Thai Charter court rules that only heterosexual marriages are constitutional

[Srikcir]

"Constitutional protection of sexual minorities - will Thailand join the club?"

March 26, 2015

https://www.constitutionnet.org/news/constitutional-protection-sexual-minorities-will-thailand-join-club

 

The new Thai constitution put forward by the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) would ensure the constitutional protection of sexual minorities against discrimination for the first time in Thai constitutional history. The CDC added “sexual orientation” to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination in the equality clause. It would for the NCPO Chief Prayut to approve the addition.

Apparently this language might not automatically amend per se the Civil Code which prohibits same sex marriages.

 

This language would reinforce the 2007 Constitution which was accompanied by a statement specifically providing that the anti-discrimination provisions in article 30, which prohibited discrimination on the grounds of gender, specifically included homosexuals, bisexuals, hermaphrodites, transgender people, and post-operative transsexuals. Of course the NCPO abolished the 2007 Constitution with its 2014 coup.

 

[OneMoreFarang]

2 hours ago, Tropposurfer said:

I'm of the thought and heart that I have no right to tell others how they can live and love. What we need is more love directed living in this cold rationalised world not more rationale. As for state control of who is to be loved I disagree with that premise entirely.

The article has nothing to do with love. It's about marriage, not love.

[OneMoreFarang]

1 hour ago, godonnet said:

The problem is that LGBT+ don't have the same rights as heterosexual couples.

 

What is normal? It is also quite normal to get a divorce, should we ban thatas well? Do you have any studies to refer to that proves any disadvantages not having 2 fathers or 2 mothers in stead of a mother and a father? Several countries allows LGBT-adoption, so there should be papers out there on this.

 

 

There is a BIG difference in 2 consenting adults and a goat/dog/fish/horse/cow etc or children who absolutely cannot consent to anything. Comparing LGBT+ with child molesters and bestiality  only makes you look like an idiot. 

 

Replace LGBT (or LBGT as you wrote) with black or colored and read back again.

 

How about just accepting people like they are and also accept them having equal rights? Why should I not have the right to move together with my partner to Thailand? Why should I not have a say when my partner is sick and in hospital? Why should I not inherent my partner? Why should I not get the same economic security and rights as a heterosexual couple? 

I don't complain if you get all the things which you describe in your last paragraph. My concern are children, and especially babies which are adopted by couples who could by nature not have children. If guys want to play with guys and women with women, fine. But leave kids out of that equation. You can't have kids in same sex couples. Accept it!

 

And about comparing same sex couples to my love for my pets: Why can't I compare that? I am not f#$#%$ing my pets. I just enjoy life with them. Like I mentioned earlier. Not so long ago if anybody would have talked about same sex couples people would have been shocked similar to suggestions about animals or whatever. But now it seems nobody is allowed to even question the idea of same sex couples. So what was completely unacceptable not too many years ago is now supposed to be as normal as male/female. It isn't the same. And it will never be the same. And this is not like black and white. There are lots of shades to this. I.e. IMHO relations are ok, marriage is ok, but  don't bring children in such a same sex relationship. Think about what is good for the children.

[ikke1959]

1 hour ago, godonnet said:

The problem is that LGBT+ don't have the same rights as heterosexual couples.

 

What is normal? It is also quite normal to get a divorce, should we ban thatas well? Do you have any studies to refer to that proves any disadvantages not having 2 fathers or 2 mothers in stead of a mother and a father? Several countries allows LGBT-adoption, so there should be papers out there on this.

 

 

There is a BIG difference in 2 consenting adults and a goat/dog/fish/horse/cow etc or children who absolutely cannot consent to anything. Comparing LGBT+ with child molesters and bestiality  only makes you look like an idiot. 

 

Replace LGBT (or LBGT as you wrote) with black or colored and read back again.

 

How about just accepting people like they are and also accept them having equal rights? Why should I not have the right to move together with my partner to Thailand? Why should I not have a say when my partner is sick and in hospital? Why should I not inherent my partner? Why should I not get the same economic security and rights as a heterosexual couple? 

That is exactly why they should now as soon as possible give an accord to the Civil union Bill. Than as a LGBT couple at least you can take take of your loved one. If it first needs a constitution change for man and woman to replace it in a person we are still decades away. Better first a bit than the rest will follow, Now we are / have nothing that protect the rights of the same sex couples

[RobU]

Step by Step. Thailand is socially at the same level that the UK and the USA were in the 1950's/60's. In fact they are more progressive than many states of the USA were then regarding same sex relationships. Thailand has to develop it's social awareness and tolerance and that means the population not the government have to achieve tolerance. You can't force it, Woke bullying doesn't work in Thailand

[PremiumLane]

9 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

What's next? Can I marry my favorite pet?

well I just read the dumbest thing on the Internet today

[ChipButty]

1 minute ago, PremiumLane said:

well I just read the dumbest thing on the Internet today

It gets better, stick around

[OneMoreFarang]

21 minutes ago, PremiumLane said:

10 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

What's next? Can I marry my favorite pet?

well I just read the dumbest thing on the Internet today

How old are you?

Imagine 30 years ago if a gay guy would have suggested marrying his partner and adopting babies. I am sure someone would have thought: well I just read the dumbest thing on the Internet today

 

But it seems these days people just have to have certain opinions. And dare to question those so called progressives.

Maybe I am just getting too old for this s@#t.

[RJRS1301]

2 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I don't complain if you get all the things which you describe in your last paragraph. My concern are children, and especially babies which are adopted by couples who could by nature not have children. If guys want to play with guys and women with women, fine. But leave kids out of that equation. You can't have kids in same sex couples. Accept it!

 

And about comparing same sex couples to my love for my pets: Why can't I compare that? I am not f#$#%$ing my pets. I just enjoy life with them. Like I mentioneloea matewed to even question the idea of same sex couples. So what was completely unacceptable not too many years ago is now supposed to be as normal as male/female. It isn't the same. And it will never be the same. And this is not like black and white. There are lots of shades to this. I.e. IMHO relations are ok, marriage is ok, but  don't bring children in such a same sex relationship. Think about what is good for the children.

Hello. get some knowledge, the offspring of same sex raised children, are now parents themselves in some cases as I type. 

Making  the original same sexed couples with children ( how ever conceived) grandparents, just like you.

Some probably together longer or equally as long as their heterosexual counterparts.

"Normal" by the way changes , as does societal concepts and constructs. 

It was once "normal" to own slaves and trade them on Saturday at the market, this no longer acceptable, life has moved on.

Marriage is a social construct, devised to own chattels and others, that concept has changed

You are aware that in western society 48% of heterosexual marriages, fail in the first 10 years? 

Children are often part of those divorcing couples, and therefore end up in one parent families.

Trying to take a high moral ground on marriage because of children is a false equivocation.

 

 

 

 

[OneMoreFarang]

42 minutes ago, RJRS1301 said:

Hello. get some knowledge, the offspring of same sex raised children, are now parents themselves in some cases as I type. 

Making  the original same sexed couples with children ( how ever conceived) grandparents, just like you.

Some probably together longer or equally as long as their heterosexual counterparts.

"Normal" by the way changes , as does societal concepts and constructs. 

It was once "normal" to own slaves and trade them on Saturday at the market, this no longer acceptable, life has moved on.

Marriage is a social construct, devised to own chattels and others, that concept has changed

You are aware that in western society 48% of heterosexual marriages, fail in the first 10 years? 

Children are often part of those divorcing couples, and therefore end up in one parent families.

Trying to take a high moral ground on marriage because of children is a false equivocation.

So how normal is it for a child in school to have no mother but two fathers? I read often in the news that kids get bullied in school for lots of reasons which should be no issue at all. But it happens, all the time. I don't even want to think about being a child at school and having to explain to the others that I don't have a mother but two fathers. How many of the children will accept that as normal? And how many will think that is a perfect reason to bully that child with two fathers?

[RJRS1301]

12 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

So how normal is it for a child in school to have no mother but two fathers? I read often in the news that kids get bullied in school for lots of reasons which should be no issue at all. But it happens, all the time. I don't even want to think about being a child at school and having to explain to the others that I don't have a mother but two fathers. How many of the children will accept that as normal? And how many will think that is a perfect reason to bully that child with two fathers?

Children bully because of perceived weakness and difference, generally because they have learned about these matters at home. 

Possibly in a negative biased manner, this in turn may lead to unacceptable behaviour from children, however does that explain bigotry from adults?

 

[OneMoreFarang]

13 minutes ago, RJRS1301 said:

Children bully because of perceived weakness and difference, generally because they have learned about these matters at home. 

Possibly in a negative biased manner, this in turn may lead to unacceptable behaviour from children, however does that explain bigotry from adults?

Fact is that any child which grows up with two fathers and no mother will suffer a lot. We can argue that this shouldn't be like that. But in reality it will be like that. So why would two gay guys adopt a child knowing that that child will suffer? It's egoism of the gay guys. They obviously don't care.

[pacovl46]

It’s only a technical formality. They’ll get there. Thailand is one of the most, if not THE most accepting nation on the planet when it comes to LGBT & Co. issues! 

[pacovl46]

2 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Fact is that any child which grows up with two fathers and no mother will suffer a lot. We can argue that this shouldn't be like that. But in reality it will be like that. So why would two gay guys adopt a child knowing that that child will suffer? It's egoism of the gay guys. They obviously don't care.

Wow! You should go back to the Stone Age so you can be with your prehistoric opinions on subject matters you clearly know nothing about! 

[pacovl46]

11 hours ago, Pedrogaz said:

I'm in the JK Rowling camp here. There are only two sexes. If you create by surgery a third sex, it is like an artificial flower, ie not natural. 

Whether they can marry some sexes I really don't care about, because I think marriage itself is nonsense, just live together whether sex sex or not.

Spoken like someone who simply can’t even imagine the possibility that there might be something else as well! Are you psychic? Can you look into their heads and see how they feel? Guess not, so therefore your opinion is just that - an ignorant one! 

[balo]

This got more to do with traditions,  Thai families want to be traditional, even if they have a Tom or Ladyboy in the family.  

If you ask me I couldn't care less about a marriage as long as you can find a partner. Wouldn't work in a Western country in 2021, but TIT. 




 

[jvs]

6 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Think about what is good for the children.

All children need is a loving environment where they receive love,care and nourishment for both

body and soul.

It does not matter if the love comes from a man and a woman,two men or two women.

 

[placeholder]

14 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

They didn't allow same sex marriages. But same sex relationships are allowed and common. What's the problem?

Personally I have no problem with people of all shades of LBGT+/- whatever. Live and let live and all that.

 

But why do many people pretend those relationships are just as normal as male/female relationships? I.e. when two gay guys adopt children. Who is the mother? How about breast feeding and all those natural things? It seems some people think all people should be allowed to do anything. Really?

 

What's next? Can I marry my favorite pet? Can we adopt children? You might think I am crazy and that has nothing to do with reality. But think twice. Not long ago nobody would have imagined gay guys marrying and adopting children. Now it's not just described as normal. Now people who don't think it is normal are attacked for their position.

 

How about accepting people like they are. Hetero people can accept that LBGT exist. And LBGT should also accept that not everybody wants to support anything what they want.

Marriage affords legal protection. In the states, before gay marriage, that meant if one of the pair became gravely ill, the family could exclude the other person from seeing their partner. 

How about when a woman gets pregnant and raises a child by herself. Who is the father?

So if a heterosexual couple adopts a child will the woman be able to breastfeed the baby? If not, I guess she's not really the mother, either, right?

Why do you liken gay people to other species of animal. When gay people marry, do you not understand that its 2 adult human beings tying the knot?

As long as people who don't think it's normal don't try and stop gay people from marrying in countries where they can, who cares what they think? There are people out there who still support a husband's right to beat his wife. As long as they don't try to enact their beliefs into law, and don't carry out their beliefs into practice, who cares?

I can just imagine your argument applied during the civil rights era:

White people accept that colored people exist. And colored people should also accept that not everybody wants to support anything they want.

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

Marriage affords legal protection. In the states, before gay marriage, that meant if one of the pair became gravely ill, the family could exclude the other person from seeing their partner. 

How about when a woman gets pregnant and raises a child by herself. Who is the father?

So if a heterosexual couple adopts a child will the woman be able to breastfeed the baby? If not, I guess she's not really the mother, either, right?

Why do you liken gay people to other species of animal. When gay people marry, do you not understand that its 2 adult human beings tying the knot?

As long as people who don't think it's normal don't try and stop gay people from marrying in countries where they can, who cares what they think? There are people out there who still support a husband's right to beat his wife. As long as they don't try to enact their beliefs into law, and don't carry out their beliefs into practice, who cares?

I can just imagine your argument applied during the civil rights era:

White people accept that colored people exist. And colored people should also accept that not everybody wants to support anything they want.

What does the scholarly research say about the well-being of children with gay or lesbian parents?

https://whatweknow.inequality.cornell.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-wellbeing-of-children-with-gay-or-lesbian-parents/

[OneMoreFarang]

2 hours ago, pacovl46 said:

Wow! You should go back to the Stone Age so you can be with your prehistoric opinions on subject matters you clearly know nothing about! 

From Wikipedia: Stone Age - The Stone Age was a broad prehistoric period during which stone was widely used to make tools with an edge, a point, or a percussion surface. The period lasted for roughly 3.4 million years, 

 

Now considering the last 3.5 million years or so, in how much of that time were gay couples allowed to marry? About 0.00000x%? Now who of us clearly has no clue about human behavior?

[KhaoYai]

16 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

What's next? Can I marry my favorite pet?

Why not?

 

https://theprimetime.in/man-marries-cobra-believes-that-snake-was-his-dead-girlfriend/

[placeholder]

28 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Now considering the last 3.5 million years or so, in how much of that time were gay couples allowed to marry? About 0.00000x%? Now who of us clearly has no clue about human behavior?

You sure about that?

History of same-sex unions

"Same-sex unions were known in Ancient Greece and Rome,[2] ancient Mesopotamia,[3] in some regions of China, such as Fujian province, and at certain times in ancient European history.[4]

Same-sex marital practices and rituals were more recognized in Mesopotamia than in ancient Egypt. The Almanac of Incantations contained prayers favoring on an equal basis the love of a man for a woman and of a man for man.[5]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_same-sex_unions

 

And can you please share with us some links pointing to the issue of whether or not same sex marriage existed in the Stone Age?

[KhaoYai]

3 hours ago, pacovl46 said:

Wow! You should go back to the Stone Age so you can be with your prehistoric opinions on subject matters you clearly know nothing about! 

Rubbish, not all of us agree with what's going on at the moment.  I have gay people in my family and one gay friend - I have no problems with accepting their sexuality as long as its not 'in my face'. I would defend their rights (normal rights) in exactly the same way as I would for anyone in the family.

 

I think that gay/lesbian couples should be allowed to marry each other if they so wish and in doing so, be afforded the same legal rights as hetrosexual couples - why not?  What I don't support is their insistence that they are normal - they are not.  That does not mean they are a lesser being than I am, it just means that they are not normal and should not/cannot be afforded some of the things that a hetrosexual couple are - adoption for example.  Same sex couples cannot produce children without outside intervention - perhaps they should accept that, it kind of goes with the territory.  Nature provided a woman with breasts so she could feed her babies. Nature did not provide a man with the means to give birth - end of.

 

I will never believe that a child, being brought up in a same sex relationship is in a healthy situation.  It must screw with their understanding and will almost certainly leave them open to taunts and bullying by their peers - known causes of mental health problems later in life.  I accept that some children are not brought up correctly in a normal family situation but I like to think that's the exception rather than the rule.

 

I consider myself to be fairly liberal but I also think there are limits and that social norms have their place. As well as gay/lesbian couples wanting acceptance perhaps they should also do some accepting themselves?  One of the reasons I rarely watch mainstream TV these days is because I'm sick of watching 2 blokes kissing in the middle of some series or other that I'd previously enjoyed - all in the name of being PC.  Pop stars with beards wearing dresses and make-up, drag queens, camp weather presenters and all sorts of odd behaviour seems to actually be being promoted. Such stuff literally makes me want to throw up, don't I have rights? Shouldn't gay/lesbian people also accept that? There should be gay/lesbian TV channels.

 

Like the poster you're having a go at, I also wonder where it will all end, what's next?

 

You will note I did not mention trans people above - that's a whole other subject.  In the UK we now have a growing number of trans people wishing to be changed back!!!  I think there's a good case for considering whether or not the whole matter is phsycological rather than genetic.

Edited November 18, 2021 by KhaoYai

[KhaoYai]

7 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

But it seems these days people just have to have certain opinions. And dare to question those so called progressives.

Maybe I am just getting too old for this s@#t.

No you're not - I believe the majority feel the same way.  They stay silent because if they say anything they are told they're out of step and in some cases, leave themselves open to prosecution for discrimination.

[Neeranam]

20 hours ago, MaiDong said:

Puangpetch Hengkham and Permsak Saeung absolutely should be able to have their marriage recognised, what century do we live in anyway?

Don't answer that, it was rhetorical..open to legitimate sarcasm. 

Are you criticizing Thailand? 

 

I wonder what country you come from; the USA didn't make it legal in all states until just 6 years ago. The UK 7 years ago. 

 

Thailand is usually about 20-40 years behind the West in many areas, so in this area, the country is doing pretty well considering it is a developing nation.  

[Neeranam]

18 hours ago, TunnelRat69 said:

I suppose it is akin to "It''s their country, their rules"   Thailand has a long way to go, let's face it, wasn't long ago when they tore out the centerfold out of Playboy magazine, and advertisers could go to jail for showing Girls in their underwear, or cloud out someone smoking a cigarette on TV.............Step by Step.

Absolutely, ever heard of cultural differences? 

Some countries didn't let blacks in certain swimming pools or to sit at the front of a bus. Some countries never let coloured people vote, and this is in my lifetime. 

Some countries stone people to death. 

Some countries practice cannibalism. 

 

Thailand is doing very nicely in the grand scheme of things. 

 

[Neeranam]

7 hours ago, RobU said:

Woke bullying doesn't work in Thailand

It certainly doesn't. It seems to be working in the USA and UK though. 

[Mr Derek]

14 hours ago, wombat said:

I'm a female trapped in a man's body.

I love women.

I used to feel like a man trapped in a woman's body.

And then I was born.

 

[joke credit: Vic Reeves]

[Neeranam]

18 hours ago, Jerno said:

And they say they want Thailand to become 1st world country.  Better get a bit more open-minded then.  Idiots.

Do you mean copy the idiot US who made it legal 6 years ago, or the idiots in the UK, 7 years ago?

 

Who are you actually insulting, the  government or the Thai people?

[Neeranam]

15 hours ago, Pedrogaz said:

This is an interesting point. Personally I am turned on by seeing two women kissing or having sex, whereas I cringe when I see two men kissing or holding hands. I'm not saying it means anything but is my innate reaction.

I cringe when I see two people of any sex kissing in public.