New Thai law to pave way for same-sex partnerships

[newnative]

4 minutes ago, KiwiKiwi said:

 

"At the risk of being "manipulative and unconvincing", not to mention "excitable", is it not true that a male child raised by a single mother, with the father completely out of the picture, would also "lack a gender role-model"?"

 

That seems likely to be true.

 

"And, likewise, a female child raised by a single father?"

 

So does that.

 

"In one of my earlier, manipulative posts, I pointed this out when someone gave this as a reason for denying gay adoption.  I do like to use sarcasm and I think I also said something like with this reasoning I guess we should outlaw single parents and place all children in homes with a father and a mother. "

 

Good luck with that, though I'm not hopeful.

 

"In all honesty, I really haven't tried to be manipulative"

 

I believe you. Manipulative personalities rarely set out to be manipulative, it's an unconscious process - usually a learned behaviour based on the experience of what has worked and what hasn't worked. We all learn from experience.

 

And so on and so on. Time for a coffee I think.

 

 

 

 

So, in the future, do not make any true statements, point out any flaws in any arguments, or call attention to any absurd statements, as that will be construed as being manipulative.   And so on and so on.  Got it.  And, no sarcasm, as so many on this forum have no idea what it is.  

[jak2002003]

6 minutes ago, greenchair said:

Why is it necessary for gays to adopt. 

Why don't they have their own children and see if they turn out damaged. 

You could collect data and post it on thaivisa. 

I have my own children..... 4 boys.  I did not adopt.  I do also look after my Thai friends 2 girls now.  

 

They are no way damaged.  

 

There is you data.

 

Happy?

[KiwiKiwi]

Just now, newnative said:

So, in the future, do not make any true statements, point out any flaws in any arguments, or call attention to any absurd statements, as that will be construed as being manipulative.   And so on and so on.  Got it.  And, no sarcasm, as so many on this forum have no idea what it is.  

 

Not\ne of that is what I said, please don't try to manipulate the conversation (which just ended because I got bored with it). Perhaps you don't realise you're doing it, that's possible. Self-knowledge is a wonderful thing - "Man, know thyself", it's quite old knowledge.

[NoshowJones]

4 hours ago, stephen tracy said:

Not nonsense at all. FritsSikkink is quite right. Children are not born with bias or prejudice, they learn that from their parents. 

Parents?????????

[Jingthing]

28 minutes ago, greenchair said:

Why is it necessary for gays to adopt. 

Why don't they have their own children and see if they turn out damaged. 

You could collect data and post it on thaivisa. 

Many gay men and much more commonly lesbians do have biological children. With gay men it may have been from a previous relationship before they came out. With lesbians, it's obvious how that happens.

Human beings deserve parental rights. Gays and lesbians are human beings. END OF. 

[attrayant]

42 minutes ago, KiwiKiwi said:

Para 1: Same as all of your beliefs. All of them. Experience, peer input, education, etc, etc.

 

I'm not sure if I would use the word 'belief' when talking about cause and effect.  There are things I know, and things I don't know.  I have some hypotheses about some things for which I have no firm answers, but I'm careful not to call these "beliefs" because that gives them some sense of legitimacy that they don't deserve.

 

42 minutes ago, KiwiKiwi said:

Para 2. If you believe this then good luck. I don't.

 

I made no assertions that require either your belief or mine.  I did ask two questions, though. Do you have any answers?

 

42 minutes ago, KiwiKiwi said:

I've seen way too many 'scientific' studies which draw conclusions from funding, political correctness, desired outcomes etc etc. Remember when 'scientific' studies clearly showed that potatoes are dangerous, that too many eggs will kill you, that the Atkins diet will kill you, that fat was the villain in increasing diabetes and obesity? Those reports were  all wrong , all fraudulent, all trying to justify convictions and beliefs that were wrong.

 

Then you made the novice mistake of forming a conclusion or assuming scientific consensus based on a single study.  That's ill-advised.  A cursory review of the research seems to point to a consensus that children of same-sex households do just fine.  I am not relying on a single study for this conclusion, I'm looking at the general overwhelming consensus.

 

I suspect you've probably fallen prey to the media-hyped version of the research, rather than the raw research itself.  If you don't trust any research papers at all, then how can we get to the bottom of anything?  Should we just all sit in our armchairs and wait for beliefs to enter our heads?

 

 

42 minutes ago, KiwiKiwi said:

Thanks very much but I will listen to the voices I hear, the sights that I see. Provided I don't shape my opinions or the opinions of others fraudulently, then that suits me much better than putting my faith in any of the many 'bought and paid for scientists'.

 

I really have no idea what this means: "bought and paid for scientists".  Do you think scientists ought to work for free?  Usually when people make this 'corrupt science' allegation, they're referring to a corporate interest that casts suspicion on a study's conclusions.  What corporation would be interested in "buying" research on child rearing in various family structures?

 

Your posts are beginning to take on the distasteful flavor of a conspiracy theory.

 

42 minutes ago, KiwiKiwi said:

do as I have done and rely on your own personal experience, not your own personal prejudice.

 

I don't have personal experience in this matter, and if I did it would likely be prejudiced so I wouldn't trust it.  If you're forming these "beliefs" based on personal experience, then that's no better than an anecdote.  Personal experiences are almost always prejudiced and colored by our biases.

 

 

42 minutes ago, KiwiKiwi said:

My beliefs are my beliefs. Perhaps they're right or perhaps they're wrong, but they shape a lifestyle which suits me.

 

That's the textbook definition of confirmation bias!  You preferentially select conclusions that fit into your world view and already-held opinions. When you use the word "beliefs" like that, it sounds like a religion.  And you ask ME not to proselytize??  These kinds of things shouldn't be left up to beliefs.  In short, don't believe everything you think.

 

42 minutes ago, KiwiKiwi said:

My professional opinion and experience, supported by my academic record, suggest that I'm right in what I think

 

That's an excellent example of confirmation bias.  

 

42 minutes ago, KiwiKiwi said:

but you will have to believe what satisfies you.

 

Sorry, that's not how it works.  I don't rest my arguments on beliefs that make me feel good.  I require evidence before I form a conclusion.

 

42 minutes ago, KiwiKiwi said:

You'd be amazed how many PC personal opinions are held merely in order to conform to what other people or trends or fashion dictate.

 

No, I wouldn't be amazed at that at all.  Why do you think I would be?

 

42 minutes ago, KiwiKiwi said:

I don't use Facebook either, or spend my time staring at a telephone. Call me a luddite if you like.

 

I didn't accuse you of any of these things.  Not sure why you feel the need to defend yourself against claims nobody has made.

[attrayant]

22 minutes ago, possum1931 said:

4 hours ago, stephen tracy said:

Not nonsense at all. FritsSikkink is quite right. Children are not born with bias or prejudice, they learn that from their parents. 

Parents?

 

Yes, parents and other adult role models.  That's why they're called "role models".

 

These Kids Were Asked “What Makes You Two Different?” — And Their Answers Are Perfect

 

Quote

In the video, kids are paired up in twos with their friends, and each are asked the same question: “What makes you two different from each other?” The beauty of it all comes when you realize that their answers are miles away from what any adult might have said. At first glance, each kid does look pretty different their friend — but their replies have nothing to do with skin color, hair color, or race.

 

 

[KiwiKiwi]

33 minutes ago, attrayant said:

 

I'm not sure if I would use the word 'belief' when talking about cause and effect.  There are things I know, and things I don't know.  I have some hypotheses about some things for which I have no firm answers, but I'm careful not to call these "beliefs" because that gives them some sense of legitimacy that they don't deserve.

 

 

I made no assertions that require either your belief or mine.  I did ask two questions, though. Do you have any answers?

 

 

Then you made the novice mistake of forming a conclusion or assuming scientific consensus based on a single study.  That's ill-advised.  A cursory review of the research seems to point to a consensus that children of same-sex households do just fine.  I am not relying on a single study for this conclusion, I'm looking at the general overwhelming consensus.

 

I suspect you've probably fallen prey to the media-hyped version of the research, rather than the raw research itself.  If you don't trust any research papers at all, then how can we get to the bottom of anything?  Should we just all sit in our armchairs and wait for beliefs to enter our heads?

 

 

 

I really have no idea what this means: "bought and paid for scientists".  Do you think scientists ought to work for free?  Usually when people make this 'corrupt science' allegation, they're referring to a corporate interest that casts suspicion on a study's conclusions.  What corporation would be interested in "buying" research on child rearing in various family structures?

 

Your posts are beginning to take on the distasteful flavor of a conspiracy theory.

 

 

I don't have personal experience in this matter, and if I did it would likely be prejudiced so I wouldn't trust it.  If you're forming these "beliefs" based on personal experience, then that's no better than an anecdote.  Personal experiences are almost always prejudiced and colored by our biases.

 

 

 

That's the textbook definition of confirmation bias!  You preferentially select conclusions that fit into your world view and already-held opinions. When you use the word "beliefs" like that, it sounds like a religion.  And you ask ME not to proselytize??  These kinds of things shouldn't be left up to beliefs.  In short, don't believe everything you think.

 

 

That's an excellent example of confirmation bias.  

 

 

Sorry, that's not how it works.  I don't rest my arguments on beliefs that make me feel good.  I require evidence before I form a conclusion.

 

 

No, I wouldn't be amazed at that at all.  Why do you think I would be?

 

 

I didn't accuse you of any of these things.  Not sure why you feel the need to defend yourself against claims nobody has made.

 

 

This has become inane and you have started to become abusive and patronising, probably because the manipulation didn't work as well as it usually does. Sorry, I have better things to do than this. Good luck.

Edited April 30, 2018 by KiwiKiwi

[stephen tracy]

1 hour ago, possum1931 said:

Parents?????????

Yes parents. I have had a step-father since I was 11 years old and growing up I considered him to be a parent and still do. Because he ticked all the boxes of being a parent and still does. It does not matter that we do not carry the same genes. How many parents that have children (in the biological sense) do not tick all the boxes of being a parent? Many. 

[newnative]

1 hour ago, KiwiKiwi said:

 

Not\ne of that is what I said, please don't try to manipulate the conversation (which just ended because I got bored with it). Perhaps you don't realise you're doing it, that's possible. Self-knowledge is a wonderful thing - "Man, know thyself", it's quite old knowledge.

And so on and so on.  Got it.

[newnative]

1 hour ago, KiwiKiwi said:

 

 

This has become inane and you have started to become abusive and patronising, probably because the manipulation didn't work as well as it usually does. Sorry, I have better things to do than this. Good luck.

     Goodness!   Not another MANIPULATIVE poster!  But, nice to have company.  And, oh dear, also "abusive" and "patronising".   I'm sensing a pattern here--when all else fails, call someone manipulative.  And, when they are particularly articulate and reasonable, as is Attrayant, and you are gnashing your teeth because this poster is making so much sense, throw in "abusive" for good measure.  Huh???  

[attrayant]

11 hours ago, KiwiKiwi said:

 

 

This has become inane and you have started to become abusive

 

All I have done is ask questions about your position, which you are unable to answer, so you turn tail and run away.  If you feel that my posts are abusive, report them and the moderators will delete them.

[KiwiKiwi]

1 hour ago, attrayant said:

 

All I have done is ask questions about your position, which you are unable to answer, so you turn tail and run away.  If you feel that my posts are abusive, report them and the moderators will delete them.

 

Of course you have. Anyway, my decision is that I have little to gain from you and any effort spent in trying to do so will be wasted, so you are free to go and annoy someone else. I thought a sensible discussion was in the offing, my mistake, I won't make it again.

 

As for the moderators, yeeeesss. I don't think I'll be troubling them and I don't expect they'll give you any trouble, nor even cause for reflection, so no, I don't think I'll be wasting my time doing that either.

 

In any event, since I doubt we'll be talking again unless I fail to spot another of your duplicate accounts (that's against the rools by the way), I'll just content myself with wishing you a wonderful day and let you be on your way.

[KiwiKiwi]

11 hours ago, newnative said:

     Goodness!   Not another MANIPULATIVE poster!  But, nice to have company.  And, oh dear, also "abusive" and "patronising".   I'm sensing a pattern here--when all else fails, call someone manipulative.  And, when they are particularly articulate and reasonable, as is Attrayant, and you are gnashing your teeth because this poster is making so much sense, throw in "abusive" for good measure.  Huh???  

 

Yes. Have a great day, enjoy those gifts nature has bestowed upon you ant try not to covet those it hasn't.

[KiwiKiwi]

12 hours ago, stephen tracy said:

Yes parents. I have had a step-father since I was 11 years old and growing up I considered him to be a parent and still do. Because he ticked all the boxes of being a parent and still does. It does not matter that we do not carry the same genes. How many parents that have children (in the biological sense) do not tick all the boxes of being a parent? Many. 

The assumption that parents have the only or even the greatest impact on a growing child is often misplaced. The reality is that in many homes, especially dysfunctional homes, a child will fairly quickly replace a parent as a role model, and adopt teachers or prominent community figures instead. This does bring with it psychological issues which may remain for a long time, even for life.

 

As an adopted child, you describe what happened pretty well, and it's not uncommon for an admired adult to be co-opted into the role of substitute parent fairly readily. Children are all different in many ways, and largely the same in many other ways. Many are wiser than they might seem when reacting unconsciously, and can overcome a suprisingly wide variety of events and environments which might, in someone else, cause psychological trauma. There is an evolutionary advantage in being able to do so.

 

And yes, many parents are what I would call bad parents, they do not tick the boxes and many are parents only because nature propels them forward along that path even though they may not have appropriate skill sets. The ubiquity of psychological damage caused to children by bas parenting is a testament to the system not being perfect, though the incidence of damaged children seems to be much worse now than it used to be when I was younger. Progress of a kind I suppose...

[tukkytuktuk]

And God created 

We join them together as husband and husband in holy matrimony, amen!

 

Edited May 1, 2018 by tukkytuktuk

[d2b2]

On 5/1/2018 at 7:07 PM, tukkytuktuk said:

And God created 

We join them together as husband and husband in holy matrimony, amen!

 

And everyone seems to be rejoicing 

[Voodoochile]

On 27 avril 2018 at 2:15 PM, ramrod711 said:

When my (now) wife and I went to Phuket for the first time in 2005 I had only been in the Thailand for a short time. We went to a travel business on the beach and were served by a person who was dressed as a woman, but seemed to me clearly be male. We booked our trip, and while we were walking away I said to my girlfriend "I think that was a guy", she said "yes". Nothing else, I compared her "so what" response with what my brother went through when he came out. My father never spoke to him again. The attitude here is refreshing, it isn't our business, who cares and what will be will be.

Ahhh the good old "who cares" in my opinion that is one of the many attitudes that is turning  the world into (at best) a freak show.

[Rimmer]

Some inflammatory posts have been removed.

 

If you see a post that breaks forum rules please help us by pressing the report button rather than venting your displeasure on here for others to read. Thank you

[Scott]

Troll post and reply removed. 

[Voodoochile]

On 26 avril 2018 at 2:53 AM, d2b2 said:

Perhaps we should follow your suggestion and resume stoning people to death as well? Who needs human rights? 

If you actually beleive in "human rights" (i mean in the way that it is sold to us by the different governments of the world) you are either very naïve or living in à fairy tale "human rights" "liberty" "equality" all these terms Would apply to an ideal utopique world but definately do not exist in todays world. 

 

555 "human rights".....that was funny

[d2b2]

On 6/9/2018 at 1:21 AM, Voodoochile said:

If you actually beleive in "human rights" (i mean in the way that it is sold to us by the different governments of the world) you are either very naïve or living in à fairy tale "human rights" "liberty" "equality" all these terms Would apply to an ideal utopique world but definately do not exist in todays world. 

 

555 "human rights".....that was funny

 

On 6/9/2018 at 1:21 AM, Voodoochile said:

If you actually beleive in "human rights" (i mean in the way that it is sold to us by the different governments of the world) you are either very naïve or living in à fairy tale "human rights" "liberty" "equality" all these terms Would apply to an ideal utopique world but definately do not exist in todays world. 

 

555 "human rights".....that was funny

If you don’t believe in human rights you are cynical and callous person. You still deserve human rights... just not much trust or attention 

[Voodoochile]

19 minutes ago, d2b2 said:

 

If you don’t believe in human rights you are cynical and callous person. You still deserve human rights... just not much trust or attention 

I believe every human deserves rights. But (like i said in my post) this has nothing to do with "human rights" as sold to us by our respective "leaders" 

 

"cynical" and  "callous"?? no i Would Just say i am a person with lucidity

or maybe you are a very naïve one?

[Jingthing]

I believe every human deserves rights. But (like i said in my post) this has nothing to do with "human rights" as sold to us by our respective "leaders" 
 
"cynical" and  "callous"?? no i Would Just say i am a person with lucidity
or maybe you are a very naïve one?

Explain to us why gay rights have nothing to do with human rights please. Are gay people not human?

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Voodoochile]

13 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Explain to us why gay rights have nothing to do with human rights please. Are gay people not human?

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

 

 

Thats not what i said?? (Or r u baiting)

 

but if all you want is an answer to your question than here it is........

just barely.

 

(if you give me a stick to wack you with i Will)

 

 

 

 

 

[Jingthing]

 
 
Thats not what i said?? (Or r u baiting)
 
but if all you want is an answer to your question than here it is........
just barely.
 
(if you give me a stick to wack you with i Will)
 
 
 
 
 

Just barely huh? You've just indicted yourself. Imagine if someone said black people are just barely human. He would be revealing to all that he is a bigot. Thanks for your honesty but nobody that has read your posts will be surprised.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[chainarong]

On ‎4‎/‎25‎/‎2018 at 9:02 AM, RichardColeman said:

Keep going, I'll be able to marry my Japanese sex robot soon !

At least it wont take all your money or answer back.?

[Voodoochile]

59 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Just barely huh? You've just indicted yourself. Imagine if someone said black people are just barely human. He would be revealing to all that he is a bigot. Thanks for your honesty but nobody that has read your posts will be surprised.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

As i have said before i am not one to be Held "hostage" by words such as racist or bigot i am what i am and accept it 100% and i am not craving the all mighty "open minded" label like so many of you out there to gain acceptance in the eyes of others.

 

for me racism for example Walks à very fine line tangled up somewhere between preference and patriotism. And like i have said also there are many different types of racism some born out of pure ignorance but i maintain that in some casses it is or can be justified. 

 

Not loving or not wanting to live amongst all the different people in society is a right, the right of choice.

its as simple as that.

 

 

Edited June 11, 2018 by Voodoochile

[Jingthing]

As i have said before i am not one to be Held "hostage" by words such as racist or bigot i am what i am and accept it 100% and i am not craving the all mighty "open minded" label like so many of you out there to gain acceptance in the eyes of others.
 
for me racism for example Walks à very fine line tangled up somewhere between preference and patriotism. And like i have said also there are many different types of racism some born out of pure ignorance but i maintain that in some casses it is or can be justified. 
 
Not loving or not wanting to live amongst all the different people in society is a right, the right of choice.
its as simple as that.
 
 

Nobody is holding you hostage. You are what you are and what you are is crystal clear with your barely human snark.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[jak2002003]

26 minutes ago, Voodoochile said:

 

 

Not loving or not wanting to live amongst all the different people in society is a right, the right of choice.

its as simple as that.

 

 

Reading your previous posts I have no idea why you are even living in Thailand... I mean.. here you ARE living in a society made up of a lot of different people, cultures, sexual orientations, colours, religions, political views, etc... unless you are just living inside you condo alone with no friends or socialisation with humans... (actually reading through you previous posts this might be quite likely what you are doing).