when will gay marriage be legalized?

[topswijaya]

Dear all,

 

I am just curious when the gay marriage will be legalized?

A report on LGBT

https://www.rt.com/news/579448-brown-university-lgbtq-students/

[brewsterbudgen]

Once (if...) Pita becomes PM and MF the government, then it might be on the agenda.

[Jingthing]

13 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Once (if...) Pita becomes PM and MF the government, then it might be on the agenda.

A big if.

[Jingthing]

If you've been to Providence Rhode Island you would understand there's no point in limiting your options. 

[Ben Zioner]

Should it be legalised without a referendum? As much  as I was in favour of civil partnerships would I vote against marriage. I would also support adoption of children of a previous normal marriage but only that.

 

The family is the Atom of our society, it should not be interfered with without good reason.

Edited July 10, 2023 by Ben Zioner

[Jingthing]

29 minutes ago, Ben Zioner said:

Should it be legalised without a referendum? As much  as I was in favour of civil partnerships would I vote against marriage. I would also support adoption of children of a previous normal marriage but only that.

 

The family is the Atom of our society, it should not be interfered with without good reason.

Thailand doesn't do referendums. Laws are passed by the legislators. The winning Move Forward party ran on a pro marriage equality platform.

Civil partnerships as a compromise are very passe.

I'm guessing you're not Thai so whatever retrograde limitations that you might support on marriage equality in Thailand are really of no consequence.

Edited July 10, 2023 by Jingthing

[orchis]

On 7/10/2023 at 10:56 AM, Ben Zioner said:

normal

Mr Zion-er would you consider yourself normal, and why?

[KhunLA]

Since Thai forum, assuming you mean in TH.  Why the USA survey ?

 

Answer ... not in our lifetime (in TH)

Didn't know RTnews links are allowed.

[Scott]

This is the gay forum and it is for gay related issues and is gay friendly.  It is not restricted to Thailand related issues.

 

[KhunLA]

2 hours ago, Scott said:

This is the gay forum and it is for gay related issues and is gay friendly.  It is not restricted to Thailand related issues.

 

Yea, why I specified (in TH) in my reply, as OP didn't specify where referring to, nor having a 'location' in profile, to even guess at.

 

Way too vague a question ... 200 countries.   If for USA, already legal in some states, 50 states, 50 different set of rules.

 

Maybe OP will chime back in and be a bit more specific ... location wise

Edited July 26, 2023 by KhunLA

[FruitPudding]

On 7/10/2023 at 4:20 PM, Jingthing said:

 

Civil partnerships as a compromise are very passe.

 

What benefits does marriage offer over civil partnership?

[KhunLA]

6 minutes ago, FruitPudding said:

What benefits does marriage offer over civil partnership?

None that I can see ...

... full disclosure, I'm on my 4th ????

[Ben Zioner]

12 hours ago, orchis said:

Mr Zion-er would you consider yourself normal, and why?

Hope I am not, I don't want to be boring.. But my family definitely: a man,  woman and two beautiful girls. 

 

And dear Mr or Mrs @orchis it isn't very smart nor pleasant to bait with a single word quote, even at Aseannow.

[Jingthing]

49 minutes ago, FruitPudding said:

What benefits does marriage offer over civil partnership?

Passe question.

Let me pose a question to you.

Would it be OK with you if only gay people were allowed to marry but straight people were limited to civil unions?

You likee? 

[Jingthing]

41 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

None that I can see ...

... full disclosure, I'm on my 4th ????

You don't know how to use a search engine or is it vision problems?

[KhunLA]

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

You don't know how to use a search engine or is it vision problems?

For ?

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, KhunLA said:

For ?

Game playing. You know what for. 

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

Yea, why I specified (in TH) in my reply, as OP didn't specify where referring to, nor having a 'location' in profile, to even guess at.

 

Way too vague a question ... 200 countries.   If for USA, already legal in some states, 50 states, 50 different set of rules.

 

Maybe OP will chime back in and be a bit more specific ... location wise

He was obviously asking about Thailand. Duh. 

[KhunLA]

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

Game playing. You know what for. 

No I don't, why I asked.   Just reread the replies, what am I missing ?

 

OP asked when, but no location implied, along with a US college survey.   All a bit vague.

[KhunLA]

2 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

He was obviously asking about Thailand. Duh. 

NO, that was not implied, as Scot pointed out, gay forum not TH specific.

 

If TH ... then I answered with my opinion.  IF USA, then I answered that also, correctly I think.

Edited July 26, 2023 by KhunLA

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, KhunLA said:

NO, that was not implied, as Scot pointed out, gay forum not TH specific.

 

If TH ... then I answered with my opinion.  IF USA, then I answered that also, correctly I think.

You're not posting in good faith. BYE. 

[KhunLA]

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

You're not posting in good faith. BYE. 

Seriously ... you want to be the pot or the kettle.

The link doesn't mention TH at all.

 

My mind reading ability isn't as good as yours, why I answered for both locations, TH & USA.

 

The only good faith needed, I believe.

[PremiumLane]

On 7/10/2023 at 3:56 PM, Ben Zioner said:

Should it be legalised without a referendum? As much  as I was in favour of civil partnerships would I vote against marriage. I would also support adoption of children of a previous normal marriage but only that.

 

The family is the Atom of our society, it should not be interfered with without good reason.

How will gay people having families affect or interfere with heterosexual families? 

[FruitPudding]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

Passe question.

Let me pose a question to you.

Would it be OK with you if only gay people were allowed to marry but straight people were limited to civil unions?

You likee? 

That would be absolutely fine with me.

[FruitPudding]

35 minutes ago, PremiumLane said:

How will gay people having families affect or interfere with heterosexual families? 

He didn't say that.

[Ben Zioner]

32 minutes ago, PremiumLane said:

How will gay people having families affect or interfere with heterosexual families? 

Why "interfere with heterosexual families" ?

 

The issue here is the wellbeing of their children. This is why I believe we have to be extremely cautious when we open the possibility to adopt unrelated children by gay couples. 

[Jingthing]

 

4 minutes ago, Ben Zioner said:

Why "interfere with heterosexual families" ?

 

The issue here is the wellbeing of their children. This is why I believe we have to be extremely cautious when we open the possibility to adopt unrelated children by gay couples. 

Anti gay bigots are always using "the children" as a shield. 

Better a child stay in an orphanage than be adopted into a loving gay family. 

Sure thing. 

[jayboy]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

Passe question.

Is it? As a supporter of marriage equality myself, I would have thought it well worth asking since in the UK at least civil partnership provides all the legal protections of marriage. I suppose the difference is essentially an emotional one, and that of course is important.

 

It's a minority opinion but some distinguished gay commentators, such as Mathew Parris, prefer civil partnerships over marriage.Here's Parris on the subject:

 

"I no longer see civil partnership as second-best to marriage. There’s a clarity about it: simple, and shorn of the baggage and hoopla. The estate is to become open to heterosexual couples too, and I offer you this firm prediction: more and more younger couples will choose it. Already I can think of three (straight) couples, friends who haven’t married because there’s something about that word they recoil from.

The church (most of it), Islam and much of Judaism wish to define “marriage” their way. I say let them. Leave them to bark at intrusions on their terminology. Give them their word and their barbed wire, and let us find our own words."

[Jingthing]

33 minutes ago, FruitPudding said:

That would be absolutely fine with me.

I don't know your sexual orientation but you can bet the house a scientific poll of straight people on that question would show over 99 percent would not like it.

[tgw]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

Passe question.

Let me pose a question to you.

Would it be OK with you if only gay people were allowed to marry but straight people were limited to civil unions?

You likee? 

if we remove the religious and traditional aspects from the equation, then come other questions, such as why only two people and not three or more if they all feel like marrying?

 

I'm critical vis à vis the institution of marriage already in its traditional form, I think its secular meaning (i.e. civil / legal) has been created based on religion to give a legal basis to what most people practiced. This is shown for example by the existence of different forms of marriage, such as Christian (man and woman) and Islamic (Man and n women).

 

So now there is an evolution to break out of the Judeo-Christian definition of marriage (man and women) and extend it to same sex couples. at the same time, still rejecting the idea of man + n women or why not woman + n men.

Same sex marriage also means turning away from the traditional biological family cell.

 

I'd argue the main goal/utility of the institution of marriage was to make the union more secure against threats ("temptation") so that it would give peace of mind and security to the couple to raise their children together and also guarantee "rightful" succession to titles, land ownership and businesses.

 

Security of marriage was ensured by heavy religious penalties for adultery, etc. and binding husband and wife together "forever", with very strong incentives to even endure an unsuccessful marriage.

 

But modern law has chipped away at nearly everything that was protecting marriage.

My opinion would be to rather remove marriage from civil law and put it back where it belongs: religion.

 

Edited July 26, 2023 by tgw