Going Dutch
Oct. 5th, 2005 01:23 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/301
Apparently, we just had the first three-person civil union in the Netherlands. Unfortunately, pretty much all google can produce is foreign language pages (dutch) and extreme-right-wing rants than they told us so (double dutch), all apparently from a single source somewhere.
If it works, I presume they'd have to:
You designate next-of-kin order, or people fight it out like multiple parents/siblings.
You have a 'primary' who gets benefits you only get one of.
Two people have to be primary for children.
Spousal employment perks, etc, will be decided in nasty case law battles
Wills would be useful.
Etc.
But I couldn't actually find any information, just "Polygamy, woo!" or "Polygamy, yuk[1]!". Does anyone know more?
PS. Thanks to Naath for bringing this to our attention. And apologies for saying it'd never happen.
[1] Lower mammals *were* mentioned as the new 'worst possible bottom of the slope' :)
Apparently, we just had the first three-person civil union in the Netherlands. Unfortunately, pretty much all google can produce is foreign language pages (dutch) and extreme-right-wing rants than they told us so (double dutch), all apparently from a single source somewhere.
If it works, I presume they'd have to:
You designate next-of-kin order, or people fight it out like multiple parents/siblings.
You have a 'primary' who gets benefits you only get one of.
Two people have to be primary for children.
Spousal employment perks, etc, will be decided in nasty case law battles
Wills would be useful.
Etc.
But I couldn't actually find any information, just "Polygamy, woo!" or "Polygamy, yuk[1]!". Does anyone know more?
PS. Thanks to Naath for bringing this to our attention. And apologies for saying it'd never happen.
[1] Lower mammals *were* mentioned as the new 'worst possible bottom of the slope' :)
no subject
Date: 2005-10-05 12:35 pm (UTC)"According to the law is not possible, but for the triad it feels as a real marriage. They signed a cohabitation agreement at the notary. The bruidegom in costume, is two women in bride dress. The trouwringen in the attack. Notary Lugtenberg Roosendaal had this way its objections, but left Victor the Bruijn (46), its woman Bianca Mirjam the Bruijn (31) and their common girlfriend yesterday nevertheless gives (35) the cohabitation agreement to sign. , for our feeling we marry, ' ' Victor said after the particular moment. , I hou van Bianca and of Mirjam. This is our accidentally happens.' ' Family and friends, invited for at home, shared the etentje at the Greek and the sociable evening in joy. But everyone did not stand jump at the decision of the trio to seal the obligation with a cohabitation agreement. Thus Sgp-Kamerlid of of the Staaij put ask to minister Donner (justice). the step of the three sneak routes on gone to polygamy, or veelwijverij. , if a man cohabits at authenticated acte with two women, with which lives he then together according to the law?' ' wonders itself of of the Staaij. The SGP'er request the minister dissolve the contract still. , this is the largest rubbish which I have heard, ' ' reacts the Bruijn. , for the law we cannot marry. Only in Morocco, but that is not accepted in the Netherlands. Nevertheless we wanted something official and how we that live personally lie to onszelf. Students who cohabit can establish also a contract.' ' Victor the Bruijn and its woman learned the separated Mirjam spend middelburg 2.5 year suffered to know by means of chatbox on Internet. Two months later withdrew them at the couple. The trio bought a large bed and is since then inseparable. , we belong simply to each other and it is not only for the sex, ' ' Victor say. , jealousy plays no role, because Bianca and Mirjam are bisexual. With two heterovrouwen it had been more difficult.' ' Itself considers them therefore the cohabitation agreement as a marriage. Notais Lugtenberg doubted if he adopt the three as a customer savages. , I can refuse, but I found no weighty reasons.' ' Victor and are two women are glad that they have taken the step. , it is for our important and what finds others there of does not determine us."
no subject
Date: 2005-10-05 12:50 pm (UTC)OK, looking at this (http://66.249.93.104/search?q=cache:t_E4ny0G720J:www.justitie.nl/english/Images/marriage_registered_tcm75-28560.pdf) it seems they have marriage, registered partnerships, which are mostly like marriage, and cohabitation agreements, which is a normal contract drawn up with a notary in a fairly straightforward fasion between any people living together to establish what obligations they have to each other, but is almost entirely only between each other.
Cohabitation Agreements sound like an incredably sensible idea. In fact, marriage + a cohabitation agreement *is* *nearly* a primary marriage and a secondary one, but a very secondary one. But isn't government recognition. And that's what they did here.
no subject
Date: 2005-10-05 12:51 pm (UTC)"This will destroy the institution of straight one-to-one marriage"
"This is a slippery slope to legalising bestiality and paedophilia"
"JESUS JESUS JESUS JESUS JESUS JESUS JESUS JESUS"
and a poke at the more respectable area of right-wing politics;
"This will be bad for the economy and only increases welfare payments" ;-)
no subject
Date: 2005-10-05 12:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-10-05 12:52 pm (UTC)LOL. No, more like "This has destroyed the institution of straight one-to-one marriage" :)
no subject
Date: 2005-10-05 12:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-10-05 12:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-10-05 12:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-10-05 12:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-10-05 05:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-10-05 05:12 pm (UTC)What did people think on SoF?