You are on page 1of 2

The state takes an active interest in the institution of marriage primarily

because of its fundamental and unique procreative ability. The institution of


marriage is not just about loving relationships between consenting adults and the
dignity and legal recognition that the state confers upon them. It is more
importantly about the unique biological chemistry of men and women united as an
institution to produce and give life to an offspring for the normal perpetuation of the
society. The real purpose, therefore, of marriage is not just about recognizing adult
relationships but rather it is made for a more profound intention, that is, the
creation of the next generation. The unique ability to actualize this profound
intention is inherently conferred only upon a man and a woman and not with the
same sex.
Marriage, for the purpose of perpetuity of the society, is distinct to that of
other relationships. If it is just the same with all other social relationships, then
there is no compelling reason for the state to take marriage seriously or pay so
much attention or interest to it. But if marriage is something beyond mutual
relationship and is exclusively for men and women, it is therefore obvious that same
sex couples do not fall under same situation to that of opposite sex married couples.
Thus, they should not be treated alike if we take it in the context relative to the
democratic principle contained in the equal protection clause. .
Another strong reason why the state has fundamental interest in the
protection of marriage is the catastrophic effect same sex marriage might bring in
the upbringing of children. According to a survey conducted by the United States
Census Bureau last 2010, out of 594,000 same sex couples in the United States,
150,000 are reported having children.84 % of these households contained own
children of the householder. In contrast, 94 % household of opposite-sex married
couples live with their natural children .Although the disparity is not high, there
still a significant proportion of kids not related to their parents in same sex
household.
.
In the status quo, there is no social clamour yet as to same sex marriage in
the context of Philippine socio-legal context. A recent survey conducted by The
Philippine Star suggests that 71% of Filipinos are not for same sex marriage. This
logically implies that the general will of the society do not
Openly entertain the very idea of same sex marriage. The constitution, as the
manifestation of the general will of the people, is silent as to whether another form
of marriage shall be considered valid and legally acceptable in the light of the
principle enshrined in the equal protection clause. However, we can logically infer
from the collective sentiment of the majority that the equal protection clause does
not require the state to license same sex marriage.