On 29 June 2018, two family judges in Cuenca, Ecuador ruled that the Civil Registry must issue same-sex marriage licenses on request, stating that the decision of the IACHR trumped the Ecuadorian Constitution's definition of marriage. The Registry has appealed, but the Constitutional Court has indicated that it is likely to rule in favor of same-sex marriage.[159][160]
In 2015, the American National Center for Transgender Equality conducted a National Transgender Discrimination Survey. Of the 27,715 transgender and non-binary people who took the survey, 21% said the term "queer" best described their sexual orientation, 18% said "pansexual", 16% said "gay", "lesbian", or "same-gender-loving", 15% said "straight", 14% said "bisexual", and 10% said "asexual".[74]
Ayoni or non-vaginal sex of all types are punishable in the Arthashastra. Homosexual acts are however treated as a smaller offence punishable by a fine while unlawful heterosexual sex have a much harsher punishment. The Dharmsastras especially the later ones prescribed against non-vaginal sex like the Vashistha Dharmasutra. The Yājñavalkya Smṛti prescribes fines for such acts including those with other men. Manusmriti prescribes light punishments for such acts.[15][16] Vanita states that the verses about punishment for a sex between female and a maiden is due to its strong emphasis on a maiden's sexual purity.[17]

In 2019, Three transgender people who identify as male lost their legal bid on Friday to be recognised as such on their Hong Kong identity cards, in a setback for the LGBT movement to achieve equal rights. While expressing sympathy, High Court judge Mr Justice Thomas Au Hing-cheung ruled against the three applicants, Henry Tse, Q and R, They have all been legally recognised as men by the British government but are unable to get their gender changed on Hong Kong ID cards. The judge said that a complete sex change would be the only “workable way” for the local government to determine a person’s gender. Although the trio, all born female, identify as men, and have had their breasts removed and undergone hormone therapy, they all still have their uterus and ovaries – which was the point of contention in their legal challenges against the city’s commissioner of registration.[17][18]
Nevada 2,839,099 October 7, 2014 October 9, 2014 Federal court decision → legislative statute Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in Sevcik v. Sandoval. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada's ruling.[70] Gender-neutral marriage bill passed by the Nevada Legislature and signed into law by the Governor of Nevada went into effect on July 1, 2017.[71][72]
On July 22, 2005, the first Latvian gay pride march took place in Riga, surrounded by protesters. It had previously been banned by the Riga City Council, and the then-Prime Minister of Latvia, Aigars Kalvītis, opposed the event, stating Riga should "not promote things like that", however a court decision allowed the march to go ahead.[78] In 2006, LGBT people in Latvia attempted a Parade but were assaulted by "No Pride" protesters, an incident sparking a storm of international media pressure and protests from the European Parliament at the failure of the Latvian authorities to adequately protect the Parade so that it could proceed.
^ APA task force (1994) "...For sexually mature individuals, the following specifiers may be noted based on the individual's sexual orientation: Sexually Attracted to Males, Sexually Attracted to Females, Sexually Attracted to Both, and Sexually Attracted to Neither..." in DSM-IV: Sections 302.6 and 302.85 Archived 2007-02-11 at the Wayback Machine published by the American Psychiatric Association. Retrieved via Mental Health Matters Archived 2007-04-07 at the Wayback Machine on 2007-04-06.

In autumn 2004 several gay businesses in London were ordered by Westminster City Council to remove the rainbow flag from their premises, as its display required planning permission.[citation needed] When one shop applied for permission, the Planning sub-committee refused the application on the chair's casting vote (May 19, 2005), a decision condemned by gay councillors in Westminster and the then Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone. In November the council announced a reversal of policy, stating that most shops and bars would be allowed to fly the rainbow flag without planning permission.
Sexual attraction, behavior, and identity may also be incongruent, as sexual attraction or behavior may not necessarily be consistent with identity. Some individuals identify themselves as heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual without having had any sexual experience. Others have had homosexual experiences but do not consider themselves to be gay, lesbian, or bisexual.[14] Likewise, self-identified gay or lesbian individuals may occasionally sexually interact with members of the opposite sex but do not identify as bisexual.[14] The terms queer,[15] polysexual,[15] heteroflexible, homoflexible, men who have sex with men and women who have sex with women may also be used to describe sexual identity or identify sexual behavior.[citation needed]
Meetings to organize the march began in early January at Rodwell's apartment in 350 Bleecker Street.[17] At first there was difficulty getting some of the major New York City organizations like Gay Activists Alliance (GAA) to send representatives. Craig Rodwell and his partner Fred Sargeant, Ellen Broidy, Michael Brown, Marty Nixon, and Foster Gunnison of Mattachine made up the core group of the CSLD Umbrella Committee (CSLDUC). For initial funding, Gunnison served as treasurer and sought donations from the national homophile organizations and sponsors, while Sargeant solicited donations via the Oscar Wilde Memorial Bookshop customer mailing list and Nixon worked to gain financial support from GLF in his position as treasurer for that organization.[18][19] Other mainstays of the organizing committee were Judy Miller, Jack Waluska, Steve Gerrie and Brenda Howard of GLF.[20] Believing that more people would turn out for the march on a Sunday, and so as to mark the date of the start of the Stonewall uprising, the CSLDUC scheduled the date for the first march for Sunday, June 28, 1970.[21] With Dick Leitsch's replacement as president of Mattachine NY by Michael Kotis in April 1970, opposition to the march by Mattachine ended.[22]
Legal marriage is a secular institution that should not be limited by religious objections to same-sex marriage. Religious institutions can decline to marry gay and lesbian couples if they wish, but they should not dictate marriage laws for society at large. As explained by People for the American Way, "As a legal matter, marriage is a civil institution... Marriage is also a religious institution, defined differently by different faiths and congregations. In America, the distinction can get blurry because states permit clergy to carry out both religious and civil marriage in a single ceremony. Religious Right leaders have exploited that confusion by claiming that granting same-sex couples equal access to civil marriage would somehow also redefine the religious institution of marriage... this is grounded in falsehood and deception." [132] Nancy Cott, PhD, testified in Perry v. Schwarzenegger that "[c]ivil law has always been supreme in defining and regulating marriage." [41] 

Allowing gay marriage would only further shift the purpose of marriage from producing and raising children to adult gratification. [19] A California Supreme Court ruling from 1859 stated that "the first purpose of matrimony, by the laws of nature and society, is procreation." [90] Nobel Prize-winning philosopher Bertrand Russell stated that "it is through children alone that sexual relations become important to society, and worthy to be taken cognizance of by a legal institution." [91] Court papers filed in July 2014 by attorneys defending Arizona's gay marriage ban stated that "the State regulates marriage for the primary purpose of channeling potentially procreative sexual relationships into enduring unions for the sake of joining children to both their mother and their father... Same-sex couples can never provide a child with both her biological mother and her biological father." Contrary to the pro gay marriage argument that some different-sex couples cannot have children or don't want them, even in those cases there is still the potential to produce children. Seemingly infertile heterosexual couples sometimes produce children, and medical advances may allow others to procreate in the future. Heterosexual couples who do not wish to have children are still biologically capable of having them, and may change their minds. [98]

Marriage is a privilege, not a right. The US Constitution contains no explicit right to marry. [99] The European Court of Human Rights ruled on June 24, 2010 that the state has a valid interest in protecting the traditional definition of marriage, and stated that the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms "enshrined the traditional concept of marriage as being between a man and a woman." [101] [102] Society can choose not to allow same-sex couples to marry, just as it does not allow a person to marry more than one partner or allow minors or close relatives to marry. [100] Matthew D. Staver, JD, Dean of the Liberty University School of Law, explained: "The unifying characteristics of the protected classes within the Civil Rights Act of 1964 include (1) a history of longstanding, widespread discrimination, (2) economic disadvantage, and (3) immutable characteristics... 'Sexual orientation' does not meet any of the three objective criteria shared by the historically protected civil rights categories." [62]


Dr. Alfred Kinsey's 1948 work Sexual Behavior in the Human Male found that "46% of the male population had engaged in both heterosexual and homosexual activities, or "reacted to" persons of both sexes, in the course of their adult lives".[13] The Kinsey Institute has stated that "Kinsey said in both the Male and Female volumes that it was impossible to determine the number of persons who are "homosexual" or "heterosexual". It was only possible to determine behavior at any given time".[13] Kinsey's book, and its companion Sexual Behavior in the Human Female, have received vocal criticism for their findings and methodology.[14][15][16][17] The New York Times called his research "conscientious and comprehensive"[18] and Professor Martin Duberman called it "skillful" and "a monumental endeavor".[19]

×