Although abrogated by the coup-makers after the Sept 19 putsch, the 1997 Constitution retains its stature as one of the best the country has had. Its Section 5 states: ''The Thai people, irrespective of their origins, sex or religion, shall enjoy equal protection under this Constitution.''
In no place did it declare Buddhism as the national religion. It was a wise and prudent course the charter set _ and one we should follow. As the crucial process of drafting the new constitution proceeds, a group of monks and lay Buddhists have come out and urged the drafters to designate Buddhism the national religion. In proposing the official status, the advocates argue that they have no intention of alienating other religions. However, considering that Buddhism is worshipped by a majority of Thais _ up to 94% of the population is Theravada Buddhist, about 5% is Muslim while Christian, Confucian, Hindu, Jewish, Sikh, Taoist, animist and atheist populations make up the remaining 1% _ they maintain that the definition would prompt the state to recognise the importance of Buddhism, to protect and support it more. They maintain that this would help Buddhism to flourish, and therefore serve to boost people's moral standards and the health of society as a whole. In the real world, where a minority religion in one place can be a majority in another, where inter-faith tolerance and dialogue are the only salvation against deadly religion-based conflicts that have flared up worldwide, such an argument is highly contentious.
First, how can Thai nationals who are Muslims or Catholics feel at one with a law that officially identifies with another religion? Buddhists in this country already prevail over other faiths by their sheer numbers. Adding the ''national religion'' status to it would be so grandiose, so imposing as to leave no room for practitioners of different religions to breathe, and would not be conducive to peaceful co-existence or meaningful inter-faith dialogue ...
http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/16Feb2007_news19.php