Re: [Recentattendees] Background on Singapore go/no go for IETF 100

Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> Thu, 26 May 2016 08:35 UTC

Return-Path: <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99CAB12D7DA for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 May 2016 01:35:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.326
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.326 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CSbfi3x9gbv7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 May 2016 01:35:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp [131.112.32.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id E057112B024 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 May 2016 01:35:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 50602 invoked from network); 26 May 2016 08:14:51 -0000
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (HELO ?127.0.0.1?) (131.112.32.132) by necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp with SMTP; 26 May 2016 08:14:51 -0000
Subject: Re: [Recentattendees] Background on Singapore go/no go for IETF 100
To: ietf@ietf.org
References: <20160525220818.18333.71186.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <003701d1b720$38acf2f0$aa06d8d0$@unizar.es>
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <50743f1a-96a0-0738-5125-349866ef788a@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 17:35:42 +0900
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <003701d1b720$38acf2f0$aa06d8d0$@unizar.es>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-2022-jp; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/FV7wz3danllOFmunBZS2bRGhZm0>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 08:35:53 -0000

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.

Situation is not so different from legitimacy on smoking marijuana.

Thus, international bodies such as ISOC should not have any position
on the issue.

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