Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "同性婚姻" in Chinese language version.
同性婚姻並不會影響到異性戀婚姻，以最早認可同志伴侶關係的北歐諸國為例(丹麥於1989年、挪威於1993年、瑞典於1995年通過同志伴侶法)，在法律上認可同志伴侶關係後，婚姻的幾個指標並沒有改變(結婚率 、離婚率 、非婚生子女人數)
同性婚姻是否應修民法，宗教團體再度站出來反對。今天由包括佛教、一貫道、道教、天主教、基督教、護家盟、軒轅教、天地正教、理教等宗教團體所組成的全國宗教大聯盟
第78點（法律認可同性伴侶或同居伴侶；）專家擔心我國缺乏法律上對婚姻家庭多元性的認可，且只有異性婚姻受認可而不包括同性婚姻或同居關係。這是帶歧視性的，且否定了同性伴侶或同居伴侶的許多福利。專家對於政府在修法認可家庭多元性之前先進行民意調查的計畫表示擔心。政府對全體人民的人權有履行義務且不應以公眾之意見做為履行的條件。第79點（應修訂民法以認可多元家庭；進行對大眾及校園中的性別教育）專家建議應修訂民法以便在法律上認可我國家庭的多元性。專家還建議應一般性的對社會大眾及特別在學校中毫不拖延地進行性別平等和性別多元性的認知和教育。
仔細閱讀這部份內政部的論理的話會發現，內政部將戶政制度的背景追溯至1906年的日本時代，強調當時「承認夫妾歸系」及特別區分「贅婚」；直到二戰之後後才「不容認納妾行為」但「重婚非當然無效」；直到1984年才禁止重婚、1998年才廢除贅婚制度。
In the early 1970s.....Marriage equality was not then a priority of gay activists.....In 1991, three gay couples in Hawaii challenged the constitutionality of laws limiting marriage to a man and woman. No national gay-rights organization would support litigation considered hopeless—but in 1993, the state supreme court unexpectedly ruled that excluding same-sex couples from marriage was presumptively unconstitutional.
宋代李昉所編《太平廣記》，歷來都被作為小說資料進行運用，主要用於小說文化的研究，而其史學價值一直很少有人問津。近年來，社會史的研究開始注意使用《太平廣記》部分資料，但仍未引起足夠的重視。小說不是正史，很多內容是虛構的。作為史料來用，就要十分注意其真實性。但小說是社會現實最直接的反映，有時其所反映的一些社會現象是比正史更真實、更鮮活。我們完全可以通過梳理這些小說資料，再現一些歷史現象，這是研究社會史的一個新角度
司法及行政實務，囿於父權與異性戀中心之傳統，將婚姻制度限定為一男一女的結合，此不但剝奪了非異性戀者選擇婚配對象的自由、否定了多元性別伴侶關係受法律及社會承認的可能，更連帶限制了非異性戀、多元性別者享有與婚姻相關之成千上百種的權利與福利
Legalizing gay marriage would offer homosexuals the same deal society now offers heterosexuals: general social approval and specific legal advantages in exchange for a deeper and harder-to-extract-yourself from commitment to another human being. Like straight marriage, it would foster social cohesion, emotional security, and economic prudence. Since there’s no reason gays should not be allowed to adopt or be foster parents, it could also help nurture children. And its introduction would not be some sort of radical break with social custom. As it has become more acceptable for gay people to acknowledge their loves publicly, more and more have committed themselves to one another for life in full view of their families and their friends, A law institutionalizing gay marriage would merely reinforce a healthy social trend.
既然「婚姻涉及身分關係之變更，攸關公共利益」（釋字第552號解釋參照），那麼對同性婚姻尚未取得法律地位的現況，便不能僅止於坐而論道，而必須採行具體的作為。
沒有血緣關係就不可能是親屬，因此，透過「結婚」成為「夫妻」是沒有血緣關係的人組成受法律充分保障之家庭的唯一方式。而現行法造成同性戀彼此之間無法結婚、「只有異性戀可以透過婚姻組成受法律充分保障的家庭」，同性戀就算和異性戀夫妻一樣互許終生，也無法獲得如同異性戀夫妻般國家的保護。也就是說，「一男一女」的規定表面上公平對待所有人，事實上造成了同性戀家庭無法獲得相等保障的差別待遇。
既然婚約由雙方當事人在自由意志下訂立，而非神旨的神聖化表現，此結婚之自由在構想上必然無法與離婚之自由脫節。又，婚姻擺脫了先前的宗教性，因此將能展現共和的價值，並逐步地將社會變遷納入其中
French Muslims have begun joining a mostly Catholic-led movement against same-sex marriage, widening opposition to the reform that the Socialist-led government is set to write into the law by June...Catholic bishops began demanding a public debate on the reform last summer and were soon joined by leaders of the Jewish, Muslim, Protestant and Orthodox Christian communities...The French Buddhist Union is the only main faith group that declined to take a stand, saying Buddha never spoke about homosexuality and suggesting a referendum to decide the issue.
惟當今之婚姻制度已揚棄過往以宗祧繼承為核心之觀念，繁衍後代不再是婚姻之必要目的，而代以當事人人格自主發展之理念，此觀諸無子嗣不再是法定婚姻解消事由即可明瞭。
Results confirm previous studies in this current body of literature, suggesting that children raised by same-sex parents fare equally well to children raised by heterosexual parents.
一男一女的婚姻具有自然生育與教養子女的功能，使得社會一代又一代地延續下去，所以全世界各國皆立法保障一男一女的婚姻關係。
But it was not until the 1990s that the modern movement towards marital equality began to make headway anywhere, and only in 2000 did the Netherlands become the first jurisdiction in the world to sanction same-sex weddings.
there’s a broad emerging consensus from respected and authoritative international bodies as well as courts in comparable jurisdictions to Australia, including the United States, that the principles of non-discrimination and equality before the law demand that civil marriage be extended beyond heterosexual couples
The attorney general, George Brandis, announced that on 9 December same-sex couples will be able “to lodge a notice of intended marriage”, paving the way for weddings as early as 6 January 2018.
Ireland has voted by a huge majority to legalise same-sex marriage, becoming the first country in the world to do so by popular vote in a move hailed as a social revolution and welcomed around the world.
許多權利的主張，皆以婚姻關係為前提，例如配偶繼承權、夫妻離婚之剩餘財產分配請求權、收養權、探望權、監護權、人工生殖技術的利用、醫療文件的簽署、保險契約受益人之保險利益的認定、所得稅法合併申報、年金請求權，還有民、 刑事訴訟程序下的拒絕證言權或告訴權等不勝枚舉的制度，與配偶地位有關。
憲法第7條規定，人民無分男女在法律上一律平等。這就是憲法平等保護的規定。法律如不接受同婚，就是根據當事人所選擇的配偶的性別決定他們是否可以結婚，同婚者因此而完全無法享受與異性婚一樣的財產分配權利、繼承權利、家庭權利等等，也就已經違反了法律上不分性別一律平等的憲法誡命...法律限制同婚，其實並不是基於男女生理上的差異或是其所形成的功能角色不同之故，也就不是能夠給予差別待遇的理由。選擇婚姻者，應該受到法律無分性別的平等保護。
宋代李昉所編《太平廣記》，歷來都被作為小說資料進行運用，主要用於小說文化的研究，而其史學價值一直很少有人問津。近年來，社會史的研究開始注意使用《太平廣記》部分資料，但仍未引起足夠的重視。小說不是正史，很多內容是虛構的。作為史料來用，就要十分注意其真實性。但小說是社會現實最直接的反映，有時其所反映的一些社會現象是比正史更真實、更鮮活。我們完全可以通過梳理這些小說資料，再現一些歷史現象，這是研究社會史的一個新角度
In the early 1970s.....Marriage equality was not then a priority of gay activists.....In 1991, three gay couples in Hawaii challenged the constitutionality of laws limiting marriage to a man and woman. No national gay-rights organization would support litigation considered hopeless—but in 1993, the state supreme court unexpectedly ruled that excluding same-sex couples from marriage was presumptively unconstitutional.
But it was not until the 1990s that the modern movement towards marital equality began to make headway anywhere, and only in 2000 did the Netherlands become the first jurisdiction in the world to sanction same-sex weddings.
既然「婚姻涉及身分關係之變更，攸關公共利益」（釋字第552號解釋參照），那麼對同性婚姻尚未取得法律地位的現況，便不能僅止於坐而論道，而必須採行具體的作為。
許多權利的主張，皆以婚姻關係為前提，例如配偶繼承權、夫妻離婚之剩餘財產分配請求權、收養權、探望權、監護權、人工生殖技術的利用、醫療文件的簽署、保險契約受益人之保險利益的認定、所得稅法合併申報、年金請求權，還有民、 刑事訴訟程序下的拒絕證言權或告訴權等不勝枚舉的制度，與配偶地位有關。
一男一女的婚姻具有自然生育與教養子女的功能，使得社會一代又一代地延續下去，所以全世界各國皆立法保障一男一女的婚姻關係。
既然婚約由雙方當事人在自由意志下訂立，而非神旨的神聖化表現，此結婚之自由在構想上必然無法與離婚之自由脫節。又，婚姻擺脫了先前的宗教性，因此將能展現共和的價值，並逐步地將社會變遷納入其中
仔細閱讀這部份內政部的論理的話會發現，內政部將戶政制度的背景追溯至1906年的日本時代，強調當時「承認夫妾歸系」及特別區分「贅婚」；直到二戰之後後才「不容認納妾行為」但「重婚非當然無效」；直到1984年才禁止重婚、1998年才廢除贅婚制度。
同性婚姻並不會影響到異性戀婚姻，以最早認可同志伴侶關係的北歐諸國為例(丹麥於1989年、挪威於1993年、瑞典於1995年通過同志伴侶法)，在法律上認可同志伴侶關係後，婚姻的幾個指標並沒有改變(結婚率 、離婚率 、非婚生子女人數)
惟當今之婚姻制度已揚棄過往以宗祧繼承為核心之觀念，繁衍後代不再是婚姻之必要目的，而代以當事人人格自主發展之理念，此觀諸無子嗣不再是法定婚姻解消事由即可明瞭。
司法及行政實務，囿於父權與異性戀中心之傳統，將婚姻制度限定為一男一女的結合，此不但剝奪了非異性戀者選擇婚配對象的自由、否定了多元性別伴侶關係受法律及社會承認的可能，更連帶限制了非異性戀、多元性別者享有與婚姻相關之成千上百種的權利與福利
沒有血緣關係就不可能是親屬，因此，透過「結婚」成為「夫妻」是沒有血緣關係的人組成受法律充分保障之家庭的唯一方式。而現行法造成同性戀彼此之間無法結婚、「只有異性戀可以透過婚姻組成受法律充分保障的家庭」，同性戀就算和異性戀夫妻一樣互許終生，也無法獲得如同異性戀夫妻般國家的保護。也就是說，「一男一女」的規定表面上公平對待所有人，事實上造成了同性戀家庭無法獲得相等保障的差別待遇。
憲法第7條規定，人民無分男女在法律上一律平等。這就是憲法平等保護的規定。法律如不接受同婚，就是根據當事人所選擇的配偶的性別決定他們是否可以結婚，同婚者因此而完全無法享受與異性婚一樣的財產分配權利、繼承權利、家庭權利等等，也就已經違反了法律上不分性別一律平等的憲法誡命...法律限制同婚，其實並不是基於男女生理上的差異或是其所形成的功能角色不同之故，也就不是能夠給予差別待遇的理由。選擇婚姻者，應該受到法律無分性別的平等保護。
第78點（法律認可同性伴侶或同居伴侶；）專家擔心我國缺乏法律上對婚姻家庭多元性的認可，且只有異性婚姻受認可而不包括同性婚姻或同居關係。這是帶歧視性的，且否定了同性伴侶或同居伴侶的許多福利。專家對於政府在修法認可家庭多元性之前先進行民意調查的計畫表示擔心。政府對全體人民的人權有履行義務且不應以公眾之意見做為履行的條件。第79點（應修訂民法以認可多元家庭；進行對大眾及校園中的性別教育）專家建議應修訂民法以便在法律上認可我國家庭的多元性。專家還建議應一般性的對社會大眾及特別在學校中毫不拖延地進行性別平等和性別多元性的認知和教育。
there’s a broad emerging consensus from respected and authoritative international bodies as well as courts in comparable jurisdictions to Australia, including the United States, that the principles of non-discrimination and equality before the law demand that civil marriage be extended beyond heterosexual couples
French Muslims have begun joining a mostly Catholic-led movement against same-sex marriage, widening opposition to the reform that the Socialist-led government is set to write into the law by June...Catholic bishops began demanding a public debate on the reform last summer and were soon joined by leaders of the Jewish, Muslim, Protestant and Orthodox Christian communities...The French Buddhist Union is the only main faith group that declined to take a stand, saying Buddha never spoke about homosexuality and suggesting a referendum to decide the issue.
同性婚姻是否應修民法，宗教團體再度站出來反對。今天由包括佛教、一貫道、道教、天主教、基督教、護家盟、軒轅教、天地正教、理教等宗教團體所組成的全國宗教大聯盟
Results confirm previous studies in this current body of literature, suggesting that children raised by same-sex parents fare equally well to children raised by heterosexual parents.
Legalizing gay marriage would offer homosexuals the same deal society now offers heterosexuals: general social approval and specific legal advantages in exchange for a deeper and harder-to-extract-yourself from commitment to another human being. Like straight marriage, it would foster social cohesion, emotional security, and economic prudence. Since there’s no reason gays should not be allowed to adopt or be foster parents, it could also help nurture children. And its introduction would not be some sort of radical break with social custom. As it has become more acceptable for gay people to acknowledge their loves publicly, more and more have committed themselves to one another for life in full view of their families and their friends, A law institutionalizing gay marriage would merely reinforce a healthy social trend.
The attorney general, George Brandis, announced that on 9 December same-sex couples will be able “to lodge a notice of intended marriage”, paving the way for weddings as early as 6 January 2018.
Ireland has voted by a huge majority to legalise same-sex marriage, becoming the first country in the world to do so by popular vote in a move hailed as a social revolution and welcomed around the world.
