The Alliance government has been split on the issue, with the junior partner Christian Democrats opposed to the use of the word “marriage” for homosexual unions.

However the three other parties, the conservative Moderates, the Liberals and the Centre Party, are in favour of a gender neutral law that eliminates the current reference to marriage as something between a man and a woman.

“Regardless of sexual orientation, people in stable couple relationships have a need to manifest their feelings and their desire to live together,” the motion reads.

While heterosexuals in Sweden can choose to marry in either a civil ceremony or a church ceremony, homosexuals are only allowed to register their partnerships in a civil ceremony. But this could all change, with parliament likely to pass new legislation on the matter.

The opposition Social Democrats, the country’s biggest party, also support such a law, and together the parties would garner enough support to adopt the legislation in parliament.

Civil unions granting gays and lesbians the same legal status as married couples have been allowed in Sweden since 1995.

If the new legislation is adopted, Sweden, already a pioneer in giving same-sex couples the right to adopt children, would become the first country in the world to allow gays to marry within a major church.

The Lutheran Church, which was separated from the state in 2000, has since January 2007 offered gays a religious blessing of their union. It has previously said it wants the word “marriage” reserved for heterosexual unions.

Pastors who do not want to perform a gay wedding ceremony may however have the right to refuse, something gay rights’ activists have criticized.

In 2007, 74 percent of Swedes were members of the Lutheran Church.

AFP/The Local

The AP reports:

Those who support the transgender protections say their opponents are really unleashing a broader attack on the rights of gay, lesbian and transgender individuals in general. The city commission approved the restroom provision by a 4-3 vote a year ago. Before the ink could dry, Bible-quoting opponents angrily began working for its repeal. “You are trying to operate in a realm you do not have the authority to operate in,” one pastor, George Brantley, told the commissioners. The debate is expected to become noisier as the ballot nears with opponents resorting to more TV ads and campaigns pegged to such slogans as “Keep Men out of Women’s Restrooms and vice versa.” [...] Since the ordinance took effect, police have reported no problems in public restrooms stemming from the law. (Ron Word, Associated Press)

It seems that Citizens for Good Public Policy is wasting its resources on the wrong things. They should be focusing on curbing predators’ attacks in their community if they are so concerned, instead of trying to take protections away from not only transgendered people, but possibly all gay, lesbian, and bisexual people, who are also protected by the ordinance. Regardless of whether this ordinance exists or not, predators will continue to exist. The ordinance offers no method to allow people who cannot legitimately prove they are transgendered to use an opposite-sex restroom.

Click here to see the ad.
Click here to see the ordinance and its revisions in full.

What do you think about the Rick Warren controversy and, specifically, his sponsored AIDS programs? Are gay rights groups being overly sensitive or are too many people willing to ignore Warren’s discriminatory views? Let us know below!