Domestic partnerships?

So last century.

Just now, Jingthing said:

Domestic partnerships?

So last century.

A comment made by a Dinosaur me thinks!

4 hours ago, Ben Zioner said:

A worthy warrior will not marry his brother in arms.

people like you have war too much on your mind.

16 hours ago, Cory1848 said:

Based on what you write, I certainly wouldn’t call you “homophobic,” but I would try to convince you that same-sex couples should have full equality, and that means the ability to enter into the legal/social arrangement called marriage. Why should they have to settle for anything less? You say that you are not religious but insist on a biblical interpretation -- for starters, I would completely disregard anything the Bible or the Koran may have to say about marriage, as these texts were written by men 1,500-3,000 years ago and have dubious relevance in terms of how present-day societies should organize themselves.

 

In other words marriage is a flexible term meaning that 2 people have committed to take care of / support each other.

 

As said 2 people. 

20 hours ago, RichardColeman said:

Because I do not agree with gay marriage , does not make me homophobic. Civil partnerships should be respected as much as marriage in the 'emergencies' you describe. I see marriage as it is in the bible, man and woman, etc - though I am not a religious person or religiously brainwashed - it is my view. Both marriage and civil partnerships should be equal in the eyes of the law, society and people.  I have no issues with people being gay or being together. If any of my sons or grandchildren were gay they would always get my full support.  The problem is that people  tarnish all people as homophobic as they do not agree with gay marriage - that is the problem in society

 

gp back to bed, grandad, no one cares what the bible says, especially in a Buddhist country. 

21 hours ago, NativeBob said:

just a letter of attendance to the shrink

and a brown envelope.

On 4/6/2024 at 3:21 PM, RichardColeman said:

Because I do not agree with gay marriage , does not make me homophobic. Civil partnerships should be respected as much as marriage in the 'emergencies' you describe. I see marriage as it is in the bible, man and woman, etc - though I am not a religious person or religiously brainwashed - it is my view. Both marriage and civil partnerships should be equal in the eyes of the law, society and people.  I have no issues with people being gay or being together. If any of my sons or grandchildren were gay they would always get my full support.  The problem is that people  tarnish all people as homophobic as they do not agree with gay marriage - that is the problem in society

It seems you can't express an opinion without being tarnished these days.

 

If people want to protest to get their way they should grow up and accept it isn't to everyone's taste.

 

I've no issue with people marrying elephants if they're happy but just shut up about it and don't try to force others to accept it. 

 

If 2 consenting adults want to get married good luck to them. In my opinion marriage will be a thing of the past eventually because it's too damn difficult to make it work.

 

Solicitors will love the world to increase marriages because the divorce rate will soar too.

 

Happy Sunday 😌😌😌

On 4/6/2024 at 3:21 PM, RichardColeman said:

Because I do not agree with gay marriage , does not make me homophobic. Civil partnerships should be respected as much as marriage in the 'emergencies' you describe. I see marriage as it is in the bible, man and woman, etc - though I am not a religious person or religiously brainwashed - it is my view. Both marriage and civil partnerships should be equal in the eyes of the law, society and people.  I have no issues with people being gay or being together. If any of my sons or grandchildren were gay they would always get my full support.  The problem is that people  tarnish all people as homophobic as they do not agree with gay marriage - that is the problem in society

Well that is all well and dandy for you. 

 

So why none Christians of opposite sex can get married?  Should marriage be only for Christians bexaie it's in your religious book? 

 

 

On 4/6/2024 at 3:21 PM, RichardColeman said:

I see marriage as it is in the bible, man and woman, etc - though I am not a religious person or religiously brainwashed -

 

This construct of argument, the second half of the sentence punches right back to the first half, "I'm not religiously brainwashed" but "I see marriage as it is in the bible..." is the de facto tactic often used by homophobic bigots, as in "I don't hate gays, I just hate that they have the same rights I do". 

 

Here another tactic, creating their own myth about those they want to criticize or put down, but too coward to do so outright:
 

Edited April 7, 20242 yr by watthong

On 4/6/2024 at 3:21 PM, RichardColeman said:

The problem is that people  tarnish all people as homophobic as they do not agree with gay marriage - that is the problem in society

 

This myth usually touted by homophobes, I repeat, usually, and especially those who loudly claim they are not - so let's debunk it once and for all: 

1) who are those people ("people who tarnish all people as homophobic as they do not agree with gay marriage")? I'm sure there are that kind of people but I for once, as a gay person "do not tarnish all people as homophobic as they do not agree with gay marriage." 

2) Homophobes do not agree with gay marriage, you can bet your life on that, but that's not the only thing that get them "tarnished" as homophobic. So let's make that clear, people don't get tarnished as homophobic because they don't agree with gay marriage, they get tarnished as homophobic because of their stance against gays,  one of the myriad application of that stance is their opposition to gay marriage.

If you can not make out those nuances  for example: << do not agree vs, opposition>>, or just want to whitewash them with your broad-stroke ("people tarnish all people") argument, then I think you have an agenda...Right, granpa?

Edited April 7, 20242 yr by watthong

18 hours ago, scorecard said:

 

In other words marriage is a flexible term meaning that 2 people have committed to take care of / support each other.

 

As said 2 people. 

Marriage as an institution is not flexible: it comes with well-defined legal rights and obligations, as well as societal expectations regarding the nature of the commitment between two married people. But it should be available to any two people who want to make that commitment to each other. As more and more countries around the world are starting to accept.

On 4/6/2024 at 9:35 PM, ikke1959 said:

good to hear... however marriage between man and woman is a religious thing and civil partnerships should be equal.. but because for many centuries homosexuals have been disapproved by the same religion as that for a marriage, there are no other choices.. Marriage or Civil partnerships.. maybe time to scrap marriage and make every possible relation legal as a Civil Partnership... all problems in all religions are solved too

Since when were marriages in Thailand religious? We go to the amphur to get married, PERIOD. People can choose to have a religious ceremony but that is not a legal marriage, only the legal signing in the office is a legal marriage.

On 4/7/2024 at 2:11 AM, Baht Simpson said:

Good question. I'm assuming they would have to.

They don't have to do anything if they don't want to.

 

I'm against marriage per se. I'd like to see the end of them, PERIOD.

In the West they are just a means for women to steal the guy's property after driving him to divorce, and they are no guarantee of a happy life. Over 50% end in divorce. If 50% of cars blew up, would we buy cars?

 

If people want to live together just do it and shut up about all the BS that people surround marriage with. It's not even a problem for kids born out of wedlock now- it's probably just normal, even in Thailand.

44 minutes ago, Cory1848 said:

Marriage as an institution is not flexible: it comes with well-defined legal rights and obligations, as well as societal expectations regarding the nature of the commitment between two married people. But it should be available to any two people who want to make that commitment to each other. As more and more countries around the world are starting to accept.

It's going to be interesting once same sex couples start getting divorced en mass ( 50% or more, just like hetero marriages ). With a man and a woman the court knows to favour the woman, but with same sex, how will they know who to give all the loot to? 5555555555555555

With children they just give the child to the mother, but with same sex marriages of males who will have the better claim? 555555555555

Not so problematic with two women as likely one actually had the child, so she will get the child, but will the partner, who obviously contributed no genetic material to the child, have to pay large to support the mother, as well as having to lose the house?

 

9 hours ago, Barnet1900 said:

If 2 consenting adults want to get married good luck to them. In my opinion marriage will be a thing of the past eventually because it's too damn difficult to make it work.

I agree about marriage ceasing to be a zillion %. It's something out of the middle ages and no longer of any use at all that I can see.

9 hours ago, Barnet1900 said:

Solicitors will love the world to increase marriages because the divorce rate will soar too.

I bet they are already gearing up for an increased divorce workload, and all that lovely money that goes with it.

9 hours ago, Barnet1900 said:

It seems you can't express an opinion without being tarnished these days.

 

If people want to protest to get their way they should grow up and accept it isn't to everyone's taste.

Ain't that the truth!

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Since when were marriages in Thailand religious? We go to the amphur to get married, PERIOD. People can choose to have a religious ceremony but that is not a legal marriage, only the legal signing in the office is a legal marriage.

It is the name not the cermony ... marriage is a legal invention  in religions for 2 people living together..... I don't care how it is named, but as you know marriage is only for people between man and woman... They should ban this word