Talk:Ban (law)

Marriages

I believe that the following sentence in the second paragraph under "Banning Marriages" violates Wikipedia policy, in that it evinces a biased point of view:

"In fact he is the first President ever to propose a constitutional amendment that would write discrimination into the Constitution of the United States."

Hear, hear! I think it is biased as well. Marriage has traditionally been between a male and female. It is the homosexual lobby that is pushing to expand the definition of marriage, not conservatives trying to "ban" homosexual marriage. Homosexual marriage never existed in the first place. BenjaS 19:36, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's actually a pretty terrible section in the first place. It's totally US-centric, for a start, and completely irrelevant in much of Canada and parts of Europe. The history of marriage is a lot more complicated than either the article or the above poster seems to think: for one thing, it wasn't even a sacrament until a few hundred years ago. Marriage is not something that's been unchangingly blessed by God for 2000 years. 86.132.141.203 23:31, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Banning in South Africa

I think we need a separate article on this practice.Dynzmoar 11:49, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Only true in the USA

"For much of the 1800s and 1900s there were bans on marriage between people of different races". Interracial marriage was certainly not banned ( ever ) in Britain ( and Im sure elsewhere but I can only speak about my country of origin ). I think this statement as stands is false. ---"unsigned anonymous comment"

Wouldn't simply adding "In some countries" or "In United States" fix it then? 89.102.125.66 (talk) 20:52, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bans in religion

I've added some relevant links. Perhaps somebody could put together a brief section for Religious bans? HG | Talk 22:23, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]