Partnership bill may still not pass NLA

By KORNRAWEE PANYASUPPAKUN 
THE NATION

 

File photo // EPA-EFE PHOTO

 

OPINIONS are divided on the Life Partnership Bill, which is holding back some rights for same-sex couples, as the bill enters the final phase before becoming law.

 

The LGBT community, on one hand, slams the bill for not recognising their rights – now limited to heterosexual couples – to adopt a child, receive a spouse’s public and private welfare, and a deduction from taxes for couples. 

 

“People are celebrating, thinking that LGBT people will eventually be able to get married. But the reality is the legislation does not recognise many of their rights and benefits. [The law] is discriminatory in many areas,” said former National Human Rights commissioner activist Naiyana Supapung. 

 

The draft legislation violates the Constitution and the 2015 Gender Equality Act forbidding laws that limit any right or benefit for a person based on their gender, says Naiyana. To ensure true equality, we must amend the Civil Code to define marriage, as a union of two individuals rather than limit it to a male and a female, she said. 

 

Those charged with drafting the Life Partnership law, argue that Thailand needs to go step by step and make compromises because of the different views on the issue. 

 

A source inside the Justice Ministry, whose department – the Rights and Liberties Protection Department (RLPD) – was charged with drafting the bill, pointed to the beliefs of religious and conservative groups. 

 

Despite strong support from the society at large, people in the Muslim-majority southern provinces are against the bill for religious reasons, and voiced their opposition at a recent public hearing in Hat Yat, Songkhla Province, he said.

 

Also, people occupying high government positions, as well as legislators in the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) appointed by the junta government, “may still hold conservative views towards this radical change”, he said.

 

As a result, some rights are excluded. The right for LGBT couples to receive medical welfare if their spouse is a civil servant, for example, are excluded as it may impact the Finance budget and allow ill-intended people to exploit the law, he said. 

 

“It is a challenge. But it is an opportunity for those in the NLA to prove themselves to the society,” he said. The Life Partnership Bill now sits in a long line of 50 bills awaiting consideration and a vote by the Assembly before an election is called and a new government takes office, he said. 

 

The Life Partnership Bill recognises the rights of LGBT couples to jointly manage debts and assets, inherit their spouse’s inheritance, and become a guardian for their spouse. The right to make medical decisions and hold funerals for a spouse were recently added to the bill.

 

The bill, however, does not recognise the right to adopt a child, receive a spouse’s public and private welfare, or receive the pension, civil-servant medical welfare or spouse-status for income tax deductions, among other omissions.

 

The NLA has also said it has a backlog of 50 bills to deliberate on, so the new civilpartnership bill may not be passed in the current session, which wraps up on February 15, one week before the general election.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/national/30361193

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2018-12-27

Not that I'm an expert on these things, but why do both of the women in the photo appear to have the backs of their dresses undone?

12 minutes ago, bluesofa said:

Not that I'm an expert on these things, but why do both of the women in the photo appear to have the backs of their dresses undone?

Well 2 reasons come to mind, either the dresses are too small, or they are left like that ready for a quick undressing for getting down to some action.????

Well 2 reasons come to mind, either the dresses are too small, or they are left like that ready for a quick undressing for getting down to some action.[emoji12]

[emoji106] [emoji23] [emoji23]

Sent from my SM-G920F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

10 minutes ago, colinneil said:

Well 2 reasons come to mind, either the dresses are too small, or they are left like that ready for a quick undressing for getting down to some action.????

Yeah, Plan B was my hope too.

Unless there is a full partnership on this so called same sex bill there's the implication of the old voodoo, discrimination , who cares what the Muslim population down south says , cares who cares what the neighbor next door says,  who cares period,  either all in or not at all and at the end of the day like it's been introduced in other countries it's not the be all to end all, as the stigma of being different still sticks no matter what strenuous efforts are conceived to cover it up, Just sayin.

45 minutes ago, bluesofa said:

Not that I'm an expert on these things, but why do both of the women in the photo appear to have the backs of their dresses undone?

Isn't a white wedding gown supposed to represent the virginity of the bride .. So they are a couple of rare birds in the photo no .? 

33 minutes ago, chainarong said:

Unless there is a full partnership on this so called same sex bill there's the implication of the old voodoo, discrimination , who cares what the Muslim population down south says , cares who cares what the neighbor next door says,  who cares period,  either all in or not at all and at the end of the day like it's been introduced in other countries it's not the be all to end all, as the stigma of being different still sticks no matter what strenuous efforts are conceived to cover it up, Just sayin.

To even hesitate to give full rights to gay+ people in Thailand is ludicrous: this country has more gays, bisexuals, and ladyboys per square mile than probably any other nation on earth. You cannot escape it: turn on the TV and there are ladyboys presenting or hosting shows; go into a shop, and there are ladyboys serving the customers, teach in a university and there are numerous gay/ transgender students. Gayness+ is second nature here. It is ridiculous and hypocritical NOT to give equal rights to human beings (yes, human beings) who are harming no one in their sexual / gender orientation. The schizoid nature of Thai society - the reality-bypass syndrome - is so clearly manifest in this hesitation over what is an in-your-face fact every day of the week: that Thailand has an abundance of gay+ people and that it is about time that such people had their rights respected and enshrined in law.

 

48 minutes ago, Justgrazing said:

Isn't a white wedding gown supposed to represent the virginity of the bride .. So they are a couple of rare birds in the photo no .? 

I think that's the word 'virginity' in the traditional sense. Not sure if it covers those batting for the other side.

4 hours ago, webfact said:

The right for LGBT couples to receive

 

4 hours ago, webfact said:

a backlog

 

4 hours ago, webfact said:

were recently added to the bill.

 

16 minutes ago, Justgrazing said:

 

4 hours ago, webfact said:

were recently added to the bill.

 

Son: Dad, dad, there's a man at the door with a bill.

Father: No son, it's a duck with a hat on.

(sorry!)