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

message: 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:
* Same-sex marriage in the United States
* Same-sex marriage legislation in the United States
* Same-sex marriage legislation in the United States by state
* Same-sex marriage status in the United States by state
* Same-sex marriage in the United States public opinion
* List of benefits of marriage in the United States
--Joshua4 10:05, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Article created 

message: Did someone forget Alabama?
:Yep. —Nightstallion (?) 00:03, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Whoops... well, at least it wasn't Poland. --Signed and Sealed, JJJJust (T C) 05:37, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  49 States? 

message: State	Marriage    	Marriage	Marriage	Same-sex unions	Same-sex unions	Same-sex unions      	Same-sex unions      	Notes
State	Defined     	Defined 	Result  	Civil Unions   	Civil Unions   	Domestic Partnerships	Domestic Partnerships	Notes
State	Constitution	Statute 	Licenses	Def.           	Status         	Def.                 	Status               	Notes
How about this ?  --Mimich 21:33, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Better heading 

message: 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)
replies: text: This is not a forum. --Prcc27 (talk) 04:31, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  People Should Marry Who They Want 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Oregon 

message: A judge in Polk County, Iowa recently declared Iowa's same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional. 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)
thread_title:  Iowa? 

message: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S147999.PDF -- Frightwolf (talk) 17:33, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: LOL, you wish. 70.250.209.212 (talk) 23:44, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  California overturns gay marriage ban 

message: 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)
thread_title:  "Ban ballot"? 

message: 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)
thread_title:  [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Samesex_marriage_in_USA.svg#RfC:_Shade_of_blue_used_to_show_marriage.3F Request for Comment] 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Ohio ruling today 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Consistency 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Judicial rulings and consistency