Taiwan Becomes First Asian Country to Mandate Same-Sex ‘Marriage’

Implementation begins in two years.

By William M Briggs Published on May 24, 2017

Taiwan declared today that disallowing same-sex “marriage” is discriminatory. It will therefore amend its Constitution to allow gmarriage. Gmarriage is government-defined marriage, as opposed to actual marriage.

Taiwan’s Judicial Yuan announced that the current Constitution did not protect gmarriage, which they called “a major falsehood.” They said it will take two years to amend the Constitution and change civil laws. The Stream predicted this move last December.

The Judicial Yuan said that Taiwan’s Civil Code does not now “allow two persons of the same sex to create a permanent union of intimate and exclusive nature for the committed purpose of managing a life together.” The government did not say why they choose “two persons” and not some other number. Divorce is legal in Taiwan, so the “permanent” nature of marriage is also flexible.

The press release claimed that gmarriage will not “alter the social order.” This goes against the experience of all nations that have thus far instituted gmarriage. Forced participation has instead been the rule.

Taiwan’s Justification

Taiwan’s government justified the move with ideology. “Sexual orientation is an immutable characteristic that is resistant to change,” it said. “Major medical associations have stated that homosexuality is not a disease.” They also say that “homosexuals … have been a discrete and insular minority in the society,” a fact which is unlikely to change even under legal gmarriage.

The Judicial Yuan anticipated criticisms by those who hold to the actual definition of marriage. It said the Civil Code’s “Marriage Chapter does not set forth the capability to procreate as a requirement for concluding an opposite-sex marriage. Nor does it provide that a marriage is void or voidable, or a divorce decree may be issued, if either party is unable or unwilling to procreate after marriage.”

Marriage as means to creating and nurturing families in support of society is not accepted as a valid point.

As in other countries, gmarriage in Taiwan becomes what the government says it is: two people coming together for whatever length of time suits their purpose. There’s no hint in the government’s announcement what penalties people who do not agree with gmarriage will face.

Exposure to Western education is thus highly predictive of support for gmarriage.

How Did Taiwan Get Here?

How did this Asian and once deeply conservative country become like any other Western nation? One clue comes from the makeup of the Taiwanese Government, which is a democracy. The country’s President Tsai Ing-wen has a Masters from America and a PhD from England. She has long expressed public support of “gay rights.” The Vice President Chen Chien-jen was schooled in Taiwan, and is Catholic. But he said he supported gay “rights,” though he waffled on his beliefs on gmarriage. He said publicly last year that it needed “further debate.” The official Catholic position is, of course, that gmarriage does not exist.

Closer to the point, the Chief Justice of the Judicial Yuan had his graduate education in Germany. Seven other Justices have graduate degrees from Western universities. Every foreign-trained Justice except one voted for gmarriage.

A minority of six Justices were educated in Taiwan. Four of these voted for gmarriage, with one other Justice dissenting. Reuters reports one additional Justice recused himself from the case because “he is married to a lawmaker who backs gay rights.”

Exposure to Western education is thus highly predictive of support for gmarriage.

The two dissenting Justices are Huang Horng-Shya and Wu Chen-Huan. (I could not discover the dissenting opinions on the official site.) In a 2015 interview with ET Today, Wu cautioned that “same-sex marriage has a great impact on society.” He has also been quoted warning about the expansion of powers and the “changing of tradition” by the government.

Justice Huang was quoted by China Times saying that families are derived from marriage, and that same-sex “marriage” does not consider the right of families. She also pointed out that same-sex “marriage” involves more than just the two people undergoing the ceremony. She echoed Justice Wu that gmarriage will influence all of society.

Taiwan’s move is similar to that of the United States Supreme Court, which in 2015 “discovered” a previously hidden “right” to gmarriage. The matter in both countries was not put to a vote. In March, polls indicated a healthy majority of Taiwanese were against gmarriage, with opposition rising further from the cosmopolitan capitol of Taipei.

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
  • Gary

    If being “educated” in the West means you reject morality. support homosexuality and want to change what marriage is, then it is better to be uneducated.

    • Timothy Horton

      then it is better to be uneducated.

      As most of the gay-bashing religious conservatives demonstrate very time they post.

      • Gary

        Some of us are well educated. But being uneducated and moral is better than being educated and immoral.

        • Timothy Horton

          Religious fundamentalists don’t get to define what is moral and immoral. They just would like to.

          • Gary

            You don’t listen. As I have said, over and over, the God of the Bible defines what is moral and immoral. Not only does God define morality, He holds every human being accountable for how they obey, or disobey, God’s moral laws.

          • Timothy Horton

            I don’t listen to your nonsensical religious regurgitations. “The Bible is true because the Bible says it is true” isn’t evidence for anyone with an IQ over double digits.

          • Gary

            Whoever makes moral law must have the authority to do so, along with the authority and ability to hold accountable everyone who breaks that moral law. Who would that be?

          • Jim Walker

            So where do you receive your moral values from ? The NYT ?
            Do you accept your young daughter to be with a pedophile ? You will be term a Bigot if you do not accept their values.
            Please find a Muslim forum to debate your moral values, it will be more challenging and exciting for you.

          • Timothy Horton

            I evolved my moral values as a member of a socially oriented species. I don’t need a book to tell me it’s good for myself and everyone else to follow the Golden Rule. Sorry for you if you’re too stupid and need a book to tell you how to think and how to behave.

          • Gary

            Evolved morality is not morality. It is opinion. With nothing authoritative to back it up. The Golden Rule is only a standard if it comes from the God of the Bible. If it didn’t then it too is only human opinion. You and everyone else can violate your version of morality all day long, every day without consequence. There is no one in your fantasy world to hold you accountable for violating your “morality”. You’re a fool.

          • Timothy Horton

            Morality you get from your personal interpretations of passages in an old book are not morality. They’re opinions. The Golden Rule preexisted the Bible by thousands of years.

          • JP

            Your morality is just mere opinion. Its not binding on anyone.

          • Gary

            It isn’t my personal interpretations of the Bible. Real morality is objective. For instance, the Ten Commandments are easily understood by everyone. Very much like a sign that says STOP.

            Who said the Golden Rule is a standard for moral behavior?

          • Jim Walker

            Well you have just said it yourself that you evolved your moral values and that means you do take pieces of your so called morals from the fancies of the day article, that “research” paper and whatever materials you subscribe to, and that is still some people’s ideology, aka some golden rule book(s)
            Sorry for you too, but you’re that stupid to need such books to tell you how to think and how to behave.
            You are what you read. So go in peace and find some muslim forum and try debating them and update us. Thank you.

  • Timothy Horton

    Poor Briggsy. More and more of educated society is rejecting his religious brand of hatred and intolerance. What’s a whiny WASP bigot to do??

    • Patmos

      Question is, can a proponent for gay marriage ever make a case for it without using the words: tolerance/intolerance, rights, or bigot/bigotry? I don’t think they can. I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation as to why the definition of marriage should be changed, as any time I ask the question it is only met with the insecure ramblings of a lost soul looking for approval. Point out the love God has for them? They love darkness more than the light.

      I don’t know. Don’t say you weren’t warned.

      • Timothy Horton

        Since the only reason equal civil rights in marriage have been denied SS couples is due to the intolerance and bigotry of the religious conservatives that’s a pretty stupid challenge.

        I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation as to why the definition of marriage should be changed

        It should be changed because the current definition unfairly excludes a not insignificant minority portion of the population for no valid or compelling secular reasons.

        Can any opponent of SSM ever make a case for denying it without using the words Jesus/God, Bible, sin/immoral, or “we did it that way in the past!”? I don’t think they can as any time I ask the question it is only met with the insecure ramblings of Bible verses from those looking for excuses.
        .

        • Gary

          The reason marriage is heterosexual is a moral reason. Marriage is a moral arrangement. Take the morality out of it and it has no reason to exist.

          • Timothy Horton

            That’s one of the more stupid things you’ve claimed. I will admit there’s a lot of competition though.

          • Gary

            You have rejected morality, and therefore, you don’t understand marriage.

          • Timothy Horton

            I have rejected your claim to be the one who decides what is or is not moral. No, “my Bible says so” is not a sufficient basis in secular law. You seem to be the one with zero understanding.

          • Gary

            What is the moral standard that the government should use, and why is it the right one?

          • Timothy Horton

            In this country it’s the one described by our secular laws as chosen and approved by a majority of the population. They are right by definition until the population changes and/or enacts new laws.

          • Gary

            A majority of Americans did not vote for “same-sex marriage”. It was imposed on the US by five judges who were not elected.

            Moral laws can only be made by God because only God has the authority to make such laws and the ability to hold people accountable to them. If you have sex with your brother, that might remain hidden from the government and society, so even if it was illegal, you would never be called to account for it. If you don’t get caught, you don’t get punished. That’s the way it works with civil laws. Not so with moral laws. You can’t do anything immoral and get away with it because God is watching.

          • Timothy Horton

            In the U.S. SSM is approved of by 65% of the adult population and 85% of the 18-35 years old demographic. Bigotry loses, love wins.

          • Gary

            If you want a poll that is legitimate, you have to put it to a vote. Most states that have voted on whether to allow ssm have rejected it. Love is not a requirement to receive a marriage license.

          • Timothy Horton

            Love is not a requirement to receive a marriage license.

            Neither is having the approval of the minority group of homophobic bigots. 🙂

          • Sgt Carver

            I’m Irish and we voted for SSM….

            So is SSM legitimate here?

            What about the States that did vote for SSM before the ruling?

            I’m guessing you’ll back peddle and contradict yourself.

            So I’ll ask do you want to live in a theocracy?

          • Gary

            I’m ashamed of Ireland. Which states voted for ssm?

          • Sgt Carver

            We don’t care how you feel, I doubt you’ve ever even been here, let alone understand the country. And you most definitely would not have understood the joyfulness of the Yes campaign and the amazing celebrations at the result. It was a very good day to be in Ireland.

            Okay, maybe I’m wrong, I thought a couple of States and DC passed laws based on popular vote. We don’t get a lot of State based reporting over here.

          • Gary

            I know you don’t care how I feel. You don’t care what God thinks of you either. Most Irish are pagans. And they will get what God has in store for pagans.

          • Sgt Carver

            Your god is so petty. I bet The Hulk could beat him up.

            You are like a child threatening an adult by telling them that Santa will not give them a present because they are being naughty.

            Seriously, you should read about Pascal’s Wager and why it doesn’t work, in fact it is the refuge of idiots. Even Homer Simpson, in a simple sentence, was able to show why it doesn’t work and that was in a silly cartoon show.

  • Dean Bruckner

    Taiwan’s days are numbered; they have lost the Mandate of Heaven.

  • Autrey Windle

    Hurricane anyone?

    • Tom Rath

      Taiwan has never been hit by a hurricane, and never will.

      • Autrey Windle

        Oh, Tom! That’s too bad…and you should never count God out especially in the signs and wonders department in this age of miracles.

        • SophieA

          Tropical cyclones also known as typhoons occur in this region of our world whereas, as I understand it, we call this same storm system a hurricane. So, yes, it is possible for a typhoon to affect Taiwan. Not sure if natural disaster will awaken their hearts, though. But as you rightly say, God works miracles.

      • Jim Walker

        I’ve been to Taipei countless times for the past 27 years and there are serious typhoons every year around July ~ Sept.
        Tom,
        Hurricanes = Typhoons = Cyclone

  • Dean Bruckner

    There once were two gnus who gmarried,
    Whose diet of gnocci ne’er varied.
    Til they sucked camel fats,
    While straining out gnats,
    From the bones that they gnawed and then buried.

  • Tom Rath

    Party! Let’s Taiwan on!

  • JP

    Homosexual “marriage” is impossible. To have a marriage you must have a husband and wife. Only a man can be a husband and a woman a wife. Without them together, you don’t have a marriage. Thus, homosexual “marriages” are fakes.

    • johndoe

      How is it impossible? Procreation isn’t a prerequisite for marriage.

      • JP

        Not about procreation but what is required for 2 people to be married. Must have a husband and wife to have a marriage. Only a man can be a husband and a woman a wife. 2 wives or 2 husbands don’t make a marriage.

        • Timothy Horton

          There’s nothing in any law anywhere which states a married couple must be designated “husband and wife”, or that those choosing to use those designations must be biologically male and female.

          • JP

            No need to. All throughout human history a marriage has always been between a man and a woman. That is why a marriage can only be between a man and a woman. Only a man can be a husband and woman a wife. That is why these so called homosexual “marriages” are legal fakes.

          • Gary

            No, you don’t. You are not going to change the meaning of husband and wife. Those words have a specific meaning, and have had for thousands of years. If you don’t like the meaning, too bad. You can pretend the words mean whatever you want. But sane people are not going along with your insanity.

  • m-nj

    The reasoning cited above by Taiwan’s government

    “Major medical associations have stated that homosexuality is not a disease.”

    is laughable. Go listen to NPR program This American Life (which is clearly not a conservative/right wing outlet) from the early 2000’s on HOW the change of homosexuality from “abnormal” to “not abnormal” was made by a simple fiat orchestrated by a few people… not based on science, just ideology.

    www. thisamericanlife. org/radio-archives/episode/204/81-words

  • Patmos

    Turns out foul and deceitful spirits are not contained by man made borders.

  • Gary

    If two people are “married” by a judge or other government official, does the government official ask them to make promises? And if so, why would the government want that? I have not been to a wedding since the government began “marrying” two men or two women, so I don’t know what the government officials asks. Does anyone know?

    • Timothy Horton

      It’s identical to the civil ceremonies of hetero marriages. The couple writes and says their own vows with a few legal terms which must be included in the vows. Those are the legal declaration of eligibility and the legal “verbal contract” part (i.e I take XXX as my lawfully wedded spouse”) The official says “By the power invested in me, I now pronounce you married.”

      Are you really so slow you couldn’t look that up yourself?

      • Ryan

        You need to go to a mosque and preach what you believe, and don’t come out until you have educated every Muslim inside.

Inspiration
God Orchestrates Our Lives With Loving Precision
Liberty McArtor
More from The Stream
Connect with Us