Template talk:Same-sex unions

message: Looking at some of the traditions and court decisions in South & SE Asia, sometimes I wonder what would be appropriate on this template if *either* of the following became true in a country that recognizes 3rd gender:
1) 3G-3G marriages are legalized in addition to M-F marriages
2) 3G-3G, 3G-M & 3G-F marriages are legalized but M-M and F-F are not.
Naraht (talk) 18:26, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: If a SS couple can marry if one of hem declares themself to be 3G, then yes. If not, I don't see how it would be particularly relevant. I'd need to see examples. — kwami (talk) 23:40, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  3rd Gender and 3rd Gender? 

message: As I understand it, Marriage Equality has passed the Cabinet in a way that if the parties in the Coalition vote in the same manner as their members of the Cabinet it will pass the legislature. Not sure of the other steps, but still *could* be derailed. Not ready to see in this template.Naraht (talk) 20:04, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with "Not Yet". However I do agree with one source that indicated that the most likely reason that there won't be Marriage Equality by mid-year would be another Thai Coup.Naraht (talk) 14:34, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thailand 

message: Would it make sense to have another character (like #) for the situation that Nepal has where there has been a recognized marriage, but that each individual case needs to work its way through courts/multiple proceeding vs. (presumably) Thailand where if it passes, it will completely sweep through and at worst you'll have a "Kim Davis" situation? Naraht (talk) 14:38, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: how did we handle that for Mexico? — kwami (talk) 23:36, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Character for Nepal vs. (presumably) Thailand 

message: Just to check, at this point Thailand and Saudi Arabia are at the same point in regards to this template, right? Naraht (talk) 20:28, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Do we not have even minimal recognition in Thai? If not, then yes: we don't list countries where SSM is criminalized. — kwami (talk) 23:46, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thailand vs. Saudi Arabia. 

message: The dispute at the Israel article affects where we place Israel in this template. 
(The problem I have is that they're claiming that you can now get married "in" Israel because you can get married in Utah remotely, so we now have SSM in Israel.) No RS that registered SSM there fully counts as marriage. (I don't know if it does or not, though it looks like the rights have increased recently.) — kwami (talk) 23:44, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Utah is not in Israel. Credit to them for a novel use of technology to help people get round bureaucratic nonsense, but it's clearly still a foreign marriage. Jdcooper (talk) 23:50, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The ref there, which seems well-researched, says that registration of a foreign marriage supplies "all" the rights of marriage (unlike common-law marriage, the other option, which affords only "most" of the rights of marriage). I'll resurrect the old foreign-recognition section of this template. — kwami (talk) 19:43, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Israel 

message: Discuss it here!Naraht (talk) 14:12, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mount Athos