Due to President Obama's historic announcement of his support of legal gay marriage in the USA, this issue has become more topical globally (for the moment).

In that spirit, here is a chance to show the current state of the opinion here about legalizing gay marriage in Thailand. Up to the Thais of course, but like anything else, we can have our opinions.

Note, I have tried to keep the poll simple. Thus I have avoided complications such as the legality of a male marrying a sex changed male.

Pesonally i do not care what two men or women get up to sexually in the privacy of their own home,up to them ,but as to getting married or adopting ,no way , marriage and adoption is for couples of the opposit sex as nature intended.

*Deleted quote edited out*

Granting equal rights is not privileged status.

I would be curious to see any surveys done of the Thai public on this issue. I know Thai gay activists haven't been very ... active ... about this, but I reckon eventually that is likely to happen when you consider countries as diverse as Argentina and South Africa have gone for full legalization.

Edited May 12, 201214 yr by Scott
Deleted quote edited out

Granting equal rights is not privileged status..

if it was equal rights , then every one would have the right to get married,, to any one, with out the distinction of sexual orientation..

for instance, two heterosexual friends, living together,, who for reasons of their own, would want the same protection, and rights under the law, as married couples,should have the right to get married to each other.

Ohh wait, that would be a civil union.

But Gay couples, dont want a civil union.. then what do they want?

I know what they want, do you?

Gay marriage is a political ploy, and has nothing to do with equal rights.

Edited May 12, 201214 yr by Scott
Deleted quote edited out

In countries with legal same sex marriage, the state is not interested if the people marrying are actually homosexual, or not. Not clear why it would matter. Similarly as any worldly person knows, there are MANY homosexual people who are married heterosexually. That's not the state's business either. As it stands now in most countries, people of the opposite sex can marry as COUPLES (two people), and people of the same sex cannot marry (two people). The equality thing is about same sex couples having the same EQUAL rights as opposite sex couples. Of course it is about equal rights.

What do gay people want? Yes of course that's a political issue as with any large group of people you have a range of opinions. In Thailand, yes, the gay people of Thailand would have to be interested in working on this issue more aggressively if they are seriously interested in the goal of marriage equality. I think now they are not in enough numbers and intensity to make any difference. There is of course the "Thai way" of not making waves which to westerners can be seen as fatalism. I also think probably sometime in the future ... they will be more interested. For the general public, legal gay marriage is good for business, marriage parties, honeymoons, household formations, ... divorce lawyers. Just my opinion.

Edited May 11, 201214 yr by Jingthing

Pesonally i do not care what two men or women get up to sexually in the privacy of their own home,up to them ,but as to getting married or adopting ,no way , marriage and adoption is for couples of the opposit sex as nature intended.

Why not?

Homosexual couples in stable committed relationships have exactly the same rights to be miserable in marriage as the rest of us. As for raising kids, why not. If they are wanting to not have a decent nights sleep for the first 6 years of their young sprogs life and do school runs, then I don't think society should stop them.

In countries with legal same sex marriage, the state is not interested if the people marrying are actually homosexual, or not. Not clear why it would matter.

oh good, I am not the only one who cant sleep

If there is no distinction, as far s the state is concerned,, between homosexual couples, and asexual couples of the same sex getting married,, then why aren't civil unions adequate?

In countries with legal same sex marriage, the state is not interested if the people marrying are actually homosexual, or not. Not clear why it would matter.

oh good, I am not the only one who cant sleep

If there is no distinction, as far s the state is concerned,, between homosexual couples, and asexual couples of the same sex getting married,, then why aren't civil unions adequate?

Why should same sex couples settle for less? Unless you're talking about downgrading all marriages to civil unions. Then you'd have equality.

Pesonally i do not care what two men or women get up to sexually in the privacy of their own home,up to them ,but as to getting married or adopting ,no way , marriage and adoption is for couples of the opposit sex as nature intended.

Why not?

Homosexual couples in stable committed relationships have exactly the same rights to be miserable in marriage as the rest of us. As for raising kids, why not. If they are wanting to not have a decent nights sleep for the first 6 years of their young sprogs life and do school runs, then I don't think society should stop them.

Society does not stop them,They have the right to be just as mistakable as every one else,,under a properly constructed civil union.

Pesonally i do not care what two men or women get up to sexually in the privacy of their own home,up to them ,but as to getting married or adopting ,no way , marriage and adoption is for couples of the opposit sex as nature intended.

Why not?

Homosexual couples in stable committed relationships have exactly the same rights to be miserable in marriage as the rest of us. As for raising kids, why not. If they are wanting to not have a decent nights sleep for the first 6 years of their young sprogs life and do school runs, then I don't think society should stop them.

Society does not stop them,They have the right to be just as mistakable as every one else,,under a properly constructed civil union.

Is that the same legal framework that heterosexual couples use? If not, then I don't agree. Inequality under the law for a country's citizens is a principal no one.shoukd strive for.

In countries with legal same sex marriage, the state is not interested if the people marrying are actually homosexual, or not. Not clear why it would matter.

oh good, I am not the only one who cant sleep

If there is no distinction, as far s the state is concerned,, between homosexual couples, and asexual couples of the same sex getting married,, then why aren't civil unions adequate?

Why should same sex couples settle for less? Unless you're talking about downgrading all marriages to civil unions. Then you'd have equality.

As far as a secular government is concerned, all maters under it's jurisdiction are of a civil nature.

This is simply an attempt by the gay community to get the government to re-define marriage.

For a group that wants the government to stay out of the bedroom, The gay community is a little confused in this issue.

Edited May 11, 201214 yr by sirineou

In countries with legal same sex marriage, the state is not interested if the people marrying are actually homosexual, or not. Not clear why it would matter.

oh good, I am not the only one who cant sleep

If there is no distinction, as far s the state is concerned,, between homosexual couples, and asexual couples of the same sex getting married,, then why aren't civil unions adequate?

Why should same sex couples settle for less? Unless you're talking about downgrading all marriages to civil unions. Then you'd have equality.

As far as a secular government is concerned, all maters under it's jurisdictional are of a civil nature.

This is simply an attempt by the gay community to get the government to re-define marriage.

For a group that wants the government to stay out of the bedroom, The gay community is a little confused in this issue.

You are being pretty disingenuous with that last line.

Governments will always impact our lives. And why shouldn't citizens of a country have the rights to lobby to amend laws?

In countries with legal same sex marriage, the state is not interested if the people marrying are actually homosexual, or not. Not clear why it would matter.

oh good, I am not the only one who cant sleep

If there is no distinction, as far s the state is concerned,, between homosexual couples, and asexual couples of the same sex getting married,, then why aren't civil unions adequate?

Why should same sex couples settle for less? Unless you're talking about downgrading all marriages to civil unions. Then you'd have equality.

Do civil unions offer inferior protection under the law? and if so, How?

In countries with legal same sex marriage, the state is not interested if the people marrying are actually homosexual, or not. Not clear why it would matter.

oh good, I am not the only one who cant sleep

If there is no distinction, as far s the state is concerned,, between homosexual couples, and asexual couples of the same sex getting married,, then why aren't civil unions adequate?

Why should same sex couples settle for less? Unless you're talking about downgrading all marriages to civil unions. Then you'd have equality.

Do civil unions offer inferior protection under the law? and if so, How?

That isn't the point.

You seem to be endorsing the fact that there should be separate laws for people depending in their sexual orientation?

seriously, who gives a shit?

love the one you are with.

You seem to be endorsing the fact that there should be separate laws for people depending in their sexual orientation?

Sorry Samran, But that is exactly the point.

I have great respect for my gay friends, but in this issue, they are dead wrong.

They are trying to get the government to make a decision that re-classifies the human condition,

The human condition is defined by nature, and not the government,

if they were alowed to do this in this instance from pressure from a political group, what is to stop them from entering in to social engineering every time a group with adequate political power comes along?

You seem to be endorsing the fact that there should be separate laws for people depending in their sexual orientation?

Quite the opposite.

Every union under a secular government is, or should be a civil union.

Pesonally i do not care what two men or women get up to sexually in the privacy of their own home,up to them ,but as to getting married or adopting ,no way , marriage and adoption is for couples of the opposit sex as nature intended.

How about a "normal couple" have a kid beat the hell out of it or it gets adopted and well taken care of by a gay couple ( shock horror) my only concern is they would tend to influence the kid to be gay too which i dont agree with.

Anyway why stop with male male why not man and monkey, man and banana why cant they all get married?

In countries with legal same sex marriage, the state is not interested if the people marrying are actually homosexual, or not. Not clear why it would matter. Similarly as any worldly person knows, there are MANY homosexual people who are married heterosexually. That's not the state's business either. As it stands now in most countries, people of the opposite sex can marry as COUPLES (two people), and people of the same sex cannot marry (two people). The equality thing is about same sex couples having the same EQUAL rights as opposite sex couples. Of course it is about equal rights.

What do gay people want? Yes of course that's a political issue as with any large group of people you have a range of opinions. In Thailand, yes, the gay people of Thailand would have to be interested in working on this issue more aggressively if they are seriously interested in the goal of marriage equality. I think now they are not in enough numbers and intensity to make any difference. There is of course the "Thai way" of not making waves which to westerners can be seen as fatalism. I also think probably sometime in the future ... they will be more interested. For the general public, legal gay marriage is good for business, marriage parties, honeymoons, household formations, ... divorce lawyers. Just my opinion.

Do you REALLY think the gay people of Thailand are that bothered when most of the population it seems arent "really" married at all legally according to the govt IE the actual marriage cert etc?

Poll: Current WESTERN Views Of Legal Gay Marriage In Thailand

There - I corrected your thread title.

You seem to be endorsing the fact that there should be separate laws for people depending in their sexual orientation?

Sorry Samran, But that is exactly the point.

I have great respect for my gay friends, but in this issue, they are dead wrong.

They are trying to get the government to make a decision that re-classifies the human condition,

The human condition is defined by nature, and not the government,

if they were alowed to do this in this instance from pressure from a political group, what is to stop them from entering in to social engineering every time a group with adequate political power comes along?

You mean the religious heterosexual group?

Marriage is none of the governments business. Get rid of the government defining, sanctifying, and tracking marriages. People should be free to define a marriage as whatever they want it to be. I think it would be nice if the government stayed out of peoples lives, but the will of the people in our generation is to take away freedoms and be more regulated. Gay marriage may have a chance of becoming legal, but what about polygamy and others. It's not fair to discriminate like this. Remember someone in Thailand married a snake and had a ceremony which was big news and became a movie.

If you're a religious person marriage is a very important thing. A sacrament, at the same level as baptism and extreme unction.

Gay people act like spoiled kids. Nobody contest their way of life but it's not enough. They want marriage because they know it's important for the straight religious community.

Everywhere in the world we see a rise of the far right, of religious extremists. People should understand they shouldn't go too far too fast.

Edited May 12, 201214 yr by JurgenG

Marriage is none of the governments business. Get rid of the government defining, sanctifying, and tracking marriages. People should be free to define a marriage as whatever they want it to be. I think it would be nice if the government stayed out of peoples lives, but the will of the people in our generation is to take away freedoms and be more regulated. Gay marriage may have a chance of becoming legal, but what about polygamy and others. It's not fair to discriminate like this. Remember someone in Thailand married a snake and had a ceremony which was big news and became a movie.

Sorry Canopy,

But it is not that simple.

The legal union of two people is the governments concern,

"Marriage"is a a bilateral contract that two people enter in to, and it defines the responsibilities that each person has toward each other and toward the rest of society. All concern have to perform based on their responsibilities, and when they fail to perform, the contract becomes a non-performing contract and is subject to dissolution.

Such contractual arrangement can only be entered in to by consenting adults,,

children, animals fruit, and vegetables , can not enter in to a legal y binding contract

The Government as the elected representative of society,and has every right to regulate the legal aspects of this contractual agreement.

What it does not have is the right, or the ability to define the human condition,whether that human condition pertains to heterosexual or homosexual relationships. Only nature has that ability.

The Gay community , and rightly so, does not want governments to define the nature of homosexual relationships,yet in a strange to me way, want government to define the nature of heterosexual relationships.

Gay Marriage - to be honest, I see no future in it.

But it is not that simple.

Yes it can be that simple and in fact some people choose this alternative already. They sanctify their marriage with a ceremony of their choosing but never enter into a legal contract with the government. I am not the only one who advocates that marriages should have no government contract, no have special privileges, no have tax deductions, and have absolutely nothing to do with the government.

But it is not that simple.

Yes it can be that simple and in fact some people choose this alternative already. They sanctify their marriage with a ceremony of their choosing but never enter into a legal contract with the government. I am not the only one who advocates that marriages should have no government contract, no have special privileges, no have tax deductions, and have absolutely nothing to do with the government.

For those who do not want to enter in to a legal binding contract, there are advantages and disadvantages, and I guess it is their decision whether the advantages out-weight the disadvantages.,

Some of the problems associated with personal unregistered marriages,

is the control and distribution of common property, , the legal parental rights and obligations when children are involved, and the ability to make medical decisions, for your spouse or child..

A civil union addresses all of these problems with in heterosexual or homosexual union

Edited May 12, 201214 yr by sirineou

Right, but these things can be better defined by the persons involved just like writing a will.

Edited May 12, 201214 yr by canopy

People know that the fashion industry promote very unhealthy models, anorexic women . Is it a surprise that the fashion industry is controlled by gays, people who hate women ?

Gay people should be tolerated,we are an open society, but giving them more rights is suicidal. They hate men, they hate women. Why do we want to give them privileged status is beyond me

Granting equal rights is not privileged status.

I would be curious to see any surveys done of the Thai public on this issue. I know Thai gay activists haven't been very ... active ... about this, but I reckon eventually that is likely to happen when you consider countries as diverse as Argentina and South Africa have gone for full legalization.

I imagine they would be more active about this issue if there were more tangible benefits. Even many straight Thais never bother registering their marriage, they just have the religious ceremony and thats it. Back home you get tax benefits and such but here the vast majority of Thais don't even pay income taxes. Most aren't even registered to pay. It would be a huge benefit to Thai-foreigner couples for visa reasons but I don't think that is going to be enough to get many Thais to push for the issue. Would be nice to see it happen however, they could be the first country in Asia to do so. Don't really see any other Asian country doing it anytime soon either.

Right, but these things should be able to be defined by the persons involved just like writing a will.

or a prenuptial agreement,

And for those sophisticated enough, and unaffected by l"love" to construct a comprehensive agreement that for-sees all eventualities,this can be an option, for all others , the government has to provide a legal frame work.

Edited May 12, 201214 yr by sirineou