Sweden loves the gays, to let them marry

[Lunar]

First Iowa, and now Sweden?

http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE5307BC20090401

STOCKHOLM (Reuters) - Sweden will allow homosexuals to legally marry from May this year after parliament on Wednesday voted overwhelmingly in favor of the move.

The change in the law, which currently allows gay couples to register unions but not formal marriage, comes into force on May 1 this year under the timetable set out in the bill.

Scandinavian countries, known for their liberal attitudes toward gays and lesbians, were among the first countries in Europe to grant same-sex partners the same rights as married couples.

Sweden gave same-sex couples the right to form a union via registered partnerships in the mid-nineties and made it legal for them to adopt in 2002.

The passage of the bill was widely expected and the final tally was 261 votes in favor of the bill and 22 opposed.

"The decision means that gender no longer has an impact on the ability to marry and that the law on registered partnership is repealed," the government said on its website.

The Christian Democrats, part of the four-party coalition government, refused to back the bill.

The new legislation eliminates legal distinctions between heterosexual and homosexual spouses, but does not force dissenting clergy to wed gay couples.

The Swedish Lutheran church, which split from the state in 2000, has said it was open to celebrating and registering same-sex unions, although it wanted to reserve the term matrimony for heterosexual marriages.

[The Ex-Factor]

If I had had to guess, I would have guessed that Sweden had had same sex marriage a long time ago. It's not a logically coherent world where same sex marriage is legal in Nepal before Sweden.

Boy, my Korean friends here would have hated that first sentence. They asked me about how and when to use "had had" yesterday and I was stumped and fell back on the too hard to explain excuse.

[Gustaf]

Well, that's Sweden for ya. Funny thing is, we didn't separate church from state until the year 2000. It went quickly after that I guess.

[Hash]

Which parties voted against? KD only is my best guess.

[Gustaf]

Which parties voted against? KD only is my best guess.

Yes.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Gay marriage is inevitable in the civilized world.

[Gustaf]

It should be noted that the Christian Democrats, alone in opposing this proposed instead to get the state out of marriage alltogether and separate the religious ceremony completely from the legal part. This was, coincidentally, a position also embraced by RFSL, the National Association for Sexual Equality (rough translation by me) the main organization for homosexuals, transsexuals, etc.

[Platypus]

It should be noted that the Christian Democrats, alone in opposing this proposed instead to get the state out of marriage alltogether and separate the religious ceremony completely from the legal part. This was, coincidentally, a position also embraced by RFSL, the National Association for Sexual Equality (rough translation by me) the main organization for homosexuals, transsexuals, etc.

A position I share

[Tender Branson]

Good for Sweden !

I´m looking forward to Jan. 1, 2010 when Civil Unions will be implemented here.

[Verily]

If I had had to guess, I would have guessed that Sweden had had same sex marriage a long time ago. It's not a logically coherent world where same sex marriage is legal in Nepal before Sweden.

Nepal doesn't have same-sex marriage yet. The legislature has six months since the ruling (in November IIRC) to implement it, but hasn't done so yet.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

"Had had" is one of the painful parts of English grammar to explain. But, once you think about it, it's not too bad. "Had" can be a helping verb for the pluperfect tense, or it can be the past tense form of "to have". When you want to use "to have" in the pluperfect, then, you use the past-tense form of the verb, "had", and the pluperfect helping verb, "had", to create "had had".

The pluperfect is the tense you use when you want to express something which happened before something else in the past. In English, we always put "had" before the past-tense form of the verb in order to form the pluperfect. ("I walked the dog"; "I had already walked the dog when my wife came home.")