Thai Constitution

[Guest]

I asked my lawyer if I could do anything against Q-Bar and other establishments for refusing LBs to enter.

He said the Thai Constitution does protect human rights, however, there are no laws to that effect, and thus it is near impossible to enforce.

Now, I'm not a legal expert, but I thought the Constitution was a 'law' sort of, however, this lawyer has helped me a lot and is extremely trusted...I believe the essence of his comment was a reflection of reality in Thailand, i.e., human rights are not enforceable.

As such, the only thing that can be done easily, is embarassment, and I do intend to do that. Watch for an essay on my web-site, in about a month, called, "No Blacks, Muslims, Jews...or Transsexuals...Allowed! Public Discrimination in Thailand." I will then mention Q-Bar, its owner's name, The Whitehouse Hotel in Pattaya, and his name, and 1 or 2 others.

[sid the sexist]

Well, good luck with your crusade. I won't be signing the petition.

I think all private businesses should be allowed to say who they allow in to use their property. If a hotel doesn't like ladyboys good luck to them. There are plenty of hotels that do. There are plenty of Jap clubs that don't allow farangs and I wholeheartedly support their right to turn me away. Q Bar aint the only club in town. Take her to one of the multitude of clubs that allow ladyboys.

This is not about human rights. If she was beaten half to death for trying to get in Q Bar you'd have a case. But being turned away is the chance you take when you go out to a new place.

I'd like to see ALL smokers barred from pubs, clubs and restaurants. I'd like to see drunks evicted from bars and beaten to death by police squads. I'd like every person who wants to enter a public area to take a piss test and if they fail it they should have DRUGGIE stamped on their foreheads till they are clean. I'd like Muslims to be forced to renounce violence or face life inside a Thai prison until they do. I'd like to see gun owners all shot through the heart with their own weapons. I'd like to see all flights from Africa stopped right now and no-one should get in or out of that foul continent. I'd like to see ALL law breakers in the UK do a minimum of one year inside and if they haven't got a British passport then they should be expelled along with any friends and family members they have. I'd like to see ALL illegal immigrants repatriated so the UK is safe from these horrible dirty criminal foreigners that the government seems to be sucking off at the moment. I'd like to see the Arab world bombed back to the stoneage and then we can march in and take the oil for free.

If a business wants to hire men only or women only or monkeys only then they should be free to do so. And if cripples are driving cars around town why should they get the best parking spaces? It's madness.

So you are sore because your missus can't spend the night dancing at a trendy night club? Welcome to Thailand.

I wish the rest of the world had the balls to follow in its' path...

[katoeylover]

Constitution: a body of fundamental principles or established precedents according to which a state or organization is governed.

I think it doesnt mean "law" per se, but more the way we live, and the morals we live by.

Unfortunately i tend to agree that owners should have the right to refuse entry to those they don't want inside, whether it be Foreigners in a Japanes Karaoke bar or Ladyboys in a trendy nightclub. By charging an entry fee they are making it a private members club, thus allowing themselves the right to refuse entry. This can't and doesn't happen in public buildings.

Whether this is right or wrong, because it doesn't suit us is not the point, but should we start forcing people to do things they dont want to, then it will lead to far greater discrimination.

Unfortunately, or fortunately as the case may be, we do live within a class system, and this is just another example of this.

[kaos]

(ziggystardust @ Mar. 19 2007,23:40) I asked my lawyer if I could do anything against Q-Bar and other establishments for refusing LBs to enter.

He said the Thai Constitution does protect human rights, however, there are no laws to that effect, and thus it is near impossible to enforce.

Now, I'm not a legal expert, but I thought the Constitution was a 'law' sort of, however, this lawyer has helped me a lot and is extremely trusted...I believe the essence of his comment was a reflection of reality in Thailand, i.e., human rights are not enforceable.

As such, the only thing that can be done easily, is embarassment, and I do intend to do that. Watch for an essay on my web-site, in about a month, called, "No Blacks, Muslims, Jews...or Transsexuals...Allowed! Public Discrimination in Thailand." I will then mention Q-Bar, its owner's name, The Whitehouse Hotel in Pattaya, and his name, and 1 or 2 others.

Ziggy to me your seems more a personal vendetta than fight for rights...as a matter of fact as owner is my right to let someone enter my property or not isnt it? IMO

[stogie bear]

as a matter of fact as owner is my right to let someone enter my property or not isnt it?

Yes it is. The law is not on your side if you want to enter a club under the 'Human Rights' act or any other 'constitution' of the law. If the owner or his representatives (ie: doorman) don't like the look of you then take it on the chin and move on.

[mardhi]

There is no 'right' to be admitted to private property anywhere - even in politically correct places such as London or LA. I would not worry about this Ziggy and just go to somewhere where your Baht and custom is welcomed.

Cheers
Mardhi

[Guest]

We'll agree to disagree.

IMO, public establishments should not be allowed to make judgements based on race, religion, color, or gender. Discrimination of this sort cannot be compared to smokers or flights from Africa.

You believe they should be allowed to do so and that's your perogative, but I think the majority of people world-wide would tend to disagree.

[Stewart]

The Whitehouse Hotel in Pattaya

Whitehouse Condotel, soi 13 beside the Dynasty?

I have been there many times and had ladyboys stay

[Stewart]

IMO, public establishments should not be allowed to make judgements based on race, religion, color, or gender. Discrimination of this sort cannot be compared to smokers or flights from Africa.

You believe they should be allowed to do so and that's your perogative, but I think the majority of people world-wide would tend to disagree.

I am firmly with Ziggy on this one. I want to live in a society that has some kind of civilised rules and norms, not somewhere where people's worst charateristics of bigotry and discrimination are allowed to be publicly displayed and openly encouraged.

Did someone mention Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther King?

[mardhi]

simple reality is that any club anywhere retains the right to say no and for that matter so does a simple pub. Q Bar used to to let ladyboys into the bar, however for some reason, presumably to do with trouble, they must have changed that policy. Personally I have not been in there for at least 3 years - I dont miss it and they probably dont miss my couple thousand baht everytime I did go there. But then again thinking about it, many clubs also discriminate for lots of reasons and I totally support that. Last week in Bed, was like going into Moscow and full of Fat, ugly farang women in flip flops. Personally I wished they had said NO to letting them in. Many clubs do, thats how you create their own style. Its no wonder that Bed Supperclub is also just chasing the money and judging by the people in there, its true enough anybody remotely hip has long gone.

Cheers
Mardhi

[kaos]

Ziggy
its your definition of public that makes the difference in what we are talking.
a pub or whatsoever establishment is not "public" but its privately owned and thus the owner or owners can decide who enters and who doesnt.
"public" refers to entity owened by the local gov or similar, as a matter of fact this means in a democracy that the public own the place thats why is open to everyone, like for example a temple in BKK or a museum or a park etc....in these kind of places i would not tolerate any restriction.
but to say you dont tolerate any restriction from a bar is a contradiction IMO, because for the same reason you are free to host who you want in your home they are free to do the same in their.
i hope i get this point clear, anyway i wouldnt give a shit if someone dont want my money and my presence and i will probably drink one beer more in another bar

[moe666]

A countries laws protects it citizens aganist the state typically not aganist private property owners. As the sign says, I reserve the right to refuse service to anyone.
Another sign, no shirt, no shoes, no service.

[PigDogg]

In New York you guys wouldn't be getting into the hottest clubs except if Jay or May WERE with you and then the velvet ropes would part and you'd be wisked right in.

Go figure.

[Guest]

(ziggystardust @ Mar. 21 2007,00:03) We'll agree to disagree.

IMO, public establishments should not be allowed to make judgements based on race, religion, color, or gender. Discrimination of this sort cannot be compared to smokers or flights from Africa.

You believe they should be allowed to do so and that's your perogative, but I think the majority of people world-wide would tend to disagree.

We have seen this Ziggy before. He carries the load of every LB on his shoulders, a knight of the Thai court trying to save the world for LB.

By the way, the majority of people world-wide agree with him.

Stand back, he sees a wind-mill in Q-Bar.

[Napalm]

(mardhi @ Mar. 20 2007,04:13) There is no 'right' to be admitted to private property anywhere - even in politically correct places such as London or LA. I would not worry about this Ziggy and just go to somewhere where your Baht and custom is welcomed.

Cheers
Mardhi

Well its a bit more complicated than that, a club is not private unless its membership is private and therefore only accesable by card carrying members???