Regarding the Group (Marriages vs Partnerships)

With genealogy - for the most part - listing marriages goes along with any legal documentation that confirms the historic content of the lineage - children from unwed partners are listed also by their birth record by natural parent(s) - by historic means and legitamacy - it is not about politics but documentation. I am not sure what your meaning is behind the question. A child adopted by straight or gay parents is still a child of the natural parents - that's genealogy - for one day that child may want to know his/her legitimate (by documentation) geneaogical ancestry.

Long Term partnerships are just as valid as formal marriages for the sake of this project, as a long term loving committed union is what counts.

This project I would think was not created for bureaucratic, religious, political or genealogical documentation purposes. However, Jackie's information is most appreciated and very informative.

Thanks Malka. That's what I wanted to know. For instance, I don't consider Projects "Genealogy." The genealogy is in the tree itself. However, to me a Project is a pool of people (at least all the projects I'm a part of) that have a similar background (celebrities, Plantagenet dynasty, African-American inventors, Prostitutes, killers, fake profiles, wild west, etc).

Of course in many countries throughout the ages, gay relationships were not considered marriage even if it was between 2 adults for 50 years, but considered fun ways of socializing or total abominations to downright illegal....or acceptable and normal.

So, I was wanting to know if adding a gay couple who were not legally married, but lived like "common-law" spouses for years allowed to be part of this project. And you've answered my question.

We'd run into trouble if we weren't. Charlemagne and his daughters had as many long-term partners as they did 'legal' marriages. Those are all on the tree. In Macbeth's time it appears to have been common practice to loan your daughters out almost as royal 'breeding stock' while waiting for a better marriage offer to turn up. Those are all included in the tree as valid genealogy. So, if we've never questioned the inclusion of heterosexual 'partnerships', why would we do it with homosexual 'partnerships'?

[http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homohuwelijk Homo-huwelijk]

In the Netherlands we just memorized ten years of legal marriages between people with the same sex. Since 1 april 2001 it is normal that any couple that wants to celebrate there love for each other with a big of moderate party for there parents, relatives (also own children, sometimes from earlier marriages or the result of a 'relation' with someone of the other sex) and friends & colleges, can ask for a 'HUWELIJK' and the 'Burgemeester' of any city is obliged to give them the opportunity to get an official document in a official ceremony.

When reading this project I was surprised that the title is written in CAPITALS and not as in most other projects, in lower case. The consequence of this choice is that the GENI-project-database it always gives priority ranking and hence an extra emphasis on the subject. That is technical and not to be avoided, but creators of a project can consider this option. Did you do that on purpose? For I think it very wise not to emphasize on this ancient topic in modern times because in a lot of countries gay-sex couples are still in jail or worse. Only step-by-step we can recreate a world where every lover can love his beloved. So please, be aware of
the sensitivity not only of profiles concerned, but also of there children and parents.