File talk:World homosexuality laws.svg/Archive 1

Colours

I'm unhappy about the colour changes made by Murraybuckley. He has not replied to my question on his talk page, so unless anyone else protests I'd like to change them to something else, if not back to the old ones. -- SLB (no) 19:40, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

If you do, remember changing the legend in the pages where the image is being used. Last time I had do it myself. --Ecelan 21:37, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I've replied to your questions, Silje. Hopefully you see my reasoning. Murraybuckley 08:00, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm unhappy too. The original image had different colors, that were carefully chosen to avoid the green/red distinction that is invisible to color blinds, especially for the median shades, where pale green and pale red are completely undistinctable.

The previous color model used blue vs. red according to usability rules, and they are especially important on maps.

This has also made existing legends in all wikis using these maps unusable. It's not just a matter of the colors you prefer but a matter of meaning and interpretation of maps.

In addition, your changes have broken the geographic delimitations, making this a "fantasy" map, with completely invented borders, unclear sea borders with spurious dots, and even errors in the delimitation of countries, where islands were detached from their respective countries, or attached to the wrong country...

Globally, this map now takes no meaning at all, and are no more usable ! I'll be reverting some wikis to the past .PNG versions (that some people have renamed when deleting at the same time the original GFDL versions and their original history just to apply their own licencing terms; such deletions was an attempt to abuse the original author rights), and I'll be ignoring this fantasy and unusable SVG... Verdy p 12:52, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Update

The map needs to be updated. Sames sex unions are allowed in Mexico City. --Dúnadan 20:25, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

There are now same sex marriages in Switzerland.

There are still NO same sex Unions of any kind in AUSTRIA. This is marked wrong on the map.

Homosexuality illegal

What exactly does it mean that a sexual orientation is illegal? Can you get arrested just for having a certain sexual orientation? Is bisexuality illegal as well, or just homosexuality? Many of the countries for which the map says homosexuality is illegal, the laws are sodomy laws, which can apply to even heterosexual sex. Most of the other countries outlaw sex between two people of the same gender, or even just between two men. I think it would be interesting if any country actually made a sexual orientation like homosexuality or bisexuality illegal, but unless we have any reliable sources that homosexuality itself is illegal, the summary should say Same-sex relationships legal or Same-sex relationships illegal. Joshuajohanson (talk) 21:49, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

In Egypt, you can get arrested for being present in a gay bar, or for displaying same-sex affection... AnonMoos (talk) 14:23, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Interesting, so the laws are more broad in Egypt than other places. That stinks. It is still focused on same-sex relationships (seeking a relationship, showing affection within a relationship), not on sexual orientation itself. Presumably a bisexual person could also be arrested for displaying same-sex affection. Same-sex relationships don't have to be sexual. They can be romantic as well. Joshuajohanson (talk) 22:41, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I agreee with Joshuajohanson; most nations with anti-gay legislation criminalise same sex sexual/romantic relations, not same sex attraction in itself. --84.202.115.208 21:24, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Gay Unions in Austria

ResolvedConfirmed with en:LGBT rights in Austria and fixed, thanks ! Outsider80 (talk) 22:35, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

In the chart it shows Austria marked under the colour for "legal Unions". This is unfortunately NOT correct. There are still NO legal Unions of any kind possible for same sex couples!!

No, that's actually not correct. After the ruling in Karner v Austria, Austria is obliged to offer cohabitating same-sex couples the same rights as cohabitating opposite-sex couples. See en:Recognition of same-sex unions in Austria. Indeed, this does not amount to a registered partnership or civil unions, but it does amount to recognition of "unregistered cohabitation" and it does offer some rights to same-sex couples. Thus, Austria should be coloured on the map in the same way as Australia, Colombia and Portugal are. Ronline (talk) 13:33, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Vermont is wrong

Vermont allows marriage now.

Please sign your comment with --~~~~. Secondly, Vermont is expected to hear its Senate ruling on the stance tomorrow, while the governor is threatening to veto the bill, requiring a 2/3 majority. Although it is still likely to pass, it has not yet. --Haha169 (talk) 03:52, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Woopsie Daisies <3 O.o

Wait... he vetoed it about an hour ago. but it's not going to pass? and the one in NH is going to pass too. alright i'm wrong.

Veto was Overridden by both senate this morning and House later. Updated map as well. VT is now 4th U.S. state to allow Same gender marriage

Needs to be updated for Iowa, after Iowa Supreme Court Ruling on April 3, 2009

Iowa court upholds ruling; marriage no longer limited to one man, one woman

Argentina and Brazil wrong

There's no civil union law at the federal level in Argentina. There are just local laws in the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires, the province of Río Negro and the city of Villa Carlos Paz (province of Córdoba). This means that the whole country shouldn't be blue-coloured. I think the information regarding Brazil is wrong as well. I doubt there's a federal law there authorizing same-sex civil unions. --Gejotape (talk) 02:08, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree. Argentina and Brazil should be marked with cobalt blue of civil union just in two of their states each one (Buenos Aires and Rio Negro, Rio de Janeiro and Río Grande do Sul) as happends in USA or Mexico because civil union laws for same sex couples don't rule in the whole country.--Osado (talk) 02:09, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

According to en:Template:SSM (which seems to be maintained pretty well on the topic), Argentina and Brazil do offer civil unions only in certain regions, but both countries are also listed under the "Unregistered cohabitation" section, which would still qualify them for medium-blue color like other similar countries. (Though from reading en:Civil union in Argentina the only nationwide benefit I saw listed was pension benefits for surviving partner, but maybe the article is just lacking). Wikignome0529 (talk) 21:42, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Sweden

Sweden was updated to "legal", which is perfect. But Sweden is also one of the first countries which has a law about same-sex religious mariage. http://www.sr.se/cgi-bin/International/nyhetssidor/artikel.asp?ProgramID=2054&Format=1&artikel=2739765

So, I suggest we create a new color on the map meaning "Same-sex marriage allowed, including religious marriage". Barraki (talk) 12:13, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

What does that mean? That the government will allow a church to marry them? That the government will allow the state church to marry them? What is the distinction between this law and, say, Canada's?

Phrasing in key

The key should really be updated to reflect the fact that no-where in the world is homosexuality illegal. Rather, in these places, it is homosexual acts that are illegal. That is to say, it is not sexual attraction to the same gender, but rather sexual liaisons between people of the same gender that are outlawed. A pedantic point, I know, but still one that deserves attention, in my opinion. --Waidawut (talk) 02:28, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Someone brought this up earlier ( File talk:World homosexuality laws.svg/Archive 1#Homosexuality illegal ). According to the thread, in Egypt you can be arrested without a sex act, though I assume most other countries would require a sex act (or at least soliciting one) (?). "Homosexual acts illegal" would be more accurate though (across the board), if no one else objects to the legend being changed. Wikignome0529 (talk) 19:55, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Nepal will recognize it's marriage licenses (&VT+NH)

Nepal is issuing marriage licenses now for same-sex couples. Will not recognize them until July 1, 2010. Changed it.

Vermont likely to legalize gay marriage tomorrow.

New Hampshire by next week.

Vermont update

Vermont legalized same-sex marriage this morning (4/7).

Doesn't take effect until September 1, 2009.--Mediaptera (talk) 13:39, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Namibia

Male homosexuality is illegal in Namibia, but female homosexuality is legal. Since we have all the other countries colored correctly that only have criminalized one or the other, I think Namibia should be colored with orange, as there is prison time for offenders. See LGBT rights in Namibia. Vickiloves08 (talk) 23:02, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Ecuador

The consitution of Ecuador did pass in 2008, so civil unions are now allowed there. Seascic (talk) 03:45, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Maryland

Maryland offers domestic partnerships (though limited). Maryland should be changed to medium blue.

To my knowledge, no it doesn't. Do you have a link or a source? Please read the box at the top of the talk page. --Haha169 (talk) 01:09, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, you're right, they do. I'll add it when I have time. I don't know how to create a "Robinson projection"(?), so I can't color Maryland. Sorry.--Haha169 (talk) 01:12, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

 Done Maryland fixed - Wikignome0529 (talk) 22:56, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Color re-organization

What is the difference between "minimal" and "large"? Additionally, why is the "not recognized" above the "foreign recognized" while on the chart? Also, I'd like to propose a differentiation between countries which have constitutionally legalized homosexuality, and countries which simply don't have any laws at all.

Gray usually denotes countries that either don't care or there is no information on the subject. This is not true with many of the countries on here, as the U.S., Japan, Italy, China, etc., all have laws legalizing homosexuality. --Haha169 (talk) 04:30, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Am not sure of the original intent behind minimal/large, but the way I have interpreted it when coloring updates using them is that anything involving prison time would be a heavy/large penalty, whereas some countries have only have fines would be minimal penalty. As far as the grey goes... if marriage bans end up being added to the map (1 or 2 people have asked me before, but I never was able to get a map up with the illegal colors shifted to something other than red -- which would allow marriage bans to be red) -- if bans and under-consideration end up being added, there might not be that many grey countries left (& maybe no problem then?) ... Wikignome0529 (talk) 19:50, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Map issue: Recent & future adding of US states

Am posting this here so any other editors of this map will be aware of the issue. This map (world laws) uses a map projection where latitude lines are straight (i.e. US/Canada border is a flat line). The problem is that all maps in the blank US maps category use a projection with curved latitude lines (US/Canada border (and horizontal state borders are curved)). The longitude lines are also off, but this can be fixed to a certain extent by rotating new states slightly when pasting them into the world laws map). If a blank US SVG map existed with the flat latitude lines, states could just be pasted in as needed, skewing them to match the longitude lines to the world laws map.

Until now, this hasn't been much of an issue (Iowa, Colorado, Maryland turned out not that bad in past updates), but the latest update (Nevada) is not working out that well (at least with my limited Inkscape experience). The north border is curved, though most viewers would not notice this. The bigger problem is there is some overlap with Northern California, which makes the California/Nevada border in relation to Oregon look very off... (compare to File:Samesex marriage in USA.svg).

As-is right now maybe we can get away with Nevada until someone can fix it, but of course more and more states are going to be gradually added (possibly a few every year?). Does anyone know of a blank US map with straight latitude lines ^{(other than File:USA location map.svg, which am not sure how to color individual states instead of whole country)} to make it easier for amateur SVG editors like myself to male future US state additions to this map? (or another solution?) Thanks, Wikignome0529 (talk) 07:28, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

The issue with Nevada isn't noticeable unless you download the file and zoom in with Inkscape. However, this may start causing problems if states like Utah or Idaho legalize some form of unions. But that's likely way in the future. --Haha169 (talk) 03:18, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

That's great.. I wasn't sure how obvious it would be to people closer to/more familiar with those borders. Eventually a more permanent solution will be needed, but if this is working for now that is great. Wikignome0529 (talk) 20:11, 3 June 2009 (UTC)