Finland to adopt gender neutral marriage laws tomorrow

[Swordfishtrombone]

About time, I say.

Tomorrow, the law allowing gay marriages, on par with heterosexual marriages, will come to effect. Predictably, some religious communities are getting their panties in a twist about it.

It is interesting that religion is such a big issue in the US, where you have separation of church and state, and has become stale and mostly a non issue in Finland, where we have religious freedom, but a state church (Lutheran). About half of Finns don't believe in a god, though the majority is still on the churches books, more out of tradition and habit, and not really giving enough of a a **** to officially quit it.

The usually milktoast church is now experiencing some internal strife about the issue of marrying gays - officially, they do not allow the marriage of gays in churches, but many priests are going rogue, planning to do it anyway. Get out your popcorn, we have drama, people.

I also recently heard some happy news from my sister, who is now planning to marry her partner about a year from now, in the summer of 2018 (this year they are just too busy, and they want a big wedding). I'm happy for her, that this is now an option, and I really like her partner too - she's very nice, and they are a good fit.

[psionl0]

Is a marriage celebrant permitted to refuse to perform a wedding ceremony for personal reasons or is that a crime?

[Swordfishtrombone]

Originally Posted by psionl0

Is a marriage celebrant permitted to refuse to perform a wedding ceremony for personal reasons or is that a crime?

I don't think that's come up, at least yet. I'll be interested to see what my sister's marriage ceremony will be like though, as she's a Buddhist, and I'm not exactly sure what, if any, religion her partner has (in Finland, we don't typically discuss issues of religion - it's considered private.)

I suspect it wouldn't be a crime for someone to choose not to marry gay couples, but our society is egalitarian enough that it'll not be difficult to find someone to preform whatever kind of ceremony they want.

[psionl0]

Originally Posted by Swordfishtrombone

I suspect it wouldn't be a crime for someone to choose not to marry gay couples, but our society is egalitarian enough that it'll not be difficult to find someone to preform whatever kind of ceremony they want.

That's how I would hope that a gender neutral marriage law would operate. Unfortunately, political correctness is often such that gay rights trumps common sense.

[Porpoise of Life]

Originally Posted by psionl0

That's how I would hope that a gender neutral marriage law would operate. Unfortunately, political correctness is often such that gay rights trumps common sense.

Yeah, alles those churches getting sued for not performing religious gay marriages... Like... And...

Cite?

[Myriad]

Originally Posted by psionl0

That's how I would hope that a gender neutral marriage law would operate. Unfortunately, political correctness is often such that gay rights trumps common sense.

What country did that happen in? Here in the U.S. there were plenty of churches fanning outrage among their own congregations over the phantom menace of churches being forced to sanction and officiate gay marriages that their doctrine didn't approve of, but no actual possibility of that happening.

(There were also many cases of church members being unhappy when their church leaders did decide to approve and perform gay marriage ceremonies. Perhaps that added to the confusion over the issue.)

[Beerina]

That's a nonstarter to anyone who follows constitutional law, and it's not even close, in the 9-0 Supreme Court range, solidly.

It's closer for people operating a business while having religious convictions, but that is still falling in favor of the religion, at least on some issues. If government can accomplish the same goal (which is the goal remember) by some other, less-intrusive manner, then it must use that method. People shouldn't have to give up fundamental rights just because the government wants to take a shortcut. These are the current front lines in constitutional cases.

[Baylor]

Originally Posted by Swordfishtrombone

About time, I say.

Tomorrow, the law allowing gay marriages, on par with heterosexual marriages, will come to effect. Predictably, some religious communities are getting their panties in a twist about it.

It is interesting that religion is such a big issue in the US, where you have separation of church and state, and has become stale and mostly a non issue in Finland, where we have religious freedom, but a state church (Lutheran). About half of Finns don't believe in a god, though the majority is still on the churches books, more out of tradition and habit, and not really giving enough of a a **** to officially quit it.

The usually milktoast church is now experiencing some internal strife about the issue of marrying gays - officially, they do not allow the marriage of gays in churches, but many priests are going rogue, planning to do it anyway. Get out your popcorn, we have drama, people.

I also recently heard some happy news from my sister, who is now planning to marry her partner about a year from now, in the summer of 2018 (this year they are just too busy, and they want a big wedding). I'm happy for her, that this is now an option, and I really like her partner too - she's very nice, and they are a good fit.

Wow. I haven't posted here in 2.5 years because I go so sick of the ignorance and virtue-signlaing. This is the FIRST POST I READ IN TWO AND AND HALF YEARS, AND IT'S FULL OF IGNORANCE AND VIRTUE-SIGNALLING

Quote:

It is interesting that religion is such a big issue in the US, where you have separation of church and state, and has become stale and mostly a non issue in Finland, where we have religious freedom, but a state church (Lutheran).

Actually, this is not interesting at all because it's ********. This is you regurgitating crap you read on social media and this is you not understanding the complex social and political structure of the US.

[Baylor]

Originally Posted by Swordfishtrombone

I suspect it wouldn't be a crime for someone to choose not to marry gay couples, but our society is egalitarian enough that it'll not be difficult to find someone to preform whatever kind of ceremony they want.

Wow. I am so impressed! Look how tolerant you are! Let's not discuss other opposing views, let's just call them racist and homophobic. I got an idea, how about you let in thousands of Muslim migrants into your country to show how virtuous, wonderful, kind-hearted you are. Let those Muslims impose their religious way of life on your country, then claim "religion is a big issue in the US."

[Porpoise of Life]

Originally Posted by Baylor

Wow. I am so impressed! Look how tolerant you are! Let's not discuss other opposing views, let's just call them racist and homophobic. I got an idea, how about you let in thousands of Muslim migrants into your country to show how virtuous, wonderful, kind-hearted you are. Let those Muslims impose their religious way of life on your country, then claim "religion is a big issue in the US."

I have no idea what you're responding to, but it's not the post you quoted, nor any other post in this thread.

[Baylor]

Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life

I have no idea what you're responding to, but it's not the post you quoted, nor any other post in this thread.

He's boasting of living in an "egalitarian" society then mocks Christians about "getting their panties in a bunch" for not sharing his values.

Grossly misunderstands how "religion is such a big issue in the US." In the "religious" United States, you can critisize any religion without being accused of a "hate speech." Not so in "egalitarian" Finland

I cannot stress this enough: Virtue-signaling how "tolerant" a country is is not the least bit impressive.

[3point14]

Originally Posted by Baylor

He's boasting of living in an "egalitarian" society then mocks Christians about "getting their panties in a bunch" for not sharing his values.

Grossly misunderstands how "religion is such a big issue in the US." In the "religious" United States, you can critisize any religion without being accused of a "hate speech." Not so in "egalitarian" Finland

I cannot stress this enough: Virtue-signaling how "tolerant" a country is is not the least bit impressive.

Care to state your opinion on the matter?

[Swordfishtrombone]

Originally Posted by Baylor

He's boasting of living in an "egalitarian" society then mocks Christians about "getting their panties in a bunch" for not sharing his values.

Grossly misunderstands how "religion is such a big issue in the US." In the "religious" United States, you can critisize any religion without being accused of a "hate speech." Not so in "egalitarian" Finland

I cannot stress this enough: Virtue-signaling how "tolerant" a country is is not the least bit impressive.

Um....

I've been criticizing religion quite openly, without facing any legal problems. We DO have freedom of speech guaranteed by our constitution. But you REALLY took a reading of my post that was strongly colored by by your expectation, it seems to me. Finns are generally egalitarian, but there are clearly things we could improve on - I LIKE the US separation of church and state, and think that even as it's apparently resulted in the state church becoming less and less popular, not having an official church would a good thing.

I don't think there's anything "impressive" about this law change - just a bit of good news.

It WOULD have been impressive if this happened a few decades ago. Now it's just a case of finally getting on with the program. It took a lot of political wrangling, and they failed to get this type of law through years ago. This time it was brought up through an official petition. (We have a system where you can set up petitions and get them signed by people on line - with their identities checked through various means - and if there are enough signatures, the issue must be brought before the parliament.) This is how it was brought up now, and after debate and votes, passed. Finally.

And as to the drama in the state church - there's no drama without Christians in the church vocally in favor of gay marriage as well, so if I am "virtue signaling" about Finnish society, then I'm "virtue signaling" about a portion of the Christian establishment as well.

Nobody's forcing any religious organization to marry gay couples - but they have the right to marry now. The strife within the church is happening because some congregations and priests think it their moral duty not to turn away gay couples, while others think the opposite.

Finnish society IS usually pretty egalitarian, but we were dragging our feet with this one, and it was more difficult to get it done that it should have been. Many other nations in Europe got there way before us.

[Baylor]

Originally Posted by Swordfishtrombone

Um....

I've been criticizing religion quite openly, without facing any legal problems..

Maybe because you've been criticizing the right religion.

“Christianity is the only religion that can be criticised and even disparaged in Finland.”

~~Finnish politician Sebastian Tynkkynen

Don't dare try criticizing any Muslims though, like this guy did.

Quote:

Finns Party MP Teuvo Hakkarainen was fined on Wednesday by Central Finland District Court in Jyväskylä, which convicted him of incitement against an ethnic group. The second-term MP was fined 1160 euros. After last summer's truck massacre in Nice, France, Hakkarainen made anti-Muslim comments on Facebook. Hakkarainen argued that his posts did not break any laws, but he does not intend to appeal the decision. In 2011 he was censured by his party for using a racial slur.

This time the party's parliamentary group will consider his case when the legislature reconvenes in early February.

"A conviction of any group member is of course a serious matter which must be considered by the group," the chair of the Finns Party's delegation, Sampo Terho, told Yle on Wednesday.

He declined to speculate as to what disciplinary measures might be taken, but promised to provide more information on February 2.

The court ruled that his comments labelled those of the Islamic faith, and included a threat against them, as he called for them to be deported from the country.

seriously, Wtf is this? Islam isn't even an "ethnic group."

Quote:

We DO have freedom of speech guaranteed by our constitution.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

[Porpoise of Life]

You come to a gay marriage thread and try to derail it into an anti Muslim thread?

Rest assured, one thing your oppressed Christians and Muslim boogeyman have in common is their rejection of gay marriage. Let's be glad sensible secular people are making the laws in Finland.

[Baylor]

Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life

You come to a gay marriage thread and try to derail it into an anti Muslim thread?

Nothing I said was "anti Muslim". Try not to sound like such an automaton.

OP said, "[Christians] getting their panties in a bunch" "religion is a such a big issue in the US." I cited an article where a Finnish MP got fined for insulting a religion on Facebook. I'd call that level of petulance towards religion "such a big deal."

I merely pointed out that in his "egalitarian" country, he is allowed to legally insult one religion and not the other.

Quote:

Rest assured, one thing your oppressed Christians and Muslim boogeyman have in common is their rejection of gay marriage. Let's be glad sensible secular people are making the laws in Finland.

"Sensible" isn't the word to use.

Many Christians are not against gay marriage. I pointed out to the OP, now that gay marriage is legal, it'll be interesting to see how the "egalitarian" government handles opposition to gay marriage depending on if the opposition is Christian or Muslim.

[Tolls]

If I'm not mistaken (and the local Finns will tell me one way or the other) both those people are from the nationalist Finns Party. So no great surprise they hold those views.

As for the other part of that post, you might have a point if you can find a similar call to deport Christians that wasn't treated the same way. That was why he was fined, after all. It wasn't just a case of saying something bad about the religion in question.

[Tolls]

Originally Posted by Baylor

I cited an article where a Finnish MP got fined for insulting a religion on Facebook.

No he wasn't.
He was fined for incitement.

[Baylor]

"It only counts if all insults are same." lol

OP insulted Christians with impunity. He wouldn't dare insult Muslims because he is Finnish and knows the consequences (watch video upthread). Hence the virtual signaling how about Christians "getting their panties in a bunch."

[Baylor]

Originally Posted by Tolls

No he wasn't.
He was fined for incitement.

Insulting is sanctimonious Euro-speak for "inciting hatred"

Splitting hairs here.

[Porpoise of Life]

If you want a thread about how the less than 1% of people in Finland who are Muslim are trying to take over the country through some conspiracy, start your own thread.

Congratulations to your sister Swordfishtrombone.

[Tolls]

Your own quote above:

Quote:

The court ruled that his comments labelled those of the Islamic faith, and included a threat against them, as he called for them to be deported from the country.

That is incitement.
Not an insult.

They are different things.

And, as I said, this is not surprising as the Party they are a part of has some "interesting" views.

[Baylor]

Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life

If you want a thread about how the less than 1% of people in Finland who are Muslim are trying to take over the country through some conspiracy, start your own thread.

Congratulations to your sister Swordfishtrombone.

Please stop sounding like an automaton.

[Baylor]

Originally Posted by Tolls

Your own quote above:


That is incitement.
Not an insult.

They are different things.

And, as I said, this is not surprising as the Party they are a part of has some "interesting" views.

Quote:

The court ruled that his comments labelled those of the Islamic faith, and included a threat against them, as he called for them to be deported from the country.

This is a policy
Not an incitement.

They are different things.

Quote:

And, as I said, this is not surprising as the Party they are a part of has some "interesting" views.

Differing political views is different.
Not interesting.

They are different things.

[jeffas69]

Originally Posted by Swordfishtrombone

Um....

I've been criticizing religion quite openly, without facing any legal problems. We DO have freedom of speech guaranteed by our constitution. But you REALLY took a reading of my post that was strongly colored by by your expectation, it seems to me. Finns are generally egalitarian, but there are clearly things we could improve on - I LIKE the US separation of church and state, and think that even as it's apparently resulted in the state church becoming less and less popular, not having an official church would a good thing.

I don't think there's anything "impressive" about this law change - just a bit of good news.

It WOULD have been impressive if this happened a few decades ago. Now it's just a case of finally getting on with the program. It took a lot of political wrangling, and they failed to get this type of law through years ago. This time it was brought up through an official petition. (We have a system where you can set up petitions and get them signed by people on line - with their identities checked through various means - and if there are enough signatures, the issue must be brought before the parliament.) This is how it was brought up now, and after debate and votes, passed. Finally.

And as to the drama in the state church - there's no drama without Christians in the church vocally in favor of gay marriage as well, so if I am "virtue signaling" about Finnish society, then I'm "virtue signaling" about a portion of the Christian establishment as well.

Nobody's forcing any religious organization to marry gay couples - but they have the right to marry now. The strife within the church is happening because some congregations and priests think it their moral duty not to turn away gay couples, while others think the opposite.

Finnish society IS usually pretty egalitarian, but we were dragging our feet with this one, and it was more difficult to get it done that it should have been. Many other nations in Europe got there way before us.

Egalitarian? Your country may be racist.

[Porpoise of Life]

Originally Posted by jeffas69

Egalitarian? Your country may be racist.

Checking if people's signatures are real is racist now?

[Fizil]

Thread completely derailed before it even reached 10 posts, is that a record?

[Baylor]

Originally Posted by Fizil

Thread completely derailed before it even reached 10 posts, is that a record?

No. I'm not going to apologize but I didn't intend to derail it. Just wanted to point to out the sanctimony that caused me to leave this place. And by the looks of it, it's only getting worse with this forum following the rest of social media's obsession with identity politics and pseudo-social justice. A thread about Finland legalizing gay marriage is perfectly fine. As I predicted, it was sprinkled with "those backward religious Americans" and Christians "getting their panties in a bunch" and how "virtuous" it is that OP's European country is "egalitarian." I concur that from my American point of view, Finland hasn't caved too deeply into grandstanding and shaming politics the rest of the region has.

But don't worry I won't be around longer.

[A'isha]

Apparently labeling the established church in Finland 'milktoast" is a grave insult against Christians, but actively calling for the deportation of all Muslims is just mild criticism that no one should make a big deal over.

[Tolls]

FFS, you're putting forward as proof people who are the closest equivalent to the Finnish Nazi Party. Do you even know who you're talking about?

We're not just on "differing views" here.

[MikeG]

Originally Posted by Baylor

......... Let those Muslims impose their religious way of life on your country, then claim "religion is a big issue in the US."

Where has this happened? What on earth has it got to do with the OP?

[Fudbucker]

Baylor, never go full Trump.

[Cleon]

Originally Posted by MikeG

Where has this happened? What on earth has it got to do with the OP?

It sounds like we're about this >< close to hearing stories about "no-go zones" in Deerborn.

[RussDill]

I was curious about the man that Baylor is holding out as a victim here, so I looked it up:

Quote:

According to him, refugees and especially blacks need to be forced into doing manual labour in the forests. "every street and boulevard in Helsinki is filled with workshy *******, who need to be put to work," said Hakkarainen. He then proceeded to mention his experiences in South America, where he travelled as a consultant for his lumber firm, Haka-Wood, where he noted that those with a 'European background' seem to be markedly more industrious than others. Hakkarainen argued that putting these '*******' into work "out into the hailstorm where we have also been" would also work as a natural disincentive for immigration into Finland. Teuvo Hakkarainen also added that he was not a racist.

Here's a translation of the Finnish Wikipedia page discussing the 'n' term that he used to refer to black people:

https://translate.google.com/transla...eri&edit-text=

Edited by Agatha:

Edited to properly mask swearing in quote

[timhau]

Originally Posted by Baylor

Maybe because you've been criticizing the right religion.

“Christianity is the only religion that can be criticised and even disparaged in Finland.”

~~Finnish politician Sebastian Tynkkynen

... and that's 'politician' in the sense that he's been trying various publicity stunts to turn his success in Big Brother into a political career. So far, after 1.5 election cycles, it has netted him a reserve seat in Oulu city council.

[A'isha]

Originally Posted by Cleon

It sounds like we're about this >< close to hearing stories about "no-go zones" in Deerborn.

Already happened.

[Dr. Keith]

Originally Posted by Swordfishtrombone

About time, I say.

Tomorrow, the law allowing gay marriages, on par with heterosexual marriages, will come to effect. Predictably, some religious communities are getting their panties in a twist about it.

It is interesting that religion is such a big issue in the US, where you have separation of church and state, and has become stale and mostly a non issue in Finland, where we have religious freedom, but a state church (Lutheran). About half of Finns don't believe in a god, though the majority is still on the churches books, more out of tradition and habit, and not really giving enough of a a **** to officially quit it.

The usually milktoast church is now experiencing some internal strife about the issue of marrying gays - officially, they do not allow the marriage of gays in churches, but many priests are going rogue, planning to do it anyway. Get out your popcorn, we have drama, people.

I also recently heard some happy news from my sister, who is now planning to marry her partner about a year from now, in the summer of 2018 (this year they are just too busy, and they want a big wedding). I'm happy for her, that this is now an option, and I really like her partner too - she's very nice, and they are a good fit.

Congrats to Finland and to your sister. Weddings can be big fun!

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by timhau

... and that's 'politician' in the sense that he's been trying various publicity stunts to turn his success in Big Brother into a political career. So far, after 1.5 election cycles, it has netted him a reserve seat in Oulu city council.

So he is a fringe politician regarded as a nut case by 99% of Finnish voters?

[Cleon]

Originally Posted by A'isha

Already happened.

Oh, Jesus tapdancing christ on a pogo stick. Really?!

[Cleon]

Originally Posted by dudalb

So he is a fringe politician regarded as a nut case by 99% of Finnish voters?

And therefore considered an authority by the American right.