Same-sex marriage
| Part of the LGBT rights series |
 LGBTQ portal |
Same-sex marriage (also called gay marriage and, less frequently, homosexual marriage) is marriage between two partners of the same sex.
For other forms of same-sex unions that are different from marriages, see the articles linked in that section.
Controversy
The moral legitimacy of marriage between two people of the same sex hinges on how the authoritative definition of marriage is derived. If marriage is to have a religious foundation, the interpretation of religious texts and traditions will be key; if marriage is a social institution or even a purely economic coupling, pragmatic arguments will have more force, though moral issues will no doubt still arise. Gay rights advocates assert that marriage is a right which should not be limited to opposite-sex couples. Their opponents assert that same-sex marriage cannot be allowed on moral and/or religious grounds, perhaps fearing a breakdown of society.
Competing definitions of "marriage"
Marriage
Nearly all people at all times have defined "marriage" in such a way that at least one male and one female were involved. Some societies have from ancient times permitted a man to have multiple wives, but those wives had congress only with the man -- not each other. But some rare variations have appeared such as polyandry (one woman with multiple husbands) and "group marriage".
In the West, conservatives have claimed that the "traditional" form of marriage has been "one man, one woman" and have insisted that this definition must be preserved unchanged.
Another definition of marriage used by gay rights advocates is:
- A socially sanctioned, voluntary, committed, monogamous, legally contracted union, of two adult people, which the government and/or society recognizes by conferring certain rights, privileges and responsibilities, such as finances, taxes, and inheritance, child-raising, adoption visitation, and medical decision-making.
This definition allows for the possibility of same-sex marriage, as long as it fits these criteria. Some proponents, such as Andrew Sullivan, argue that this is a conservative moral definition that will strengthen families.
Others maintain that the concept cannot be defined without being limited to one woman and one man, and often protest that the traditional concept of marriage is being hijacked. They argue that proponents of the above definition favor it because it facilitates changes to the grounds of a marriage's validity from morality to custom, as any relationship may be considered "marriage" if a society can be found to approve of it. Some argue that this then leads to anarchy.
Religious marriages (which may or may not be recognized by the government) are frequently different from civil marriages -- state-sanctioned legal marriages (which may or may not be recognised by religious organizations). In some countries religious marriage and civil marriage occur simultaneously, with the clergy member acting as an agent of the state. In many others, religious marriage and civil marriage are two separate and distinct acts. For further information, see marriage.
In the historical context, marriage is often not so easy to define. In various societies there may have been marriage-like unions that do not fit the modern definition of marriage. These are noted where applicable.
Same-sex
In the context of same-sex marriages, and throughout this article, same-sex refers to two people of the same gender. In this context, same-sex is not synonymous with gay, lesbian, or homosexual, nor with bisexual, transgendered or transsexual, but "same-sex marriage" may, depending on the couple and the jurisdiction, refer to marriages between two adults from any of those groups. In nearly all jurisdictions, unrelated and consenting men and women can marry each other, while two men or two women cannot do so.
In this article, the inclusive term "same-sex marriage" is used throughout. Where necessary for clarity, the terms "gay", "lesbian", "bisexual," and "transsexual" are used (there are a number of reasons for this; please see the talk page for more details).
History of same-sex unions
The east
For detailed information, please see Homosexuality in Japan, Homosexuality in China, History of homosexuality.
Same-gender romantic love or sexual desire has been recorded from ancient times in the east. Such desire often took the form of same-sex unions, usually between men, and often included some difference in age (there is far less information available on relationships among women in ancient times. This may in part reflect a philosophy that saw writing about women as unnecessary or inappropriate, or may be because same-sex attraction between women was not valued as it was between men, or may even be because women were not afforded equal status with men, so that, while men were free to pursue sexual and romantic pleasure both within and without marriage, women often were not).
In China, especially in the southern province of Fujian where male love was especially cultivated, men would marry youths in elaborate ceremonies. The marriages would last a number of years, at the end of which the elder partner would help the younger find a (female) wife and settle down to raise a family.
The west
There is a long history of same-sex unions in the western world. That many early western societies tolerated, and even celebrated, same sex relationships is well-known. Evidence of same-sex marriage, however, is less clear, but there exists some evidence, often controversial, of same-sex marriages in ancient Rome and Greece, and even in medieval Europe. Same-sex unions have also been recorded among Native Americans and Africans.
In ancient Rome, for example, the Emperor Nero is reported to have married, at different times, two other men in wedding ceremonies. Other Roman Emperors are reported to have done the same thing. The increasing influence of Christianity, which promoted marriage for procreative purposes, is linked with the increasing intolerance of homosexuality in Rome.
Some historians have claimed that same-sex marriage has been documented in many societies that were not subject to Christian influence. In North America, among the Native American societies, it has taken the form of two-spirit-type relationships, in which some members of the tribe elect to take on female gender with all its responsibilities. They are prized as wives by the other men in the tribe, who enter into formal marriages with these two-spirit men.
In Africa, among the Azande of the Congo, men would marry youths for whom they had to pay a bride-price to the father. These marriages likewise were understood to be of a temporary nature.
Finally, in Europe during Hellenic times, the relationships between Greek men (erastes) and youths (eromenos) who had come of age were analogous to marriage in several aspects. The age of the youth was similar to the age at which women married (the mid-teens), and the relationship could only be undertaken with the consent of the father. This consent, just as in the case of a daughter's marriage, was contingent on the suitor's social standing. The relationship, just like a marriage, consisted of very specific social and religious responsibilities, and also had an erotic component.
Modern same-sex civil marriage
Same-sex civil marriages currently are legally recognized nationwide only in the Netherlands and Belgium.
Following provincial court rulings, the Canadian provinces of Ontario, British Columbia, and Quebec have also legalized same-sex marriage. The Canadian federal government (working with the Supreme Court of Canada) is currently in the process of trying to create new legislation that could legalize same-sex marriage nationally.
The Swedish federal government is similarly preparing legislation to legalize same-sex marriage across the country [1], and shortly after his election in 2004 the Spanish prime minister announced his intention to push for legalization of same-sex marriage [2].
Same-sex marriage is legal in the US state of Massachusetts, following a November 2003 court ruling. Several local government bodies in the United States are also performing same-sex marriages, on various degrees of legal footing.
Recently, the term "same-sex marriage" has been displacing "gay marriage", the term being perceived as less value-laden for the union of two partners of the same sex and also being more inclusive of bisexuals.
Other forms of same-sex partnership
The movement towards the legal recognition of same-sex marriages has resulted in changes in the law in many jurisdictions, though the extent of the changes have varied:
- Civil unions provide most of the rights and responsibilities of same-sex marriage, but use a different name for the arrangement. They exist in several European countries as well as in the U.S. state of Vermont, the Canadian provinces of Quebec and Nova Scotia, and the city of Buenos Aires, Argentina.
- Domestic partnerships or registered partnerships provide varying degrees of privileges and responsibilities, usually far fewer than those found in civil unions. Their purpose is not limited to same-sex arrangements and they exist in many jurisdictions.
Even in jurisdictions where they are not legally recognized, many gay and lesbian couples choose to have weddings (also called "commitment ceremonies" in this context) to celebrate and affirm their relationship, fulfilling the social aspect of a marriage. Such ceremonies have no legal validity, however, and as such do not deal with issues such as inheritance, property rights or social security.
Some writers have advanced the idea that the term "marriage" should be restricted to a religious context and that state and federal governments should not be involved in a religious rite. Some regard this as a governmental intrusion into religion; they believe that all statutes involving domestic contracts should replace the word "marriage" with "domestic partnership" and thus bypass the controversy of gender. This would then allow a domestic contract between any two individuals who have attained their majority.
Legal recognition of same-sex marriage
In the late 20th and early 21st centuries, there has been a growing movement in a number of countries to regard marriage as a right which should be extended to same-sex couples. Legal recognition of a marital union opens up a wide range of entitlements, including social security, taxation, inheritance and other benefits unavailable to couples unmarried in the eyes of the law. Restricting legal recognition to opposite-sex couples excludes same-sex couples from gaining legal access to these benefits, and while opposite-sex unmarried couples without other legal impediments have the option of marrying in law and so gaining access to these rights, that option is unavailable to same-sex couples. Similarly, though certain rights extending from marriage can be replicated by legal means (for example, by drawing up contracts), many cannot; thus, despite the presence of legal contracts, same-sex couples may still face insecurity in areas such as inheritance, hospital visitation and immigration. Lack of legal recognition also makes it more difficult for same-sex couples to adopt children.
Canada and several other countries recognize same-sex unions as "marriage" on a legal par with opposite-sex marriage, while the United States does not. (See Defense of Marriage Act.)
On Feb. 24, 2004 President George W. Bush called for a Constitutional Amendment to prohibit same-sex marriages at the federal level.
Opponents of same-sex marriage
Some opponents object to same-sex marriage on religious grounds, arguing that extending marriage to same-sex couples undercuts the conventional meaning of marriage in various traditions, and does not fulfill any procreational role. In countries with monogamous marriages only, some opponents also claim that allowing same-sex marriage will re-open the door to the legalization of polyamorous marriage, or to marriage between family members, or to marriages of convenience contracted for tax or other reasons. Some object on the grounds that same-sex couples should not be allowed to have or adopt children, and that same-sex marriage would make those adoptions easier. Others simply do not recognize any pressing need for same-sex marriages.
A fundamental concern is that its legalization will lead to a direct attack via lawsuits against traditional churches to force those churches to perform marriage ceremonies that the church does not approve of. This is a realistic fear only in jurisdictions which fail to distinguish between civil and religious marriages, or have established religions. Additionally, in litigious societies, there are concerns about bankrupting established churches through these types of lawsuits.
Some libertarians object to same-sex marriage because they are opposed to any form of state-sanctioned marriage, including opposite-sex unions. They are not necessarily opposed to the idea of a same-sex wedding itself, only that the government should not have any role in the event, nor for that matter should government approval be sought for opposite-sex marriages.
Some other people object to same-sex marriage on the grounds that the purpose of marriage is a procreative partnership and that the same-sex partnership is inherently sterile. These people generally do not carry over their objections to sterile heterosexual couples, nor to heterosexual couples who simply choose to remain childless.
Many other people, while tolerant towards the sexual behaviour of others, see no reason to alter their society or government's traditional attitudes towards marriage and family.
Proponents of same-sex marriage
Proponents point out that traditional concepts of marriage have already given way to liberalization in other areas, such as the availability of no-fault divorce and the elimination of anti-miscegenation laws. They also suggest that many people in modern societies no longer subscribe to the religious beliefs which inform traditional limits upon marriage, and no longer wish these beliefs to constitute the law. In fact, there are some religions that celebrate same-sex weddings or commitment ceremonies already; in Canada, for example, the United Church of Canada, the country's largest Protestant denomination, has striven for the legalization of same-sex marriage.
In the United States, proponents of equal marriage rights for same-sex couples point out that there are over 1,049 federal rights and benefits denied same-sex couples by excluding them from participating in marriage. A legal denial of rights or benefits afforded to others, they say, directly contradicts the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution which provides for equal protection and substantive due process under the law, meaning that rights conferred to one group cannot be denied to another. In the 2003 case before the Supreme Court titled Lawrence v. Texas, the court held that intimate consensual sexual conduct was part of the liberty protected by substantive due process under the Fourteenth Amendment. Many proponents of same-sex marriage have noted that this ruling paves the way for a subsequent decision invalidating state laws prohibiting same-sex marriage.
In June 2003 the British Government published what was described as a consultation document for England and Wales: "Civil Partnership - a framework for the legal recognition of same-sex couples" which describes a system of official registration of same-sex partnerships.
On 30 September 2003, the Scottish Executive published a consultation paper concerning a similar scheme for Scotland.
King Norodom Sihanouk of Cambodia announced in February 2004 that he believed his country ought to legalize same-sex marriage.
In May 2004, the largest opposition party in France, the French Socialist Party, announced its support for same-sex marriage. A poll by ELLE found that 64% of France supports same-sex marriage. [3]
Some conservative proponents of equal marriage also say that the institution of marriage would be strengthened by making it available to more people, and argue further that same-sex marriage would encourage gays and lesbians to settle down with one partner and raise families.
When confronted by the sentiment that "the purpose of marriage is procreative", proponents often note that sterile male-female pairings are not prevented from marrying, and that such pairings are encouraged to use various medical and/or legal means to acquire offspring.
Terminology
The term "mixed marriage" usually does not refer to sex but to religion, culture or race.
See also
- Ted Nebbeling - Canada's first cabinet minister, and possibly the world's highest elected official, to marry a same-sex partner.
- Marriage rights and obligations
- Log Cabin Republicans