Hope for same-sex marriage still a faint glimmer in Thailand

[Longwood50]

55 minutes ago, newnative said:

reasons to deny someone the same benefits you have.

Thank you for your very civil reply.  However, I never said I was in favor of denying any benefits. I am totally for two people of the same sex have the same 'RIGHTS AND BENEFITS" but not the same term to describe their union. 

What I said was that we use terms to differentiate differences in almost every aspect of life.  Blonde, Brunette, Asian, Caucasian.  What I have repeatedly said, I am for whatever union you wish to call a life partnership between two people of the same sex, but I am not for calling it a marriage.  I "might" even go so far as to agree to two marriage certificates with one labeled Heterosexual Marriage, and one Same Sex Marriage.  

 

Your comments make "some sense" but your theory of some sort of imprinting I just don't believe.  Who a person is "attracted to" is a matter of personal opinion and choice.  If I like younger women is that "imprinted" on me.  If I like heavy women is that "imprinted" on me.  If I prefer Asians over Hispanics is that "imprinted" on me.  If I am dishonest  is that "imprinted" on me.  If I am a "rapists" is that behavior "imprinted" on me.  I believe this notion of that someone is "predestined" to be gay is nothing more than a mental coping exercise designed to provide some pretense for a sexual preference that they have not completely accepted as acceptable.  It is no different than the black person who doesn't get the job.  It is easier to blame racism than accept the fact that they were not the most qualified candidate for the job. 

No, we all make choices and the choice to be attracted to another person of the same sex, is absolutely no different than the person who has an attraction to younger women, Blondes versus Redheads,  

Now as for "equal" rights.  I am totally for Equal rights for everyone, and preferential rights to NO ONE. 

When governments starts mandating that company boards "must have" a certain portion of their board being of a particular race or sexual orientation, that is "preferential".  When laws are passed that mandate that LGBT curriculum must be taught in pre-schools or lose federal funding.  That is not equal.  That is discrimination and indoctrination. 

If I am terminated from my job and what I truly want is my "benefits"  I can care less if the agreement is termed a separation agreement, a non disclosure agreement, an agreement not to sue, a termination agreement.  So long as the benefits I receive are identical.  However, the LGTB community could care less about any legal union that truly conveys equal rights.  They really want the term "marriage" to convey to others that the union has the same public perception as a heterosexual couple and that the same sex union is "normal"  No mind you I did not say deviant, but normal it is not.  Normal is when something is manifested by the majority, and abnormal is when it is a behavior only manifesting itself by a small percentage. 

My complaint is not that people are gay, or that they want the "rights" of others.  My complaint is the constant call for "special treatment" and "special recognition"   I don't ask that you see the heterosexual flag flying over the U.S. embassies, I don't ask that you have a special heterosexual pride month, I don't ask for special legislation that endures benefits to only heterosexuals.  So don't do the opposite to me. 

 

[newnative]

5 hours ago, Longwood50 said:

Thank you for your very civil reply.  However, I never said I was in favor of denying any benefits. I am totally for two people of the same sex have the same 'RIGHTS AND BENEFITS" but not the same term to describe their union. 

What I said was that we use terms to differentiate differences in almost every aspect of life.  Blonde, Brunette, Asian, Caucasian.  What I have repeatedly said, I am for whatever union you wish to call a life partnership between two people of the same sex, but I am not for calling it a marriage.  I "might" even go so far as to agree to two marriage certificates with one labeled Heterosexual Marriage, and one Same Sex Marriage.  

 

Your comments make "some sense" but your theory of some sort of imprinting I just don't believe.  Who a person is "attracted to" is a matter of personal opinion and choice.  If I like younger women is that "imprinted" on me.  If I like heavy women is that "imprinted" on me.  If I prefer Asians over Hispanics is that "imprinted" on me.  If I am dishonest  is that "imprinted" on me.  If I am a "rapists" is that behavior "imprinted" on me.  I believe this notion of that someone is "predestined" to be gay is nothing more than a mental coping exercise designed to provide some pretense for a sexual preference that they have not completely accepted as acceptable.  It is no different than the black person who doesn't get the job.  It is easier to blame racism than accept the fact that they were not the most qualified candidate for the job. 

No, we all make choices and the choice to be attracted to another person of the same sex, is absolutely no different than the person who has an attraction to younger women, Blondes versus Redheads,  

Now as for "equal" rights.  I am totally for Equal rights for everyone, and preferential rights to NO ONE. 

When governments starts mandating that company boards "must have" a certain portion of their board being of a particular race or sexual orientation, that is "preferential".  When laws are passed that mandate that LGBT curriculum must be taught in pre-schools or lose federal funding.  That is not equal.  That is discrimination and indoctrination. 

If I am terminated from my job and what I truly want is my "benefits"  I can care less if the agreement is termed a separation agreement, a non disclosure agreement, an agreement not to sue, a termination agreement.  So long as the benefits I receive are identical.  However, the LGTB community could care less about any legal union that truly conveys equal rights.  They really want the term "marriage" to convey to others that the union has the same public perception as a heterosexual couple and that the same sex union is "normal"  No mind you I did not say deviant, but normal it is not.  Normal is when something is manifested by the majority, and abnormal is when it is a behavior only manifesting itself by a small percentage. 

My complaint is not that people are gay, or that they want the "rights" of others.  My complaint is the constant call for "special treatment" and "special recognition"   I don't ask that you see the heterosexual flag flying over the U.S. embassies, I don't ask that you have a special heterosexual pride month, I don't ask for special legislation that endures benefits to only heterosexuals.  So don't do the opposite to me. 

 

     It's not my 'theory'.   I was relaying the latest scientific research.   You're welcome to believe what you believe but it's not backed up by science.  I'm curious about one thing.  With your belief that we just choose to be gay, why do you suppose conversion therapy doesn't work?  If it's just a choice, shouldn't the therapy easily work--especially since anyone doing the therapy in the first place would be a highly motivated person strongly wanting to 'convert'?   Should be a breeze.  Instead, failure.  Something's not adding up with your choice of choice.  

     Nice you support civil unions.  I would be happy with civil unions as a start in Thailand as long as that meant the same rights for straight and gay couples.  I think many gays want only gay marriage for the same reasons you don't want them to have it.

     The rest of your post does not really relate to gay marriage.  I will say that preferential treatment (nothing to do with gay marriage) is not new.  My father liked to tell the story of when he took an exam to become a mailman sometime during the Great Depression.  He scored the highest of the people taking the test and should have gotten the job.  But, a veteran was also taking the test and, as a veteran, he was awarded 10 extra points, which put his score higher and he got the job.  Happy ending though.  My Dad got a job working for the Department of Defense and ended up with a much more interesting and challenging job that took him, and his family, all over the World.  C'est la vie.

[Longwood50]

1 hour ago, newnative said:

It's not my 'theory'.   I was relaying the latest scientific research.

You are going to have to show me this "new research"  Most conclusions are contrived to show the outcome desired by whoever funded the research. 

As to why therapy does not work,  give me a break.  We have alcoholics that don't respond to therapy, we have criminals who don't rehabilitate, we have pedophiles that don't respond to therapy, we have drug addicts that don't respond to therapy to say nothing of smoking. 

Again, the fact that one person is physically attracted to another of their own sex should be viewed no differently than someone who finds a person with a large derrière physically attractive, or who is into bondage and finds that activity "stimulating"  

It just seems that this " I was born " to be gay is indeed some sort of self medication that soothes whatever reservations a person has about being gay. 

Whether the person is born to be gay which I seriously doubt, or they select to be gay.  My position really doesn't change.  I want "equal rights" for everyone and "special rights" for no one.  

I do not want a person who is Christian, Muslim, Hindu, or any other faith to try and indoctrinate me or the public.  I find it hugely discriminatory if the flag of BLM matter flies over the embassy and gets a kneeling adoration from congress to the exclusion of non blacks.  I find that all the legislation is really nothing more than reverse discrimination intended to somehow address differences in the workforce or colleges.  The people most impacted by colleges are Asians who don't get into schools because of slots targeted for minorities.  Well if that is ok then why not target schools like Tuskegee or Howard that are almost exclusively black to take in a targeted percentage of whites.  If black only scholarships are OK then why not white only colleges.  If it is fine to have a congressional black caucus then why not a congressional  white caucus.   If the gays and BLM were considered religions the government would be barred from providing any support or preferential treatment.  Frankly Gay Pride, and BLM are "belief systems" not terribly different than religions except for the lack of a deity. 

To beat a dead horse, I am totally for whether Lesbian, Gay, Bi or Trans having exactly and I mean exactly the same rights as heterosexual couples.  But they should not be treated any differently that those who choose to be celibate, or those who are heterosexual.  That means no "special months" where the government pushes us to not tolerate but celebrate the lifestyle.  The government by flying the gay pride flag symbolizing alliance is blatantly discriminating against the 95% of the population that is not LGBT.  Not only that, no other country has ever received that honor of their flag flying over the embassies for one month.  Finally, it is stated in code that the US flag should always be the highest on the flagpole, fly separately from any other flag, and be the largest flag on the flagpole symbolic of its higher place of recognition.  All of those were disregarded in some embassies where the USA flag was not the largest, not at the top of the flag pole and not flying separately. 

You obviously believe the term "marriage" to by of symbolic importance.  I find the actions that openly promote the alternative lifestyle to by "symbolic" 

Edited December 24, 2021 by Longwood50

[ikke1959]

9 hours ago, Longwood50 said:

Thank you for your very civil reply.  However, I never said I was in favor of denying any benefits. I am totally for two people of the same sex have the same 'RIGHTS AND BENEFITS" but not the same term to describe their union. 

What I said was that we use terms to differentiate differences in almost every aspect of life.  Blonde, Brunette, Asian, Caucasian.  What I have repeatedly said, I am for whatever union you wish to call a life partnership between two people of the same sex, but I am not for calling it a marriage.  I "might" even go so far as to agree to two marriage certificates with one labeled Heterosexual Marriage, and one Same Sex Marriage.  

 

Your comments make "some sense" but your theory of some sort of imprinting I just don't believe.  Who a person is "attracted to" is a matter of personal opinion and choice.  If I like younger women is that "imprinted" on me.  If I like heavy women is that "imprinted" on me.  If I prefer Asians over Hispanics is that "imprinted" on me.  If I am dishonest  is that "imprinted" on me.  If I am a "rapists" is that behavior "imprinted" on me.  I believe this notion of that someone is "predestined" to be gay is nothing more than a mental coping exercise designed to provide some pretense for a sexual preference that they have not completely accepted as acceptable.  It is no different than the black person who doesn't get the job.  It is easier to blame racism than accept the fact that they were not the most qualified candidate for the job. 

No, we all make choices and the choice to be attracted to another person of the same sex, is absolutely no different than the person who has an attraction to younger women, Blondes versus Redheads,  

Now as for "equal" rights.  I am totally for Equal rights for everyone, and preferential rights to NO ONE. 

When governments starts mandating that company boards "must have" a certain portion of their board being of a particular race or sexual orientation, that is "preferential".  When laws are passed that mandate that LGBT curriculum must be taught in pre-schools or lose federal funding.  That is not equal.  That is discrimination and indoctrination. 

If I am terminated from my job and what I truly want is my "benefits"  I can care less if the agreement is termed a separation agreement, a non disclosure agreement, an agreement not to sue, a termination agreement.  So long as the benefits I receive are identical.  However, the LGTB community could care less about any legal union that truly conveys equal rights.  They really want the term "marriage" to convey to others that the union has the same public perception as a heterosexual couple and that the same sex union is "normal"  No mind you I did not say deviant, but normal it is not.  Normal is when something is manifested by the majority, and abnormal is when it is a behavior only manifesting itself by a small percentage. 

My complaint is not that people are gay, or that they want the "rights" of others.  My complaint is the constant call for "special treatment" and "special recognition"   I don't ask that you see the heterosexual flag flying over the U.S. embassies, I don't ask that you have a special heterosexual pride month, I don't ask for special legislation that endures benefits to only heterosexuals.  So don't do the opposite to me. 

 

I agree, but gay people are not treated as equals and want the same rights. It starts already that gay people have to tell that they are gay... Ever heard of a hetero said to the family and friends.. Hee I am a hetero... So same rights is the same... can not because you are not mixed couple.. and so on. 

[newnative]

9 hours ago, Longwood50 said:

You are going to have to show me this "new research"  Most conclusions are contrived to show the outcome desired by whoever funded the research. 

As to why therapy does not work,  give me a break.  We have alcoholics that don't respond to therapy, we have criminals who don't rehabilitate, we have pedophiles that don't respond to therapy, we have drug addicts that don't respond to therapy to say nothing of smoking. 

Again, the fact that one person is physically attracted to another of their own sex should be viewed no differently than someone who finds a person with a large derrière physically attractive, or who is into bondage and finds that activity "stimulating"  

It just seems that this " I was born " to be gay is indeed some sort of self medication that soothes whatever reservations a person has about being gay. 

Whether the person is born to be gay which I seriously doubt, or they select to be gay.  My position really doesn't change.  I want "equal rights" for everyone and "special rights" for no one.  

I do not want a person who is Christian, Muslim, Hindu, or any other faith to try and indoctrinate me or the public.  I find it hugely discriminatory if the flag of BLM matter flies over the embassy and gets a kneeling adoration from congress to the exclusion of non blacks.  I find that all the legislation is really nothing more than reverse discrimination intended to somehow address differences in the workforce or colleges.  The people most impacted by colleges are Asians who don't get into schools because of slots targeted for minorities.  Well if that is ok then why not target schools like Tuskegee or Howard that are almost exclusively black to take in a targeted percentage of whites.  If black only scholarships are OK then why not white only colleges.  If it is fine to have a congressional black caucus then why not a congressional  white caucus.   If the gays and BLM were considered religions the government would be barred from providing any support or preferential treatment.  Frankly Gay Pride, and BLM are "belief systems" not terribly different than religions except for the lack of a deity. 

To beat a dead horse, I am totally for whether Lesbian, Gay, Bi or Trans having exactly and I mean exactly the same rights as heterosexual couples.  But they should not be treated any differently that those who choose to be celibate, or those who are heterosexual.  That means no "special months" where the government pushes us to not tolerate but celebrate the lifestyle.  The government by flying the gay pride flag symbolizing alliance is blatantly discriminating against the 95% of the population that is not LGBT.  Not only that, no other country has ever received that honor of their flag flying over the embassies for one month.  Finally, it is stated in code that the US flag should always be the highest on the flagpole, fly separately from any other flag, and be the largest flag on the flagpole symbolic of its higher place of recognition.  All of those were disregarded in some embassies where the USA flag was not the largest, not at the top of the flag pole and not flying separately. 

You obviously believe the term "marriage" to by of symbolic importance.  I find the actions that openly promote the alternative lifestyle to by "symbolic" 

        I think you found the study I was referring to.  As I said in my earlier post, the study did not find a specific 'gay gene'.  Instead, it found that hundreds and in some cases thousands of genes play a role in sexual orientations.  Other earlier studies have also shown that genetics play a role. This study indicates the role is limited, perhaps a third or less, but it is still a role.  To say genetics plays no role is false.  

       It's interesting that you use alcoholics being unsuccessful in quitting to explain conversion therapy not working for gays.  But, here's something interesting.  Alcoholism is strongly linked to genetics, and two genes for alcoholism have been identified.  So, actually, your argument proves my point more than yours.  It's difficult for alcoholics to quit because it's in their genes.  Same for gays. 

    Your argument that some gays want to see genetics as a reason for being gay because they are ashamed of being gay is, sorry, rather laughable.  Again, if it's just a choice, why would someone with those feelings choose to be gay?  It just doesn't make any sense.  I wonder, by the way, if you chose to be straight or do you think you were just born that way.  

      One thing I failed to mention in my earlier post is your repeated statements that we choose blondes or brunettes, big butt, etc.  What you fail to include is blonde what?  Blonde male or blonde female?  What makes you choose a male or a female to begin with?  Research shows that genetics plays a role in your sexual preference.  Other factors, such as life experiences, environment, and psychology, also contribute and can play a role in your preference for a blonde.

      In my case, I lived in Japan during my teen years.  While genes contributed to my sexual preference for men, I believe living in Japan likely contributed to my attraction to Asian men.  So, life experiences and environment likely playing a role, too.  I find it all interesting and fascinating.  And, as the study found, very complex.  

[Longwood50]

30 minutes ago, newnative said:

  Alcoholism is strongly linked to genetics,

Yes alcoholism is linked to genetics  That does not by default that because alcoholism is genetically linked and difficult to cure, that somehow proves that being gay must be genetically linked because it is a difficult lifestyle to abandon.

Pedophilia is difficult to cure, rapist are difficult to be rehabilitated,  gambling is difficult to stop, pornography is difficult to overcome.  Are all of these "genetically" linked traits. 

I happen to like Asian women, slight built, and medium shade complexion with a pretty smile.  Oh, I must be predestined genetically to be predisposed to that choice .  Bull Pucky.

I don't know why you are fighting so hard to say gays are imprinted.  If it is a choice, so what.  

As mentioned my gripe is not that the person is gay, but the fact that it gets constantly shoved in my face.  That is a uniquely gay trait that somehow they feel compelled to share to the world their sexual preference and ask them to regale in it.  I don't want 7th day Adventists shoving their religious beliefs at me, I don't want a person who lets say is a communist attempt to force their political ideology on me, and finally, I don't want someone attempting to indoctrinate the public or me and the joy of being gay.  Live your life, keep your sexuality like your sexual organs to yourself.  I doubt you care my "sexual preference" why would you think that others care about yours. 

Now as to preference, this is what I was talking about.  Now be honest,  if the states required "heterosexual history" would you not feel discriminated against.  Further, it is a family's role to raise their children as they sit fit, and not be indoctrinated and that is the term indoctrinated by the public school system.  They should not be teaching religion, politics or showcasing "sexual preference"  

 

As part of the Build Back better act, it was shoved by LGBT groups to include a provision that withholds federal grant money if LGBT curriculum was not taught in the pre schools.  That sir is brainwashing. Again, please tell me you would not be outraged if a similar provision was included that withheld money from schools if they did not have an anti-gay curriculum, or a pro heterosexuality curriculum.  

Equal rights and privileges for everyone, special rights and privileges for no one. 


 

Edited December 25, 2021 by Longwood50

[Neeranam]

On 12/13/2021 at 7:36 AM, OneMoreFarang said:

The minority, the LGBTQ+/- whatever, do in Thailand more or less what they want. I see them everyday on the streets and they don't seems to be very suppressed.

I sometimes discriminate against ladyboys, as in my experience they are very annoying, in fact even to the point of sexual harassment, like a barber a while ago who asked to see me penis, or the group of them that mugged me in Bangkok. They seem to think that just as I have white skin, I am attracted to them. Well I suspect it is my skin, it could be my good looks, I suppose ???? I don't think they should be lumped together. I am all for equal rights of gay, which includes lesbians. Everyone is bisexual to a degree. Ladyboys are freaks of nature and the woke countries have gone too far, like the male swimmer in the US who thinks he has the right to break all the female swimmers' records.  He has mental problems and in fact Gender Dysphoria is in the DSM5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)

[Neeranam]

On 12/21/2021 at 3:34 PM, Mr Dome said:

Anyway, since you're from the US, gay marriage has been legal there since 2015.

That's only 6 years! 

 

I was talking to a wise person this week who said that ladyboys are as they are due to their previous lives. Perhaps it is similar to alcoholism, in that there is a spiritual facet to the condition. 

[newnative]

54 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

Yes alcoholism is linked to genetics  That does not by default that because alcoholism is genetically linked and difficult to cure, that somehow proves that being gay must be genetically linked because it is a difficult lifestyle to abandon.

Pedophilia is difficult to cure, rapist are difficult to be rehabilitated,  gambling is difficult to stop, pornography is difficult to overcome.  Are all of these "genetically" linked traits. 

I happen to like Asian women, slight built, and medium shade complexion with a pretty smile.  Oh, I must be predestined genetically to be predisposed to that choice .  Bull Pucky.

I don't know why you are fighting so hard to say gays are imprinted.  If it is a choice, so what.  

As mentioned my gripe is not that the person is gay, but the fact that it gets constantly shoved in my face.  That is a uniquely gay trait that somehow they feel compelled to share to the world their sexual preference and ask them to regale in it.  I don't want 7th day Adventists shoving their religious beliefs at me, I don't want a person who lets say is a communist attempt to force their political ideology on me, and finally, I don't want someone attempting to indoctrinate the public or me and the joy of being gay.  Live your life, keep your sexuality like your sexual organs to yourself.  I doubt you care my "sexual preference" why would you think that others care about yours. 

Now as to preference, this is what I was talking about.  Now be honest,  if the states required "heterosexual history" would you not feel discriminated against.  Further, it is a family's role to raise their children as they sit fit, and not be indoctrinated and that is the term indoctrinated by the public school system.  They should not be teaching religion, politics or showcasing "sexual preference"  

 

As part of the Build Back better act, it was shoved by LGBT groups to include a provision that withholds federal grant money if LGBT curriculum was not taught in the pre schools.  That sir is brainwashing. Again, please tell me you would not be outraged if a similar provision was included that withheld money from schools if they did not have an anti-gay curriculum, or a pro heterosexuality curriculum.  

Equal rights and privileges for everyone, special rights and privileges for no one. 


 

       You seem to misread or pretend to misread.   Nowhere did I say that my liking for Asian men could be traced to genetics.  My sexual preference for men?  Yes.  Linked to genetics by science.  My sexual preference specifically for Asian men?  No, not linked to genetics by any scientific research I am aware of.  Nor have I ever used the word 'imprinted'.  I specifically said my preference for liking Asian men I think has to do with environment and my life experiences--the 'environment' in my case being Japan and my 'life experience' being that I lived there in my teens.  Genetics, environment, life experiences, biology, and other factors have all been found to be contributors to sexual preferences.

[Mr Dome]

2 hours ago, Neeranam said:

I sometimes discriminate against ladyboys, as in my experience they are very annoying, in fact even to the point of sexual harassment, like a barber a while ago who asked to see me penis, or the group of them that mugged me in Bangkok. They seem to think that just as I have white skin, I am attracted to them. Well I suspect it is my skin, it could be my good looks, I suppose ???? I don't think they should be lumped together. I am all for equal rights of gay, which includes lesbians. Everyone is bisexual to a degree. Ladyboys are freaks of nature and the woke countries have gone too far, like the male swimmer in the US who thinks he has the right to break all the female swimmers' records.  He has mental problems and in fact Gender Dysphoria is in the DSM5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)

For me, it all comes down to individual behavior. I couldn't care less where someone is from, what they look like, who they find attractive or whatever, just be nice & kind.

I wouldn't call your reaction discrimination. It's only natural to get a little weary after bad encounters, as long as you keep an open mind that they are not all like that.

[Longwood50]

3 hours ago, newnative said:

other factors have all been found to be contributors to sexual preferences.

Some people like vegetables, some like red meat, some like chicken, some like fish.  Those are preferences.  No, I never meant to infer your preference for Asian men was genetically linked.  Quite the opposite, I don't think a persons "preferences" are inherited traits.  We have for reasons unexplained preferences on how we dress, on the type of car we drive, on the style of home we prefer, on the climate we like.  I don't know why it is so difficult for gays to come to the realization that no they are not predestined or imprinted they just happen to prefer same sex over opposite sex.  To which I say, so what.  As previously mentioned but worth repeating.  The world does not care about how I revel in my sexual preference.  The public is not suppose to fawn over the fact that I am a heterosexual.  The world does not believe that I or any other heterosexuals should be actively indoctrinating them or their children on my lifestyle.  Why do gays think that somehow the world is interested in their sexual preference  I don't care about their preference in any aspect of their lives and I certainly am not deluded to think they care abut mine. 

Now to pose a question.  If you truly believe that somehow you were "imprinted" by genetics to be gay, then why the push for "education" of the youth.  All that needs to be taught is tolerance of the lifestyle and nothing more.  After all there is nothing to teach only that some DNA causes the same sex preference, and you either have that DNA or you don't. 

Again, thank you for being civil.  Many just end up ranting and bring out the homophobe card.  I truly don't think I am.  I have no problem with what consenting adults agree to.  I have known people who are into swinging, though I am not.  I have known people who are into group sex, but I am not.  The bottom line is that your preferences not just sexual ones are yours and though important to you, are of no concern to others.  When I go to a Broadway play and it opens with some tribute to gays I get angry.  I paid to be entertained not lectured to.  Yet for whatever unexplained reason the LGBT community is constantly clamoring to not just be left to live their life but seem to be seeking public affirmation of their lifestyle to somehow validate to themselves its acceptability.  As Morgan Freeman said about Black History Month, it is ludicrous  and to end racism people just have to stop constantly reopening the divisions by talking about it.  The same is true for LGBT.  The public I truly believe has accepted that others have the right to that lifestyle.  But they don't believe that lifestyle has to be constantly thrown in our face and we are asked to kiss the ring. 

[newnative]

2 hours ago, Longwood50 said:

Some people like vegetables, some like red meat, some like chicken, some like fish.  Those are preferences.  No, I never meant to infer your preference for Asian men was genetically linked.  Quite the opposite, I don't think a persons "preferences" are inherited traits.  We have for reasons unexplained preferences on how we dress, on the type of car we drive, on the style of home we prefer, on the climate we like.  I don't know why it is so difficult for gays to come to the realization that no they are not predestined or imprinted they just happen to prefer same sex over opposite sex.  To which I say, so what.  As previously mentioned but worth repeating.  The world does not care about how I revel in my sexual preference.  The public is not suppose to fawn over the fact that I am a heterosexual.  The world does not believe that I or any other heterosexuals should be actively indoctrinating them or their children on my lifestyle.  Why do gays think that somehow the world is interested in their sexual preference  I don't care about their preference in any aspect of their lives and I certainly am not deluded to think they care abut mine. 

Now to pose a question.  If you truly believe that somehow you were "imprinted" by genetics to be gay, then why the push for "education" of the youth.  All that needs to be taught is tolerance of the lifestyle and nothing more.  After all there is nothing to teach only that some DNA causes the same sex preference, and you either have that DNA or you don't. 

Again, thank you for being civil.  Many just end up ranting and bring out the homophobe card.  I truly don't think I am.  I have no problem with what consenting adults agree to.  I have known people who are into swinging, though I am not.  I have known people who are into group sex, but I am not.  The bottom line is that your preferences not just sexual ones are yours and though important to you, are of no concern to others.  When I go to a Broadway play and it opens with some tribute to gays I get angry.  I paid to be entertained not lectured to.  Yet for whatever unexplained reason the LGBT community is constantly clamoring to not just be left to live their life but seem to be seeking public affirmation of their lifestyle to somehow validate to themselves its acceptability.  As Morgan Freeman said about Black History Month, it is ludicrous  and to end racism people just have to stop constantly reopening the divisions by talking about it.  The same is true for LGBT.  The public I truly believe has accepted that others have the right to that lifestyle.  But they don't believe that lifestyle has to be constantly thrown in our face and we are asked to kiss the ring. 

     Thank you, as well, for being civil.  I think we have both made the points we wanted to make.  In my case I wanted to correct your statement that being gay is a choice.  That is incorrect and I wanted to call attention to it.   It's important to have this clarified when discussing the topic of gay marriage, the subject of this thread, because it has been used in the past, and likely is still used, as an excuse to deny gay marriage.  As one website put it:

 

     'Anti-gay activists keenly oppose the granting of "special" civil rights protections to gay people similar to those afforded black Americans and other minorities. But if people are born gay — in the same way that people have no choice as to whether they are black or white — discrimination against gay men and lesbians would be vastly more difficult to justify. Thus, anti-gay forces insist that sexual orientation is a behavior that can be changed, not an immutable characteristic.'

 

    Obviously, those who are anti-gay can use the 'behavior that can be changed' argument to oppose more than just gay marriage.  "Just stop being gay, fella, and I won't have to fire you."  So, as I said, it's important to set the record straight. 

     Hmm.  Wait a minute.  'Set the record straight'???  My lord!  Is there no escape!  Yet another reference to being straight that I have to put up with!  When will it end!  Why can't straight people just quietly go about their business and not always be throwing being straight in my face!   Who cares if they're straight!  I don't.  Keep it to yourself!   

    Everywhere I look there are straight people flaunting their straightness by public displays of affection I can't avoid seeing.  Holding hands!  In public!  Sometimes even kissing with no warning!  In public!  Disgraceful behavior and I would even say they want to be noticed.  Look at us!  We're holding hands!  Just dreadful and clamoring for attention, in my opinion.

    But, that's not the half of it.  If I have to watch one more movie,  see one more tv show, read one more book celebrating straight people I'm going to barf.  Really, it's just too much!  I sit down to watch a play and, lo and behold, nine times out of ten it's about straight people!   How much more, as you say, 'public affirmation of their lifestyle' do I have to suffer through!  Enough already!

    All kidding aside, it would be great if there wasn't a need for things like Black History Month, Hispanic Heritage, gay events, Women's History Month, and so on.  We haven't yet reached that point.  Not too long ago a mini-series called 'Watchmen' aired.  One of the opening scenes was the Tulsa Massacre, which occurred over a two-day period in 1921.  Over 35 square blocks in a Black part of the city were burned to the ground, 800 people were injured and hospitalized, and estimates of 75 to 300 killed by White mobs.  

     One of the stars of the series, Jean Smart, has said that at first she thought it was fiction.  Me, too; I was shocked watching it.  Neither of us, as Americans, had ever heard of the Tulsa Massacre.  It wasn't in any of our American history books, we weren't taught about it, so we were ignorant of it.   Which makes me wonder what else was left out, ignored, or glossed over--and all the more reason for the above mentioned events that help educate and balance things a bit.

      

    

 

 

[Longwood50]

On 12/24/2021 at 8:07 PM, newnative said:

 I was relaying the latest scientific research. 

No you "gleaned' what you wanted and omitted the fact that the study found "NO GENE" that predestines a persons proclivity to be gay. 

Again I don't see how this is anything more than some sort of mental medication that comforts the person who is gay believing that genetically they were programmed to be gay.  Personally, I believe it is a choice, a preference.  I don't know why that is so repulsive.  Some people have a sexual preference for a particular body type, a particular hair color, a particular age group, or a particular ethnic group.  Now is that "programmed"   No, just like the article you keep referencing preference are based on a myriad of factors.   Why when we look at a person do we have the immediate mental response "oh they are attractive" versus "oh they are very homely"  That is not imprinted on us that is something we develop as we age. 

One final point coming from the perspective of a heterosexual.  I have no delusions that anyone cares about my sexual preferences.  I am not so misguided as to think that somehow showcasing those preferences to others will make them admire, respect, or convert to them. I am lost as to why the LGBT community thinks it is any different with them.  People by their very nature do not like to be prodded or preached to.  

I mentioned before I am for equal rights for everyone and special rights for no one. Consider

There is One day to celebrate and pay recognition to the life of Martin Luther King

 

There is One day to celebrate and pay recognition to two presidents Washington and Jefferson whose accomplishments of founding the USA are not deemed so unimportant that they must share a single day on Presidents Day

There is One day to celebrate and pay recognition on Memorial Day to those that fought and died for people's freedom in the USA.

There is :One day to celebrate and pay recognition on July 4, for the birth of the country and its end of servitude to another country. 

There is :One day to celebrate and pay recognition on Labor Day to those who toil daily to help create the worlds largest economy.

There is One day to celebrate and pay recognition on Veterans Day to those who served in the armed forces to protect Americans freedom. 
 

There is One day to celebrate and pay recognition on Thanksgiving Day for all the blessings bestowed on us. 

There is One day to celebrate and pay recognition on Christmas Day to the birth of Jesus who if Christian represents the savior of mankind. The number of Christians in the world living today is 2.32 billion.  So in the scheme of things the icon of the Christian Church is given only scant attention compared to the gay rights movement. 

 Somehow the public is subject to celebrate and pay recognition of Gay Pride for an entire month.  With the news media focused on the various parades and festivities celebrating and pandering to a population of the U.S. public that comprises fewer than 5%. of its citizens.  Excuse me if I don't share your enthusiasm for the lifestyle but it seems the attention drawn to it continually is way out of proportion to its significance particular when compared to the one day relegated to far more significant events.   Live your life, enjoy your lifestyle, but please stop trying to convince me to regal in it.  When someone is constantly seeking affirmation from others it only shows they are not confident of it themselves and want others to validate it. 




 

 

 

Edited December 26, 2021 by Longwood50

[newnative]

2 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

No you "gleaned' what you wanted and omitted the fact that the study found "NO GENE" that predestines a persons proclivity to be gay. 

Again I don't see how this is anything more than some sort of mental medication that comforts the person who is gay believing that genetically they were programmed to be gay.  Personally, I believe it is a choice, a preference.  I don't know why that is so repulsive.  Some people have a sexual preference for a particular body type, a particular hair color, a particular age group, or a particular ethnic group.  Now is that "programmed"   No, just like the article you keep referencing preference are based on a myriad of factors.   Why when we look at a person do we have the immediate mental response that "oh they are attractive" versus "oh they are very homely"  That is not imprinted on us that is something we develop as we age. 

One final point coming from the perspective of a heterosexual.  I have no delusions that anyone cares about my sexual preferences.  I am not so misguides as to think that somehow showcasing those preferences to others will make them admire, respect, or convert to them. I am lost as to why the LGBT community thinks it is any different with them.  People by their very nature to not like to be prodded or preached to.  

I mentioned before I am for equal rights for everyone and special rights for no one. Consider

There is One day to celebrate and pay recognition to the life of Martin Luther King

There is One day to celebrate and pay recognition to two presidents Washington and Jefferson whose accomplishments of founding the USA are not deemed so unimportant that they must share a single day on Presidents Day

There is One day to celebrate and pay recognition on Memorial Day to those that fought and died for people's freedom in the USA.

There is :One day to celebrate and pay recognition on July 4, for the birth of the country and its end of servitude to another country. 

There is :One day to celebrate and pay recognition on Labor Day to those who toil daily to help create the worlds largest economy.

There is One day to celebrate and pay recognition on Veterans Day to those who served in the armed forces to protect Americans freedom. 
 

There is One day to celebrate and pay recognition on Thanksgiving Day for all the blessings bestowed on us. 

There is One day to celebrate and pay recognition on Christmas Day to the birth of Jesus who if Christian represents the savior of mankind. The number of Christians in the world living today is 2.32 billion.  So in the scheme of things the icon of the Christian Church is given only scant attention compared to the gay rights movement. 

 Somehow the public is subject to celebrate and pay recognition of Gay Pride for an entire month.  With the news media focused on the various parades and festivities celebrating and pandering to a population of the U.S. public that comprises fewer than 5%. of its population.  Excuse me if I don't share your enthusiasm for the lifestyle but it seems the attention drawn to it continually is way out of proportion to its significance particular when compared to the one day relegated to far more significant events.   Live your life, enjoy your lifestyle, but please stop trying to convince me to regal in it.  When someone is constantly seeking affirmation from others it only shows they are not confident of it themselves and want others to validate it. 




 

 

 

    Yes, there is not a 'gay gene'.  I've said that several times.   Instead, sexuality is polygenetic, with many different genes contributing--you always ignore this and keep repeating that there is not a gene that has been identified as the specific 'gay gene'.  I explained in one of my earlier posts why this made sense---there are not just specifically straight and specifically gay people in the World.  "Here's the straight gene that makes you straight."   "Here's the gay gene that makes you gay."  That's not how it works--and I think you know that.

    The latest study found that genes (again, not just one) can make up to a third of the determination of one's sexuality.  I've already gone over all of this before--again, several times.  Other earlier studies have found that sexuality is linked to genetics, as well.  You can choose to ignore the science but it's there.  At this point I think we have both made the points we want to convey and it makes no sense to keep repeating ourselves.  

[Scott]

A post violating Fair Use Policy has been removed along with the reply.  

 

14) You will not post any copyrighted material except as fair use laws apply (as in the case of news articles). Please only post a link, the headline and the first three sentences.

 

https://aseannow.com/terms/

 

[BobBKK]

On 12/22/2021 at 11:57 PM, jak2002003 said:

Are you on the same planet as the rest of us?

 

It's obvious that we dont need 'white lives matter' as white people are rarely targeted and abuses by people of other colours due to being white as the reason.

 

Your 'heterosexual pride' is every day in bars, nightclubs...and ever time heterosexuals get married in public or are shown together on TV or in movies. 

 

There is no need to have targeted number of whites at universities...they are the majority already! 

 

Are you so ignorant that you can't understand equal rights is not preferential or more rights?

 

Take a look at what various minorites have to endure in their lives, discrimination, hate, violence and discrimination...and please have some compassion and kindness to share some of the rights you have and that you have the privilege to enjoy. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You are a very sad and mistaken individual.

[BobBKK]

On 12/24/2021 at 10:55 PM, ikke1959 said:

I agree, but gay people are not treated as equals and want the same rights. It starts already that gay people have to tell that they are gay... Ever heard of a hetero said to the family and friends.. Hee I am a hetero... So same rights is the same... can not because you are not mixed couple.. and so on. 

no one should have to say what their sexual preference is - and so you get equal rights

[MyFriend You]

On 12/12/2021 at 3:23 PM, Darksidedude said:

Dont know why this was not the first country to implement same sex marriage, gay/lesbien, transgenger are very common and excepted in Thailand and have been for century's 

Century's ??   maybe in the last 75 years.................but Asians as a whole have cross dressed, men dressing feminine, for a lot longer etc etc. The King and I comes to mind.    I too, am surprised Thailand has not enacted same sex marriage laws, I can remember in the late seventies, early eighties where it was actually seriously against the law to attack a Katoey in any manner -  the general consensus back then was gays/lesbians were somehow mentally deficient - of course we all know that is not true...............but it was a serous crime back then.     Peace