when will gay marriage be legalized?

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, tgw said:

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.

 

From marriage equality flows all other kinds of legal equality for LGBTQ people.

Actually getting married is not required. 

Social equality and fighting bigotry can't be legislated. 

Restricting gay people to an OTHER form of legal status is second class citizen stuff.

It's different if marriage and unions are available to ALL.

But usually the argument is not allow marriage for LGBTQ. Obviously unfair discrimination. 

[mfd101]

In post-Christian Europe many heterosexual couples now go the civil route rather than the marriage route (which is associated with religion).

 

In France for example the number of couples who are 'pacsés' (Pacte civil de solidarité) now equals the number who get 'married'. This transition has no doubt been made historically easier in France  because since the C19th everyone had to get married and registered by the local mayor first (the only marriage recognized by the State) and then they could traipse off to church for a religious ceremony if they wanted to.

 

Much the same is happening in other modern countries (eg Australia) when young people reject all the huha and the expense of a 'traditional' wedding.

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, mfd101 said:

In post-Christian Europe many heterosexual couples now go the civil route rather than the marriage route (which is associated with religion).

 

In France for example the number of couples who are 'pacsés' (Pacte civil de solidarité) now equals the number who get 'married'. This transition has no doubt been made historically easier in France  because since the C19th everyone had to get married and registered by the local mayor first (the only marriage recognized by the State) and then they could traipse off to church for a religious ceremony if they wanted to.

 

Much the same is happening in other modern countries (eg Australia) when young people reject all the huha and the expense of a 'traditional' wedding.

As I said. of BOTH marriage and unions are available to all, that's fine, because that increases choice.

But as is typical unions are offered to LGBTQ and they are banned from marrying that means LGBTQ people are treated as second class citizens. 

[FruitPudding]

42 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

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.

More rubbish.

 

99% of straight people don't even care about marriage.

 

I have better things to care about.

 

Aside of that, there's no such thing as fully equal rights in the world. I can accept that.

[Jingthing]

Just now, FruitPudding said:

More rubbish.

 

99% of straight people don't even care about marriage.

 

I have better things to care about.

 

Aside of that, there's no such thing as fully equal rights in the world. I can accept that.

Again, marriage not required. 

But all adults should have the same options.

Legal equality should at least be a goal. 

[KhunLA]

3 hours 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? 

Would have spared me 3 divorces, though they were mutual & no issues.

 

If marrying the opposite sex (male/female) wouldn't necessarily mean either or both are straight.   Maybe a new question for license applications ????

[FruitPudding]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

From marriage equality flows all other kinds of legal equality for LGBTQ people.

Bingo!

 

First, it was, "we just want to get married..."

 

Then, it was, "...and as a married couple we should have the right to have children" (whether adoption or surrogacy)

 

Now, it's "our boy is not a boy, he's a girl and needs puberty blockers" and also "we need to teach kids about anal sex in elementary schools"

 

What next?

 

Edited July 26, 2023 by FruitPudding

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, FruitPudding said:

Bingo!

 

First, it was, "we just want to get married..."

 

Then, it was, "...and as a married couple we should have the right to have children" (whether adoption or surrogacy)

 

Now, it's "our boy is not a boy, he's a girl and needs puberty blockers" and also "we need to teach kids about anal sex in elementary schools"

 

What next?

 

Hopefully anti LGBTQ bigots go into the closet but I'm not optimistic.

[PremiumLane]

3 hours 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. 

You mean other than the fact that every study shows there is no detriment to children being raised in same-sex families? 

I do believe you are talking bull

[PremiumLane]

3 hours ago, FruitPudding said:

He didn't say that.

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

[Ben Zioner]

2 hours ago, PremiumLane said:

You mean other than the fact that every study shows there is no detriment to children being raised in same-sex families? 

I do believe you are talking bull

Feel free to post some links.

 

And BTW, how many of those "gay" children have been evaluated after reaching middle age? 

 

No need to trade insults..

 

¹⁸   "Reckless words pierce like a sword, but the tongue of the wise brings healing."

 

Proverbs 12:18

Edited July 26, 2023 by Ben Zioner

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, Ben Zioner said:

Feel free to post some links.

 

And BTW, how many of those "gay" children have been evaluated after reaching middle age? 

 

No need to trade insults..

It's a matter of human rights. Period.

All straight ethnicities are allowed to marry regardless of statistics on how their kids turn out, better or worse than average. It's irrelevant. 

LGBTQ people are humans deserving of the exact same civil rights. 

No need to justify their existence to people looking for reasons to oppress them.

[PremiumLane]

15 hours ago, Ben Zioner said:

Feel free to post some links.

 

And BTW, how many of those "gay" children have been evaluated after reaching middle age? 

 

No need to trade insults..

 

¹⁸   "Reckless words pierce like a sword, but the tongue of the wise brings healing."

 

Proverbs 12:18

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4091994/

 

"To date, the consensus in the social science literature is clear: in the United States, children living with two same-sex parents fare, as well as children residing with two different-sex parents." 

 

https://gh.bmj.com/content/8/3/e010556

 

"Our findings indicated that children of sexual minority couples are not at a disadvantage when compared with children of heterosexual couples."

[Ben Zioner]

2 hours ago, PremiumLane said:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4091994/

 

"To date, the consensus in the social science literature is clear: in the United States, children living with two same-sex parents fare, as well as children residing with two different-sex parents." 

 

https://gh.bmj.com/content/8/3/e010556

 

"Our findings indicated that children of sexual minority couples are not at a disadvantage when compared with children of heterosexual couples."

Could you certify  that none of the others are gay activists?

[PremiumLane]

Just now, Ben Zioner said:

Could you certify  that none of the others are gay activists?

hahahahahaha

[Jingthing]

Don't even play these games the anti LGBTQ bigots play.

Imagine a country where the dominant ethnic demographic (for example white people in the U.S.) decided they would not allow a minority ethnic demographic to marry and have children unless they met the oppressing majority's metrics as far as "studies" of their children over time. Such studies on any group may have academic interest but they should be irrelevant as far as the politics of extending the same equal civil rights including marriage to ALL.

[Jingthing]

It's funny not ha ha that so many straight people are so ingrained in their priviledge that they think they're entitled to restrict the rights of non straight people. Such bigots are truly blind to the injustice they harbor in their minds.

[KhunLA]

 

16 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

It's funny not ha ha that so many straight people are so ingrained in their priviledge that they think they're entitled to restrict the rights of non straight people. Such bigots are truly blind to the injustice they harbor in their minds.

You must know a lot more different minded straight people than myself.  As I don't know anyone, I think, straight or otherwise, that is against gay marriage. 

Same-Sex Marriage Support Inches Up to New High of 71%

Edited July 27, 2023 by KhunLA

[Jingthing]

5 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

You must know a lot more different minded straight people than myself.  As I don't know anyone, I think, straight or otherwise, that is against gay marriage. 

Marriage equality. ALL the same rights including rights to have children.

You're being disingenuous yet again if you assert being anti gay marriage is rare.

Globally, it's a very unpopular position.

Who is stopping gay people from having legal equality?

It's not other gay people, buddy.

It's tyranny of the majority that take the power and oppress. 

If if was a minority race they were doing this too, that would be much more unacceptable but against gay people, A OK, they are treated so often as either less than or even criminals. 

 

Would people be demanding "studies" about a certain race to decide whether to allow them to marry and have children? 

 

Edited July 27, 2023 by Jingthing

[KhunLA]

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

Marriage equality. ALL the same rights including rights to have children.

You're being disingenuous yet again if you assert being anti gay marriage is rare.

Globally, it's a very unpopular position.

If you say so, although I thought we were discussing TH, or the USA, since OP's link is referenced to the USA.

 

Of course globally, you have to consider Islam, and not fans of gays, with a 23.2% of the population.  That's a big chunk who are probably against it.

https://www.pbslearningmedia.org/resource/sj14-soc-religmap/world-religions-map/

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

If you say so, although I thought we were discussing TH, or the USA, since OP's link is referenced to the USA.

 

Of course globally, you have to consider Islam, and not fans of gays, with a 23.2% of the population.  That's a big chunk who are probably against it.

https://www.pbslearningmedia.org/resource/sj14-soc-religmap/world-religions-map/

Probably?

Don't forget the Christian countries like Uganda.

 

Edited July 27, 2023 by Jingthing

[Scott]

This is the gay forum and it is not limited to Thai-related topics.  It is, however, not a platform for homophobic remarks.  A few posters are extremely close to having a formal warning and suspension given.  

 

Civil partnerships are very close but not the same as marriage.  The rules and regulations related to marriage are roughly the same from a legal point of view wherever you are.  Civil partnerships do not necessarily confer those rights once you cross an international border.  

 

There are obvious differences in the type of ceremony and there are other differences.   First, inheritance. In some countries, civil partners do not have the same inheritance rights as spouses.  Second, Social Security.  In some countries, civil partners may not be eligible for the same social security benefits as spouses.  In the United States, civil partnerships are not recognized by the federal government, so civil partners do not have the same federal benefits as married couples.  The issue of ending a marriage or civil partnership are also different.   Marriages are ended by divorce.  

 

But the basic issue is one of equality and fair treatment. In most places, everyone can get a civil partnership, but one group may not be allowed to marry. The contention by the LGBT community is that denial of rights is wrong.

 

Please keep it civil and on topic.  If you intend to be dismissive or derogatory, you may find restrictions imposed.