Image talk:World homosexuality laws.svg

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Are you here to request a map update? Please leave a new message below with the region to be changed, its new color (refer to the chart below), and (if possible) a link to confirm that a change in law took place.      No information Homosexuality legal      Same sex marriages      Same sex unions      No same sex unions      Foreign same sex marriages recognized Homosexuality illegal      Minimal penalty      Large penalty      Life in prison      Death penalty      No info on penalty

Contents

[edit] A couple of mistakes in South America

a) There´s a confusion between Buenos Aires city that allows civil unions and the Province of Buenos Aires, which doesn't. However, in the current map the last also appears painted in green.

b) Colombia has not civil unions legalised. Gay couples have acquired some economic rights in particular cases, but they are exceptions to the rule.

Conclusion:

- Buenos Aires autonomous city in green (it's just a little point) - Buenos Aires Province in light green. - Colombia in light green.

Example: http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/8226/rughtswh9.jpg

[edit] Victoria

The Australian state of Victoria has legalized a registry system similar to Tasmania's so it should be medium green. ACT will likely follow suit.

[edit] Turkey

I think Turkey has harsher laws against homosexuality than as depicted on the map. Could someone confirm this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.66.32.66 (talk) 19:04, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

No, as Turkey has decided to associate itself with the European community it is required to decriminalise homosexuality. The government still has some restrictions on the free speech of gay rights groups, but it does not criminalise sex between homosexual adults. Kidoragon (talk) 04:50, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Homesexuality was never penalized in the Turkish republic although the attitude toward homosexuals was not always favourable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.22.131.65 (talk) 06:25, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Belize and Panama

Belize and Panama have sodomy laws on the books not reflected in the map. They should both be orange to represent a large penalty. [1] Kidoragon (talk) 22:04, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Australia

Australia

All Australian Territories and States (and two Councils; Sydney and Melbourne) have either or both unregistered co-habitation or a registered partnerships (except for the Commonwealth Government, which still has 60 laws that discriminate same-sex couples by not reginising the relationship only recognising opposite-sex relationships only; Civil partnerships or Unions and SSM's are not legally recognised and are not allowed to be performed under Commonwealth law) - So it should be the appropriate color for all Australian Territories and States.

And what are the appropriate colors? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.22.177.31 (talk) 04:31, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
I think there is an inevitable problem with categorising the states of a federation when state law and federal law can issue on an issue. As I have argued before in the case of death penalty maps, the legal situation in a state is the sum of the state and federal laws applicable to it. So if federal law does not treat same-sex relationships equally, then we cannot really consider the state to treat them equally, even if state law happens to do so, because the unequal federal law still applies in the state. In much the same way, even though some US states may not have any death penalty under state law, they are all subject to federal law, and so long as there is a federal death penalty in the US thus all US states/territories should be coloured on maps as retentionist. --SJK (talk) 10:27, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Argentina

I see the map shows that in Argentina the provinces of Río Negro and Buenos Aires allow for same sex unions. That's not totally correct. The only 3 districts recognizing same-sex unions as "civil unions" in Argentina are the following: (1) the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires (not the province of Buenos Aires); (2) the province of Río Negro (that one is correct on the map); (3) the city of Villa Carlos Paz, in the province of Córdoba.

Civil union for both opposite-sex and same-sex couples was legalized in the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires by law Nº 1004, passed by the Autonomus City's Legislature on Dec. 12, 2002. That month also Río Negro passed a law in the same sense. Finally, same-sex unions were permitted in Villa Carlos Paz, a well-known touristic city in the province of Córdoba, on Nov. 23, 2007. The above applies only to residents of those districts, subject to some conditions proving effective residence.

Could this be shown in the map?


[edit] "International marriage licenses recognized"

I am going to change this wording to "Foreign same-sex marriages recognized". This is because the term "marriage license" is a term only used in some jurisdictions (I think it is a bit of an Americanism), whereas in other jurisdictions (e.g. Australia) this term is not used at all. I think by contrast the term "foreign marriages" is equally applicable to all jurisdictions. --SJK (talk) 10:20, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Wouldn't cohabitation be a more significant category than the recognition of same-sex marriages contracted in another jurisdiction? Both in the sense of being more widespread and a more significant step in a continuum towards full marriage rights. (And also affecting more people in the relevant jurisdiction).

I suppose placing both categories at once on the map would get too confusing, but if it doesn't, then that would be the ideal for me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.198.217.194 (talk) 18:14, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Brazil, Austria and Australia updates

Hi. I've updated the map to better reflect recognition of same-sex couples in Brazil, Austria and Australia. In Brazil, according to Recognition of same-sex unions in Brazil, same-sex couples have some rights, meaning that there is recognition of unregistered cohabitation. This is also the case for Austria. In Australia, all states and territories recognise same-sex couples as being equal to opposite-sex de facto couples, which are given a series of rights. Furthermore, the Australian Federal government has just announced that it plans to recognise same-sex couples in Federal law (unregistered cohabitation). Ronline ✉ 07:52, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] California legalized Same-Sex Marriages today

Map needs updated to show change of Clifornia's recognition of SSM. Davodd (talk) 17:50, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Color Blindness Unfriendly

This map is incredibly difficult for red-green colorblind people to see, particularly "marriage legal" and "death penalty" --LonelyPixel08 (talk) 00:33, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Norway

The map needs to be updated to dark green for Norway, same-sex marriage was just legalised. I found this source in English: [1] Lampman Talk to me! 18:47, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Portugal

There are no same sex unions in Portugal! They've not been legalized yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.22.160.125 (talk) 06:59, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Differentiation between 'Unregistered co-habitation' and 'Same-sex union'

This map doesn't really make clear the difference between 'unregistered co-habitation'- that is, a couple in a relationship which is not formally recognised in anyway - and an actual 'same-sex union', which implies some sort of registration with the government. For example, in Australia, the federal government has recently announced it will undertake reforms on laws which discriminate against same-sex couples, giving them de-facto relationship status. However, only the states of Tasmania, South Australia, Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) are implementing registered partnerships. This difference, as compared to the other states, is currently no able to be noted on this map, and I'm sure this would be similar in other countries as well.

Perhaps 'Same sex unions' should be changed to 'Same sex relationships recognised', create a new colour with the title 'Unregistered co-habitation', and change 'No same sex unions' to 'Same sex relationships unrecognised' - you could do this by darkening the colour for 'Same sex marriage' and what's currently marked 'Same sex unions', lightening the current 'No same sex unions' and fitting in 'Same sex relationships recognised' between. In this way, we'd see a differentiation made between the states of Australia, as well as other countries. Terovian (talk) 11:49, 14 June 2008 (UTC)