Virender Sehwag

Virender Sehwag,

Virender Sehwag pronunciation (help·info) (Hindi: वीरेंद्र सेहवाग) (born 20 October 1978, in Delhi, India), affectionately known as Viru, is one of the leading batsmen in the Indian cricket team. Sehwag is an aggressive right-handed opening batsman and an occasional right-arm off-spin bowler. He played his first One Day International in 1999 and joined the Indian Test cricket team in 2001. In April 2009, Sehwag became the only Indian to be honored as the Wisden Leading Cricketer in the World for his performance in 2008,subsequently becoming the first player of any nationality to retain the award for 2009.

Sehwag holds multiple records including the highest score made by an Indian in Test cricket (319), which was also the fastest triple century in the history of international cricket (reached 300 off only 278 balls) as well as the fastest 250 by any batsman (in 207 balls against Sri Lanka on 3rd December, 2009 at the Brabourne stadium in Mumbai). Sehwag also holds the distinction of being one of three batsmen in the world to have ever surpassed 300 twice in Test cricket, and the only one to score two triple centuries and take a five-wicket innings haul. In March 2009, Sehwag smashed the fastest century ever scored by an Indian in ODI cricket, from 60 balls.

Sehwag was appointed as vice-captain of the Indian team under Rahul Dravid in October 2005 but due to poor form, he was later replaced by V. V. S. Laxman in December 2006 as Test vice-captain. In January 2007, Sehwag was dropped from the ODI team and later from the Test team as well. During his term as vice-captain, Sehwag skippered the team in place of injured Dravid in 2 ODIs and 1 Test. Following his return to form in 2008 and the retirement of Anil Kumble, Sehwag has been reappointed as the vice-captain for both Tests and ODIs. By early 2009, Sehwag had reestablished himself as one of the best performing batsmen in ODI cricket.

Early years

Sehwag was born in a Jat family from Haryana. The son of a grain merchant, Sehwag spent his childhood in a bungalow in a joint family, with siblings, uncles, aunts and sixteen cousins. Though now settled in New Delhi, the Sehwag family hails from Haryana. Sehwag was the third of four children born to father Krishan and mother Krishna Sehwag, with two older sisters Manju and Anju, and younger brother Vinod. His father attributes his interest in cricket to a toy bat which he was given when he was seven months old. He attended Arora Vidya School in Delhi, and pestered his parents to let him play cricket, on the basis that he was not academically gifted. His father tried to end his career when he broke a tooth as a child in 1990, but Sehwag evaded the ban with the help of his mother.

Cricketing career

Early domestic cricket

Sehwag made his debut for Delhi cricket team in first class cricket in the 1997–98 season. He was selected to the North Zone cricket team for the Duleep Trophy the following 1998-99 season, ending fifth in the total runscoring list. The following year he was fourth on the Duleep Trophy run scoring list, including a 274, the highest score of the competition. This was attained against South Zone at Agartala in just 327 balls, and followed a rapid 187 from just 175 in a Ranji Trophy match against Punjab.He was then selected for the U-19 team which toured South Africa. He was seventh in the 2000–01 season with two centuries, but his consistency earned the attention of selectors and he became a regular member of the national team in mid 2001.

Since his international career started, he has continued to play for Delhi in the domestic competition whilst he is not occupied with international duty and has captained North Zone to victory in the Deodhar Trophy in 2004–05 and 2005–-06. He also had a short stint with Leicestershire in county cricket in 2003, but a back injury lead to a mutual termination of the contract.

ODI career

Sehwag's ODI career started poorly when he scored 1 against Pakistan in Mohali in April 1999. His bowling performance was also ineffective and expensive, conceding 35 runs off 3 overs.

Sehwag wasn't given another match until the home series against Zimbabwe in December 2000. Sehwag rose to prominence in his fourth ODI match in March 2001 when he scored 58 off 54 balls, against Australia in Bangalore. Combined with his three wickets, he help earn India a victory and was awarded his first man of the match award. He followed this with an unproductive tour of Zimbabwe in mid 2001.

Sehwag had his international breakthrough in Sri Lanka in August 2001 when he was promoted to the opening slot for the tri-series also involving New Zealand. The promotion to open the innings came because regular opener Sachin Tendulkar was absent due to a foot injury.In the match against New Zealand that was to decide the finalist, he scored his maiden century from 69 balls. The century is the third fastest ODI century for an Indian behind Mohammad Azharuddin's 62 ball effort and Yuvraj singh's 64 ball effort. This was his first score beyond 50 in ten matches and saw him named man of the match. This performance earned him a regular spot in the ODI squad in the middle-order. He bettered his own record by hitting a 60-ball century against New Zealand during the 2009 tour. An innings of note in 2002 was the 22 ball half-century against Kenya in Bloemfontein, tying the second fastest 50 by an Indian. Because of his attacking cricket stroke plays, Sehwag has got many fans, including the WestIndies legend Desmond Haynes, who admitted that he is a great fan of him 

With Ganguly's injury in the India-England ODI Series in January 2002, Sehwag received another opportunity to open the innings which he seized by scoring 82 from 64 balls in Kanpur in an eight-wicket Indian victory. With good performances as opener, Sehwag was made a permanent fixture at the top of the innings. Sachin Tendulkar, who opened in the England ODI series, was moved to middle order - a strategy that reaped dividends for India in 2002 in ODI matches. In the England series and the preceding tour to South Africa, he compiled 426 runs at 42.6 with four half-centuries .

After modest returns on the tours of the West Indies and England in early and mid 2002, he scored 271 runs at 90.33 in the 2002 ICC Champions Trophy in Sri Lanka, with two man of the match performances. After running out Ian Blackwell, he was involved in a 192 run partnership with Ganguly, scoring 126 from 104 balls to help set up an eight wicket victory against England in a group match. He then scored 58 from 54 balls and took 3/25 including two wickets in the final over to help defeat South Africa by 10 runs to help India progress to the final.

In late 2002 he scored an unbeaten 114 from 82 balls that included a 196 run partnership with Ganguly to lead India to a nine wicket win over the West Indies in Rajkot. He was the only batsman to score a century in the 7 match New Zealand ODI Series where he made two centuries - 108 in Napier in an Indian defeat and 112 in Auckland in a one-wicket victory.

Virender Sehwag had a mediocre 2003 Cricket World Cup, scoring 299 runs at an average of 27, he top scored with 82 in the loss against Australia in the final.

Sehwag in fielding practice.

Later in 2003, he scored his fourth century and earned Man of the Match award against New Zealand in Hyderabad, scoring 130 and putting on a 182 run partnership with Tendulkar, to lay the foundations for a 145 run victory. In spite of it, Sehwag struggled for consistency in 2003 and 2003/04 ODI series where he had only one century and 3 fifties, two against minnows - Bangladesh and Zimbabwe and one against Pakistan, in 22 matches.

Even with his inconsistent form, he earned 3 MoM awards in 2004 and 2004/05 ODI season with one award each against Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Pakistan. In the match against Pakistan in Kochi he scored 108 off 95 balls, his first century in eighteen months which set up a 95 run victory.

Sehwag then started a two year streak without a century in ODIs, as well as having his ODI tour of Pakistan in early 2006 curtailed due to a shoulder injury. His drought in limited overs cricket has puzzled cricket experts because of the consistent performances in Test matches with a high scoring rate has not translated into significant contributions in the ODI format of the game. Sehwag was dropped from the ODI Squad for the WI-IND 4 Match ODI series. With debate over whether he deserved to be included in the 2007 Cricket World Cup squad, captain Dravid's insistence on his retention paved the way to being named in the World Cup squad. However, despite this assurance, Sehwag's form continued to decline.

Sehwag started the 2007 World Cup in poor form, only being picked for the side because of Rahul Dravid's wishes. He scored poorly in the first group match but bounced back to hit a magnificent 114 from 87 deliveries against lowly ranked Bermuda. The Indian team scored 413-5, the highest team total in a World Cup match, and went on to win the match but this was their only win in the tournament.

On March 11, 2009, Sehwag blasted India's fastest ODI hundred against New Zealand by reaching 3 figures in just 60 balls. Eventually, he led India to win its first series win in New Zealand.

ODI summary

Sehwag's scoring rate is extremely quick, at 103.44 runs per 100 balls (it is exceeded only by one current player: Shahid Afridi, who has a much lower average). He has had more success in run chases, scoring seven of his twelve centuries while chasing. He has led India on seven occasions, due to the unavailability of the incumbent due to illness, injury or rotation policy.

Test career

An innings-by-innings breakdown of Sehwag's Test match batting career, showing runs scored (red bars) and the average of the last ten innings (blue line).

Sehwag's maiden century in mid-2001 in Sri Lanka was not enough to gain selection in the Test team for the corresponding series. Sehwag made his Test debut in late 2001 in the First Test against South Africa in Bloemfontein as a middle-order batsman. He scored 105 on debut despite the South African win.He was given a one match suspension by ICC match referee Mike Denness for overappealing  in the Second Test in Port Elizabeth, which lead to political dispute amongst the ICC and the two countries. He returned for the home series in 2001-02 against England and Zimbabwe. After scoring two half-centuries in the preceding series, he was promoted to a makeshift-opener on the 2002 England tour after the failure of previous openers and an experiment with wicket-keeper Deep Dasgupta. He scored 84 in the new role at Lord's and then a century in the Second Test at Trent Bridge,and has batted there in Test matches ever since. He scored his maiden home-century of 147 in the First Test against the West Indies in the 2002-03 home season in Mumbai, which was at the time his top score in Test matches, earning him his first man of the match award. After a poor tour to New Zealand, he scored passed 50 for the first time in 9 innings when he scored 130 in a Test at Mohali against New Zealand in late 2003.

He then scored 195 against Australia on Boxing Day 2003 at the Melbourne Cricket Ground. His dismissal on the first afternoon lead to an Indian collapse and eventual defeat.

In early 2004, he became the only Indian to score a triple century in Test cricket, with 309 against Pakistan in the First Test in Multan, beating V. V. S. Laxman's previous Indian record(281 against Australia) and helping India to a total of 5/675, the highest ever against Pakistan. It was Sehwag's sixth Test century in 21 Tests. India went on to win by an innings, with Sehwag named man of the match. He also scored 90 in the Second Test defeat in Lahore and was named man of the series for his efforts after being the highest run scorer and average for the series. He later auctioned the bat with which he made the triple century, for Rs. 70,000, to aid in relief efforts for the tsunami victims of the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake.

In the First Test of the 2004 Border Gavaskar Trophy in Bangalore, Sehwag was fined for showing "serious dissent" towards umpire Billy Bowden following an LBW dismissal. Replays showed that he had hit the ball off the middle of his bat onto his leg, which later led to an apology from Bowden. Sehwag scored 155 in the Chennai test match to set up a triple figure lead for the Indians, but the match was rained out on the final day with the Indians requiring 229 for victory In the home series against South Africa that year, he scored 164 in the drawn First Test in Kanpur, and 88 in the Second in Kolkata, which India won to claim the series. Sehwag was again named man of the series.

Sehwag failed on the tour of Bangladesh, but on the 2005 home series against Pakistan, he scored 173 in Mohali, 81 in Kolkata and then 201 in Bangalore, totalling 544 runs at an average of 90.66 to win the man of the series award. He passed the 3000 run mark in Tests during the Bangalore Test, becoming the fastest Indian to reach the mark in terms of innings played. His performances over the preceding 12 months earned him selection in the ICC Test Team of the Year as well as nomination for Test player of the year.

He earned selection for the ICC World XI which played Australia in the 2005 ICC Super Series, where he top scored in the first innings with 76. He attracted some criticism at the end of 2005, having failed to pass 50 in four Tests against Zimbabwe and Sri Lanka. He also missed the Second Test against Sri Lanka in Delhi due to illness, but returned to the team in the following match in Ahmedabad and captained the Indians to victory whilst Rahul Dravid was ill.

Sehwag bowling in the nets.

Sehwag scored his first century in a year when he compiled 254 against Pakistan in the First Test in Lahore in January 2005, the highest ever Test score at a strike rate of over 100 and the second fastest double century ever. In doing so he was involved in a 410 run partnership with captain Rahul Dravid, the highest ever against Pakistan and in Pakistan, and just four short of a new world record opening partnership in Test matches. Sehwag went on to lampoon the Pakistani attack led by Shoaib Akhtar. Sehwag however failed to pass 50 in the following two Tests against Pakistan, and aside from a 76* in the Second Test in Mohali against England, fell seven times for less than 20 runs to the new ball , leading criticism of his position in the team.

During the 2006 West Indies tour, Sehwag narrowly missed out on scoring a century in the opening session of the Second Test in St Lucia, ending with 99 at the interval. He went on to compile 180 in just 190 balls, and also collected four wickets for the match to be named man of the match.Although Sehwag had collected more than 50 wickets in ODIs, he was substantially used as a Test bowler for the first time on the West Indies tour, taking nine wickets in the first two Test matches when he was used in the absence of off-spinner Harbhajan Singh as India opted to only use one specialist spinner. He had previously only three wickets at Test level . He was also fined in the First Test for excessive appealing.

Poor form saw Sehwag being dropped from the Test team in 2007. In December 2007, he was recalled for India's tour of Australia after being omitted form the list of probables, amid calls for his return by several commentators, most notably Ian Chappell. 

Though he was omitted from the team for the first two matches, both of which India lost, he was picked for the third Test at the WACA in Perth after scoring a century in a tour match against the ACT Invitational XI.He played a key part in India's victory, making 72 runs at a brisk pace and taking 2 crucial wickets  He scored a match-saving 151 in the second innings of the fourth Test in Adelaide. This was his first century in the second innings of a test match, and was notable in that he rejected his usual, aggressive batting style in favour of a more defensive approach which was the need of the hour.

Sehwag continued his good form against South Africa, in the home series in April 2008]], scoring 319 in the first Test in Chennai, having reached 300 off just 278 balls, the fastest triple century in test history. Sehwag became only the third batsman after Sir Donald Bradman and Brian Lara to score 2 triple centuries in Test Cricket. He scored 257 runs the third day of the match, which was the most runs scored by an individual batsman on a single day of a Test match since 1954, when Dennis Compton made 273 runs on the second day of the Nottingham Test against Pakistan.

He has a habit of making big centuries, with his last eleven centuries having all been over 150, including two triple centuries and further three double centuries which surpassed Sir Donald Bradman's record of having seven consecutive centuries beyond 150.

In the first test against England in Chennai in December 2008, Sehwag's rapid 83 off just 68 balls, in the last session of the fourth day, set India up for its record run-chase of 4/387, the highest successful target on Indian soil. He got the man-of-the-match award despite Sachin Tendulkar scoring an unbeaten century later in the same innings and Andrew Strauss scoring a century in each of England's innings.

He has been noted for his record against Pakistan, averaging over 90 against and in Pakistan, scoring four centuries against India's arch rivals. The disparity in his average in the first and second innings is often noted, being 68 and 25 and all but one of his fifteen Test centuries having come in the first innings.

During Sri Lanka's tour of India in 2009, in the 3-match test series he finished with the highest run getter of the series with 491 runs. In the last test match, he made 293 with the help of which India won the test match. In this innings he established many records: 1. Scoring the second fastest 200. 2. Scoring the fastest 250 off just 207 balls. 3. Third highest run scorer on a single day. [284 n.o] He missed accomplishing the feat of being the only player to score three triple centuries. He was caught and bowled by Murlitharan short by just seven runs. This innings, which consisted of 40 fours and 7 sixes, was described as his third best by him after his two triple centuries.

Sehwag in Non-India Colours

He was selected in the ICC World XI for the 2005 ICC Super Series against Australia in late 2005, but only managed 64 runs at an average of 21.33 [7]. Earlier in 2005, he was selected for the Asian Cricket Council XI for the fundraising match against the ICC World XI in the aftermath of the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami,

Playing style

Sehwag batting in the nets.

Sehwag was often compared to Sachin Tendulkar in his early days due to the similar batting style, build and appearance. He has acknowledged numerous times that he consciously attempted to model his playing style on Tendulkar's in his youth.

Sehwag's technique is often cited as being particularly unorthodox, often backing away (considered technically incorrect) to free his arms whilst playing his shots, in particular to cut or drive spinners inside out. He is frequently cited by commentators for his extremely strong (physically) square cutting and upper cutting and power through the off-side. He is also an excellent player of the late cut. In particular his tendency to strike the ball in the air and risk dismissal is a trait which has seen him noted for his chancy and adventurous mindset. He is also noted for a relative lack of footwork, with his timing often attributed to his eyesight. Of late, Sehwag has shown a proclivity to be dismissed by inswing deliveries, something attributed to his leaden-footed batting style. He has also got dismissed playing the cut shot when the ball was too close to his body to cut, especially in limited over matches.

Virender Sehwag is often noted for his extremely attacking style of batting, and in 2005 he was described by Wisden Cricketers' Almanack as the "most exciting opener in the world" due to his aggressive style in Test matches, his strike rate being inferior only to that of Adam Gilchrist and Shahid Afridi. Sehwag has also been noted for his apparent disregard for the match situation, exhibited by aggressive batting even when his team is in a poor position or after being out manoeuvred by the bowler in the recent past. This is a two-edged sword as it allows him to not be psychologically hindered by previous failures, but can also lead to excessive aggression. He was quoted by Pakistan coach Bob Woolmer as a sophisticated slogger. But over the years, his style has changed from "reckless hitting" to that of "controlled aggression", according to an article in the Sydney Morning Herald. Previously Sehwag was known predominantly as an offside player, with a weakness against straight short pitched bowling. However in the last 2 years he has improved his leg side and bouncer hitting considerably. This is shown in the recent ODIs against New Zealand where he utilised the pull, hook and flick shots to devastating effect.

As on 15 March 2010, Sehwag has an average of nearly 68 in the first innings of test matches where he has scored 5130 runs, 18 centuries and 12 fifties in 76 matches. In the second innings, his average drops to 31 and has scored 1561 runs, an only century and 9 fifties in 54 innings. The first and second innings difference of 37 runs is the one of the highest and indicates a lack of ability in dealing with more difficult batting conditions as the pitch deteriorates. However, his match-saving second-innings 151 against Australia at Adelaide during the 2007-08 Border-Gavaskar series, and a match winning 92 in trying situations at Nagpur during the 2008-09 series, went a long way towards repairing that image. In the 2008 Test series against England, Sehwag played a key role in the fourth innings of the first Test in Chennai. He amassed 83 runs in 68 balls, which helped India chase down an improbable target of 387 with six wickets to spare. This was the highest successful run chase in India, and the fourth highest in Test history. For this effort, Sehwag was adjudged Man of the Match.

Controversy

Mike Denness and Indian cricket team incident

In November 2001, Sehwag was involved in controversy in the Second Test match between India and South Africa at St George's Park, Port Elizabeth, when he was given a one Test ban for "excessive appealing" by ICC Match referee Mike Denness. He was one of six Indian players to be receive bans, four of which were suspended bans. The unprecedented severity of the bans precipitated an international cricketing, political and administrative crisis with the Indian cricket establishment threatened to call off the tour unless Mike Denness was removed as match referee from the third test match. ICC backed Mike Denness and the South African board backed the Indian cricket establishment and did not allow Mike Denness to enter the stadium on the first day of the third test match. ICC declared that the match was 'unofficial' and 'friendly five day match'and the series was officially declared as a 2 match series and South Africa as 1-0 winners. The subsequent England tour to India was placed in jeopardy when India picked Sehwag in the test squad. Subsequent to this development, ICC issued a warning that any match with Sehwag in the cricket team will not be considered an "official" Test match until Sehwag had served his one match ban. After negotiations with ECB and ICC and in general interest of cricket, Sehwag was dropped from the team for the first Test against England.

Personal life

Sehwag married Aarti Ahlawat in April 2004 under heavy security cover in a widely publicised wedding hosted by Arun Jaitley, the then Union law minister of India, at his residence.The couple have a son, Aryavir, born on 18 October 2007.

Sehwag is fondly referred to in the media as the Nawab of Najafgarh, Najafgarh being his home locality in Delhi. A lifelong vegetarian, Sehwag owns a vegetarian eatery, Sehwag Favourites, which opened in late 2005 at the Fun Republic cineplex in Delhi, following in the footsteps of his role model Sachin Tendulkar. The majority of the products on the menu are named after cricketing themes related to his memorable innings, such as Multan Ke Sultan Ki Tikdi, meaning dish for three persons, which alludes to his triple century in Multan and is priced at 309 rupees. There are plans to expand the chain across India with a second outlet already planned in Ludhiana. Sehwag does charity work for UNICEF.

International centuries

See: List of international cricket centuries by Virender Sehwag

Achievements

Awards

Arjuna Award (2002)

Wisden Leading Cricketer in the World 2008, 2009

Records

Fastest 250 in Test cricket in terms of balls faced.

Most Test runs in a single day by an Indian. Sehwag made 257 in a day against SA in Chennai. He surpassed this in making 284 in a day against Sri Lanka. The latter was the second consecutive innings in which India scored more than 400 runs in a single day in Tests. Sehwag also made a century at faster than a run a ball on the previous equation.

Only Indian batsman to have scored two triple centuries in Test cricket. He is the third batsman in the history of Test cricket to score two triple centuries, alongside Sir Donald Bradman and Brian Lara.

Fastest century in ODI cricket by an Indian - 100 runs off 60 balls against New Zealand in 2009.

Second fastest ODI 50 by an Indian.- a record, he shares with Rahul Dravid, Kapil Dev and Yuvraj Singh - when he took 22 balls against Kenya in 2001

Six double centuries - the first three of which came against Pakistan.[103] Greg Chappell is the only other player to have scored multiple double centuries against Pakistan (2). Sehwag is the only Indian to have made six Test double centuries.

Highest score by an Indian batsman in Test cricket. He first achieved this when he scored 309 against Pakistan in Multan in 2004, and bettered his previous record in March 2008 at Chennai against South Africa by scoring 319.

Fastest triple century: His second triple century scored at Chennai on 27-28 March 2008 against South Africa was the fastest in terms of balls faced by any batsman (off 278 balls).

Consecutive 150+ scores in Test cricket: He holds the record for consecutive test hundreds converted to scores of 150+, at 11.

He is one of the only five players to have scored more test hundreds than test fifties(15c/14f), along with Don Bradman(29c/13f), Mohammad Azharuddin (22c/21f),[104] Matthew Hayden (30c/27f) and Kevin Pietersen(13c/11f) as on August 7, 2008 

Two consecutive double century partnerships in a Test innings. He achieved this record, for the first two wickets in Chennai on 27-28 March 2008 (with Wasim Jaffer and Rahul Dravid respectively). This was the first time in Test history that the first two wickets in an innings have resulted in double-century stands. He equaled this in the innings against Sri Lanka in Mumbai, combining with Murali Vijay and Dravid for the first and second wickets.

He is the first person in the history of test cricket to hit two triple centuries and take five wickets in a Test innings.

Test Matches Awards

Man of the Series Awards

# Series Season Series Performance

1 India in Pakistan Test Series 2003/0 440 Runs (3 Matches, 4 Innings, 1x100, 1x50); 6-0-27-0; 2 Catches

2 South Africa in India Test Series 2004/05 262 Runs (2 Matches, 3 Innings, 1x100, 2x50); 1 Catch

3 Pakistan in India Test Series 2004/05 544 Runs (3 Matches, 6 Innings, 2x100, 1x50); 5-2-14-0; 2 Catches

4 Sri Lanka in India Test Series 2009/10 491 Runs (3 Matches, 4 Innings, 2x100, 1x50); 16-3-47-1; 1 Catch

Man of the Match Awards

S No Opponent Venue Season Match Performance

1 West Indies Wankhede, Mumbai 2002/03 1st Innings: 147 (24x4, 3x6); 2-0-7-0

2nd Innings: 1 Catch

2 Pakistan Multan 2003/04 1st Innings: 309 (39x4, 6x6); 2-0-11-0

2nd Innings: 3-0-8-0; 1 Catch

3 Pakistan Gaddafi Stadium, Lahore 2006 1st Innings: 254 (47x4, 1x6); 6-0-24-0

4 West Indies Gros Islet, St Lucia 2006 1st Innings: 180 (20x4, 2x6); 16.1-5-33-3

2nd Innings: 30-9-48-1

5 South Africa Chennai 2007/08 1st Innings: 319 (42x4, 5x6); 11-1-37-1

2nd Innings: 22-2-55-1

6 Sri Lanka Galle 2008/09 1st Innings: 201 (22x4, 4x6)

2nd Innings: 50 (6x4, 1x6)

7 England Chennai 2008/09 1st Innings: 9 (2x4); 1-0-8-0

2nd Innings: 83 (11x4, 4x6); 6-0-22-0

8 Sri Lanka Mumbai 2009/10 1st Innings: 293 (254); 1 Catch

2nd Innings:9-2-24-0

ODI Cricket Awards

Man of the Series Awards

# Series Season Series Performance

1 India in New Zealand ODI Series 2008/09 299 (5 Matches, 5 Innings, 1x100, 2x50); 2 Catches

Man of the Match Awards

S No Opponent Venue Season Match Performance

1 Australia Bangalore 2000/01 58 (54b, 8x4); 9-0-59-3

2 New Zealand Colombo (SSC) 2001 100 (70b, 19x4, 1x6); 3-0-26-0

3 England Kanpur 2001/02 82 (62b, 14x4); 1-0-9-0; 1 Catch

4 England Colombo (RPS) 2002/03 126 (104b, 21x4, 1x6); 5-0-25-0

5 South Africa Colombo (RPS) 2002/03 59 (58b, 10x4); 5-0-25-3

6 West Indies Rajkot 2002/03 114* (82b, 17x4, 2x6); 6-0-29-0

7 New Zealand Napier 2002/03 108 (119b, 9x4, 2x6)

8 New Zealand Auckland 2002/03 112 (139b, 11x4, 3x6)

9 New Zealand Hyderabad 2003/04 130 (134b, 15x4, 2x6)

10 Zimbabwe Hobart 2003/04 90 (102b, 5x4, 5x6); 10-0-40-2; 1 Catch

11 Sri Lanka Colombo (RPS) 2004 81 (92b, 6x4, 2x6); 9-0-37-3

12 Bangladesh Dhaka 2004/05 70 (52b, 9x4, 3x6); 6-1-31-0

13 Pakistan Kochi 2004/05 108 (95b, 9x4, 3x6); 5-0-26-0

14 Bermuda Port of Spain, Trinidad 2007 115 (87b, 17x4, 3x6); 5-0-15-0

15 England Bangalore, India 2008 69 (57b, 9x4, 3x6)

16 England Cuttack, India 2008 91 (73b, 15x4, 1x6)

17 New Zealand Hamilton, New Zealand 2009 125* (75b,14x4, 6x6)

18 Sri Lanka Rajkot, India 2009/10 146 (102b,17x4, 6x6)

19 Sri Lanka Dambulla, Srilanka 2009/10 99* (100b,11x4, 2x6)

(source:wikipedia)

Vestas

Vestas Wind Systems,

Vestas Wind Systems is a Danish manufacturer, seller, installer, and servicer of wind turbines, currently the largest in the world with a 28% market share.The company operates manufacturing plants in Denmark, Germany, India, Italy, Britain, Spain, Sweden, Norway, Australia, China, and the United States, and employs more than 20,000 people globally.

After a sales slump in 2005, Vestas recovered and was voted Top Green Company of 2006. In December, 2008, Vestas announced a major expansion of its North American headquarters in Portland, Oregon. In late 2008 the company also announced a manufacturing expansion in Colorado.

History

Vestas was founded in 1945 by Peder Hansen as "Vestjysk Stålteknik A/S" (West-Jutlandish steel technology). The company initially manufactured household appliances, moving its focus to agricultural equipment in 1950, intercoolers in 1956, and hydraulic cranes in 1968. It entered the wind turbine industry in 1979.

In 2003, the company merged with the Danish wind turbine manufacturer NEG Micon to create the largest wind turbine manufacturer in the world, under the banner of Vestas Wind Systems. After an operational loss in 2005, Vestas recovered in 2006, and continues to have 28% market share.

In February 2009, the company announced the production of two new turbine types, the 3-megawatt V112 and 1.8-megawatt V100. The new models will be available in 2010.

Operations

Vestas has installed over 39,000 wind turbines in 63 countries on five continents.The company employs more than 20,000 people globally, and has built production facilities in more than 12 countries. It is currently expanding and opening up new production facilities in China, Spain and the United States. Vestas announced expansion of its North American headquarters in Portland, Oregon from 350 to at least 1200 employees on December 1, 2008. It employs a further 200 persons at a blade manufacturing facility in Windsor, Colorado, and plans to add 1400 jobs at a new blade and nacelle assembly facility that is under construction near Brighton, Colorado, and up to 125 engineers at a 47,675 square-foot product development site in Louisville, Colorado. Vestas also operates a tower facility in Pueblo, Colorado. Vestas said it decided to build its North American production facilities in Colorado because of the state’s central location, extensive transportation infrastructure and rail system, existing manufacturing base, and skilled workforce. Vestas wind turbine blades are made from high strength, light weight carbon fiber supplied by Zoltek Companies Inc. in St. Louis, MO.

Products

Some of the more recent wind turbine models made by Vestas are listed below. The rotor diameter (in meters) follows the V.

V47-660 kW

V52-850 kW

V60-850 kW (China)

V66-1.75MW

V80-1.8MW

V80-2.0MW

V82-1.65MW

V90-1.8MW

V90-2.0MW

V90-3.0MW

V100-1.8MW

V112-3.0MW

Business strategy

The Vestas protest on the Isle of Wight in 2009.

In July 2009, Vestas' operations on the U.K.'s Isle of Wight were announced to close due to lack of demand, affecting 525 jobs there and 100 jobs in Southampton. Approximately 25 workers at the wind turbine factory on the island occupied the administration offices in protest on 20 July 2009, demanding nationalisation to save their jobs.

In August 2009 Vestas hired more than 5,000 extra workers for its new factories in China, the United States, and Spain. The company said it was "expanding heavily in China and the US because these markets were growing the fastest, in contrast to the sluggish pace of wind farm development in the UK".

Sponsorship

In 2009 Vestas took over the shirt sponsorship of the Warrington Wolves from Omega. Warrington Wolves are a Rugby League Team currently competing in the European Super League and were Challenge Cup Holders Last Year [2009].

(source:wikipedia)

Same-sex marriage

Same-sex marriage,

(also called gay marriage)is a legally or socially recognized marriage between two persons of the same biological sex or social gender. Same-sex marriage is a civil rights, political, social, moral, and religious issue in many nations. The conflict arises over whether same-sex couples should be allowed to enter into marriage, be required to use a different status (such as a civil union, which either grant equal rights as marriage, or limited rights in comparison to marriage), or not have any such rights. A related issue is whether the term "marriage" should be applied.

Financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and children of same-sex couples benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally-recognized union supported by society’s institutions.

Support for same-sex marriage is often based upon what is regarded as a universal human rights issue, mental and physical health concerns, equality before the law,and the goal of normalizing LGBT relationships. Opposition to same-sex marriage arises from a rejection of the use of the word "marriage" as applied to same-sex couples or objections about the legal and social status of marriage itself being applied under any terminology. Other stated reasons include direct and indirect social consequences of same-sex marriages, parenting concerns, religious grounds, and tradition. Supporters of same-sex marriage often attribute opposition to it as coming from homophobia[ or heterosexism and liken prohibitions on same-sex marriage to past prohibitions on interracial marriage.

Etymology and terminological usage

The word "marriage" comes from Old French mariage, from marier (“‘to marry’”), from Latin maritare (“‘to marry", literally “give in marriage’”), from maritus (“‘lover", "nuptial’”), from mas (“‘male", "masculine", "of the male sex’”).

Anthropologists have struggled to come up with a definition of marriage that absorbs commonalities of the social construct across cultures. Edvard Westermarck defined marriage in the 1922 edition of The History of Human Marriage as "a relation of one or more men to one or more women which is recognized as custom or law and involves certain rights and duties" to the individuals who enter into it, and any children born from it.[20] Such definitions failed to recognize same-sex marriages that have been documented around the world, including in more than 30 African cultures, such as the Kikuyu and Nuer.

In lexicography, words have changed and expanded in accordance to the status quo. In the last 10 years, in the English-speaking world, all major dictionaries have either dropped gender specifications, or supplemented them with secondary definitions to include gender-neutral language or same-sex unions. The Oxford English Dictionary has recognized same-sex marriage since 2000.

Many proponents of same-sex marriages use the term marriage equality to stress that they seek equality as opposed to special rights. Opponents argue that equating same-sex and opposite-sex marriages changes the meaning of marriage and its traditions, and use the term traditional marriage to mean marriages between one man and one woman.

Alan Dershowitz and others have suggested reserving the word "marriage" for religious contexts as part of privatizing marriage, and in civil and legal contexts using a uniform concept of civil unions, in part to strengthen the separation between church and state. Jennifer Roback Morse, the president of the anti-same-sex marriage group National Organization for Marriage's Ruth Institute project, claims that the conflation of marriage with contractual agreements is itself a threat to marriage.

Use in print and online media

Some publications that oppose same-sex marriages adopt an editorial style policy of placing the word marriage in quotation marks ("marriage") when it is used in reference to same-sex couples. In the United States, the mainstream press has generally abandoned this practice. Some socially conservative online publications, such as WorldNetDaily and Baptist Press, still follow the practice. Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media argues for use of quotation marks on the grounds that marriage is a legal status denied same-sex couples by most state governments. Same-sex marriage supporters argue that the use of scare quotes is an editorialization that implies illegitimacy.

Associated Press style recommends the usages marriage for gays and lesbians or in space-limited headlines gay marriage with no hyphen and no scare quotes. The Associated Press warns that the construct gay marriage can imply that marriage licenses offered to gay and lesbian couples are somehow legally different.

History

History of same-sex unions and Timeline of same-sex marriage

Ancient

Various types of same-sex marriages have existed, ranging from informal, unsanctioned relationships to highly ritualized unions.

In the southern Chinese province of Fujian, through the Ming dynasty period, females would bind themselves in contracts to younger females in elaborate ceremonies. Males also entered similar arrangements. This type of arrangement was also similar in ancient European history.

An example of egalitarian male domestic partnership from the early Zhou Dynasty period of China is recorded in the story of Pan Zhang & Wang Zhongxian. While the relationship was clearly approved by the wider community, and was compared to heterosexual marriage, it did not involve a religious ceremony binding the couple.

The first historical mention of the performance of same-sex marriages occurred during the early Roman Empire.For instance, Emperor Nero is said to have married one of his males slaves. Emperor Elagabalus married a Carian slave named Hierocles.While there is a consensus among modern historians that same-sex relationships existed in ancient Rome, the exact frequency and nature of same-sex unions during that period has been obscured. In 342 AD Christian emperors Constantius II and Constans issued a law in the Theodosian Code (C. Th. 9.7.3) prohibiting same-sex marriage in Rome and ordering execution for those so married.

Modern

In October 1989, Denmark became the first country to recognize same-sex unions in the form of "registered partnerships". In 2001, the Netherlands became the first nation to grant same-sex marriages. Same-sex marriages are granted and mutually recognized by Belgium (2003), Spain (2005), Canada (2005), South Africa (2006), Norway (2009), Sweden (2009), Portugal (2010), Iceland (2010) and Argentina (2010). In Nepal, their recognition has been judicially mandated but not yet legislated. 250 million people (or 4% of the world population) currently live in areas that recognise same sex marriage.

Current status

Status of same-sex marriage and Same-sex marriage legislation around the world

Same-sex sexual activity legal     Same-sex marriage     Other type of partnership (or unregistered cohabitation)     Foreign same-sex marriages recognized     No recognition of same-sex couples

Same-sex sexual activity illegal     Minimal penalty     Large penalty     Life in prison     Death penalty

---

 Country-wide recognition

Same-sex sexual activity legal

Same-sex marriage

Other type of partnership (or unregistered cohabitation)

Foreign same-sex marriages recognized

No recognition of same-sex couples

Same-sex sexual activity illegal

Minimal penalty

Large penalty

Life in prison

Death penalty

v • d • e

-wide recognition

Same-sex marriage currently is legal in Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Canada, South Africa, Norway, Sweden, Portugal, Iceland and Argentina.

Subject debated

Nepal

In November 2008, Nepal's highest court issued final judgment on matters related to LGBT rights. Based on the court recommendation the government announced its intention to introduce a same-sex marriage bill by 2010. Same-sex marriage and protection for sexual minorities will be included in the new Nepalese constitution which will be drafted one of these days.

Europe

Recognition of same-sex unions in Europe

The granting and honoring of same-sex marriages is also currently being considered by several countries in Europe.

In early July 2009, the Slovenian minister of interior announced that it is likely that Slovenia will legalize same-sex marriage in the near future, following government agreement that same-sex couples deserve to be entitled to all of the same benefits of opposite-sex couples. In December 2009, the government approved a bill allowing same-sex marriage and adoption and sent it to parliament. The new government of Luxembourg has also announced its intention to legalize same-sex marriage. In France in 2006, a 30-member non-quorum parliamentary commission of the French National Assembly published a 453-page Report on the Family and the Rights of Children, which rejected same-sex marriages.

Latin America

Some Latin American nations have taken up such proposals, Justice Minister of Argentina worked to submit a gender neutral law draft before the Congress.. On July 14, 2010 the Argentine Senate prepared to vote on a bill granting the broadest marital protections to gay people in Latin America. It was supported by the Government of President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner and opposed by the hierarchy of the Catholic Church. Polls showed that nearly 70 percent of Argentines support giving gay people the same marital rights as heterosexuals. Same-sex marriage became a nationwide law after the Senate approved it on July 15, 2010.

On 21 December 2009, Mexico City's Legislative Assembly legalized same-sex marriages and adoption by same-sex couples. The law was enacted eight days later and became effective in early March 2010.Since then, same-sex marriage bills have been proposed in other Mexican states such as Morelos,Puebla,and Sonora. Michoacán, Tabasco, and Tamaulipas are expected to follow later in 2010.

Oceania

Australia bans recognition of same-sex marriages at the federal level, but the current Labor Party government favors synchronized state and territory registered partnership legislation (as in Tasmania and Victoria). The Australian Capital Territory offers civil partnerships. New Zealand's Parliament rejected a bill that would have prohibited the recognition of same-sex marriage in New Zealand in December 2005. However, New Zealand's Marriage Act 1955 still only recognizes marriage rights for opposite-sex couples. The marriage laws consider transsexuals who have undergone reassignment surgery as having changed sex for legal purposes, following Family Court and High Court of New Zealand decisions in 1995.

Israel

Israel's High Court of Justice ruled to honor same-sex marriages granted in other countries even though Israel itself does not issue such licenses. A bill was raised in the Knesset (parliament) to rescind the High Court's ruling, but the Knesset has not advanced the bill since December 2006.

Africa

Same-sex marriage became legal in South Africa on 30 November 2006 when the Civil Unions Bill was enacted after having been passed by the South African Parliament earlier that month. A ruling by the Constitutional Court on 1 December 2005 had imposed a deadline of 1 December 2006 to make same-sex marriage legal. South Africa became the fifth country, the first in Africa, and the second outside Europe, to legalize same-sex marriage. In 2006, Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo introduced legislation that prohibits same-sex marriages and criminalizes anyone who "performs, witnesses, aids or abets" such ceremonies.Among the Igbo people of Nigeria, there are circumstances where a marriage between two women is allowed, such as when a woman has no child and the husband dies.

United States

Same-sex marriage in the United States

In the United States, although same-sex marriages are not recognized federally, same-sex couples can currently marry in five states (New Hampshire, Iowa, Massachusetts, Vermont and Connecticut) and the District of Columbia and receive state level benefits.Additionally, several states offer civil unions or domestic partnerships, granting all or part of the state-level rights and responsibilities of marriage. Thirty-one states have put same-sex marriage on the ballot, but none have passed. In 1996, the United States Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) defining marriage solely as a union between a couple of the opposite sex for all federal purposes and allowing for the non-recognition amongst the states. President Barack Obama is opposed to same-sex marriage,while he "supports full civil unions and federal rights for LGBT couples", a full repeal of DOMA, and called California's Proposition 8 "unnecessary".The validity of Proposition 8 under the United States Constitution is currently being challenged in a federal court case, Perry v. Schwarzenegger, which could potentially have an effect on all same-sex marriage bans nationwide. The District Court found the ban unconstitutional, ruling on August 4, 2010 that "Proposition 8 disadvantages gays and lesbians without any rational justification". The proponents of Proposition 8 state they expect to appeal the ruling, and the actual performing of further marriage ceremonies is being deferred due to the ongoing legal proceedings.

International organizations

The terms of employment of the staff of international organizations (not commercial) in most cases are not governed by the laws of the country in which their offices are located. Agreements with the host country safeguard these organizations' impartiality.

Despite their relative independence, few organizations currently recognize same-sex partnerships without condition. The agencies of the United Nations recognize same-sex marriages if and only if the country of citizenship of the employees in question recognizes the marriage.In some cases, these organizations do offer a limited selection of the benefits normally provided to opposite-sex married couples to de facto partners or domestic partners of their staff, but even individuals who have entered into an opposite-sex civil union in their home country are not guaranteed full recognition of this union in all organizations. However, the World Bank does recognize domestic partners.

Other legally recognized same-sex unions

Civil union

Civil unions, civil partnerships, domestic partnerships, registered partnerships, or unregistered partnership/unregistered co-habitation legal status offer varying portions of the legal benefits of marriage and are available to same-sex couples in: Andorra, Australia, Colombia, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Luxembourg, New Zealand, Slovenia, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and Uruguay. They are also available in parts of Mexico (Coahuila and the Federal District) and the United States (California, Hawai'i, Maine, New Jersey, New York, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, Washington and the federal District of Columbia)

Many advocates, such as this protester at a demonstration in New York City against California Proposition 8, reject the notion of civil unions. U.S. Same-sex marriage movement activist Evan Wolfson does not feel civil unions are a replacement for full marriage equality.

In some countries with legal recognition the actual benefits are minimal. Many people consider civil unions, even those that grant equal rights, inadequate, as they create a separate status, and think they should be replaced by gender-neutral marriage.

Australia

In Australia, Commonwealth law prohibits the recognition of same-sex marriage under the Marriage Act 1961. However, every Australian government jurisdiction provides to de facto same-sex couples a wide range of rights equal to those afforded to de facto opposite-sex couples. These rights are gained without registration, under a status called "unregistered cohabitation". Furthermore, formal domestic partnership registries exist in New South Wales, Tasmania, Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory. Since 1 July 2009, same-sex couples are recognised as de facto partners in a wide range of legislation in every Australian government jurisdiction, including superannuation, social security, health care and taxation. In 2007, Grace Abrams and Fiona Power became Australia's first legally recognized same-sex married couple after Grace Abrams had gender-modification surgery and was later officially granted a passport with female status.

Europe

Laws regarding same-sex partnerships in Europe

Same-sex marriage

Other type of partnership

Unregistered cohabitation

Issue under political consideration

Unrecognized

Constitution limits marriage to man–woman

v • d • e

In Denmark, Finland and Hungary, a registered partnership provides nearly all of the rights of marriage, including joint adoption rights in Denmark. Finland and Greenland have biological adoption only (no joint adoption). These partnership laws are short laws that state that wherever the word "marriage" appears in the country's law, it will now also be construed to mean "registered partnership", and wherever the word "spouse" appears, it will now also be construed to mean "registered partner" — thereby transferring the body of marriage laws onto same-sex couples in registered partnerships.

In the United Kingdom, civil partnerships were introduced in 2005. The law gives civil partners the same benefits and associated legal rights of marriage; ranging from tax exemptions and joint property rights, to next-of-kin status and shared parenting responsibilities. The one notable exception is the use of courtesy titles by the partner of a male peer or knight. In the first year, 16,100 ceremonies took place. Civil unions in New Zealand are identical to British civil partnerships in their association with equivalent spousal rights and responsibilities to marriage.

Transgender and intersex persons

This section needs additional citations for verification.

Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2008)

Transsexualism, Legal aspects of transsexualism, and Gender identity

When sex is defined legally, it may be defined by any one of several criteria: the XY sex-determination system, the type of gonads, or the type of external sexual features. Consequently, both transsexuals and intersexed individuals may be legally categorized into confusing gray areas, and could be prohibited from marrying partners of the "opposite" sex or permitted to marry partners of the "same" sex due to legal distinctions. This could result in long-term marriages, as well as recent same-sex marriages, being overturned.

The problems of defining gender by the existence/non-existence of gonads or certain sexual features is complicated by the existence of surgical methods to alter these features. Estimates run as high as 1 percent of live births exhibiting some degree of sexual ambiguity, and between 0.1% and 0.2% of live births being ambiguous enough to become the subject of specialist medical attention, including sometimes involuntary surgery to address their sexual ambiguity.

In any legal jurisdiction where marriages are defined without distinction of a requirement of a male and female, these complications do not occur. In addition, some legal jurisdictions recognize a legal and official change of gender, which would allow a transsexual to be legally married in accordance with an adopted gender identity.

In the United Kingdom, the Gender Recognition Act 2004 allows a person who has lived in their chosen gender for at least two years to receive a gender recognition certificate officially recognizing their new gender. Because in the UK marriages are for mixed-sex couples and civil partnerships are for same-sex couples, a person must dissolve his/her marriage or civil partnership before obtaining a gender recognition certificate. Such persons are then free to enter or re-enter civil partnerships or marriages in accordance with their newly recognized gender identity.

In the United States, transsexual and intersexual marriages typically run into the complications detailed above. As definitions and enforcement of marriage are defined by the states, these complications vary from state to state.

Controversy

This section may stray from the topic of the article. Please help improve this section or discuss this issue on the talk page. (April 2010)

See also: LGBT rights opposition

While few societies have recognized same-sex unions as marriages, the historical and anthropological record reveals a large range of attitudes towards same-sex unions ranging from praise, to sympathetic toleration, to indifference, to prohibition. Opponents of same-sex marriages have argued that recognition of same-sex marriages would erode religious freedoms,and that same-sex marriage, while doing good for the couples that participate in them and the children they are raising, undermines a right of children to be raised by their biological mother and father.

Some supporters of same-sex marriages take the view that the government should have no role in regulating personal relationships, while others argue that same-sex marriages would provide social benefits to same-sex couples. A 2004 Statement by the American Anthropological Association states that there is no evidence that society needs to maintain "marriage as an exclusively heterosexual institution", and, further, that same-sex unions can "contribute to stable and humane societies." The American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, and National Association of Social Workers state: "There is no scientific basis for distinguishing between same-sex couples and heterosexual couples with respect to the legal rights, obligations, benefits, and burdens conferred by civil marriage.... Empirical research has consistently shown that lesbian and gay parents do not differ from heterosexuals in their parenting skills, and their children do not show any deficits compared to children raised by heterosexual parents.... [I]f their parents are allowed to marry, the children of same-sex couples will benefit not only from the legal stability and other familial benefits that marriage provides, but also from elimination of state-sponsored stigmatization of their families."

The debate regarding same-sex marriages includes debate based upon social viewpoints as well as debate based on majority rules, religious convictions, economic arguments, health-related concerns, and a variety of other issues.

Judicial and legislative

Marriage (conflict)#Same-sex marriage

A "majority rules" position regards same-sex marriage as void and illegal unless it has been accepted by a simple majority of voters or of their elected representatives.In contrast, a civil-rights view holds that, after carefully studying both sides of the controversy, an impartial judiciary, in upholding its constitutional duties, should decide whether the right to marry regardless of the gender of the participants is constitutionally guaranteed.

In general, the legal effect marriage has on same-sex couples when marriage licenses are issued to them and honored by the states in which they live is indistinguishable from any other legal effect marriage has on any other couple under state law. The United States has developed extensive case law and legislation addressing the nuance of American legal conceptions of equality before the law.

[edit]Religion

Main article: Religious arguments about same-sex marriage

Arguments on both sides of the same-sex marriage debate are often made on religious grounds and/or formulated in terms of religious doctrine. One source of controversy is how same-sex marriage affects freedom of religion. Many religious organizations (citing their religious beliefs) refuse to provide employment, public accommodations, adoption services and other benefits to same-sex couples. Some areas have made special provisions for religious protections.

Many Christian groups have been vocal and politically active in opposing same-sex marriage laws in the United States. Christians opposed to same-sex marriage have claimed that extending marriage rights to same-sex couples could undercut the conventional purpose of marriage, or would be contrary to God's will. Christian opposition to same-sex marriage also comes from the belief that same-sex marriage normalizes homosexual behavior and would encourage it, instead of encouraging resistance to same-sex attraction.

Christian supporters of same-sex marriage have claimed that marriage rights for same-sex couples strengthens the institution of marriage and provides legal protection for children of gay and lesbian parents. Bible-based arguments for same-sex marriage rights include that the word "homosexual", as found in modern versions of the Bible, is an inaccurate translation of the original texts.Neither Vine's Expository Dictionary nor Strong's Concordance (two significant bible reference works) contains the word "homosexual". There also is no direct biblical prohibition of marriage rights for same-sex couples. Certain biblical texts used by non-affirming Christian organizations to condemn homosexuality, and by extension same-sex marriage, may refer only to specific sex acts and idolatrous worship lacking any relevance to contemporary same-sex relationships.Supporting marriage rights for gays and lesbians is viewed by affirming Christians as a Christ-like commitment to the equality and dignity of all persons. The United Church of Canada asserts that "human sexual orientations, whether heterosexual, bisexual or homosexual, are a gift from God", whilst the Yearly Meeting of Quakers in the United Kingdom decided to offer same-sex marriages, though national law permits only Civil Partnerships.

On July 4, 2005 the United Church of Christ (UCC), at their 25th General Synod, voted to support full legal and religious marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples making it the first mainline Christian denomination in the United States to support and promote same sex marriage equality. The UCC is a liberal Christian denomination with a long history of supporting gay rights, women's rights, African-American civil rights and other issues of social justice.

Unitarian Universalism, a liberal faith tradition, supports marriage equality for same-sex couples. It has taken an active role advocating for LGBT rights and same-sex marriages are often performed in UU congregations.

Judaism, like Christianity, contains varying views on the issue of marriage rights, both politically and religiously, for same-sex couples. Many Orthodox Jews maintain the traditional Jewish bans on both sexual acts and marriages amongst members of the same sex, but other orthodox rabbis, such as Steven Greenberg, disagree. Some Conservative Jews reject recognition of same-sex unions as marriages, but permit celebration of commitment ceremonies, while others recognize same-sex marriage.The Union for Reform Judaism (formerly known as the Union of American Hebrew Congregations) supports the inclusion of same-sex unions within the definition of marriage.The Jewish Reconstructionist Federation leaves the choice to individual rabbis.

From the Islamic perspective, a majority of Muslim legal scholars cite the rulings of Muhammad and the story of Lot in Sodom as condemnation of homosexuality. Given that Islam views marriage as an exchange between two parties of protection and security for exclusive sexual and reproductive rights, same-sex marriages cannot be considered legal within the constrains of a Muslim marriage. 

Buddhist scripture and teachings do not take a consistent stance against homosexuality, and do not specifically proscribe nor endorse same-sex marriage; thus, there is no unified stance for or against the practice.

Wiccan communities are often supportive of same-sex marriages.

Children and the family
Same-sex marriage and the family

Parenting

LGBT parenting

LGBT parenting is when lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people are parents to one or more children, either as biological or non-biological parents. Gay men face options which include: "foster care, variations of domestic and international adoption, diverse forms of surrogacy (whether "traditional" or gestational), and kinship arrangements, wherein they might coparent with a woman or women with whom they are intimately but not sexually involved." LGBT parents can also include single people who are parenting; to a lesser extent, the term sometimes refers to families with LGBT children.

In the 2000 U.S. Census, 33 percent of female same-sex couple households and 22 percent of male same-sex couple households reported at least one child under eighteen living in their home. Some children do not know they have an LGB parent; coming out issues vary and some parents may never come out to their children. LGBT parenting in general, and adoption by LGBT couples may be controversial in some countries. In January 2008, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that same-sex couples have the right to adopt a child. In the U.S., LGB people can legally adopt in all states except for Florida.

Society’s early assumptions about the superiority of the traditional family form have been challenged by the results of empirical research. Early in the Twentieth Century, it was widely believed that traditional family settings were necessary in order for children to adjust well. Since the 1970s, it has become increasingly clear that it is family processes (such as the quality of parenting, the psychosocial well-being of parents, the quality of and satisfaction with relationships within the family, and the level of co-operation and harmony between parents) that contribute to determining children’s well-being and ‘outcomes’, rather than family structures, per se, such as the number, gender, sexuality and co-habitation status of parents. Since the end of the 1980’s, as a result, it has been well established that children and adolescents can adjust just as well in nontraditional settings as in traditional settings.

Although it is sometimes asserted in policy debates that heterosexual couples are inherently better parents than same-sex couples, or that the children of lesbian or gay parents fare worse than children raised by heterosexual parents, those assertions find no support in the scientific research literature. In fact, the promotion of this notion, and the laws and public policies that embody it, are clearly counter to the well-being of children. No research supports the widely held conviction that the gender of parents matters for child well-being. Society is replete with role models from whom children and adolescents can learn about socially prescribed male and female roles.

Indeed, the scientific research that has directly compared outcomes for children with gay and lesbian parents with outcomes for children with heterosexual parents has been remarkably consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are every bit as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents,despite the reality that considerable legal discrimination and inequity remain significant challenges for these families. These data have demonstrated no risk to children as a result of growing up in a family with 1 or more gay parents.

The abilities of gay and lesbian persons as parents and the positive outcomes for their children are not areas where credible scientific researchers disagree. Statements by the leading associations of experts in this area reflect professional consensus that children raised by lesbian or gay parents do not differ in any important respects from those raised by heterosexual parents. No credible empirical research suggests otherwise. If gay, lesbian, or bisexual parents were inherently less capable than otherwise comparable heterosexual parents, their children would evidence problems regardless of the type of sample. This pattern clearly has not been observed. Given the consistent failures in this research literature to disprove the null hypothesis, the burden of empirical proof is on those who argue that the children of sexual minority parents fare worse than the children of heterosexual parents. Literature indicates that parents’ financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally-recognized union.

Most of the studies appeared in rigorously peer-reviewed and highly selective journals, whose standards represent expert consensus on generally accepted social scientific standards for research on child and adolescent development. Canadian Psychological Association is concerned that some are mis-interpreting the findings of psychological research to support their positions, when their positions are more accurately based on other systems of belief or values. According to the Maine Chapter of American Academy of Pediatrics "those who claim that children need a biologically related mother and father to flourish are either ignorant of the scientific literature or are misrepresenting it or both".

Professor Judith Stacey, of New York University, stated: “Rarely is there as much consensus in any area of social science as in the case of gay parenting, which is why the American Academy of Pediatrics and all of the major professional organizations with expertise in child welfare have issued reports and resolutions in support of gay and lesbian parental rights”. These organizations include the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, the American Psychiatric Association,the American Psychological Association , the American Psychoanalytic Association  the National Association of Social Workers,[5] the Child Welfare League of America, the North American Council on Adoptable Children, and Canadian Psychological Association.

Education controversy

The subject of how the legalization of same-sex marriage affects public education is a source of controversy. An argument sometimes used by supporters is that teaching about same-sex marriage in schools will help children to be more open minded by exposing them to different types of families. There is concern from opponents of same-sex marriage that it will undermine parental rights over their children's education.

There is also concern that the information being presented might not be accurate, omits medical, psychological and legal impacts of homosexuality, and might not be appropriate for the age group. There has also been controversy that educators who disagree may be punished.

Effects of same-sex marriage

The American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association and National Association of Social Workers have stated in an Amicus curiae brief presented to the California Supreme Court

Homosexuality is neither a disorder nor a disease, but rather a normal variant of human sexual orientation. The vast majority of gay and lesbian individuals lead happy, healthy, well-adjusted, and productive lives. Many gay and lesbian people are in a committed same-sex relationship. In their essential psychological respects, these relationships are equivalent to heterosexual relationships. The institution of marriage affords individuals a variety of benefits that have a favorable impact on their physical and psychological well-being. A large number of children are currently being raised by lesbians and gay men, both in same-sex couples and as single parents. Empirical research has consistently shown that lesbian and gay parents do not differ from heterosexuals in their parenting skills, and their children do not show any deficits compared to children raised by heterosexual parents. State policies that bar same-sex couples from marrying are based solely on sexual orientation. As such, they are both a consequence of the stigma historically attached to homosexuality, and a structural manifestation of that stigma. By allowing same-sex couples to marry, the Court would end the antigay stigma imposed by the State of California through its ban on marriage rights for same-sex couples. In addition, allowing same-sex couples to marry would give them access to the social support that already facilitates and strengthens heterosexual marriages, with all of the psychological and physical health benefits associated with that support. In addition, if their parents are allowed to marry, the children of same-sex couples will benefit not only from the legal stability and other familial benefits that marriage provides, but also from elimination of state-sponsored stigmatization of their families. There is no scientific basis for distinguishing between same-sex couples and heterosexual couples with respect to the legal rights, obligations, benefits, and burdens conferred by civil marriage.

The Canadian Psychological Association has stated in 2006

The literature (including the literature on which opponents to marriage of same-sex couples appear to rely) indicates that parents’ financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally-recognized union. As the CPA stated in 2003, the stressors encountered by gay and lesbian parents and their children are more likely the result of the way in which society treats them than because of any deficiencies in fitness to parent. The CPA recognizes and appreciates that persons and institutions are entitled to their opinions and positions on this issue. However, CPA is concerned that some are mis-interpreting the findings of psychological research to support their positions, when their positions are more accurately based on other systems of belief or values. CPA asserts that children stand to benefit from the well-being that results when their parents’ relationship is recognized and supported by society’s institutions.

Health issues

Recently, several psychological studies have shown that an increase in exposure to negative conversations and media messages about same-sex marriage creates a harmful environment for the LGBT population that may affect their health and well-being.

In 2010, a Mailman School of Public Health study examining the effects of institutional discrimination on the psychiatric health of lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) individuals found an increase in psychiatric disorders among the LGB population living in states that instituted bans on same-sex marriage. According to the author the study highlighted the importance of abolishing institutional forms of discrimination, including those leading to disparities in the mental health and well-being of LGB individuals. Institutional discrimination is characterized by societal-level conditions that limit the opportunities and access to resources by socially-disadvantaged groups.

Gay activist Jonathan Rauch has argued that marriage is good for all men, whether homosexual or heterosexual, because engaging in its social roles reduces men's aggression and promiscuity. After reviewing current psychological and other social science studies on same-sex marriage in comparison to opposite-sex marriage, Gregory M. Herek claims that the data indicate that same-sex and opposite-sex relationships do not differ in their essential psychosocial dimensions; that a parent's sexual orientation is unrelated to their ability to provide a healthy and nurturing family environment; and that marriage bestows substantial psychological, social, and health benefits. Herek concludes that same-sex couples and their children are likely to benefit in numerous ways from legal recognition of their families, and providing such recognition through marriage will bestow greater benefit than civil unions or domestic partnerships.

In 2009, a pair of economists at Emory University tied the passage of state bans on same-sex marriage in the US to an increase in the rates of HIV infection. The study linked the passage of same-sex marriage ban in a state to an increase in the annual HIV rate within that state of roughly 4 cases per 100,000 population.

Marriage privatization

A libertarian argument for marriage privatization holds that the state has no role in defining the terms whereby individuals contract to arrange their personal relationships, regardless of sexual orientation. People holding this viewpoint argue that the state should have a limited role or no role in defining marriage, only in enforcing those contracts people construct themselves and willfully enter. The rights granted to a married couple exceed those that can be mutually granted by two people to each other contractually, and also involve rights granted by the state.

Source:Gay marriage