Sarah Colegrove

United States and Scandinavia on Sexual Orientation

11/01/2012

UNITED STATES AND SCANDINAVIA ON SEXUAL ORIENTATION

United States and Scandinavia on Sexual Orientation

Differences in sexual orientation have existed throughout human history. However, the heterosexual orientation has been traditionally the only accepted sexual orientation. Over the past 100 years that has started to change across the globe. Government has been an important institution in society that has paved the way for this acceptance to be more permanent and more widely accepted by the people. The shape of government and the policies that the government has varies widely across the globe; from a complete democracy to a partial democracy to communism to fascism to socialism, etc. Some countries are much more restrictive, and even violent towards those who are homosexual, while other countries offer equality for everyone regardless of what their sexual orientation is. The United States and Scandinavia (which is a region that refers to the countries of Sweden, Norway, and Denmark) have made policies and laws regarding sexual orientation. Although some think that the policies between the countries do not vary that much, there are significant differences between the United States and Scadinavia (Jeppesen De Boer & Kronborg, 2011) What then are the differences between how the United States and Scandinavia approach the issue of sexual orientation?

Sexual Orientation and the Law

Until 2003, there were laws in the United States that forbid sodomy. If someone were to be caught in the act of sodomy, they would be treated as criminals. Same-sex marriage has been forbidden in many states while it is allowed in only six states (although some other states do allow for a civil or domestic partnership and others are waiting on voter referendums to be decided in the election this year). Vermont was the first state to take this step when they voted to allow civil unions for same-sex couples in 2000 and later allowed same-sex marriage in 2009
2

UNITED STATES AND SCANDINAVIA ON SEXUAL ORIENTATION

(Civil Union, 2002). The vast majority of states, however, have laws in place that ban either civil union, domestic partnerships, or same-sex marriage (Human Rights Campaign). Sexual orientation in many states is not protected under law from discrimination like race, gender, and age are. This has allowed employers to fire employees for being gay or asking church leaders to leave the church because they are gay (Pitas). Until fall of 2011, people who were openly homosexual were forbidden from serving in the military. If they were found to be homosexual, they were more often than not dishonorably discharged from the military (Human Rights Campaign).

Scandinavia has some of the most progressive laws on equality in sexual orientation. Homosexuality was illegal for a long time throughout the globe (and continues to be in several countries). In 1933 in Denmark, it was legal to engage in same-sex sexual activity (Jeppesen De Boer, 2011). In 1944 in Sweden, homosexuality became legal. In Norway in 1972, same-sex sexual activity became legal (Andersson, Noack, Seierstad & Weedon-Fekjaer, 2006). Homosexuality (more specifically the sexual acts that are between those of the same-sex) was not fully legal in all parts of the United States until 2003 (fourteen states did not recognize homosexuality until the U.S. Supreme Court case Lawrence v. Texas). Illinois, in 1964, was the first state to allow same-sex sexual activities between consenting partners.

In Denmark, same-sex couples could be formally recognized as registered partnerships in 1989 and in 2012 the law was changed to allow same-sex marriage (Jeppesen De Boer, 2011). In Norway, same-sex couples were recognized under a civil partnership law in 1993. In 2009, Norway passed a law allowing for gender neutral marriage. In Sweden, same-sex marriage was fully legalized in 2009 (Andersson et al, 2006). Homosexuals have been allowed to serve openly

UNITED STATES AND SCANDINAVIA ON SEXUAL ORIENTATION

in the military for decades in all three countries (Konigsberg, 1992). They have also have been protected from discrimination (which includes hate speech) for several years (Andersson et al, 2006; Jeppesen De Boer, 2011).

Trust in the Government

The United States and Scandinavia have used different forms of democracy to shape their laws. The people have had a voice in the government proceedings. In Scandinavia there is must more of a generalized trust among the population than in the United States. This can make it easier for government officials to accomplish their goals. Generalized trust is the idea that many people outside of one's close friends and family members can be trusted which can lead to an essential part of a democratic political culture because 'it clearly indicates an inclusive and tolerant approach to the population at large.' (Draper & Ramsay, 2012 p. 89) In the United States, on the other hand, many people are distrustful of others and especially in the government.

Liberalism or Conservatism?

Liberalism in comparative political science has been described as a movement towards evolutionary change while conservatism in comparative political science has been described as a desire to not change or to even move back to policies and positions that they used to have (Draper & Ramsay, 2012). Sweden, Norway, and Denmark are very similar in their policies and laws regarding sexual orientation. They seem to take a liberal approach to sexual orientation while the United States is much more mixed although leaning much more conservatively. In several areas, the U.S. is more conservative on sexual orientation policies (even in states that have the most liberal policies on sexual orientation, they are behind Scandinavia is terms of

UNITED STATES AND SCANDINAVIA ON SEXUAL ORIENTATION

being more open and equal). From within the government, there does not appear to much of move at all towards equal rights and in some states they are moving backwards. In Scandinavia, there are laws allowing same-sex couples to adopt, laws that protect from hate crimes, and laws to not be discriminated against in the workplace. Scandinavia, in general, has moved in a direction that pushes for equality on level and in every institution in society for those with varying sexual orientations. The United States is very split on the issue. Some argue for states rights that each state should be allowed to choose their stance on sexual orientation while others argue that equality for all in all societal institutions needs to be guaranteed regardless of sexual orientation and that equality is a human right (Lupia, Krupnikov, Levine, Piston, & Von Hagen-Jamar, 2010; Pitas).

Freedom or Equality?

There is a debate on whether freedom or equality is more important to have in a nation. The emphasis that a country puts on either freedom or equality can shape the laws that are made (Draper & Ramsay, 2012). Scandinavia seems to have taken the approach that equality is more important. There are many laws in the Scandinavia region to ensure equality for all, such as not discriminating against those with differing sexual orientations and allowing for same-sex marriage. More restrictions are put on such things as limiting speech by increasing what can be considered a hate crime or hate speech (Jeppesen De Boer, 2011). The United States, on the other hand, seems to value freedom more. Each state is given significant amount of power to shape the laws in their state to what they want. There are few limitations on what laws a state can and cannot have. It allows for much more freedom of law while much more equality for all is forsaken (Human Rights Campaign).

UNITED STATES AND SCANDINAVIA ON SEXUAL ORIENTATION

Government

A problem that the proponents of equality for all sexual orientations face in the United States is the way the government is set up. The United States has a federal government and gives a lot of power to the states to decide on laws. This is the case for sexual orientation which so far the federal government has not gotten very involved in (with the most notable exceptions being U.S. Supreme Court cases). Individual states are given the choice on the laws that they want to make in regards to sexual orientation such as protecting from hate speech (Draper & Ramsay, 2012). This can allow for Vermont to be a very accepting state while Texas and fourteen other states did not recognize same-sex sexual activities as being non-criminal until 2003 (when the U.S. Supreme Court finally intervened). However, some of the states have not repealed their anti-sodomy laws and some enforcement officers still use this to harass individuals who appear to fall outside of the heterosexual norm (Pitas). Among states there are differences in same-sex marriage. Nine states have decided to allow same-sex marriage or a civil union while over 25 states have a ban in place on either same-sex marriages or civil unions (Human Rights Campaign).

These differences between state laws can allow for someone to be given unequal treatment in the workplace because of their sexual orientation in one state while having full equality under the law in another state all within the same nation. Another problem that has arisen because of the differences between states is that if a same-sex couple were to be married in one state and moves to state where same-sex marriage is not allowed, their marriage would not be recognized. Several marriages have been terminated in the eyes of the law because the couple moved across state boundaries (Pitas; Lipia et al, 2010). Several LGBT advocacy groups in the

UNITED STATES AND SCANDINAVIA ON SEXUAL ORIENTATION

United States are pushing for the federal government to become more involved in LGBT rights like they did in the Civil Rights Movement or in the Women's Rights Movement. They believe that the LGBT community needs protection from the government and equal rights given to them, otherwise their human rights are being violated (Human Rights Campaign).

Norway, Sweden, and Denmark have governments that are much smaller and the power is more consolidated. All three countries have a form of a constitutional monarchy with a prime minister and a parliament. Local government within these nations is mainly limited to only a few areas of which legislating laws that deal with sexual orientation are not a concern. The centralization of the government helps to decrease the variety of forms that laws take around the country. The size of these countries also helps in the decisions that are made. A much larger country, like the United States, has the opportunity for the population to be much more diverse on a large scale which can make it harder to make laws on a federal level that fit everywhere (Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, 2012).

Scandinavia has many more laws protecting and providing equality for those with differing sexual orientations than the United States has. This is in part because of their differing forms of government and that Scandinavia emphasizes equality more while the United States emphasizes freedom more. Scandinavia appears to have taken an approach that will better humankind in the long run. They are valuing the humanness and the human rights of the individual and are leveling the playing field (Norway concerned about prison, 2010). However, in the United States horrific hate crimes (such as outright killing someone who is homosexual or by bulling someone who is homosexual until they feel forced to commit suicide so they can escape) still occurs in several states on a rather consistent basis and the prosecution

UNITED STATES AND SCANDINAVIA ON SEXUAL ORIENTATION

these cases are not equal (Human Rights Campaign). It appears as if the federal government in the United States is taking a much more hands off approach to this issue of public policy and letting the states figure it out for themselves. It is as if the U.S. government does not recognize freedom to express sexual orientation preferences without threat of persecution as human right (Lupia et al, 2010). This hands off approach approach by the federal government has caused and will continue to cause significant harm to many of citizens in the United States as they are persecuted because they have not been granted the same rights as everyone else in the United States. Families have been torn apart from this lack of intervention as same-sex couples, in states that do not allow or recognize either same-sex marriage or civil unions, are not granted the same rights as a married couple when it comes to inheritance, hospital visitation, custody rights, and many other similar areas (Human Rights Campaign; Pitas).

Conclusion

That idea that (United States of) America is exceptional in some way has caused many to believe (falsely) that the United States is the best, most progressive nation in the world and that the United States protects individual liberties like no other nation does (or could even dream of doing). The United States is not on the top when it comes to laws dealing with sexual orientation. In fact, the United States is pretty far between several countries in protecting citizens with different sexual orientations. Scandinavia appears to have a much better approach to the equality of sexual orientation than the United States. Scandinavia has paved the way for equal rights and hopefully the United States (and the world as a whole) will be able to follow the path. It is my hope that one day all countries will be able to reach a point where governments can

UNITED STATES AND SCANDINAVIA ON SEXUAL ORIENTATION

provide equal protection for all regardless of sexual orientation and that everyone will be free to truly be themselves and to love without risking themselves.

UNITED STATES AND SCANDINAVIA ON SEXUAL ORIENTATION

10

Works Cited

Andersson, G., Noack, T., Seierstad, A., & Weedon-Fekjaer, H. (2006). The demographics of same-sex marriages in Norway and Sweden. Demography.

Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs. (April 5, 2012). Background note: Sweden. Retrieved 10/31, 2010, from www.state.gov

Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs. (June 15, 2012). U.S. relations with Denmark. Retrieved 10/31, 2012, from www.state.gov

Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs. (March 7, 2012). Background note: Norway. Retrieved 10/31, 2010, from www.state.gov

Civil union. (2002). Funk & wagnalss new world encyclopedia World Almanac Education Group.

Draper, A., & Ramsay, A. (2012). The good society: An introduction to comparative politics (2nd ed ed.). Glenview, IL: Pearson Education, Inc.

Human rights campaign. Retrieved 10/30, 2012, from www.hrc.org

Hrutkay, M. J. (2010). "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses," but not your homosexual partners: International solutions to America's same-sex immigration dilemma. Cardozo Journal of International & Comparative Law.

Jeppesen De Boer, Christina G., & Kronborg, A. (2011). National report: Denmark. American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law.
10

UNITED STATES AND SCANDINAVIA ON SEXUAL ORIENTATION

11

Konigsberg, E. (1992). Gays in arms. Washington Monthly,24(11)

Lupia, A., Krupnikov, Y., Levine, A. S., Piston, S., & Von Hagen-Jamar, A. (2010). Why state constitutions differ in their treatment of same-sex marriage. Journal of Politics.

Norway concerned about prison sentence for homosexuality. (2010). M2PressWIRE

Pitas, J. History of the gay rights movement in the US. Retrieved 10/31, 2012, from www.lifeintheusa.com/people/gaypeople

11