On 26 May 2016, at 11:35 AM, Masataka Ohta
<mohta(_at_)necom830(_dot_)hpcl(_dot_)titech(_dot_)ac(_dot_)jp> wrote:
Jose Saldana wrote:
Another thing to put in the pros and cons: this would set a precedent
for future meetings.
This map reflects the current situation worldwide:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_of_same-sex_marriage#/media/File:World_laws_pertaining_to_homosexual_relationships_and_expression.svg
The map implies that there is no international consensus that same sex
marriage is/were basic human right and that there are a lot of countries
where same sex marriage is considered to be criminally immoral.
I don’t think there is consensus in any single country. There’s prevailing law
in each country.
Situation is not so different from legitimacy on smoking marijuana.
With the exception that requiring someone to abstain from smoking marijuana (or
drinking alcohol or eating meat) for a week is acceptable though not
convenient. Requiring someone to abstain from relations with their spouse is
usually considered overboard.
Thus, international bodies such as ISOC should not have any position
on the issue.
Well, we’re not ISOC([1]) but we are international and we have a stated
position on pervasive monitoring. There’s no international consensus on that
either.
If US court tries to enforce ISOC have some position, it's time to
consider to relocate ISOC outside of US, maybe to Singapore.
Masataka Ohta
[1] Yes, I know the IETF is an activity of ISOC. (Almost) none of the people on
this thread work for ISOC, so any position we come up with is the IETF’s
position, not ISOC’s. The fact that the IETF is maybe not a legal person makes
no difference in this regard.
