Jump to content

Talk:Same-sex marriage in Nepal

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Legality

[edit]

Hi. I'm writing here to clarify what has been a point of controversy over this article: is same-sex marriage legal in Nepal or not? All the media sources I have read say that the Supreme Court has merely ordered the Nepali government to set up a commission looking into same-sex relationship recognition, including marriage and civil partnership. So, it is incorrect to say that same-sex marriage is legal in Nepal: the Court did not propose a deadline (like in South Africa), and neither are same-sex couples currently being issued marriage licences. I think we should wait and see how the government responds.

Nonetheless, this is a very interesting outcome. I would be interested in reading the actual court decision, if available in English. Ronline ✉ 12:25, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I edited it to make a little more sense with a little more detail. Its clear that they are allowing same sex marriage, but there law constitutes differently than American law. Therefore, they must go through a different procedure. Also, there not just recognizing same sex marriage, they have stated that all sexual minorities deserve to be treated equaly which concludes that marriage is part of this law.

I would love to find out more information, but it is currently under debate, so we just have to wait. IM EXCITED! Azcolvin429 (talk) 12:13, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm definitely excited too. This is the first example of same-sex marriage being explored judicially in Asia,. Nevertheless, I don't think the procedure is all that different to what other countries have gone through. The closest analogy I can find is South Africa, where the court gave the government a specific timeframe to implement marriage equality. In this case, however, the Court's ruling was more ambiguous. No deadline was given (i.e. legalise marriage in one year's time), and the Court didn't decide between marriage and civil unions. If the government decides to implement civil unions/registered partnership, this may still satisfy the equal rights requirement of the court (see also Civil unions in New Jersey). In any case, SSM is not currently legal in Nepal. Ronline ✉ 14:35, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sodomy illegal

[edit]

Sodomy is illegal in Nepals Penal Code 1964, how can SSM be legal? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.207.230 (talk) 11:51, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was legalized in 2007. Wikitiki666 (talk) 00:52, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Newsticle

[edit]

This article reads more like a news article than a Wikipedia article. --TheSeer (TalkˑContribs) 07:09, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Same-sex marriage in Nepal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:26, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 3 February 2018

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: consensus to move the page, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 20:55, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Same-sex marriage in Nepal → Recognition of same-sex unions in Nepal – Per consistency with other countries that have not yet legalized same-sex marriage 174.114.211.255 (talk) 17:44, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Court case

[edit]

In Same-sex union court cases says of a June 2018 case: The Supreme Court of Nepal held that denying a dependent visa for a foreign same-sex spouse of a Nepalese citizen is unlawful, as the Immigration Rules do not specify the gender of the spouse. The plaintiffs married in the U.S. It is not mentioned here. --190.5.179.180 (talk) 00:16, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

We have source, e.g. here, that say Nepal will be the 2nd country in Asia with SSM if the legislation is passed. On the other hand, this sounds like the situation in several Mexican states which we portray as having SSM despite legislation not yet being passed. See discussion at Talk:Same-sex_marriage#Nepal_II. — kwami (talk) 20:20, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I found the interim order in the news. After decoding and translating it, I think Nepal does not recognize same-sex marriage yet, but just residence rights for couples married abroad. --DaddyCell (talk) 11:54, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's dated to the month पुस Paush of this past year, so presumably it's the January 2023 ruling I recall (though it could be December 2022). — kwami (talk) 21:20, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Supreme Court Order of 2007? 2008?

[edit]

I am reading about the Supreme Court Order of 27/12/12 in this book (page 117).

https://www.njanepal.org.np/public/reports/21040752654-landmark-decision-english.pdf

This seems the first SC order which had mentioned the same sex marriage.

But in this article and even in the discussion here, most of you talk about the order of November 2008.

I have not found information about order of 2008 in the book above.

Could someone kindly clarify my confusion? M.I. (Japanese) (talk) 06:41, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 30 November 2023

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) The Night Watch (talk) 16:56, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Recognition of same-sex unions in Nepal → Same-sex marriage in Nepal – Please place your rationale for the proposed move here. Doomdorm64 (talk) 15:53, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]


The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Date

[edit]

I opened a discussion here on the date we use. Cordially. Aréat (talk) 16:09, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Ministry of Home Affairs website

[edit]

The article says that the Ministry of Home Affairs allowed local administration offices to begin registering same-sex marriages. But I can't find that information on their website. Can anyone verify the info and provide a link to the regulations implementing same-sex marriage?

Here is the link to the Ministry of Home Affairs website: https://www.moha.gov.np/en Cyanmax (talk) 16:25, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It probably is not online. We have and are using secondary sources. The article already cites one. Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:03, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still not convinced that same-sex marriage is fully legal in Nepal. No primary source on the Ministry of Home Affairs website has been found (it is online btw). I haven't seen any reports of other same-sex couples being married. And the whole wording — "temporarily register them" — doesn't sound very solid. --Extended Cut (talk) 16:37, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, there are still no reports of other couples being married. That Nepali activist claimed 200 couples would get married immediately, but it's not happening. That's really suspicious. Also, Wikipedia shouldn't misgender the trans woman calling their wedding "the first same-sex marriage", it's definitely not. No lie lives forever. That 2017 disinformation spread by pro-Armenian wikiusers was debunked only in 2023. Those pro-Armenian wikiusers managed to deceive the Wikipedia community for many years. Cyanmax (talk) 08:32, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it turns out that others can't get married, we should change Nepal on the map to dark green with a blue ring for the one case. — kwami (talk) 03:34, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is an analogy here with Argentina and Colombia:
On November 12, 2009, a court in Buenos Aires approved the marriage of a same-sex couple, Alex Freyre and José María Bello. In December 2009, the Governor of Tierra del Fuego Province, Fabiana Ríos, ordered the civil registry office to register their marriage. Following the first legal same-sex marriage registered in December 2009, seven other same-sex couples registered their marriages in Argentina before the national law legalizing same-sex marriage took effect at the end of July 2010.
On 24 July 2013, a judge in Bogotá declared a same-sex couple legally married. This was the first same-sex couple married in Colombia. In September 2013, two judges married two other same-sex couples. The final verdict was given by the Constitutional Court of Colombia in April 2016.
We changed Argentina to dark blue in July 2010, not in December 2009. We changed Colombia to dark blue in April 2016, not in July 2013.
We can use these examples as a standard. Cyanmax (talk) 07:05, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, this (Did Nepal Achieve Marriage Equality? Not Quite Yet: Nepal has celebrated its first same-sex wedding, but it is still virtually impossible for most queer couples to tie the knot. 2023 December 14) suggests it should be green, with an asterisk in the table. — kwami (talk) 03:48, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"The prime minister’s office has also indicated to LGBTQ+ rights activists that they are taking the supreme court’s interim order seriously, while the Ministry of Home Affairs gave its blessing to the local officials who registered Gurung and Pandey’s marriage." Seem to me that it's just the government of a quite poor country being slow compared to first world standards, not rejecting the change.--Aréat (talk) 04:15, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What standard do we use to decide that it's available? Cf. Mexico, where individual states refused to follow the SC ruling for years. We didn't count Mexico as fully legal until the last state enacted legislation. Has the legislation even been started yet in Nepal? The SC has been making these rulings since 2008. — kwami (talk) 04:20, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This source (Did Nepal Achieve Marriage Equality? Not Quite Yet) doesn’t seem to actually provide any evidence that other couples haven’t been able to marry or were rejected at government offices. It gives two examples, but from 2017 and 2023, before the court ruling. Is there any evidence that other couples were rejected? Panda2024 (talk) 06:14, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, but neither has there been any evidence that people can get married. Without that, we shouldn't be saying that they can. We have a couple who were able to get married after they won as litigants at court, but not a single couple who were able to get married without litigation. In Mexico too we had couples who got married through court order (amparo), but we didn't count those states as having SSM until people could get married without a court order. Is there really not a single other couple in Nepal who wanted to get married, who were waiting for this court ruling? — kwami (talk) 06:45, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In Estonia, several same-sex couples have already applied to get married after same-sex marriage was legalized on January 1. Since the turn of the year, half of the submitted marriage applications have come from same-sex couples, data from the Tallinn Vital Statistics Office shows. [1] It hasn't even been a week. Despite the harsh northern climate, there are already several same-sex couples rushing to get married. While in Nepal, only 1 couple applied to get married since June 2023. Nepal has a population of 30.5 million people, while the population of Estonia is only 1.3 million. There are still many questions. Cyanmax (talk) 08:24, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Population is not a good metric for the number of same-sex marriages. Examples include South Africa and Colombia were relatively few same-sex marriages have occurred despite both countries' high populations. This is likely due to cultural reasons. "While in Nepal, only 1 couple applied to get married since June 2023." Unfortunately, this is unsourced. I am not arguing either way, but we currently have no sources confirming or denying that other couples have married. Panda2024 (talk) 09:45, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What are you talking about? Same-sex marriages were legalized in South Africa 18 years ago, and in Colombia 8 years ago. There are thousands of married same-sex couples in both Colombia and South Africa. While in Nepal there's only one marriage between a trans woman and a cis man. Even in Estonia several same-sex couples applied for marriage in less than a week. I remember some wikiusers celebrating historic same-sex marriage legalization in Armenia (2017) and Haiti (2020), but then it turned out to be fake news. Cyanmax (talk) 10:21, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not fake, but exaggerated. Which it what seems to be going on here. I have yet to see a single report that a couple went to the clerk (or whoever you go to in Nepal) and got married. — kwami (talk) 10:30, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest we keep the article as neutral as possible for the time being until we have better sources. We truly have no idea if other couples have married in Nepal, or if couples have been rejected.
"Same-sex marriages were legalized in South Africa 18 years ago" Indeed, and in that time at least 17,000 same-sex couples have married in South Africa. This is a very similar number to New Jersey for example, where same-sex marriage was legalized 7 years later than South Africa and has a population 63 times smaller than South Africa. Population is not at all a good metric for the number of same-sex marriages. There are cultural and economic reasons too, and the "harsh northern climate" is certainly not one such reason. Panda2024 (talk) 13:18, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Estonian same-sex couples rushed to get married DESPITE the cold winter weather. There are already several same-sex couples geting married even though the law came into force five days ago. That's what I meant. Ok, so does that mean Nepali same-sex couples are scared or ashamed to get married because it's a "cultural thing"? If that's a "cultural thing", then maybe the country is not fully ready to legalize same-sex marriage. There is no need to force through "legalization" using dubious methods such as interim orders, marriages between trans and cis people and media manipulations. Thailand edges closer to legalizing same-sex marriage because it's supported by both the government and the majority of the population. That's how it should be. Cyanmax (talk) 14:28, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think Panda means that cold weather is not much of a barrier. (Today the high in Tallin is about −10. That wouldn't stop me from shopping, let alone getting married.)
Nepal has 24 times the population of Estonia, and marriage has supposedly been available for longer. Even given cultural differences, I'd expect at least a few additional marriages. If nothing else, there are people being bullied into accepting arranged marriages who could fend that off with SSM.
I don't think we should rely on the initial media reports, which are often sensationalized, if there's no follow up, and here there are warning signs such as the registrations being "temporary." (Maybe that just means provisional until the legislation is passed, but we don't really know.)
What we think "should" be is irrelevant, but I disagree that countries should wait until the population is "ready". Societal sanction is a powerful thing, and legalization of SSM increases public support. That seems to be because most people don't have strong opinions either way, and in polls they respond according to how they think they're supposed to think: if the police are arresting people and their church is preaching against it, most people are going to be opposed; if their leaders say it's a matter of human rights or their church starts marrying people, many of those people are going to change their minds. Granted, if the courts did this in Nigeria or Pakistan there would probably be riots, and even if that resulted in a doubling of support it would be a miniscule change, but once a significant fraction of people support it, as in Nepal or, say, Mozambique, a change in govt policy can be highly influential. For most of the world, being able to get married is not particularly important: what they need is anti-discrimination and anti-hate legislation. But the increasing support that comes from marriage equality boosts the chances of such legislation being passed, so it has value to more than just those people who want to get married. — kwami (talk) 18:15, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This source (https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/this-country-becomes-1st-in-south-asia-to-register-same-sex-marriage-4618539/amp/1)
suggests that the marriage was "temporarily registered and after the formulation of necessary laws, it will get permanent recognition automatically." I guess we don’t even really know if all the rights of marriage are guaranteed to marriages recorded in this temporary registry. Panda2024 (talk) 19:03, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For most of Nepal's population, same-sex marriage is not particularly important or interesting: what they need is clean air and water. They have more pressing concerns. There is no awareness of the issue. Although the literacy rate has been increasing over the past few years, the rate is still relatively low compared to other countries. That's why the Nepali people and the government are indifferent to this issue. I wish Nigeria and Pakistan would decriminalize same-sex sexual activity first. There would probably be violent riots even in Armenia which claims to be "western" and "civilized". Terrifying riots have already happened in neighboring country Georgia. I would be more than happy if Nepali parliament legalized same-sex marriage. But it's probably going to be a while, possibly years, before there is SSM in Nepal without individual court rulings. All we have now is that "temporary order" of a single judge bench with confusing wording and unknown legal effect. Cyanmax (talk) 21:01, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Multiple orders, really, the govt's just failed to act. — kwami (talk) 23:26, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1. This file from HRW is the primary source. It seems the file is translated by HRW. The origin document is Nepalese.
2. According to the news, if I understand correctly, the court's interim order establishes the issuance of marriage certificates, but it seems not to automatically grant associated rights to spouses, such as property inheritance or tax benefits. Instead, there is a temporary registration database in the civil registration system indicating that these individuals have established a "legal relationship" based on the Supreme Court's interim order. The news also mentions that the court has not yet commenced a final hearing on the matter. The interim order may be scrapped by the court while passing the final verdict, and they want a permanent solution. Gladio Arcanum (talk) 16:41, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, some Wikipedia users are deliberately trying to censor these important details and to mislead the world community. But these despicable methods don't work for long as we have already seen with the 2017 Armenia example.
By the way, I found a new source. Nepali LGBT activists openly admit the lack of same-sex marriage rights in Nepal.
Source: https://kathmandupost.com/art-culture/2024/02/02/an-initiative-for-marriage-equality-for-the-lgbtqia-community Cyanmax (talk) 14:42, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think anyone's trying to 'mislead' anyone. We're just trying to read too much in too little information. — kwami (talk) 19:08, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I remember a wikipedia user who cliamed "there are same-sex marriage cases in Armenia, even though they do not go to the news". That was without a doubt the most ridiculous lie I have ever seen in a Wikipedia article. They were rigidly gate-keeping Wikipedia articles and labeling me a "vandal", but I was right after all. Now I'm trying to expose another pinkwashing bu****it. Cyanmax (talk) 20:57, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think you really need to calm down a bit here. No one is trying to gatekeep anything. We're all trying to understand the situation with the news we currently have. Panda2024 (talk) 11:32, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There has been a second rainbow marriage in Nepal that was celebrated around christmas. Honestly so far only some municipalities are allowing these type of unions, if I am not mistaken the decision of made by the one judge has been appeal to the full supreme court, we will see what they order when they provide a ruling.

[1] <ref><https://www.instagram.com/nonextquestion/p/C1PGHORvO5t/?img_index=1/ref> Allancalderini12 (talk) 04:29, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So it looks like we have partial implementation, but not a final ruling. Maybe add a blue ring or something, but personally I'd like to wait untilthe situation is stabilized (and any couple can get married) before coloring Nepal solid blue on the map. And for the timeline, I think using the date of that final ruling would be best. — kwami (talk) 04:37, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The caption literally says "transgender couple registers their marriage". Calling this "same-sex marriage" is misleading and transphobic. Trans people can marry in a lot of countries, even in Iran. So we still have no reports of actual same-sex marriages. Cyanmax (talk) 08:23, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://sajhaparibesh.com/2023/12/24/70816/prakash-chaudhary-manila-neupane/

Same-sex or transgender marriage?

[edit]

The title of the article is "same-sex marriage in Nepal". But instead of providing at least a single case of same-sex marriage, the article tells about transgender couples who got married in 2023. Marriage between transgender people is not the same thing as "same-sex marriage". I must admit that this is getting ridiculous. It is either a shameful ignorance or a deliberate distortion of facts. Based on the lead of this article at it is now, most readers will assume same-sex couples are actually getting married in Nepal. This is completely false. Transgender couples are getting married there exactly because they are NOT same-sex couples. We can rename the article to read "marriages of gender minorities and non-traditional couples in Nepal" or "rainbow marriages in Nepal". Though the term "minorities, non-traditional etc." may sound archaic and offensive, while "rainbow marriages" sounds totally childish. The article is definitely not about same-sex marriages but rather about transgender marriages. Cyanmax (talk) 08:51, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not intend to get deeply into how Wikipedia should cover this stuff. But I would suggest that we follow the sources. This says same-sex marriage is now legal because both parties are legally identified as of the same sex. It may not be same-sex marriage per se, but it was a same-sex marriage as far as the law is concerned. That means it's legal. That means same sex couples who are not transgender or heterosexual can get married too. Doing additional work by yourself sounds a lot like original research to me. Usedtobecool ☎️ 09:17, 3 February 2024 (UTC)~[reply]
Agreed Panda2024 (talk) 11:32, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14 March Supreme Court arguments

[edit]

Hi all! Does anyone have news from the Supreme Court oral arguments that were supposed to have occurred on 14 March ? I can't find any sources online whether these arguments actually happened. Panda2024 (talk) 12:02, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is it actually legal?

[edit]

There's been several announcements from various Nepali authorities about same-sex marriage, but what's actually changed as to getting married? Do they have the same rights as heterosexual married couples? WindofWasps (talk) 10:05, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, don't ask any inconvenient questions, just trust biased wiki users. They even staged weddings with photos, and now many media outlets keep parroting dubious information from Wikipedia. Similar pinkwashing media campaign happened with Armenia a few years ago. I dared to question the accuracy of the info and was temporarily blocked by fanatical and ignorant wiki users.
By the way, there were no official announcements from Nepali authorities including Prime Minister or Ministry of Home Affairs. We just get info from intermediary "activists". Those "interim orders" or "ministry decisions" have not yet been published in the government gazette, the government website, or even the supreme court website. You can go check it yourself. While the governments and supreme courts of other countries normally publish their same-sex marriage laws and court rulings in their government gazette, the Nepali government and the supreme court are unable or unwilling to do so. Cyanmax (talk) 17:58, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 11 October 2024

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Bobby Cohn (talk) 19:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Same-sex marriage in Nepal → Recognition of same-sex unions in Nepal – "Marriage" with literally ZERO rights. Even Japanese partnership certificates are more useful than those temporary "marriage" certificates. Same-sex couples are misgendered and pressured into adopting gendered roles with little regard for their sexual orientation and gender identity. Plus, same-sex couples are entered into a "separate and temporary register" which sounds discriminatory and not very reassuring. In Thailand approximately 1500 same-sex couples are expected to marry on 22 January 2025. While in Nepal they are celebrating the seventh "same-sex marriage" in 15 months. Most of those couples are NOT even same-sex couples, they are transgender couples. Anyone who really believes this is "historic, groundbreaking, massive, powerful, amazing" is just ignorant and ridiculous. Cyanmax (talk) 17:00, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose - nomination doesn't sound like a policy-based proposal. Current article title is WP:CONSISTENT with others of similar scope. estar8806 (talk) ★ 21:23, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose- once again, we are basing what marriage should look like. These couples are married as far as the Nepali government is concerned, despite the legislature's unfortunate inability to offers these couples equal rights vis-á-vis opposite-sex marriages.
Take Ecuador, Aruba, Curaçao and the ten or so states in Mexico that do not recognize same-sex adoption, for example. States such as Croatia and Bolivia, whilst not providing marriage equality, do offer more rights than Quito has granted to its citizens. We don't list Croatia and Bolivia under the same-sex marriage heading, while we do count Ecuador as a state with equalized marriage. It is not our place to judge how many rights a married couple has, but simply just to acknowledge that it exists.
If anything, I would argue that Nepal be listed among states that provide for same-sex marriages. The heading is "same-sex marriage in Nepal," not "marriage equality in Nepal." Andrew1444 (talk) 04:41, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So tell me please, when exactly SSM was "legalized" in Nepal? 28 June 2023? 29 November 2023? 24 April 2024? When? Comparing Ecuador and Nepal is a very weak argument and whataboutism. First, in Ecuador, same-sex couples don't have adoption rights while in Nepal same-sex couples don't have any rights at all. Second, the Constitutional Court of Ecuador issued two rulings in favour of same-sex marriage, both by a 5–4 margin, on 12 June 2019. The rulings took effect upon publication in the government gazette, the Registro Oficial, on 8 July 2019. Article 81 of the Civil Code was amended to read: Marriage is a solemn contract by which two persons are united in order to live together and mutually help each other. In Nepal, a single judge Til Prasad Shrestha issued an interim order directing the government to establish a "separate register" for "sexual minorities and non-traditional couples" and to "temporarily register them". It was never officially published and the full bench of the Supreme Court has yet to deliver a final verdict on the case. The Civil Code of Nepal enacted in 2018 explicitly defines marriage as "when a man and a woman accept each other as husband and wife". We need to stop using those ambiguous and childish terms "marriage equality", "marriage for all", "rainbow marriage", "candy marriage" just call it same-sex marriage. We also need to stop that weird "Asia is a beacon of LGBT rights" fetish and start thinking critically instead. Cyanmax (talk) 08:34, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Moves are not made based on POV. We need policy and reliable sources to support our article titles. The fact of the matter is that Nepal recognizes same-sex marriage, even if it's not on an equal basis with opposite-sex marriage, and our standing consensus is to use "Same-sex marriage in X" once its legalized/recognized in a country. estar8806 (talk) ★ 14:51, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I agree for the moment Nepal should be in the list of same sex marriage countries, If Nepal consider this couples married, and marriages are occurring in the country, then we should add Nepal in the countries with same sex marriage. I agree that they might not provide the same benefits but honestly many countries like Mexico and Ecuador do not offer all benefits to ss couples compare to heterosexual the primary being adoption. Marriage certificates are being given in Nepal and even though they are in aa temporary register they are still consider marriages in the country. I also think that this needs to be resolved soon, the Wikipedia article for same sex marriage in Spanish considers Nepal as a marriage equality country, making them have 39 countries with same sex marriage while the English article only have 38, we need to resolved this now because it might confuse users.--Allancalderini12 (talk) 06:18, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I can provide plenty of sources:
    1 [2]
    2 [3]
    3 [4]
    4 [5]
    5 [6]
    6 [7]
    7 [8]
    8 [9]
    9 [10]
    No reason to jump ahead of the game. I understand that u guys love that country so much, but u have to keep any personal fetishes out of it. Stop parroting pointless claims, provide sources. Cyanmax (talk) 14:30, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Those sources do nothing but support the fact that same-sex marriage exists in Nepal. And UNCIVIL comments won't get you very far here. estar8806 (talk) ★ 15:09, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Facepalm. u haven't even read the sources, don't u? Cyanmax (talk) 15:25, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Which source says Nepal hasn't legalized same sex marriage? In the meantime, I would again strongly suggest you read WP:AVOIDUNCIVIL. Your fourth source says Nepal is only the second place in Asia to recognise same-sex marriages. The fifth says Local authorities in a village in Nepal registered the Himalayan nation's first same-sex marriage on. Sixth says At the end of November, Nepal’s government recognized a marriage. The first and last sources are clearly not reliable, and the second source is an interview which are generally considered unreliable. Your own sources don't support your argument, and I'm not quite sure what that argument is.estar8806 (talk) ★ 15:45, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Facepalm. So u picked up only what you wanted to see and ignored the key details. Also, u labeled some of the sources as "unreliable" just because you didn't like what you saw. Regardless, I’m not going to bother with this any longer because u keep seeing reliable sources as "uncivility" lol. Cyanmax (talk) 16:30, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Being rude and uncivil will not help you here. I suggest you calm down and be civil. Panda2024 (talk) 16:34, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Same-sex_marriage_in_Nepal&oldid=1251907992"