Do You Support Legalization Of Same Sex Marriage In Thailand?

[surayu]

You are just too bright for me and too complicated. I am just a simple guy. If all the people on the planet had to vote tomorrow on having same sex marriage legal how do you think they would vote? Percent yes and no?

Not a trick question. Make same sex marriage legal, check one box, yes or no.

Kerryk, do you think it's nice to brag about injustices, just because a larger number of people is in favour of it? be honest

[jdinasia]

Jdinasia,

I didn't ask about equal rights. I only asked you what percent of people world wide you think would favor same sex marriage. You answered a bunch of other questions about equal rights and people not having an opinion but all I really wanted was your opinion on the number of people world wide who would favor same sex marriage.

If everyone had to have an opinion either yes or no how many people world would be in favor of same sex marriage?

KerryK ----- Like I said about your horse ....

It depends on how the question is phrased. Your new and added stipulation of "if everyone HAD to have an opinion" is simply silly. How long would the questioner have to explain the question .... How many people have never considered the question (70% at least imho) etc etc Marriage rights are equal rights ---- phrase it one way and you get a different answer than phrasing it a different way.

If you want to keep playing the Mr Ed game --- let's limit it to the topic ... Thailand. Then agree to the phrasing of the question

In Thailand it would need to be phrased in a longish multi-part question in most places. I think you could arrive at a more than 50% "Yes" to the question phrased like this ......

Q: Do you think that all Thais should be treated equally under the law, and if so, would this extend to allowing gay people, of either gender, and khatoey to register their relationships at the amphur office?

I think that with an active civil-rights education movement that the numbers could be improved to about 70% with simple education on the subject of why it would help Thai people in situations of medical care and inheritance etc. Phrased as above I think it would just pass 50% and possibly approach 60% approval.

I think that approval rating would remain high in all sub-groups of Thais other than Th/Ch over 50 years old and it would remain that high in the Muslim communities except possibly in the ethnic Yawi communities in Yala, Pattani, Narathiwat, and Songkhla (and even then I am not sure, because my landlord in Kamala was Yawi and had absolutely no problems with gay people!)

You are just too bright for me and too complicated. I am just a simple guy. If all the people on the planet had to vote tomorrow on having same sex marriage legal how do you think they would vote? Percent yes and no?

Not a trick question. Make same sex marriage legal, check one box, yes or no.

Again your bias (yes I have decided you have a horse in this race) is showing ------

You initially started with governments being representational of the people --- to show that the world was against it ----- but that argument went south on you fairly fast. In fact, you defended that government position with not caring about them being secular and non-authoritarian --- why? Because it fit your bias.

A little research showed that MAJOR sections of the world have changed and are changing rapidly including China and India --- which killed your 90% argument quite effectively -- so you switch tactics (since apparently about 50% of the population of the world currently live in or soon will live in countries that have civil unions and or gay marriages). Then you start pushing the poverty issue really hard --- but that one fell through too with India and China --- not to mention the "declining numbers" argument ....

So no, Mr Ed's jockey ..... The topic isn't "How would the people of the world react if given an extremely narrow question regarding gay marriage, when most have never ever heard of the concept much less given it any thought .....

The question is Support of Same Sex marriage (and by extension of the poll) and/or civil unions in Thailand.

I stand by my assertion in my most recent post that if phrased the way I wrote it -- it would pass a referendum by more than 50%.

(By the way --- you didn't describe yourself as a "simple guy" when you claimed not to have a horse in this race .... you described yourself this way ....

I am an enlightened thinker and a really flexible guy who does not have a horse in the race.

Which means your "simple guy" statement is a lie ... or the claim of being an "enlightened thinker" is

[kerryk]

You are just too bright for me and too complicated. I am just a simple guy. If all the people on the planet had to vote tomorrow on having same sex marriage legal how do you think they would vote? Percent yes and no?

Not a trick question. Make same sex marriage legal, check one box, yes or no.

Kerryk, do you think it's nice to brag about injustices, just because a larger number of people is in favour of it? be honest

Never thought about it as bragging. I was really wondering what % Jdinasia thought would favor same sex marriage world wide. I have no idea what he will respond hence I could not form an opinion.

[samurai]

Samurai: has nothing to do with "white" or "not white".

You and I both know that some places on this planet are behind the curve when it comes to being civilized. Unless you consider chopping a hand off or blinding a man "civilized". Or sentencing someone to death for being gay, or for hiding a cell phone under your bed.

You still want to get all PC when it comes to barbarisms like this?

You forget that equal part and all the prejudice.

The whole thread here and the arguments, from both sides, have a lot to do with white patriarchy.

Meanwhile in the sister thread, in the news forum, the activists post Rosa Parks photos.

[kerryk]

Jdinasia,

Enlightened simple guy I guess would have been a better choice of words, sorry . So you don't want to hazard a guess as to how the rest of the world would vote about same sex marriage?

[jdinasia]

Jdinasia,

Enlightened simple guy I guess would have been a better choice of words, sorry . So you don't want to hazard a guess as to how the rest of the world would vote about same sex marriage?

I told you --- that I won't play under your extremely limited "yes or no" rules ....

Instead, why don't you tell us what you think THAIS would say to the following question on a referendum ballot

Q: Do you think that all Thais should be treated equally under the law, and if so, would this extend to allowing gay people, of either gender, and khatoey to register their relationships at the amphur office?

[surayu]

I don't think the discussion should be focused on %'s but in what is right and what is wrong, possibly stating the supporting reasons for that.

If there is something i really dislike, is that sort of "football team" (or soccer if you prefere) mentality, where someone will belittle someone else just because he belongs to a different side and then having the feel it's ok because there are others backing up that sillyness....

Even if you have the entire world on your part, you might still be wrong.

[kerryk]

Jdinasia,

Enlightened simple guy I guess would have been a better choice of words, sorry . So you don't want to hazard a guess as to how the rest of the world would vote about same sex marriage?

I told you --- that I won't play under your extremely limited "yes or no" rules ....

Instead, why don't you tell us what you think THAIS would say to the following question on a referendum ballot

Q: Do you think that all Thais should be treated equally under the law, and if so, would this extend to allowing gay people, of either gender, and khatoey to register their relationships at the amphur office?

Well that makes two. Both you and Jingthing will not bother to hazard a guess as to world wide opinion of same sex marriage legislation. I think it is a valid extension of the topic and one a reasonable person would ask but I can see why you would avoid it's discussion.

I would like to point out that comparison of Thailand with the rest of the world might make for more complete knowledge of the issue and its discussion.

[surayu]

Edit: triplicated post?

Edited June 3, 2011 by surayu

[surayu]

Edit: triplicated post?

Edited June 3, 2011 by surayu

[kerryk]

I don't think the discussion should be focused on %'s but in what is right and what is wrong, possibly stating the supporting reasons for that.

If there is something i really dislike, is that sort of "football team" (or soccer if you prefere) mentality, where someone will belittle someone else just because he belongs to a different side and then having the feel it's ok because there are others backing up that sillyness....

Even if you have the entire world on your part, you might still be wrong.

So who decides what is right and wrong? I guess the majority opinion is out as a guide. Elections might be tough.

[jdinasia]

Jdinasia,

Enlightened simple guy I guess would have been a better choice of words, sorry . So you don't want to hazard a guess as to how the rest of the world would vote about same sex marriage?

I told you --- that I won't play under your extremely limited "yes or no" rules ....

Instead, why don't you tell us what you think THAIS would say to the following question on a referendum ballot

Q: Do you think that all Thais should be treated equally under the law, and if so, would this extend to allowing gay people, of either gender, and khatoey to register their relationships at the amphur office?

Well that makes two. Both you and Jingthing will not bother to hazard a guess as to world wide opinion of same sex marriage legislation. I think it is a valid extension of the topic and one a reasonable person would ask but I can see why you would avoid it's discussion.

I would like to point out that comparison of Thailand with the rest of the world might make for more complete knowledge of the issue and its discussion.

Like I said --- You obviously have a horse in this race ----

I do wonder why you will not answer a question that is directly on topic though? .... Oh yeah, you have a horse in this race

[kerryk]

Jdinasia,

Enlightened simple guy I guess would have been a better choice of words, sorry . So you don't want to hazard a guess as to how the rest of the world would vote about same sex marriage?

I told you --- that I won't play under your extremely limited "yes or no" rules ....

Instead, why don't you tell us what you think THAIS would say to the following question on a referendum ballot

Q: Do you think that all Thais should be treated equally under the law, and if so, would this extend to allowing gay people, of either gender, and khatoey to register their relationships at the amphur office?

Well that makes two. Both you and Jingthing will not bother to hazard a guess as to world wide opinion of same sex marriage legislation. I think it is a valid extension of the topic and one a reasonable person would ask but I can see why you would avoid it's discussion.

I would like to point out that comparison of Thailand with the rest of the world might make for more complete knowledge of the issue and its discussion.

Like I said --- You obviously have a horse in this race ----

I do wonder why you will not answer a question that is directly on topic though? .... Oh yeah, you have a horse in this race

I asked my question first

[surayu]

So who decides what is right and wrong? I guess the majority opinion is out as a guide. Elections might be tough.

Yes it's a "guide", but we must be carefull as sometime the guide create injustices....

[kerryk]

So who decides what is right and wrong? I guess the majority opinion is out as a guide. Elections might be tough.

Yes it's a "guide", but we must be carefull as sometime the guide create injustices....

So who decides if it is an injustice?

[surayu]

So who decides if it is an injustice?

Well, let your brain have a chat with your heart, together they might start developing a "conscience" , try to think what "goods" and what "bads" a certain action would create and then choose the option that will create the less damages.

Edit:

This however need to be further elaborated, as let's take for example a non existent religion, accepted by a whole nation, which want to kill any person born on a particular day (or any other sort of weird reason), even if we would have to fight to death an enormous number of people, so in fact creating more damages, that's still the right thing to do, in protecting an innocent.

So how the right formula can be correctly worded? "any forbiddings/action not based on well founded reason shouldn't taking place" ?

Edited June 3, 2011 by surayu

[jdinasia]

I told you --- that I won't play under your extremely limited "yes or no" rules ....

Instead, why don't you tell us what you think THAIS would say to the following question on a referendum ballot

Q: Do you think that all Thais should be treated equally under the law, and if so, would this extend to allowing gay people, of either gender, and khatoey to register their relationships at the amphur office?

Well that makes two. Both you and Jingthing will not bother to hazard a guess as to world wide opinion of same sex marriage legislation. I think it is a valid extension of the topic and one a reasonable person would ask but I can see why you would avoid it's discussion.

I would like to point out that comparison of Thailand with the rest of the world might make for more complete knowledge of the issue and its discussion.

Like I said --- You obviously have a horse in this race ----

I do wonder why you will not answer a question that is directly on topic though? .... Oh yeah, you have a horse in this race

I asked my question first

Nah --- You stared a whole line of statements and questions but avoid answering any. When you get caught you duck and switch tactics ...and make claims contradictory to your previous claims ... "I am an enlightened thinker and a really flexible guy who does not have a horse in the race." ---- becomes "I am just a simple guy"

Your most recent off topic spin is "how would the world vote?" about a topic they had never thought of before .... yeah That's what I would describe as "intellectually honest" (cough*)

I answered your question with a VERY direct answer. I will not play that game. Now --- how about an answer to my question which is actually ON TOPIC and not just a slanted question that has already been beaten on a couple of levels with nations etc ....

[kerryk]

So who decides if it is an injustice?

Well, let your brain have a chat with your heart, together they might start developing a "conscience" , try to think what "goods" and what "bads" a certain action would create and then choose the option that will create the less damages.

That is how but not who. Who decides if it is an injustice?

[kerryk]

Jdinasia,

You wrote, "I answered your question with a VERY direct answer. I will not play that game. Now --- how about an answer to my question which is actually ON TOPIC and not just a slanted question that has already been beaten on a couple of levels with nations etc"

That is not an answer. That is refusing to answer. My question, "What percent of the world's population would vote for same sex marriage?" When you answer my question I will answer yours.

The question is relevant to the discussion of same sex marriage in Thailand because Thailand does not exist in a vacuum.

[jdinasia]

Jdinasia,

You wrote, "I answered your question with a VERY direct answer. I will not play that game. Now --- how about an answer to my question which is actually ON TOPIC and not just a slanted question that has already been beaten on a couple of levels with nations etc"

That is not an answer. That is refusing to answer. My question, "What percent of the world's population would vote for same sex marriage?" When you answer my question I will answer yours.

The question is relevant to the discussion of same sex marriage in Thailand because Thailand does not exist in a vacuum.

Then we are finished I explained why I won't play your game (and game it is ... with all your different spins (countries that allow it --- etc etc) to try and get someone to agree with you. That you got knocked down on those arguments and now want an absolute answer about a question most of the world has never considered is absurd.

The topic is Thailand ---- Buh bye

[surayu]

That is how but not who. Who decides if it is an injustice?

It doesn't matter who, it can be you, me, his computer or your cat, the idea is what it matter and not from where it comes from.

So anyones/anything that would like to express an opinion on the matter is always welcome, as it might be the right one or even directing us towards the right thing .

Too often we see people, dismissing a particular thought, just because it came out from an entity they dislikes.....and idolatry is equally wrong.

[Richard4849]

BS.

What people in Uganda think of gay marriage has ZERO to do with what Thailand should / would / will do in response to the question. Thailand is a sovereign nation: the only thing that matters on a domestic issue such is this is the opinion of the citizens of this country.

The fact that a bunch of foreigners here is arguing about what the Thai should do is of equally little to no consequence.

[goldenbow]

Im discussed of the idea, but i support it. I mean, it's your choice, your life, your bed

[Richard4849]

I'm discussed, too -- whatever that means.

[goldenbow]

disgusted

disgusted

disgusted

[surayu]

disgusted

disgusted

disgusted

by what-what-what ?-?-?

[goldenbow]

Don't tease me around! From the gay's marriages...

[Richard4849]

Ah, DISGUSTED!

Why would someone feel the need to express disgust at anyone else's bed partner? Perhaps he should post a picture of whomever he is sleeping with, so that we can all express whether or not we find the thought of sex with her to be disgusting?

[Jingthing]

Ah, DISGUSTED!

Why would someone feel the need to express disgust at anyone else's bed partner? Perhaps he should post a picture of whomever he is sleeping with, so that we can all express whether or not we find the thought of sex with her to be disgusting?

The politics of DISGUST coming from homophobes is actually a very relevant aspect of the global fight for gay liberation and equality. I feel this is a much more important factor in the west, especially Anglo cultures like America, than Buddhist Thailand.

http://www.slate.com/id/2246892/

In From Disgust to Humanity, Nussbaum, a prominent professor of law and philosophy at the University of Chicago, explains that much of the political rhetoric around denying equal rights to gay Americans is rooted in the language of disgust. Their activities are depicted as "vile and revolting," threatening to "contaminate and defile" the rest of us. Looked at starkly, she argues, much of the anti-gay argument is bound up in feces and saliva, germs, contagion and blood.

[maidu]

I used to think gays raising children might adversely influence the kids - or perhaps deprive their kids of some sort of balanced upbringing / influences.

Now, I've come to realize that parents can be screwed up, no matter what their sexual orientation. Recent conversations have cemented what many of us pretty much knew already: some parents actively harm their kids. I'm close with one guy who's told me his natural father beat him senseless and often for the slightest wrongdoing. Another guy (who is gay) told me of prolonged and awful abuse while growing up with his mom as the sole disciplinarian. Don't get me started on my mom, ....the horror stories could go on all night. If I were to grade humans in general on their overall skills at parenting, I'd probably give them a D minus.