IN a gathering of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community in Davao City on December 17, President Duterte clarified he was not rejecting same-sex marriage in the Philippines, but the law must be amended.
Duterte was referring to Article 2 of the Family Code of the Philippines (Executive Order 209 as amended), which provides that no marriage shall be valid unless the contracting parties have legal capacity and consent has been freely given. Legal capacity refers to gender (the contracting parties must be a male and a female) and age (they must be 18 years or older).
Sorsogon Bishop Arturo Bastes warned that the Church would not approve same-sex marriage because “the main great purpose of marriage is procreation of children and the building up of a loving family, the basic unit of human society, which is also the domestic church” (https: news mb.com.ph 2017/12/18).
Some countries have begun recognizing same-sex marriage. At present, same-sex marriage is legally recognized in Argentina, Belgium, Canada, Iceland, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Spain and Sweden. In the United States, same-sex marriages are not recognized federally, though same sex couples can marry in six of the 50 states and one district.
There are still other cases waiting to be resolved either at Congress level or at the Supreme Court. Some countries have already stood firmly to preserve the conventional concept of marriage—that is a marriage between a man and woman only (Explanatory Note, House Bill [HB] 3179).
The ongoing debate on whether to legislate same-sex marriage in the Philippines will not be resolved overnight. In my opinion, we are missing the whole point of the debate—the LGBT community (if I understand them correctly) is fighting for no less than their constitutional right to equality and equal opportunity. Toward this end, several bills have already been filed in the House of Representatives, among them:
- HB 01034
An act proscribing discrimination against members of the lgbt community and prescribing penalties therefor.
Principal Author/s: Castello,
Winston.
- HB 01451
An act prohibiting discrimination of teachers who are unwed mothers, single parents and members of the LGBT community.
Principal Author/s: Belaro, Salvador Jr. B.
- HB 02952/HB 5082
An act establishing LGBT help and protection desks in all Philippine National Police stations nationwide, amending for the purpose Title VII of Republic Act 8551, as amended, otherwise known as the “Philippine National Police Reform and Reorganization Act of 1998,” and for other purposes.
Principal Author/s: Santos-Recto, Vilma.
- HB 04307
An act establishing an alternative education facility for LGBTs to be known as LGBT Specialist School and situated in the City of San Jose del Monte, Bulacan, and appropriating funds therefore.
Principal Author/s: Robes, Florida P.
- HB 05584
An act defining domestic violence against individuals, including members of the LGBT community, other than women and children, and providing for protection measures for victims, prescribing penalties therefore, and for other purposes.
Principal Author/s: Sandoval, Federico II S.
- HR 00184
A resolution of the House of Representatives expressing profound condolences for the victims of the Orlando Night Club shooting, the deadliest incident of violence against the LGBT people.
Principal Author/s: Olivarez, Eric L.
- HR 00623
A resolution expressing the sense of the House of Representatives to terminate the visiting forces agreement in the light of the cases of abuses committed by United States of America military personnel against women, children and LGBT community on philippine soil.
Principal Author/s: De Jesus, Emmi A.; Brosas, Arlene D.; Zarate, Carlos Isagani T.; Casilao, Ariel “Ka Ayik” B.; Tinio, Antonio L.; Castro, France L.; Elago, Sarah Jane I.
Most of these bills and resolutions have been approved by the House, transmitted to the Senate and awaiting appropriate action by the Senate (when it has time to legislate and not investigate
Noticeable in all the House bills filed, is that there is not one on same-sex marriage (at least as of this writing). There is, however, HB 3179 introduced as far back as October 2013 in the 16th Congress by Edcel B. Lagman covering property ownership of couples of the same sex living together, including its ownership, administration and dissolution. Known as “Same Sex Property Relation Act,” the bill proposes the registration of the same-sex relationship in the registrar of the city or municipality where either one of the partners actually reside. The same-sex partners, in the absence of any written agreement, shall be deemed as coowners of all the properties that they bring into, or acquire, during their actual living together, and shall have joint rights of administration. The same-sex partners can agree in writing (registered with the civil registrar) that certain properties shall be considered as separate properties and exclusively owned by the same-sex partner to which it is attributed in the agreement. The coownership of properties of the same-sex relationship shall be deemed dissolved if one of them dies or chooses to terminate said same-sex relationship. Such dissolution must be registered with the civil registrar where the same-sex partnership was registered.
In my view, rather than a discussion on the morality or immorality of a same-sex marriage, the national debate should shift to recognizing the basic right of every person to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, the equal protection of the laws, and the right against discrimination on account of gender.
The LGBT community deserves no less!
Peace on Earth, goodwill to all humans!