From April: Kosovo promises to introduce same-sex unions in May

Since then, nothing?

How do we define "Muslim-majority country"? It's an issue mostly for Eritrea (sources disagree on the majority religion, but homosexuality is illegal there, so they're unlikely to legalize same-sex marriage before 2030), Guinea-Bissau, Nigeria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Chad, and Albania.

I see two options:

We can choose a single source and stick to it, for instance, Pew 2017 (but it's severely outdated; for example, it gives Bosnia as 40% Muslim based on a 2001 source, whereas the 2013 census says it's 51% Muslim).

Or we say, "For this question, a Muslim-majority country is a country with 50% or more of the population counted as Muslim by reliable sources when the decision to legalize same-sex marriage union was voted." In that case, if, let's say, Bosnia and Herzegovina (Muslim-majority today) becomes non-Muslim majority in a few years (according to an official census or another reliable source such as a reputable polling institute) then even if BiH later legalizes same-sex marriage, it would not resolve as YES.

@adssx I like the second. I'll add it

The 2023 Albanian census now has the Muslim population at 50.7%. Given the current trends, Albania will soon not be a Muslim-majority country anymore.

@JoshuaWilkes: is your YES primarily based on Kosovo? It looks like there's still a long way to go: https://balkaninsight.com/2023/07/26/kosovos-other-deadlock-lgbt-rights-in-a-time-of-strife

Also, these are two good sources for these questions:
- LGBT Equality Index: The most LGBT-Friendly Countries in the World
- Social Acceptance of LGBTI People in 175 Countries and Locations

@adssx well the market has a long way to run and IMO it was very undervalued before.

But I noticed you have bet very little mana, if you think I'm wrong this is a good opportunity for you!

@JoshuaWilkes I don't know much about LGBT rights in the Balkans, so I have low conviction. I was more curious to see whether I missed something obvious or not. I was surprised to learn that the Kosovo constitution and gov were quite progressive on LGBT issues. Northern Cyprus (included in the criterion) looks like another possibility: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Northern_Cyprus

Most Muslim-majority countries ban same-sex relationships. Those that don't do not even recognize civil partnerships.

Kosovo (not fully recognized, so not sure if included in this question) and Bosnia and Herzegovina (with just 51% of Muslims so could not sure if it will keep its Muslim-majority until 2030) are the only two I can imagine legalizing same-sex unions by 2030 because all their European neighbors are legalizing same-sex unions, one after another, and they want to join the EU and maybe appear more LGBT-friendly. Still, it seems unlikely to happen...

@Stralor had better clarify whether Kosovo counts!

@JoshuaWilkes I think that depends on wikipedia

@Stralor looks like the relevant pages already treat Kosovo as a qualifying country, so I'm content

@JoshuaWilkes @Stralor: the relevant Wikipedia page ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recognition_of_same-sex_unions_in_Europe ) lists Kosovo among "Partially-recognised and unrecognised states". So, unless explicitly mentioned in the resolution criteria, I wouldn't consider that Kosovo counts.

@adssx I think we should count it. it's a pretty significant "partial" recognition

@Stralor can you put your decision into the description for full clarity?

(If indeed you've made a decision)

@JoshuaWilkes I've added this, hope it seems fair:

The question of partially recognized states has come up. We're going to count them if they're self-governed (Kosovo, f. ex.), but not subnational states (e.g. Greenland). The key point is if they're able to decide their own policy here.

@Stralor I think this needs a little workshopping. Greenland is clearly different from Kosovo in terms of 'subnational'-ness (in a way that I think is satisfying for this question. However, like many subnational entities Greenland *does* determine its own domestic marriage laws.

Could just take that line out?

@JoshuaWilkes done. not convinced that's entirely true; Denmark makes edicts that Greenland must follow and change their policies by. but I'm not sure about marriage laws so that's fair, tho I suspect Greenland is subject to EU regulations via Denmark

@Stralor (so are any EU countries really sovereign anymore?)

@Stralor well, specifically Greenland is not really an EU member (although it often looks like one).

More generally, I would argue that the sovereignty that states 'surrender' to the EU is done in ways that are fundamentally voluntary in nature (can often opt out, without or with costs, and can leave the EU), whereas the relationship between countries and their subnational territories is quite different. Limits on (often extensive) autonomy are much harder and the junior partner can't simply end the relationship unilaterally (in most cases? I think free associations are an exception here)

@JoshuaWilkes well put!

@Stralor I would suggest a clearer definition than rhe subjective "well governed". Maybe "If they are recognized by at least 50 UN states".

@adssx any criteria that exclude Taiwan from the categories of 'state' or 'country' are poor criteria

(and, specifically for this series of markets, would exclude the only country in Asia that has legalised same-sex marriage)

@adssx was "well governed" a typo, or was it a misreading? I suppose "self-governed" isn't perfectly objective. I could replace with "sovereign"

@Stralor Oops indeed sorry. Still I'm not satisfied with "self governed". The British overseas territories are self governed but they're not "subnational states": they're not part of the UK.

If we want to include Taiwan we can just lower the threshold from 50 to 10 (Taiwan has 12) or "more than 5" (Abkhazia and South Ossetia have exactly 5). Or just "at least one".

@adssx btw tribes in the US are self governed and have their own laws regarding same sex unions: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_tribal_nations_in_the_United_States#:~:text=In%20the%20United%20States%2C%20Congress,form%20their%20own%20marriage%20laws.

@adssx British Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies are clearly subordinate to the British Government though; no one is confused that they might be independent states.

If I were @Stralor, what I might do is say 'UN member states plus a short list that is relevant to this market' (easier because we are dealing with non-global markets)

@JoshuaWilkes "no one is confused that they might be independent states": and yet @Stralor is "inclined to count them all": https://manifold.markets/Stralor/will-samesex-marriage-be-newly-lega#wxGSxtsrX0ZKGOtzjwiS

We should strive for consistency between all these related questions. Their title says "country", so it shouldn't include "territories" (Greenland, British Overseas Territories, tribes, etc.).

I would say "States that are state parties within the United Nations System" (this includes Kosovo and Palestine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_limited_recognition#States_that_are_state_parties_within_the_United_Nations_System ) and maybe "Non-UN member states recognised by at least one UN member state" (Abkhazia, Northern Cyprus, Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, South Ossetia, and Taiwan). Of course, in each case, within the relevant geographic or demographic group.

@adssx this does look like something I'm amenable to

@JoshuaWilkes Is this preferable to using all but the sub-nationals on the list here ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recognition_of_same-sex_unions_in_Europe )?

@Stralor I think it is preferable compared to referring to 5 different Wikipedia articles (Europe, Africa, Asia, Oceania and the Americas), especially for "Muslim-majority countries" that don't have such a Wikipedia page. We would have the same definition for all these questions: "For this question, a country is a state party within the United Nations System or recognised by at least one UN member state".