Same-Sex Union Bill No Cause For Celebration

[Nisa]

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?

It is a situation of where does it all end.

If same sex marriages, why not multiple partner marriages, as in Islam and Mormon religions.

Then any sense of 'equality' is mocked.

Nothing wrong with that, if one man and some women one to live together and want to get married, why not? whats wrong with that?Marriage is nothing holly or sacrosant, marriage is just a legal institution to say that in the eyes of the law you and your partners are familly and therefore have certain rights and duties, nothing more nothing else.

While I tend to agree with you, there is a heck of a lot of people who don't and see marriage as much more on both sides be it those who believe in the sanctity of marriage or those who believe that a Civil Union, which provides the same rights, is a form of discrimination and not a satisfactory solution. The problem is that governments have taken the churches word (marriage) and the churches definition of marriage to make law on domestic partnership agreements even in countries that provide freedom of religion. It is time for governments to use this as an opportunity to further separate church and state and get out of the marriage business and simply issue partnership contracts that have absolutely nothing to do with people's sex lives or having to have sex to finalize the agreement and give marriage back to churches and/or the personal beliefs of the people. This would solve everyone's problem except those wanting to make problems for others.

Edited April 29, 2013 by Nisa

[Spalpeen]

This forum only works because there are rules. Some things are forbidden and there are mods. to enforce those rules. If you removed those restrictions then many threads would quickly degenerate into screeching matches.

Society works the same way. There are some things that are allowed and some that are forbidden. Different societies have different rulebooks but it's still the rules that define a society. Marriage between a man and a woman is a fundamental institution in every human society, and the restrictions surrounding it are not something to be lightly set aside.

Otherwise, like a forum without rules, the whole thing degenerates into an unregulated free for all.

[Spalpeen]

Potosi makes an interesting point here. The next thing after gay 'marriage' will be bisexuals (The B in GLBTI) wanting to marry both a man and a woman because marrying only one person would deny them the right to fully express their sexuality. And if all three are consenting adults, who could possibly object to that?

It as if now you are scraping the bottom of the barrel looking desperately for some kind of argument....and they're getting more and more facile.

As the man says - Legalising gay marriage will not open any flood gates, it just gives the opportunity for some people to be able to live like the rest of us. there will be no threat to the fabric of society, in fact it might actually gicve the institution of marriage a much needed jolt in the arm......maybe gays can do for marriage what they did for musical theatre?

So you're saying that you would definitely draw the line after gay marriage and oppose any further loosening of the rules?

[cup-O-coffee]

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.

I think that people who push for equality on any basis need to keep their focus on their issues in a professional and mature way, and absolutely not demean others who disagree with them. Please do not imply that I have a virus and hence am a virus just because you can't get your way. It really makes you look ignorant and compels me to abandon even the remotest consideration for what you want.

[Nisa]

Potosi makes an interesting point here. The next thing after gay 'marriage' will be bisexuals (The B in GLBTI) wanting to marry both a man and a woman because marrying only one person would deny them the right to fully express their sexuality. And if all three are consenting adults, who could possibly object to that?

It as if now you are scraping the bottom of the barrel looking desperately for some kind of argument....and they're getting more and more facile.

As the man says - Legalising gay marriage will not open any flood gates, it just gives the opportunity for some people to be able to live like the rest of us. there will be no threat to the fabric of society, in fact it might actually gicve the institution of marriage a much needed jolt in the arm......maybe gays can do for marriage what they did for musical theatre?

So you're saying that you would definitely draw the line after gay marriage and oppose any further loosening of the rules?

I don't think I agree with your views but like you I am confused how somebody can be for gay marriage but be against having multiple spouses or even marrying a relative if everyone involved is a consenting adult. I personally can think of no reason against multiple spouses except for the definition of marriage and as for marrying a relative, just like homosexuals, they don't need to have their own children to marry. Just seems a bit hypocritical if somebody believes in opening up the definition for themselves and their group but not for other who also suffer because of the laws and actually see opening up the laws to include other groups as scraping the bottom of the barrel. Pretty sure many would be highly offended if that term was used to describe changing the laws for homosexuals.

[sbk]

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.

I think that people who push for equality on any basis need to keep their focus on their issues in a professional and mature way, and absolutely not demean others who disagree with them. Please do not imply that I have a virus and hence am a virus just because you can't get your way. It really makes you look ignorant and compels me to abandon even the remotest consideration for what you want.

Bit confused unless you are using two user names. You have not posted in this thread before this so why you feel this post is aimed at you is a tad confusing. Suggest you stop taking things personally and discuss the subject with civility.

[BuddyPinkham]

a "homosexuality test"????????

I wonder who will administer and grade it!

Edited April 29, 2013 by metisdead
Over sized font reset to normal.

[Spalpeen]

a "homosexuality test"????????

I wonder who will administer and grade it!

From The Rocky Horror Show.

Edited April 30, 2013 by Scott
font

[Ticketmaster]

If the child is all the matters then what about a gay or lesbian child being raised by a homophobic family in a largely homophobic world. Imagine the pain the the suffering.

What you describe is undoubtedly painful -- and unfortunate. But the fact is, most if not all gay children are born to heterosexual couples, as those are the folks producing the kids. If a gay child is born to a heterosexual couple, homophobic or not, there is no choice involved; it's simply the hand nature dealt. But with adopted kids, there is a choice. Just because a gay kid born to a homophobic hetero couple suffers, this is a reason to flip it and choose to allow homosexual couple to adopt kids? I think not. Again, the welfare of the child is paramount over the rights of persons wishing to adopt them.

[indyuk]

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.

This is not fair. The very uniqueness of Thai cutural tolerance of diverse gender issues make drafting an acceptable law that can formally rationalise those diverse sexual issues. Great tolerance exists to diversity here in Asia and many uniquely Thai solutions exist for resolution of gender issues for Thai people regardless of their sexual definition at birth. That a profound uneasiness exists in respect to blatent homosexuallity due to the presence of Thailand's secularity, which is in concert with the maintainance of secularity throughout Asia, needss to be respected.

Our western gloves will never quite fit in Asia, that is until the day that Asian's trash their culture as many western nations have.

Edited April 29, 2013 by indyuk

[Jingthing]

What tolerance? Thais who have changed their sex through surgery STILL can't get the sex changed on their ID card. Thai tolerance is WAY OVERRATED by foreigners.

Edited April 29, 2013 by Jingthing

[PeaceBlondie]

Thai

Fertile 2005-2010 1.63

[tpop]

i posted a link to Calhoun's research

and got not even one response

i think that if you stand back and look at this whole "debate" and the countless other debates on the net just like it

don't you think that maybe, just maybe, there might be some deeper truth lurking beneath it all?

here's the premise that his research evokes:

various behavioral aberrations are a consequence of population density (sans environmental designs aimed at reducing the impact of such population densities)

amongst these sociological (read that as epigenetic ie gene+environment) expressions are to be found the following

1. abandonment of progeny

2. sexual deviance and extreme violence in sexual behavior (recall recent sexual abuse of 6 year old girl in India)

3. cannibalism - especially of young

4. isolationism

5 many other "aberrations" that do not manifest themselves in a population that is not exposed to such pressures

so

if his work (and the work of others including myself) on the effect of population density on mammal populations hyas any relevance at all to human populations

how are we to look at it from a distance?

if something is a sociological "ill" does trying to stamp it out prevent the cause from erupting elsewhere?

does "accepting" it cause it to go away?

let me ask this most distressing of questions - and i do apologize deeply for asking it

if you are not "pure" heterosexual (ie read that as, sorry but i really have no other word, "normal"), if you could wave a magic wand and make yourself "normal" again, really, sorry

would you wave it?

in Calhoun-speak - if you could remove all "negative" consequences of population density would you do it even if it meant changing your own nature?

tpop

ps

don't any of you completely ignorant right-wing types leap on this as defense of your limited view of things - it is not - your attempt to stamp out that which you feel abborance while sanctioning all that leads to it's existence has no defense i ethics whatsoever

t

[Scully]

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.

This is not fair. The very uniqueness of Thai cutural tolerance of diverse gender issues make drafting an acceptable law that can formally rationalise those diverse sexual issues. Great tolerance exists to diversity here in Asia and many uniquely Thai solutions exist for resolution of gender issues for Thai people regardless of their sexual definition at birth. That a profound uneasiness exists in respect to blatent homosexuallity due to the presence of Thailand's secularity, which is in concert with the maintainance of secularity throughout Asia, needss to be respected.

Our western gloves will never quite fit in Asia, that is until the day that Asian's trash their culture as many western nations have.

I take it you don't speak Thai?. Homosexuality and katoeys are frowned upon, a butt of many jokes. I talked to a Thai gay man for an hour and at the end he thanked me as he said straight men don't go near him.

Young katoeys have to join expensive private schools with relaxed dress codes if they want to grow their hair, and when they finish school they have very few options for employment.

Homophobia exists in all countries, it's the governments job to relax the rules and gradually people will accept it.

I know you mean well but it's not Western gloves it's modern times, Thailand has grown rapidly and so should it's laws.

[Nisa]

What tolerance? Thais who have changed their sex through surgery STILL can't get the sex changed on their ID card. Thai tolerance is WAY OVERRATED by foreigners.

I am on the fence on this one as I believe every person has the right to know if the person they may take home used to be a different sex. In this case I think an added designation(s) should be made to properly identify them as what they actually are which is neither fully male or female. Give them all the rights they want in their new gender but lets not lie and deceive others of what they actually are.

In the US you can change your Passport to say you're a women even if you are a man who never had any kind of surgery. This is just getting a bit carried away and makes identifying sex on a passport a moot point. http://transequality.org/Resources/passports_2012.pdf

Edited April 29, 2013 by Nisa

[comserve]

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.

I totally disagree. This seems to be the first sensible approach to a "Same Sex Marriage" bill. I believe that same sex marriages can marry if they wish but male homosexuals should NOT be allowed to adopt children. Already there is a case of two gay men marrying & then adopting 6 or 8 boy children for their own gratification. They are in front of the courts for child abuse!

By the way, what is an "intersex" person? Is that a castrated male?

[Jingthing]

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.

I totally disagree. This seems to be the first sensible approach to a "Same Sex Marriage" bill. I believe that same sex marriages can marry if they wish but male homosexuals should NOT be allowed to adopt children. Already there is a case of two gay men marrying & then adopting 6 or 8 boy children for their own gratification. They are in front of the courts for child abuse!

By the way, what is an "intersex" person? Is that a castrated male?

Lets look at your logic. Suppose there was ONE case of heterosexual parents adopting and then abusing the child. No need to suppose. Of course there have been many such cases all over the world over time. So let's make it illegal for heterosexual people to adopt children. Sure thing, buster.

[sjaak327]

This forum only works because there are rules. Some things are forbidden and there are mods. to enforce those rules. If you removed those restrictions then many threads would quickly degenerate into screeching matches.

Society works the same way. There are some things that are allowed and some that are forbidden. Different societies have different rulebooks but it's still the rules that define a society. Marriage between a man and a woman is a fundamental institution in every human society, and the restrictions surrounding it are not something to be lightly set aside.

Otherwise, like a forum without rules, the whole thing degenerates into an unregulated free for all.

Yet plenty of countries already recognise gay marriage using the only law that matters, the one that is democratically established and is being strictly separated (for damm good reasons) from whatever the century old fairy tale book of choice is propagating, depending on who exactly is doing the quoting.

The fundamental institution called marriage should not be limited to a man and a woman, just because some century old book, being selectively quoted by people that have ulterior motives, seem to indicate it is a man-woman affair. The respective religions are perfectly free to restrict their cerimony to man-woman, from my society I expect something different. Here I applaud the strict separation between politics and religion, and applaud the fact that we as citizens of that society can use democratic means to change laws, as was done in my society (The Netherlands) as was done in Belgium and even in Spain.

The wait is for people in other societies (such as Thailand) to enjoy the same basic human rights, the sooner the better !

[dickyknee]

I totally disagree. This seems to be the first sensible approach to a "Same Sex Marriage" bill. I believe that same sex marriages can marry if they wish but male homosexuals should NOT be allowed to adopt children. Already there is a case of two gay men marrying & then adopting 6 or 8 boy children for their own gratification. They are in front of the courts for child abuse!

Because all gay men are kiddy-fiddlers?

Edited April 29, 2013 by dickyknee

[BostonQuackie]

It Imposes Its Acceptance on All Society

[Jingthing]

It Imposes Its Acceptance on All Society

Would it make any difference to anyone whether I accept or don't accept straight marriage?

Edited April 29, 2013 by Jingthing

[notmyself]

It Imposes Its Acceptance on All Society

Inequality is imposed while equality is not.

[wilcopops]

Actually I'm sure gay & lesbian couples would probably settle for equal rights of inheritance, adoption, tax benefits, etc enjoyed by married couples - without the 'married' tag. It's an OK first step and better than nothing. Sent from my GT-S5360B using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Why should they?

Why shouldn't gays have those rights? Your comment is totally ignorant and stupid. Do those rights take something away from you?

I was referring to this - " I'm sure gay & lesbian couples would probably settle for equal rights of inheritance, adoption, tax benefits, etc enjoyed by married couples - without the 'married' tag"

[wilcopops]

Assumptions assumptions........I see now that people are making wild and inaccurate assumptions about homosexuality in nature.

Homosexuality in the wild is not rare and it can well be argued that it actually can be beneficial to a species when males undertake a different set of roles in a community.

[KhunNene]

This forum only works because there are rules. Some things are forbidden and there are mods. to enforce those rules. If you removed those restrictions then many threads would quickly degenerate into screeching matches.

Society works the same way. There are some things that are allowed and some that are forbidden. Different societies have different rulebooks but it's still the rules that define a society. Marriage between a man and a woman is a fundamental institution in every human society, and the restrictions surrounding it are not something to be lightly set aside.

Otherwise, like a forum without rules, the whole thing degenerates into an unregulated free for all.

Marriage between a man and a woman is not a fundamental institution in every human society. Where did you got that? In Denmark, and Denmark is quite a very human society, marriage is a fundamental institution between two human beings. I hear that this is aswell in Spain, France and quite like more 11 or 12 countries.

[BostonQuackie]

It Imposes Its Acceptance on All Society

By legalizing same-sex “marriage,” the Thailand Govt. becomes its official and active promoter. The Govt. will call on public officials to officiate at the new civil ceremony, order public schools to teach its acceptability to children, and punishe any Govt. employee who expresses disapproval.

In every situation where marriage affects society, the Govt. will expect all Religious folks to betray their beliefs and consciences by condoning, through silence or act.

The natural tendency of such a union is not to create families.

It's hard enough now raising children by the biological parents nevermind children being raised by gay partners who are not related to them, and how this may affect the children. they will never experience the many nuances of experiences and cultural differences having to do with male and female. There will be no mom and dad balance, do you want to be raised this way or have your family members raised in such a home?

This movement has nothing to do with equality, right to marry etc.. it has to do with making the Govt. and people of Thailand accept their lifestyle.

Just because I don't believe in the Gay movement and their beliefs, it doesn't make me a homophobe, gay basher etc.

If you want to accept this movement fine, just don't try and put it on me, as I'm entitled to my beliefs as well, with the right to protect and promote them.

Don't be a hater... because I'm a Straight Guy.

[wilcopops]

"Marriage between a man and a woman is a fundamental institution in every human society," - why do people insist on making baseless comments like this ...this is not a fact it's an assumption and completely without anthropological merit.

Edited April 29, 2013 by wilcopops

[KhunNene]

It Imposes Its Acceptance on All Society

By legalizing same-sex “marriage,” the Thailand Govt. becomes its official and active promoter. The Govt. will call on public officials to officiate at the new civil ceremony, order public schools to teach its acceptability to children, and punishe any Govt. employee who expresses disapproval.

In every situation where marriage affects society, the Govt. will expect all Religious folks to betray their beliefs and consciences by condoning, through silence or act.

The natural tendency of such a union is not to create families.

It's hard enough now raising children by the biological parents nevermind children being raised by gay partners who are not related to them, and how this may affect the children. they will never experience the many nuances of experiences and cultural differences having to do with male and female. There will be no mom and dad balance, do you want to be raised this way or have your family members raised in such a home?

This movement has nothing to do with equality, right to marry etc.. it has to do with making the Govt. and people of Thailand accept their lifestyle.

Just because I don't believe in the Gay movement and their beliefs, it doesn't make me a homophobe, gay basher etc.

If you want to accept this movement fine, just don't try and put it on me, as I'm entitled to my beliefs as well, with the right to protect and promote them.

Don't be a hater... because I'm a Straight Guy.

It does not impose anything. Do not worry, nobody is going to force you to marry another straight guy.

[wilcopops]

It Imposes Its Acceptance on All Society

By legalizing same-sex “marriage,” the Thailand Govt. becomes its official and active promoter. The Govt. will call on public officials to officiate at the new civil ceremony, order public schools to teach its acceptability to children, and punishe any Govt. employee who expresses disapproval.

In every situation where marriage affects society, the Govt. will expect all Religious folks to betray their beliefs and consciences by condoning, through silence or act.

The natural tendency of such a union is not to create families.

It's hard enough now raising children by the biological parents nevermind children being raised by gay partners who are not related to them, and how this may affect the children. they will never experience the many nuances of experiences and cultural differences having to do with male and female. There will be no mom and dad balance, do you want to be raised this way or have your family members raised in such a home?

This movement has nothing to do with equality, right to marry etc.. it has to do with making the Govt. and people of Thailand accept their lifestyle.

Just because I don't believe in the Gay movement and their beliefs, it doesn't make me a homophobe, gay basher etc.

If you want to accept this movement fine, just don't try and put it on me, as I'm entitled to my beliefs as well, with the right to protect and promote them.

Don't be a hater... because I'm a Straight Guy.

"Just because I don't believe in the Gay movement and their beliefs, it doesn't make me a homophobe"

"Just because I don't bleive in the civil rights movement, it doesn't make me a racist"

what does it do then?

Edited April 29, 2013 by wilcopops

[notmyself]

Just because I don't believe in the Gay movement and their beliefs

It is no more of a belief than is the distance between 2 fixed points. You can and are welcome to believe the distance between CM and BK is 2 light years but that does not make it true.