SURVEY: Should Thailand legalize gay Marriage?

[h90]

This topic is about same sex marriage.

Same sex civil unions have already been actively considered by the Thai government.

The topic IS NOT about polygamy.

Maybe wait until that is really a credible issue in Thailand before trying to hijack this thread towards there.

In Polygamy there are multiple wifes who could be lesbian..

And when they age you have 5 big fat wifes who are complaining and ranting all days.....that would turn every straight man into a gay.

And why should a gay or lesbian not have polygamy?

[h90]

I wonder when the day will come that some dogooder activist will climb out of his closet and demand that all electrical plugs and sockets shall be made "asexual", neither male nor female so that nobody could be offended by them being either male or female in this ongoing gender gaganess...

It isn't political correct anyhow with 2 pins going into two holes.

It should be just 1 pin like for the headphones.

[h90]

What is the point for marriage anyhow?

My wife and I married for the sole purpose of visa issues else we wouldn't.

My parents married because my fathers religious mother wanted it so much. As my parents weren't religious they just did it to make the old and very lovely lady happy.

They all promise each other to stay together till the die, but divorce 5 years later. I somehow don't get the point of it all.

[h90]

DECIDES to be gay??? lol

Yes, gay people decide to be gay.

I don't like this BS about some kind of biological programming which forces someone to be gay. When I was 13, I felt my biology was forcing me to hump anything with a vagina, yet I chose not to. If an insanely horny 13-year-old can make the conscious decision to masturbate rather than have sex with the class slut, then anyone can, gay or straight. Anyone can choose abstinence. I don't recommend it, but please don't have sex with someone and then tell the world that you couldn't have avoided it just because you were born that way.

Tell the truth: I am a man/woman and I chose to have sex with a man/woman because that's what I like and that is my right!

I wish I could use the excuse that my biology forces me to smoke weed in order to be happy. Unfortunately, as humans, our brains give us near total control over our natural urges.

Well a gay who decide to not have sex, is a gay who doesn't has sex. Not a straight.

For the rest of your posting: I am so sorry I went in a technical school without class slut. If we would have one it would have been the most honored person in the class and school.....

[Jingthing]

It's not required. A choice like for all other Thai citizens. That is fair.

[h90]

Correction on my previous post...right, but if a nation is idolizing a religion which DOES At the same time support gay marriage, I call this hypocrisy. I am personally not against religion or gay people but I just want to point out this is clear hypocrisy in exchange for votes. In my opinion this is treason to one of the two fundamentals.

Jeez.

I've read and wrote some.convoluted crap in my time but this post takes the.biscuit.

rijit

dear Rijt, a person cannot at the same time preach the word of God and allow same sex marriage. Same with abortion. You should also learn to keep your posts polite. Other members can have other opinions but I hope that besides your hollow words, you are member of the human race...

Not every person, religion or country follows the teaching of the Church of Rome or follows the dogma of American religious groups.

I know plenty of Christains who have no problems with abortion or gay marriage, they wouldnt consider themselves hypocrites, for the simple reason they dont follow the schools of thought mentioned above.

I am Atheist but it is obvious that someone can't choose a conservative religion and take only the things he like.

Abortion is an absolute no go for people with the books of the invisible friend.

[phuketjock]

If nature had intended man to marry man and woman to marry woman it

would have given them the gift of procreation, it did not consider such a

union worthy of that gift, it surely must then follow that such a union is not

in line with nature and therefore unnatural and abnormal, nothing more to

be said really.

Now when innocent children are introduced into this situation we can

no longer claim that gay marriage does not harm anyone when it will,

in fact, affect every subsequent generation down the road from every

gay/lesbian marriage, and the crime is that these innocents will have

no choice or say in the matter, will they?

[troy]

Yes, gay people decide to be gay

Mate, if you think that being gay or straight is a decision that someone makes, you may need to have a very uncomfortable conversation with yourself.

[Seastallion]

This is what offends me. But I won’t demand their rainbow flag be banned and I certainly won’t riot in the streets.

Goodness.thats disgusting , I mean.............socks with trainers....sheeeeeeeeeesh

It's not the socks, it's the hairy backs! They really should put a shirt on.

[Rumblecat]

If nature had intended man to marry man and woman to marry woman it

would have given them the gift of procreation, it did not consider such a

union worthy of that gift, it surely must then follow that such a union is not

in line with nature and therefore unnatural and abnormal, nothing more to

be said really.

Now when innocent children are introduced into this situation we can

no longer claim that gay marriage does not harm anyone when it will,

in fact, affect every subsequent generation down the road from every

gay/lesbian marriage, and the crime is that these innocents will have

no choice or say in the matter, will they?

Uh, yeah, except there's wide-spread examples of same-sex sexual behaviour amongst many animals in 'nature' which seems to clash against the your attempt to define nature's 'intent' as the be-all and end-all of what is right or wrong (and procreation the only defining factor in sexual relationships. Damn those abnormal masturbators). It's lazy anthropomorphism, where nature somehow gets tied into the concept of morality. The same kind of false logic where "some animals eat their young = cannibalism and child murder is natural and right".

I didn't understand much of the innocent children stuff though. What exactly is the harm and crime here..? That they have loving parents who can't procreate or something..? Just didn't follow this at all.

[i claudius]

What is the point for marriage anyhow?

My wife and I married for the sole purpose of visa issues else we wouldn't.

My parents married because my fathers religious mother wanted it so much. As my parents weren't religious they just did it to make the old and very lovely lady happy.

They all promise each other to stay together till the die, but divorce 5 years later. I somehow don't get the point of it all.

well the point is my wife and I loved each other and still do 23 years on,and we like being married

[i claudius]

If nature had intended man to marry man and woman to marry woman it

would have given them the gift of procreation, it did not consider such a

union worthy of that gift, it surely must then follow that such a union is not

in line with nature and therefore unnatural and abnormal, nothing more to

be said really.

Now when innocent children are introduced into this situation we can

no longer claim that gay marriage does not harm anyone when it will,

in fact, affect every subsequent generation down the road from every

gay/lesbian marriage, and the crime is that these innocents will have

no choice or say in the matter, will they?

Uh, yeah, except there's wide-spread examples of same-sex sexual behaviour amongst many animals in 'nature' which seems to clash against the your attempt to define nature's 'intent' as the be-all and end-all of what is right or wrong (and procreation the only defining factor in sexual relationships. Damn those abnormal masturbators). It's lazy anthropomorphism, where nature somehow gets tied into the concept of morality. The same kind of false logic where "some animals eat their young = cannibalism and child murder is natural and right".

I didn't understand much of the innocent children stuff though. What exactly is the harm and crime here..? That they have loving parents who can't procreate or something..? Just didn't follow this at all.

also in nature there is wide spread examples of animals having sex with their mothers and sisters also having sex with very young animals,I suppose you think this is ok as well,I doubt it so please do not make stupid comparisons without thinking

[cdnvic]

Please cool it with the personal attacks.

[Rumblecat]

If nature had intended man to marry man and woman to marry woman it

would have given them the gift of procreation, it did not consider such a

union worthy of that gift, it surely must then follow that such a union is not

in line with nature and therefore unnatural and abnormal, nothing more to

be said really.

Now when innocent children are introduced into this situation we can

no longer claim that gay marriage does not harm anyone when it will,

in fact, affect every subsequent generation down the road from every

gay/lesbian marriage, and the crime is that these innocents will have

no choice or say in the matter, will they?

Uh, yeah, except there's wide-spread examples of same-sex sexual behaviour amongst many animals in 'nature' which seems to clash against the your attempt to define nature's 'intent' as the be-all and end-all of what is right or wrong (and procreation the only defining factor in sexual relationships. Damn those abnormal masturbators). It's lazy anthropomorphism, where nature somehow gets tied into the concept of morality. The same kind of false logic where "some animals eat their young = cannibalism and child murder is natural and right".

I didn't understand much of the innocent children stuff though. What exactly is the harm and crime here..? That they have loving parents who can't procreate or something..? Just didn't follow this at all.

also in nature there is wide spread examples of animals having sex with their mothers and sisters also having sex with very young animals,I suppose you think this is ok as well,I doubt it so please do not make stupid comparisons without thinking

Yeah, I'm actually pointing out that 'what happens in nature' is a ridiculous benchmark for human morality and behaviour.

That was my whole point. Hence the whole "animals eat their young" comparison and how absurd it is to use the concept of 'natural' as a yardstick for human morality. I wasn't actually saying killing and eating children was a good thing....

[rijit]

Just the fact that its taken this long 2015 for US to legalize it says it all. in my humble opinion, Marriage is for a man and a woman. and if people decide to be gay , they should not be allowed the right to have children!

DECIDES to be gay??? lol

Yep, infortunatly about sums up the 'awareness' of the average no poster.

rijit

[h90]

What is the point for marriage anyhow?

My wife and I married for the sole purpose of visa issues else we wouldn't.

My parents married because my fathers religious mother wanted it so much. As my parents weren't religious they just did it to make the old and very lovely lady happy.

They all promise each other to stay together till the die, but divorce 5 years later. I somehow don't get the point of it all.

well the point is my wife and I loved each other and still do 23 years on,and we like being married

would you love each other less if only the temple or the church would have signed to it, but not the government? And for your safety you would have signed the "government recommended partner contract #2"?

I think it would be all the same for you with the same party or whatever you did.

I just think it is not the duty of the government to sign up that you love each other (just think of the politicians.......I wouldn't want my marriage is up to Prayut, Yingluck, Obama or whoever).

[i claudius]

Well it was up to me and my wife,no one rlsr

[bigt3116]

A better question would be " should non-Thais keep their nose out of their host countries affairs ?"

Edited July 13, 2015 by bigt3116

[robertthebruce]

This is what offends me. But I wont demand their rainbow flag be banned and I certainly wont riot in the streets.

Goodness.thats disgusting , I mean.............socks with trainers....sheeeeeeeeeesh

It's not the socks, it's the hairy backs! They really should put a shirt on.

I actually thought it was "Horse Cartwright" from Bonanza...... Same build for sure....

[Asiantravel]

of course

Of course.....not.

Marriage is for men and women.

While i have no problem with what two men or women want to do in private ,When i was young if you were that way inclined you kept it to yourself and as my dad used to say ,i dont think he will ever get married ,he wears suede shoes , meaning he was that way inclined ,and everybody just got on with their lives ,now what puts me off gays ,is not the fact that they are gay ,but the ,Gay rainbow flag ,gay parades ,gays targeting cake shops that will not make them a wedding cake( i notice they never target Muslim cake shops)and all the other bullshit gays keep harping on about ,on and on and on .

please just get on with your lives and let us get on with ours ,quietly

And i know its hackneyd but yes i do have gay relatives , but they dont ram it down your throat (no pun intended)

" now what puts me off gays ,is not the fact that they are gay ,but the ,Gay rainbow flag ,gay parades ,gays targeting cake shops that will not make them a wedding cake"

perhaps when they eventually achieve true equality the little things that seem to put you off will fade into the background...................

[i claudius]

of course

Of course.....not.

Marriage is for men and women.

While i have no problem with what two men or women want to do in private ,When i was young if you were that way inclined you kept it to yourself and as my dad used to say ,i dont think he will ever get married ,he wears suede shoes , meaning he was that way inclined ,and everybody just got on with their lives ,now what puts me off gays ,is not the fact that they are gay ,but the ,Gay rainbow flag ,gay parades ,gays targeting cake shops that will not make them a wedding cake( i notice they never target Muslim cake shops)and all the other bullshit gays keep harping on about ,on and on and on .

please just get on with your lives and let us get on with ours ,quietly

And i know its hackneyd but yes i do have gay relatives , but they dont ram it down your throat (no pun intended)

" now what puts me off gays ,is not the fact that they are gay ,but the ,Gay rainbow flag ,gay parades ,gays targeting cake shops that will not make them a wedding cake"

perhaps when they eventually achieve true equality the little things that seem to put you off will fade into the background...................

you missed out the bit that asked why they do not target Muslim cake shops ,surely not fear

[Jingthing]

The cake question is way overblown.

[partington]

If nature had intended man to marry man and woman to marry woman it

would have given them the gift of procreation, it did not consider such a

union worthy of that gift, it surely must then follow that such a union is not

in line with nature and therefore unnatural and abnormal, nothing more to

be said really.

Now when innocent children are introduced into this situation we can

no longer claim that gay marriage does not harm anyone when it will,

in fact, affect every subsequent generation down the road from every

gay/lesbian marriage, and the crime is that these innocents will have

no choice or say in the matter, will they?

Nature doesn't actually have marriage at all. if you believe nature intended marriage for procreation why don't chimps , bonobos and gorillas, who clearly procreate all over the place, get married?

Of course marriage is a completely artificial construct that humans have created, it's not a gift of nature. Marriage doesn't exist in nature, and is unnecessary in nature for anything at all.

Since humans created marriage, just like they created parking regulations and tax regimes, humans can define marriage however they like.

If a society decides to define marriage as a legal union open equally to the same or different genders, that is fine. Many societies have done this already and many more will follow.

Never mind.

[AYJAYDEE]

DECIDES to be gay??? lol

Yes, gay people decide to be gay.

I don't like this BS about some kind of biological programming which forces someone to be gay. When I was 13, I felt my biology was forcing me to hump anything with a vagina, yet I chose not to. If an insanely horny 13-year-old can make the conscious decision to masturbate rather than have sex with the class slut, then anyone can, gay or straight. Anyone can choose abstinence. I don't recommend it, but please don't have sex with someone and then tell the world that you couldn't have avoided it just because you were born that way.

Tell the truth: I am a man/woman and I chose to have sex with a man/woman because that's what I like and that is my right!

I wish I could use the excuse that my biology forces me to smoke weed in order to be happy. Unfortunately, as humans, our brains give us near total control over our natural urges.

what you like or dont like really has no bearing on science.

[AYJAYDEE]

If nature had intended man to marry man and woman to marry woman it

would have given them the gift of procreation, it did not consider such a

union worthy of that gift, it surely must then follow that such a union is not

in line with nature and therefore unnatural and abnormal, nothing more to

be said really.

Now when innocent children are introduced into this situation we can

no longer claim that gay marriage does not harm anyone when it will,

in fact, affect every subsequent generation down the road from every

gay/lesbian marriage, and the crime is that these innocents will have

no choice or say in the matter, will they?

nature doesnt "intend"

[i claudius]

The cake question is way overblown.

not in the UK my friend. Quite a few gay couples have targeted Christian bakeries ,as they know there will be no comeback ,but it has upset many many people

[attrayant]

Knowing how the government likes to put the screws to us, I'm betting whatever SSM laws get passed in the near future will apply only to Thais marrying Thais. I hope I'm wrong about that.

[Jingthing]

Knowing how the government likes to put the screws to us, I'm betting whatever SSM laws get passed in the near future will apply only to Thais marrying Thais. I hope I'm wrong about that.

Well, yet again, there is marriage equality and then there is marriage equality with CONDITIONS. It's up to the Thais but really if this starts to happen at all here, it won't be marriage, it will be more like civil unions.

[rgs2001uk]

A better question would be " should non-Thais keep their nose out of their host countries affairs ?"

A better question may be, if non Thais dislike the way Thailand conducts itself, why dont they all leave?

[Jingthing]

This is an expat forum about Thailand. OF COURSE we're going to comment on Thai matters. Duh. DOUBLE DUH!