Like sitting in a sidewalk cafe
Sep 15th, 2003, 08:36 AM
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,589
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like sitting in a sidewalk cafe
Wow, what a discussion of morals, customs, attitudes, etc. on Scandinavia and U. S. And on a travel forum, too! I'm glad I did initiate the discussion and can't begin to respond to every idea expressed. It's like sitting at an outdoor table with friends in Politiker'n in Oslo, Kappelis in Helsinki, Cattelin in Stockholm, Tivoli-Perlen in Copenhagen. Only thing is that everyone is so anonymous...no names, no faces, no locations. It leads me to wish I really did know some of you. But maybe this nameless forum encourages more genuine discussion than around a cafe table!
I am a typical Middlewestern American in many ways and appreciative of the individual
freedoms and economic dynamics and religious values in my country, but at the same time I have misgivings about our recent problems and policies. Also I'm grateful for things I saw and experienced in an all too brief visit to four Scandinavian/Nordic countries (and that mostly in capitals).
A few random things I appreciated from our recent venture: public transportation, cheeses, outdoor cafes, pedestrian walkways, social system, public fish or food markets, bicycles, and more. I want to affirm that I as one American don't going around crowing that we are the greatest nation in the world. But I do believe some should realize what a huge complex and diverse society we are, a real experiment in very different people living together. And thus quite different from Scandinavian countries by and large. Well, Stockholm has diversity, but Copenhagen is now struggling with how to deal with immigrants where the state is lenient about their productivity in society. We are also struggling (and sometimes not well) with how to deal with terrorism. 9/11 has greatly affected our national psyche and even caused us to act irrationally such as invading Iraq. (BTW,we were in Dublin on 9/11).
Thanks to all...wish I had personal emails to respond to specific questions.
Bill Longman [email protected]
Sep 15th, 2003, 10:01 AM
#4
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rex, it seems that Bill knows his stuff ;o) With Nordic he means that he includes Finland.
Ozarksbill, I am glad you enjoyed your trip. If you ever come to these corners again, try to include a little cottage holiday by a lake into your program. Or maybe you can do that same in Minnesota...
Ozarksbill, I am glad you enjoyed your trip. If you ever come to these corners again, try to include a little cottage holiday by a lake into your program. Or maybe you can do that same in Minnesota...
Sep 15th, 2003, 12:57 PM
#5
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bill, I enjoyed that discussion and thought it unfortunate it was shut down. Thanks for your initial post.
It's interesting to me that while discussions about cultural/philosophical/policital differences between European countries and, say, the United States, seem to be permitted here, those which touch on controversial issues (e.g. drug policies, policies toward same-sex unions) seem to be verboten and, eventually, deleted or shut down from further discussion/debate.
When that previous thread touched on morality in general, and same-sex unions in particular, I found myself wondering -- since the topic was Scandinavian society -- how Scandinavian countries have addressed the issue of same-sex unions, especially vis-a-vis the U.S., and, interestingly, today I just discovered this website...
"Worldwide Geography of Laws Recognizing Homosexual Unions: A Tendency That Started in Scandinavia"
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/956934/posts
It says...
The following is a summary of such laws as found in countries throughout the world.
Scandinavia: Denmark was the first Nordic country (1989) which allowed the registration of the civil union of two persons of the same sex. Norway (1993), Sweden (1994), Iceland (1996), and Finland (2002) then adopted this decision. Homosexual couples have the same rights as married heterosexual couples, but they cannot adopt a child or take recourse to artificial insemination, with the exception of Sweden, where adoptions have been possible since 2002.
It's interesting to me that while discussions about cultural/philosophical/policital differences between European countries and, say, the United States, seem to be permitted here, those which touch on controversial issues (e.g. drug policies, policies toward same-sex unions) seem to be verboten and, eventually, deleted or shut down from further discussion/debate.
When that previous thread touched on morality in general, and same-sex unions in particular, I found myself wondering -- since the topic was Scandinavian society -- how Scandinavian countries have addressed the issue of same-sex unions, especially vis-a-vis the U.S., and, interestingly, today I just discovered this website...
"Worldwide Geography of Laws Recognizing Homosexual Unions: A Tendency That Started in Scandinavia"
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/956934/posts
It says...
The following is a summary of such laws as found in countries throughout the world.
Scandinavia: Denmark was the first Nordic country (1989) which allowed the registration of the civil union of two persons of the same sex. Norway (1993), Sweden (1994), Iceland (1996), and Finland (2002) then adopted this decision. Homosexual couples have the same rights as married heterosexual couples, but they cannot adopt a child or take recourse to artificial insemination, with the exception of Sweden, where adoptions have been possible since 2002.
Sep 15th, 2003, 02:32 PM
#6
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bill,
The sure-fire way to get a thread shut down is as capo says -- mention morality in general or same-sex unions in particular.
What's interesting to me is that we are undoubtedly diametrically opposed politically but we both very much enjoyed our stay in Scandinavian countries. I simply can't take Richard Gere or the Dixie Chicks or Susan Sarandon seriously, apparently you do, judging by your statement that the invasion of Iraq was irrational. I think you'll find quite a bit of support for that notion on this forum, except from me or Uncle Sam . . . I really don't know why.
However, I mention it not to spark another debate, but rather to observe that I had several "sidewalk cafe" type discussions with locals while in Copenhagen and in Stockholm recently that were pretty similar to the thread that was shut down in that some pretty controversial subjects and opinions were thrown around. It seems as though knowing that we won't see each other again enabled them to say things they might not have said otherwise. . . not unlike this forum. It's also interesting to me that practically every Dane (about 8) that I discussed the war with supports the US intervention in Iraq. Granted all 8 of them appeared to be in their mid 40s. Of the Swedes I talked with, there was a 50-50 split. My sampling is not large enough for me to conclude anything, really, but it seemed worth mentioning because of the title of your post.
The sure-fire way to get a thread shut down is as capo says -- mention morality in general or same-sex unions in particular.
What's interesting to me is that we are undoubtedly diametrically opposed politically but we both very much enjoyed our stay in Scandinavian countries. I simply can't take Richard Gere or the Dixie Chicks or Susan Sarandon seriously, apparently you do, judging by your statement that the invasion of Iraq was irrational. I think you'll find quite a bit of support for that notion on this forum, except from me or Uncle Sam . . . I really don't know why.
However, I mention it not to spark another debate, but rather to observe that I had several "sidewalk cafe" type discussions with locals while in Copenhagen and in Stockholm recently that were pretty similar to the thread that was shut down in that some pretty controversial subjects and opinions were thrown around. It seems as though knowing that we won't see each other again enabled them to say things they might not have said otherwise. . . not unlike this forum. It's also interesting to me that practically every Dane (about 8) that I discussed the war with supports the US intervention in Iraq. Granted all 8 of them appeared to be in their mid 40s. Of the Swedes I talked with, there was a 50-50 split. My sampling is not large enough for me to conclude anything, really, but it seemed worth mentioning because of the title of your post.
Sep 15th, 2003, 03:04 PM
#7
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 12,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snoopy, those are interesting figures. I would not have guessed that support for the US was nearly so high in Denmark and Sweden, although when I was in Scandinavia this summer I mostly stayed away from the subject. (I got the impression that support was low, though, but maybe that was my own filtered perception.) Where did you meet these US supporters?
Sep 16th, 2003, 02:32 AM
#8
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heh, starting to talk about politics is a sure way to get a thread delated. Sorry Bill, if this gets into some debate, becaise I know you did not mean it to turn into it. I just wish to comment on Snoopy`s statistics: there were official polls before the war, and almost 100% of Swedes were against. And over 90% of Danes, although their far-right government supported. Which is a political suicide.
Sep 16th, 2003, 06:33 AM
#11
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vinstue 90 on Gammel Kongevej, a bar. Ordinarily I don't carry a cell phone in Europe but because of a family member's health problem I wanted to stay in touch. I got a call from my wife . . . a couple of guys at the table next to me first apologised for evesdropping but said they overheard me talking about another family member stationed in Iraq and they asked me how I felt about it.
elina, without knowing how the question was phrased to elicit a "100% or 90% against" response I cannot say for sure, but my guess is that the poll was bogus or very, very small. Even the newspapers in Denmark AND Sweden were fair to neutral about the war. The ONLY negativity I was exposed to in either country vis a vis US intervention in Iraq was a very bizarre -- a key four letter word that begins with an 'F' was misspelled -- piece of grafitti on a wall near the Copenhagen Technological Institute.
In Stockholm I was at an Ericsson facility and the subject came up several times during "ice breaker" type comments before meetings began. I would never think to sit in a meeting in my own office in my own country and tell a Swede, for example, that Sweden's King or Prime Minister was a fool for becoming involved in whatever . . . but they (a couple of Swedes at Ericsson) didn't seem to have the same manners. Twice this happened, and twice more than one other Swede argued with his countryman that his view was irrational and without proper perspective.
elina, without knowing how the question was phrased to elicit a "100% or 90% against" response I cannot say for sure, but my guess is that the poll was bogus or very, very small. Even the newspapers in Denmark AND Sweden were fair to neutral about the war. The ONLY negativity I was exposed to in either country vis a vis US intervention in Iraq was a very bizarre -- a key four letter word that begins with an 'F' was misspelled -- piece of grafitti on a wall near the Copenhagen Technological Institute.
In Stockholm I was at an Ericsson facility and the subject came up several times during "ice breaker" type comments before meetings began. I would never think to sit in a meeting in my own office in my own country and tell a Swede, for example, that Sweden's King or Prime Minister was a fool for becoming involved in whatever . . . but they (a couple of Swedes at Ericsson) didn't seem to have the same manners. Twice this happened, and twice more than one other Swede argued with his countryman that his view was irrational and without proper perspective.
Sep 16th, 2003, 07:31 AM
#12
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,589
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, I don't mind a debate on any subject. Just to get you oriented, my wife & I traveled to Scandinavia (or the Nordic countries if you prefer) for our 50th wedding anniversary. Just to let you know you're talking to an old guy!
First subject: I'm past president of a local PFLAG (which is Parents, Family & Friends of Lesbians & Gays). Does that tell you where I land regarding the g/l/b/t subject? Our son who is a political science prof. has a committed partner relationship. Thanks for the website on unions which I'll look up.
Second subject: my wife is chair of our local United Nations Assoc. chapter and we are strong internationalists. We are both convinced that the Bush administration promoted the invasion of Iraq by deceptive information and proceded despite failure to win UN endorsement. Having said that, if Danes, Swedes and others want to join in the international police force, hey that's great! At this point we need all the help we can in an attempt to bring order out of chaos. But I can't believe many will sign on...what a mess!
BTW, what is your take on the Swedish defeat of the euro...much discussed while were were there.
Bill [email protected]
First subject: I'm past president of a local PFLAG (which is Parents, Family & Friends of Lesbians & Gays). Does that tell you where I land regarding the g/l/b/t subject? Our son who is a political science prof. has a committed partner relationship. Thanks for the website on unions which I'll look up.
Second subject: my wife is chair of our local United Nations Assoc. chapter and we are strong internationalists. We are both convinced that the Bush administration promoted the invasion of Iraq by deceptive information and proceded despite failure to win UN endorsement. Having said that, if Danes, Swedes and others want to join in the international police force, hey that's great! At this point we need all the help we can in an attempt to bring order out of chaos. But I can't believe many will sign on...what a mess!
BTW, what is your take on the Swedish defeat of the euro...much discussed while were were there.
Bill [email protected]
Sep 16th, 2003, 08:17 AM
#13
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bill, good for you for your involvement in PFLAG. I'm sure your son is grateful to have loving, understanding, and supportive parents like you and your wife.
I went back to the other thread you started and re-read this comment regarding Scandinavia from Elina...
<i>'Instead of linking church-going and morals together, one could approach the question by looking at Scandinavian's relationship to religion. Religion and faith are very personal and private matters here. They are not something one shouts from the rooftops or something one "shares". People usually don't feel any need to go to church, because church does not represent community and their possible relationship with God is private.</i>'
...and, interestingly, this seems to tie in to what New Testament scholar L. William Countryman argues in light of his exhaustive study of Christian "purity codes." (see "Dirt, Greed, and Sex" at the bottom of this PBS website: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...assault/bible/ ) Countryman's conclusion: "The gospel allows no rule against the following, in and of themselves
list of various sexual acts I won't list here] or erotic art and literature. The Christian is free to be repelled by any or all of these and may continue to practice her or his own purity code in relation to them. <i>What we are not free to do is impose our codes on others.</i>"
...and this may very well be the kind of religious/spiritual philosophy practiced, in general, in Scandinavian countries, especially as expressed via their giving -- as the previous website I posted noted -- homosexual couples the same rights as married heterosexual couples.
I went back to the other thread you started and re-read this comment regarding Scandinavia from Elina...
<i>'Instead of linking church-going and morals together, one could approach the question by looking at Scandinavian's relationship to religion. Religion and faith are very personal and private matters here. They are not something one shouts from the rooftops or something one "shares". People usually don't feel any need to go to church, because church does not represent community and their possible relationship with God is private.</i>'
...and, interestingly, this seems to tie in to what New Testament scholar L. William Countryman argues in light of his exhaustive study of Christian "purity codes." (see "Dirt, Greed, and Sex" at the bottom of this PBS website: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...assault/bible/ ) Countryman's conclusion: "The gospel allows no rule against the following, in and of themselves
list of various sexual acts I won't list here] or erotic art and literature. The Christian is free to be repelled by any or all of these and may continue to practice her or his own purity code in relation to them. <i>What we are not free to do is impose our codes on others.</i>"...and this may very well be the kind of religious/spiritual philosophy practiced, in general, in Scandinavian countries, especially as expressed via their giving -- as the previous website I posted noted -- homosexual couples the same rights as married heterosexual couples.
Sep 16th, 2003, 01:21 PM
#14
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OZBill,
I also applaud your support of your son though I have, perhaps, a different opinion from yours on that particular subject. And, by the way my 49th birthday is 18 Sep.
capo,
PBS is hardly a neutral moderator and LWC is anything but representative of mainstream Christian thought, though I would agree in principle to your conclusion that his observations may apply in some sophomoric term paper way to Scandinavian culture. However, I would not go so far to say that this is in any way a sign that Scandinavians have the same "sliding window of morality" that you appear to espouse. It's one thing to tolerate and quite another to condone. Although my posts may indicate intolerance, that tone is simply a byproduct of the language of debate . . . As a Christian I am tolerant of a lot of things that I find personally and morally objectionable. Non-Christians generally don't like to acknowledge this distinction in formal debate, however; it makes the target far more difficult to hit.
I also applaud your support of your son though I have, perhaps, a different opinion from yours on that particular subject. And, by the way my 49th birthday is 18 Sep.
capo,
PBS is hardly a neutral moderator and LWC is anything but representative of mainstream Christian thought, though I would agree in principle to your conclusion that his observations may apply in some sophomoric term paper way to Scandinavian culture. However, I would not go so far to say that this is in any way a sign that Scandinavians have the same "sliding window of morality" that you appear to espouse. It's one thing to tolerate and quite another to condone. Although my posts may indicate intolerance, that tone is simply a byproduct of the language of debate . . . As a Christian I am tolerant of a lot of things that I find personally and morally objectionable. Non-Christians generally don't like to acknowledge this distinction in formal debate, however; it makes the target far more difficult to hit.
Sep 16th, 2003, 02:24 PM
#17
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yup, dumas1870, I skated on OZBill's comment about the UNA because of the 50th Anniversary comment . . . I hope people cut me some slack for surviving 50 years of marriage . . . provided I get there.
The only organization more outrageously worthless to the point of bordering corrupt than the UN is the ALCU . . . both of which probably have OZB and capo's strong support.
The only organization more outrageously worthless to the point of bordering corrupt than the UN is the ALCU . . . both of which probably have OZB and capo's strong support.
Sep 16th, 2003, 02:42 PM
#18
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snoopy, what you refer to as "mainstream Christian thought" is hardly the arbiter of all that is proper and moral in the world. Prior to 1920, I believe it was "mainstream Christian thought" that women should not vote. (Susan B. Anthony was raised as a Quaker and, contrary to "mainstream Christian thought" at that time, her Quaker parents taught her that women had rights equal to those of men.) I am equally sure that, in the past, at least in the U.S., "mainstream Christian thought" held that blacks and whites should not marry.
"Mainstream Islamic thought" in Saudi Arabia appear to hold that other religions, including Christianity, should not be practiced in public, since such practices are banned. But, since that's "mainstream" thought, it must be proper and moral, right?
"Mainstream Islamic thought" in Saudi Arabia appear to hold that other religions, including Christianity, should not be practiced in public, since such practices are banned. But, since that's "mainstream" thought, it must be proper and moral, right?
Sep 16th, 2003, 02:55 PM
#19
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here ya go, my floppy-eared friend (this is but one of many websites I'm sure exist on the topic)...
"The Atheistic Roots of Women's Suffrage"
http://www.preteristcentral.com/arti...suffragism.htm
'Churches opposed women's suffrage for all the same reasons the majority of women opposed it, but tended to rely more upon Biblical precedents. Sexual immorality and the break down of the family were typical concerns. Adolf Hult, an early 20th century Lutheran pastor claimed that "Suffragism is gripped by feminism." John Williams, an Episcopal priest in Nebraska, stated: "God meant for women to reign over the home, and most good women reject politics because woman's suffrage will destroy society." Churches favoring women's suffrage were typically very liberal, such as Unitarian, Universalist, and Quaker.'
"The Atheistic Roots of Women's Suffrage"
http://www.preteristcentral.com/arti...suffragism.htm
'Churches opposed women's suffrage for all the same reasons the majority of women opposed it, but tended to rely more upon Biblical precedents. Sexual immorality and the break down of the family were typical concerns. Adolf Hult, an early 20th century Lutheran pastor claimed that "Suffragism is gripped by feminism." John Williams, an Episcopal priest in Nebraska, stated: "God meant for women to reign over the home, and most good women reject politics because woman's suffrage will destroy society." Churches favoring women's suffrage were typically very liberal, such as Unitarian, Universalist, and Quaker.'
Thread
Original Poster
Forum
Replies
Last Post
marcie
Europe
11
May 2nd, 2002 07:03 AM
