> and was signed by the President on 20 February 2015.<ref name="Finland Dec 2014">{{cite news|url=http://www.helsinkitimes.fi/finland/finland-news/domestic/8709-initiative-for-equal-marriage-act-presented-to-parliament.html|title= Initiative for equal Marriage Act presented to Parliament|newspaper=Helsinki Times|date=13 December 2013}}</ref><ref name="Finland introdebate 2014">{{cite web|url=http://web.eduskunta.fi/Resource.phx/pubman/templates/1.htx?id=6367|title=Torstain täysitunnossa kansalaisaloite tasa-arvoisesta avioliittolaista|trans-title=Thursday's plenary session debates initiative on marriage equality|publisher=Parliament of Finland|date=20 February 2014|language=fi|accessdate=20 February 2014}}</ref><ref name="Finland parl procedure">{{cite web|url=http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/ajantasa/2000/20000040|title=Eduskunnan työjärjestys|publisher=Ministry of Justice of Finland|language=fi|accessdate=20 February 2014}}</ref>

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

====France====
{{main|Same-sex marriage in France}}
Since November 1999, France has had a ] scheme known as a ] that is open to both opposite-sex and same-sex couples.<ref>{{in lang|fr}} </ref>

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

On 12 April 2013, the upper house of the French Parliament voted to legalise same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite news|title=French senate votes to legalise gay marriage|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22126437|accessdate=24 April 2013|newspaper=BBC News|date=12 April 2013}}</ref> On 23 April 2013, the law was approved by the National Assembly in a 331–225 vote.<ref name="Same-sex marriage: France">{{cite news|title=Same-sex marriage: French parliament approves new law|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22261494|publisher=BBC News Europe|accessdate=23 April 2013|date=23 April 2013}}</ref> ''Law No.2013-404'' grants same-sex couples living in France, including foreigners provided at least one of the partners has their domicile or residence in France, the legal right to get married. The law also allows the recognition in France of same-sex couples' marriages that occurred abroad before the bill's enactment.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Lesur|first1=Lionel|title=France Allows Same-Sex Marriages|url=http://www.natlawreview.com/article/france-allows-same-sex-marriages|accessdate=20 June 2013|newspaper=The National Law Review|date=13 June 2013|first2=Lisa A.|last2=Linsky|author3=McDermott Will & Emery}}</ref>

The main right-wing opposition party UMP challenged the law in the ], which had one month to rule on whether the law conformed to the Constitution. The Constitutional Council had previously ruled that the issue of same-sex marriage was one for the Parliament to decide and there was only little hope for UMP to overturn the Parliament's vote.<ref>{{cite web|title=Décision n° 2010–92 QPC du 28 janvier 2011|url=http://www.conseil-constitutionnel.fr/decision/2011/2010-92-qpc/decision-n-2010-92-qpc-du-28-janvier-2011.52612.html|website=Les décisions|publisher=Conseil Constitutionel|accessdate=24 April 2013|language=fr}}</ref> On 17 May 2013, the ] declared the bill legal in its entire redaction. President ] signed it into law on 18 May 2013.<ref>, ]; retrieved 17 May 2013.{{in lang|fr}}</ref>

====Germany====
{{main|Same-sex marriage in Germany}}

Prior to the legalisation of same-sex marriage, Germany was one of the first countries to legislate ] (''Eingetragene Lebenspartnerschaft'') for same-sex couples, which provided most of the rights of marriage. The law came into effect on 1 August 2001, and the act was progressively amended on subsequent occasions to reflect ] rulings expanding the rights of registered partners.

Same-sex marriage has been legal in Germany since 1 October 2017. A bill recognising marriages and adoption rights for same-sex couples passed the ] on 30 June 2017 after ] ] stated that she would allow her ] parliamentarians a ] on such legislation, shortly after it was made a requirement for any future coalition by the ], the ] and ].<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.berliner-zeitung.de/politik/bundesparteitag-der-spd-schulz-macht-ehe-fuer-alle-zur-koalitionsbedingung-27856194|title=Bundesparteitag der SPD Schulz macht Ehe für alle zur Koalitionsbedingung|work=]|publisher=]|language=de|date=25 June 2017|accessdate=26 June 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170625220038/http://www.berliner-zeitung.de/politik/bundesparteitag-der-spd-schulz-macht-ehe-fuer-alle-zur-koalitionsbedingung-27856194|archive-date=25 June 2017}}</ref> The co-governing ] consequently forced a vote on the issue together with the opposition parties.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/30/world/europe/germany-gay-marriage.html|title=Parliament in Germany Approves Same-Sex Marriage|last1=Smale|first1=Alison|date=30 June 2017|work=]|access-date=30 June 2017|last2=Shimer|first2=David|language=en-US|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170703142747/https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/30/world/europe/germany-gay-marriage.html|archive-date=3 July 2017}}</ref> Previous attempts by smaller parties to introduce same-sex marriage were blocked by the CDU/CSU-led government over several years. The bill was signed into law by ] ] on 20 July and came into effect on 1 October 2017.<ref>{{Cite newspaper|url=http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-germany-equalmarriage/germanys-first-same-sex-i-dos-as-marriage-equality-dawns-idUKKCN1C50TA|title=Germany's first same-sex "I do"'s as marriage equality dawns|journal=Reuters|date=1 October 2017}}</ref>

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

====Ireland====
{{Main|Same-sex marriage in the Republic of Ireland}}
Prior to the legalization of same-sex marriage, the ''Civil Partnership and Certain Rights and Obligations of Cohabitants Act 2010'' allowed same sex couples to enter civil partnerships. The Act came into force on 1 January 2011 and gave same-sex couples rights and responsibilities similar to, but not equal to, those of civil marriage.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.irishtimes.com/news/partnership-laws-come-into-force-1.869456 |title=Partnership laws come into force |newspaper=The Irish Times |date=1 January 2011}}</ref>

On 22 May 2015, Ireland held a ]. The referendum proposed to add to the ]: "marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction as to their sex". The proposal was approved with 62% of voters supporting same-sex marriage. On 29 August 2015, Irish President ] signed the result of the May referendum into law,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/president-signs-same-sex-marriage-into-constitution-1.2333882|title=President signs same-sex marriage into Constitution|date=29 August 2015|website=The Irish Times|accessdate=22 September 2015}}</ref> which made Ireland the first country in the world to approve same-sex marriage at a nationwide referendum.<ref>{{Cite journal|url=http://www.rte.ie/news/vote2015/2015/0523/703205-referendum-byelection/|title=Ireland says Yes to same-sex marriage|journal=RTÉ.ie|date=23 May 2015}}</ref> Same-sex marriage became formally legally recognised in Ireland on 16 November 2015.<ref name="legal123">{{Cite newspaper|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34810598|title=Same-sex marriage is now legal in Republic of Ireland|journal=BBC News|date=16 November 2015}}</ref>

====Luxembourg====
{{main|Same-sex marriage in Luxembourg}}
The Parliament approved a bill to legalise same-sex marriage on 18 June 2014.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.chd.lu/wps/portal/public/!ut/p/b1/rZFba4NAEIV_UdnZ0ej66GU1a82W1c1FX4KWEhJNLKTUuL--WygUAiUvnXk4DHznnIchDanRQbbAwKNkR5pL-3k8tB_H8dIO33fj7RNMNqVwETJfuYA5z_11JR2WeBaoLYCMVWUWrngQrCMQENOKqwhB4CP_ltTRTwj8MSE8Cqkt4P8CrIgYoAzDyl8KB5IF0WQH7r46ze_C9KY8GTVJI2bJGaU9oO46JTV3dJBaucbX-qb7EVeFMtqkBX29wSZVGZt4MtyXZYXwAVN4iZ6pAsjov5blpDkMY2c_sY2JXI7nN3JuhmJ-au120xfIHKbP/dl4/d5/L2dBISEvZ0FBIS9nQSEh|title=Feu vert pour le mariage gay au Luxembourg|publisher=Chamber of Deputies (Luxembourg)|date=18 June 2014|accessdate=18 June 2014}}</ref> The law was published in the official gazette on 17 July and took effect on 1 January 2015.<ref>{{in lang|fr}} {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160916105733/http://www.legilux.public.lu/leg/a/archives/2014/0125/a125.pdf |date=16 September 2016 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wort.lu/en/politics/save-the-date-same-sex-marriages-from-january-1-53c77b26b9b398870804667d|title=Luxemburger Wort|website=Wort.lu|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.chronicle.lu/categoriesluxembourgathome/item/7947-same-sex-marriage-in-luxembourg-from-1-january-2015|title=Chronicle.lu|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref> On 15 May 2015, Luxembourg became the first country in the European Union to have a prime minister who is in a same-sex marriage, and the second one in Europe. Prime Minister ] married Gauthier Destenay, with whom he had been in a civil partnership since 2010.

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

On 21 February 2017, Minister for Social Dialogue, Consumer Affairs, and Civil Liberties ] said that she was preparing a bill to legalise same-sex marriage.<ref>, timesofmalta.com; accessed 5 July 2017.</ref> The bill was presented to Parliament on 5 July 2017.<ref>, timesofmalta.com; accessed 5 July 2017.</ref> The bill's last reading took place in Parliament on 12 July 2017, where it was approved 66–1. It was signed into law and published in the Government Gazette on 1 August 2017.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://gov.mt/en/Government/Government%20Gazette/Documents/2017/08/Government%20Gazette%20-%201st%20August.pdf|title=Government Gazette - 1 August 2017}}</ref> Malta became the 14th country in Europe to legalise same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite news|last=Borg|first=Bertrand|date=10 July 2017|url=https://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20170710/local/valletta-prepares-for-silent-protest-celebrations-as-marriage-bill.652960|title=Valletta prepares for silent protest, celebrations as marriage bill nears finish line|work=Times of Malta}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Dirett: Jiccelebraw il-vot favur il-ligi taz-zwieg indaqs fi Piazza Kastilja|url=http://www.tvm.com.mt/mt/news/dirett-jiccelebraw-il-vot-favur-il-ligi-taz-zwieg-indaqs-fi-pjazza-kastilja/|work=Television Malta|date=12 July 2017}}</ref>

====Mexico====
{{Main|Same-sex marriage in Mexico}}
{{Same-sex marriage in Mexico|230px}}
Same-sex couples can marry in ] and in the states of ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ] and ], as well as in some municipalities in ], ] and ]. In individual cases, same-sex couples have been given judicial approval to marry in all other states. Since August 2010, same-sex marriages performed within Mexico are recognized by the 31 states without exception. On 18 December 2019, the ruling party, Morena, introduced a constitutional amendment that would legalize marriage at the federal level and require all states to adjust their laws correspondingly.<ref></ref>

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

On 28 November 2011, the first two same-sex marriages occurred in ] after it was discovered that Quintana Roo's Civil Code did not explicitly prohibit same-sex marriage,<ref name="QR marriages legal">{{cite news|first=Brisa|last=Muñoz|publisher=CNN México|title=Dos matrimonios homosexuales se casaron en un municipio conservador|date=2 December 2011|url=http://mexico.cnn.com/nacional/2011/12/02/los-matrimonios-del-mismo-sexo-despiertan-polemica-en-quintana-roo|language=es|accessdate=2 January 2012|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120106064114/http://mexico.cnn.com/nacional/2011/12/02/los-matrimonios-del-mismo-sexo-despiertan-polemica-en-quintana-roo|archive-date=6 January 2012}}</ref> but these marriages were later annulled by the ] in April 2012.<ref name="QR marriages annulled">{{cite web|url=http://www.proceso.com.mx/?p=304595|website=]|publisher=Comunicación e Información, S.A. de C.V|title=Anula gobernador de Quintana Roo dos bodas gay; lo acusan de homofóbico|language=es|date=17 April 2012|accessdate=20 April 2012|first=Rosa|last=Santana}}</ref> In May 2012, the Secretary of State of Quintana Roo reversed the annulments and allowed for future same-sex marriages to be performed in the state.<ref name="QR marriages reinstated">{{cite news|url=http://www.eluniversal.com.mx/notas/845171.html|language=es|title=Revocan anulación de bodas gay en QRoo|first=Adriana|last=Varillas|work=]|date=3 May 2012|accessdate=13 June 2012}}</ref>

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

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

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

On 17 December 2015, the Congress of ] approved a bill legalizing same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.jornada.unam.mx/ultimas/2015/12/17/aprueban-el-congreso-de-nayarit-los-matrimonios-gay-5165.html|title=Aprueba el Congreso de Nayarit los matrimonios gay|publisher=La Jornada|date=17 December 2015|accessdate=18 December 2015|language=es|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151220005904/http://www.jornada.unam.mx/ultimas/2015/12/17/aprueban-el-congreso-de-nayarit-los-matrimonios-gay-5165.html|archive-date=20 December 2015}}</ref> In January 2016, the Mexican Supreme Court declared ]'s Civil Code unconstitutional for limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples, effectively legalizing same-sex marriage in the state.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.joemygod.com/2016/01/26/mexico-same-sex-marriage-legalized-in-jalisco-state-after-unanimous-ruling-by-supreme-court/|title=MEXICO: Same-Sex Marriage Legalized In Jalisco State After Unanimous Ruling By Supreme Court|first=Joe|last=Jervis|date=26 January 2016|website=joemygod.com}}</ref> On 10 May 2016, the Congress of ] passed a same-sex marriage bill.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://theperchybird.wordpress.com/2016/05/10/mexico-campeche-becomes-7th-state-with-same-sex-marriage/|title=Mexico: Campeche Becomes 7th Mexican State with Same-Sex Marriage|date=10 May 2016|website=The Perchy Bird Blog}}</ref> On 18 May 2016, both ] and ] passed bills allowing for same-sex marriage to be legal.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cronica.com.mx/notas/2016/961695.html|title=Aprueban en el Congreso de Michoacán el matrimonio igualitario|website=cronica.com.mx}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.reforma.com/aplicacioneslibre/preacceso/articulo/default.aspx?id=847187|title=Aprueba Morelos matrimonio igualitario|website=reforma.com}}</ref> On 25 May 2016, a bill to legalize same-sex marriage in Colima was approved by the state Congress.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.periodicooficial.col.gob.mx/p/11062016/sup02/26061104.pdf |title=DECRETO No. 103 Colima, Col., Sábado 11 de Junio del año 2016|website=Periodicooficial.col.gob.mx|accessdate=7 July 2017}}</ref> In July and August 2017, respectively, the Mexican Supreme Court invalidated same-sex marriage bans in the states of ] and ].<ref>{{cite news|last1=Reyes|first1=Juan Pablo|title=Suprema Corte avala el matrimonio igualitario en Chiapas|url=http://www.excelsior.com.mx/nacional/2017/07/11/1175019|accessdate=11 July 2017|newspaper=]|date=11 July 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170711211747/http://www.excelsior.com.mx/nacional/2017/07/11/1175019|archive-date=11 July 2017|location=Mexico City, Mexico|language=es}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=SCJN avala los matrimonios homosexuales en Puebla|url=http://amp.noticiasmvs.com/amp/noticias/scjn-avala-los-matrimonios-homosexuales-en-puebla-190|accessdate= 1 August 2017|agency=Noticias MVS|date=1 August 2017}}</ref> In November 2017, the State Government of ] decided to stop enforcing its same-sex marriage ban.

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

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

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

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

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

New Zealand marriage law only applies to New Zealand proper and the ] in Antarctica. New Zealand's dependent territory, ], and associated states, ] and ], have their own marriage laws and do not perform or recognise same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gaymarriagefactsnow.com/gay-marriage-in-new-zealand/|title=Gay Marriage in New Zealand – Gay Marriage Facts|website=www.gaymarriagefactsnow.com}}</ref>

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

====Portugal====
{{Main|Same-sex marriage in Portugal}}
{{See also|De facto union in Portugal}}

Portugal created de facto unions similar to common-law marriage for cohabiting opposite-sex partners in 1999, and extended these unions to same-sex couples in 2001. However, the 2001 extension did not allow for same-sex adoption, either jointly or of stepchildren.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.lahistoriaconmapas.com/war-maps/Same-sex-marriage-Legal-recognition-War-Maps.htm|title=Historia con Mapas|accessdate=26 July 2015}}{{dead link|date=March 2020|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}}</ref>

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

In December 2015, the Portuguese Parliament approved a bill to recognise adoptions rights for same-sex couples.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/portugal-sex-adoption-artificial-insemination-35322018|title=International News: Latest Headlines, Video and Photographs from Around the World|first=ABC|last=News|website=go.com|access-date=29 December 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151121020547/http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/portugal-sex-adoption-artificial-insemination-35322018|archive-date=21 November 2015|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://uk.news.yahoo.com/portuguese-parliament-backs-adoption-gay-couples-182121858.html|title=Portuguese parliament backs adoption by gay couples|website=yahoo.com|access-date=10 January 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160102172415/https://uk.news.yahoo.com/portuguese-parliament-backs-adoption-gay-couples-182121858.html|archive-date=2 January 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/11/20/portugal-just-equalised-its-adoption-laws-for-gay-couples|title=Portugal just equalised its adoption laws for gay couples|website=pinknews.co.uk}}</ref> It came into effect in March 2016.

====South Africa====
]
{{Main|Same-sex marriage in South Africa}}

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

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

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

In 2004, the nation's newly elected ] Government, led by ] ], began a campaign for its legalization, including the right of ].<ref name="SOD">{{cite news|title=Spain's new government to legalize gay marriage|agency=Reuters |publisher=SignonSanDiego.com|date=15 April 2004|url=http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/20040415-0750-spain-marriage.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090304003526/http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/20040415-0750-spain-marriage.html|archive-date=4 March 2009|accessdate=14 December 2009|url-status=live}}</ref> After much debate, the law permitting same-sex marriage was passed by the '']'' (Spain's ]) on 30 June 2005. ] ], who by law has up to 30 days to decide whether to grant ] to laws, ] on 1 July 2005. The law was published on 2 July 2005.<ref>{{cite web|title=Disposiciones Generales|publisher=Boletin Oficial del Estado|date=2 June 2005|url=http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2005/07/02/pdfs/A23632-23634.pdf|accessdate=8 January 2007|language=es}}</ref>

====Sweden====
{{Main|Same-sex marriage in Sweden}}
Same-sex marriage in Sweden has been legal since 1 May 2009, following the adoption of a new gender-neutral law on marriage by the ] on 1 April 2009, making Sweden the seventh country in the world to open marriage to same-sex couples nationwide. Marriage replaced Sweden's registered partnerships for same-sex couples. Existing registered partnerships between same-sex couples remained in force with an option to convert them into marriages.<ref name="swedishmarriagerights">{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7978495.stm|title=Sweden allows same-sex marriage|work=BBC News|date=2 April 2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Church of Sweden says yes to gay marriage|url=http://www.thelocal.se/22810/20091022|accessdate=24 July 2012|newspaper=The Local|date=22 October 2009|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120111080159/http://www.thelocal.se/22810/20091022|archive-date=11 January 2012}}</ref> Same-sex marriages have been performed by the ] since 2009.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.svenskakyrkan.se/samkonade-aktenskap |title=Samkönade äktenskap |publisher=Svenskakyrkan.se |date=14 December 2017 |accessdate=13 April 2018}}</ref>

====Taiwan====
{{main|Same-sex marriage in Taiwan}}
Taiwan is the only country in Asia where same-sex marriage is legal.

On 24 May 2017, the Constitutional Court ruled that same-sex couples have the right to marry, and gave the Taiwanese Government two years to amend the law to that effect. It was also ruled that if the law was not amended after two years, same-sex couples would automatically be able to register valid marriage applications in Taiwan.<ref name="NBC News">{{Cite news|url=https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/taiwan-court-rules-same-sex-marriage-legal-asia-first-n763931|title=Taiwan Court Rules Same Sex Marriage Legal in Asia First|date=24 May 2017|work=]|access-date=6 April 2018}}</ref>

On 17 May 2019, lawmakers in Taiwan approved a bill legalising same-sex marriage.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/17/asia/taiwan-same-sex-marriage-intl/index.html|title=Taiwan legalizes same-sex marriage in historic first for Asia|first=Julia|last=Hollingsworth|website=CNN|access-date=2019-06-28}}</ref> The bill was signed by the President Tsai Ing-Wen on 22 May and came into effect on 24 May 2019.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/05/taiwan-parliament-vote-sex-marriage-legislation-190517041658310.html|title=Taiwan's parliament approves same-sex marriage legislation|website=www.aljazeera.com|access-date=2019-06-28}}</ref>

====United Kingdom====
{{Same-sex marriage map Lesser Antilles}}
{{main|Same-sex marriage in the United Kingdom}}

Since 2005, same-sex couples have been allowed to enter into ], a separate union providing the ]. In 2006, the ] rejected a legal bid by a British ] who had ] in Canada to have their union recognised as a marriage in the UK rather than a civil partnership.

In September 2011, the Coalition Government announced its intention to introduce same-sex civil marriage in England and Wales by the ].<ref>{{cite news|last=Green|first=Jessica|title=Government proposes introducing gay marriage after Cameron intervention|url=http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2011/09/16/government-proposes-introduction-of-full-gay-marriage-after-cameron-intervention/|accessdate=28 September 2012|newspaper=]|date=16 September 2011}}</ref> However, unlike the Scottish Government's consultation, the UK Government's consultation for England and Wales did not include provision for religious ceremonies. In May 2012, three religious groups (Quakers, Liberal Judaism and Unitarians) sent a letter to David Cameron, asking that they be allowed to solemnise same-sex weddings.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2012/05/29/religious-groups-urge-david-cameron-to-maintain-equal-marriage-support/|title=Religious groups urge David Cameron to maintain equal marriage support|website=PinkNews|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref>

In June 2012, the UK Government completed the consultation to allow civil marriage for same-sex couples in ].<ref name="grauni1127">{{cite news|title=Gay marriages and heterosexual civil partnerships may soon be welcomed|first=Alan|last=Travis|url=https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2011/feb/17/civil-partnerships-marriage|newspaper=The Guardian|location=London|date=17 February 2011|accessdate=18 February 2011}}</ref> In its response to the consultation, the Government said that it also intended "...to enable those religious organisations that wish to conduct same-sex marriage ceremonies to do so, on a permissive basis only".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/equal-marriage-consultation|title=Equal marriage consultation|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref>

In December 2012, the Prime Minister, ], announced that, whilst he favoured allowing same-sex marriage within a religious context, provision would be made guaranteeing no religious institution would be required to perform such ceremonies.<ref>{{Cite newspaper|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20642428|title=Gay marriage: David Cameron backs church role|journal=BBC News|accessdate=26 July 2015|date=7 December 2012}}</ref> The third ] took place on 21 May 2013, and was approved by 366 votes to 161.<ref>{{cite news|title=Gay marriage: Commons passes Cameron's plan|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22605011|accessdate=21 May 2013|date=21 May 2013|work=BBC News}}</ref> On 16 July 2013, the Commons accepted all of the Lords' amendments.<ref name=BBC23338279>{{cite news|work=BBC News|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23338279|title=Same-sex marriage becomes law in England and Wales|date=17 July 2013|accessdate=5 July 2017}}</ref> On 17 July 2013, the bill received ] becoming the '']'', which came into force on 13 March 2014.<ref name="BBC23338279"/> The first same-sex marriages took place on 29 March 2014.<ref>{{Cite newspaper|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26793127|title=Same-sex marriage now legal as first couples wed|journal=BBC News|accessdate=26 July 2015|date=29 March 2014}}</ref>

The ] conducted a three-month-long consultation that ended on 9 December 2011. The analysis was published in July 2012.<ref>{{cite news|title=Consultation sees 50,000 responses|work=The Scotsman|location=Edinburgh|url=http://www.scotsman.com/the-scotsman/politics/consultation_sees_50_000_responses_1_2001639|accessdate=9 February 2012|date=10 December 2011}}</ref> Unlike the consultation held in England and Wales, Scotland considered both civil and religious same-sex marriage. Whilst the Scottish Government was in favour of same-sex marriage, it stated that no religious body would be forced to hold such ceremonies once legislation is enacted.<ref>{{cite web|title=Scottish Parliament Website|url=http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2011/09/05153328/1|publisher=Scottish Government|accessdate=9 February 2012|date=2 September 2011}}</ref> On 27 June 2013, the Government published the bill.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2013/06/same-sex-marriage-27062013|title=Same sex marriage|accessdate=26 July 2015|date=27 June 2013}}</ref> In order to preserve the freedom of both religious groups and individual clergy, the Scottish Government believed it necessary for changes to be made to the ''Equality Act 2010'' and communicated with the UK Government on this matter; thus, the first same-sex marriages in Scotland did not occur until this had taken place.<ref>{{Cite newspaper|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-23067324|title=Scotland's gay marriage bill published at Holyrood|journal=BBC News|accessdate=26 July 2015|date=27 June 2013}}</ref>

On 4 February 2014, the Scottish Parliament overwhelmingly passed legislation legalising same-sex marriage.<ref>{{Cite newspaper|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-25960225|title=Scotland's same-sex marriage bill is passed|journal=BBC News|accessdate=26 July 2015|date=4 February 2014}}</ref> The bill received royal assent as the '']'' on 12 March 2014.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/BusinessBulletin/74320.aspx|title=Thursday 13 March 2014 – Announcements – Scottish Parliament|publisher=scottish.parliament.uk|date=13 March 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Scotland's same-sex marriage bill is passed |accessdate=14 March 2014|date=4 February 2014|url=http://m.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-25960225|work=BBC News}}</ref> The law took effect on 16 December 2014, with the first same-sex weddings occurring for those converting their civil partnerships into marriage.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.scotsman.com/news/scotland/top-stories/same-sex-marriage-becomes-legal-in-scotland-1-3635305|title=Same-sex marriage becomes legal in Scotland|newspaper=Scotsman|date=16 December 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterson/first-same-sex-marriages-to-take-place-in-scotland-on-hogman|title=Scotland's First Same-Sex Marriages To Take Place On Hogmanay|website=BuzzFeed|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref>

The Northern Ireland Assembly, prior to its collapse in 2017, could not agree to pass legislation allowing for same-sex marriage in Northern Ireland, due to the DUP's use of the petition of concern veto. This was despite majority support in the Assembly.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-politics-34692546|title=Same-sex marriage vote fails in assembly|date=2015-11-02|access-date=2020-01-13|language=en-GB}}</ref> Instead same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions were treated as civil partnerships. However, on 9 July 2019, MPs at Westminster voted that the UK government would have to legislate for same-sex marriage if devolved government was not restored at ] by 21 October 2019.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-48924695|title=Abortion and same-sex marriage moves for NI backed by MPs|date=9 July 2019|work=BBC News|accessdate=9 July 2019}}</ref> As devolution was not restored by this date, regulations to legalise same-sex marriage were passed in December 2019 and came into effect on 13 January 2020.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2019/1514/contents/made/data.htm|title=The Marriage (Same-sex Couples) and Civil Partnership (Opposite-sex Couples) (Northern Ireland) Regulations 2019|website=www.legislation.gov.uk|access-date=2020-01-13}}</ref>

Of the fourteen ], same-sex marriage has been legal in ] since 2014, ] and the ] (for UK military personnel) since 3 June 2014, the ] since 14 May 2015, the ] since 13 October 2016, ]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gbc.gi/news/command-paper-published-same-sex-marriage-31191|title=Command Paper published on same sex marriage|website=]|date=22 December 2015|accessdate=29 March 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151223071507/http://www.gbc.gi/news/command-paper-published-same-sex-marriage-31191|archive-date=23 December 2015}}</ref> since 15 December 2016, ] since 1 January 2017, the ] since 29 April 2017, ] since 4 August 2017, and ] since 20 December 2017. In February 2018, ] passed the '']'', revoking same-sex marriage, which had been legalised by a May 2017 Supreme Court ruling.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.royalgazette.com/news/article/20170505/victory-for-gay-couple|title=Gay couple win right to marry {{!}} The Royal Gazette:Bermuda News|work=The Royal Gazette|access-date=5 May 2017|language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.travelandleisure.com/travel-news/carnival-funding-legal-action-against-bermuda-gay-marriage-ban|title=Carnival Is Supporting Bermuda's LGBTQ and Funding Efforts to Bring Back Gay Marriage}}</ref> In June 2018, the Bermuda Supreme Court struck down the parts of the law revoking same-sex marriage, but stay the rule to allow to Government to consider an appeal. On 23 November 2018, the court upheld the Supreme Court's ruling, by which same-sex marriage became again legal in ].

In the ], same-sex marriage has been legal in the ] since 22 July 2016, in ] since 2 May 2017, in ] since 14 June 2018, in ] since 1 July 2018, and in ] since 11 March 2020.

====United States====
{{Main|Same-sex marriage in the United States}}
{{Map of same-sex marriage in the United States|size=300px}}
], illuminated in rainbow colors, on the evening of the ], 26 June 2015.]]
] expanded from one state in 2004 to all fifty states in 2015 through various state court rulings, state legislation, direct popular votes, and federal court rulings. The ] each have separate ]s, which must adhere to rulings by the ] that recognize ] as a ] that is guaranteed by both the ] and the ] of the ], as first established in the 1967 ] ] case of '']''.

Civil rights campaigning in support of marriage without distinction as to sex or sexual orientation began in the 1970s.<ref>{{cite web|title=The Same-Sex Couple Who Got a Marriage License in 1971|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/17/us/the-same-sex-couple-who-got-a-marriage-license-in-1971.html|work=]|date=16 May 2015|accessdate=6 April 2018}}</ref> In 1972, the now overturned '']'' saw the ] decline to become involved.<ref>{{cite news|title=The Great Undoing?|url=http://www.advocate.com/news/2009/06/20/great-undoing|work=]|first=Andrew|last=Gumbel|accessdate=9 July 2012}}</ref> The issue became prominent from around 1993, when the ] ruled in '']'' that it was unconstitutional under the ] for the state to abridge marriage on the basis of sex. That ruling led to federal and state actions to explicitly abridge marriage on the basis of sex in order to prevent the marriages of same-sex couples from being recognized by law, the most prominent of which was the 1996 federal ]. In 2003, the ] ruled in '']'' that it was unconstitutional under the ] for the state to abridge marriage on the basis of sex. From 2004 through to 2015, as ] continued to move towards support of same-sex marriage, various state court rulings, state legislation, direct popular votes (]s and ]s), and federal court rulings established same-sex marriage in thirty-six of the fifty states.

The first two decades of the 21st century saw same-sex marriage receive support from prominent figures in the ], including ], ], ], and ].<ref name="civil rights">{{cite web|url=https://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-g-long/coretta-scott-king_b_2592049.html|title=Coretta's Big Dream: Coretta Scott King on Gay Rights|work=]|first=Michael|last=Long|date=31 January 2013|accessdate=18 July 2018}}{{indent}}{{cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/feb/03/coretta-scott-king-extract|title='I am not a symbol, I am an activist': the untold story of Coretta Scott King|work=]|first=Jeanne|last=Theoharis|date=3 February 2018|accessdate=18 July 2018}}{{indent}}{{cite web|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2007/06/mildred-loving-40-years-later/227582/|title=Mildred Loving, 40 Years Later|work=]|first=Douglas|last=Martin|date=18 June 2007|accessdate=11 March 2015}}{{indent}}{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/06/us/06loving.html|title=Mildred Loving, Who Battled Ban on Mixed-Race Marriage, Dies at 68|work=]|first=Douglas|last=Martin|date=6 May 2008|accessdate=14 July 2018}}{{indent}}{{cite web|url=http://blog.nj.com/njv_guest_blog/2009/12/gay_marriage_naacp_chairman_ju.html|title=Gay marriage: NAACP chairman Julian Bond says gay rights are civil rights|publisher=]|author=Star-Ledger Editorial Board|date=9 December 2009|accessdate=12 December 2018}}{{indent}}{{Cite newspaper|url=https://www.npr.org/2015/08/17/432541992/civil-rights-community-mourns-death-of-julian-bond|title=Civil Rights Community Mourns Death Of Julian Bond|publisher=]|date=17 August 2015|accessdate=12 December 2018}}{{indent}}{{cite web|url=https://www.ajc.com/blog/news/georgia-congressman-john-lewis-reacts-gay-marriage-ruling/XTUyxBIQerIoWjw98ftebK/|title=Georgia Congressman John Lewis reacts to gay marriage ruling|work=]|date=26 June 2015|accessdate=12 December 2018}}{{indent}}{{Cite newspaper|url=https://johnlewis.house.gov/issues/lgbt-rights|title=LGBT RIGHTS|website=]|author=Office of ] ]|accessdate=12 December 2018}}</ref> In May 2011, ] rose above 50% for the first time.<ref>{{cite web|title=For First Time, Majority of Americans Favor Legal Gay Marriage|url=http://news.gallup.com/poll/147662/first-time-majority-americans-favor-legal-gay-marriage.aspx|website=]|date=20 May 2011}}</ref> In May 2012, the ], the leading African-American civil rights organization, declared its support for same-sex marriage and stated that it is a ].<ref name="NAACP">{{cite web|url=http://www.naacp.org/latest/naacp-passes-resolution-in-support-of-marriage-equality/|title=NAACP PASSES RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF MARRIAGE EQUALITY|publisher=]|date=20 May 2018|accessdate=11 April 2018}}{{indent}}{{cite web|url=https://www.naacp.org/latest/naacp-speaks-out-for-marriage-equality/|title=NAACP SPEAKS OUT FOR MARRIAGE EQUALITY|publisher=]|date=2 April 2013|accessdate=14 July 2018}}{{indent}}{{Cite newspaper|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/20/us/politics/naacp-endorses-same-sex-marriage.html|title=In Largely Symbolic Move, N.A.A.C.P. Votes to Endorse Same-Sex Marriage|work=]|first=Michael|last=Barbaro|date=19 May 2012|accessdate=14 July 2018}}</ref> In June 2013, the ] struck down ] for violating the ] in the landmark civil rights case of '']'', leading to federal recognition of same-sex marriage, with federal benefits for married couples connected to either the state of residence or the state in which the marriage was solemnized. In May 2015, ] rose to 60% for the first time.<ref>{{cite web|title=Record-High 60% of Americans Support Same-Sex Marriage|url=https://news.gallup.com/poll/183272/record-high-americans-support-sex-marriage.aspx|website=]|date=19 May 2015}}</ref> In June 2015, the Supreme Court ruled in the landmark civil rights case of '']'' that the ] of same-sex couples to marry on the same terms and conditions as opposite-sex couples, with all the accompanying rights and responsibilities, is guaranteed by both the ] and the ] of the ].

The ruling of the Supreme Court in ''Obergefell'' occurred following decades of consistently rising ], with support continuing to rise thereafter.

The ] is the most populous country in the world to have established same-sex marriage nationwide.

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

===National debates===
====Armenia====
{{Main|Recognition of same-sex unions in Armenia}}
] has historically had few protections or recognition in law of same-sex couples. This changed in July 2017, when the Ministry of Justice revealed that all marriages performed abroad are valid in Armenia, including marriages between people of the same sex.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.panarmenian.net/m/eng/news/243348 |title=Mobile |website=Panarmenian.Net |date=3 July 2017|accessdate=7 July 2017}}</ref> Though it's not clear if the statement has any practical effect. As of early 2019, "no such recognition has yet been documented."<ref name=Armenia>{{cite web |url= https://armenianweekly.com/2019/02/19/you-have-no-right-to-call-yourself-armenian-say-gay-mans-attackers/ |website= The Armenian Weekly |title= 'You have no right to call yourself Armenian' Say Gay Man's Attackers |first= Vic |last= Gerami |date= 19 February 2019 |accessdate= 6 March 2019 }}</ref>

====Bulgaria====
{{Main|Recognition of same-sex unions in Bulgaria}}
The Bulgarian Constitution forbids the legalisation of same-sex marriage, stipulating that marriage can only be between a man and a woman.

In late 2017, a Bulgarian same-sex couple, who ], filed a lawsuit in order to have their marriage recognised.<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180913124655/https://sofiaglobe.com/2017/12/05/woman-sues-bulgarian-authorities-for-recognition-of-same-sex-marriage/ |date=13 September 2018 }} ''The Sofia Globe'', 5 December 2017</ref> The Sofia Administrative Court ruled against them in January 2018.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.novinite.com/articles/186950/The+Court+did+not+Recognize+a+Marriage+Between+Bulgarian+Women+in+the+UK |title=The Court did not Recognize a Marriage Between Bulgarian Women in the UK |publisher=Novinite.com |date=12 January 2018 |accessdate=13 April 2018}}</ref> A ] court granted a same-sex couple the right to live in Bulgaria on 29 June 2018. The couple, an ]n woman and her French spouse, had married in ] in 2016, but were denied residency in Bulgaria a year later when they attempted to move there.<ref>, ''VOA News'', 4 July 2018</ref>

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

], the President of Chile, who was elected to a second term in March 2014, promised to work for the implementation of same-sex marriage and had a majority in both houses of ]. Previously, she said, "Marriage equality, I believe we have to make it happen."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/chile-expected-legalize-gay-marriage120314|title=Chile expected to legalize gay marriage|work=Gay Star News|first=Joe|last=Morgan|date=12 March 2014|accessdate=10 April 2014}}</ref> Polling shows majority support for same-sex marriage among Chileans.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cepchile.cl/dms/lang_1/doc_4844.html|title=Estudio Nacional de Opinión Pública, Junio–Julio 2011. Tema especial: Educación|publisher=Cepchile.cl|accessdate=11 April 2014|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140116230706/http://www.cepchile.cl/dms/lang_1/doc_4844.html|archive-date=16 January 2014}}</ref> A poll carried out in September 2015 by the pollster Cadem Plaza Pública found that 60% of Chileans supported same-sex marriage, whilst 36% were against it.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://plazapublica.cl/wp-content/uploads/658799.pdf |title=Track semanal de Opinion Publica |website=Plazapublica.cl |accessdate=7 July 2017 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170207182725/http://plazapublica.cl/wp-content/uploads/658799.pdf |archive-date=7 February 2017 }}</ref>

On 10 December 2014, a group of ] from various parties, joined LGBT rights group ] (Homosexual Movement of Integration and Liberation) in presenting a bill to allow same-sex marriage and adoption to Congress. MOVILH had been in talks with the Chilean Government to seek an amiable solution to the pending marriage lawsuit brought against the state before the ].<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.cascaraamarga.es/politica-lgtb/lgtb-internacional/10299-el-proyecto-de-ley-de-matrimonio-igualitario-llega-al-parlamento-de-chile.html|title=El proyecto de ley de matrimonio igualitario llega al Parlamento de Chile|publisher=Cáscara Amarga|accessdate=11 December 2014}}</ref> On 17 February 2015, lawyers representing the Government and MOVILH met to discuss an amicable solution to the same-sex marriage lawsuit. The Government announced that they would drop their opposition to same-sex marriage. A formal agreement between the two parties and the ] was signed in April 2015.<ref name="blade"> ''The Washington Blade'', 15 January 2018</ref> The Chilean Government pledged to legalise same-sex marriage.

On 28 January 2015, the National Congress approved a bill recognizing civil unions for same-sex and opposite-sex couples offering some of the rights of marriage. Bachelet signed the bill on 14 April, and it came into effect on 22 October.<ref>{{Cite newspaper|title=Chile recognises same-sex civil unions|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-32296246|journal=BBC News|date=14 April 2015}}</ref><ref name=Reuters-bill-pass>{{cite news|last1=Esposito|first1=Anthony|title=Socially-conservative Chile approves civil unions|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/28/chile-civilunions-idUSL1N0V71X020150128|accessdate=28 January 2015|agency=Reuters}}</ref>

In September 2016, President Bachelet stated before a United Nations General Assembly panel that the Chilean Government would submit a same-sex marriage bill to Congress in the first half of 2017.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.voanews.com/a/chile-bachelet-gay-marriage-bill/3520246.html|title=Chile's President Plans to Send Gay Marriage Bill to Congress in 2017|website=VOA & Reuters|date=21 September 2016}}</ref> A same-sex marriage bill was submitted in September 2017.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.camara.cl/pley/pley_detalle.aspx?prmID=11934&prmBoletin=11422-07|title=Modifica diversos cuerpos legales para regular, en igualdad de condiciones, el matrimonio de parejas del mismo sexo|publisher=]|accessdate=8 September 2017}}</ref> Parliament began discussing the bill on 27 November 2017,<ref> ''The Washington Blade'', 27 November 2017</ref> but it failed to pass before March 2018, when a new Government was inaugurated. On 16 January 2020, the bill was approved in the Senate by a 22 to 16 vote, then headed to the constitutional committee.

The 2018 Inter-American Court of Human Rights ruling regarding the legalisation of same-sex marriage in countries that have ratified the ] applies to Chile.

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

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

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

====Cuba====
{{main|Recognition of same-sex unions in Cuba}}
Currently, Article 36 of the ] defines marriage as "the voluntarily established union between a man and a woman".<ref></ref> In July 2018, the ] approved revisions to the Constitution that include an amendment to the definition of marriage; "the consensual union of two people, regardless of gender".<ref>{{Cite newspaper|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/23/cubas-new-constitution-paves-way-for-same-sex-marriage|title=Cuba's new constitution paves way for same-sex marriage|journal=The Guardian|date=23 July 2018|last1=Augustin|first1=Ed}}</ref> The constitutional changes will undergo public scrutiny before being put to a referendum on 24 February 2019.{{citation needed|date=April 2019}} In September 2018, following some public concerns and conservative opposition against the possibility of paving the way to legalisation of same-sex marriage in Cuba, In his first interview since taking office in April, ] ] announced his support for same-sex marriage after he told ] that he supports "marriage between people without any restrictions", and defended the draft constitution, adding that he is in favor of "eliminating any type of discrimination in society".<ref>{{cite web | url=https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/407066-new-cuban-president-says-he-supports-same-sex-marriage | title=New Cuban president says he supports same-sex marriage| date=17 September 2018}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/09/cuban-president-miguel-diaz-canel-backs-sex-marriage-180917162537797.html|title=Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel backs same-sex marriage|first=Charlotte|last=Mitchell|date=17 September 2018|website=Al Jazeera}}</ref> However, the proposed change was dropped from the draft constitution in December 2018.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.npr.org/2018/12/19/678155969/cuba-scraps-words-establishing-same-sex-marriage-from-drafted-constitution|title=Cuba Scraps Words Establishing Same-Sex Marriage From Drafted Constitution|date=19 December 2018|first=Sasha|last=Ingber}}</ref>

====Czech Republic====
{{main|Recognition of same-sex unions in the Czech Republic}}
Before the ], LGBT activists started a public campaign with the aim of achieving same-sex marriage within the next four years.<ref name="door">{{cite web|url=https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/08/15/door-opens-achieving-marriage-equality-czech-republic |title=Door Opens to Achieving Marriage Equality in Czech Republic |publisher=Hrw.org |date= 15 August 2017|accessdate=13 April 2018}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.praguemonitor.com/2017/07/03/gays-lesbians-launching-campaign-marriage |title=Gays, lesbians launching campaign for marriage |publisher=Praguemonitor.com |date=3 July 2017 |accessdate=13 April 2018}}</ref>

Prime Minister ] supports the legalisation of same-sex marriage.<ref>{{in lang|cs}} </ref> A bill to legalise same-sex marriage was introduced to the Czech Parliament in June 2018.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.psp.cz/sqw/historie.sqw?o=8&T=201|title=Sněmovní tisk 201 - Novela z. - občanský zákoník|accessdate=15 June 2018|publisher=Chamber of Deputies of the Czech Republic}}</ref> Recent opinion polls have shown that the bill is quite popular in the Czech Republic; a 2018 poll found that 75% of Czechs favoured legalising same-sex marriage.<ref></ref>

====El Salvador====
{{Main|Recognition of same-sex unions in El Salvador}}
In August 2016, a lawyer in El Salvador filed a lawsuit before the ] asking for the nullification of Article 11 of the Family Code, which defines marriage as a heterosexual union. Labeling the law as discriminatory and explaining the lack of gendered terms used in Article 34 of the ]'s summary of marriage, the lawsuit sought to allow same-sex couples the right to wed.<ref></ref><ref>{{in lang|es}} </ref> On 20 December, the ] rejected the lawsuit on a ].<ref>{{in lang|es}} </ref>

A second lawsuit against the same-sex marriage ban was filed on 11 November 2016.<ref>{{in lang|es}} </ref> On 17 January 2019, the Supreme Court dismissed the case on procedural grounds.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.washingtonblade.com/2019/01/22/corte-suprema-de-el-salvador-rechaza-nueva-demanda-del-matrimonio-igualitario/|title=Corte Suprema de El Salvador rechaza nueva demanda del matrimonio igualitario|work=Washington Blade|date=22 January 2019|language=es}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.lavanguardia.com/vida/20190119/454199833033/piden-a-juzgadse-salvadorena-resolver-demanda-para-permitir-matrimonio-gay.html|title=Piden a juzgadse salvadoreña resolver demanda para permitir matrimonio gay|work=La Vanguardia|date=19 January 2019|language=es}}</ref>

The 2018 Inter-American Court of Human Rights ruling regarding the legalisation of same-sex marriage in countries that have ratified the ] applies to El Salvador.

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

In December 2016, the Tallinn Circuit Court ruled that same-sex marriages concluded in another country must be recorded in the civil registry. However, they do not count as marriages for the purpose of granting spousal residency rights.

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

In September 2017, the Georgian Parliament approved a constitutional amendment establishing marriage as "a union between a woman and a man for the purpose of creating a family".<ref>{{cite web|last=Dumbadze |first=Devi |url=https://jamestown.org/program/georgias-ruling-party-supermajority-passes-unilateral-constitutional-reform/ |title=Georgia's Ruling Party 'Supermajority' Passes Unilateral Constitutional Reform |publisher=Jamestown.org |date=28 September 2017 |accessdate=13 April 2018}}</ref> President ] vetoed the constitutional amendment on 9 October. Parliament overrode his veto on 13 October.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.civil.ge/eng/article.php?id=30522 |title=Parliament Overrides Presidential Veto on Constitutional Amendments |website=] |date=13 October 2017 |access-date=10 January 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171018204109/http://www.civil.ge/eng/article.php?id=30522 |archive-date=18 October 2017 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

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

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

As of 2017, a draft of a ] that would legalise same-sex marriage has been proposed.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.catchnews.com/amp/india-news/a-new-ucc-for-a-new-india-progressive-draft-ucc-allows-for-same-sex-marriages-85386.html|title=A new UCC for a new India? Progressive draft UCC allows for same-sex marriages - Catchnews |newspaper=Catchnews|access-date=12 October 2017}}</ref>

Although same-sex couples are not legally recognized currently by any form, performing a symbolic same-sex marriage is not prohibited under Indian law either. On 6 September 2018, the Supreme Court of India decriminalised homosexuality by declaring ] unconstitutional.

====Israel====
{{Main|Recognition of same-sex unions in Israel}}
In 2006, Israel's High Court of Justice ruled to recognize foreign same-sex marriages for the limited purpose of registration with the Administration of Border Crossings, Population and Immigration; however, this is merely for statistical purposes and grants no state-level rights. Israel does not recognize civil marriages performed under its own jurisdiction. A bill was raised in the ] (Israeli Parliament) to rescind the High Court's ruling, but the Knesset did not advance the bill. A bill to legalize same-sex and interfaith civil marriages was defeated in the Knesset, 39–11, on 16 May 2012.<ref>{{cite news|work=The Jerusalem Post|url=http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=270221|title=Knesset rejects marriage equality bill|date=16 May 2012|author=Harkov, Lahav|accessdate=28 May 2012|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120522013505/http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=270221|archive-date=22 May 2012}}</ref>

In November 2015, the National LGBT Taskforce of Israel petitioned the ] to allow same-sex marriage in the country, arguing that the refusal of the rabbinical court to recognise same-sex marriage should not prevent civil courts from performing same-sex marriages.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://m.jpost.com/Israel-News/NGO-The-Aguda-petitions-Supreme-Court-to-allow-same-sex-marriage-Israel-431733#article=6017RkIwRTRGQ0UyQzlCNUYxOUM3OUI5QTc1RTJGQkVGMkU=|title=NGO petitions High Court to allow same-sex marriage in Israel|website=The Jerusalem Post|date=2 November 2015}}</ref> The court handed down a ruling on 31 August 2017, determining the issue was the responsibility of the Knesset, and not the judiciary.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://jpost.com/Israel-News/Supreme-Court-rejects-petition-to-recognize-same-sex-marriage-503894|date=31 August 2017|website=Jerusalem Post|title=Supreme Court rejects petition to recognize same-sex marriage}}</ref>

Opinion polls have shown that Israelis overwhelmingly support recognizing same-sex unions. A 2017 opinion poll showed that 79% of the Israeli public were in favor of legalizing same-sex unions (either marriage or civil unions).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://jewishstandard.timesofisrael.com/israeli-support-for-gay-marriage-is-at-an-all-time-high/|title=Israeli support for gay marriage is at an all-time high}}</ref> A 2018 poll showed that 58% of Israelis were specifically in favor of same-sex marriage.<ref>, ''The Times of Israel'', 5 June 2018</ref>

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

The cities of ], ] and ] began recognizing same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions in July 2014,<ref>{{cite news|title=Nozze gay all'estero, c'è la firma del sindaco: saranno trascritte in Comune | work =La Repubblica| date = 22 July 2014| url = http://bologna.repubblica.it/cronaca/2014/07/22/news/nozze_gay_c_la_firma_del_sindaco_potranno_essere_trascritte-92118610/ | accessdate = 22 July 2014|language=it}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title = Matrimoni gay, via alle trascrizioni: Roberto e Miguel la prima coppia | work =La Repubblica| date = 25 June 2014| url = http://napoli.repubblica.it/cronaca/2014/06/25/news/matrimoni_gay_via_alle_trascrizioni_roberto_e_manuel_la_prima_coppia-89937623/ | accessdate = 25 June 2014|language=it}}</ref> followed by ], ], ] and ] in September,<ref>{{cite news|title = Via libera del sindaco Barnini ai matrimoni gay. Emanata una direttiva | publisher = Gonews.it| date = 15 September 2014| url = http://www.gonews.it/2014/09/15/empoli-via-libera-del-sindaco-barnini-ai-matrimoni-gay-emanata-una-direttiva/ | accessdate = 15 September 2014|language=it}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title = Matrimoni gay presto possibili a Pordenone | work =Messaggero Veneto| date = 15 September 2014| url = http://messaggeroveneto.gelocal.it/udine/cronaca/2014/09/15/news/matrimonio-gay-pedrotti-faremo-la-registrazione-1.9936875 | accessdate = 15 September 2014|language=it}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title = Udine dice sì alla trascrizione dei matrimoni gay | publisher =IlFriuli.it| date = 29 September 2014| url = http://www.ilfriuli.it/articolo/Cronaca/Udine_dice_s%C3%AC_alla_trascrizione_dei_matrimoni_gay/2/136322 | accessdate = 29 September 2014|language=it}}</ref> and ], ], ] and ] in October,<ref>{{cite news|title = Primo sì al registro delle nozze gay | work =Corriere Fiorentino | date = 2 October 2014| url = http://corrierefiorentino.corriere.it/firenze/notizie/cronaca/2014/2-ottobre-2014/primo-si-registro-nozze-gay-230260453079.shtml|accessdate=2 October 2014|language=it}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Matrimoni gay, c'è l'ok del consiglio comunale di Piombino|publisher=Il Tirreno|date=2 October 2014|url=http://iltirreno.gelocal.it/piombino/cronaca/2014/10/02/news/matrimoni-gay-c-e-l-ok-del-consiglio-comunale-1.10034602|accessdate=2 October 2014|language=it}}</ref> and by ] in November.<ref>{{cite news|title=è festa a Bagheria: trascritto il primo matrimonio gay|work=Palermo Today|date=13 November 2014|url=http://www.palermotoday.it/cronaca/bagheria-matrimonio-gay-registro.html|accessdate=13 November 2014|language=it}}</ref> The ] annulled these marriages in October 2015.

A January 2013 Datamonitor poll found that 54.1% of respondents were in favour of same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite news|title=Nozze gay: il 54% degli italiani è favorevole, sondaggio Datamonitor|website=L'Huffington Post|date=7 January 2013|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.it/2013/01/07/nozze-gay-il-54-degli-italiani-favorevole_n_2424464.html|accessdate=7 January 2013|language=it}}</ref> A May 2013 Ipsos poll found that 42% of Italians supported allowing same-sex couples to marry and adopt children.<ref>{{in lang|fr}} {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160201082402/http://www.ifop.com/media/poll/2255-1-study_file.pdf|date=1 February 2016}}</ref> An October 2014 Demos poll found that 55% of respondents were in favour of same-sex marriage, with 42% against.<ref>{{cite news|title=Nozze gay, per la prima volta oltre la metà degli italiani dice sì|url=http://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2014/10/12/news/nozze_gay_per_la_prima_volta_oltre_la_met_degli_italiani_dice_s-97902620|date=12 October 2014|newspaper=La Repubblica|language=it}}</ref> A ] survey showed that 59% of Italians were in favour of legalising same-sex marriage.<ref name="pew">, ''Pew Research Center'', 29 May 2018</ref>

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

On 31 January 2017, the Italian ] ruled that same-sex marriages performed abroad can be fully recognized by court order, when at least one of the two spouses is a citizen of a ] country where same-sex marriage is legal.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.blitzquotidiano.it/cronaca-italia/nozze-gay-in-italia-cassazione-convalida-il-primo-matrimonio-tra-due-donne-2630868/|title=Nozze gay riconosciute dalla Cassazione: prima volta in Italia|website=www.blitzquotidiano.it|date=3 February 2017}}</ref>

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

51% of the Japanese population supports same-sex marriage, according to the latest poll carried out in 2017.<ref>{{cite web|url= https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-11-29/majority-of-japanese-support-same-sex-marriage-poll-shows|title=Majority of Japanese Support Same-Sex Marriage, Poll Shows|publisher=Bloomberg|date=29 November 2015}}</ref>

====Latvia====
{{Main|Recognition of same-sex unions in Latvia}}
On 27 May 2016, the ] overturned an administrative court decision that refused an application to register a same-sex marriage in the country. A Supreme Court press spokeswoman said that the court agrees with the administrative court that current regulations do not allow for same-sex marriages to be legally performed in Latvia. However, the matter should have been considered in a context not of marriage, but of registering familial partnership. Furthermore, it would have been impossible to conclude whether the applicants' rights were violated or not unless their claim is accepted and reviewed in a proper manner.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.lsm.lv/en/article/societ/society/supreme-court-rules-same-sex-marriage-request-will-be-considered.a184891/ |title=Supreme Court rules same-sex marriage request will be considered |publisher=Public broadcasting of Latvia |date=27 May 2016 |access-date=15 November 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170116173216/http://www.lsm.lv/en/article/societ/society/supreme-court-rules-same-sex-marriage-request-will-be-considered.a184891/ |archive-date=16 January 2017 |url-status=dead }}</ref> The Supreme Court will now decide whether the refusal was in breach of the Latvian Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights.

====Nepal====
{{main|Recognition of same-sex unions in Nepal}}
In November 2008, the ] issued final judgment on matters related to LGBT rights, which included permitting same-sex couples to marry. Same-sex marriage and protection for sexual minorities were to be included in the new Nepalese Constitution required to be completed by 31 May 2012.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/nepal/Nepal-charter-to-grant-gay-rights/Article1-499154.aspx|title=Nepal charter to grant gay rights|website=Hindustan Times|date=19 January 2010|accessdate=1 February 2010|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100123144431/http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/nepal/Nepal-charter-to-grant-gay-rights/Article1-499154.aspx|archive-date=23 January 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Nelson|first=Dean|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/nepal/7027736/Nepal-to-stage-gay-weddings-on-Everest.html|title=Nepal 'to stage gay weddings on Everest'|work=The Daily Telegraph|date=19 January 2010|accessdate=1 February 2010|location=London}}</ref> However, the Legislature was unable to agree on the Constitution before the deadline and was dissolved after the Supreme Court ruled that the term could not be extended.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/28/world/asia/nepal-disbands-legislature-as-talks-on-constitution-fail.html|title=Legislature in Nepal Disbands in Failure|work=The New York Times|date=31 May 2012|accessdate=1 June 2012|first1=Kiran|last1=Chapagain|first2=Jim|last2=Yardley}}</ref> The Nepali Constitution was enacted in September 2015, but does not address same-sex marriage.

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

====Panama====
{{Main|LGBT rights in Panama}}
On 17 October 2016, a married same-sex couple filed an action of unconstitutionality seeking to recognise same-sex marriages performed abroad.<ref>{{in lang|es}} , Telemetro.com; accessed 5 July 2017.</ref> In early November, the case was admitted to the Supreme Court.<ref>{{in lang|es}} , Prensa.com; accessed 5 July 2017.</ref> A challenge seeking to fully legalize same-sex marriage in Panama was introduced before the Supreme Court in March 2017.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/panama-activists-start-new-push-marriage-equality/ |title=Same-sex marriage could come to Panama if activists win legal fight |website=Gaystarnews.com |date=4 April 2017 |accessdate=7 July 2017}}</ref> The Supreme Court heard arguments on both cases in summer 2017.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.washingtonblade.com/2017/10/01/gay-lawyer-spearheads-panama-sex-marriage-efforts/|title=Gay lawyer spearheads Panama same-sex marriage efforts|date=1 October 2017}}</ref>

As the Supreme Court was deliberating on the two cases, the ] ruled on 9 January 2018 that countries signatory to the ] must legalise same-sex marriage. On 16 January, the Panamanian Government welcomed the decision. Then Vice President ], speaking on behalf of the Government, announced that the country would fully abide by the ruling. Official notices, requiring compliance with the ruling, were sent out to various governmental departments that same day.<ref name="panama1">{{cite web|url=http://laestrella.com.pa/panama/nacional/panama-acoge-opinion-corte-sobre-matrimonio/24043659 |title=Panamá acoge a la opinión de Corte IDH sobre matrimonio gay |publisher=] |date=16 January 2018}}</ref><ref name="panama">{{cite web|url=http://www.wradio.com.co/noticias/internacional/el-gobierno-panameno-acoge-opinion-de-la-corteidh-sobre-matrimonio-homosexual/20180116/nota/3691473.aspx |title=El Gobierno panameño acoge opinión de la CorteIDH sobre matrimonio homosexual |publisher=W Radio |date=16 January 2018}}</ref>

However under the presidency of the more ] ] a ] was approved by the ] to ban same-sex marriage by establishing in the Constitution that marriage is between a man and a woman. The reform had to be voted again in 2020 and then submitted to referendum.<ref>{{cite news |title=Parlamento panameño niega el derecho a casarse a parejas del mismo sexo |url=http://www.lr21.com.uy/mundo/1413942-panama-parlamento-prohibe-matrimonio-igualitario |accessdate=29 October 2019 |agency=La Red 21 |date=29 October 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Panamá cierra las puertas al matrimonio igualitario con reforma constitucional |url=https://teletica.com/240856_panama-cierra-las-puertas-al-matrimonio-igualitario-con-reforma-constitucional |accessdate=29 October 2019 |agency=Teletica}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Panamá busca impedir con una reforma constitucional el matrimonio igualitario |url=https://www.elmundo.cr/mundo/panama-busca-impedir-con-una-reforma-constitucional-el-matrimonio-igualitario/ |accessdate=29 October 2019 |agency=Mundo |date=29 October 2019}}</ref>

====Peru====
{{Main|LGBT rights in Peru}}
In a ruling published on 9 January 2017, the 7th Constitutional Court of Lima ordered the ] to recognize and register the marriage of a same-sex couple who had previously wed in ].<ref>{{in lang|es}} , Peru21.pe; accessed 28 March 2018.{{in lang|es}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/peru-same-sex-marriage-oscar-galarza|title=Court orders Peru to recognize its first same-sex marriage|website=Gay Star News|date=10 January 2017}}</ref> RENIEC subsequently appealed the ruling.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.yahoo.com/news/peru-takes-step-toward-recognizing-same-sex-marriage-201957900.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170111162311/https://www.yahoo.com/news/peru-takes-step-toward-recognizing-same-sex-marriage-201957900.html|archive-date=11 January 2017|title=Peru takes step toward recognizing same-sex marriage|agency=Associated Press|website=Yahoo News |date=10 January 2017}}</ref>

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

The 2018 Inter-American Court of Human Rights ruling regarding the legalisation of same-sex marriage in countries that have ratified the ] applies to Peru. On 11 January, the president of the ] stated that the Peruvian Government should abide by the IACHR ruling.<ref name="peru"/>

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

In October 2016, Speaker of the ] ] announced he will file a civil union bill in ].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://asianjournal.com/news/same-sex-marriage-legalization-eyed-in-ph|title=Same-sex marriage legalization eyed in PH - News|website=asianjournal.com|accessdate=5 July 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170801072915/http://asianjournal.com/news/same-sex-marriage-legalization-eyed-in-ph/|archive-date=1 August 2017|url-status=dead}}</ref> The bill was introduced to Congress in October of the following year under the wing of the House Speaker and three other congresspersons, including Geraldine Roman, the country's first duly-elected transgender lawmaker.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.congress.gov.ph/legisdocs/basic_17/HB06595.pdf|title=House Bill No. 6595|publisher=]|accessdate=21 October 2017}}</ref>

President ] supports the legalization of same-sex marriage, but feels that such a law may not pass in Congress yet as many are still influenced heavily by colonial-era Christian ideals. He also supports same-sex civil unions, which has a higher possibility for passage and is supported by the majority of congresspersons.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-18/philippines-rodrigo-duterte-says-he-supports-same-sex-marriage/9266962 |title=Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte says he supports same-sex marriage |publisher=Abc.net.au |date=18 December 2017 |accessdate=13 April 2018}}</ref>

On 19 June 2018, the ] heard oral arguments in a case seeking to legalise same-sex marriage in the Philippines.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/03/06/18/sc-sets-oral-arguments-on-same-sex-marriage|title=SC sets oral arguments on same-sex marriage|first=Ina Reformina, ABS-CBN|last=News}}</ref> The court dismissed the case on 3 September 2019 due to "lack of standing" and "failing to raise an actual, justiciable controversy", additionally finding the plaintiff's legal team liable for indirect ] for "using constitutional litigation for propaganda purposes."<ref name=CNN20190904>{{cite web|url=https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/04/asia/philippines-gay-marriage-intl-hnk/index.html|title=Philippines Supreme Court upholds ban on same-sex marriage|first=Julie|last=Zaugg|website=CNN|date=September 4, 2019}}</ref>

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

On 5 June 2018, the ] (ECJ) ruled, in a case originating from Romania, that same-sex couples have the same residency rights as different-sex couples, when a national of an EU country gets married while resident in an EU country where same-sex marriage is legal, and the spouse is from a non-EU country.<ref name="bbc">{{Cite newspaper|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44366898|title=Same-sex spouses have equal residency rights|journal=BBC News|date=6 June 2018}}</ref><ref name="conversation">{{cite news|url=https://theconversation.com/rights-for-same-sex-married-couples-to-move-around-the-eu-confirmed-in-landmark-ruling-96387 |title=Rights for same-sex married couples to move around the EU confirmed in landmark ruling |first=Alina |last=Tryfonidou |work=The Conversation |date=6 June 2018}}</ref>

Initially, the case was filed with the ], which later decided to consult with the ECJ.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/romania-consult-european-court-over-same-sex-marriage-case-n689551|title=Romania to consult with European court over same-sex marriage case}}</ref> In line with the ECJ ruling, the Constitutional Court ruled on 18 July 2018 that the state must grant residency rights to the same-sex partners of European Union citizens.<ref>{{Cite newspaper|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-romania-lgbt/romania-must-give-residency-rights-to-same-sex-spouses-court-rules-idUSKBN1K81Y9|title=Romania must give residency rights to same-sex spouses, court rules|journal=Reuters|date=19 July 2018}}</ref>

In June 2019, ] and 14 people forming seven same-sex couples have sued the Romanian state to the ] (ECHR), asking for the legal recognition of their families in Romania.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.romania-insider.com/gay-couples-romania-echr |title=Seven gay couples take Romania to court to have family relation recognized |work=Romania-Insider.com |date=18 June 2019 |access-date=4 July 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190704205954/https://www.romania-insider.com/gay-couples-romania-echr |archive-date=4 July 2019 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

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

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

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

====South Korea====
{{Main|Recognition of same-sex unions in South Korea}}
In July 2015, ] and his partner, Kim Seung-Hwan, filed a lawsuit seeking legal status for their marriage after their marriage registration form was rejected by the local authorities in ]. On 25 May 2016, a South Korean district court ruled against the couple and argued that without clear legislation a same-sex union can not be recognized as a marriage.<ref>{{Cite newspaper|url=https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/may/25/south-korea-rejects-film-director-kim-jho-gwang-so-same-sex-marriage-case|title=South Korean court rejects film director's same-sex marriage case|journal=The Guardian|date=25 May 2016|last1=France-Presse|first1=Agence}}</ref> The couple quickly filed an appeal against the district court ruling. Their lawyer, Ryu Min-Hee, announced that two more same-sex couples had filed separate lawsuits in order to be allowed to wed.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2016/05/26/south-korea-set-for-more-court-battles-over-same-sex-marriage-ban|author=Duffy, Nick|title=South Korea set for more court battles over same-sex marriage ban|newspaper=Pink News|date=26 May 2016}}</ref>

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

A 2017 poll found that 41% of South Koreans supported same-sex marriage, while 52% were opposed.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://imnews.imbc.com/replay/2017/nwdesk/article/4482816_21408.html |title=특집 여론조사…국민 59.7% "적폐청산 수사 계속해야" |date=26 December 2017 |publisher=MBC News}}</ref> Support is significantly higher among younger people, however, with a 2014 opinion poll showing that 60% of South Koreans in their 20s supported same-sex marriage, about double that of 2010 (30.5%).<ref> ''The Asian Institute for Policy Studies''</ref>

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

In a poll in June 2013 for ], 63% approved of same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ifop.com/media/poll/2255-1-study_file.pdf |title=Archived copy |accessdate=26 May 2015 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160201082402/http://www.ifop.com/media/poll/2255-1-study_file.pdf |archive-date=1 February 2016 |language=fr}}, ], retrieved 18 June 2014</ref> After the ]'s Committee of Law Affairs' decision to approve same-sex marriage, two opinion polls released on 22 February 2015 showed support of 54% (] for ])<ref>{{in lang|de}} , Blick.ch, retrieved on 22 February 2015</ref> and 71% (GfS Zürich for ])<ref>{{in lang|de}} , Sonntagszeitung.ch, retrieved on 22 February 20152015</ref> allowing same-sex couples to marry and adopt children. Additionally, in November 2016, voters in the ] overwhelmingly rejected an initiative seeking to ban same-sex marriage in the cantonal Constitution, with 81% voting against.<ref>, Srf.ch; accessed 5 July 2017.{{in lang|de}}</ref> A 2017 poll found that 75% of Swiss were in favour of same-sex marriage.<ref name="pew"/>

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

The ] (CVP/PDC) started in 2011 with gathering signatures for a ] entitled "For the couple and the family - No to the penalty of marriage". This initiative would change article 14 of the ] and aimed to put equal fiscal rights and equal social security benefits between married couples and unmarried cohabiting couples. However, the text aimed to introduce as well in the Constitution for the first time ever the definition of marriage, which would be the sole "union between a man and a woman".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.admin.ch/ch/d/pore/vi/vis404t.html|title=Eidgenössische Volksinitiative 'Für Ehe und Familie - gegen die Heiratsstrafe'|website=admin.ch}}</ref> On 19 June 2015, the Parliament recommended that voters reject the initiative.<ref>, Admin.ch; accessed 5 January 2017.{{in lang|fr}}</ref> The ] also recommended rejecting the initiative.<ref> {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151125082428/https://queer.ch/politik/schweiz/bundesrat-gegen-cvp-initiative/ |date=25 November 2015 }}, Queer.ch, 18 November 2015; accessed 5 January 2017.{{in lang|de}}</ref><ref>, 17 November 2015, admin.ch</ref> The Swiss people voted on the Christian Democrats' proposal in a referendum on 28 February 2016<ref>, NZZ.ch, 7 October 2014.{{in lang|de}}</ref> and rejected it by 50.8% of the votes.<ref>, Swissinfo.ch, 28 February 2016.</ref>

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

President ] supports same-sex marriage, and has suggested that the ] would agree to legalising it.<ref>{{in lang|es}} ''shangay.com'', 20 November 2017</ref>

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

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


===International court rulings===
In June 2013, the National Assembly began formal debate on a proposal to establish legal recognition for same-sex marriage.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://gaynewsnetwork.com.au/news/world/11253-vietnam-national-assembly-begins-debate-on-marriage-equality.html|title=The latest entertainment news for Australia's LGBTIQ community|publisher=Gay News Network|accessdate=6 January 2014}}</ref> On 24 September 2013, the Government issued the decree abolishing the fines on same-sex marriages. The decree took effect on 11 November 2013.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://tuoitrenews.vn/society/13750/vietnam-to-remove-fines-on-samesex-marriage|title=Vietnam to remove fines on same-sex marriage|author=Tuoi Tre Newspaper|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://thuvienphapluat.vn/archive/Nghi-dinh-110-2013-ND-CP-xu-phat-vi-pham-hanh-chinh-bo-tro-tu-phap-hanh-chinh-tu-phap-vb208274.aspx |title=Nghị định 110/2013/NĐ-CP xử phạt vi phạm hành chính bổ trợ tư pháp hành chính tư pháp - bản lưu trữ |website=Thuvienphapluat.vn |date=24 September 2013 |accessdate=7 July 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://conganhatinh.gov.vn/web/guest/9/-/vcmsview/qvgy/1506/1506/6374 |title=Cổng thông tin điện tử Công an Tỉnh Hà Tĩnh |date=17 May 2014 |accessdate=7 July 2017 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140517121108/http://conganhatinh.gov.vn/web/guest/9/-/vcmsview/qvgy/1506/1506/6374 |archive-date=17 May 2014 }}</ref>


==== European Court of Human Rights ====
On 27 May 2014, the National Assembly's Committee for Social Affairs removed the provision giving legal status and some rights to cohabiting same-sex couples from the Government's bill to amend the ''Law on Marriage and Family''.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/vietnamese-lawmakers-back-down-giving-rights-same-sex-couples300514|title=Vietnamese lawmakers back down on giving rights to same-sex couples|date=30 May 2014|website=Gay Star News}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.voanews.com/content/vietnams-proposed-marriage-law-disappoints-lgbt-activists-/1925916.html|title=Vietnam's Proposed Marriage Law Disappoints LGBT Activists|website=VOA|accessdate=26 July 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160128133354/http://www.voanews.com/content/vietnams-proposed-marriage-law-disappoints-lgbt-activists-/1925916.html|archive-date=28 January 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref> The bill was approved by the National Assembly on 19 June 2014.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://thanhniennews.com/politics/vietnam-allows-surrogacy-within-families-denies-samesex-marriage-27502.html|title=Vietnam allows surrogacy within families, denies same-sex marriage|website=Thanh Nien Daily|accessdate=26 July 2015|date=20 June 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://tuoitrenews.vn/society/20478/vietnam-removes-ban-on-same-sex-marriage|title=Vietnam removes ban on same sex marriage|newspaper=Tuoi Tre|accessdate=26 July 2015}}</ref>
In 2010, the ] (ECHR) ruled in '']'', a case involving an Austrian same-sex couple who were denied the right to marry.<ref name="CASE OF SCHALK AND KOPF v. AUSTRIA">{{Cite web |title=HUDOC – European Court of Human Rights |url=http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-99605 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150911221342/http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-99605 |archive-date=11 September 2015 |access-date=26 July 2015}}</ref> The court found, by a vote of 4 to 3, that their human rights had not been violated.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Buyse |first=Antoine |date=24 June 2010 |title=Strasbourg court rules that states are not obliged to allow gay marriage |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/law/2010/jun/24/european-court-of-human-rights-civil-partnerships |url-status=live |access-date=8 November 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131213205714/http://www.theguardian.com/law/2010/jun/24/european-court-of-human-rights-civil-partnerships |archive-date=13 December 2013}}</ref> The court further stated that same-sex unions are not protected under art. 12 of ECHR ("Right to marry"), which exclusively protects the right to marry of opposite-sex couples (without regard if the sex of the partners is the result of birth or of sex change), but they are protected under art. 8 of ECHR ("Right to respect for private and family life") and art. 14 ("Prohibition of discrimination").<ref>{{Cite book |last=Avram |first=Marieta |title=Drept civil Familia |date=2016 |publisher=Editura Hamangiu |isbn=978-606-27-0609-8 |location=Bucharest |language=Romanian |trans-title=Civil law Family}}</ref>


] states that: "Men and women of marriageable age have the right to marry and to found a family, according to the national laws governing the exercise of this right",<ref>{{Cite web |title=European Convention on Human Rights |url=http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140703060501/http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf |archive-date=3 July 2014 |access-date=25 July 2015 |website=ECHR.coe.int |publisher=European Court of Human Rights}}</ref> not limiting marriage to those in a heterosexual relationship. However, the ECHR stated in ''Schalk and Kopf v Austria'' that this provision was intended to limit marriage to heterosexual relationships, as it used the term "men and women" instead of "everyone".<ref name="CASE OF SCHALK AND KOPF v. AUSTRIA" /> Nevertheless, the court accepted and is considering cases concerning same-sex marriage recognition, e.g. ''Andersen v Poland''.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-218104 |website=ECHR |access-date=21 July 2022 |language=English|title=HUDOC - European Court of Human Rights }}</ref> In 2021, the court ruled in '']''—followed by later judgements concerning other member states—that countries must provide some sort of legal recognition to same-sex couples, although not necessarily marriage.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Palazzo |first1=Nausica |title=Fedotova and Others v. Russia : Dawn of a new era for European LGBTQ families? |journal=Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law |date=April 2023 |volume=30 |issue=2 |pages=216–228 |doi=10.1177/1023263X231195455|s2cid=261655476 }}</ref>
On 1 January 2015, the ''2014 Law on Marriage and Family'' officially went into effect. It states that while Vietnam allows same-sex weddings, it will not offer legal recognition or protection to unions between people of the same sex.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.marilynstowe.co.uk/2014/12/29/vietnam-set-to-lift-gay-marriage-ban/|title=Vietnam set to lift gay marriage ban|website=Marilyn Stowe Blog|accessdate=26 July 2015|date=29 December 2014}}</ref>


==== European Union ====
===International organizations===
{{further|Coman and Others v General Inspectorate for Immigration and Ministry of the Interior}}
The terms of employment of the staff of ] (not ]) in most cases are not governed by the laws of the country where their offices are located. Agreements with the host country safeguard these organizations' impartiality.
On 5 June 2018, the ] ruled, in a case from ], that, under the specific conditions of the couple in question, married same-sex couples have the same residency rights as other married couples in an EU country, even if that country does not permit or recognize same-sex marriage.<ref>{{Cite web |title=EU court backs residency rights for gay couple in Romania |url=https://apnews.com/561b1bb4ecff48b598eb1c2c20db2735 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180612142617/https://apnews.com/561b1bb4ecff48b598eb1c2c20db2735 |archive-date=12 June 2018 |access-date=6 June 2018 |website=]|date=5 June 2018 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=5 June 2018 |title=Same-sex spouses have EU residence rights, top court rules – BBC |work=BBC News |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44366898 |url-status=live |access-date=6 June 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190508223531/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44366898 |archive-date=8 May 2019}}</ref> However, the ruling was not implemented in Romania and on 14 September 2021 the ] passed a resolution calling on the ] to ensure that the ruling is respected across the EU.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Texts adopted – LGBTIQ rights in the EU – Tuesday, 14 September 2021 |url=https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2021-0366_EN.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210916211040/https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2021-0366_EN.html |archive-date=16 September 2021 |access-date=16 September 2021 |website=European Parliament |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=14 September 2021 |title=MEPs condemn failure to respect rights of same-sex partners in EU |language=en |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/14/meps-condemn-failure-respect-rights-same-sex-partners-eu |url-status=live |access-date=16 September 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210914132153/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/14/meps-condemn-failure-respect-rights-same-sex-partners-eu |archive-date=14 September 2021}}</ref>


==== Inter-American Court of Human Rights ====
Despite their relative independence, few organizations recognize same-sex partnerships without condition. The agencies of the ] recognize same-sex marriages if the country of citizenship of the employees in question recognizes the marriage.<ref>{{cite web|title=UN Secretary-General Bulletin|url=http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N04/522/40/PDF/N0452240.pdf|publisher=United Nations|accessdate=25 September 2012}}</ref> In some cases, these organizations do offer a limited selection of the benefits normally provided to mixed-sex married couples to de facto partners or ]s of their staff, but even individuals who have entered into a mixed-sex civil union in their home country are not guaranteed full recognition of this union in all organizations. However, the ] does recognize domestic partners.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTHRJOBS/0,,contentMDK:20522360~menuPK:1353209~pagePK:64262408~piPK:64262191~theSitePK:1058433,00.html|title=Jobs&nbsp;— Compensation & Benefits|publisher=The World Bank Group|accessdate=8 March 2007}}</ref>
]
On 8 January 2018, the ] (IACHR) issued an advisory opinion that states party to the American Convention on Human Rights should grant same-sex couples accession to all existing domestic legal systems of family registration, including marriage, along with all rights that derive from marriage. The Court recommended that governments issue temporary decrees recognizing same-sex marriage until new legislation is brought in. They also said that it was inadmissible and discriminatory for a separate legal provision to be established (such as ]s) instead of same-sex marriage.<ref>{{Cite web |date=25 January 2018 |title=Major Advance for Marriage Equality and Gender Identity Rights in Latin America |work=San Francisco Bay Times |url=http://sfbaytimes.com/major-advance-marriage-equality-gender-identity-rights-latin-america/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180129141726/http://sfbaytimes.com/major-advance-marriage-equality-gender-identity-rights-latin-america/ |archive-date=29 January 2018 |access-date=13 April 2018 |publisher=Sfbaytimes.com}}</ref>


==Other arrangements== ==Other arrangements==
===Civil unions=== ===Civil unions===
{{Main|Civil union}} {{Main|Civil union}}
] against ], reject the notion of ], describing them as inferior to the legal recognition of same-sex marriage.<ref name=Towleroad>{{cite web|last=Towle|first=Andy|title=NYC Protest and Civil Rights March Opposing Proposition 8|url=http://www.towleroad.com/2008/11/we-did-it.html|publisher=]|accessdate=28 September 2012|date=13 November 2008}}</ref>]] ] against ], reject the notion of ], describing them as inferior to the legal recognition of same-sex marriage.<ref name="Towleroad">{{Cite web |last=Towle |first=Andy |date=13 November 2008 |title=NYC Protest and Civil Rights March Opposing Proposition 8 |url=http://www.towleroad.com/2008/11/we-did-it.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090213224331/http://www.towleroad.com/2008/11/we-did-it.html |archive-date=13 February 2009 |access-date=28 September 2012 |publisher=]}}</ref>]]


Civil union, ], ], ], unregistered partnership, and unregistered cohabitation statuses offer varying legal benefits of marriage. As of {{date}}, countries that have an alternative form of legal recognition other than marriage on a national level are: ], ], ], ], the ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ] and ].<ref name="countries and states legal">{{cite web|last=Pearson|first=Mary|title=Where is Gay Marriage Legal?|url=http://christiangays.com/marriage/legal.shtml|publisher=christiangays.com|accessdate=20 February 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120301004148/http://christiangays.com/marriage/legal.shtml|archive-date=1 March 2012|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=Williams|first=Steve|title=Which Countries Have Legalized Gay Marriage?|url=http://www.care2.com/causes/which-countries-have-legalized-gay-marriage.html|publisher=Care2.com (news.bbc.co.uk as source)|accessdate=20 February 2012}}</ref> ] and ] offer more limited rights. On a subnational level, the ], and ] allow same-sex couples to access civil unions or partnerships, but restrict marriage to couples of the opposite sex. Additionally, various cities and counties in ] and ] offer same-sex couples varying levels of benefits, which include hospital visitation rights and others. Civil union, ], ], ], unregistered partnership, and unregistered cohabitation statuses offer varying legal benefits of marriage. As of {{date}}, countries that have an alternative form of legal recognition other than marriage on a national level are: ], ], ], the ], ], ], ], ], ] and ].<ref name="countries and states legal">{{Cite web |last=Pearson |first=Mary |title=Where is Gay Marriage Legal? |url=http://christiangays.com/marriage/legal.shtml |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120301004148/http://christiangays.com/marriage/legal.shtml |archive-date=1 March 2012 |access-date=20 February 2012 |publisher=christiangays.com}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Williams |first=Steve |title=Which Countries Have Legalized Gay Marriage? |url=http://www.care2.com/causes/which-countries-have-legalized-gay-marriage.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190429011118/https://www.care2.com/causes/which-countries-have-legalized-gay-marriage.html |archive-date=29 April 2019 |access-date=20 February 2012 |publisher=Care2.com (news.bbc.co.uk as source)}}</ref> Same-sex marriage performed remotely or abroad is recognized with full marital rights by ]. ] offers more limited rights. Additionally, various cities and counties in ] and ] offer same-sex couples varying levels of benefits, which include hospital visitation rights and others.


Additionally, sixteen countries that have legalized same-sex marriage still have an alternative form of legal recognition for same-sex couples, usually available to heterosexual couples as well: ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], the ], ], ], ], the ] and ].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://eli.legilux.public.lu/eli/etat/leg/loi/2004/07/09/n3 |title=Loi du 9 juillet 2004 relative aux effets légaux de certains partenariats. - Legilux |website=Eli.legilux.public.lu |accessdate=7 July 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do;jsessionid=0F15B99854A4FE47659F950BE42DF000.tpdjo05v_3?cidTexte=LEGITEXT000005628705&dateTexte=vig |title=Loi n° 99-944 du 15 novembre 1999 relative au pacte civil de solidarité |language=fr |website=Legifrance.gouv.fr |date=12 March 2007 |accessdate=7 July 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/mopdf/2000/03/02_1.pdf |title=WETTEN, DECRETEN, ORDONNANTIES EN VERORDENINGEN LOIS, DECRETS, ORDONNANCES ET REGLEMENTS |website=Ejustice.jkust.fgov.be |accessdate=7 July 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/33/contents|title=Civil Partnership Act 2004|website=Legislation.gov.uk|accessdate=5 July 2017}}</ref> Additionally, nineteen countries that have legally recognized same-sex marriage also have an alternative form of recognition for same-sex couples, usually available to heterosexual couples as well: ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], the ], ], ], ], the ] and ].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Loi du 9 juillet 2004 relative aux effets légaux de certains partenariats. – Legilux |url=http://eli.legilux.public.lu/eli/etat/leg/loi/2004/07/09/n3 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160911061405/http://eli.legilux.public.lu/eli/etat/leg/loi/2004/07/09/n3 |archive-date=11 September 2016 |access-date=7 July 2017 |website=Eli.legilux.public.lu}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=12 March 2007 |title=Loi n° 99-944 du 15 novembre 1999 relative au pacte civil de solidarité |url=http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do;jsessionid=0F15B99854A4FE47659F950BE42DF000.tpdjo05v_3?cidTexte=LEGITEXT000005628705&dateTexte=vig |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190816215959/https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do;jsessionid=0F15B99854A4FE47659F950BE42DF000.tpdjo05v_3?cidTexte=LEGITEXT000005628705&dateTexte=vig |archive-date=16 August 2019 |access-date=7 July 2017 |website=Legifrance.gouv.fr |language=fr}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=WETTEN, DECRETEN, ORDONNANTIES EN VERORDENINGEN LOIS, DECRETS, ORDONNANCES ET REGLEMENTS |url=http://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/mopdf/2000/03/02_1.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190429011144/http://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/mopdf/2000/03/02_1.pdf |archive-date=29 April 2019 |access-date=7 July 2017 |website=Ejustice.jkust.fgov.be}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Civil Partnership Act 2004 |url=http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/33/contents |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190429011336/http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/33/contents |archive-date=29 April 2019 |access-date=5 July 2017 |website=Legislation.gov.uk}}</ref>


They are also available in parts of the United States (], ], ], ], ], ] and ]).<ref>{{cite web|title=Same-Sex Marriage, Civil Unions and Domestic Partnerships|url=http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/human-services/same-sex-marriage-overview.aspx|publisher=National Conference of State Legislatures|accessdate=20 February 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7017501996?Congress%20Considers%20Outcome%20of%20D.C.%20Gay%20Marriage%20Legislation|title=Congress Considers Outcome of D.C. Gay Marriage Legislation|work=AHN|author=Ramstack, Tom|date=11 January 2010|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100620042439/http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7017501996?Congress%20Considers%20Outcome%20of%20D.C.%20Gay%20Marriage%20Legislation|archive-date=20 June 2010}}</ref> They are also available in parts of the United States (],{{efn|Legally available in the Arizona municipalities of Bisbee, Clarkdale, Cottonwood, Jerome, Sedona and Tucson.}} ], ], ], ], ], ] and ]) and Canada.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Same-Sex Marriage, Civil Unions and Domestic Partnerships |url=http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/human-services/same-sex-marriage-overview.aspx |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130610003023/http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/human-services/same-sex-marriage-overview.aspx |archive-date=10 June 2013 |access-date=20 February 2012 |publisher=National Conference of State Legislatures}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Ramstack, Tom |date=11 January 2010 |title=Congress Considers Outcome of D.C. Gay Marriage Legislation |work=AHN |url=http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7017501996?Congress%20Considers%20Outcome%20of%20D.C.%20Gay%20Marriage%20Legislation |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100620042439/http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7017501996?Congress%20Considers%20Outcome%20of%20D.C.%20Gay%20Marriage%20Legislation |archive-date=20 June 2010}}</ref>


===Non-sexual same-sex marriage=== ===Non-sexual same-sex marriage===
====Kenya==== ====Kenya====
{{main|LGBT rights in Kenya}} {{main|LGBT rights in Kenya}}
Female same-sex marriage is practiced among the ], ], ], ], and to a lesser extent neighboring peoples. About 5–10% of women are in such marriages. However, this is not seen as homosexual, but is instead a way for families without sons to keep their inheritance within the family.<ref>''Gender and Language in Sub-Saharan Africa,'' 2013:35</ref> Female same-sex marriage is practiced among the ], ], ], ], and to a lesser extent neighboring peoples. About 5–10% of women are in such marriages. However, this is not seen as homosexual, but is instead a way for families without sons to keep their inheritance within the family.<ref>''Gender and Language in Sub-Saharan Africa,'' 2013:35</ref>


====Nigeria==== ====Nigeria====
{{main|Same-sex marriage in Nigeria}} {{main|Recognition of same-sex unions in Nigeria}}
Among the ] and probably other peoples in the south of the country, there are circumstances where a marriage between women is considered appropriate, such as when a woman has no child and her husband dies, and she takes a wife to perpetuate her inheritance and family lineage.<ref name=NigeriaTribune>{{cite web|url=http://www.tribune.com.ng/19062009/opinion.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100111010506/http://www.tribune.com.ng/19062009/opinion.html|archive-date=11 January 2010|title=Tradition of same gender marriage in Igboland|first=Leo|last=Igwe|website=Nigerian Tribune|date=19 June 2009}}</ref> Among the ] and probably other peoples in the south of the country, there are circumstances where a marriage between women is considered appropriate, such as when a woman has no child and her husband dies, and she takes a wife to perpetuate her inheritance and family lineage.<ref name="NigeriaTribune">{{Cite web |last=Igwe |first=Leo |date=19 June 2009 |title=Tradition of same gender marriage in Igboland |url=http://www.tribune.com.ng/19062009/opinion.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100111010506/http://www.tribune.com.ng/19062009/opinion.html |archive-date=11 January 2010 |website=Nigerian Tribune}}</ref>

== Studies ==
The ] stated on 26 February 2004:{{blockquote|text=The results of more than a century of anthropological research on households, kinship relationships, and families, across cultures and through time, provide no support whatsoever for the view that either civilization or viable social orders depend upon marriage as an exclusively heterosexual institution. Rather, anthropological research supports the conclusion that a vast array of family types, including families built upon same-sex partnerships, can contribute to stable and humane societies.<ref name="aaa">{{Cite web |last=American Anthropological Association |author-link=American Anthropological Association |year=2004 |title=Statement on Marriage and the Family |url=http://www.aaanet.org/issues/policy-advocacy/Statement-on-Marriage-and-the-family.cfm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150912104755/http://www.aaanet.org/issues/policy-advocacy/Statement-on-Marriage-and-the-Family.cfm |archive-date=12 September 2015 |access-date=18 September 2015}}</ref>}}

Research findings from 1998 to 2015 from the ], ], ], the ], the ], ], the ], the ], ], ], the Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health, and independent researchers also support the findings of this study.<ref>{{Cite news |date=26 June 2015 |title=Same-sex marriage and children's well-being: Research roundup |work=Journalist's Resource |url=http://journalistsresource.org/studies/society/gender-society/same-sex-marriage-children-well-being-research-roundup |url-status=live |access-date=29 December 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160102172415/http://journalistsresource.org/studies/society/gender-society/same-sex-marriage-children-well-being-research-roundup |archive-date=2 January 2016}}</ref>{{vague|date=February 2021}}

The overall socio-economic and health effects of legal access to same-sex marriage around the world have been summarized by Badgett and co-authors.<ref>{{Cite journal |doi = 10.1002/pam.22587|title = A review of the effects of legal access to same-sex marriage |journal = Journal of Policy Analysis and Management|year = 2024|last1=Badgett|first1=M.V. Lee|last2=Carpenter|first2=Christopher S.|last3=Lee|first3=Maxine J.|last4=Sansone|first4 = Dario|doi-access=free|hdl=10871/135707|hdl-access=free}}</ref> The review found that sexual minority individuals took-up legal marriage when it became available to them (but at lower rates than different-sex couples). There is instead no evidence that same-sex marriage legalization affected different-sex marriages. On the health side, same-sex marriage legalization increased health insurance coverage for individuals in same-sex couples (in the US), and it led to improvements in sexual health among men who have sex with men, while there is mixed evidence on mental health effects among sexual minorities. In addition, the study found mixed evidence on a range of downstream social outcomes such as attitudes toward LGBTQ+ people and employment choices of sexual minorities.

===Health===

{{as of|2006}}, the data of current psychological and other social science studies on same-sex marriage in comparison to mixed-sex marriage indicate that same-sex and mixed-sex relationships do not differ in their essential psychosocial dimensions; that a parent's sexual orientation is unrelated to their ability to provide a healthy and nurturing family environment; and that marriage bestows substantial psychological, social, and health benefits. Same-sex parents and carers and their children are likely to benefit in numerous ways from legal recognition of their families, and providing such recognition through marriage will bestow greater benefit than civil unions or domestic partnerships.<ref name="aap2006" /><ref name="autogenerated4">Herek, Gregory M. "Legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the United States: A social science perspective." ''American Psychologist,'' Vol 61(6), September 2006, pp. 607–21.</ref>{{update inline|date=December 2023}} Studies in the United States have correlated legalization of same-sex marriage to lower rates of HIV infection,<ref>{{Cite web |author=Elaine Justice |title=Study Links Gay Marriage Bans to Rise in HIV infections |url=http://www.emory.edu/home/news/releases/2009/06/study-links-gay-marriage-bans-to-rise-in-hiv-rate.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100409072056/http://www.emory.edu/home/news/releases/2009/06/study-links-gay-marriage-bans-to-rise-in-hiv-rate.html |archive-date=9 April 2010 |access-date=5 November 2010 |publisher=Emory University}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Peng |first=Handie |title=The Effect of Same-Sex Marriage Laws on Public Health and Welfare |journal=Userwww.service.emory.edu |url=https://emory.academia.edu/HandiePeng/Papers/430809/The_Effects_of_Same-Sex_Marriage_Laws_on_Public_Health_and_Welfare |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120220025915/http://emory.academia.edu/HandiePeng/Papers/430809/The_Effects_of_Same-Sex_Marriage_Laws_on_Public_Health_and_Welfare |archive-date=20 February 2012 |access-date=11 February 2012}}</ref> psychiatric disorders,<ref>{{Cite web |last=Hasin |first=Deborah |title=Lesbian, gay, bisexual individuals risk psychiatric disorders from discriminatory policies |url=http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-03/cums-lgb030210.php |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130227012518/http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-03/cums-lgb030210.php |archive-date=27 February 2013 |access-date=20 September 2012 |publisher=]}}</ref><ref name="psychtoday">{{Cite news |last=Mustanski |first=Brian |date=22 March 2010 |title=New study suggests bans on gay marriage hurt mental health of LGB people |work=] |url=http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-sexual-continuum/201003/new-study-suggests-bans-gay-marriage-hurt-mental-health-lgb-people |access-date=8 November 2010}}</ref> and ].<ref name="JAMA">{{Cite journal |last1=Raifman |first1=Julia |last2=Moscoe |first2=Ellen |last3=Austin |first3=S. Bryn |last4=McConnell |first4=Margaret |year=2017 |title=Difference-in-Differences Analysis of the Association Between State Same-Sex Marriage Policies and Adolescent Suicide Attempts|journal=JAMA Pediatrics |volume=171 |issue=4 |pages=350–356 |doi=10.1001/jamapediatrics.2016.4529 |pmc=5848493 |pmid=28241285}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=20 February 2017 |title=Same-Sex Marriage Legalization Linked to Reduction in Suicide Attempts Among High School Students |url=https://www.jhsph.edu/news/news-releases/2017/same-sex-marriage-legalization-linked-to-reduction-in-suicide-attempts-among-high-school-students.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190429010934/https://www.jhsph.edu/news/news-releases/2017/same-sex-marriage-legalization-linked-to-reduction-in-suicide-attempts-among-high-school-students.html |archive-date=29 April 2019 |access-date=8 June 2018 |website=]}}</ref>


==Issues== ==Issues==
{{See also|LGBT rights opposition}} {{See also|LGBT rights opposition}}
While few societies have recognized same-sex unions as marriages, the ] reveals a large range of attitudes towards same-sex unions ranging from praise, through full acceptance and integration, sympathetic toleration, indifference, prohibition and discrimination, to persecution and physical annihilation.{{citation needed|date=June 2018}} Opponents of same-sex marriages have argued that same-sex marriage, while doing good for the couples that participate in them and the children they are raising,<ref name="Laurie">{{citation |last=Laurie|first=Timothy|url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-03/laurie-bigotry-or-biology/6514156|title=Bigotry or biology: the hard choice for an opponent of marriage equality|publisher=The Drum|date=3 June 2015}}</ref> undermines a right of children to be raised by their biological mother and father.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://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|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101025170627/http://family.findlaw.com/marriage/marriage-agreements/|archive-date=25 October 2010}}</ref> while others argue that same-sex marriages would provide social benefits to same-sex couples.<ref name="indegayforum1">Dale Carpenter is a prominent spokesman for this view. For a better understanding of this view, see Carpenter's writings at {{cite web|url=http://www.indegayforum.org/staff/show/91.html |title=Archived copy|accessdate=31 October 2006|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061117201231/http://www.indegayforum.org/staff/show/91.html|archive-date=17 November 2006}}</ref> The debate regarding same-sex marriages includes debate based upon social viewpoints as well as debate based on majority rules, religious convictions, economic arguments, health-related concerns, and a variety of other issues.{{citation needed|date=July 2017}} While few societies have recognized same-sex unions as marriages,{{update inline|date=January 2024}} the ] reveals a large range of attitudes towards same-sex unions ranging from praise, through full acceptance and integration, sympathetic toleration, indifference, prohibition and discrimination, to persecution and physical annihilation.{{citation needed|date=June 2018}} Opponents of same-sex marriages have argued that same-sex marriage, while doing good for the couples that participate in them and the children they are raising,<ref name="Laurie">{{Cite web |last=Laurie |first=Timothy |date=3 June 2015 |title=Bigotry or biology: the hard choice for an opponent of marriage equality |url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-03/laurie-bigotry-or-biology/6514156 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150604151718/http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-03/laurie-bigotry-or-biology/6514156 |archive-date=4 June 2015 |access-date=4 June 2015 |publisher=The Drum}}</ref> undermines a right of children to be raised by their biological mother and father.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Blankenhorn |first=David |date=19 September 2008 |title=Protecting marriage to protect children |work=Los Angeles Times |url=https://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-blankenhorn19-2008sep19,0,6057126.story |url-status=live |access-date=6 October 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090904154130/http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-blankenhorn19-2008sep19,0,6057126.story |archive-date=4 September 2009}}</ref> Some supporters of same-sex marriages take the view that the government should have no role in regulating personal relationships,<ref name="findlaw1">{{Cite web |title=See discussion of prenuptial and postmarital agreements at Findlaw |url=http://family.findlaw.com/marriage/marriage-agreements |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101025170627/http://family.findlaw.com/marriage/marriage-agreements/ |archive-date=25 October 2010 |access-date=5 November 2010 |publisher=Family.findlaw.com}}</ref> while others argue that same-sex marriages would provide social benefits to same-sex couples.{{efn|1=Dale Carpenter is a prominent spokesman for this view. For a better understanding of this view, see Carpenter's writings at {{Cite web |title=Dale Carpenter |url=http://www.indegayforum.org/staff/show/91.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061117201231/http://www.indegayforum.org/staff/show/91.html |archive-date=17 November 2006 |access-date=31 October 2006 |website=Independent Gay Forum}} }} The debate regarding same-sex marriages includes debate based upon social viewpoints as well as debate based on majority rules, religious convictions, economic arguments, health-related concerns, and a variety of other issues.{{citation needed|date=July 2017}}


===Parenting=== ===Parenting===
{{Main|LGBT parenting|Same-sex marriage and the family}} {{Main|LGBT parenting|Same-sex marriage and the family}}
] ]
Scientific literature indicates that parents' financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally recognized union (either a mixed-sex or same-sex union). As a result, professional scientific associations have argued for same-sex marriage to be legally recognized as it will be beneficial to the children of same-sex parents or carers.<ref name="amici">{{cite web|url=http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2010/10/27/amicus29.pdf|title=Brief of the American Psychological Association, The California Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy as amici curiae in support of plaintiff-appellees&nbsp;– Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of California Civil Case No. 09-CV-2292 VRW (Honorable Vaughn R. Walker)|accessdate=5 November 2010}}</ref><ref name=cpa2006/><ref>{{Cite journal|vauthors=Pawelski JG, Perrin EC, Foy JM |display-authors=etal |title=The effects of marriage, civil union, and domestic partnership laws on the health and well-being of children|journal=]|volume=118|issue=1|pages=349–64|date=July 2006|pmid=16818585|doi=10.1542/peds.2006-1279|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=Lamb, Ph.D.|first=Michael|title=Expert Affidavit for U.S. District Court (D. Mass. 2009)|url=http://www.glad.org/uploads/docs/cases/pedersen-v-opm/2011-09-14-pedersen-lamb-rebuttal-afffidavit.pdf|publisher=Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders|accessdate=24 July 2012}}</ref><ref name="AAP-Discovery">{{cite web|url=http://news.discovery.com/human/health/pediatricians-gay-marriage-is-good-for-kids-health-130322.htm|title=Pediatricians: Gay Marriage Good for Kids' Health|publisher=news.discovery.com|date=22 March 2013|accessdate=11 April 2013}}</ref> Scientific literature indicates that parents' financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally recognized union (either a mixed-sex or same-sex union). As a result, professional scientific associations have argued for same-sex marriage to be legally recognized as it will be beneficial to the children of same-sex parents or carers.<ref name="amici">{{Cite web |title=Brief of the American Psychological Association, The California Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy as amici curiae in support of plaintiff-appellees&nbsp;– Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of California Civil Case No. 09-CV-2292 VRW (Honorable Vaughn R. Walker) |url=http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2010/10/27/amicus29.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150413160709/http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2010/10/27/amicus29.pdf |archive-date=13 April 2015 |access-date=5 November 2010}}</ref><ref name="cpa2006">{{Cite web |year=2006 |title=Marriage of Same-Sex Couples – 2006 Position Statement Canadian Psychological Association |url=http://www.cpa.ca/cpasite/userfiles/Documents/Marriage%20of%20Same-Sex%20Couples%20Position%20Statement%20-%20October%202006%20(1).pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090419195945/http://www.cpa.ca/cpasite/userfiles/Documents/Marriage%20of%20Same-Sex%20Couples%20Position%20Statement%20-%20October%202006%20%281%29.pdf |archive-date=19 April 2009}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |display-authors=etal |vauthors=Pawelski JG, Perrin EC, Foy JM |date=July 2006 |title=The effects of marriage, civil union, and domestic partnership laws on the health and well-being of children |journal=] |volume=118 |issue=1 |pages=349–64 |doi=10.1542/peds.2006-1279 |pmid=16818585 |s2cid=219194821 |doi-access=}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Lamb |first=Michael |title=Expert Affidavit for U.S. District Court (D. Mass. 2009) |url=http://www.glad.org/uploads/docs/cases/pedersen-v-opm/2011-09-14-pedersen-lamb-rebuttal-afffidavit.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150924022457/http://www.glad.org/uploads/docs/cases/pedersen-v-opm/2011-09-14-pedersen-lamb-rebuttal-afffidavit.pdf |archive-date=24 September 2015 |access-date=24 July 2012 |publisher=Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders}}</ref><ref name="AAP-Discovery">{{Cite web |date=22 March 2013 |title=Pediatricians: Gay Marriage Good for Kids' Health |url=http://news.discovery.com/human/health/pediatricians-gay-marriage-is-good-for-kids-health-130322.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141112053402/http://news.discovery.com/human/health/pediatricians-gay-marriage-is-good-for-kids-health-130322.htm |archive-date=12 November 2014 |access-date=11 April 2013 |publisher=news.discovery.com}}</ref>


Scientific research has been generally consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents.<ref name=cpa2006/><ref name="AAP-Discovery" /><ref name=apsp>{{cite web|url=http://www.psychology.org.au/Assets/Files/LGBT-Families-Lit-Review.pdf |title=Elizabeth Short, Damien W. Riggs, Amaryll Perlesz, Rhonda Brown, Graeme Kane: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) Parented Families – A Literature Review prepared for The Australian Psychological Society |accessdate=5 November 2010}}</ref><ref name=amici2010>{{cite web|title=Brief of the American Psychological Association, The California Psychological Association, The American Psychiatric Association, and The American Association of Marriage and Family Therapy as Amici Curiae in Support of Plaintiff-Appellees|url=http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2010/10/27/amicus29.pdf|publisher=]|accessdate=28 September 2012}}</ref> According to scientific literature reviews, there is no evidence to the contrary.<ref name="aap2006">{{Cite journal|last1=Pawelski|first1=J.G.|last2=Perrin|first2=E.C.|last3=Foy|first3=J.M.|last4=Allen|first4=C.E.|last5=Crawford|first5=J.E.|last6=Del Monte|first6=M.|last7=Kaufman|first7=M.|last8=Klein|first8=J.D.|last9=Smith|first9=K.|last10=Springer|first10=S.|last11=Tanner|first11=J.L.|last12=Vickers|first12=D.L.|title=The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children|doi=10.1542/peds.2006-1279|journal=Pediatrics|volume=118|issue=1|pages=349–64|year=2006|pmid=16818585|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name="herek">{{cite journal|author=Herek, GM |title=Legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the United States: a social science perspective |journal=The American Psychologist |volume=61 |issue=6 |pages=607–21 |date=September 2006 |pmid=16953748 |doi=10.1037/0003-066X.61.6.607 |url=http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/AP_06_pre.PDF |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100610164736/http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/AP_06_pre.PDF |archive-date=10 June 2010 }}</ref><ref name="How Does the Gender of Parents Matter?">{{cite journal|url=http://www.famigliearcobaleno.org/public/documenti/file/How-Does-the-Gender-of-Parents-Matter.pdf|title=How Does the Gender of Parents Matter?|author1=Biblarz, Timothy J.|author2=Stacey, Judith|journal=Journal of Marriage and Family|date=February 2010|volume=72|issue=1|pages=3–22|doi=10.1111/j.1741-3737.2009.00678.x|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130512111336/http://www.famigliearcobaleno.org/public/documenti/file/How-Does-the-Gender-of-Parents-Matter.pdf|archive-date=12 May 2013|citeseerx=10.1.1.593.4963}}</ref><ref name=cpa2005>{{Cite web |url=http://www.cpa.ca/cpasite/UserFiles/Documents/advocacy/brief.pdf |title=Brief presented to the Legislative House of Commons Committee on Bill C38 by the Canadian Psychological Association – 2 June 2005. |access-date=7 August 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121013225547/http://www.cpa.ca/cpasite/userfiles/Documents/advocacy/brief.pdf |archive-date=13 October 2012 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Scientific research has been generally consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents.<ref name=cpa2006/><ref name="AAP-Discovery" /><ref name="apsp">{{Cite web |title=Elizabeth Short, Damien W. Riggs, Amaryll Perlesz, Rhonda Brown, Graeme Kane: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) Parented Families – A Literature Review prepared for The Australian Psychological Society |url=http://www.psychology.org.au/Assets/Files/LGBT-Families-Lit-Review.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110304014530/http://www.psychology.org.au/Assets/Files/LGBT-Families-Lit-Review.pdf |archive-date=4 March 2011 |access-date=5 November 2010}}</ref><ref name="amici2010">{{Cite web |title=Brief of the American Psychological Association, The California Psychological Association, The American Psychiatric Association, and The American Association of Marriage and Family Therapy as Amici Curiae in Support of Plaintiff-Appellees |url=http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2010/10/27/amicus29.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150413160709/http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2010/10/27/amicus29.pdf |archive-date=13 April 2015 |access-date=28 September 2012 |publisher=]}}</ref> According to scientific literature reviews, there is no evidence to the contrary.<ref name="aap2006">{{Cite journal |last1=Pawelski |first1=J.G. |last2=Perrin |first2=E.C. |last3=Foy |first3=J.M. |last4=Allen |first4=C.E. |last5=Crawford |first5=J.E. |last6=Del Monte |first6=M. |last7=Kaufman |first7=M. |last8=Klein |first8=J.D. |last9=Smith |first9=K. |last10=Springer |first10=S. |last11=Tanner |first11=J.L. |last12=Vickers |first12=D.L. |year=2006 |title=The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children |journal=Pediatrics |volume=118 |issue=1 |pages=349–64 |doi=10.1542/peds.2006-1279 |pmid=16818585 |s2cid=219194821 |doi-access=}}</ref><ref name="herek">{{Cite journal |last=Herek, GM |date=September 2006 |title=Legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the United States: a social science perspective |url=http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/AP_06_pre.PDF |url-status=dead |journal=The American Psychologist |volume=61 |issue=6 |pages=607–21 |doi=10.1037/0003-066X.61.6.607 |pmid=16953748 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100610164736/http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/AP_06_pre.PDF |archive-date=10 June 2010}}</ref><ref name="How Does the Gender of Parents Matter?">{{Cite journal |last1=Biblarz, Timothy J. |last2=Stacey, Judith |date=February 2010 |title=How Does the Gender of Parents Matter? |url=http://www.famigliearcobaleno.org/public/documenti/file/How-Does-the-Gender-of-Parents-Matter.pdf |url-status=dead |journal=Journal of Marriage and Family |volume=72 |issue=1 |pages=3–22 |citeseerx=10.1.1.593.4963 |doi=10.1111/j.1741-3737.2009.00678.x |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130512111336/http://www.famigliearcobaleno.org/public/documenti/file/How-Does-the-Gender-of-Parents-Matter.pdf |archive-date=12 May 2013}}</ref><ref name="cpa2005">{{Cite web |title=Brief presented to the Legislative House of Commons Committee on Bill C38 by the Canadian Psychological Association – 2 June 2005. |url=http://www.cpa.ca/cpasite/UserFiles/Documents/advocacy/brief.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121013225547/http://www.cpa.ca/cpasite/userfiles/Documents/advocacy/brief.pdf |archive-date=13 October 2012 |access-date=7 August 2018}}</ref>{{update inline|date=December 2023}}

Compared to heterosexual couples, same-sex couples have a greater need for ] or ] to become parents. Lesbian couples often use ] to achieve pregnancy, and ] (where one woman provides the egg and the other gestates the child) is becoming more popular in the 2020s, although many couples cannot afford it. ] is an option for wealthier gay male couples, but the cost is prohibitive. Other same-sex couples adopt children or raise the children from earlier opposite-sex relationships.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Goldberg |first1=Abbie E. |title=LGBTQ-parent families: Diversity, intersectionality, and social context |journal=Current Opinion in Psychology |date=February 2023 |volume=49 |pages=101517 |doi=10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101517|pmid=36502588 |s2cid=253665001 |url=https://commons.clarku.edu/faculty_psychology/4 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Leal |first1=Daniela |last2=Gato |first2=Jorge |last3=Coimbra |first3=Susana |last4=Freitas |first4=Daniela |last5=Tasker |first5=Fiona |title=Social Support in the Transition to Parenthood Among Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Persons: A Systematic Review |journal=Sexuality Research and Social Policy |date=December 2021 |volume=18 |issue=4 |pages=1165–1179 |doi=10.1007/s13178-020-00517-y|hdl=10216/132451 |hdl-access=free }}</ref>


====Adoption==== ====Adoption====
{{main|LGBT adoption}} {{main|LGBT adoption}}
[[File:World same-sex adoption laws.svg|right|thumb|upright=1.35|Legal status of adoption by same-sex couples around the world: {{legend|#800080|Joint adoption allowed<sup>1</sup>}} [[File:World same-sex adoption laws.svg|center|thumb|upright=3|Legal status of adoption by same-sex couples around the world: {{legend|#800080|Joint adoption allowed}}
{{legend|#ba75ff|Second-parent (stepchild) adoption allowed<sup>2</sup>}} {{legend|#ba75ff|Second-parent (stepchild) adoption allowed}}
{{legend|#e0e0e0|No laws allowing adoption by same-sex couples}}]] {{legend|#CCCCCC|No laws allowing adoption by same-sex couples and no same-sex marriage}}
{{legend|#E4D69D|Same-sex marriage but adoption by married same-sex couples not allowed}}
All states that allow same-sex marriage also allow the joint ] of children by people of the same sex, with the exceptions of Jalisco, Nayarit and Quintana Roo in Mexico. In addition, ] and ] as well as several subnational jurisdictions that do not recognize same-sex marriage nonetheless permit joint adoption by unmarried same-sex couples: Querétaro and Veracruz in Mexico as well as Northern Ireland and Jersey in the United Kingdom. Some additional states allow stepchild adoption by those who are in a same-sex relationship but are unmarried: ], ], ] (on a case-by-case basis), ] and ].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://euroclashblog.wordpress.com/2015/01/16/austrian-court-rules-to-allow-same-sex-adoptions/|title=Austrian court rules to allow same-sex adoptions|website=The Privateer|date=16 January 2016|accessdate=8 October 2017}}</ref>
]]

All states that allow same-sex marriage also allow the joint ] of children by those couples with the exception of Ecuador and a third of states in Mexico, though such restrictions have been ruled unconstitutional in Mexico. In addition, Bolivia, Croatia, Israel and Liechtenstein, which do not recognize same-sex marriage, nonetheless permit joint adoption by same-sex couples. Some additional states do not recognize same-sex marriage but allow stepchild adoption by couples in civil unions, namely the Czech Republic and San Marino.{{citation needed|date=December 2023}}
As of 2010, more than 16,000 same-sex couples were raising an estimated 22,000 adopted children in the United States,<ref>{{cite web|title=LGBT Adoption Statistics|url=http://www.lifelongadoptions.com/lgbt-adoption/lgbt-adoption-statistics|website=lifelongadoptions.com|access-date=13 February 2016}}</ref> 4% of all adopted children.<ref>{{cite web|title=Families are created with love|url=http://gayadoption.org/facts-supporting-gay-adoption|website=gayadoption.org|access-date=13 February 2016}}</ref>

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


===Transgender and intersex people=== ===Transgender and intersex people===
{{synthesis|date=May 2017}} {{synthesis|date=May 2017}}
{{See also|Transgender rights|Intersex human rights}} {{See also|Transgender rights|Intersex human rights}}
The legal status of same-sex marriage may have implications for the marriages of couples in which one or both parties are ], depending on how sex is defined within a jurisdiction. ] and ] individuals may be prohibited from marrying partners of the "opposite" sex or permitted to marry partners of the "same" sex due to legal distinctions. The legal status of same-sex marriage may have implications for the marriages of couples in which one or both parties are ], depending on how sex is defined within a jurisdiction. Transgender and ] individuals may be prohibited from marrying partners of the "opposite" sex or permitted to marry partners of the "same" sex due to legal distinctions.{{citation needed|date=February 2021}} In any legal jurisdiction where marriages are defined without distinction of a requirement of a male and female, these complications do not occur. In addition, some legal jurisdictions recognize a legal and official change of gender, which would allow a transgender male or female to be legally married in accordance with an adopted gender identity.<ref>Bockting, Walter, Autumn Benner, and Eli Coleman. "Gay and Bisexual Identity Development Among Female-to-Male Transsexuals in North America: Emergence of a Transgender Sexuality." ''Archives of Sexual Behavior'' 38.5 (October 2009): 688–701. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. 29 September 2009</ref>


In the United Kingdom, the '']'' allows a person who has lived in their chosen gender for at least two years to receive a gender recognition certificate officially recognizing their new gender. Because in the United Kingdom marriages were until recently only for mixed-sex couples and civil partnerships are only for same-sex couples, a person had to dissolve their civil partnership before obtaining a gender recognition certificate{{citation needed|date=February 2020}}, and the same was formerly true for marriages in England and Wales, and still is in other territories. Such people are then free to enter or re-enter civil partnerships or marriages in accordance with their newly recognized gender identity. In Austria, a similar provision requiring transsexual people to divorce before having their ] marker corrected was found to be unconstitutional in 2006.<ref>{{Cite web |date=5 July 2006 |title=Austria gets first same-sex marriage |url=http://www.365gay.com/Newscon06/07/070506austria.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071017161302/http://365gay.com/Newscon06/07/070506austria.htm |archive-date=17 October 2007 |access-date=20 July 2008 |publisher=365gay.com}}</ref> In Quebec, prior to the legalization of same-sex marriage, only unmarried people could apply for legal change of gender. With the advent of same-sex marriage, this restriction was dropped. A similar provision including sterilization also existed in Sweden, but was phased out in 2013.<ref>{{Cite web |date=11 January 2013 |title=Sweden ends forced sterilization of trans |url=http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/sweden-ends-forced-sterilization-trans110113 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180612234631/https://www.gaystarnews.com/article/sweden-ends-forced-sterilization-trans110113/ |archive-date=12 June 2018 |access-date=10 October 2017 |website=gaystarnews.com}}</ref> In the United States, transgender and intersex marriages was subject to legal complications.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Deborah |first=Anthony |date=Spring 2012 |title=CAUGHT IN THE MIDDLE: TRANSSEXUAL MARRIAGE AND THE DISCONNECT BETWEEN SEX AND LEGAL SEX. |journal=Texas Journal of Women & the Law |volume=21 |issue=2}}</ref> As definitions and enforcement of marriage are defined by the states, these complications vary from state to state,<ref>{{Cite news |last=Schwartz |first=John |date=18 September 2009 |title=U.S. Defends Marriage Law |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/19/us/19brfs-USDEFENDSMAR_BRF.html |url-status=live |access-date=29 September 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140714172436/http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/19/us/19brfs-USDEFENDSMAR_BRF.html |archive-date=14 July 2014}}</ref> as some of them prohibit legal changes of gender.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Movement Advancement Project {{!}} Equality Maps |url=http://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-maps |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190422164047/http://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-maps |archive-date=22 April 2019 |access-date=2019-04-19 |website=www.lgbtmap.org |language=en}}</ref>
In any legal jurisdiction where marriages are defined without distinction of a requirement of a male and female, these complications do not occur. In addition, some legal jurisdictions recognize a legal and official change of gender, which would allow a transgender male or female to be legally married in accordance with an adopted gender identity.<ref>Bockting, Walter, Autumn Benner, and Eli Coleman. "Gay and Bisexual Identity Development Among Female-to-Male Transsexuals in North America: Emergence of a Transgender Sexuality." ''Archives of Sexual Behavior'' 38.5 (October 2009): 688–701. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. 29 September 2009</ref>

In the United Kingdom, the '']'' allows a person who has lived in their chosen gender for at least two years to receive a gender recognition certificate officially recognizing their new gender. Because in the United Kingdom marriages were until recently only for mixed-sex couples and civil partnerships are only for same-sex couples, a person must dissolve his/her civil partnership before obtaining a gender recognition certificate{{citation needed|date=February 2020}}, and the same was formerly true for marriages in England and Wales, and still is in other territories. Such people are then free to enter or re-enter civil partnerships or marriages in accordance with their newly recognized gender identity. In Austria, a similar provision requiring transsexual people to divorce before having their legal sex marker corrected was found to be unconstitutional in 2006.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.365gay.com/Newscon06/07/070506austria.htm|title=Austria gets first same-sex marriage|publisher=365gay.com|date=5 July 2006|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071017161302/http://365gay.com/Newscon06/07/070506austria.htm|archive-date=17 October 2007|accessdate=20 July 2008}}</ref>

In Quebec, prior to the legalization of same-sex marriage, only unmarried people could apply for legal change of gender. With the advent of same-sex marriage, this restriction was dropped. A similar provision including sterilization also existed in Sweden, but was phased out in 2013.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/sweden-ends-forced-sterilization-trans110113|title=Sweden ends forced sterilization of trans|date=11 January 2013|website=gaystarnews.com}}</ref>

In the United States, transgender and intersex marriages can be subject to legal complications.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Deborah |first1=Anthony |title=CAUGHT IN THE MIDDLE: TRANSSEXUAL MARRIAGE AND THE DISCONNECT BETWEEN SEX AND LEGAL SEX. |journal=Texas Journal of Women & the Law |date=Spring 2012 |volume=21 |issue=2 }}</ref> As definitions and enforcement of marriage are defined by the states, these complications vary from state to state,<ref>{{cite news|last=Schwartz|first=John|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/19/us/19brfs-USDEFENDSMAR_BRF.html|title=U.S. Defends Marriage Law|work=The New York Times|date=18 September 2009|accessdate=29 September 2009}}</ref> as some of them prohibit legal changes of gender.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-maps|title=Movement Advancement Project {{!}} Equality Maps|website=www.lgbtmap.org|language=en|access-date=2019-04-19}}</ref>


===Divorce=== ===Divorce===
{{Main|Divorce of same-sex couples}} {{Main|Divorce of same-sex couples}}
In the United States of America before the case of ''Obergefell v. Hodges'', couples in same-sex marriages could only obtain a divorce in jurisdictions that recognized same-sex marriages, with some exceptions.<ref>{{cite web|author1=Matthew S. Coleman, Esq.|title=Obergefell v. Hodges|url=http://www.einhornharris.com/familylawblog/obergefell-v-hodges|publisher=Einhorn Harris|accessdate=8 November 2015|date=16 September 2015}}</ref> In the United States before the case of '']'', couples in same-sex marriages could only obtain a divorce in jurisdictions that recognized same-sex marriages, with some exceptions.<ref>{{Cite web |author=Matthew S. Coleman |date=16 September 2015 |title=Obergefell v. Hodges |url=http://www.einhornharris.com/familylawblog/obergefell-v-hodges |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151224103921/http://www.einhornharris.com/familylawblog/obergefell-v-hodges/ |archive-date=24 December 2015 |access-date=8 November 2015 |publisher=Einhorn Harris}}</ref>


===Judicial and legislative=== ===Judicial and legislative===
{{Main|Conflict of marriage laws#Same-sex marriage}} {{Main|Conflict of marriage laws#Same-sex marriage}}
There are differing positions regarding the manner in which same-sex marriage has been introduced into democratic jurisdictions. A "]" position holds that same-sex marriage is valid, or void and illegal, based upon whether it has been accepted by a simple majority of voters or of their elected representatives.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2008-12-04-gay-poll_N.htm|title=Poll: Calif. gay marriage ban driven by religion|author=Leff, Lisa|agency=Associated Press|date=4 December 2008|work=USA Today|url-status=bot: unknown|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081208080418/http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2008-12-04-gay-poll_N.htm|archive-date=8 December 2008}} archived here.</ref> There are differing positions regarding the manner in which same-sex marriage has been introduced into democratic jurisdictions. A "]" position holds that same-sex marriage is valid, or void and illegal, based upon whether it has been accepted by a simple majority of voters or of their elected representatives.<ref name="USA Today">{{Cite news |last=Leff |first=Lisa |date=4 December 2008 |title=Poll: Calif. gay marriage ban driven by religion |work=USA Today |agency=Associated Press |url=https://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2008-12-04-gay-poll_N.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081208080418/http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2008-12-04-gay-poll_N.htm |archive-date=8 December 2008}} archived here.</ref>


In contrast, a ] view holds that the institution can be validly created through the ruling of an impartial judiciary carefully examining the questioning and finding that the right to marry regardless of the gender of the participants is guaranteed under the civil rights laws of the jurisdiction.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7723645.stm|title= Divisions persist over gay marriage ban|author=Mirchandani, Rajesh|work=BBC News|date=12 November 2008}}</ref> In contrast, a ] view holds that the institution can be validly created through the ruling of an impartial judiciary carefully examining the questioning and finding that the right to marry regardless of the gender of the participants is guaranteed under the civil rights laws of the jurisdiction.<ref name="bbc">{{Cite news |last=Mirchandani, Rajesh |date=12 November 2008 |title=Divisions persist over gay marriage ban |work=BBC News |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7723645.stm |url-status=live |access-date=18 December 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140428173747/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7723645.stm |archive-date=28 April 2014}}</ref>


==See also== ==Public opinion==
{{See also|Public opinion of same-sex marriage in the United States|Public opinion of same-sex marriage in Australia}}
{{Portal|LGBT|Human sexuality|Law}}
[[File:Public Support of Same-Sex Marriage.svg|center|thumb|upright=3|Public opinion of same-sex marriage. Fraction in favor:<ref>For ease of comparison, only 'yes' and 'no' responses are counted. For old polling data, support figures have been adjusted upward @1%/year.</ref>
{{col-begin}}
{{col-break}}
{{legend|#58006e|5⁄6+}}
{{legend|#b000dc|2⁄3+}}
{{col-break}}
{{legend|#dd55ff|1⁄2+}}
{{legend|#f5cdff|1⁄3+}}
{{col-break}}
{{legend|#fcefff|1⁄6+}}
{{legend|#e0e0e0|<1⁄6}}
{{col-break}}
{{legend|#f0f0f0|no polls}}
{{col-end}}
]]

Numerous polls and studies on the issue have been conducted. A trend of increasing support for same-sex marriage has been revealed across many countries of the world, often driven in large part by a generational difference in support. Polling that was conducted in developed democracies in this century shows a majority of people in support of same-sex marriage. Support for same-sex marriage has increased across every age group, political ideology, religion, gender, race and region of various developed countries in the world.<ref name="Gallup2011">{{Cite web |last=Newport |first=Frank |date=20 May 2011 |title=For First Time, Majority of Americans Favor Legal Gay Marriage |url=http://www.gallup.com/poll/147662/First-Time-Majority-Americans-Favor-Legal-Gay-Marriage.aspx |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140729043935/http://www.gallup.com/poll/147662/First-Time-Majority-Americans-Favor-Legal-Gay-Marriage.aspx |archive-date=29 July 2014 |access-date=25 September 2012 |publisher=]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Public Opinion: Nationally |url=http://www.australianmarriageequality.com/wp/who-supports-equality/a-majority-of-australians-support-marriage-equality |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110303043929/http://www.australianmarriageequality.com/wp/who-supports-equality/a-majority-of-australians-support-marriage-equality/ |archive-date=3 March 2011 |access-date=25 September 2012 |publisher=australianmarriageequality.com}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Gay Life in Estonia |url=http://www.globalgayz.com/europe/estonia/gay-life-in-estonia |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120716100828/http://www.globalgayz.com/europe/estonia/gay-life-in-estonia |archive-date=16 July 2012 |access-date=25 September 2012 |publisher=globalgayz.com}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Jowit |first=Juliette |date=12 June 2012 |title=Gay marriage gets ministerial approval |work=] |location=London |url=https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/jun/12/gay-marriage-receive-ministerial-approval |url-status=live |access-date=25 September 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190506173542/https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/jun/12/gay-marriage-receive-ministerial-approval |archive-date=6 May 2019}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=24 February 2011 |title=Most Irish people support gay marriage, poll says |work=PinkNews |url=http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2011/02/24/most-irish-people-support-gay-marriage-poll-says |url-status=dead |access-date=25 September 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130926032112/http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2011/02/24/most-irish-people-support-gay-marriage-poll-says |archive-date=26 September 2013}}</ref>{{update inline|date=December 2021}}

Various detailed polls and studies on same-sex marriage that were conducted in several countries show that support for same-sex marriage significantly increases with higher levels of education and is also significantly stronger among younger generations, with a clear trend of continually increasing support.<ref name="Pew Survey 2023">{{cite web|url=https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/06/13/how-people-in-24-countries-view-same-sex-marriage/|title=How people in 24 countries view same-sex marriage|access-date=12 December 2023}}</ref>

;Greater support with youth
] polling results from 32 countries found 21 with statistically higher support for same-sex marriage among those under 35 than among those over 35 in 2022–2023. Countries with the greatest absolute difference are placed to the left in the following chart. Countries without a significant generational difference are placed to the right.<ref name="Pew Survey 2023"/>

<div style="overflow:auto">
{{ #invoke:Chart | bar-chart
| height = 400
| width = 1200
| stack = 1
| group 1 = 33 : 52 : 37 : 34 : 52 : 43 : 35 : 57 : 54 : 64 : 48 : 47 : 59 : 62 : 71 : 73 : 34 : 20 : 5 : 90 : 15 : 89 : 87 : 82 : 80 : 79 : 74 : 53 : 36 : 31 : 5 : 2
| group 2 = 42 : 29 : 28 : 27 : 26 : 24 : 24 : 22 : 22 : 20 : 19 : 17 : 15 : 13 : 11 : 8 : 8 : 7 : 7 : 6 : 5 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0 : 0
| x legends = <small>Taiw</small> : <small>Mex</small> : <small>Sing</small> : <small>ROK</small> : <small>HK</small> : <small>Gre</small> : <small>Pol</small> : <small>Viet</small> : <small>Thai</small> : <small>Jpn</small> : <small>Cam</small> : <small>Braz</small> : <small>USA</small> : <small>Arg</small> : <small>Ital</small> : <small>Oz</small> : <small>S. Af.</small> : <small>Sri Lanka</small> : <small>Keny</small> : <small>Swed</small> : <small>Malay</small> : <small>Neth</small> : <small>Spa</small> : <small>Fran</small> : <small>Germ</small> : <small>Cana</small> : <small>UK</small> : <small>India</small> : <small>Isra</small> : <small>Hung</small> : <small>Indo</small> : <small>Nigeria</small>
| colors = navy : blue
| group names = over 35 : additional support from those under 35
}}
</div>

A 2016 survey by the ] found similarly high support of same-sex marriage (63%) among 18–21-year-olds in an online survey of 18 countries around the world.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.varkeyfoundation.org/media/4487/global-young-people-report-single-pages-new.pdf|title=What the world's young people think and feel.}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://aifs.gov.au/research/family-matters/no-100/who-supports-equal-rights-same-sex-couples|title=Who supports equal rights for same-sex couples? |website=Australian Institute of Family Studies}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=Jun 2, 2015 |title=Age is decisive factor when it comes to supporting same-sex marriage: LAPOP |url=https://news.vanderbilt.edu/2015/06/02/age-is-decisive-factor-when-it-comes-to-supporting-same-sex-marriage-lapop/ |access-date=2023-12-26 |website=Vanderbilt University |language=en-US}}</ref>

{{ #invoke:Chart | bar-chart
| height = 300
| width = 800
| stack = 1
| group 1 = 82 : 81 : 77 : 77 : 74 : 74 : 73 : 73 : 71 : 59 : 54 : 54 : 53 : 53 : 50 : 47 : 33 : 16
| x legends = <small>Germ</small> : <small>Cana</small> : <small>Oz</small> : <small>UK</small> : <small>NZ</small> : <small>Fran</small> : <small>Ital</small> : <small>Arg</small> : <small>USA</small> : <small>Braz</small> : <small>Chin</small> : <small>S. Af.</small> : <small>India</small> : <small>Jpn</small> : <small>Isra</small> : <small>ROK</small> : <small>Turk</small> : <small>Nigeria</small>
| colors = navy
| group names = 18&ndash;21 year-olds
}}

(The sampling error is approx. 4% for Nigeria and 3% for the other countries. Because of legal constraints, the question on same-sex marriage was not asked in the survey countries of Russia and Indonesia.)

{{Same-sex marriage opinion polls worldwide}}

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

* ]
'''Documentaries and literature'''
{{clear}}
* '']''
* '']''
* '']''
* '']''
* '']''
* '']''
* '']''
* ]

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


==Notes== ==Notes==
{{notelist}} {{notelist|35em}}


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


==Bibliography== ==Bibliography==
{{refbegin|30em}} {{refbegin|30em}}
* {{cite book|last=Boswell|first=John|author-link=John Boswell (historian)|year=1995|title=The Marriage of Likeness: Same-sex Unions in Pre-modern Europe|publisher=Simon Harper and Collins|location=New York|isbn=978-0-00-255508-1}} * {{Cite book |last=Boswell |first=John |title=The Marriage of Likeness: Same-sex Unions in Pre-modern Europe |publisher=Simon Harper and Collins |year=1995 |isbn=978-0-00-255508-1 |location=New York |author-link=John Boswell (historian)}}
* {{cite book|last=Boswell|first=John|author-link=John Boswell|year=1994|title=Same-sex Unions in Premodern Europe|publisher=Villard Books|location=New York|isbn=978-0-679-43228-9|url=https://archive.org/details/samesexunionsinp00bosw}} * {{Cite book |last=Boswell |first=John |url=https://archive.org/details/samesexunionsinp00bosw |title=Same-sex Unions in Premodern Europe |publisher=Villard Books |year=1994 |isbn=978-0-679-43228-9 |location=New York |author-link=John Boswell}}
* {{cite book|last=Brownson|first=James V.|title=Bible, Gender, Sexuality: Reforming the Church's Debate on Same-Sex Relationships|year=2013|publisher=]|isbn=978-0-8028-6863-3|url-access=registration|url=https://archive.org/details/biblegendersexua0000brow}} * {{Cite book |last=Brownson |first=James V. |url=https://archive.org/details/biblegendersexua0000brow |title=Bible, Gender, Sexuality: Reforming the Church's Debate on Same-Sex Relationships |publisher=] |year=2013 |isbn=978-0-8028-6863-3 |url-access=registration}}
* {{cite book|last=Calò|first=Emanuele|title=Matrimonio à la carte&nbsp;— Matrimoni, convivenze registrate e divorzi dopo l'intervento comunitario|location=Milano|publisher=Giuffrè|year=2009}} * {{Cite book |last=Calò |first=Emanuele |title=Matrimonio à la carte&nbsp;— Matrimoni, convivenze registrate e divorzi dopo l'intervento comunitario |publisher=Giuffrè |year=2009 |location=Milano}}
* {{cite book|last=Caramagno|first=Thomas C.|year=2002|title=Irreconcilable Differences? Intellectual Stalemate in the Gay Rights Debate|publisher=Praeger|location=Westport, CT|isbn=978-0-275-97721-4}} * {{Cite book |last=Caramagno |first=Thomas C. |title=Irreconcilable Differences? Intellectual Stalemate in the Gay Rights Debate |publisher=Praeger |year=2002 |isbn=978-0-275-97721-4 |location=Westport, CT}}
* {{cite book|last=Cere|first=Daniel|author-link=Daniel Cere|year=2004|title=Divorcing Marriage: Unveiling the Dangers in Canada's New Social Experiment|publisher=McGill-Queen's University Press|location=Montreal|isbn=978-0-7735-2895-6|url-access=registration|url=https://archive.org/details/divorcingmarriag0000unse}} * {{Cite book |last=Cere |first=Daniel |url=https://archive.org/details/divorcingmarriag0000unse |title=Divorcing Marriage: Unveiling the Dangers in Canada's New Social Experiment |publisher=McGill-Queen's University Press |year=2004 |isbn=978-0-7735-2895-6 |location=Montreal |author-link=Daniel Cere |url-access=registration}}
* {{cite book|last=Chauncey|first=George|author-link=George Chauncey|year=2004|title=Why Marriage?: The History Shaping Today's Debate over Gay Equality|publisher=Basic Books|location=New York|isbn=978-0-465-00957-2|url-access=registration|url=https://archive.org/details/whymarriagehisto0000chau}} * {{Cite book |last=Chauncey |first=George |url=https://archive.org/details/whymarriagehisto0000chau |title=Why Marriage?: The History Shaping Today's Debate over Gay Equality |publisher=Basic Books |year=2004 |isbn=978-0-465-00957-2 |location=New York |author-link=George Chauncey |url-access=registration}}
* {{cite book|last=Dobson|first=James C.|author-link=James Dobson|year=2004|title=Marriage Under Fire|publisher=Multnomah|location=Sisters, Or.|isbn=978-1-59052-431-2|url=https://archive.org/details/marriageunderfir00dobs}} * {{Cite book |last=Dobson |first=James C. |url=https://archive.org/details/marriageunderfir00dobs |title=Marriage Under Fire |publisher=Multnomah |year=2004 |isbn=978-1-59052-431-2 |location=Sisters, Or. |author-link=James Dobson}}
* {{cite book|editor1-last=George |editor1-first=Robert P. |editor2-link=Jean Bethke Elshtain |editor2-last=Elshtain |editor2-first=Jean Bethke |year=2006|title=The Meaning of Marriage: Family, State, Market, And Morals|publisher=Spence Publishing Company|location=Dallas|isbn=978-1-890626-64-8}} * {{Cite book |title=The Meaning of Marriage: Family, State, Market, And Morals |publisher=Spence Publishing Company |year=2006 |isbn=978-1-890626-64-8 |editor-last=George |editor-first=Robert P. |location=Dallas |editor-last2=Elshtain |editor-first2=Jean Bethke |editor-link2=Jean Bethke Elshtain}}
* {{cite book|editor1-link=Robert Goss |editor1-last=Goss |editor1-first=Robert E. |editor2-last=Strongheart |editor2-first=Amy Adams Squire |year=2008|title=Our Families, Our Values: Snapshots of Queer Kinship|publisher=The Harrington Park Press, An Imprint of the Haworth Press, Inc.|location=New York, NY|isbn=978-1-56023-910-9}} * {{Cite book |title=Our Families, Our Values: Snapshots of Queer Kinship |publisher=The Harrington Park Press, An Imprint of the Haworth Press, Inc. |year=2008 |isbn=978-1-56023-910-9 |editor-last=Goss |editor-first=Robert E. |editor-link=Robert Goss |location=New York, NY |editor-last2=Strongheart |editor-first2=Amy Adams Squire}}
* {{Cite book|author1=Greenwich, Alex|author2=Robinson, Shirleene|title=Yes Yes Yes: Australia's Journey to Marriage Equality|year=2018|location=Australia|publisher=NewSouth Books|isbn=9781742235998}} * {{Cite book |last1=Greenwich, Alex |title=Yes Yes Yes: Australia's Journey to Marriage Equality |last2=Robinson, Shirleene |publisher=NewSouth Books |year=2018 |isbn=9781742235998 |location=Australia}}
* {{cite book|last=Larocque|first=Sylvain|year=2006|title=Gay Marriage: The Story of a Canadian Social Revolution |publisher=James Lorimer & Company|location=Toronto|isbn=978-1-55028-927-5}} * {{Cite book |last=Larocque |first=Sylvain |title=Gay Marriage: The Story of a Canadian Social Revolution |publisher=James Lorimer & Company |year=2006 |isbn=978-1-55028-927-5 |location=Toronto}}
* {{cite book|editor1-last=Laycock |editor1-first=Douglas |editor1-link=Douglas Laycock |editor2-last=Picarello |editor2-first=Anthony Jr. |editor3-last=Wilson |editor3-first=Robin Fretwell |year=2008|title=Same-Sex Marriage and Religious Liberty: Emerging Conflicts|publisher=Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.|location=Lanham, MD|isbn=978-0-7425-6326-1}} * {{Cite book |title=Same-Sex Marriage and Religious Liberty: Emerging Conflicts |publisher=Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. |year=2008 |isbn=978-0-7425-6326-1 |editor-last=Laycock |editor-first=Douglas |editor-link=Douglas Laycock |location=Lanham, MD |editor-last2=Picarello |editor-first2=Anthony Jr. |editor-last3=Wilson |editor-first3=Robin Fretwell}}
* {{cite book|editor1-last=López |editor1-first=Robert Oscar|editor2-last=Edelman |editor2-first= Rivka|title=Jephthas's Daughters. Innocent casualties in the war for "family equality"|publisher= CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform|year=2015|isbn=978-1-5058-1078-3}} * {{Cite book |last=Moats |first=David |url=https://archive.org/details/civilwarsbattlef00moat |title=Civil Wars: A Battle For Gay Marriage |publisher=Harcourt, Inc. |year=2004 |isbn=978-0-15-101017-2 |location=New York, NY}}
* {{cite book|last=Moats|first=David|year=2004|title=Civil Wars: A Battle For Gay Marriage|publisher=Harcourt, Inc.|location=New York, NY|isbn=978-0-15-101017-2|url=https://archive.org/details/civilwarsbattlef00moat}} * {{Cite book |last=Oliver |first=Marilyn Tower |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=XXIFAAAACAAJ |title=Gay and lesbian rights: a struggle |publisher=Enslow Publishers |year=1998 |isbn=978-0-89490-958-0 |access-date=28 October 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210204174006/https://books.google.com/books?id=XXIFAAAACAAJ |archive-date=4 February 2021 |url-status=live}}
* {{Cite book |last=Rauch |first=Jonathan |title=Gay Marriage: Why It Is Good for Gays, Good for Straights, and Good for America |title-link=Gay Marriage: Why It Is Good for Gays, Good for Straights, and Good for America |publisher=Henry Holt and Company, LLC |year=2004 |isbn=978-0-8050-7815-2 |location=New York, NY |author-link=Jonathan Rauch}}
* {{cite book|last=Oliver|first=Marilyn Tower|year=1998|title=Gay and lesbian rights: a struggle|publisher=Enslow Publishers|isbn=978-0-89490-958-0|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=XXIFAAAACAAJ}}
* {{Cite book |last=Rugg, Sally |title=How Powerful We Are : Behind the scenes with one of Australia's leading activists |publisher=Hachette Australia |year=2019 |isbn=9780733642227 |location=Australia |oclc=1103918151}}
* {{cite book|last=Rauch|first=Jonathan|author-link=Jonathan Rauch|year=2004|title=Gay Marriage: Why It Is Good for Gays, Good for Straights, and Good for America|publisher=Henry Holt and Company, LLC|location=New York, NY|isbn=978-0-8050-7815-2|title-link=Gay Marriage: Why It Is Good for Gays, Good for Straights, and Good for America}}
* {{Cite book |last1=Smart |first1=Carol |title=Same sex marriages: new generations, new relationships. Genders and sexualities in the social sciences |last2=Heaphy |first2=Brian |last3=Einarsdottir |first3=Anna |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan |year=2013 |isbn=9780230300231 |location=Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire}}
* {{Cite book|title=How Powerful We Are : Behind the scenes with one of Australia's leading activists|year=2019|last=Rugg, Sally|publisher=Hachette Australia|isbn=9780733642227|location=Australia|oclc=1103918151}}
* {{Cite book |last=Spedale |first=Darren |url=https://archive.org/details/gaymarriageforbe0000eskr |title=Gay Marriage: For Better or For Worse? What We've Learned From the Evidence |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2006 |isbn=978-0-19-518751-9 |location=New York |author-link=Darren Spedale}}
* {{cite book | last1 = Smart | first1 = Carol | last2 = Heaphy | first2 = Brian | last3 = Einarsdottir | first3 = Anna | title = Same sex marriages: new generations, new relationships. Genders and sexualities in the social sciences | publisher = Palgrave Macmillan | location = Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire | year = 2013 | isbn = 9780230300231 }}
* {{Cite book |title=Same-Sex Marriage: Pro and Con&nbsp;— A Reader, Revised Updated Edition |publisher=Vintage Books, a division of Random House, Inc. |year=2004 |isbn=978-1-4000-7866-0 |editor-last=Sullivan |editor-first=Andrew |editor-link=Andrew Sullivan |location=New York, NY}}
* {{cite book|last=Spedale|first=Darren|author-link=Darren Spedale|year=2006|title=Gay Marriage: For Better or For Worse? What We've Learned From the Evidence|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=New York|isbn=978-0-19-518751-9|url=https://archive.org/details/gaymarriageforbe0000eskr}}
* {{cite book|editor-link=Andrew Sullivan |editor-last=Sullivan |editor-first=Andrew |year=2004|title=Same-Sex Marriage: Pro and Con&nbsp;— A Reader, Revised Updated Edition|publisher=Vintage Books, a division of Random House, Inc.|location=New York, NY|isbn=978-1-4000-7866-0}} * {{Cite book |last=Truluck |first=Rembert S. |title=Steps to Recovery from Bible Abuse |publisher=Chi Rho Press, Inc. |year=2000 |isbn=978-1-888493-16-0 |location=Gaithersburg, MD |author-link=Rembert S. Truluck}}
* {{Cite book |last=Wolfson |first=Evan |url=https://archive.org/details/whymarriagematte00wolf |title=Why Marriage Matters: America, Equality, and Gay People's Right to Marry |publisher=Simon & Schuster |year=2004 |isbn=978-0-7432-6459-4 |location=New York |author-link=Evan Wolfson |url-access=registration}}
* {{cite book|last=Truluck|first=Rembert S.|author-link=Rembert S. Truluck|year=2000|title=Steps to Recovery from Bible Abuse|publisher=Chi Rho Press, Inc.|location=Gaithersburg, MD|isbn=978-1-888493-16-0}}
* {{cite book|last=Wolfson|first=Evan|author-link=Evan Wolfson|year=2004|title=Why Marriage Matters: America, Equality, and Gay People's Right to Marry|url=https://archive.org/details/whymarriagematte00wolf|url-access=registration|publisher=Simon & Schuster|location=New York|isbn=978-0-7432-6459-4}}

{{refend}} {{refend}}


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

{{Wikimedia}}
* {{Curlie|Society/Gay,_Lesbian,_and_Bisexual/Law/Marriage_and_Domestic_Partnership}}
<!--======================== {{No more links}} ============================ <!--======================== {{No more links}} ============================
| PLEASE BE CAUTIOUS IN ADDING MORE LINKS TO THIS ARTICLE. Misplaced Pages | | PLEASE BE CAUTIOUS IN ADDING MORE LINKS TO THIS ARTICLE. Misplaced Pages |
Line 1,041: Line 640:
{{Marriage amendments}} {{Marriage amendments}}
{{Types of marriages}} {{Types of marriages}}
{{LGBT|state=collapsed|rights=expanded}} {{LGBTQ|state=collapsed|rights=expanded}}
{{Discrimination}}
{{Authority control}} {{Authority control}}


] ]
] ]

Latest revision as of 06:19, 14 January 2025

Marriage of persons of the same sex or gender "Marriage equality" and "gay marriage" redirect here. For other uses, see marriage equality (disambiguation) and gay marriage (disambiguation).

Part of the LGBTQ rights series
Legal status of
same-sex unions
Marriage

Recognized

Civil unions or registered partnerships but not marriage
Minimal recognition
See also
Notes
  1. ^ Performed in the Netherlands proper (including the Caribbean Netherlands), as well as in Aruba and Curaçao. May be registered in Sint Maarten in such cases, but the rights of marriage are not guaranteed.
  2. Neither performed nor recognized in Niue, Tokelau, or the Cook Islands.
  3. Neither performed nor recognized in six British Overseas Territories.
  4. ^ Neither performed nor recognized in some tribal nations of the US. Recognized but not performed in several other tribal nations and American Samoa.
  5. Registered foreign marriages confer all marriage rights in Israel. Domestic common-law marriages confer most rights of marriage. Domestic civil marriage recognized by some cities.
  6. ^ The Coman v. Romania ruling of the European Court of Justice obliges the state to provide residency rights for the foreign spouses of EU citizens. Some member states, including Romania, do not follow the ruling.
  7. A "declaration of family relationship" is available in several of Cambodia's communes which may be useful in matters such as housing, but is not legally binding.
  8. Guardianship agreements confer some limited legal benefits in China, including decisions about medical and personal care.
  9. Hong Kong provides inheritance, guardianship rights, and residency rights for foreign spouses of legal residents.
  10. Indian courts have recognised guru–shishya, nata pratha or maitri karar–type contractual relationships, but they are not legally binding.
  11. Most Japanese cities and prefectures issue partnership certificates, but they are not legally binding.
  12. Marriages conducted abroad between a Namibian national and a foreign spouse provide residency rights in Namibia.
  13. Romania provides hospital visitation rights through a "legal representative" status.
  1. Not yet in effect.
LGBTQ portal
Part of a series on
LGBTQ topics
      
Sexual orientation and gender
History
General
Identities
Culture
Rights
Health
Social attitudes
Issues
Academic fields and discourse
LGBTQ portal
Part of a series on
Discrimination
Forms
Attributes
Social
Religious
Ethnic/national
Manifestations
Policies
Countermeasures
Related topics

Same-sex marriage, also known as gay marriage, is the marriage of two people of the same legal sex. As of 2025, marriage between same-sex couples is legally performed and recognized in 37 countries, with a total population of 1.5 billion people (20% of the world's population). The most recent jurisdiction to legalize same-sex marriage is Liechtenstein. Thailand is set to begin performing same-sex marriages in January 2025.

Same-sex marriage is legally recognized in a large majority of the world's developed countries; notable exceptions are Italy, Japan, South Korea and the Czech Republic. Adoption rights are not necessarily covered, though most states with same-sex marriage allow those couples to jointly adopt as other married couples can. Some countries, such as Nigeria and Russia, restrict advocacy for same-sex marriage. A few of these are among the 35 countries (as of 2023) that constitutionally define marriage to prevent marriage between couples of the same sex, with most of those provisions enacted in recent decades as a preventative measure. Other countries have constitutionally mandated Islamic law, which is generally interpreted as prohibiting marriage between same-sex couples. In six of the former and most of the latter, homosexuality itself is criminalized.

There are records of marriage between men dating back to the first century. Michael McConnell and Jack Baker are the first same sex couple in modern recorded history known to obtain a marriage license, have their marriage solemnized, which occurred on September 3, 1971, in Minnesota, and have it legally recognized by any form of government. The first law providing for marriage equality between same-sex and opposite-sex couples was passed in the continental Netherlands in 2000 and took effect on 1 April 2001. The application of marriage law equally to same-sex and opposite-sex couples has varied by jurisdiction, and has come about through legislative change to marriage law, court rulings based on constitutional guarantees of equality, recognition that marriage of same-sex couples is allowed by existing marriage law, and by direct popular vote, such as through referendums and initiatives. The most prominent supporters of same-sex marriage are the world's major medical and scientific communities, along with human rights and civil rights organizations, while its most prominent opponents are religious fundamentalist groups. Polls consistently show continually rising support for the recognition of same-sex marriage in all developed democracies and in many developing countries.

Scientific studies show that the financial, psychological, and physical well-being of gay people is enhanced by marriage, and that the children of same-sex parents benefit from being raised by married same-sex couples within a marital union that is recognized by law and supported by societal institutions. At the same time, no harm is done to the institution of marriage among heterosexuals. Social science research indicates that the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage stigmatizes and invites public discrimination against gay and lesbian people, with research repudiating the notion that either civilization or viable social orders depend upon restricting marriage to heterosexuals. Same-sex marriage can provide those in committed same-sex relationships with relevant government services and make financial demands on them comparable to that required of those in opposite-sex marriages, and also gives them legal protections such as inheritance and hospital visitation rights. Opposition is based on claims such as that homosexuality is unnatural and abnormal, that the recognition of same-sex unions will promote homosexuality in society, and that children are better off when raised by opposite-sex couples. These claims are refuted by scientific studies, which show that homosexuality is a natural and normal variation in human sexuality, that sexual orientation is not a choice, and that children of same-sex couples fare just as well as the children of opposite-sex couples.

Terminology

Alternative terms

Two men marry, surrounded by wedding party, in New Orleans, United States on 11 November 2017

Some proponents of the legal recognition of same-sex marriage—such as Marriage Equality USA (founded in 1998), Freedom to Marry (founded in 2003), Canadians for Equal Marriage, and Marriage for All Japan - used the terms marriage equality and equal marriage to signal that their goal was for same-sex marriage to be recognized on equal ground with opposite-sex marriage. The Associated Press recommends the use of same-sex marriage over gay marriage. In deciding whether to use the term gay marriage, it may also be noted that not everyone in a same-sex marriage is gay – for example, some are bisexual – and therefore using the term gay marriage is sometimes considered erasure of such people.

Use of the term marriage

Anthropologists have struggled to determine a definition of marriage that absorbs commonalities of the social construct across cultures around the world. Many proposed definitions have been criticized for failing to recognize the existence of same-sex marriage in some cultures, including those of more than 30 African peoples, such as the Kikuyu and Nuer.

With several countries revising their marriage laws to recognize same-sex couples in the 21st century, all major English dictionaries have revised their definition of the word marriage to either drop gender specifications or supplement them with secondary definitions to include gender-neutral language or explicit recognition of same-sex unions. The Oxford English Dictionary has recognized same-sex marriage since 2000.

Opponents of same-sex marriage who want marriage to be restricted to pairings of a man and a woman, such as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Catholic Church, and the Southern Baptist Convention, use the term traditional marriage to mean opposite-sex marriage.

History

Main article: History of same-sex unions For a chronological guide, see Timeline of same-sex marriage. For broader coverage of this topic, see History of homosexuality.

Ancient

Further information: Homosexuality in ancient Rome

A reference to marriage between same-sex couples appears in the Sifra, which was written in the 3rd century CE. The Book of Leviticus prohibited homosexual relations, and the Hebrews were warned not to "follow the acts of the land of Egypt or the acts of the land of Canaan" (Lev. 18:22, 20:13). The Sifra clarifies what these ambiguous "acts" were, and that they included marriage between same-sex couples: "A man would marry a man and a woman a woman, a man would marry a woman and her daughter, and a woman would be married to two men."

A few scholars believe that in the early Roman Empire some male couples were celebrating traditional marriage rites in the presence of friends. Male–male weddings are reported by sources that mock them; the feelings of the participants are not recorded. Various ancient sources state that the emperor Nero celebrated two public weddings with males, once taking the role of the bride (with a freedman Pythagoras), and once the groom (with Sporus); there may have been a third in which he was the bride. In the early 3rd century AD, the emperor Elagabalus is reported to have been the bride in a wedding to his male partner. Other mature men at his court had husbands, or said they had husbands in imitation of the emperor. Roman law did not recognize marriage between males, but one of the grounds for disapproval expressed in Juvenal's satire is that celebrating the rites would lead to expectations for such marriages to be registered officially. As the empire was becoming Christianized in the 4th century, legal prohibitions against marriage between males began to appear.

Contemporary

Newly married couple in Minnesota shortly after the federal legalization of same-sex marriage in the United States, 2015

Michael McConnell and Jack Baker are the first same sex couple in modern recorded history known to obtain a marriage license, have their marriage solemnized, which occurred on September 3, 1971, in Minnesota, and have it legally recognized by any form of government. Historians variously trace the beginning of the modern movement in support of same-sex marriage to anywhere from around the 1980s to the 1990s. During the 1980s in the United States, the AIDS epidemic led to increased attention on the legal aspects of same-sex relationships. Andrew Sullivan made the first case for same sex marriage in a major American journal in 1989, published in The New Republic.

In 1989, Denmark became the first country to legally recognize a relationship for same-sex couples, establishing registered partnerships, which gave those in same-sex relationships "most rights of married heterosexuals, but not the right to adopt or obtain joint custody of a child". In 2001, the continental Netherlands became the first country to broaden marriage laws to include same-sex couples. Since then, same-sex marriage has been established by law in 34 other countries, including most of the Americas and Western Europe. Yet its spread has been uneven — South Africa is the only country in Africa to take the step; Taiwan and Thailand are the only ones in Asia.

Timeline

Main article: Timeline of same-sex marriage

The summary table below lists in chronological order the sovereign states (the United Nations member states and Taiwan) that have legalized same-sex marriage. As of 2025, 37 states have legalized in some capacity.

Dates are when marriages between same-sex couples began to be officially certified, or when local laws were passed if marriages were already legal under higher authority.

2001 Netherlands Netherlands (1 April)
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006 South Africa South Africa (30 November)
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025

Same-sex marriage around the world

Main articles: Legal status of same-sex marriage, Same-sex union legislation, and Recognition of same-sex unions by country

Same-sex marriage is legally performed and recognized in 37 countries: Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Denmark, Ecuador, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Uruguay. Same-sex marriage performed remotely or abroad is recognized with full marital rights by Israel.

  Marriage open to same-sex couples   Same-sex marriage recognized with full rights when performed remotely or abroad   Legislation or binding domestic court ruling establishing same-sex marriage, but marriage is not yet provided for   Civil unions or domestic partnerships   Unregistered cohabitation or legal guardianship   Nonbinding certification   Limited recognition of marriage performed in certain other jurisdictions (residency rights for spouses)   No legal recognition of same-sex unions

Same-sex marriage will begin to be performed by Thailand in January 2025, and is under consideration by the legislature or the courts in El Salvador, Italy, Japan, Nepal, and Venezuela.

Civil unions are being considered in a number of countries, including Kosovo, Peru, and Poland.

On 12 March 2015, the European Parliament passed a non-binding resolution encouraging EU institutions and member states to " on the recognition of same-sex marriage or same-sex civil union as a political, social and human and civil rights issue".

In response to the international spread of same-sex marriage, a number of countries have enacted preventative constitutional bans, with the most recent being Mali in 2023, and Gabon in 2024. In other countries, such restrictions and limitations are effected through legislation. Even before same-sex marriage was first legislated, some countries had constitutions that specified that marriage was between a man and a woman.

  Same-sex marriage banned by secular constitution   Same-sex marriage banned by constitutionally mandated religious law   No constitutional ban

International court rulings

European Court of Human Rights

In 2010, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled in Schalk and Kopf v Austria, a case involving an Austrian same-sex couple who were denied the right to marry. The court found, by a vote of 4 to 3, that their human rights had not been violated. The court further stated that same-sex unions are not protected under art. 12 of ECHR ("Right to marry"), which exclusively protects the right to marry of opposite-sex couples (without regard if the sex of the partners is the result of birth or of sex change), but they are protected under art. 8 of ECHR ("Right to respect for private and family life") and art. 14 ("Prohibition of discrimination").

Article 12 of the European Convention on Human Rights states that: "Men and women of marriageable age have the right to marry and to found a family, according to the national laws governing the exercise of this right", not limiting marriage to those in a heterosexual relationship. However, the ECHR stated in Schalk and Kopf v Austria that this provision was intended to limit marriage to heterosexual relationships, as it used the term "men and women" instead of "everyone". Nevertheless, the court accepted and is considering cases concerning same-sex marriage recognition, e.g. Andersen v Poland. In 2021, the court ruled in Fedotova and Others v. Russia—followed by later judgements concerning other member states—that countries must provide some sort of legal recognition to same-sex couples, although not necessarily marriage.

European Union

Further information: Coman and Others v General Inspectorate for Immigration and Ministry of the Interior

On 5 June 2018, the European Court of Justice ruled, in a case from Romania, that, under the specific conditions of the couple in question, married same-sex couples have the same residency rights as other married couples in an EU country, even if that country does not permit or recognize same-sex marriage. However, the ruling was not implemented in Romania and on 14 September 2021 the European Parliament passed a resolution calling on the European Commission to ensure that the ruling is respected across the EU.

Inter-American Court of Human Rights

Alexandra Chávez and Michelle Avilés, the first same-sex couple to marry in Ecuador

On 8 January 2018, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) issued an advisory opinion that states party to the American Convention on Human Rights should grant same-sex couples accession to all existing domestic legal systems of family registration, including marriage, along with all rights that derive from marriage. The Court recommended that governments issue temporary decrees recognizing same-sex marriage until new legislation is brought in. They also said that it was inadmissible and discriminatory for a separate legal provision to be established (such as civil unions) instead of same-sex marriage.

Other arrangements

Civil unions

Main article: Civil union
Many advocates, such as this November 2008 protester at a demonstration in New York City against California Proposition 8, reject the notion of civil unions, describing them as inferior to the legal recognition of same-sex marriage.

Civil union, civil partnership, domestic partnership, registered partnership, unregistered partnership, and unregistered cohabitation statuses offer varying legal benefits of marriage. As of 18 January 2025, countries that have an alternative form of legal recognition other than marriage on a national level are: Bolivia, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Monaco, Montenegro and San Marino. Same-sex marriage performed remotely or abroad is recognized with full marital rights by Israel. Poland offers more limited rights. Additionally, various cities and counties in Cambodia and Japan offer same-sex couples varying levels of benefits, which include hospital visitation rights and others.

Additionally, nineteen countries that have legally recognized same-sex marriage also have an alternative form of recognition for same-sex couples, usually available to heterosexual couples as well: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, France, Greece, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal, South Africa, Spain, the United Kingdom and Uruguay.

They are also available in parts of the United States (Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, Nevada and Oregon) and Canada.

Non-sexual same-sex marriage

Kenya

Main article: LGBT rights in Kenya

Female same-sex marriage is practiced among the Gikuyu, Nandi, Kamba, Kipsigis, and to a lesser extent neighboring peoples. About 5–10% of women are in such marriages. However, this is not seen as homosexual, but is instead a way for families without sons to keep their inheritance within the family.

Nigeria

Main article: Recognition of same-sex unions in Nigeria

Among the Igbo people and probably other peoples in the south of the country, there are circumstances where a marriage between women is considered appropriate, such as when a woman has no child and her husband dies, and she takes a wife to perpetuate her inheritance and family lineage.

Studies

The American Anthropological Association stated on 26 February 2004:

The results of more than a century of anthropological research on households, kinship relationships, and families, across cultures and through time, provide no support whatsoever for the view that either civilization or viable social orders depend upon marriage as an exclusively heterosexual institution. Rather, anthropological research supports the conclusion that a vast array of family types, including families built upon same-sex partnerships, can contribute to stable and humane societies.

Research findings from 1998 to 2015 from the University of Virginia, Michigan State University, Florida State University, the University of Amsterdam, the New York State Psychiatric Institute, Stanford University, the University of California-San Francisco, the University of California-Los Angeles, Tufts University, Boston Medical Center, the Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health, and independent researchers also support the findings of this study.

The overall socio-economic and health effects of legal access to same-sex marriage around the world have been summarized by Badgett and co-authors. The review found that sexual minority individuals took-up legal marriage when it became available to them (but at lower rates than different-sex couples). There is instead no evidence that same-sex marriage legalization affected different-sex marriages. On the health side, same-sex marriage legalization increased health insurance coverage for individuals in same-sex couples (in the US), and it led to improvements in sexual health among men who have sex with men, while there is mixed evidence on mental health effects among sexual minorities. In addition, the study found mixed evidence on a range of downstream social outcomes such as attitudes toward LGBTQ+ people and employment choices of sexual minorities.

Health

As of 2006, the data of current psychological and other social science studies on same-sex marriage in comparison to mixed-sex marriage indicate that same-sex and mixed-sex relationships do not differ in their essential psychosocial dimensions; that a parent's sexual orientation is unrelated to their ability to provide a healthy and nurturing family environment; and that marriage bestows substantial psychological, social, and health benefits. Same-sex parents and carers and their children are likely to benefit in numerous ways from legal recognition of their families, and providing such recognition through marriage will bestow greater benefit than civil unions or domestic partnerships. Studies in the United States have correlated legalization of same-sex marriage to lower rates of HIV infection, psychiatric disorders, and suicide rate in the LGBT population.

Issues

See also: LGBT rights opposition

While few societies have recognized same-sex unions as marriages, the historical and anthropological record reveals a large range of attitudes towards same-sex unions ranging from praise, through full acceptance and integration, sympathetic toleration, indifference, prohibition and discrimination, to persecution and physical annihilation. Opponents of same-sex marriages have argued that same-sex marriage, while doing good for the couples that participate in them and the children they are raising, undermines a right of children to be raised by their biological mother and father. Some supporters of same-sex marriages take the view that the government should have no role in regulating personal relationships, while others argue that same-sex marriages would provide social benefits to same-sex couples. The debate regarding same-sex marriages includes debate based upon social viewpoints as well as debate based on majority rules, religious convictions, economic arguments, health-related concerns, and a variety of other issues.

Parenting

Main articles: LGBT parenting and Same-sex marriage and the family
Gay couple with a child

Scientific literature indicates that parents' financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally recognized union (either a mixed-sex or same-sex union). As a result, professional scientific associations have argued for same-sex marriage to be legally recognized as it will be beneficial to the children of same-sex parents or carers.

Scientific research has been generally consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents. According to scientific literature reviews, there is no evidence to the contrary.

Compared to heterosexual couples, same-sex couples have a greater need for adoption or assisted reproductive technology to become parents. Lesbian couples often use artificial insemination to achieve pregnancy, and reciprocal in vitro fertilization (where one woman provides the egg and the other gestates the child) is becoming more popular in the 2020s, although many couples cannot afford it. Surrogacy is an option for wealthier gay male couples, but the cost is prohibitive. Other same-sex couples adopt children or raise the children from earlier opposite-sex relationships.

Adoption

Main article: LGBT adoption
Legal status of adoption by same-sex couples around the world:   Joint adoption allowed   Second-parent (stepchild) adoption allowed   No laws allowing adoption by same-sex couples and no same-sex marriage   Same-sex marriage but adoption by married same-sex couples not allowed

All states that allow same-sex marriage also allow the joint adoption of children by those couples with the exception of Ecuador and a third of states in Mexico, though such restrictions have been ruled unconstitutional in Mexico. In addition, Bolivia, Croatia, Israel and Liechtenstein, which do not recognize same-sex marriage, nonetheless permit joint adoption by same-sex couples. Some additional states do not recognize same-sex marriage but allow stepchild adoption by couples in civil unions, namely the Czech Republic and San Marino.

Transgender and intersex people

This article or section possibly contains synthesis of material that does not verifiably mention or relate to the main topic. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. (May 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
See also: Transgender rights and Intersex human rights

The legal status of same-sex marriage may have implications for the marriages of couples in which one or both parties are transgender, depending on how sex is defined within a jurisdiction. Transgender and intersex individuals may be prohibited from marrying partners of the "opposite" sex or permitted to marry partners of the "same" sex due to legal distinctions. In any legal jurisdiction where marriages are defined without distinction of a requirement of a male and female, these complications do not occur. In addition, some legal jurisdictions recognize a legal and official change of gender, which would allow a transgender male or female to be legally married in accordance with an adopted gender identity.

In the United Kingdom, the Gender Recognition Act 2004 allows a person who has lived in their chosen gender for at least two years to receive a gender recognition certificate officially recognizing their new gender. Because in the United Kingdom marriages were until recently only for mixed-sex couples and civil partnerships are only for same-sex couples, a person had to dissolve their civil partnership before obtaining a gender recognition certificate, and the same was formerly true for marriages in England and Wales, and still is in other territories. Such people are then free to enter or re-enter civil partnerships or marriages in accordance with their newly recognized gender identity. In Austria, a similar provision requiring transsexual people to divorce before having their legal sex marker corrected was found to be unconstitutional in 2006. In Quebec, prior to the legalization of same-sex marriage, only unmarried people could apply for legal change of gender. With the advent of same-sex marriage, this restriction was dropped. A similar provision including sterilization also existed in Sweden, but was phased out in 2013. In the United States, transgender and intersex marriages was subject to legal complications. As definitions and enforcement of marriage are defined by the states, these complications vary from state to state, as some of them prohibit legal changes of gender.

Divorce

Main article: Divorce of same-sex couples

In the United States before the case of Obergefell v. Hodges, couples in same-sex marriages could only obtain a divorce in jurisdictions that recognized same-sex marriages, with some exceptions.

Judicial and legislative

Main article: Conflict of marriage laws § Same-sex marriage

There are differing positions regarding the manner in which same-sex marriage has been introduced into democratic jurisdictions. A "majority rules" position holds that same-sex marriage is valid, or void and illegal, based upon whether it has been accepted by a simple majority of voters or of their elected representatives.

In contrast, a civil rights view holds that the institution can be validly created through the ruling of an impartial judiciary carefully examining the questioning and finding that the right to marry regardless of the gender of the participants is guaranteed under the civil rights laws of the jurisdiction.

Public opinion

See also: Public opinion of same-sex marriage in the United States and Public opinion of same-sex marriage in Australia
Public opinion of same-sex marriage. Fraction in favor:
  5⁄6+   2⁄3+   1⁄2+   1⁄3+   1⁄6+   <1⁄6   no polls

Numerous polls and studies on the issue have been conducted. A trend of increasing support for same-sex marriage has been revealed across many countries of the world, often driven in large part by a generational difference in support. Polling that was conducted in developed democracies in this century shows a majority of people in support of same-sex marriage. Support for same-sex marriage has increased across every age group, political ideology, religion, gender, race and region of various developed countries in the world.

Various detailed polls and studies on same-sex marriage that were conducted in several countries show that support for same-sex marriage significantly increases with higher levels of education and is also significantly stronger among younger generations, with a clear trend of continually increasing support.

Greater support with youth

Pew Research polling results from 32 countries found 21 with statistically higher support for same-sex marriage among those under 35 than among those over 35 in 2022–2023. Countries with the greatest absolute difference are placed to the left in the following chart. Countries without a significant generational difference are placed to the right.

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Taiw Mex Sing ROK HK Gre Pol Viet Thai Jpn Cam Braz USA Arg Ital Oz S. Af. Sri Lanka Keny Swed Malay Neth Spa Fran Germ Cana UK India Isra Hung Indo Nigeria
  •   over 35
  •   additional support from those under 35

A 2016 survey by the Varkey Foundation found similarly high support of same-sex marriage (63%) among 18–21-year-olds in an online survey of 18 countries around the world.

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Germ Cana Oz UK NZ Fran Ital Arg USA Braz Chin S. Af. India Jpn Isra ROK Turk Nigeria

(The sampling error is approx. 4% for Nigeria and 3% for the other countries. Because of legal constraints, the question on same-sex marriage was not asked in the survey countries of Russia and Indonesia.)

Opinion polls for same-sex marriage by country
  Same-sex marriage performed nationwide   Same-sex marriage performed in some parts of the country   Civil unions or registered partnerships nationwide   Civil unions or registered partnerships pending   Same-sex marriage rights pending   Same-sex sexual activity is illegal
Country Pollster Year For Against Neither Margin
of error 		Ref.
Albania Albania IPSOS 2023 26%
 73%
(74%) 		1%
Andorra Andorra Institut d'Estudis Andorrans 2013 70%
(79%) 		19%
(21%) 		11%
Antigua and Barbuda Antigua and Barbuda AmericasBarometer 2017 12% – –
Argentina Argentina Ipsos 2024 69%
(81%) 		16%
(19%) 		15% not sure ±5%
Pew Research Center 2023 67%
(72%) 		26%
(28%) 		7% ±3.6%
Armenia Armenia Pew Research Center 2015 3%
(3%) 		96%
(97%) 		1% ±3%
Aruba Aruba 2021 46%
Australia Australia Ipsos 2024 64%
(73%) 		25%
(28%) 		12% not sure ±3.5%
Pew Research Center 2023 75%
(77%) 		23% 2% ±3.6%
Austria Austria Eurobarometer 2023 65%
(68%) 		30%
(32%) 		5%
The Bahamas Bahamas AmericasBarometer 2015 11% – –
Belarus Belarus Pew Research Center 2015 16%
(16%) 		81%
(84%) 		3% ±4%
Belgium Belgium Ipsos 2024 69%
(78%) 		19%
(22%) 		12% not sure ±5%
Eurobarometer 2023 79% 19% 2% not sure
Belize Belize AmericasBarometer 2014 8% – –
Bolivia Bolivia AmericasBarometer 2017 35% 65% – ±1.0%
Bosnia and Herzegovina Bosnia and Herzegovina IPSOS 2023 26%
(27%) 		71%
(73%) 		3%
Brazil Brazil Ipsos (more urban/educated than representative) 2024 51%
(62%) 		31%
(38%) 		18% not sure ±3.5%
Pew Research Center 2023 52%
(57%) 		40%
(43%) 		8% ±3.6%
Bulgaria Bulgaria Eurobarometer 2023 17%
(18%) 		75%
(82%) 		8%
Cambodia Cambodia Pew Research Center 2023 57%
(58%) 		42% 1%
Canada Canada Ipsos 2024 65%
(75%) 		22%
(25%) 		13% not sure ±3.5%
Pew Research Center 2023 79%
(84%) 		15%
(16%) 		6% ±3.6%
Chile Chile Cadem 2024 77%
(82%) 		22%
(18%) 		2% ±3.6%
China China Ipsos (more urban/educated than representative) 2021 43%
(52%) 		39%
(48%) 		18% not sure ±3.5%
Colombia Colombia Ipsos (more urban/educated than representative) 2024 46%
(58%) 		33%
(42%) 		21% ±5%
Costa Rica Costa Rica CIEP 2018 35% 64% 1%
Croatia Croatia Eurobarometer 2023 42%
(45%) 		51%
(55%) 		7%
Cuba Cuba Apretaste 2019 63% 37% –
Cyprus Cyprus Eurobarometer 2023 50%
(53%) 		44%
(47%) 		6%
Czech Republic Czech Republic Eurobarometer 2023 60% 34% 6%
Denmark Denmark Eurobarometer 2023 93% 5% 2%
Dominica Dominica AmericasBarometer 2017 10% 90% – ±1.1%
Dominican Republic Dominican Republic CDN 37 2018 45% 55% -
Ecuador Ecuador AmericasBarometer 2019 23%
(31%) 		51%
(69%) 		26%
El Salvador El Salvador Universidad Francisco Gavidia 2021 82.5% –
Estonia Estonia Eurobarometer 2023 41%
(45%) 		51%
(55%) 		8%
Finland Finland Eurobarometer 2023 76%
(81%) 		18%
(19%) 		6%
France France Ipsos 2024 62%
(70%) 		26%
(30%) 		12% not sure ±3.5%
Pew Research Center 2023 82%
(85%) 		14%
(15%) 		4% ±3.6%
Eurobarometer 2023 79%
(85%) 		14
(%)
(15%) 		7%
Georgia (country) Georgia Women's Initiatives Supporting Group 2021 10%
(12%) 		75%
(88%) 		15%
Germany Germany Ipsos 2024 73%
(83%) 		18%
(20%) 		12% not sure ±3.5%
Pew Research Center 2023 80%
(82%) 		18% 2% ±3.6%
Eurobarometer 2023 84%
(87%) 		13%< 3%
Greece Greece Pew Research Center 2023 48%
(49%) 		49%
(51%) 		3% ±3.6%
Eurobarometer 2023 57%
(59%) 		40%
(41%) 		3%
Grenada Grenada AmericasBarometer 2017 12% 88% – ±1.4%c
Guatemala Guatemala AmericasBarometer 2017 23% 77% – ±1.1%
Guyana Guyana AmericasBarometer 2017 21% 79% – ±1.3%
Haiti Haiti AmericasBarometer 2017 5% 95% – ±0.3%
Honduras Honduras CID Gallup 2018 17%
(18%) 		75%
(82%) 		8%
Hong Kong Hong Kong Pew Research Center 2023 58%
(59%) 		40%
(41%) 		2%
Hungary Hungary Ipsos 2024 44%
(56%) 		35%
(44%) 		21% not sure ±5%
Pew Research Center 2023 31%
(33%) 		64%
(67%) 		5% ±3.6%
Eurobarometer 2023 42%
(45%) 		52%
(55%) 		6%
Iceland Iceland Gallup 2006 89% 11% –
India India Pew Research Center 2023 53%
(55%) 		43%
(45%) 		4% ±3.6%
Indonesia Indonesia Pew Research Center 2023 5% 92%
(95%) 		3% ±3.6%
Republic of Ireland Ireland Ipsos (more urban/educated than representative) 2024 68%
(76%) 		21%
(23%) 		10% ±5%
Eurobarometer 2023 86%
(91%) 		9% 5%
Israel Israel Pew Research Center 2023 36%
(39%) 		56%
(61%) 		8% ±3.6%
Italy Italy Ipsos 2024 58%
(66%) 		29%
(33%) 		12% not sure ±3.5%
Pew Research Center 2023 73%
(75%) 		25% 2% ±3.6%
Eurobarometer 2023 69%
(72%) 		27%
(28%) 		4%
Jamaica Jamaica AmericasBarometer 2017 16% 84% – ±1.0%
Japan Japan Kyodo News 2023 64%
(72%) 		25%
(28%) 		11%
Asahi Shimbun 2023 72%
(80%) 		18%
(20%) 		10%
Ipsos 2024 42%
(54%) 		31%
(40%) 		22% not sure ±3.5%
Pew Research Center 2023 68%
(72%) 		26%
(28%) 		6% ±2.75%
Kazakhstan Kazakhstan Pew Research Center 2016 7%
(7%) 		89%
(93%) 		4%
Kenya Kenya Pew Research Center 2023 9% 90%
(91%) 		1% ±3.6%
Kosovo Kosovo IPSOS 2023 20%
(21%) 		77%
(79%) 		3%
Latvia Latvia Eurobarometer 2023 36% 59% 5%
Liechtenstein Liechtenstein Liechtenstein Institut 2021 72% 28% 0%
Lithuania Lithuania Eurobarometer 2023 39% 55% 6%
Luxembourg Luxembourg Eurobarometer 2023 84% 13% 3%

Malaysia Malaysia

Pew Research Center 2023 17% 82%
(83%) 		1%
Malta Malta Eurobarometer 2023 74% 24% 2%
Mexico Mexico Ipsos (more urban/educated than representative) 2024 55% 29% 17% not sure ±3.5%
Pew Research Center 2023 63%
(66%) 		32%
(34%) 		5% ±3.6%
Moldova Moldova Europa Libera Moldova 2022 14% 86%
Montenegro Montenegro IPSOS 2023 36%
(37%) 		61%
(63%) 		3%
Mozambique Mozambique (3 cities) Lambda 2017 28%
(32%) 		60%
(68%) 		12%
Netherlands Netherlands Ipsos 2024 77% 15% 8% not sure ±5%
Pew Research Center 2023 89%
(90%) 		10% 1% ±3.6%
Eurobarometer 2023 94% 5% 2%
New Zealand New Zealand Ipsos 2023 70%
(78%) 		20%
(22%) 		9% ±3.5%
Nicaragua Nicaragua AmericasBarometer 2017 25% 75% – ±1.0%
Nigeria Nigeria Pew Research Center 2023 2% 97%
(98%) 		1% ±3.6%
North Macedonia North Macedonia IPSOS 2023 20%
(21%) 		78%
(80%) 		2%
Norway Norway Pew Research Center 2017 72%
(79%) 		19%
(21%) 		9%
Panama Panama AmericasBarometer 2017 22% 78% – ±1.1%
Paraguay Paraguay AmericasBarometer 2017 26% 74% – ±0.9%
Peru Peru Ipsos (more urban/educated than representative) 2024 36%
 44% 20% ±5%
Philippines Philippines SWS 2018 22%
(26%) 		61%
(73%) 		16%
Poland Poland Ipsos 2024 51%
(54%) 		43%
(46%) 		6%
Pew Research Center 2023 41%
(43%) 		54%
(57%) 		5% ±3.6%
United Surveys by IBRiS 2024 50%
(55%) 		41%
(45%) 		9%
Eurobarometer 2023 50% 45% 5%
Portugal Portugal Ipsos 2023 80%
(84%) 		15%
(16%) 		5%
Eurobarometer 2023 81% 14% 5%
Romania Romania Ipsos 2023 25%
(30%) 		59%
(70%) 		17% ±3.5%
Eurobarometer 2023 25% 69% 6%
Russia Russia Ipsos (more urban/educated than representative) 2021 17%
(21%) 		64%
(79%) 		20% not sure ±4.8%
FOM 2019 7%
(8%) 		85%
(92%) 		8% ±3.6%
Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Kitts and Nevis AmericasBarometer 2017 9% 91% – ±1.0%
Saint Lucia Saint Lucia AmericasBarometer 2017 11% 89% – ±0.9%
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Saint Vincent and the Grenadines AmericasBarometer 2017 4% 96% – ±0.6%
Serbia Serbia IPSOS 2023 24%
(25%) 		73%
(75%) 		3%
Singapore Singapore Ipsos (more urban/educated than representative) 2024 33% 46% 21% ±5%
Pew Research Center 2023 45%
(47%) 		51%
(53%) 		4%
Slovakia Slovakia Focus 2024 36%
(38%) 		60%
(62%) 		4%
Eurobarometer 2023 37% 56% 7%
Slovenia Slovenia Eurobarometer 2023 62%
(64%) 		37%
(36%) 		2%
South Africa South Africa Ipsos (more urban/educated than representative) 2024 53% 32% 13% ±5%
Pew Research Center 2023 38%
(39%) 		59%
(61%) 		3% ±3.6%
South Korea South Korea Ipsos 2024 36% 37% 27% not sure ±5%
Pew Research Center 2023 41%
(42%) 		56%
(58%) 		3%
Spain Spain Ipsos 2024 73%
(80%) 		19%
(21%) 		9% not sure ±3.5%
Pew Research Center 2023 87%
(90%) 		10% 3% ±3.6%
Eurobarometer 2023 88%
(91%) 		9%
(10%) 		3%
Sri Lanka Sri Lanka Pew Research Center 2023 23%
(25%) 		69%
(75%) 		8%
Suriname Suriname AmericasBarometer 2014 18% – –
Sweden Sweden Ipsos 2024 78%
(84%) 		15%
(16%) 		7% not sure ±5%
Pew Research Center 2023 92%
(94%) 		6% 2% ±3.6%
Eurobarometer 2023 94% 5% 1%
Switzerland Switzerland Ipsos 2023 54%
(61%) 		34%
(39%) 		13% not sure ±3.5%
Taiwan Taiwan CNA 2023 63% 37%
Pew Research Center 2023 45%
(51%) 		43%
(49%) 		12%
Thailand Thailand Ipsos (more urban/educated than representative) 2024 58% 29% 12% not sure ±5%
Pew Research Center 2023 60%
(65%) 		32%
(35%) 		8%
Trinidad and Tobago Trinidad and Tobago AmericasBarometer 2014 16% – –
Turkey Turkey Ipsos (more urban/educated than representative) 2024 18%
(26%) 		52%
(74%) 		30% not sure ±5%
Ukraine Ukraine Rating 2023 37%
(47%) 		42%
(53%) 		22% ±1.5%
United Kingdom United Kingdom YouGov 2023 77%
(84%) 		15%
(16%) 		8%
Ipsos 2024 66%
(73%) 		24%
(27%) 		10% not sure ±3.5%
Pew Research Center 2023 74%
(77%) 		22%
(23%) 		4% ±3.6%
United States United States Ipsos 2024 51%
(62%) 		32%
(39%) 		18% not sure ±3.5%
Pew Research Center 2023 63%
(65%) 		34%
(35%) 		3% ±3.6%
Uruguay Uruguay LatinoBarómetro 2023 78%
(80%) 		20% 2%
Venezuela Venezuela Equilibrium Cende 2023 55%
(63%) 		32%
(37%) 		13%
Vietnam Vietnam Pew Research Center 2023 65%
(68%) 		30%
(32%) 		5%

See also

Notes

  1. Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in continental Australia and in the non-self-governing possessions of Norfolk Island, Christmas Island and the Cocos Islands, which follow Australian law.
  2. Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in continental Denmark, the Faroe Islands and Greenland, which together make up the Realm of Denmark.
  3. Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized throughout Ecuador, but such couples are not considered married for purposes of adoption and may not adopt children.
  4. Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in metropolitan France and in all French overseas regions and possessions, which follow a single legal code.
  5. Same-sex marriage is available in all jurisdictions, though the process is not everywhere as straightforward as it is for opposite-sex marriage and does not always include adoption rights.
  6. Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in the continental Netherlands, the Caribbean municipalities of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba, and the constituent countries of Aruba and Curaçao, but not yet in Sint Maarten.
  7. Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in New Zealand proper, but not in its possession of Tokelau, nor in the Cook Islands and Niue, which make up the Realm of New Zealand.
  8. Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in all parts of the United Kingdom and in its non-Caribbean possessions, but not in its Caribbean possessions, namely Anguilla, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, Montserrat and the Turks and Caicos Islands.
  9. Same-sex marriage is performed and recognized by law in all fifty states of the US and in the District of Columbia, in all overseas territories except American Samoa (recognition only), and in all tribal nations that do not have their own marriage laws, as well as in most nations that do. The largest of the dozen or so known exceptions among the federal reservations are Navajo and Gila River, and the largest among the shared-sovereignty Oklahoma Tribal Statistical Areas are the Creek and Citizen Potawatomi. These polities ban same-sex marriage and do not recognize marriages from other jurisdictions, though members may still marry under state law and be accorded all the rights of marriage under state and federal law.
  10. Nepal is waiting for a final decision by its supreme court, but meanwhile all local governments are ordered to temporarily register same-sex marriages in a separate record. In April 2024 the National ID and Civil Registration Department issued a circular to all local governments that they register such marriages. However, simply being registered does not grant same-sex couples the legal rights of marriage, and registered same-sex couples cannot inherit property, get tax subsidies, make spousal medical decisions, adopt children etc.
  11. Legally available in the Arizona municipalities of Bisbee, Clarkdale, Cottonwood, Jerome, Sedona and Tucson.
  12. Dale Carpenter is a prominent spokesman for this view. For a better understanding of this view, see Carpenter's writings at "Dale Carpenter". Independent Gay Forum. Archived from the original on 17 November 2006. Retrieved 31 October 2006.
  13. ^ Because some polls do not report 'neither', those that do are listed with simple yes/no percentages in parentheses, so their figures can be compared.
  14. Comprises: Neutral; Don't know; No answer; Other; Refused.
  15. ^

References

  1. VERPOEST, LIEN (2017). "The End of Rhetorics: LGBT policies in Russia and the European Union". Studia Diplomatica. 68 (4): 3–20. ISSN 0770-2965. JSTOR 26531664.
  2. Williams, CA., Roman Homosexuality: Second Edition, Oxford University Press, 2009, p. 280, p. 284.
  3. ^ Padnani, Amisha; Fang, Celina (26 June 2015). "Same-Sex Marriage: Landmark Decisions and Precedents". The New York Times.
  4. ^ Baume, Matt (1 March 2019). "Meet the Gay Men Whose 1971 Marriage Was Finally Recognized". The Advocate.
  5. ^ StoryCorps Archive (September 12, 2017). "Michael McConnell, Jack Baker, and Lisa Vecoli".
    • Michael McConnell (75) and husband Jack Baker (75) talk with friend Lisa Vecoli (55) about having the first same-sex marriage legally recognized by a U.S. civil government in 1971, why they chose to get married, and what the response to their marriage was like.
    • JB describes the decades-long (46-year) process from the denial of their marriage license in 1971 until a second request that same year in Blue Earth County, Minnesota, was "declared to be in all respects valid" by Order of Gregory J. Anderson, Judge of District Court.
  6. ^ Newsletter, "Hidden Treasures from the Stacks", The National Archives at Kansas City, p. 6 (September 2013).
  7. ^ Source: Blue Earth County
    • Applicants: James Michael McConnell and Pat Lyn McConnell
    • Date of Marriage: September 3, 1971
  8. ^ "The September 3, 1971 marriage of James Michael McConnell and Pat Lyn McConnell, a/k/a Richard John Baker, has never been dissolved or annulled by judicial decree and no grounds currently exist on which to invalidate the marriage."
    • Sources: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW by Assistant Chief Judge Gregory Anderson, Fifth Judicial District, (page 4);
    • Copy: Minnesota Judicial Branch, File Number 07-CV-16-4559, "Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order for Partial Summary Judgment" from Blue Earth County District Court in re James Michael McConnell et al. v. Blue Earth County et al. (September 18, 2018);
    • Available online from U of M Libraries;
    • McConnell Files, "America’s First Gay Marriage" (binder #4), Tretter Collection in GLBT Studies, U of M Libraries.
  9. ^ Michael McConnell, with Jack Baker, as told to Gail Langer Karwoski, "The Wedding Heard Heard 'Round the World: America's First Gay Marriage Archived August 26, 2015, at the Wayback Machine". University of Minnesota Press (2016). Reprint, "With A New Epilogue" (2020).
  10. ^ Winter, Caroline (4 December 2014). "In 14 years, same-sex marriage has spread round the world". Bloomberg. Archived from the original on 13 January 2022. Retrieved 20 February 2022.
  11. "Same-sex Oklahoma couple marries legally under tribal law". KOCO. 26 September 2013. Archived from the original on 22 October 2013. Retrieved 22 October 2013.
  12. "Clela Rorex, former Boulder County Clerk who issued first same-sex marriage license in 1975 dies at 78". 19 June 2022.
  13. ^ Multiple sources:
  14. ^ "Brief of the American Psychological Association, The California Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy as amici curiae in support of plaintiff-appellees – Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of California Civil Case No. 09-CV-2292 VRW (Honorable Vaughn R. Walker)" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 13 April 2015. Retrieved 5 November 2010.
  15. ^ "Marriage of Same-Sex Couples – 2006 Position Statement Canadian Psychological Association" (PDF). 2006. Archived from the original (PDF) on 19 April 2009.
  16. ^ Mirchandani, Rajesh (12 November 2008). "Divisions persist over gay marriage ban". BBC News. Archived from the original on 28 April 2014. Retrieved 18 December 2008.
  17. ^ "The Divine Institution of Marriage". The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 13 August 2008. Archived from the original on 11 June 2019. Retrieved 28 September 2012.
  18. Molly Ball, 2024 May 13, Wall Street Journal, How 20 Years of Same-Sex Marriage Changed America
  19. Multiple sources:
  20. "Brief of Amici Curiae American Anthropological Association et al., supporting plaintiffs-appellees and urging affirmance – Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of California Civil Case No. 09-CV-2292 VRW (Honorable Vaughn R. Walker)" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 26 December 2010. Retrieved 5 November 2010.
  21. ^ American Anthropological Association (2004). "Statement on Marriage and the Family". Archived from the original on 12 September 2015. Retrieved 18 September 2015.
  22. Handbook of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Administration and Policy — Page 13, Wallace Swan – 2004
  23. "Marriage Equality". Garden State Equality. Archived from the original on 18 October 2014. Retrieved 24 July 2012.
  24. "Marriage 101". Freedom to Marry. Archived from the original on 16 February 2010. Retrieved 28 September 2012.
  25. Pratt, Patricia (29 May 2012). "Albany area real estate and the Marriage Equality Act". Albany Examiner. Retrieved 25 December 2012. On July 24, 2011 the Marriage Equality Act became a law in New York State forever changing the state's legal view of what a married couple is.
  26. "Vote on Illinois marriage equality bill coming in January: sponsors". Chicago Phoenix. 13 December 2012. Archived from the original on 26 December 2012. Retrieved 23 December 2012.
  27. Mulholland, Helene (27 September 2012). "Ed Miliband calls for gay marriage equality". The Guardian. London, UK. Archived from the original on 28 September 2013. Retrieved 23 December 2012.
  28. Ring, Trudy (20 December 2012). "Newt Gingrich: Marriage Equality Inevitable, OK". The Advocate. Los Angeles. Archived from the original on 23 December 2012. Retrieved 25 December 2012. He noted to HuffPo that he not only has a lesbian half-sister, LGBT rights activist Candace Gingrich, but has gay friends who've gotten married in Iowa, where their unions are legal. Public opinion has shifted in favor of marriage equality, he said, and the Republican Party could end up on the wrong side of history if it continues to go against the tide.
  29. APStylebook (12 February 2019). "The term same-sex marriage is preferred over gay marriage. In places where it's legal, same-sex marriage is no different from other marriages, so the term should be used only when germane and needed to distinguish from marriages between heterosexual couples. #APStyleChat" (Tweet). Archived from the original on 19 October 2022. Retrieved 13 December 2022 – via Twitter.
  30. "One in 10 LGBT Americans Married to Same-Sex Spouse". Gallup. 24 February 2021.
  31. Yin, Karen (8 March 2016). "When Bisexual People Marry". Conscious Style Guide.
  32. Fedorak, Shirley A. (2008). Anthropology matters!. , Ont.: University of Toronto Press. pp. Ch. 11, p. 174. ISBN 978-1442601086.
  33. ^ Gough, Kathleen E. (January–June 1959). "The Nayars and the Definition of Marriage". The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. 89 (1): 23–34. doi:10.2307/2844434. JSTOR 2844434.
  34. Murray, Stephen O.; Roscoe, Will (2001). Boy-wives and female husbands : studies of African homosexualities (1st pbk. ed.). New York: St. Martin's. ISBN 978-0312238292. Archived from the original on 4 February 2021. Retrieved 28 October 2020.
  35. Njambi, Wairimu; O'Brien, William (Spring 2001). "Revisiting "Woman-Woman Marriage": Notes on Gikuyu Women". NWSA Journal. 12 (1): 1–23. doi:10.1353/nwsa.2000.0015. S2CID 144520611. Archived from the original on 13 January 2012. Retrieved 28 September 2012.
  36. "Dictionaries take lead in redefining modern marriage". The Washington Times. 24 May 2004. Archived from the original on 18 September 2012. Retrieved 25 September 2012.
  37. "Webster Makes It Official: Definition of Marriage Has Changed". American Bar Association. Archived from the original on 27 April 2015. Retrieved 28 September 2012.
  38. Redman, Daniel (7 April 2009). "Noah Webster Gives His Blessing: Dictionaries recognize same-sex marriage—who knew?". Slate. Archived from the original on 17 September 2011. Retrieved 28 September 2012.
  39. Rabbi Joel Roth. Homosexuality Archived 24 August 2017 at the Wayback Machine rabbinicalassembly.org 1992.
  40. Martial 1.24 and 12.42; Juvenal 2.117–42. Williams, Roman Homosexuality, pp. 28, 280; Karen K. Hersh, The Roman Wedding: Ritual and Meaning in Antiquity (Cambridge University Press, 2010), p. 36; Caroline Vout, Power and Eroticism in Imperial Rome (Cambridge University Press, 2007), pp. 151ff.
  41. Suetonius, Tacitus, Dio Cassius, and Aurelius Victor are the sources cited by Williams, Roman Homosexuality, p. 279.
  42. Williams, Roman Homosexuality, pp. 278–279, citing Dio Cassius and Aelius Lampridius.
  43. ^ Williams, Roman Homosexuality, p. 280.
  44. "How Same-Sex Marriage Came to Be". Harvard Magazine. March–April 2013. Archived from the original on 2 May 2019. Retrieved 28 March 2015.
  45. Hari, Johann (Spring 2009). "Andrew Sullivan: Thinking. Out. Loud". Intelligent Life. Archived from the original on 25 April 2009. Retrieved 24 October 2013.
  46. Sullivan, Andrew (9 November 2012). "Here Comes the Groom". Slate. Retrieved 24 October 2013.
  47. Rule, Sheila (2 October 1989). "Rights for Gay Couples in Denmark". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 19 August 2013.
  48. "Same-sex marriage around the world". CBC News. Toronto. 26 May 2009. Archived from the original on 25 November 2010. Retrieved 6 October 2009.
  49. "The Dutch went first in 2001; who has same-sex marriage now?". Associated Press. 28 April 2021. Archived from the original on 21 August 2021. Retrieved 21 August 2021.
  50. Sangwongwanich, Pathom (18 June 2024). "Thai Same-Sex Marriage Bill Clears Final Hurdle With Senate Nod". www.bloomberg.com. Retrieved 18 June 2024.
  51. Theil, Michele (16 February 2024). "This map shows you where same-sex marriage is legal around the world – and there's a long way to go". PinkNews. Retrieved 16 February 2024.
  52. "Marriage Equality Around the World". Human Rights Campaign. Retrieved 3 February 2024.
  53. "Information for couples marrying outside the Rabbinate" (PDF). Rackman Center. 2018. Retrieved 10 November 2023.
  54. "Sala de lo Constitucional resolvería demanda sobre matrimonio igualitario en los primeros tres messes de 2020". elsalvador.com (in Spanish). 6 January 2020.
  55. "Bukele busca que se apruebe el aborto terapéutico y la unión homosexual". El Observador (in Spanish). 18 August 2021.
  56. "Diritti: matrimonio "egualitario". Opinioni a confronto: Scalfarotto vs Bonaldi vs Centinaio". 9 March 2023. Archived from the original on 10 March 2023. Retrieved 10 March 2023.
  57. "Da Zaia a Centinaio: la Lega ora cambia sui diritti lgbt (e c'entra "l'effetto Francesca")". 10 March 2023. Archived from the original on 10 March 2023. Retrieved 10 March 2023.
  58. "Japan opposition party submits bill for same-sex marriage". Kyodo News. 6 March 2023. Retrieved 31 May 2023.
  59. Raut, Swechhya (10 July 2024). "Nepal: Same-sex couples face hurdles on road to recognition". DW.
  60. Ghimire, Binod (3 December 2023). "How court laid the ground for same-sex marriage in Nepal". The Kathmandu Post.
  61. Dhakal, Manisha. "The Long Road to Lasting Marriage Equality in Nepal". APCOM.
  62. "Diputada plantea iniciativa para el matrimonio civil igualitario en la Asamblea Nacional". El Acarigueño (in Spanish). 24 February 2022. Archived from the original on 20 May 2022. Retrieved 17 April 2022.
  63. Taylor, Alice; Alipour, Nick (26 April 2024). "Kosovo promises to introduce same-sex unions in May". www.euractiv.com.
  64. "Presentan proyecto de ley sobre el matrimonio igualitario entre personas del mismo sexo". El Comercio. elcomercio.pe. 23 October 2021. Retrieved 28 June 2022.
  66. Duffy, Nick (13 March 2015). "UKIP and Tories abstain on EU motion to recognise same-sex marriage". PinkNews. Archived from the original on 9 August 2015. Retrieved 26 July 2015.
  67. "Texts adopted – Thursday, 12 March 2015 – Annual report on human rights and democracy in the world 2013 and the EU policy on the matter". European Parliament. Archived from the original on 7 August 2015. Retrieved 26 July 2015.
  68. ^ "HUDOC – European Court of Human Rights". Archived from the original on 11 September 2015. Retrieved 26 July 2015.
  69. Buyse, Antoine (24 June 2010). "Strasbourg court rules that states are not obliged to allow gay marriage". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 13 December 2013. Retrieved 8 November 2013.
  70. Avram, Marieta (2016). Drept civil Familia [Civil law Family] (in Romanian). Bucharest: Editura Hamangiu. ISBN 978-606-27-0609-8.
  71. "European Convention on Human Rights" (PDF). ECHR.coe.int. European Court of Human Rights. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 July 2014. Retrieved 25 July 2015.
  72. "HUDOC - European Court of Human Rights". ECHR. Retrieved 21 July 2022.
  73. Palazzo, Nausica (April 2023). "Fedotova and Others v. Russia : Dawn of a new era for European LGBTQ families?". Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law. 30 (2): 216–228. doi:10.1177/1023263X231195455. S2CID 261655476.
  74. "EU court backs residency rights for gay couple in Romania". Associated Press. 5 June 2018. Archived from the original on 12 June 2018. Retrieved 6 June 2018.
  75. "Same-sex spouses have EU residence rights, top court rules – BBC". BBC News. 5 June 2018. Archived from the original on 8 May 2019. Retrieved 6 June 2018.
  76. "Texts adopted – LGBTIQ rights in the EU – Tuesday, 14 September 2021". European Parliament. Archived from the original on 16 September 2021. Retrieved 16 September 2021.
  77. "MEPs condemn failure to respect rights of same-sex partners in EU". The Guardian. 14 September 2021. Archived from the original on 14 September 2021. Retrieved 16 September 2021.
  78. "Major Advance for Marriage Equality and Gender Identity Rights in Latin America". San Francisco Bay Times. Sfbaytimes.com. 25 January 2018. Archived from the original on 29 January 2018. Retrieved 13 April 2018.
  79. Towle, Andy (13 November 2008). "NYC Protest and Civil Rights March Opposing Proposition 8". Towleroad. Archived from the original on 13 February 2009. Retrieved 28 September 2012.
  80. Pearson, Mary. "Where is Gay Marriage Legal?". christiangays.com. Archived from the original on 1 March 2012. Retrieved 20 February 2012.
  81. Williams, Steve. "Which Countries Have Legalized Gay Marriage?". Care2.com (news.bbc.co.uk as source). Archived from the original on 29 April 2019. Retrieved 20 February 2012.
  82. "Loi du 9 juillet 2004 relative aux effets légaux de certains partenariats. – Legilux". Eli.legilux.public.lu. Archived from the original on 11 September 2016. Retrieved 7 July 2017.
  83. "Loi n° 99-944 du 15 novembre 1999 relative au pacte civil de solidarité". Legifrance.gouv.fr (in French). 12 March 2007. Archived from the original on 16 August 2019. Retrieved 7 July 2017.
  84. "WETTEN, DECRETEN, ORDONNANTIES EN VERORDENINGEN LOIS, DECRETS, ORDONNANCES ET REGLEMENTS" (PDF). Ejustice.jkust.fgov.be. Archived (PDF) from the original on 29 April 2019. Retrieved 7 July 2017.
  85. "Civil Partnership Act 2004". Legislation.gov.uk. Archived from the original on 29 April 2019. Retrieved 5 July 2017.
  86. "Same-Sex Marriage, Civil Unions and Domestic Partnerships". National Conference of State Legislatures. Archived from the original on 10 June 2013. Retrieved 20 February 2012.
  87. Ramstack, Tom (11 January 2010). "Congress Considers Outcome of D.C. Gay Marriage Legislation". AHN. Archived from the original on 20 June 2010.
  88. Gender and Language in Sub-Saharan Africa, 2013:35
  89. Igwe, Leo (19 June 2009). "Tradition of same gender marriage in Igboland". Nigerian Tribune. Archived from the original on 11 January 2010.
  90. "Same-sex marriage and children's well-being: Research roundup". Journalist's Resource. 26 June 2015. Archived from the original on 2 January 2016. Retrieved 29 December 2015.
  91. Badgett, M.V. Lee; Carpenter, Christopher S.; Lee, Maxine J.; Sansone, Dario (2024). "A review of the effects of legal access to same-sex marriage". Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. doi:10.1002/pam.22587. hdl:10871/135707.
  92. ^ Pawelski, J.G.; Perrin, E.C.; Foy, J.M.; Allen, C.E.; Crawford, J.E.; Del Monte, M.; Kaufman, M.; Klein, J.D.; Smith, K.; Springer, S.; Tanner, J.L.; Vickers, D.L. (2006). "The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children". Pediatrics. 118 (1): 349–64. doi:10.1542/peds.2006-1279. PMID 16818585. S2CID 219194821.
  93. Herek, Gregory M. "Legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the United States: A social science perspective." American Psychologist, Vol 61(6), September 2006, pp. 607–21.
  94. Elaine Justice. "Study Links Gay Marriage Bans to Rise in HIV infections". Emory University. Archived from the original on 9 April 2010. Retrieved 5 November 2010.
  95. Peng, Handie. "The Effect of Same-Sex Marriage Laws on Public Health and Welfare". Userwww.service.emory.edu. Archived from the original on 20 February 2012. Retrieved 11 February 2012.
  96. Hasin, Deborah. "Lesbian, gay, bisexual individuals risk psychiatric disorders from discriminatory policies". Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health. Archived from the original on 27 February 2013. Retrieved 20 September 2012.
  97. Mustanski, Brian (22 March 2010). "New study suggests bans on gay marriage hurt mental health of LGB people". Psychology Today. Retrieved 8 November 2010.
  98. Raifman, Julia; Moscoe, Ellen; Austin, S. Bryn; McConnell, Margaret (2017). "Difference-in-Differences Analysis of the Association Between State Same-Sex Marriage Policies and Adolescent Suicide Attempts". JAMA Pediatrics. 171 (4): 350–356. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2016.4529. PMC 5848493. PMID 28241285.
  99. "Same-Sex Marriage Legalization Linked to Reduction in Suicide Attempts Among High School Students". Johns Hopkins University. 20 February 2017. Archived from the original on 29 April 2019. Retrieved 8 June 2018.
  100. Laurie, Timothy (3 June 2015). "Bigotry or biology: the hard choice for an opponent of marriage equality". The Drum. Archived from the original on 4 June 2015. Retrieved 4 June 2015.
  101. Blankenhorn, David (19 September 2008). "Protecting marriage to protect children". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on 4 September 2009. Retrieved 6 October 2009.
  102. "See discussion of prenuptial and postmarital agreements at Findlaw". Family.findlaw.com. Archived from the original on 25 October 2010. Retrieved 5 November 2010.
  103. Pawelski JG, Perrin EC, Foy JM, et al. (July 2006). "The effects of marriage, civil union, and domestic partnership laws on the health and well-being of children". Pediatrics. 118 (1): 349–64. doi:10.1542/peds.2006-1279. PMID 16818585. S2CID 219194821.
  104. Lamb, Michael. "Expert Affidavit for U.S. District Court (D. Mass. 2009)" (PDF). Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders. Archived (PDF) from the original on 24 September 2015. Retrieved 24 July 2012.
  105. ^ "Pediatricians: Gay Marriage Good for Kids' Health". news.discovery.com. 22 March 2013. Archived from the original on 12 November 2014. Retrieved 11 April 2013.
  106. "Elizabeth Short, Damien W. Riggs, Amaryll Perlesz, Rhonda Brown, Graeme Kane: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) Parented Families – A Literature Review prepared for The Australian Psychological Society" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 March 2011. Retrieved 5 November 2010.
  107. "Brief of the American Psychological Association, The California Psychological Association, The American Psychiatric Association, and The American Association of Marriage and Family Therapy as Amici Curiae in Support of Plaintiff-Appellees" (PDF). United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Archived (PDF) from the original on 13 April 2015. Retrieved 28 September 2012.
  108. Herek, GM (September 2006). "Legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the United States: a social science perspective" (PDF). The American Psychologist. 61 (6): 607–21. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.61.6.607. PMID 16953748. Archived from the original (PDF) on 10 June 2010.
  109. Biblarz, Timothy J.; Stacey, Judith (February 2010). "How Does the Gender of Parents Matter?" (PDF). Journal of Marriage and Family. 72 (1): 3–22. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.593.4963. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2009.00678.x. Archived from the original (PDF) on 12 May 2013.
  110. "Brief presented to the Legislative House of Commons Committee on Bill C38 by the Canadian Psychological Association – 2 June 2005" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 13 October 2012. Retrieved 7 August 2018.
  111. Goldberg, Abbie E. (February 2023). "LGBTQ-parent families: Diversity, intersectionality, and social context". Current Opinion in Psychology. 49: 101517. doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101517. PMID 36502588. S2CID 253665001.
  112. Leal, Daniela; Gato, Jorge; Coimbra, Susana; Freitas, Daniela; Tasker, Fiona (December 2021). "Social Support in the Transition to Parenthood Among Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Persons: A Systematic Review". Sexuality Research and Social Policy. 18 (4): 1165–1179. doi:10.1007/s13178-020-00517-y. hdl:10216/132451.
  113. Bockting, Walter, Autumn Benner, and Eli Coleman. "Gay and Bisexual Identity Development Among Female-to-Male Transsexuals in North America: Emergence of a Transgender Sexuality." Archives of Sexual Behavior 38.5 (October 2009): 688–701. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. 29 September 2009
  114. "Austria gets first same-sex marriage". 365gay.com. 5 July 2006. Archived from the original on 17 October 2007. Retrieved 20 July 2008.
  115. "Sweden ends forced sterilization of trans". gaystarnews.com. 11 January 2013. Archived from the original on 12 June 2018. Retrieved 10 October 2017.
  116. Deborah, Anthony (Spring 2012). "CAUGHT IN THE MIDDLE: TRANSSEXUAL MARRIAGE AND THE DISCONNECT BETWEEN SEX AND LEGAL SEX". Texas Journal of Women & the Law. 21 (2).
  117. Schwartz, John (18 September 2009). "U.S. Defends Marriage Law". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 14 July 2014. Retrieved 29 September 2009.
  118. "Movement Advancement Project | Equality Maps". www.lgbtmap.org. Archived from the original on 22 April 2019. Retrieved 19 April 2019.
  119. Matthew S. Coleman (16 September 2015). "Obergefell v. Hodges". Einhorn Harris. Archived from the original on 24 December 2015. Retrieved 8 November 2015.
  120. Leff, Lisa (4 December 2008). "Poll: Calif. gay marriage ban driven by religion". USA Today. Associated Press. Archived from the original on 8 December 2008. archived here.
  121. For ease of comparison, only 'yes' and 'no' responses are counted. For old polling data, support figures have been adjusted upward @1%/year.
  122. Newport, Frank (20 May 2011). "For First Time, Majority of Americans Favor Legal Gay Marriage". Gallup. Archived from the original on 29 July 2014. Retrieved 25 September 2012.
  123. "Public Opinion: Nationally". australianmarriageequality.com. Archived from the original on 3 March 2011. Retrieved 25 September 2012.
  124. "Gay Life in Estonia". globalgayz.com. Archived from the original on 16 July 2012. Retrieved 25 September 2012.
  125. Jowit, Juliette (12 June 2012). "Gay marriage gets ministerial approval". The Guardian. London. Archived from the original on 6 May 2019. Retrieved 25 September 2012.
  126. "Most Irish people support gay marriage, poll says". PinkNews. 24 February 2011. Archived from the original on 26 September 2013. Retrieved 25 September 2012.
  127. ^ "How people in 24 countries view same-sex marriage". Retrieved 12 December 2023.
  128. "What the world's young people think and feel" (PDF).
  129. "Who supports equal rights for same-sex couples?". Australian Institute of Family Studies.
  130. "Age is decisive factor when it comes to supporting same-sex marriage: LAPOP". Vanderbilt University. 2 June 2015. Retrieved 26 December 2023.
  131. ^ "Attitudes towards LGBTIQ+ people in the Western Balkans" (PDF). ERA – LGBTI Equal Rights Association for the Western Balkans and Turke. June 2023. Archived (PDF) from the original on 7 December 2024.
  132. "Un 70% d'andorrans aprova el matrimoni homosexual". Diari d'Andorra (in Catalan). 7 July 2013. Archived from the original on 27 February 2024.
  133. ^ "Cultura polítical de la democracia en la República Dominicana y en las Américas, 2016/17" (PDF). Vanderbilt University (in Spanish). 13 November 2017. p. 132. Archived (PDF) from the original on 13 December 2024.
  134. ^ LGBT+ PRIDE 2024 (PDF). Ipsos. 1 May 2024. Archived from the original (PDF) on 7 June 2024. Retrieved 8 June 2024.
  135. ^ Gubbala, Sneha; Poushter, Jacob; Huang, Christine (27 November 2023). "How people in 24 countries view same-sex marriage". Pew Research Center. Archived from the original on 13 December 2024. Retrieved 12 December 2023.
  136. ^ "Religious Belief and National Belonging in Central and Eastern Europe" (PDF). Pew. Archived (PDF) from the original on 12 December 2024. Retrieved 11 May 2017.
  137. ^ "Religious belief and national belonging in Central and Eastern Europe - Appendix A: Methodology". Pew Research Center. 10 May 2017. Archived from the original on 28 November 2024. Retrieved 26 August 2017.
  138. "Bevolking Aruba pro geregistreerd partnerschap zelfde geslacht". Antiliaans Dagblad (in Dutch). 26 February 2021. Archived from the original on 10 December 2024.
  139. ^ "Discrimination in the European Union". TNS. European Commission. Archived from the original on 3 December 2024. Retrieved 8 June 2024. The question was whether same-sex marriage should be allowed throughout Europe.
  140. ^ "Barómetro de las Américas: Actualidad – 2 de junio de 2015" (PDF). Vanderbilt University. 2 July 2015.
  141. "63% está de acuerdo con la creación de una AFP Estatal que compita con las actuales AFPs privadas" (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 10 June 2024. Retrieved 10 June 2024.
  142. ^ LGBT+ PRIDE 2021 GLOBAL SURVEY (PDF). Ipsos. 16 June 2021. Archived (PDF) from the original on 3 December 2024. Retrieved 12 June 2023.
  143. Unknown
  144. "Encuesta: Un 63,1% de los cubanos quiere matrimonio igualitario en la Isla". Diario de Cuba (in Spanish). 18 July 2019. Archived from the original on 21 July 2019.
  145. Guzman, Samuel (5 February 2018). "Encuesta de CDN sobre matrimonio homosexual en RD recibe más de 300 mil votos - CDN - El Canal de Noticias de los Dominicanos" [CDN survey on homosexual marriage in DR receives more than 300 thousand votes] (in Spanish).
  146. America's Barometer Topical Brief #034, Disapproval of Same-Sex Marriage in Ecuador: A Clash of Generations?, 23 July 2019. Counting ratings 1–3 as 'disapprove', 8–10 as 'approve', and 4–7 as neither.
  147. "Partido de Bukele se "consolida" en preferencias electorales en El Salvador". 21 January 2021.
  148. "წინარწმენიდან თანასწორობამდე (From Prejudice to Equality), part 2" (PDF). WISG. 2022.
  149. "Más del 70% de los hondureños rechaza el matrimonio homosexual". Diario La Prensa (in Spanish). 17 May 2018.
  150. "Litlar breytingar á viðhorfi til giftinga samkynhneigðra" (PDF) (in Icelandic). Gallup. September 2006.
  151. Staff (13 February 2023). "64% favor recognizing same-sex marriage in Japan: Kyodo poll". Kyodo News. Retrieved 13 February 2023.
  152. Isoda, Kazuaki (21 February 2023). "Survey: 72% of voters in favor of legalizing gay marriages". The Asahi Shimbun. Retrieved 27 February 2023.
  153. Vogt, Desiree (March 2021). "Rückhalt für gleichgeschlechtliche Paare". Liechtensteiner Vaterland (in German).
  154. "Sondaj: chișinăuienii au devenit mai toleranți față de comunitatea LGBT". Radio Europa Liberă Moldova (in Romanian). 18 May 2022.
  155. "Most Mozambicans against homosexual violence, study finds". MambaOnline - Gay South Africa online. 4 June 2018., (full report)
  156. ^ LGBT+ PRIDE 2023 GLOBAL SURVEY (PDF). Ipsos. 1 June 2023. Archived (PDF) from the original on 30 November 2024. Retrieved 12 June 2023.
  157. "First Quarter 2018 Social Weather Survey: 61% of Pinoys oppose, and 22% support, a law that will allow the civil union of two men or two women". 29 June 2018. Retrieved 6 January 2019.
  158. "(Nie)dzielące związki: Polki i Polacy o prawach par jednopłciowych". More in Common. Retrieved 27 September 2024.
  159. Mikołajczyk, Marek (24 April 2024). "Tak dla związków partnerskich, nie dla adopcji [SONDAŻ DGP]". Dziennik Gazeta Prawna. Retrieved 25 April 2024.
  160. "Отношение к сексменьшинствам" (in Russian). ФОМ. June 2019.
  161. "Polovici slovenských občanov neprekážajú registrované partnerstvá pre páry rovnakého pohlavia". 27 March 2024.
  162. Strong, Matthew (19 May 2023). "Support for gay marriage surges in Taiwan 4 years after legalization". Taiwan News. Retrieved 19 May 2023.
  163. "Соціологічне дослідження до Дня Незалежності: УЯВЛЕННЯ ПРО ПАТРІОТИЗМ ТА МАЙБУТНЄ УКРАЇНИ (16-20 серпня 2023) Назад до списку" (in Ukrainian). 24 August 2023. Archived from the original on 13 December 2024.
  164. Simons, Ned (4 February 2023). "It's Ten Years Since MPs Voted For Gay Marriage, But Is There A 'Backlash'?". The Huffington Post. Archived from the original on 13 December 2024. Retrieved 5 February 2023.
  165. "Opinión sobre el matrimonio igualitario" [Opinion on equal marriage]. LatinoBarómetro. 10 June 2024.
  166. Antolínez, Héctor (2 March 2023). "Encuesta refleja que mayoría de venezolanos apoya igualdad de derechos para la población LGBTIQ". Crónica Uno (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2 December 2024. Retrieved 13 December 2024.

Bibliography

External links

Status of same-sex unions around the world
Africa
Americas
Asia
Europe
Oceania
Antarctica
Gay pride flag Constitutional amendments banning civil unions or same-sex marriages around the world Globe
Same-sex marriage prohibited by
constitutional amendment
Same-sex marriage and civil unions
prohibited by constitutional amendment
Types of marriages
Legal scenarios
Religious
Age
Arranged
Ceremonial
Circumstantial
basis
Death
Financial
Convenience
Other
De facto
Endogamy
Exogamy
Non-monogamous
Sexless
Other
LGBTQ topics
Symbols
Pride flags
Gender identity
Third sex / Third gender
Sexual identities
Sexual orientations
Related
History
LGBTQ history
Pre-modern era
16th to 19th century
20th century
21st century
LGBTQ rights by country or territory
LGBTQ rights topics
LGBTQ rights movements
Sexual orientation — Medicine, science and sexology
Societal attitudes
Prejudice and discrimination
Violence against LGBTQ people
Discrimination
Forms
Attributes
Social
Religious
Ethnic/National
Manifestations
Discriminatory
policies
Countermeasures
Related topics
Categories:
Same-sex marriage: Difference between revisions Add topic