Texas proposition 2 (2005)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Legal recognition of
Same-sex unions
Same-sex marriage

Belgium
Canada
Netherlands

South Africa
Spain

Recognized in some regions

United States (MA, CA eff. 2008-6-16 at 5:01 p.m.)

Foreign marriages recognized

Aruba
Israel
Netherlands Antilles
United States (NM, NY, RI)

Civil unions and
registered partnerships

Andorra
Czech Republic
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany
Hungary (eff. 2009-1-1)
Iceland

Luxembourg
New Zealand
Norway
Slovenia
Sweden
Switzerland
United Kingdom
Uruguay

Recognized in some regions

Argentina (C, R, VCP)
Australia (TAS, SA, ACT, VIC eff. 2008-12-1)
Brazil (RS)
Canada (QC)
Mexico (Coah., DF)
United States (CA, CT, DC, HI, ME, NH, NJ, OR, VT, WA)

Unregistered co-habitation

Australia
Austria
Brazil
Colombia

Croatia
Israel
Portugal

Recognition being debated

Argentina
Austria
Australia (QLD)
Brazil
Chile
China
Colombia
Costa Rica
Croatia
Cuba
Estonia
Ecuador
Faroe Islands

Greece
Ireland
Italy
Jersey
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Poland
Romania
Slovakia
Taiwan
United States
   (IA, IL, MD, NM, NY, RI)

Same-sex marriage debated,
recognition granted

Iceland
New Zealand

Norway
Sweden

United States (CT, DC, HI, ME, NH, NJ, OR, VT, WA)
See also

Same-sex marriage
Civil union
Registered partnership
Domestic partnership
Timeline of same-sex marriage
Listings by country

This box: view  talk  edit

Texas Proposition 2 of 2005 is a so-called "defense of marriage amendment" that amended the Texas Constitution to make it unconstitutional for the state to recognize or perform same-sex marriages or civil unions. The referendum was approved by 76% of the voters.[1]

The text of the amendment stated:

(a) Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman.

(b) This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.[2]

During the debate up to the election, a local minister in Austin, Texas opposed the amendment on somewhat unusual grounds. According to the minister, the wording of subsection (b) could actually be used to outlaw marriage itself.[citation needed] Proponents claimed that this was nothing more than a "smokescreen" to confuse voters on the issue.

[edit] References

  1. ^ 2005 Constitutional Amendment Election, Texas Secretary of State, Elections Division. Accessed 22 December 2006.
  2. ^ Texas Constitution, Article I, section 32. Accessed 22 December 2006.

[edit] External links