Talk:Same-sex marriage status in the United States by state

This redirect is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBT studiesLGBT articles

United States

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.

United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles

Article created[edit]

I moved and updated this article from List of U.S. state laws on same-sex unions to serve as a one-stop source for the "right now" legality of same-sex unions in the U.S. by state. Please remember there are many articles on this topic, each with specific scopes of presenting the material. This article is NOT to serve as a place to note any pending, ongoing litigation, ballots, or legal battles except maybe the very most recent when relevant. See the following articles:

--Joshua4 10:05, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't you think this is ridiculously redundant? By the way, I would have appreciated a little more discussion before you unilaterrally moved my article. --Hyphen5 07:20, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

49 States?[edit]

Did someone forget Alabama?

Yep. —Nightst a llion (?) 00:03, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops... well, at least it wasn't Poland. --Signed and Sealed, JJJJust (T C) 05:37, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Better heading[edit]

State	Marriage			Same-sex unions				Notes
	Defined		Result	Civil Unions		Domestic Partnerships
	Constitution	Statute	Licenses	Def.	Status	Def.	Status

How about this ? --Mimich 21:33, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

People Should Marry Who They Want[edit]

I think people should be able to express there love by being able to marry that person no matter who he or she is. No matter if they're white, black, big, small, tall, or short. We don't make it illegal for blacks to marry whites. So why should we make it illegal for women to marry women, or men to marry men. I think we should let them marry who they love, because being married is just another way to express your love for that special someone. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.111.3.247 (talk) 00:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

In the United States it was never legal for homosexuals to Marry in any state until the late 1900's. The illegality that you speak of predates many generations of people that hold your last name. Marriage as it stands is an issue for the states to resolve. Allow it? Don't? Call your state representative.Serialjoepsycho (talk) 06:40, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@71.111.3.247: This is not a forum. --Prcc27 (talk) 04:31, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oregon[edit]

I thought of changing the blurb about Oregon's status by deleting any reference to civil unions. The OR statute is not like other states' civil union legislation, there are some major differences. If we want to be most accurate, the legislation is not civil union legislation that uses the term 'domestic partnership,' but rather just domestic partnership legilsation that doesn't reference and is wholly different from civil unions. Ronnotronald 14:48, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Iowa?[edit]

A judge in Polk County, Iowa recently declared Iowa's same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional.[1] The Iowa Supreme Court will likely be asked to settle the matter, but it seems that Polk County officials are currently giving marriage licenses to same-sex couples per the judge's order. To anyone who has spent much time working on this article in the past: how should we classify this? Should we mark same-sex marriage as legal in Iowa, or should we wait until the Supreme Court weighs in, especially since the recent ruling only applies to one county? Etphonehome 04:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

California overturns gay marriage ban[edit]

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S147999.PDF -- Frightwolf (talk) 17:33, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, you wish. 70.250.209.212 (talk) 23:44, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"In 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Lawrence v. Texas paved the way for same-sex marriage to emerge as a hot-button political issue"

But then again lawrence vs texas only paved the way for same sex marriage to emerge as a hot button issue in approximatly 14 states because all but those 14 states didn't have sodomy laws at the time of Lawrence vs texas. Further more there is a lack of source to show that lawrence vs texas made made same sex marriage a hot button issue in even the 14 states that still had antisodomy laws. Besides one wikipedia author there is nothing at all to show that same sex marriage is a hot button issue in the USA or that Lawrence vs Texas steered it in that direction.Serialjoepsycho (talk) 06:18, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Map Edit[edit]

The new Illinois civil union law states that out-of-state gay marriages shall be recognized by the State of Illinois. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recognition_of_same-sex_unions_in_Illinois .) The map does not reflect this. Illinois shoudl be striped three colors: pink, blue, and dark gray.

"Ban ballot"?[edit]

Where did this term "ban ballot" come from? Is that simple POV pushing or POV pushing via a neologism? I'm not finding any other hits on the phrase in WP (except on this SSM status page and the SSM legislation page), and a Google search does not turn up any instances of the phrase being used without qualification for at least ten pages of results (except these WP pages). ~ MD Otley (talk) 07:20, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Comment[edit]

There is currently a request for comment on what shade of blue should be used on File:Samesex marriage in USA.svg to represent full marriage equality. Fry1989 ^eh? 03:27, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ohio ruling today[edit]

Federal judge ruled that same-sex marriage in other states must be recognized by Ohio on death certificates. Story here. Need to update articles. EvergreenFir (talk) 21:40, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Consistency[edit]

If this page is supposed to be a "bottom line" legal status of same-sex marriage/unions, then why are we indicating judicial rulings and pending stays on the map at all? I think this page has too many categories... your thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dialectic2012 (talk • contribs) 01:19, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Judicial rulings and consistency[edit]

With regard to the judicial rulings against same-sex marriage bans in Kentucky, Tennessee, and Ohio... why colorize those states with stripes when those rulings apply only to recognition of out-of-state same-sex marriages... and again, I say colorizing the pending status of states with judicial rulings doesn't indicate the "bottom line" status of recognition in that state and only adds to the inconsistency of application of anti-marriage laws across the country. We need to remove the yellow stripes altogether if consensus allows. Those are my thoughts. We need less categories, not more. The map is too messy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:C555:99C0:6C42:6C51:7F55:5A53 (talk) 22:53, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tennessee[edit]

If we are colorizing Ohio and Kentucky yellow, why not Tennessee? They are the same rulings regarding out-of-state same-sex marriage recognition.