(no subject)

[theweaselking]

Finland, to be dragged kicking and screaming into The Century
Of The Fruitbat, sometime in 2017, which means they'll probably lag behind Mississippi and Vermont.

Better than nothing, but, seriously, UTAH beats you to basic bare-minimum humanity? That's really sad.

Comments

[skiriki.livejournal.com]

*handwaggle*

Well, right now there's this weaksauce "civil union" thing which is marriage-lite (like diff between Home/Professional editions of Windows) for non-heterosexual people, so it is not completely ZOMG US BARBARIANS.

Just... you know, extremely OMG WHY THE HELL THIS IS TAKING SO LONG AND WHY IT HAS TAKEN THIS MUCH TIME TO REACH THIS POINT YOU SODDING PILLOCKS level of bad.

[ariaflame.livejournal.com]

Though I can understand to a certain degree that if there was existing legislation which might cause conflicts that would be bad, and that given that legislation change is not something you want to do carelessly (words *matter* in legislation) updating the rest of the legislation to match isn't going to be as quick as we would like.

[skiriki.livejournal.com]

This is indeed the root of the problem "why 2017, not now" -- every other law that touches marriage also needs to be touched up so they are compliant, plus bureaucratic paperwork and electronic forms fixed, and people who do the actual bureaucratic thing trained in what it means. Two year delay doesn't mean that bureaucracy is sitting on its hands with thumbs lodged up its ass.

[tisiphone.livejournal.com]

It's not as bad as it looks. Finland has had civil partnerships since 2002, they're just getting around to changing the legal term.

[kjn]

Part of it comes down to that Finland in several ways is more socially conservative than the other Nordic countries (there are lots of differences between us that are not readily apparent to outsiders).

Another thing to consider is the differences in the legal system between the USA and Finland. Now, I'm far from an expert in the Finnish approach to laws and law-making, but it's a lot closer to Sweden's approach than to the US one. When the Finns pull the trigger in 2017, I imagine they will have made sure that (hopefully) all their other laws has been updated to include same-sex marriages, and the issue will have been settled for good.

Quite unlike the back-and-forth in the USA, where one never can be sure from one day to the next if one's marriage will be considered valid, or if there happen to be circumstances where it's suddenly invalid, or if it will be valid in the next state over.

[skiriki.livejournal.com]

Bingo, this is it.

[sparkindarkness.livejournal.com]

This is kind of the level I'm reaching with marriage equality now. I celebrate every new victory, of course - but I still look at the new arrivals and think "Utah beat you. Utah. Seriously guys."

[bruorton.livejournal.com]

Vermont? Vermont was one of the leaders on this... the first to create any legal status (back in 2000) anywhere in the US, and then the first to establish marriage equality legislatively (over the damn governor's veto, too) back in 2009. Only a handful of state courts had acted at that point -- MA and CT, and IA (by a few days).

[pappy-legba.livejournal.com]

As others have pointed out, it looks like this is partially a side effect of early adopter's syndrome. They latched onto an early, incomplete version of marriage equality and now they have to replace some now-inconvenient legal structures.

I find this somewhat more forgivable, but at the same time it's still making the lives of homosexual couples more difficult.

[skiriki.livejournal.com]

Yes, yes it is. :(

There is a small ray of sunshine, though: this was the first "citizens' initiative" to pass. By a massive avalanche of VERIFIED signatories. (Thru stroke of luck, I was in first three thousand to sign it after an hour it went up in 'net.)

Now, the lulzy part: bigoted people set up their own campaign after the Parliament had voted twice for aye, calling for its repeal. While there are 13k names too many for comfort (the idea that this many people support bigotry is upsetting to me)... there is no way they will get prerequisite 50k signatures for it before deadline. And their piddly campaign is getting scorned, loudly.

So... we will get shiny, improved, more equal law, and we can point and laugh at bigots. Bonus! (And yes, this law theoretically affects me, should I suddenly end up single and looking for a partner, so I am glad that the weak civil union law is getting scrapped.)

[pappy-legba.livejournal.com]

And you get two more years of increasingly hysterical idiocy from that pocket of bigots as they try to turn back the law before it takes effect in 2017. Their voices will grow louder and shriller as their numbers shrink.

[zenicurean.livejournal.com]

I notice there's also at least two citizens' initiatives to retroactively put it to a public referendum. One has five hundred and the other nine hundred signatures.