EDITORIAL
Same-sex union bill no cause for celebration
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- Lesbians, gays and others seek equal treatment under the law, not special favours and condescension

The recent move by the Parliamentary Commission on Law, Justice and Human Rights to legalise same-sex relationships came as a pleasant surprise to the local community of lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgenders and intersex persons (LGBTIs). Three leading LGBTI activists were duly invited to sit on the working group established by the commission to prepare a draft.

However, the celebratory mood quickly evaporated when the voices of these representatives were heard but went largely unheeded. Indeed, the resulting bill provides cause for concerns. The exclusion of rights in regards to children - even biological ones from a previous marriage - deprives LGBTIs of opportunities to found a family. Worse, a "homosexuality test" was repeatedly mentioned as precondition for relationship registration under this law.

When LGBTI activists expressed their reservations at last week's public hearing, the bill's promoters told them they should feel lucky for not having been born Afghan or Iranian LGBTIs, to be thankful for the "favour" and stop being greedy. These shocking words reveal the prevalent cultural attitude regarding LGBTIs not as equals, but as pitiable inferiors - like beggars obliged to feel grateful for every mercy tossed into their bowls.

The bill's pushers should consult the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, which recognises inherent human dignity and equal, inalienable rights in all human beings. In other words, human rights are not a special favour or charity project. What lawmakers and governments must do is affirm these rights and removing the obstacles to their realisation.

Article 30 of our Constitution also prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender, which, its official statement of intention explicitly clarifies, refers not only to physical differences between males and females but also includes gender, sexual orientation and gender identity. This renders the Civil Code's chapter on marriage unconstitutional, not only for excluding same-sex couples but also for its prescribed inequality between husband and wife.

Without political will and interest to amend the outdated code, however, Thai lawmakers could have followed international good practices by enacting a new gender-neutral civil union law. Instead, they chose to write one specifically for two persons of the same gender - allegedly as a "favour" to LGBTIs. (None of the fourteen marriage-equality countries did this. South Africa enacted a new gender-neutral marriage law to augment its old ones. All remaining countries amended their marriage laws to remove gendered language.)

Separate is never equal; it has been proven time and again. This ill-conceived bill, if it becomes law, will be unconstitutional by formalising the segregation of LGBTIs. It can also be challenged for reverse discrimination by opposite-sex couples who may want to use it out of uneasiness with gender inequality in traditional marriage.

Besides the constitutionality issue, the bill's attempt to confine people in neat sex and gender boxes is problematic for transgenders and intersex persons. Writing sex and gender into law with no good reasons is an obstacle to future legal developments to guarantee equality and non-discrimination on the basis of gender.

By telling LGBTIs to be thankful for their lot, the bill's pushers reveal their view of LGBTI rights as "special rights" - to be given or withheld at will. This is exactly how hostile countries attack the rights of LGBTI, who they believe to be less than human and undeserving of any rights.

By telling LGBTIs to consider themselves lucky not having been born Afghans or Iranians, the bill's promoters unwittingly show how they are, in fact, identical to the very homophobes they feel superior to. All they can congratulate themselves on is having found a way to discriminate in the guise of human rights promotion and protection.

-- The Nation 2013-04-28

This is stupid, homosexuals should hav the sames right as heterosexuals do, they should be able to get married, adopt etc the same that hetero.

This is stupid, homosexuals should hav the sames right as heterosexuals do, they should be able to get married, adopt etc the same that hetero.

You know that, we know that, but Thailand doesn't yet have the balls to do it, so again they take their PC attitude to avoid confruntation.

Wake up! It's 2013! <deleted>!

It's hard to see any way forward for this section of the community, whilst you have a dysfunctional style of government , they proudly call Democracy, any calls for reforms that excludes money isn't bound to go far, it's rather disappointing to say the least that I and many others have a very low opinion of the Government , but at the end of the day they bring it on themselves, this being said , a conscious vote from both houses ,if passed , the same entitlements apply as the rest of the community,no strings attached, easy, now go n do it.

Religion has never been one of my priorities so can anyone tell where Buddhism stands on homosexuality ?

Religion has never been one of my priorities so can anyone tell where Buddhism stands on homosexuality ?

I don't think Buddha ever got into it specifically but am sure since then some have put there own spin on it.

It's hard to see any way forward for this section of the community, whilst you have a dysfunctional style of government , they proudly call Democracy, any calls for reforms that excludes money isn't bound to go far, it's rather disappointing to say the least that I and many others have a very low opinion of the Government , but at the end of the day they bring it on themselves, this being said , a conscious vote from both houses ,if passed , the same entitlements apply as the rest of the community,no strings attached, easy, now go n do it.

More "functional" governments than this one, struggle hard as well...

If same sex people wish to party or spend a life time together - so be it. Who really cares?

a "homosexuality test" was repeatedly mentioned as precondition for relationship registration under this law.

I imagine some asking the applicant.. "are you now, or have you ever been a practicing homosexual"

sound familiar to anyone ??

This is stupid, homosexuals should hav the sames right as heterosexuals do, they should be able to get married, adopt etc the same that hetero.

Homosexuals do have the same rights as other people. They're free to marry a person of the opposite sex any time they like, just like the rest of us. This current fad for same sex "marriage" undermines and trivialises the importance of real marriage. Before long they'll be demanding the right to marry their dog, their mother, their iPad or God knows what else. Where does it stop?

I wonder what they mean exactly by homosexuality test.

For example, this is the way it is in Turkey:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/26/turkish-military-pink-certificate-gay_n_1379823.html

Having grown a few days' beard at the time of the inquiry, Ahmet
adds, "They asked me if I liked football, whether I wore woman's clothes
or used woman's perfume...they told me I didn't look like a normal gay
man.'' He was then asked to provide a picture of himself dressed as a
woman.

In another case, the article notes, a Turkish gay man provided
explicit photos of himself having sex with another man in order to
obtain an exemption. ''The face must be visible,'' the man, identified
only as Gokhan, noted. ''And the photos must show you as the passive
partner.''

This is typical in the more backwards countries, the idiotic assumption that only PASSIVE partners and men who look and act like women can actually really be gay men.

Thailand is another country where it seems the majority of the general public doesn't really understand the difference between transgender issues and homosexuality.

While I doubt the proposed Thailand homosexuality test is as odious as in Turkey, the concept of a homosexuality test is most definitely a very serious RED FLAG to Thai civil rights advocates.

Homo's do have the same rights as normal people.

No they don't.

A number of offensive posts and their responses have been removed.

Spalpeen what do you care who or what people wan t to marry as long as you can do the same?

I think this is one of the first steps towards total equality and i t may be a long way but even a country like France is beginning to see the light.

Being infected with the homophobia virus seems to be really affecting the mental health of some people.

This is stupid, homosexuals should hav the sames right as heterosexuals do, they should be able to get married, adopt etc the same that hetero.

Homosexuals do have the same rights as other people. They're free to marry a person of the opposite sex any time they like, just like the rest of us. This current fad for same sex "marriage" undermines and trivialises the importance of real marriage. Before long they'll be demanding the right to marry their dog, their mother, their iPad or God knows what else. Where does it stop?

No they dont, they can't legally marry or adopt like heterosexual couples do, and the rest of ur post is incredibly stupid, guess u r a christian, right?

I keep wondering why people are so selfish. You wanna marry or sleep with same sex partner but adopt kids fathered by other people why not make your own kids.

This is stupid, homosexuals should hav the sames right as heterosexuals do, they should be able to get married, adopt etc the same that hetero.

Homosexuals do have the same rights as other people. They're free to marry a person of the opposite sex any time they like, just like the rest of us. This current fad for same sex "marriage" undermines and trivialises the importance of real marriage. Before long they'll be demanding the right to marry their dog, their mother, their iPad or God knows what else. Where does it stop?

I was waiting for a bigotted post and lone behold !

It's a bad as disabled people wanting wheelchair ramps, whatever next, they can crawl upstairs so they already have the same rights, soon the disabled will also be expecting to be treated equally (sarcasm)

I keep wondering why people are so selfish. You wanna marry or sleep with same sex partner but adopt kids fathered by other people why not make your own kids.

Nothing to stop them having their own children but when there are many children awaiting adoption why shouldn't Gays be able to adopt ?

I think people fear the children will catch the 'disease' and turn out homosexual a view which of course just shows how ignorant some are about sexuality.

I keep wondering why people are so selfish. You wanna marry or sleep with same sex partner but adopt kids fathered by other people why not make your own kids.

you'll be happy to know then, from the OP:

The exclusion of rights in regards to children - even biological ones from a previous marriage - deprives LGBTIs of opportunities to found a family

Lesbians have no problem making their own kids (with a little liquid help from their friends or a sperm bank). Some gay men and even more lesbians have children from previous relationships. Also, yes, adoption is an option for straight people, so why not gay people? Probably the majority of gay male couples don't want kids anyway and the homophobes use that argument too, that marriage is for reproduction, so if so, why not ALSO ban infertile and non-reproducing by choice straight people from legal marriage? In any case Thailand isn't even close to considering actual gay MARRIAGE, so we're jumping the gun here.

This is stupid, homosexuals should hav the sames right as heterosexuals do, they should be able to get married, adopt etc the same that hetero.

Homosexuals do have the same rights as other people. They're free to marry a person of the opposite sex any time they like, just like the rest of us. This current fad for same sex "marriage" undermines and trivialises the importance of real marriage. Before long they'll be demanding the right to marry their dog, their mother, their iPad or God knows what else. Where does it stop?

No they dont, they can't legally marry or adopt like heterosexual couples do, and the rest of ur post is incredibly stupid, guess u r a christian, right?

Bigoted people of limited intelligence may attempt to use Christianity to prop up their hate towards people they perceive as different from themselves, but that doesn't mean they are genuinely Christians.

Gandhi: “I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your Christ.”

Considering how much bigotry is on display in this forum toward Thai people, it's hardly surprising that many of the same self-described "normal" people have enough hate to spread around to others they see as different from themselves.

a "homosexuality test" was repeatedly mentioned as precondition for relationship registration under this law.

I imagine some asking the applicant.. "are you now, or have you ever been a practicing homosexual"

sound familiar to anyone ??

This very question used to be par t of the booking in procedure in British prisons but I'm a couple of decades out of date so I not sure now. Before anyone asks Yes I've been in prison a few times and No not as a guest of the Queen.

a "homosexuality test" was repeatedly mentioned as precondition for relationship registration under this law.

I imagine some asking the applicant.. "are you now, or have you ever been a practicing homosexual"

sound familiar to anyone ??

This very question used to be par t of the booking in procedure in British prisons but I'm a couple of decades out of date so I not sure now. Before anyone asks Yes I've been in prison a few times and No not as a guest of the Queen.

That serves a different purpose in prison than what we are talking about here.

a "homosexuality test" was repeatedly mentioned as precondition for relationship registration under this law.

I imagine some asking the applicant.. "are you now, or have you ever been a practicing homosexual"

sound familiar to anyone ??

This very question used to be par t of the booking in procedure in British prisons but I'm a couple of decades out of date so I not sure now. Before anyone asks Yes I've been in prison a few times and No not as a guest of the Queen.

That serves a different purpose in prison than what we are talking about here.

and it serves to stop people being badly assaulted and I mean in the old fashioned way but the question is still the same

If same sex people wish to party or spend a life time together - so be it. Who really cares?

no one, "legalise same-sex relationships" is therefor nonsense. It wasn't illegal like in Saudi Arabia.

But the point is, if it is good if two gays can adopt young boys. Which might be complete OK in 99 %, but what is with the 1 % where real bad things happen??

Bearing in mind that the main aim of any species is further the existence of that species surely the legalising of any same sex union, which is unable to procreate, is actually a retrograde step and indeed a move toward extinction.

Someone should have looked into the amount spent in Thailand by LGBT visitors....not good to slap the hand that had s big open wallet.

Besides just looking silly for the way this sad little piece was written.

If same sex people wish to party or spend a life time together - so be it. Who really cares?

no one, "legalise same-sex relationships" is therefor nonsense. It wasn't illegal like in Saudi Arabia.

But the point is, if it is good if two gays can adopt young boys. Which might be complete OK in 99 %, but what is with the 1 % where real bad things happen??

You're confusing issues here. The bill isn't about decriminalizing homosexuality or homosexual acts. It's about legal recognition of RELATIONSHIPS.

By your red herring pedo scare argument, NOBODY should be allowed children, as the majority of pedo crimes in the world happen in heterosexual families.

Bearing in mind that the main aim of any species is further the existence of that species surely the legalising of any same sex union, which is unable to procreate, is actually a retrograde step and indeed a move toward extinction.

No it is not. Because it only means something to a small percentage of the population. The massive breeding continues unabated. No threat in stopping that.