Talk:LGBTQ rights in Nevada: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:19, 22 May 2013

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the LGBTQ rights in Nevada article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Nevada (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nevada, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.NevadaWikipedia:WikiProject NevadaTemplate:WikiProject NevadaNevada

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

LGBTQ+ studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Human rights Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

References

I've redone the refs to show the full linked-item urls in the References section. I notice the third one has become a dead link, and needs to dug up again. Hiroe (talk) 00:12, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

comment

The age of consent for gays in Nevada is 18 per nrs chapter 201.195 in crimes against nature. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.250.68.214 (talk) 05:59, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

False Framed Viewpoint

I intend to remove nearly the entire opening paragraph as LGBT couples who enter the commitment that equals "marriage" to straight couples have nowhere near equal rights. A recent repeal (April,2013) of a gay marriage ban does not in any way mean LGBT married couples have "most of the same rights" They have none of the same rights.Dirtclustit (talk) 17:50, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What I read on Recognition of same-sex unions in Nevada suggests that the rights provided by a Nevada domestic partnership are extensive. Not identical to marriage, but extensive. That entry says: "The Domestic Partnership Responsibilities Act provides largely the same state-level rights, responsibilities, obligations, entitlements and benefits of marriage under the name domestic partnership." A long list follows. The entry also details some serious differences: "Nevada domestic partnerships differ from marriage in that a couple forming a domestic partnership must share a common residence and be at least 18 years old rather than 16 with the consent of one parent. Public agencies and public employers who provide health insurance for married partners of employees need not provide those same benefits to domestic partners." I'd assume from that that non-public employers are also free to discriminate against those in domestic partnerships in providing health benefits, but it doesn't say that. I'd be surprised if Nevada holds private enterprise to a higher standard that the private sector.

I'd suggest that what needs improvement is the description in the body of this entry under the heading "Recognition of same-sex relationships". That refers to legislation to "grant both opposite-sex and same-sex couples all the responsibilities, obligations, rights, entitlements and benefits of marriage within a type of domestic partnership registry without calling it marriage." If that is overstated -- and it must be since it uses the word all -- then it needs to be properly restated before we work on the opening paragraph, which is supposed to be a summary of what follows.

So first let's improve what we have in the body and then we can work to be sure the opening paragraph -- which is supposed to summarize the body of the entry -- does so. And if I find the time I'll look into what Nevada domestic partnerships do and do not provide. Perhaps Recognition of same-sex unions in Nevada needs some work. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 21:19, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 I intend to remove nearly the entire opening paragraph as LGBT couples who enter the commitment that equals "marriage" to straight couples have nowhere near equal rights. A recent repeal (April,2013) of a gay marriage ban does not in any way mean LGBT married couples have "most of the same rights" They have none of the same rights.[[User:Dirtclustit|Dirtclustit]] ([[User talk:Dirtclustit|talk]]) 17:50, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
+:What I read on [[Recognition of same-sex unions in Nevada]] suggests that the rights provided by a Nevada ''domestic partnership'' are extensive. Not identical to marriage, but extensive. That entry says: "The Domestic Partnership Responsibilities Act provides largely the same state-level rights, responsibilities, obligations, entitlements and benefits of marriage under the name domestic partnership." A long list follows. The entry also details some serious differences: "Nevada domestic partnerships differ from marriage in that a couple forming a domestic partnership must share a common residence and be at least 18 years old rather than 16 with the consent of one parent. Public agencies and public employers who provide health insurance for married partners of employees need not provide those same benefits to domestic partners." I'd assume from that that ''non-public'' employers are also free to discriminate against those in domestic partnerships in providing health benefits, but it doesn't say that. I'd be surprised if Nevada holds private enterprise to a higher standard that the private sector.
+:I'd suggest that what needs improvement is the description in the ''body'' of this entry under the heading "Recognition of same-sex relationships". That refers to legislation to "grant both opposite-sex and same-sex couples all the responsibilities, obligations, rights, entitlements and benefits of marriage within a type of domestic partnership registry without calling it marriage." If that is overstated -- and it must be since it uses the word ''all'' -- then it needs to be properly restated before we work on the opening paragraph, which is supposed to be a summary of what follows.
+:So first let's improve what we have in the body and then we can work to be sure the opening paragraph -- which is supposed to summarize the body of the entry -- does so. And if I find the time I'll look into what Nevada domestic partnerships do and do not provide. Perhaps [[Recognition of same-sex unions in Nevada]] needs some work. [[User:Bmclaughlin9|Bmclaughlin9]] ([[User talk:Bmclaughlin9|talk]]) 21:19, 22 May 2013 (UTC)