File talk:Same-sex marriage in Mexico.svg

Oaxaca en este mapa

Saludos. Recientemente la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación resolvió tres juicios de amparo interpuestos por parejas homosexuales del estado de Oaxaca, con efecto de que el registro civil de ese estado registrara sus matrimonios. Los tres juicios argumentaban que el artículo 143 del Código Civil oaxaqueño es discriminatorio. La resolución de la Corte fue favorable a las parejas, de modo que finalmente sus matrimonios fueron reconocidos en el registro civil. Sin embargo, esto no quiere decir que en el estado de Oaxaca se permitan matrimonios gays, pues la resolución de la Corte beneficia exclusivamente a las parejas demandantes. El Código Civil de Oaxaca sigue definiendo al matrimonio como la unión de un solo hombre con una sola mujer, de modo que, mientras no se modifique esa definición, la ley estatal no reconoce otra clase de matrimonios. Lo que es cierto es que cualquier pareja de Oaxaca y del resto de México puede solicitar un amparo a la SCJN para poder casarse, pero estos juicios sólo tienen efecto individual. Por favor, no difundan información errónea por medio de estos mapas. Yavidaxiu (talk) 20:48, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Confusing Colors

When I was looking at the map, I saw how when there are 1-4 amperos in a state, the state is beige, but if there are no amperos, the state is light blue, due to federal recognition of marriages from out-of-state. This has the appearance that the states with no amperos are closer to same-sex marriage than the states with 1-4 amperos because blue is associated with same-sex marriage. Does anyone else think changing the color system would be good? Tenor12 (留言) 01:53, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

• LOL, you spelled amparo wrong. TenorTwelve (留言) 22:41, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

January 2016: Jalisco

Mexico supreme court legalizes gay marriage in sixth jurisdiction Jalisco state.

Ende Januar 2016 ermöglichte der Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación die Eheöffnung im Bundesstaat Jalisco.

• Gaystarnews: Mexico supreme court legalizes gay marriage in sixth jurisdiction Jalisco state

Frewdvfre213 (留言) 13:26, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Classification

Wouldn't it be better to classify states according to the strength of their legal protection of same-sex marriages? My reasoning:

• Keeping track of all amparos and their outcome is almost impossible. In all likelihood, the numbers are significantly higher than what can be gathered from the few cases reported in the media.
• Since the SCJN ruling, some states are quietly marrying same-sex couples despite having no legislation.
• Among the states marrying same-sex couples, their legal underpinnings for doing so vary a lot. Some of these depend on individual decisions or the will of the current governor/mayor (which can easily change). Some are clearly written in a State's Civil Code and can only be overturned by new laws (which will certainly be challenged).

Kenohori (留言) 18:49, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Tried to edit the map; remove amparo counts, add civil unions

Hi, I just tried to edit the svg file, but apparently I did it wrong. Basically, counting the amparos is both pointless and misleading. Please read the article for the explanation. The states should simply be classified as "marriage is legal by statute/practice" or "marriage requires an amparo". A third category, noting that "civil unions allowed by statue, marriage by amparo" is useful to note Tlaxcala.

Can someone update the map, please? — 以上未签名的留言是由该用户加入的： Robsalerno (留言 • 贡献) 18:41, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Striping for where not fully legal ('legal a medias')

It's bothered me for a while that we were coloring these states as SSM-legal when many have yet to achieve full equality. Per this source, SSM is only legislated for in 10 states + CDMX. In the others we count as 'legal', you can get married w/o an amparo, but it can still be a pain in the ass because it's still illegal per state law. You can't just apply for a license like opposite-sex couples can. The article describes the situation specifically in Puebla, but provide a map for the whole country. There's a problem with it, in that they give Sonora as a state w a SC ruling, when it should probably be Aguascalientes. Also, they don't mention BC, SLP or Oaxaca, which are all colored peach on the map. Since editors here on WP have commented on how SSM is not fully equal in Oaxaca or BC (though not as bad as in Puebla, from the sound of it), I figure the same kind of situation exists, just legalized by local order rather than SC order, but still without the backing legislation. So I striped states dark blue with the SC-order gold for what's purple on the map in the article, and dark blue with tan for what's peach, except for the mix-up of Sonora and Aguas.

Though, for SLP, we have "Passed by the Congress of San Luis Potosí". Would that be solid blue then? Also, from our article it sounds like the legislation has never been passed for Chihuahua, so wouldn't that be striped blue/tan? I swapped those two per our articles in a second upload, so that someone could revert from the file history if need be. Kwamikagami (留言) 03:43, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

I think it’s a very terrible idea. Not wanting to be harsh, but the map looks extremely unesthetic. Indeed, in states where the Supreme Court acted, state law still bans same-sex marriage, but it has been declared void and unenforceable. It’s no different than say Brazil, where marriage law still defines marriage in heterosexual terms, or a majority of U.S. states, which have both constitutional and statutory bans. Jedi Friend (留言) 06:25, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Honestly, I feel as though this is just adding stuff for the sake of adding stuff. Why not have a footnote instead? Jedi Friend (留言) 06:36, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

I agree with Jedi Friend. The new map is very confusing. I am not against adding a second map, though, showing which federal states have updated their civil codes and which have not. Shall we revert to the old map? Finedelledanze (留言) 09:43, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

My point was that the striped states don't have marriage equality, which is what we were claiming they had. I don't know about Brazil, but in the US any contrary state laws are null and void. In Mexico they aren't, which means that you can't get married by the route that OS couples use. "Separate but equal" except that it's not really equal.

People are agitating for SSM legislation in states like Puebla when SSM is supposedly legal. That's not happening in the US.

Anyway, since we've got a template for the map now, it's simple to change the wording and legends for whatever we decide. Kwamikagami (留言) 10:19, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

But, they do have marriage equality! The Supreme Court has the power to void any state law it deems unconstitutional. This is exactly what happened in the five states concerned (Jalisco, Chiapas, Puebla, Nuevo León and Aguascalientes). These states are forbidden from discriminating against same-sex couples in relation to marriage. You might want to read Rex Wockner's blog, as it's very informative. Jedi Friend (留言) 10:44, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

As for the U.S., that's actually not true. In Nevada, for instance, an initiative to remove the constitutional ban on gay marriage is on the ballot for November. There are also bills pending in New Jersey, Texas, Puerto Rico, among others, as per the WP article "Same-sex marriage legislation in the United States". Jedi Friend (留言) 11:03, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

For Brazil, Art. 1.514 of the Civil Code uses the terms "man and woman" when referring to marriage (O casamento se realiza no momento em que o homem e a mulher manifestam, perante o juiz, a sua vontade de estabelecer vínculo conjugal, e o juiz os declara casados.). Jedi Friend (留言) 11:05, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Lastly, I doubt your source is very accurate, considering, as you said, that it mixed up Sonora and Aguascalientes, forgot San Luis Potosí and also falsely claimed that Chihuahua legalized marriage in 2012 when actually it did so in 2015. Jedi Friend (留言) 13:15, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

You have a point about the source not being very accurate. But I doubt they're inaccurate re. Puebla. In the US, the ballot measures are a technical detail, since the SC ruling overrides state and federal law. But that's not true of Mexico. In Mexico people don't have equal access to marriage. If we ignore differences in access, then shouldn't the whole country be blue? and Israel too? After all, SSM is legal in all 31 Mexican states: all you have to do is get married in the next state over, no different than in Alabama.

But maybe it is too much detail to repeat in every article. Maybe a second map just for the SSM in Mexico and SSM legislation articles? If we go that route, though, I think we should have a fn than access to marriage is not equal in all states. Kwamikagami (留言) 18:55, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

But Mexican federal law does override state law. See this source. I agree with maybe creating a separate map showing the different methods of legalization, akin to File:Method of same-sex marriage legalization in the United States.svg. I’m happy to create it, if it’s a problem. Jedi Friend (留言) 19:21, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

How's that? (I reverted a while ago, your cache probably hasn't cleared.)

Yes, federal law does override state law, but there is no federal law. MORENA is debating introducing federal legislation. But until then there is only state legislation. And SSM is only legislated in 10 states. In the other 8 it's being performed per federal court or governor order despite being illegal under state law, and that means people do not have equal access to marriage. It's not just this recent article, we've had discussions about this before for Baja, about the longer waiting times and greater paperwork.

Is there really that much difference between waiting a week for the bureaucracy to generate the paperwork for an exception to state law, and driving across the border to where SSM is legal, compared to just walking up to the counter and getting your license like anyone else? In all three cases, your marriage is legal, but we color-code two blue and one brown. Kwamikagami (留言) 19:46, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

In several of these 8 states, gay couples can marry without any impediment. Jalisco, Chiapas, for example. Baja California and Oaxaca are the exceptions, I think. PS: shouldn’t Zacatecas, Guerrero and Querétaro also be striped blue/tan on the new map? It’s legal in a few local municipalities. And Quintana Roo too?, since the state has yet to pass legislation. Jedi Friend (留言) 19:57, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

I thought Quintana had passed. I've wondered about Queretaro, but I think for the others we'd only want to use dots for the cities.

If there's no impediment in Jalisco and Chiapas, then I agree that's relevant. I was thinking more of practical equality than the technical legalities. This is just the first source I've seen to establish something like this across the country. If we don't have RS's to compare across the states, then the whole idea is problematic. Maybe a footnote that not all states provide complete equality, without trying to determine where the problems are? Kwamikagami (留言) 20:57, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Technically no, Quintana Roo hasn’t passed any legislation. Although its Civil Code mostly uses gender-neutral language, some articles of the code do have gender-specific language. Such as art. 828, where the parties are assumed to be bride and groom, or art. 882. Jedi Friend (留言) 19:48, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

change tan color?

Tan is used for anti-propaganda laws on the world map. Should we change? Kwamikagami (留言) 21:22, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Okay, it's been a couple days, so changed. Also striped Queretaro per earlier suggestion/request. We could add dots for cities too. Kwamikagami (留言) 10:52, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

I don’t mean to be a pain, but personally I don’t really like the colours. Jedi Friend (留言) 19:33, 14 July 2019 (UTC)