Lesbian Celebrities To Be Married In Western Country

[belg]

both thai, so why the need to marry

except for the free publicity?

its not like they will be having children any soon....

many farang here married to their thai wife, only way to stay here if you are not 50+ or wanting to waiste your life as a low paid teacher

[Jingthing]

both thai, so why the need to marry

except for the free publicity?

its not like they will be having children any soon....

many farang here married to their thai wife, only way to stay here if you are not 50+ or wanting to waiste your life as a low paid teacher

Many people marry who never have children. The idea that gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry because they don't usually have children is silly unless you want to require ALL married people to have children, gay and straight.

[Jingthing]

Her new "husband" is married to a Swedish national already.

That might explain my point before. If one spouse has Swedish nationality via a previous marriage that would make the problem of any restrictions on two foreign nationals in a mystery western country go away. Two women marrying are wife and wife and two men marrying are husband and husband; is that so difficult to fathom?

[rotary]

Bet they do it(pun intended) in the Peoples Republic of Kalifornia

Edited December 18, 2013 by rotary

[Jingthing]

Bet they do it(pun intended) in the Peoples Republic of Kalifornia

In the U.S. each state has their own marriage laws. Not sure of any specific states that would allow two same sex FOREIGNERS to marry, but perhaps so, I don't know. Anyway, the OP refers to EUROPE. California is one of the minority of U.S. states currently allowing same sex marriages.

Edited December 18, 2013 by Jingthing

[John71]

I guess some people will do just about anything for publicity?

[Jingthing]

I guess some people will do just about anything for publicity?

You are suggesting this couple wants to get married for publicity only when you couldn't possibly know that to be the case.

Edited December 18, 2013 by Jingthing

[Rob8891]

The degree of negativity (not to mention prejudice and sheer ignorance) in the majority of posts in this thread does the posters no credit whatsoever. It may not be your chosen lifestyle, but it IS theirs: as such who are you to judge them? I am sure their decision does not really harm any fragile male egos, does it? If they also choose to allow their decision to marry to be publicised, more kudos to them. Perhaps it will help to eventually break down ill-informed prejudices.

It is not often I find myself in agreement with Jingthing, but I have to commend his even tone and balanced approach to this topic in the face of aforementioned ignorance.

Good on you, JT!

Good grief! Did I really write that last line????

[CapeCobra]

Slow news day eh?

And, in another important news story....My dog licked himself.

After studying this important behaviour for many years, I found the answer. Why do dogs lick themselves?

BECAUSE THEY CAN!

Sent from my HTC One max using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Costas2008]

I wish them every happiness for their future life.

And I have a small request.........can I come and watch!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[cup-O-coffee]

I'd be happy to consider this as "no news", where couples can get married regardless their orientation, just as a part of ordinary, everyday life. Still long way to go...

A profound and mature view on the issue and the matter, but what you suggest portends issues and matters that will never be allowed to come into fruition without a bloody battle.

What one interprets as "newsworthy" is up to one. How it is received by another is up to another.

To promote how another receives this news, and/or to ignore or censure how another receives this news, sets an uneven playing field from the inception of what one interprets as being "newsworthy".

This is an issue and a matter. It is still evident to me that this issue is not newsworthy to the majority who disagree with it, yet do not feel it is such an issue that demands direct attention and absolute opposition. The matter, on the other hand, lies in the views of the gay community that this matter should be an issue, and therefore to rub it in the faces of those who who have the same rights to their views as the gay community have to theirs, because the response is not giving the warm reception that they would hope for.

You can take a belief and keep throwing it into the spin, and it will keep on getting tossed back hard at you. No matter how much you dress it up, change laws, threaten people with being criminals for having opposing views, or whatever, these views will never be taken seriously and have any possibility of being realized and accepted by a majority as long as those enforcing their beliefs have such a diverse, caustic and schizophrenic cross "sub-cultural" behavior pattern.

With all due respect, this matter is becoming an issue because it is like "Obama-Care". People were happy the way things were and things that mattered. Things weren't great, but people were happy and had a choice in matters. Now it has become an issue because they are now being told that government knows better what things matter for people than what people think is better for themselves.

I know a few gay people that are proper diamonds. They are decent people who do not get caught up in all of this political issue about changing what matters to the majority; a majority who would simply rather be left alone and not have to deal with an issue that threatens their majority views. I respect what matters to them, and they respect what matters to me. We avoid confrontation and manage to be civil.

The thing is, though, that I fear for gay people such as those friends I know. I fear that the radicals will make this such an issue, out of what matters most to the majority, and cross so many taboo lines in the sand, that this wil become an issue of which the backlash will reach all corners of people's lives and remove any ability for gay and lesbian people to enjoy what they DO have at this moment: to live together and enjoy each other whilst they live and to leave me out of it, as well as my gay friends who want the same.

I am happy for this couple. I am sad that the paparazzi is making much ado about nothing. The thing is, though... don't push an issue over on top of what matters most to the majority as history demonstrates that it hurts when the majority gets upset enough and feels it is time to push back; and at that, usually with much more force than is necessary.

[flyingdoc]

No!

I doubt if it would be recognised in Thailand, just as polygamous marriages are not recognised in the U.K. whether legal back home or not!

[Jingthing]

...

I am happy for this couple. I am sad that the paparazzi is making much ado about nothing. The thing is, though... don't push an issue over on top of what matters most to the majority as history demonstrates that it hurts when the majority gets upset enough and feels it is time to push back; and at that, usually with much more force than is necessary.

Oy vey. In other words, gay people don't be so uppity!

No. This is a global CIVIL RIGHTS battle. There have been and will be setbacks such as in Russian and India recently, but in the bigger international picture, the progress is FORWARD.

Edited December 18, 2013 by Jingthing

[granuaile]

Yes, given that they can't obtain a legal marriage in Thailand and they wish to marry, doing this foreign marriage would mean they actually ARE technically married. So THEY will know and recognize what they've done even if their country will not.

Exactly!!!

[cup-O-coffee]

...

I am happy for this couple. I am sad that the paparazzi is making much ado about nothing. The thing is, though... don't push an issue over on top of what matters most to the majority as history demonstrates that it hurts when the majority gets upset enough and feels it is time to push back; and at that, usually with much more force than is necessary.

Oy vey. In other words, gay people don't be so uppity!

No. This is a global CIVIL RIGHTS battle. There have been and will be setbacks such as in Russian and India recently, but in the bigger international picture, the progress is FORWARD.

Jingthing, you summarize what I have just stated, yet put it in a less formal perspective.

I read a lot of your posts, and I admire your stance on issues. You are definitely a friend to have on the side of one who is facing opposition and going in to battle, there is no doubt about that, but as to going into a debate, I would have to think twice before having you stand there at my side as a supporter (I say that last part jokingly, of course).

All I suggested in my post is that caution is the better part of err. Be careful in how you interpret what the majority values and what matters to the majority.

Be careful how you become impatient and turn your suggestion into a push, and then a nudge, and then a shove, and then a battle. This could be interpreted as a threat on my part, but it is not. It is simply friendly advice to a fellow man, of which I am certain you are already aware of.

So, also be careful when you jump ahead of what matters to the majority and what the majority values, and make bold statements like, "This is a global CIVIL RIGHTS battle.", simply because this is a battle you don't want to come right back to your doorstep.

The gay community has not done anything wrong so far, but if it comes to forcing your views upon the majority and being deluded enough into thinking that any government law NOT voted into law by the majority can somehow cow down the majority and "make" them accept your views, then you also are deluded.

This issue about gay rights has had me thinking a lot. I like a lot of people for reasons I don't feel are necessary to express here, and I do not make it a preemptive rule to judge them first by their "choice". I judge them by their behavior and the way they treat me and my family and friends;

...but the thing is, no person or group of people I know of have ever effected change by choosing the routes you are suggesting (i.e. battle). What other translation is there? I sense that you are implying the figurative and the literal sense when you say "battle", and it is the latter that has me alarmed.

I am alarmed because I hate to think of the consequences that will rain down upon those who persist against the will of those who do not subscribe, and hence will turn an unrealistic battle into an all out war.

There may be a possibility that gay people can co-exist in a predominantly heterosexual society worldwide, and the twain live their lives with fulfillment and well-being, but to my recollection, there is no society or civilization in the history of mankind where gay people reached a level of recognition and acceptance which was satisfactory to said gay people. So, you are treading a new frontier; something that has never been achieved in the history of mankind, and I think you would be a bit more cautious about how you endeavor to achieve those goals. To charge in with head down and horns pointed at the ones you will need to accomplish your dreams will end in disaster.

So, dispense with your "Oy Veys", and acting like you are shocked, and then feeling the need to imply that I am forcing you to not be uppity (remember, you are the one pushing against the majority's views to get what you want), all whilst sounding the call to "battle". It is not necessary. I know you like to get a bit aggressive, and so do I. So maybe you and I can find some solution to all this and let's not have you relying on a government to support you and think it can push me around and force me to assimilate. Me and the majority won't like that very much, I think.

I am an intelligent person and am simply voicing my express concerns for people who want change, but I feel are going about it all wrong. When I do that, I am allowing you the opportunity to counter my views with something a little more legitimate than "Oy vey. In other words, gay people don't be so uppity!" That kind of response makes me laugh with a grim light-heartedness, and triggers the thought that you are being a bit childish, which I know you are not.

All the best to you.

[huangnon]

I guess some people will do just about anything for publicity?

You are suggesting this couple wants to get married for publicity only when you couldn't possibly know that to be the case.

Knowing the blushing-bride-to-be, I have to agree with John71. Publicity and money, in her case.

[SOTIRIOS]

...why glorify her...her life..... or the soaps that she plays in...is that commendable....is this a role model that young Thais need anyway...

(.......or is this about boosting ratings....)

[MrBrad]

If we lived by the "only the majority rules" rule, blacks would still be partial persons with no vote nor any other freedom, and women, too, would be silent citizens unable to vote or be considered equals to men. At least that's how it was in the United States, and I'd guess more than a few other countries. In South Africa not too long ago at all blacks--who were and still are about 80% of the population--had no voting power; therefore, whites (the voting majority) made the laws.

Thailand, though, is a constitutional monarchy, not a democracy where it's the duty of the majority to protect and look after the interests of the minority.

[TPI]

OK, I'm assuming they are both Thai nationals. Of course there are a number of nations now that allow same sex marriages for their own nationals and also one of their nationals and one foreigner. My question is which specific nations allow same sex marriage between two foreigners (as this couple will presumably be)? In any case, not sure what legal benefits they would gain from this, assuming it's possible in at least one country, as their marriage will have no legal meaning whatsoever in Thailand.

BTW, Thailand as it moves forward towards same sex civil unions legalization and eventually marriage legalization might want to consider being one of the nations allowing these marriages between two foreigners. Yes ... for TOURISM. Many such couples would spend mucho dinero.

If they are legally married in another country, then surely they are legally married in Thailand - which is exactly how it works for heterosexual couples.

Wrong! Sorry Mr/s Greer, Marriages performed outside of Thailand are not recognised in the Kingdom. So beware! Your kids will get "bastard" on their ID cards.