Experts say Thailand not ready for same-sex marriage, but partnership recognition likely

[welovethailand]

I have read all the posts up to here now, and one very important point has been missed.  A "marriage" has always been viewed as a "Holy Matrimony, in the eyes of God".  Instead of trying to change the Words of God Almighty, and force others to accept it , why don't you just start your own "legal Document'  and say "in the eyes of the Devil who runs this world"? Whats wrong with that? Simple & easy. You got your and we got ours.

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, welovethailand said:

I have read all the posts up to here now, and one very important point has been missed.  A "marriage" has always been viewed as a "Holy Matrimony, in the eyes of God".  Instead of trying to change the Words of God Almighty, and force others to accept it , why don't you just start your own "legal Document'  and say "in the eyes of the Devil who runs this world"? Whats wrong with that? Simple & easy. You got your and we got ours.

Ever heard of going to city hall and getting married there? No need for any religious involvement. It's a legal union. If you want to bring your "God" into it, that's your choice, but not for everyone. 

[welovethailand]

City Hall is the same thing. Those who rule this earth. So why do they need such attention to a matter that should not matter to  us who really don't care what they do with theirselves? Why bring all of us into this thing? Go parade in the streets and call it a "Union" or what ever you like.

[Jingthing]

14 minutes ago, welovethailand said:

City Hall is the same thing. Those who rule this earth. So why do they need such attention to a matter that should not matter to  us who really don't care what they do with theirselves? Why bring all of us into this thing? Go parade in the streets and call it a "Union" or what ever you like.

It has nothing to do with you. It's about the people that want to get married. It doesn't hurt you at all if they do. Why so PIGGY? 

[welovethailand]

Wether you like it or not, it will all roll back into our faces, as, "The People have spoken". "We are in an agreement". I'm not. I don't consent. Don't speak for  me.

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, welovethailand said:

Wether you like it or not, it will all roll back into our faces, as, "The People have spoken". "We are in an agreement". I'm not. I don't consent. Don't speak for  me.

Here is your answer. Don't get married to a person of the same sex. Sorted. 

[welovethailand]

HaHa, Agree.  Have to go get some food  now. Enjoyed chatting with ya. 

[ChiangMaiLightning2143]

 
Why is it rubbish? Because you don't like it? Because you want it to be untrue? Neither reasoning assists those (like me) who would like to understand more.
 
Time to grow up and learn that not everyone is going to agree or sympathise with you perhaps?
 
 

Is there a question there, I mean really? You are spewing rubbish.

What does it bother you if two boys have a paper that says they are “Married” and go move into a Condo. No affect on you whatsoever.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KiwiKiwi]

45 minutes ago, ChiangMaiLightning2143 said:

Is there a question there, I mean really? You are spewing rubbish.

What does it bother you if two boys have a paper that says they are “Married” and go move into a Condo. No affect on you whatsoever.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Conversely, what does it matter to you if this guy thinks differently to you? No effect on you whatsoever - or shouldn't be.

 

Remember that the 10% should not dictate to the 90% what they should think., whatever the lobbyists or trendissimos say.

Edited May 6, 2018 by KiwiKiwi

[attrayant]

1 hour ago, KiwiKiwi said:

Remember that the 10% should not dictate to the 90% what they should think.

 

Nobody is telling anyone what to think.  The 90% are free to think that same sex marriage is disgusting.  If the idea of marring somebody who is the same sex as you are disgusts you, then don't marry somebody who is the same sex as you.  It's just that easy.  But on what grounds can you tell somebody else that they aren't free to marry the person of their choice?  Can you show that some kind of harm will come to society as a result?  If you can, that might be a valid reason.

 

The problem is when the 90% want to legislate against it, creating two classes of citizen: those who are free to marry the person of their choice, and those who aren't.  The "ick factor" is not a valid reason for declaring something illegal, and religious sentiments or "hurt cultural feelings", whatever that is, are also not a good reason.

[attrayant]

3 hours ago, welovethailand said:

A "marriage" has always been viewed as [...]

 

Viewed by whom?  Are you making an appeal to tradition?  All throughout history, we've seen ridiculous and evil practices continue solely because they are/were traditional.  "Because we've always done it that way" is not a valid reason to continue doing something.  If you disagree, you're going to have to defend an awful lot of abhorrent human behavior that has been kept alive on the life support of tradition.

 

3 hours ago, welovethailand said:

Instead of trying to change the Words of God Almighty [...]

 

Oh, appeals to religion.  If that's what we're going to do, then these are all the marriages that should be legal too:

 

One man + woman (nuclear family)

One man + wives + concubines
One man + woman + woman's slaves

One man + multiple women

One man + brother's widow (Levirate marriage)

One rapist + his victim

A male soldier + his captives

Marriages between slaves, arranged by the slave owner

 

And probably more. Chapter & verse citations available upon request.

[Chris Lawrence]

15 hours ago, greenchair said:

Well I have never said I have any aversion or dislike of gay people at all. I believe  in my body my choice. People at 18 should be allowed to use drugs, smoke, have group sex, be gay , be religious, dress the way they want. 

 none of the above should be promoted or introduced to children below at least 16. Unfortunately, the addicts, priests, smoke companies, and gay community, all know that they must recruit their victims young. 

So if my grandson was not indoctrinated to a persuasion at an early age, I would be happy for him. I would love my grandson if he was an opium addict. It doesn't mean I would encourage him to grow to be an opium addict. 

 

 

 

 

Your posts that I have read are a form of Gibberish that is similar to that of a troll. Your arguments are not creditable and are very weak. 

 

For example, how is opium addiction comparable to homosexuality? Its gobbledygook, writing or language that is meaningless or is made unintelligible by excessive use of abstruse technical terms. (Wikipedia)

[KiwiKiwi]

20 minutes ago, Chris Lawrence said:

Your posts that I have read are a form of Gibberish that is similar to that of a troll. Your arguments are not creditable and are very weak. 

 

For example, how is opium addiction comparable to homosexuality? Its gobbledygook, writing or language that is meaningless or is made unintelligible by excessive use of abstruse technical terms. (Wikipedia)

I don't know Chris, I haven't read many of his posts, but the one we both refer to seems to make a reasonable point and doesn't draw any obvious link between opium addiction and homosexuality that I can discern. Each to his own, but are you sure you are not allowing past posts which you didn't happen to like or didn't happen to agree with to colour your judgment?

 

I think I possibly agree with his assertion that none of the things he refers to should be promoted to minors, and we all 3 of us know what he's mainly talking about. I recall listening to one lunatic school counsellor who thought she was doing school children a wonderful favour by establishing LGBT outreach centres among 11-year old schoolchildren. Which seemed to be tasking trendiness a bit far to me, but she seemed serious as well as extremely odd.

[stephen tracy]

4 hours ago, welovethailand said:

I have read all the posts up to here now, and one very important point has been missed.  A "marriage" has always been viewed as a "Holy Matrimony, in the eyes of God".  Instead of trying to change the Words of God Almighty, and force others to accept it , why don't you just start your own "legal Document'  and say "in the eyes of the Devil who runs this world"? Whats wrong with that? Simple & easy. You got your and we got ours.

So how does this apply if you don't worship deities?

[AGareth2]

52 minutes ago, attrayant said:

Oh, appeals to religion.  If that's what we're going to do, then these are all the marriages that should be legal too:

 

One man + woman (nuclear family)

One man + wives + concubines
One man + woman + woman's slaves

One man + multiple women

One man + brother's widow (Levirate marriage)

One rapist + his victim

A male soldier + his captives

Marriages between slaves, arranged by the slave owner

 

And probably more. Chapter & verse citations available upon request.

but they are in some parts of the world surely?

[Expatthailover]

On 05/05/2018 at 2:39 PM, notmyself said:

 

 

 

So it's a question of people being offended rather than what is correct or incorrect. I do so love living in a third world country.

3rd world so suits you maybe

[KiwiKiwi]

4 hours ago, welovethailand said:

I have read all the posts up to here now, and one very important point has been missed.  A "marriage" has always been viewed as a "Holy Matrimony, in the eyes of God".  Instead of trying to change the Words of God Almighty, and force others to accept it , why don't you just start your own "legal Document'  and say "in the eyes of the Devil who runs this world"? Whats wrong with that? Simple & easy. You got your and we got ours.

 

I honestly believe that anyone who believes the bible or any other document is comprised of the 'Word of God' is gullible and suffers from attention deficit. It certainly does not speak of high intelligence or thorough thought.

Edited May 6, 2018 by KiwiKiwi

[attrayant]

24 minutes ago, AGareth2 said:

but they are in some parts of the world surely?

 

Possibly, but how would that be relevant?  

[kaorop]

6 hours ago, KiwiKiwi said:

 

I honestly believe that anyone who believes the bible or any other document is comprised of the 'Word of God' is gullible and suffers from attention deficit. It certainly does not speak of high intelligence or thorough thought.

im more of the line that it is primitive, a behavior that will one day be laughed and ridiculed. i 

find it incredibly sad that these things still exert so much power over so many.. im quite confident i can mock and deride any diety and not be further 'punish3d' for my dis belief..

[sjaak327]

On ‎5‎-‎5‎-‎2018 at 2:25 AM, Samui Bodoh said:

I have always found that one of Thailand's great strengths and attractions is a 'live and let live' attitude towards personal matters; what other country has a national beauty pageant for ladyboys and/or has a good chuckle at the 'beauties' who show up for the draft?

 

This tolerance is a good thing; it would be a shame if it was ruined by God-botherers/morality-crusaders as in so many other countries.

 

Letting gay people get married harms no one. And if something harms no one, what is the justification for not doing it?

 

Lead the way Thailand.

 

But the reality is that Thailand is decades behind many other countries in the west. In my country, same sex marriage is a reality since 2001, 17 years ago. Yeah Thailand may seem tolerant, but action speak louder than words, and actions in this area have been absent for all this time..

[sjaak327]

23 hours ago, greenchair said:

Why should people's old values be taken away from them, just so you can have your values respected. A civil union is a way for the tradition and values of marriage to be maintained ,whilst respecting and upholding the values and rights of an extremely diverse group of people. Why are priests losing their jobs for refusing to go against their deep personal beliefs. And it won't end there. Now you want it taught in schools. Now you want to adopt people's children, with no regards to the wishes of the parents. Now you want transgender toilets in schools. Now you want extra benefits. Now we have to say the letters of the alphabet.  I just don't want to deal with it anymore. It's not a great lifestyle. It's awful. A gay life is quite difficult. Why encourage it. 

Hmm, maybe you should mind your own business, a gay life is not difficult, it is only in your little mind. Live and let live is the prashe here. 

[sjaak327]

11 hours ago, welovethailand said:

Wether you like it or not, it will all roll back into our faces, as, "The People have spoken". "We are in an agreement". I'm not. I don't consent. Don't speak for  me.

Your opinion on the matter really does not matter. It is not about god, it is not about marriage as such, it is about having certain rights as partners, that is the issue here. Of course self centered people such as yourself, will not think about it, because of the inability to think for others. 

 

We get it, you are against, you are in the minority, the world over, people are agreeing with the need for gay couples to have the same legal rights as heterosexual couples. How anyone can object to this is beyond me, it's not like anyone is invading your little world..

[KiwiKiwi]

8 hours ago, sjaak327 said:

Your opinion on the matter really does not matter. It is not about god, it is not about marriage as such, it is about having certain rights as partners, that is the issue here. Of course self centered people such as yourself, will not think about it, because of the inability to think for others. 

 

We get it, you are against, you are in the minority, the world over, people are agreeing with the need for gay couples to have the same legal rights as heterosexual couples. How anyone can object to this is beyond me, it's not like anyone is invading your little world..

 

Hmmm. Well, if his opinion doesn't matter, I wonder why the gay rights lobby persistently tries to change opinions  - eg by saying homosexuality is normal and should be promoted as a valid lifestyle in schools (neither of which is true in my opinion)? Answer:: to change opinions, which they have been very successful in doing. Buit it should always be remembered that the incidence of homosexuality now is about the same as it has been in the past - about 10% if I read the surveys correctly. 10% is not a majority, it is a small minority, and, as with other small minorities, it should remember that the tail does not wag the dog lest the wheel should turn back the way it came. Though I will confess that several small minorities have managed to persuade that accepting their particular agenda somehow makes someone 'enlightened' or 'superior '. Which is a very fragile and probably transitory situation, time will doubtless tell.

 

So opinions apparently do matter. And I would guess he is not in the minority, but if you can demonstrate that he is I would be interested to see the evidence.

 

Lest it be misunderstood and the flamers come out to play, I personally do not give a toss how people spend their personal time. I am not a homophobe, though like most people, there are some things I do not appreciate being shoved in my face. Many of the so-called 'Gay Pride' parades fall into that category for me, and it seems to me that at least some of them are nothing to do with pride of any kind, but are merely an opportunity for extremists to come out and try to shock people with lewd and lascivious behaviour that governments would never tolerate if they were 'straight pride' parades.

 

Apart from that, live your lives as you will, just please don't shove it down my throat or expect me to join you. Engage your personal preferences and pursuits the same way I do - behind closed doors, where controversy or criticism are not invited.

 

Just my personal opinion, but I'd be amazed if at least some others were not of the same view.

 

 

[KiwiKiwi]

9 hours ago, kaorop said:

im more of the line that it is primitive, a behavior that will one day be laughed and ridiculed. i 

find it incredibly sad that these things still exert so much power over so many.. im quite confident i can mock and deride any diety and not be further 'punish3d' for my dis belief..

I agree that it is primitive behaviour, it is an expression of the need for many people to have approval. In fact the  churches (all of them so far as I'm aware) have used their position and the psychology of people to gain power and wealth (often 2 sides of the same coin). You can see this every day in Thailand in how Thais (and many indoctrinated foreigners) behave when they see a monk.

 

A reality check is sorely needed.

[KiwiKiwi]

9 hours ago, sjaak327 said:

But the reality is that Thailand is decades behind many other countries in the west. In my country, same sex marriage is a reality since 2001, 17 years ago. Yeah Thailand may seem tolerant, but action speak louder than words, and actions in this area have been absent for all this time..

It seems to me that it's not a 'live and let live' attitude at all, though I accept it may seem that way after a superficial look. It's a 'can't be bothered' thing. If it were a live and let live thing, than the racism and xenophobia against foreigners would not exist, though many of us say that it does.

[sjaak327]

1 hour ago, KiwiKiwi said:

 

Hmmm. Well, if his opinion doesn't matter, I wonder why the gay rights lobby persistently tries to change opinions  - eg by saying homosexuality is normal and should be promoted as a valid lifestyle in schools (neither of which is true in my opinion)? Answer:: to change opinions, which they have been very successful in doing. Buit it should always be remembered that the incidence of homosexuality now is about the same as it has been in the past - about 10% if I read the surveys correctly. 10% is not a majority, it is a small minority, and, as with other small minorities, it should remember that the tail does not wag the dog lest the wheel should turn back the way it came. Though I will confess that several small minorities have managed to persuade that accepting their particular agenda somehow makes someone 'enlightened' or 'superior '. Which is a very fragile and probably transitory situation, time will doubtless tell.

 

So opinions apparently do matter. And I would guess he is not in the minority, but if you can demonstrate that he is I would be interested to see the evidence.

 

Lest it be misunderstood and the flamers come out to play, I personally do not give a toss how people spend their personal time. I am not a homophobe, though like most people, there are some things I do not appreciate being shoved in my face. Many of the so-called 'Gay Pride' parades fall into that category for me, and it seems to me that at least some of them are nothing to do with pride of any kind, but are merely an opportunity for extremists to come out and try to shock people with lewd and lascivious behaviour that governments would never tolerate if they were 'straight pride' parades.

 

Apart from that, live your lives as you will, just please don't shove it down my throat or expect me to join you. Engage your personal preferences and pursuits the same way I do - behind closed doors, where controversy or criticism are not invited.

 

Just my personal opinion, but I'd be amazed if at least some others were not of the same view.

 

 

His opinion does not really matter, as he isn't a stakeholder in this whole process. This is about the government recognizing and allowing same sex couples to have the same rights as hetrosexual couples, there is really nothing more too it. As already stated, many countries have now legalized same sex marriages and more will follow, simply because it is the right thing to do, and it does not hurt anyone. 

 

I have yet to see a single valid argument why same sex marriages should not be allowed. And the arguments being brought to the table are all from religious nutters, remember the separation of religion and state, a concept vital in many western countries. If Spain can legalize same sex marriages, I see no reason for others to be held back. 

 

Allowing such marriages in no way shoves anything down anyone's throat. And civil servants having a problem carrying out the ceremony, need to find other employment. Comming back to the separation of religion and state. 

 

It defies believe how anyone can object to same sex marriages, it's not like normal marriages are suddenly less valid or valuable. 

 

 

Edited May 7, 2018 by sjaak327

[sjaak327]

57 minutes ago, KiwiKiwi said:

It seems to me that it's not a 'live and let live' attitude at all, though I accept it may seem that way after a superficial look. It's a 'can't be bothered' thing. If it were a live and let live thing, than the racism and xenophobia against foreigners would not exist, though many of us say that it does.

Nowhere did I claim Thailand is deploying a live and let live attitude towards this, on the contrary. 

[KiwiKiwi]

1 hour ago, sjaak327 said:

His opinion does not really matter, as he isn't a stakeholder in this whole process. This is about the government recognizing and allowing same sex couples to have the same rights as hetrosexual couples, there is really nothing more too it. As already stated, many countries have now legalized same sex marriages and more will follow, simply because it is the right thing to do, and it does not hurt anyone. 

 

I have yet to see a single valid argument why same sex marriages should not be allowed. And the arguments being brought to the table are all from religious nutters, remember the separation of religion and state, a concept vital in many western countries. If Spain can legalize same sex marriages, I see no reason for others to be held back. 

 

Allowing such marriages in no way shoves anything down anyone's throat. And civil servants having a problem carrying out the ceremony, need to find other employment. Comming back to the separation of religion and state. 

 

It defies believe how anyone can object to same sex marriages, it's not like normal marriages are suddenly less valid or valuable. 

 

 

 

In my opinion, this is wrong in 3 ways:

 

1.legalized same sex marriages and more will follow, simply because it is the right thing to do... Well, that's an opinion stated as if it were a fact. Why is it 'the right thing to do'?

 

2. 'I have yet to see a single valid argument why same sex marriages should not be allowed'. If that were a valid argument, why have they not been allowed throughout history? So far as I'm aware, even in ancient Greece and Rome, where homosexuality was widespread,  and presumably homosexual co-habitation also prevalent, homosexual marriage was not on the statute books, neither was it practiced informally on a grand scale (so far as I'm aware anyway). So what makes it appropriate now?

 

3. ''It defies believe how anyone can object to same sex marriages.' Does it? Why? Everyone is a stakeholder in society, for good or ill. There's nothing to prevent two men or two women living together as man and wife. Whilst I agree that homosexuality should have been, and was, decriminalised (I think it;s a personal freedon issue, but that is my belief and I don't state it as a fact). Why lobby for the same  legal rights of a heterosexual marriage which were largely forulated for the protection of children anyway? 2 men cannot procreate and 2 women cannot procreate, so the protection of familial children appears not to be the reason.

 

Straying off topic perhaps?.

 

 

[KiwiKiwi]

1 hour ago, sjaak327 said:

Nowhere did I claim Thailand is deploying a live and let live attitude towards this, on the contrary. 

 

 No, you didn't. But Samui Bodoh did and it was his post I was replying to.

 

Would you like to tell us again how someone else should mind his own business? You did claim that.

 

[sjaak327]

16 minutes ago, KiwiKiwi said:

 

 No, you didn't. But Samui Bodoh did and it was his post I was replying to.

 

Would you like to tell us again how someone else should mind his own business? You did claim that.

 

You quoted MY post. Naturally one would assume you were replying to me....