Jump to content

Talk:Same-sex marriage in New Zealand: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Don't remove legitimate discussion
CRaZyKcNz (talk | contribs)
38 edits
No edit summary
Line 16: Line 16:


As opposed to the above assertion, looking at the Marriage Act itself it does seem to explicitly allow for recognition of overseas same sex marriages if they are legal in the country they are conducted in. Part 7, section 40, clause 2 "Nothing in this section shall affect the validity of any marriage solemnised out of New Zealand in accordance with the law of the country where the marriage was solemnised." [http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1955/0092/latest/DLM292371.html here].[[User:Number36|Number36]] ([[User talk:Number36|talk]]) 23:20, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
As opposed to the above assertion, looking at the Marriage Act itself it does seem to explicitly allow for recognition of overseas same sex marriages if they are legal in the country they are conducted in. Part 7, section 40, clause 2 "Nothing in this section shall affect the validity of any marriage solemnised out of New Zealand in accordance with the law of the country where the marriage was solemnised." [http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1955/0092/latest/DLM292371.html here].[[User:Number36|Number36]] ([[User talk:Number36|talk]]) 23:20, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

== Removal of referenced information ==

I have posted the follow twice, I stand by its accuracy please critique and allow for modification


==Public opinion==
A ''[[New Zealand Herald]]'' poll in 2004 found that 40% of New Zealanders supported same-sex marriages and 54% were against.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.nzherald.co.nz/civil-unions/news/article.cfm?c_id=565&objectid=3597388 |title=Civil Union Bill: What the readers say |publisher=New Zealand Herald |date=2004-10-05 |accessdate=2011-08-17}}</ref> A Research New Zealand poll in 2011 found that 60% were in favour, and 34% against, with support at 79% among 18 - 34 year olds.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.researchnz.com/pdf/Media%20Releases/RNZ%20Media%20Release%20-%202011-07-12%20Same%20sex%20marriages.pdf |title=RNZ Media Release: Same Sex Marriages |publisher=Research New Zealand |date=2011-07-12 |accessdate=2011-07-19}}</ref> According to a May 2012 One News Colmar Brunton poll, 63% of New Zealanders supported same-sex marriage, 31% were against.<ref>[http://www.colmarbrunton.co.nz/images/Views_on_same_sex_marriage_May_2012.pdf Views on whether same-sex couples should be able to marry]</ref><ref>[http://www.gaynz.com/articles/publish/2/article_11843.php Poll shows majority backs same-sex marriage]</ref><ref>[http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/NZ-poll-shows-same-sex-marriage-support-UZBWL?OpenDocument&src=hp8 NZ poll shows same-sex marriage support]</ref>


Both polls the 2004 and the 2008 used the same survey question of: "In New Zealand same-sex couples can enter into a Civil Union, but they are not able to get married. Do you think same-sex couples should be able to get married?". The question repetition and method duplication makes the poll suitable for showing actual opinion change.<ref>[http://www.colmarbrunton.co.nz/images/Views_on_same_sex_marriage_May_2012.pdf Views on whether same-sex couples should be able to marry]</ref>


According to a May 2012 One News Colmar Brunton poll, 63% of New Zealanders supported same-sex marriage, 31% were against. <ref>[http://www.colmarbrunton.co.nz/images/Views_on_same_sex_marriage_May_2012.pdf Views on whether same-sex couples should be able to marry]</ref><ref>[http://www.gaynz.com/articles/publish/2/article_11843.php Poll shows majority backs same-sex marriage]</ref><ref>[http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/NZ-poll-shows-same-sex-marriage-support-UZBWL?OpenDocument&src=hp8 NZ poll shows same-sex marriage support]</ref>
This survey also asked if the respondents identified with a spiritual/religious group. Based the 2012 Colmar Brunton poll responses the following can be calculated: <ref>[http://www.colmarbrunton.co.nz/images/Views_on_same_sex_marriage_May_2012.pdf]</ref>

- 14.57% of the population are religious people who oppose gay marriage, while 43.55% of the total population identifies as being religious. This means 33.46% of religious people oppose same-sex marriage

- 6.51% of the population are non-religious people who oppose gay marriage, while 53.76% of the total population identifies as being non-religious. This means 12.11% of non-religious people oppose same-sex marriage.

- These results indicate a link between identifying with a religious/spiritual group and opposing same sex marriage. Differences in total responses from 100% exist due to some respondents answering 'not sure' or 'prefer not to say'.


Vastly different results have been found by the Curia poll conducted in New Zealand 2011 on behalf of the Christian based organisation Family First which asked "The law currently defines marriage as being only allowable between a man and a woman? Do you support this?" The poll found: 52% of New Zealanders approve of the definition, 42% disapprove, and 6% were unsure. <ref>http://www.familyfirst.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Definition-of-Marriage-Mar-2011-FULL-REPORT.pdf</ref>

The Curia poll has been widely used by advocates of the movement opposing same sex marriage to suggest the government is acting against constituent support. This includes leading opposition website protectmarriage.org.nz. <ref>http://www.protectmarriage.org.nz/archives/tag/poll</ref>


The following criticisms of Curias methodology have been accused of producing skewed results:

- 78% of the respondents surveyed were over 46. Only 22% were under 45 <ref>http://www.familyfirst.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Definition-of-Marriage-Mar-2011-FULL-REPORT.pdf]</ref>. The amount of 18-45 year olds that oppose the definition is 53-56%, the{{unsigned|CRaZyKcNz}}

:I strongly oppose these edits. There is no reason to include so many details in the article. Everyone can read the sources. The ""Public opinion"" section is not central point of the article and should not be too big. [[User:Ron 1987|Ron 1987]] ([[User talk:Ron 1987|talk]]) 16:17, 14 August 2012 (UTC)


It is politics. Public opinion and facts are almost exclusively what matters. The information I am posting has been extensively used by media/journalists and political organisations in their debate.

[[User:CRaZyKcNz|CRaZyKcNz]] ([[User talk:CRaZyKcNz|talk]]) 00:47, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
:Short information about polls is absolutely enough. I don't see a good reason to expand it. Further details are in sources, which could be read by users. [[User:Ron 1987|Ron 1987]] ([[User talk:Ron 1987|talk]]) 00:55, 15 August 2012 (UTC)


Enough to what? My thought was Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, the goal being to give full access to verifiable information. First, the curia poll was left out completely on the page. Secondly that curia poll is one of the most extensively referenced sources in ongoing the political debates. Thirdly the link between the polls as showing society change not just poll results is notable. Fourthly the link between political view and religious affiliation is explanatory. and Finally the weaknesses in the Curia poll results are notable and relevant to the debate. I am not sold on wording. You could perhaps re-write it more concisely?

[[User:CRaZyKcNz|CRaZyKcNz]] ([[User talk:CRaZyKcNz|talk]]) 02:51, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
:I did not remove the Curia poll from the article despite that the poll is probably biased.
Citation: """The following criticisms of [[Curia Market Research]]s methodology have been accused of producing skewed results:
− 78% of the respondents surveyed were over 46. Only 22% were under 45 <ref>http://www.familyfirst.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Definition-of-Marriage-Mar-2011-FULL-REPORT.pdf]</ref>. The amount of 18-45 year olds that oppose the definition is 53-56%, the amount of 45-61+ year olds that oppose the definition is only 31-47%. Similarly those supporting the definition in 18-45 year olds is 34-43% while 45-61+ rises to 46-62%.
− Respondents in rural locations were over surveyed (with generally more religious and more traditional populations). 31% of respondents were in rural areas but only 8.4% of New Zealands live in rural areas (see source table 1) <ref>http://www.lincoln.ac.nz/Documents/4321_RR300_s14338.pdf</ref>
Curia has also been identified as having a biased relationship with the family first organisation including Curia principal, David Farrar voicing personal opinions of support on his blog <ref>http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/</ref> and has widely been criticized as producing results 'as requested' for clients. A quote from Curia Market Researches website states "Curia believes polling is an art, as well as a science. The most essential aspect to any poll is taking the time to understand the key drivers for clients, and ensuring the questions asked will be of maximum value." <ref>http://curia.co.nz/</ref>. Other work commissioned for Curia by family first includes polls on legalized prostitution <ref>http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1202/S00110/prostitution-law-harming-homes-and-retailers.html</ref> and anti-smacking laws <ref>http://familyfirst.org.nz/research/anti-smacking-polls/</ref>; both of which produced results inconsistent with other market research companies like Colmar Brunton."""

Is methodology criticized? By who? Who say that the curia's relationship with family first organisation is biased? No sources about that. Or maybe it is your personal opinion?
[[User:Ron 1987|Ron 1987]] ([[User talk:Ron 1987|talk]]) 03:33, 15 August 2012 (UTC)


Thanks for your Reply Ron

I agree the poll is biased. But that makes it more relevant. A largely sourced poll with obvious errors. When you look up the Earth wiki it doesn't just say 'the earth is round' it says 'the earth was thought to be flat, for these reasons, and this is why its not'. Because although it is wrong it is relevant to the current understanding of the issue. If you would like to see the frequency of the polls sourcing google it and you will see it is common

>Is methodology criticized?

You just stated and accepted the reasoning in giving your explanation for not posting the poll

>By who? Who say that the curia's relationship with family first organisation is biased? No sources about that.

If the problem was wanting more sources you just had to say:

Here is the protect marriage.org.nz website with over 26,759 signatures claiming the poll: http://www.protectmarriage.org.nz/archives/debate-needed-to-understand-purpose-of-marriage

Here is the political party 'the greens' criticizing curia: http://www.greens.org.nz/press-releases/another-attack-keeping-our-children-safe-violence

Cheers
[[User:CRaZyKcNz|CRaZyKcNz]] ([[User talk:CRaZyKcNz|talk]]) 04:17, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
:I'm not convinced at all. This article is not about Curia Market Research. ''Obvious errors'' should be pointed by the some source. In current form it's original research. The poll itself can't be used as a source in this case. Obviously, we don't have consensus on this. [[User:Ron 1987|Ron 1987]] ([[User talk:Ron 1987|talk]]) 04:31, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

The FF poll result was sourced only to FF's own web site. I have removed it because it is self-published. If anyone wishes to re-add these results, please find a [[WP:RS|reliable source]] for them first. [[User:Daveosaurus|Daveosaurus]] ([[User talk:Daveosaurus|talk]]) 05:31, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 12:31, 24 August 2012

Transexuals

I have read and re-read the last sentence of this paragraph. Can it please be re-written in simpler english? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.187.137.106 (talk) 03:31, 17 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Overseas marriages and registered partnerships

The article currently incorrectly states that "couples that have same-sex marriages from countries that allow them can have their ]marriages recognised as civil unions [in New Zealand]". This is actually false. Couples who have been in such a relationship are definitely recognised as being in a de facto partnership, but are not automatically recognised as being in a "civil union" in New Zealand. My husband and I had a looooong argument with the DIA on this when we arrived in the country and wanted our Canadian marriage to be recognised as an NZCU and finally gave up becasue, frankly, they were just too stupid to deal with. Going to correct the article and provide references now. 82.124.32.180 (talk) 20:52, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Overseas marriages and registered partnerships 2

As opposed to the above assertion, looking at the Marriage Act itself it does seem to explicitly allow for recognition of overseas same sex marriages if they are legal in the country they are conducted in. Part 7, section 40, clause 2 "Nothing in this section shall affect the validity of any marriage solemnised out of New Zealand in accordance with the law of the country where the marriage was solemnised." here.Number36 (talk) 23:20, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Same-sex_marriage_in_New_Zealand&oldid=508925478"