Talk:Religion and LGBTQ people

Somebody placed a template to merge LGBT matters and religion into the Religion and homosexuality and Transgenderism and religion articles. I have placed a template to merge those articles into this article, as the topic would be better served by one article giving coverage of all aspects of LGBT matters and religion than two - one for homosexuality and one for transgenderism. Mish (talk) 20:41, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Rather than have this discussion in two places, let's use the one at Talk:Religion and homosexuality#Merge_template. --Alynna (talk) 00:37, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

OK. Mish (talk) 00:49, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

As there was no interest in disscussing this, and no support for any merge, I have removed the merge templates. Mish (talk) 10:25, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

A LOT of the articles in this topic area fall foul of our WP:Article titles policy, which tells us to avoid titles containing "and". These articles will need to be retitled to comply with the policy, but I will leave it to the editors who regularly work in this topic area to determine what they should be retitled to. Blueboar (talk) 14:39, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

I think at least some of these would fall into the "no reasonable overarching title is available" exception named in that policy. For instance, the content of Homosexual behavior and Judaism (which is a bad title for other reasons, but) is all obviously related to the intersection of Judaism and homosexuality, which is significant and has been documented by many sources, but narrowing the topic to "LGBT Jews" or "the Tanach + Talmud's mentions of homosexuality" or "homophobic views of Jews" would all exclude things that belong in the article. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:32, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

The policy appears to be aimed mostly at articles containing two complementary topics, such as big- and little-endian numbering systems covered in the same article. LGBT and X religion topics are not that.

"Life and death" is given as an acceptable title, so we know that exceptions exist.

Finally, the policy which applies to this series of articles says that "titles containing 'and' are often red flags that the article has neutrality problems or is engaging in original research: avoid the use of 'and' in ways that appear biased." All we have to do to is make certain that the article titles do not contain bias and we have satisfied the policy. There is nothing that needs to be done here. Binksternet (talk) 20:31, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Blueboar, that are many Wikipedia articles with "and" in the their titles, and these titles are usually valid/needed. Or if not needed, usually better with "and" in them. And I'm not simply talking about the names of films, television shows, books or plays. Yes, I'm using a WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument in this case; that's because I think it's valid in this case. Flyer22 (talk) 09:53, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

The main page title for each religion/faith has a different format - can we make them the same in some format like "<insert faith> and sexual orientation"? Not sure whether this is the right place to ask, but here looks to be more a centralized article that is good for such discussion.--ネイ (talk) 11:53, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Just a brief few sentences would be useful to give this article an overview of LGBT issues for most major religions. At this time there are only forward references for the East Asian religions:

   Confucianism — Main article: LGBT topics and Confucianism
   Shinto — Main article: LGBT topics and Shinto
   Taoism — Main article: Homosexuality in China

as well as those grouped as "Other" religions:

   Scientology — Main article: Scientology and sexual orientation
   Vodou — Main article: Haitian Vodou and sexual orientation
   Wicca — Main article: Wicca and LGBT people
   Zoroastrianism — Main article: Zoroastrianism and sexual orientation

This page's purpose seems to be as a concise comparative, or an at-a-glance overview. Saltlakejohn (talk) 19:16, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

I haven't seen any source of the sources in the section that calls Tu'er Shen gay god. I tried searching in Google I also didn't find any source that calls him gay god.--SharabSalam (talk) 13:07, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Religion and LGBT people's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "brewer99":

• From Babaylan: Brewer, Carolyn (1999). "Baylan, Asog, Transvestism, and Sodomy: Gender, Sexuality and the Sacred in Early Colonial Philippines". Intersections: Gender, History and Culture in the Asian Context (2). Archived from the original on 12 Feb 2020.
• From Cultural achievements of pre-colonial Philippines: Carolyn Brewer (1999). "Baylan, Asog, Transvestism, and Sodomy: Gender, Sexuality and the Sacred in Early Colonial Philippines". Intersections: Gender, History and Culture in the Asian Context (2): 1.

Reference named "garcia2008":

• From Babaylan: Garcia, J. Neil C. (2008). "Precolonial Gender-Crossing and the Babaylan Chronicles". Philippine Gay Culture: Binabae to Bakla, Silahis to MSM. The University of the Philippines Press. ISBN 9789715425773.
• From LGBT themes in mythology: J. Neil C. Garcia (2008). "Precolonial Gender-Crossing and the Babaylan Chronicles". Philippine Gay Culture: Binabae to Bakla, Silahis to MSM. The University of the Philippines Press. ISBN 9789715425773.

Reference named "kroeber":

• From LGBT themes in mythology: A. L. Kroeber (1918). "The History of Philippine Civilization as Reflected in Religious Nomenclature". Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History. XXI (Part II): 35–37.
• From Babaylan: Kroeber, A. L. (1918). "The History of Philippine Civilization as Reflected in Religious Nomenclature". Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History. XXI (Part II): 35–37.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 10:12, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

Removed apparent spam. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 13:32, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2022 and 9 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Taylorjones0611 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Marimend.

— Assignment last updated by WGST320 (talk) 01:37, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 August 2022 and 9 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Aaro2001 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Averd7.

— Assignment last updated by ACHorwitz (talk) 18:54, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 January 2023 and 8 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Candychill (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Idabelda.

— Assignment last updated by ACHorwitz (talk) 20:20, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

My good faith recent addition of a relevant and representative image to the Scientology subsection which symbolically represented the discussion of homosexuality and Scientology to help improve the article was removed. I propose to keep the image per reasons outlined on MOS:LEADIMAGE:

• It "give[s] readers visual confirmation that they've arrived at the right" section.
• It is an "appropriate representations of the topic".
• It is the "type of image used for similar purposes in high-quality reference works".
• Wikipedia is WP:NOTCENSORED.
• It is "relevant in the topic's context" visually representing the intersection of homosexuality and Scientology by combining the two recognized symbols for each.

Here are some examples of reputably published academic works using art showing combined or side-by-side symbols to artistically represent the intersection of the book's topics using well known symbols from each:

• The Flag and the Cross (Oxford University Press)
• Theology of Money (Duke University Press)
• Baptized in Blood (University of Georgia Press)
• The Market as God (Harvard University Press)
• Religion and Politics in Comparative Perspective (Cambridge University Press)

Here are examples of a Wikipedia pages using a similar symbolic concept in a lead image used elsewhere on Wikipedia: Template:LGBT Mormon topics, Baháʼí views on homosexuality, Homosexuality and religion, Jewish views on homosexuality, Christianity and homosexuality, and Time magazine. Additionally, other sections have similar symbolic depictions on this article. Here are some similar examples specific to Scientology elsewhere on the web representing the intersection between homosexuality and Scientology: Newsweek magazine, An artist's page, Elle magazine. I would like to WP:DISCUSSCONSENSUS. Any thoughts before I restore the image? Pastelitodepapa (talk) 00:49, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Is this article a content fork of Homosexuality and religion?   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 14:52, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

So the comment from February about this article being a content fork plus me adding some information and references to this article got me thinking. Would it be better to merge the two articles AND/OR could this article get reassessed for class? Amethystloucks (talk) 00:45, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

They should be merged in my opinion. Very similar content and intent. Joiedevivre123321 (talk) 14:05, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

I support merging Homosexuality and religion into this article. That article is redundant to this one which encompasses sexual orientation (e.g. homosexuality) as well as gender identity and other queer topics. Pastelitodepapa (talk) 17:43, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

I propose merging Homosexuality and religion into Religion and LGBTQ people. The article specifically on homosexuality alone is WP:redundant to the one on LGBTQ people which encompasses sexual orientation (e.g. homosexuality) as well as gender identity and other queer topics. Merging any unique material from the homosexuality article into this LGBTQ one shouldn't cause any article-size issues. @Amethystloucks, Joiedevivre123321, and Grorp: Notifying users who had already chimed in about potentially merging them. Pastelitodepapa (talk) 04:05, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

I guess I did remark about one article possibly being a fork of the other. Good luck merging the two; seems like a big job.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 05:15, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

I agree that a merge should probably take place. The first step might be to identify which content is duplicated and which is unique. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 16:51, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Since no one has objected since the original suggestion in June, I've tagged the articles as ready to merge. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 06:21, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

This is perhaps a dumb question but if they are merged what name will the new article use? I 100% think they should be merged, but prefer to call it something about LGBTQ people rather than just "homosexuality" so it focus on broader things (romantic feelings, be inclusive of ace people, etc.). Joiedevivre123321 (talk) 13:15, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Religion and LGBTQ people is set as the target article, so the content from Homosexuality and religion will be moved into this one. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:24, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you 🥰 Joiedevivre123321 (talk) 16:31, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

I've never merged an article before. Is there something I can do beforehand to make the process smoother? Amethystloucks (talk) 16:15, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

I believe that the section on Unitarian Universalism should be moved to be under new religious movements, rather than under Abrahamic faiths. This would be more accurate, and would be more consistent with other articles, as it is listed under the article for new religious movements but not for Abrahamic faiths. AShoutofLight (talk) 05:45, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

I agree. They do have a lot of Abrahamic roots, but it seems it's generally classified in the "New religious movements" category (link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:New_religious_movements_established_in_the_1960s) and not in any Abrahamic ones on Wikipedia. Does anyone with more knowledge of the history of UU think it should stay under the Abrahamic umbrella in this article? Pastelitodepapa (talk) 20:58, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

I talked to my minister (we are UU) and she said that both classifications could be seen as accurate and she would list us as both. In my religion class we learned about Unitarian Universalism during the week about new religious movements and other more modern religions, rather than with the other Abrahamic traditions. I personally find the classification under new religious movements slightly more compelling, since UU does not necessitate belief in an Abrahamic God, plus there is influence from a number of other religions outside of Christianity. However, the history of UU is strongly rooted in Christian tradition, and both Unitarianism and Universalism were definitely Christian denominations, so I can see the alternate argument. I think some UU churches would likely fall better under Abrahamic, especially some of those pre-dating the merger, while others would be more under new religious movements as they might have a stronger focus on influences such as Paganism. Although the classification surprised me, I mostly pointed it out because it was inconsistent with the new religious movements list. I don't know if there's one good answer about this. AShoutofLight (talk) 05:23, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your on the ground research! I support your suggestion to move it to the new religious movements section in this article if you decide to go through with that! Pastelitodepapa (talk) 01:09, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

See Talk:LGBTQ-affirming religious groups#Satanism and Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Order of 9 Angles affiliations and the CTC Sentinel. --~2026-25877-60 (talk) 21:16, 29 April 2026 (UTC)