Do You Support Legalization Of Same Sex Marriage In Thailand?

[Forethat]

Forethat: what choices does a gay couple impose on a baby? The baby will grow up to be either gay or straight, depending on how it is hard-wired, not who its parents are.

Getting beat up every day at school because "your dad's getting shagged in the arse every night...?"

I can only guess that it has been a fair number of years since you were a student. I grew up in Texas .... in a conservative small city .... graduated HS in 1982 ... and was openly gay. I was "beat up" once (jumped by a group of guys at school) and only once throughout my HS years. I wasn't a jock ... in fact I played the cello, so I should have been an easy target. (I dealt with that group one:one later -- and was beat down once more -- out of 5 fights that I picked. That backed off anyone targetting gay kids in my school.) There were a couple of really outrageously femme guys and they were never touched. The reality was most people didn't care and life was fairly easy because I had parents that were only concerned with my happiness and well being.

The world has changed even more since 1982 --- and while there certainly could be issues of bullies --- it would simply be because those kids are bullies. They will always look for a victim, but they are far less tolerated now than they were even when I was in school.

This being Thailand .... the issues would be far smaller than in the West

So you agree with me in full - that the choice is made by the parents, in this case a gay couple? Thanks for making that clear.

[jdinasia]

So you agree with me in full - that the choice is made by the parents, in this case a gay couple? Thanks for making that clear.

Pardon me? Where did I agree with you? Where did I even mention gay parents in what you quoted? I mentioned gay kids .. from nearly 30 years ago as an example of tolerance.

BTW --- as a relevant question, How old are you (so I can understand when you went to school?)

[elliss]

Yes, they should be able to marry. Only the bible thumpers want to stop it.

i,m all for it ,

darling .

:jap:

[jdinasia]

78% for marriage/domestic partnership

16% against

6% null-vote/no opinion

[Forethat]

So you agree with me in full - that the choice is made by the parents, in this case a gay couple? Thanks for making that clear.

Pardon me? Where did I agree with you? Where did I even mention gay parents in what you quoted? I mentioned gay kids .. from nearly 30 years ago as an example of tolerance.

Your words were "what choices does a gay couple impose on a baby?". Feel free to claim that the gay couple wasn't the parents of the baby, I'm not going to hold it against you, but it looks to me as if you're talking about parents. If you weren't, just let me know.

So you still agree that as long as one cannot guarantee that there are NO mental, physical or behavioural implications related to a child who grows up with a gay couple as parents, the choice to expose the child for this risk is a choice made entirely by the parents and not the child?

BTW --- as a relevant question, How old are you (so I can understand when you went to school?)

I struggle to see in which way mine or your age is relevant for a discussion regarding parental responsibilities and choices amongst gay couples, and what impact they might have on a young persons life. Edited June 2, 2011 by Forethat

[kerryk]

78% for marriage/domestic partnership

16% against

6% null-vote/no opinion

You asked in another post. And I don't mean to come off as an expert but I think there are about 20 countries that allow homosexual marriage and 172 where it is illegal. That is about 10% for and 90% against, world wide. I guess that would mean that the Thai Visa population is completely out of touch with the rest of the world.

[kerryk]

Yes, they should be able to marry. Only the bible thumpers want to stop it.

i,m all for it ,

darling .

:jap:

Since there are 170 some countries where it is illegal I would think you need to include some other religious texts in your statement besides the bible. Not knowing much about religion I really can't quote. Or maybe it is something about those 170 countries who don't want homosexual marriage as opposed to the 20 who do. In any event it must be more than just people who are quoting the bible. I don't think Muslims care for it much and I don't think Muslims thump the bible. But I could be wrong. Like I said I am not an expert.

[happyrobert]

78% for marriage/domestic partnership

16% against

6% null-vote/no opinion

Wow, yet another pathetic but humerous attempt to quote "statistics" to one's own ends. I don't care what the "voting" is about, to quote this and claim victory is comical.

92 entire votes! Gee, well, that does it, no question about it then!

71 for, 15 against.

Such a small sampling, who's to argue that all the gay TV posters voted and the straights couldn't bother?

[samurai]

So you agree with me in full - that the choice is made by the parents, in this case a gay couple? Thanks for making that clear.

Pardon me? Where did I agree with you? Where did I even mention gay parents in what you quoted? I mentioned gay kids .. from nearly 30 years ago as an example of tolerance.

BTW --- as a relevant question, How old are you (so I can understand when you went to school?)

More relevant would be the question *Where you went to school?*.

And i think when the debate here focused now on *adoption rights for gay couples* or *gay couples as parents* we don't talk about Thailand anymore, but "farang" home countries.

Your individual experience, that you could fight back, 30 years ago, in Texas. doesn't mean it don't exist anymore.

Bullying is still out there. Wasn't that big news last year,in the USA, with cases of teen suicides. And newsworthy because it was cyber bullying and not just the gold old fashioned schoolyard bullying.

If kids bully other gay kids or just the child of a gay couple, its rooted in the same problem. A society with homophobic tendencies, hatred copied or reflect by the kids who don't know what they are doing or don't know what is wrong with that.

However, the probability that kids with a gay couples getting bullied at school, isn't really a valid argument why gay parents should not (be allowed to) raise kids. Don't let your life dictate by bullies.

I personally think that a kid raised by gay parents will not developed any psychological disorder because its parents are two *dads* or two *mums*, but the reaction of the society to such a family may vary in different countries, regions, in the big cities vs. small towns and so on.

Gay emancipation is still a struggle of a minority against the mainstream society that hasn't fully accepted them yet and has still its negative attitudes and feelings towards homosexuals, its understandable when some have concerns when it comes to kids.

If the environment is friendly or don't mind at all if you are gay, it will be friendly for the child too. If this is not the case, a not so gay friendly environment, emancipation activists should not instrumentalise a kid in their struggle. Raising kids is not a stonewall riot.

[Richard4849]

Making a case against gay parenting by quoting possible teasing on the playground? What a pathetic argument!

Mixed race kids get teased, fat kids get teased, kids of divorced parents get teased, "four-eyed" kids get teased, kids who ate weak or not into sports get teased...and somehow everyone turns out just fine.

You're going to have to come up with something a lot better than that...

[surayu]

Cut the crap - just tell me how I am biased - if you can, which I doubt.

I believe your computer is "biosed" , with that being said, i am now going to cut the carp...

[samurai]

Making a case against gay parenting by quoting possible teasing on the playground? What a pathetic argument!

Mixed race kids get teased, fat kids get teased, kids of divorced parents get teased, "four-eyed" kids get teased, kids who ate weak or not into sports get teased...and somehow everyone turns out just fine.

You're going to have to come up with something a lot better than that...

Did someone came up with such an argument?

Nevertheless there are people, couples (no matter if same sex, or man&woman) who make the conscious decision NOT to have children because they consider the social environment in which they live in as not child friendly enough or even hostile and think it would be irresponsible to push a new life into this.

[jdinasia]

78% for marriage/domestic partnership

16% against

6% null-vote/no opinion

Wow, yet another pathetic but humerous attempt to quote "statistics" to one's own ends. I don't care what the "voting" is about, to quote this and claim victory is comical.

92 entire votes! Gee, well, that does it, no question about it then!

71 for, 15 against.

Such a small sampling, who's to argue that all the gay TV posters voted and the straights couldn't bother?

No claims made --- just stated the numbers ----

The number of posters like Mr Forbes (heterosexual) that have posted opinions on here certainly show it didn't just poll "all the gays and the straights couldn't bother"

[jdinasia]

78% for marriage/domestic partnership

16% against

6% null-vote/no opinion

You asked in another post. And I don't mean to come off as an expert but I think there are about 20 countries that allow homosexual marriage and 172 where it is illegal. That is about 10% for and 90% against, world wide. I guess that would mean that the Thai Visa population is completely out of touch with the rest of the world.

Sorry .... but that makes absolute statements about the people in each country as a whole .. and not as individuals

Since there are 20 countries in Europe alone that recognize same sex unions, I think it may be skewed a bit Hell, they'll even let str8 couples opt for civil unions in some countries to avoid the issue of separate but equal

That you came (in another post) with a literalist approach to a comment by another str8 poster about "bible-thumpers" ---- I would assume that would include those that would thump people with whatever religious book of dogma they use, be it the Q'uran etc ... (but apparently not the Torah since Israel has civil unions I would have thought that all the countries dominated by Catholicism would have been against civil unions/gay marriage --- but Brazil and Uruguay allow it too ... Even Mexico has it ....

Some countries like India were so squashed by the English occupation that they have just started to deal with homosexuality in the recent years, even though the Vedas included many instances of same sex unions etc ....

New Zealand allows civil unions for same sex couples AND opposite sex couples.

Perhaps a better question for you KerryK is how many countries with non-authoritarian and secular governments are against it .. there will still be many, but fewer every year ...

[saraburioz]

Cut the crap - just tell me how I am biased - if you can, which I doubt.

I believe your computer is "biosed" , with that being said, i am now going to cut the carp...

eh?

Come on JD, I'm still waiting.

[jdinasia]

Pardon me? Where did I agree with you? Where did I even mention gay parents in what you quoted? I mentioned gay kids .. from nearly 30 years ago as an example of tolerance.

Your words were "what choices does a gay couple impose on a baby?". Feel free to claim that the gay couple wasn't the parents of the baby, I'm not going to hold it against you, but it looks to me as if you're talking about parents. If you weren't, just let me know.

So you still agree that as long as one cannot guarantee that there are NO mental, physical or behavioural implications related to a child who grows up with a gay couple as parents, the choice to expose the child for this risk is a choice made entirely by the parents and not the child?

BTW --- as a relevant question, How old are you (so I can understand when you went to school?)

I struggle to see in which way mine or your age is relevant for a discussion regarding parental responsibilities and choices amongst gay couples, and what impact they might have on a young persons life.

One -- you are attributing a statement to me that was made by someone else. "what choices does a gay couple impose on a baby?" was not my statement. However, it is a valid question. Gay parents do not create gay children In fact if you polled gay people I would suggest that almost 100% of them had heterosexual parents and that is the point the poster who made that statement was trying to make (I think)

Two -- the relevant studies of children who live with gay parents show them to be well adjusted (they are cited in one of the 2 threads about this subject currently running)

Three-- some people "come out" after they are already parents, whilst others choose surrogacy and adoption

Four-- I cannot guarantee the outcome for any child including children of heterosexuals. So unless you can guarantee that children from homes with 2 heterosexual parents will have no issues then your argument would extend to them too

Your age IS relevant for the reason cited. Feel free not to disclose .... but when YOU went to school and how bullies were dealt with then and there versus today ... is a valid issue imho, I do understand that some older people might resent the implication that they were calcified and inflexible on this issue, but I tried to make the reason I asked very obvious. Mr Forbes has some decades on me age wise and shows that not all older (errr Mature ;p) people have issues with the topic

[jdinasia]

Cut the crap - just tell me how I am biased - if you can, which I doubt.

I believe your computer is "biosed" , with that being said, i am now going to cut the carp...

eh?

Come on JD, I'm still waiting.

I have answered your question Sara Go back to the post you quoted from

[jdinasia]

Am I biased? Yes. Are you biased? Yes.

Now that we have that clear .......

Please tell how I am biased.

I am hoping this will help you remember the post you quoted from

[kerryk]

78% for marriage/domestic partnership

16% against

6% null-vote/no opinion

You asked in another post. And I don't mean to come off as an expert but I think there are about 20 countries that allow homosexual marriage and 172 where it is illegal. That is about 10% for and 90% against, world wide. I guess that would mean that the Thai Visa population is completely out of touch with the rest of the world.

Sorry .... but that makes absolute statements about the people in each country as a whole .. and not as individuals

Since there are 20 countries in Europe alone that recognize same sex unions, I think it may be skewed a bit Hell, they'll even let str8 couples opt for civil unions in some countries to avoid the issue of separate but equal

That you came (in another post) with a literalist approach to a comment by another str8 poster about "bible-thumpers" ---- I would assume that would include those that would thump people with whatever religious book of dogma they use, be it the Q'uran etc ... (but apparently not the Torah since Israel has civil unions I would have thought that all the countries dominated by Catholicism would have been against civil unions/gay marriage --- but Brazil and Uruguay allow it too ... Even Mexico has it ....

Some countries like India were so squashed by the English occupation that they have just started to deal with homosexuality in the recent years, even though the Vedas included many instances of same sex unions etc ....

New Zealand allows civil unions for same sex couples AND opposite sex couples.

Perhaps a better question for you KerryK is how many countries with non-authoritarian and secular governments are against it .. there will still be many, but fewer every year ...

I don't know why I would be concerned with only secular non authoritarian governments as they are only a small part of the world's population.

6,775,235,700 people in the world. How many do you think would be in favor of same sex marriages? Don't forget that the uneducated third world population is growing at a faster rate than the first world educated populations.

The gay population looks like it is going down as a percent too but I can only estimate that. Although it does make sense because of the large increase in Muslim and Catholic populations in less educated countries. I think the most common new birth name in England last year was Mohammed.

[trisailer]

The reason that countries have constitutions is to insure equal rights. If it were up to popular sentiment blacks would still be "separate but equal"

No one is asking straight people to give up anything. They still get married just the same as gay people if we embraced equality.

I am confident that the US Supreme Court will soon rule that denying gays the right to marry is unconstitutional. After that it will be a lot harder for the bible thumper's to cram their "morality" down our throats.

[saraburioz]

Am I biased? Yes. Are you biased? Yes.

Now that we have that clear .......

Please tell how I am biased.

I am hoping this will help you remember the post you quoted from

Why do you keep quoting that - it doesn't answer my question.

I asked a simple question -" tell me how I am biased?", not - "do you think I'm biased?"

[samurai]

The reason that countries have constitutions is to insure equal rights. If it were up to popular sentiment blacks would still be "separate but equal"

No one is asking straight people to give up anything. They still get married just the same as gay people if we embraced equality.

I am confident that the US Supreme Court will soon rule that denying gays the right to marry is unconstitutional. After that it will be a lot harder for the bible thumper's to cram their "morality" down our throats.

If marriage is such a bible thumper thing, why want secular, open minded people get married too?

[jdinasia]

I don't know why I would be concerned with only secular non authoritarian governments as they are only a small part of the world's population.

6,775,235,700 people in the world. How many do you think would be in favor of same sex marriages? Don't forget that the uneducated third world population is growing at a faster rate than the first world educated populations.

The gay population looks like it is going down as a percent too but I can only estimate that. Although it does make sense because of the large increase in Muslim and Catholic populations in less educated countries. I think the most common new birth name in England last year was Mohammed.

You are suggesting because of national laws that this in some way represents what individuals think. That cannot even be close to being a valid argument in places without secular non-authoritarian governments. Even some heavily Catholic countries are offering Civil Unions. Yes, there are gay Muslims, etc etc etc

You assume less educated means less tolerant ... but upcountry Thailand tells a different story. Someone quite important (don't know if you can talk about royalty elsewhere) in Cambodia approves of gay marriage.

Indonesia, the country with the largest Muslim population in the world, decriminalized private, consensual sexual relations between people of the same sex in 1993 ---- Indonesia is a LONG way off from having any protection for gays built into the law .... but they are moving forward (at a snail's pace).

India --- largest population of any country in the world .... the British code for sexual conduct was finally struck down in 2009. There are no laws prohibiting civil unions and there are no laws prohibiting gay marriages (this one shocked me as I thought since the sodomy law remnant from the UK colonial era was just knocked down in 2009 ----- that anything more would be off the table.) India has a long way to go as well --- yet ... again is moving forward ....

(I think this is hurting your argument a bit Kerry)

Jordan, Israel and Iraq ... all have decriminalized gay sex --- Israel itself recognizes gay marriages performed elsewhere and has domestic partnership. Jordan has had legalized gay sex longer than most of the USA

China --- (crap -- this hurts my argument is a great way!) legalized gay sex in 1997 --- AND has a pending law for civil unions (not yet enacted) There's the second largest country for ya ....

Still under authoritarian regimes we just cannot assume that the laws reflect the will/desire/understanding of the people ....

[jdinasia]

Am I biased? Yes. Are you biased? Yes.

Now that we have that clear .......

Please tell how I am biased.

I am hoping this will help you remember the post you quoted from

Why do you keep quoting that - it doesn't answer my question.

I asked a simple question -" tell me how I am biased?", not - "do you think I'm biased?"

explained IN the post you quoted FROM .... (The quote you also claimed not to have made in this same thread --- that earned you at least 3 smilies! )

[trisailer]

The reason that countries have constitutions is to insure equal rights. If it were up to popular sentiment blacks would still be "separate but equal"

No one is asking straight people to give up anything. They still get married just the same as gay people if we embraced equality.

I am confident that the US Supreme Court will soon rule that denying gays the right to marry is unconstitutional. After that it will be a lot harder for the bible thumper's to cram their "morality" down our throats.

If marriage is such a bible thumper thing, why want secular, open minded people get married too?

It wouldn't matter to me if anyone decided to marry or not, but to deny equal rights to either is unconstitutional. The recent defeats of the right to marry in California and Maine was a result of millions of dollars collected by the church to spread lies about what gay marrage would mean to the average person. One popular lie was that teachers would be required to teach a gay lifestyle to grade school students. There were many others. Both referendums were defeated by narrow margins and most people agree that the lies were responsible. The anti-gay campaign manager later testified to the lies that were told in Maine. He said he felt ashamed.

[kerryk]

I don't know why I would be concerned with only secular non authoritarian governments as they are only a small part of the world's population.

6,775,235,700 people in the world. How many do you think would be in favor of same sex marriages? Don't forget that the uneducated third world population is growing at a faster rate than the first world educated populations.

The gay population looks like it is going down as a percent too but I can only estimate that. Although it does make sense because of the large increase in Muslim and Catholic populations in less educated countries. I think the most common new birth name in England last year was Mohammed.

You are suggesting because of national laws that this in some way represents what individuals think. That cannot even be close to being a valid argument in places without secular non-authoritarian governments. Even some heavily Catholic countries are offering Civil Unions. Yes, there are gay Muslims, etc etc etc

You assume less educated means less tolerant ... but upcountry Thailand tells a different story. Someone quite important (don't know if you can talk about royalty elsewhere) in Cambodia approves of gay marriage.

Indonesia, the country with the largest Muslim population in the world, decriminalized private, consensual sexual relations between people of the same sex in 1993 ---- Indonesia is a LONG way off from having any protection for gays built into the law .... but they are moving forward (at a snail's pace).

India --- largest population of any country in the world .... the British code for sexual conduct was finally struck down in 2009. There are no laws prohibiting civil unions and there are no laws prohibiting gay marriages (this one shocked me as I thought since the sodomy law remnant from the UK colonial era was just knocked down in 2009 ----- that anything more would be off the table.) India has a long way to go as well --- yet ... again is moving forward ....

(I think this is hurting your argument a bit Kerry)

Jordan, Israel and Iraq ... all have decriminalized gay sex --- Israel itself recognizes gay marriages performed elsewhere and has domestic partnership. Jordan has had legalized gay sex longer than most of the USA

China --- (crap -- this hurts my argument is a great way!) legalized gay sex in 1997 --- AND has a pending law for civil unions (not yet enacted) There's the second largest country for ya ....

Still under authoritarian regimes we just cannot assume that the laws reflect the will/desire/understanding of the people ....

Slate said in 2011 "In China, the pressure to form a heterosexual marriage is so acute that 80 percent of China's gay population marries straight people.

[samurai]

The reason that countries have constitutions is to insure equal rights. If it were up to popular sentiment blacks would still be "separate but equal"

No one is asking straight people to give up anything. They still get married just the same as gay people if we embraced equality.

I am confident that the US Supreme Court will soon rule that denying gays the right to marry is unconstitutional. After that it will be a lot harder for the bible thumper's to cram their "morality" down our throats.

If marriage is such a bible thumper thing, why want secular, open minded people get married too?

It wouldn't matter to me if anyone decided to marry or not, but to deny equal rights to either is unconstitutional. The recent defeats of the right to marry in California and Maine was a result of millions of dollars collected by the church to spread lies about what gay marrage would mean to the average person. One popular lie was that teachers would be required to teach a gay lifestyle to grade school students. There were many others. Both referendums were defeated by narrow margins and most people agree that the lies were responsible. The anti-gay campaign manager later testified to the lies that were told in Maine. He said he felt ashamed.

If you are woman you can marry a man and if you are a man you can marry a woman. that right is equal to everyone.

[saraburioz]

JDinasia -

Be a man and just admit you can't answer my question.

[Richard4849]

Slate's info is either inaccurate or already out of date.

China has figured out that homosexuality is great for their population problem, and attitudes there are changing very, very quickly.

[jdinasia]

Slate said in 2011 "In China, the pressure to form a heterosexual marriage is so acute that 80 percent of China's gay population marries straight people.

Slate? Statistics come from? How does that fit with your claim about Nations indicating attitudes of people?

LOL ... I looked it up ____ It was a story about FAKE marriages to satisfy parents I know quite a few Th/Ch that have made the same choices ---

While past generations buried their sexuality in straight marriages, the people gathered at the yoga studio are trying a new approach. No. 8 (the men sport numbered buttons in a pleasing shade of blue, the women's are pink), a pretty 22-year-old woman with curly dyed chestnut hair, skinny jeans, and Snoopy slippers wants a fake marriage to ease parental pressure, but she doesn't want a baby. No. 15, a strikingly tall man with side-swept bangs, says: "I want to get married for my parents, but I think lying to them will make me feel terrible. So I want to have a fake marriage with a lesbian girl, but just for one or two years, and then I want a divorce to show my parents that I am not a marriage type." There's one constant: All the participants talk about pleasing their parents.......

Back at the fake-marriage market, Fen Yu and his friends see themselves as the "transitional" generation. While they can't come out to their parents, they can, at least, be open about their sexuality among friends, go to gay bars, and date. "For the generation after ours, it might be easier," he says, "Our parents have no idea what homosexuality is. It's very difficult, because it's just opening up."

If Fen becomes a father, his will be a different approach: "I might not be able to tell my parents," he says, "but when my child grows up, I will tell them the real story about why it happened and who I am.".

http://www.msnbc.msn...hinas-gays-out/

--- but still -- YOUR argument was about nations --- India and China are moving along nicely in legislation (taking care of about 30%+ of the world's population (killing your 90% statement) and Indonesia is progressing and Jordan has been more progressive than most since 1951 ,,, killing the Muslim argument. Brazil and Mexico etc take care of the Catholicism issue .... So .. adding India, China, all of North America, almost all of Europe, parts of the Middle East, ..... It is safe to say that your suggestion of 90% was ---- possibly only indicative of a bit of bias and a look at numbers of countries (that you got way wrong

Edited June 2, 2011 by jdinasia