The Injustice

Involving Same-sex
Marriage

Members:
Pauline Carpio
Miah Francine Apolinar
Jenny Rose Angeles
Christian Bautista
Marvin Dela Cruz
Carlo Gole Cruz

RESEARCH OUTLINE

a. History of same sex marriage

i. Same sex marriage in early years
ii. Ancient civilizations
iii. Rise of Christianity
iv. First laws against same sex relationships
v. National awareness and rise of the Gay Movement
b. Religion and same sex marriage
i. Procreation
1. Having children is main reason for marriage
ii. Artificial insemination
1. Other alternatives for having children
iii. Marriage ceremonies involving the church.
1. Church blessing
iv. Organization of bill.
1. The bill could be crafted in a way so the church is not involved. Marriage
would take place in a courtroom.
c. Discrimination
i. Denied rights.
1. Marriage is a right every individual is entitled to.
a. Social Security benefits upon death, disability or retirement of spouse, as
well as benefits for minor children, workers' compensation protections for the
family of a worker injured on the job, exemptions from estate taxes when a
spouse dies, exemptions from federal income taxes on spouse's health
insurance are all denied to same sex couples.
ii. Emotional trauma
1. Hospital visits, decisions regarding loved one’s life, custody of children
iii. Ideal image of a family
a. Father and mother figure
b. Parents would still rather see their children find someone who loves
them and be happy
d. Civil unions versus marriage
i. Civil unions are separate and unequal
 In early times, same-sex marriage was not considered taboo and in many cultures, it
was encouraged.
A vast history of recorded same-sex unions and marriage are all over the world, as it is always
have been part of the history. This acts are widely known in the Ancient Greece and Rome,
Ancient Mesopotamia, and few regions of China, such as the Fujian Province, and at certain
times in the Ancient European History.
Same-sex marital practices and rituals were more recognized in Mesopotamia than in Ancient
Egypt. The Almanac of Incantations contained prayers favoring equal basis love of a man for a
woman and of a man for a man.
An example of egalitarian male domestic partnership from the early Zhou Dynasty
period of China is recorded in the story of Pan Zhang & Wang Zhongxian. While the
relationship was clearly approved by the wider community, and was compared to heterosexual
marriage, it did not involve a religious ceremony binding the couple.
In Ancient Greece, same-sex love often took form of pederasty, which was limited in
duration and co-existed with marriage.The documented cases of this unions were temporary
pederastic relationships, these unions created a moral dilemma for the Greeks and were not
universally accepted.
In Rome, 13 out of the first 14 Roman Emperors are held to have been bisexual or
exclusively homosexual.
And the first emperor to have married a man was Nero, who married two man on different
occasion. The first one is Pythagoras in which Nero took the role of the Bride, and later as the
groom of his second bride named Sporus.
In Hellenic Greece, the pederastic relationships between Greek men (erastes-
dominant) and youths (eromenos-submissive) were similar to marriage in that the age of the
youth was similar to the age at which women married (the mid-teens, though in some city
states, as young as age seven), and the relationship could only be undertaken with the consent
of the father.
 In those times, same-sex marriages are often believed to be more pure than a
heterosexual marriage. Same-sex marriage was believed to be the union based on loved.A
marriage consisting of two males or two females, if women had the right to get married, was
not frowned upon.
It was not until the rise of Christianity that a negative attitude towards same-sex marriage
became introduced. The belief that marriage was based on procreation and any relationship
that was non-procreative began to increase in many societies.It is believed by some
interpreters in recent times that St. Paul was only addressing such practices in Romans 1: 26–
27, while others usually see these verses as condemning all forms of homoeroticism.
The Judaic prohibitions found in Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 address the issue of sex
between two men. The latter verse (20:13) says: 'And if a man also lies with mankind, as with
womankind, both of them have committed abomination; they shall surely be put to death;
their blood shall be upon them."
This verses and such caused a change in the perspectives of mind about same-sex
unions. But the Buddhism seems to be the most tolerant of all when it comes to sexuality even
in these times.
Buddhism have a basis for all schools and one of the is the Eight-Fold Path (guide to
enlightenment). Which contains the Five Precepts - serve as voluntary guidelines for life and
are the bases of Buddhist morality. And it includes individual’s choices or willingness o be that
is said to be in the book and the Third Precepts of the Five Precepts is the willingness to be :
“Aware of the suffering caused by sexual misconduct: I undertake the training to refrain from
using sexual behavior in ways that are harmful to myself and to others. I will attempt to express my
sexuality in ways that are beneficial and bring joy.”
perspectives vary greatly within the religion because of Buddhism’s core theme to attain
enlightenment, the path one chooses to take within the religion is largely personal, as is one’s
beliefs. Hence, most Buddhist literature indicates that opposition to or support for marriage
rights for same-sex couples is a personal, rather than religious, statement.
Starting in the 12th Century, the Roman Catholic Church launched a massive campaign
against sodomites, especially homosexuals. Most sodomy related laws in Western civilization
originated from the growth of Christianity during Late Antiquity. Note that today some
Christian denominations allow gay marriage and the ordination of gay clergy. Between the
years 1250 and 1300, homosexual activity was radically criminalized in most of Europe, even
punishable by death. In England, Henry VIII introduced the first legislation under English
criminal law against sodomy with the Buggery Act of 1533, making buggery punishable by
hanging, a penalty not lifted until 1861.
Following Sir William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, the crime of
sodomy has often been defined only as the "abominable and detestable crime against nature",
or some variation of the phrase. This language led to widely varying rulings about what
specific acts were encompassed by its prohibition.
in the 17th century cross dressing was common in plays, as evident in the content of many of
William Shakespeare's plays and by the actors in actual performance (since female roles in
Elizabethan theater were always performed by males, usually prepubescent boys). It was one of
exceptions against the sodomy and sumptuary laws as cross-dressing were a serious crimes
under sodomy and sumptuary laws.
From the 1870s, social reformers began to defend homosexuality, but due to the controversial
nature of their advocacy, kept their identities secret. A secret British society called the "Order
of Chaeronea" campaigned for the legalisation of homosexuality, and counted playwright
Oscar Wilde among its members in the last decades of the 19th century. The society was
founded by George Cecil Ives, one of the earliest gay rights campaigners, who had been
working for the end of oppression of homosexuals, what he called the "Cause".
the English socialist poet Edward Carpenter thought that homosexuality was an innate and
natural human characteristic and that it should not be regarded as a sin or a criminal offence.
In the 1890s, Carpenter began a concerted effort to campaign against discrimination on the
grounds of sexual orientation, possibly in response to the recent death of Symonds, whom he
viewed as his campaigning inspiration. His 1908 book on the subject, The Intermediate Sex,
would become a foundational text of the LGBT movements of the 20th century. Scottish
anarchist John Henry Mackay also wrote in defense of same-sex love and androgyny.
USSR's Criminal Code of 1922 decriminalised homosexuality. A remarkable step in the USSR at
the time – which was very backward economically and socially, and where many conservative
attitudes towards sexuality prevailed. This step was part of a larger project of freeing sexual
relationships and expanding women's rights – including legalising abortion, granting divorce
on demand, equal rights for women, and attempts to socialise housework. During Stalin's era,
however, USSR reverted all these progressive measures – re-criminalizing homosexuality and
imprisoning gay men and banning abortion.
In 1786 Pietro Leopoldo of Tuscany, abolishing death penalty for all crimes, became not
only the first Western ruler to do so, but also the first ruler to abolish death penalty for sodomy
(which was replaced by prison and hard labour). And in the following years many empires and
countries changed their laws and as of 2018, sodomy related laws have been repealed or
judicially struck down in:

Repe Eu No Sout
aled rope rth h
 A Ame
merica rica

Exce An Ba Barb
ptions tigua rbuda ados

Do Gr Guy
minica enada ana

Ja Sa Nevi
maica int s

Ki
tts

Sai Sa Gre
nt int nadines

Lu Vi
cia ncent
 Although the debate for same-sex marriage became noticeably public in the late
twentieth century, it was not until 1993 during a Hawaiian case, that the issue became national
news. The ruling of the case stated that the restriction of marriage and its benefits to opposite-
sex couples were unconstitutional. “The Defense of Marriage Act, which was introduced in
1996, was almost a direct response to the Hawaiian case, declared that no state would be
required to recognize a same-sex marriage from another state, and also defined marriage as a
union between one man and one woman” . By that same year, a majority of states passed laws
prohibiting same-sex marriage. Since then, states have defined their own definition of
marriage.
Despite the fact that the debate over same-sex marriage is relatively new in the United
States, five states have made same-sex marriage legal, as well as Washington D.C. According to
the Florida’s Domestic Partnership (2010), currently, there are only two states that recognize
same-sex marriages as of 2012, New York and California. In California, the marriage is only
recognized if it was before proposition 8. Ballot Pedias 2008 research explains how proposition
8 is a statewide ballot proposition in California. The people of California voted for the
illegalization of same-sex marriage. Though some people are against same-sex marriages for
religious reasons, not allowing same-sex marriages is discrimination. Same-sex marriages
should be legalized because the discrimination same-sex couples receive is emotionally
traumatic, and unfair.

*Egalitarian - relating to or believing in the principle that all people are equal and deserve
equal rights and opportunities
*Pederasty - a socially acknowledged romantic relationship between an adult male (the
erastes) and a younger male (the eromenos) usually in his teens.
*Nero - The last Roman emperor of the Julio-Claudian dynasty
*Story of Pan Zhang and Wang Zhongxian - first recorded in a Song Dynasty collection of
tales called Anthology Of Tales From Records Of The Taiping Era
*Hellenic Greece - a period of around 200 years (5th and 4th centuries BC) in Greek culture.
*Sodemy - a law that defines certain sexual acts as crimes. Sodomy typically includes anal sex,
oral sex, and bestiality

(civil union vs same sex marriage)

People are against same sex marriage. We Filipinos have beliefs that we can marry the opposite
sex not same sex. So, for now its still undecided on the law if they can accept that they can
marry the same sex, but Geraldine Roman proposed civil union. Eventually, we are religious
people so we can't accept that changes about love. You can love one another but marry the
opposite sex. In other countries, they legalized same sex marriage. Same sex marriage is
between two people by a man to man and a woman to woman with ceremonies and religous
matter. It is considered to be a human right and a civil right as well as political, social and
religious issue. These two people are protected by the law. In terms of having a child, they can
adopt a child to have a happy family, but they need to fix the papers of the child for the
confirmation that it is their child. While Civil Union, you don't need a priest to be married, you
just need a people who are under by the law to marry your partner. In short, there are no
religious matter in case of Civil Union. There are no ceremonies in your wedding. But you are
also protected under the law. It's about LGBT rights , Geraldine Roman discussed about
equality between LGBT and straight people. Because we all know that they experiencing
discrimination. A civil union is also a legal status that provides many of the same protections
that a marriage offers to both same-sex and heterosexual couples. The biggest difference
between a civil union and a marriage is the fact that these protections are only recognized on
the state level.It recognize civil unions between same-sex couples, granting them virtually all
the benefits, protections and responsibilities that married couples have. They can have same
benefits and protection as married opposite couples. In short, they can live happier as a couple.

The main differences between marriages and civil unions concern how those unions are
treated by other states and the federal government. Marriage law is decided by the states, but
has implications in federal law. Spouses can file taxes jointly and have rights to each other's
Social Security and Medicaid benefits.

Civil unions, on the other hand, aren’t recognized under federal law -- unless they've been
converted to marriages.

Thus, couples in civil unions don’t have Social Security entitlement benefits through their
partners, individuals in a civil union with federal employees don’t have access to federal
employee benefits, and civil union partners of foreign nationals can’t submit family based
immigration petitions. If you’re in a same-sex civil union, you can now seek a marriage license
in any state and become eligible for benefits.

Also, since marriage law is decided by the states, each state gets to decide which out-of-state
marriages and unions it will recognize. However, all states must recognize same-sex
marriages.
Having children is main reason for marriage

According to the English dictionary procreation the production of offspring; reproduction.

Through this fundamental the community is against and cannot accept the new content of
marriage.
According to the IGF Culture Watch
By Dale Carpenter written on March 18, 2004
A common argument against gay marriage is that marriage is for procreation and gay couples
cannot procreate. Let's call it "the procreationist argument." Is it persuasive?
The procreationist argument starts with the indisputable proposition that procreation is
indispensable to human survival. It then posits that marriage exists to encourage this
indispensable act to occur within a lasting union. The procreationist may concede that
marriage has other purposes - for example, providing the married person with a primary
caretaker and channeling sexual activity into monogamous commitments. Still, the
procreationist maintains, these other purposes serve mainly to help sustain the overarching
marital purpose of encouraging procreation and stabilizing family life for the resulting
children.
Individual gay persons can procreate, of course, through means such as artificial insemination
and surrogacy arrangements. But gay couples, note the procreationists, cannot procreate as a
couple. The distinction is important, they say, because parents tend to give better care to
biological children than to adopted children. Further, no event helps the durability of a
relationship like the birth of the couple's biological child.

According to the ABC Religion and Ethics on the article:

Why the Infertility of Couples is Irrelevant to the Same-Sex Marriage Debate
Marriage is based on the anthropological truth that men and women are distinct and
complementary, the biological fact that reproduction requires a man and a woman, and the
social reality that children deserve a mother and a father.
Perhaps the most common objection to this argument involves infertility. If infertile couples
can marry - and no one has ever denied that they can - how can the definition of marriage be
linked to procreation?
Proponents of same-sex marriage usually regard this argument as a "silver bullet" that
destroys the traditional understanding of marriage - as if no one in the previous millennia has
realized that some couples (and any woman above a certain age) can't conceive a child.
But as i argue on greater details there are four responses to this argument.

First, as a policy matter, the state is in the business of recognizing marriage, not because every
marriage will produce a child, but because every child has a mother and a father. Through its
marriage policy, the state respects the natural bonds that unite the parents who brought a
child into the world and encourages them to commit to each other permanently and
exclusively.

Second, as a practical matter, many couples who think they are infertile end up conceiving or
adopting children. Many who say they never want children change their minds. It's important
to keep these men and women united with each other. Indeed, infertility rarely strikes both
husband and wife, and marital fidelity ensures that the fertile spouse doesn't procreate
children with someone else, children who will be deprived of a fully committed mother and
father.

Third, as a philosophical matter, an infertile marriage is fully a marriage. A marriage is a

comprehensive union marked by one-flesh union - the coordination of the spouses' two
bodies toward the single biological end of reproduction. That coordination - and thus the one-
flesh union - takes place whether or not it achieves its biological end in the fertilization of an
egg by a sperm some hours later. The union, like the act that seals it, is still oriented toward
family life.
This explains why in common, civil, and canon law, infertility has never nullified a marriage.
Impotence, by contrast - which prevents a couple from consummating their union in the one-
flesh marital act - has been grounds for declaring that a marriage was never completed.

ii. Artificial insemination

1. Other alternatives for having children

There were a lot of alternatives that the medical community have done and started to wide
spread

One of the example is:

From azfertility.com
At Advanced Fertility Care we have helped many same sex couples achieve the dream of
parenthood. Advanced Fertility Care Physicians and their staff welcome those committed
couples who wish to start a family and will guide them through the fertility treatment process.
One of the first challenges facing female couples is which person will carry the pregnancy.
From strictly a medical perspective, the younger the patient the more successful the chance at
conceiving. Regardless of whom the couple chooses to carry the pregnancy, the first step is to
undergo basic diagnostic testing. This testing would include ovarian, tubal, and uterine
evaluation and will also necessitate some mandatory blood testing including those for sexually
transmitted diseases. In most cases, donor sperm with artificial insemination will be used,
requiring specific tests to be performed prior to choosing the sperm donor.
Given the cost of purchasing and utilizing donor sperm, the doctors will usually recommend
some form of ovarian stimulation whether it be Clomid or gonadotropins to increase the odds
of success. When relying on donor sperm, Advanced Fertility Care Physicians will perform only
one well timed insemination per cycle (rather than two consecutive days of insemination) in
order to try and keep the financial costs as low as possible.

Based on the
Colombua University Irving Medical Center

LGBTQ Fertility Services

For same-sex couples, the journey to parenthood looks quite different than the journey
opposite-sex couples undertake. Biological parenthood for same-sex couples involves
significant medical and legal challenges that opposite-sex couples are less likely to have to
navigate. At Columbia University Fertility Center, we support all paths to parenthood and will
work with you to achieve a happy and healthy family.

Female Same-Sex Couples

Usually female same-sex couples have already begun the conversation of who will carry the
baby before their initial appointment. One partner will decide to be the "patient," however,
your physician will obtain a full medical and gynecologic history on both partners. Sometimes,
there will be medical complications in one partner that will make it either more difficult for her
to carry or more dangerous.
Female same-sex couples have a number of different options to achieve a successful
pregnancy. Your physician will help you decide which option makes the most sense for you:
* Intrauterine insemination (IUI): Also called natural cycle with intrauterine insemination, IUI
is the simplest and least expensive method of conceiving for female same-sex couples and can
be done without medication. However, there is still a lot of testing that goes into starting
treatment. This method has around a 20 percent pregnancy rate per month.
* In vitro fertilization (IVF): Typically IVF is the fastest option, because it carries with it the
highest chance of success per month, but it is not usually the most cost-effective option.
* Co-maternity: With this option, one woman in the couple donates her eggs for the other to
carry.
Couples can opt to use anonymous or known-donor sperm. There are benefits and challenges
to both approaches. Using known-donor sperm requires legal and psychiatric clearance, and a
six-month quarantine of the sperm is recommended to retest for infectious diseases.

Male Same-Sex Couples

Male same-sex couples who are seeking to start a family have two options when deciding who
will carry the baby:
* Gestational carrier: This option involves choosing a woman who serves as the source of both
the egg and the uterus. Legal aspects of this option present numerous complications, however,
so it has become a less popular choice.
* Surrogate carrier: With this option one woman serves as the egg donor — either someone
who is known to them or an anonymous donor — and a second, different woman carries the
baby. This option presents fewer legal complications.

Actually here is an abstract proof

Though estimates vary, as many as 2 million to 3.7 million U.S. children under age 18 may have
a lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender parent, and about 200,000 are being raised by same-
sex couples. Much of the past decade's legal and political debate over allowing same-sex
couples to marry has centered on these couples' suitability as parents, and social scientists
have been asked to weigh in.

iii. Marriage ceremonies involving the church.

1. Church blessing

The blessing of same-sex marriages and same-sex unions is an issue about which Christian
churches are in ongoing disagreement. These disagreements are primarily centered on the
interpretation of various scripture passages related to homosexuality, and in some churches
on varying understandings of homosexuality in terms of psychology, genetics and other
scientific data. While various Church bodies have widely varying practices and teachings,
individual Christians of every major tradition are involved in practical (orthopraxy)
discussions about how to respond to the issue.

In 2004, the then Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, asked the Lambeth Commission
on Communion to produce a report looking into the legal and theological implications flowing
from decisions related to homosexuality that were apparently threatening the Anglican
Communion, including decisions relating to the blessing of same-sex unions. Once published
the Windsor Report led to the calling by the Lambeth Commission for a moratorium on the
blessing of same-sex unions, and recommended that bishops who have authorised such rites
in the United States and Canada "be invited to express regret that the proper constraints of the
bonds of affection were breached by such authorisation." The report was roundly condemned
by supporters of the gay and lesbian community, as well as by a number of theologians for its
partiality. To date, "the more liberal provinces that are open to changing Church doctrine on
marriage in order to allow same-sex unions include Brazil, Canada, New Zealand, Scotland,
South India, South Africa, the US and Wales".
On July 9, 2012, the Episcopal Church passed a resolution approving an official liturgy for
blessing same-sex unions. This liturgy, called “The Witnessing and Blessing of a Lifelong
Covenant” offers a blessing close to marriage, but the church is clear that it is not marriage.
According to Rev. Ruth Meyers, chairwoman of the Standing Commission on Liturgy and
Music, “There are a lot of similarities. The couple give their consent to being joined in lifelong
commitment, they exchange vows. There’s the possibility of exchanging rings, or, for couples
who have been together for some time and already have rings, to have their rings blessed.
There is a blessing over the couple. But we’re clear at this point that this is not a marriage
because the Episcopal Church is not in agreement in its understanding of marriage.” The
resolution enables priests to bestow the church’s blessing on gay couples even if they live in a
state where same-sex marriage is illegal; however, bishops who do not approve of the liturgy
can prohibit their priests from using it. The resolution is provisional and will be reviewed in
three years.
As of September 1, 2012, clergy of the Episcopal Diocese of New York have been authorized to
officiate at same sex weddings.

The United Church of Christ has no formal rules requiring or prohibiting solemnization of
wedding vows, but owing to its Congregational polity and constitution, each Local Church is
"autonomous in the management of its own affairs" and has the "right to operate in the way
customary to it"; it cannot be "abridge[d] or impair[ed]" by other UCC agencies, and so each
congregation has the freedom to bless or prohibit any kind of marriage or relationship in
whatever way they discern appropriate. Thus a congregation may choose at their discretion to
solemnise same-sex marriages, to bless same-sex unions, or refuse to perform any ceremony
for same-sex couples, or refuse to perform any kind of marriage for anyone. There are no
available statistics on how many UCC congregations solemnize same-sex relationships, but
there are documented cases where this happen and documented cases where congregations
have taken stands against marriage between same-gender couples.
Among Baptists, The American Baptist Churches USA allows each congregation to decide for
itself.Also, "the National Baptist Convention USA Inc. does not have an "official" position on
any issues with regards to homosexuality".Each congregation is autonomous in the National
Baptist Convention USA Inc.. Likewise, the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship recognizes the
autonomy of each local congregation on these issues.
The Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) allows each congregation to decide whether to
perform same-sex marriages.

iv. Organization of bill.

1. The bill could be crafted in a way so the church is not involved. Marriage would take place in
a courtroom.

The information below proved that this bill is just,fair,lawful and equable:

Same-sex marriage legislation in the United States

In response to court action in a number of states, the United States federal government and a
number of state legislatures passed or attempted to pass legislation either prohibiting or
allowing same-sex marriage or other types of same-sex unions.
On June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in the case of Obergefell v.
Hodges that a fundamental pright to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples by the
Fourteenth Amendment, and that states must allow same-sex marriage.
STATES THAT ALLOWED SAME-SEX MARRIAGE PRIOR TO 2015 U.S. SUPREME COURT
RULING

Alabama New Hampshire

Alaska New Jersey
Arizona New Mexico
California New York
Colorado North Carolina
Connecticut Oklahoma
Delaware Oregon
Florida Pennsylvania
Hawaii Rhode Island
Idaho South Carolina
Illinois Utah
Indiana Vermont
Iowa Virginia
Kansas Washington
Maine West Virginia
Maryland Wisconsin
Massachusetts Wyoming
Minnesota District of Columbia
Montana Guam
Nevada

LGBT rights in India

Status
Legal since 2018, has unclear in Jammu and Kashmir
Gender
Transgender people have a constitutional right to change their legal gender and a third gender
is recognised
Military
Pending
Discrimination
Supreme Court has banned all forms of discrimination based on sexual orientation.
Family rights
Recognition of relationships
No recognition
Adoption
Single adoption regardless of sexual orientation.

Sexual activity between people of the same gender is legal but same-sex couples cannot legally
marry or obtain civil partnerships.On 6 September 2018, the Supreme Court of India
decriminalised homosexuality by declaring Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code
unconstitutional.
Since 2014, transgender people in India have been allowed to change their gender without sex
reassignment surgery, and have a constitutional right to register themselves under a third
gender. Additionally, some states protect hijras, a traditional third gender population in South
Asia, through housing programmes, welfare benefits, pension schemes, free surgeries in
government hospitals and others programmes designed to assist them. There are
approximately 4.8 million transgender people in India.

But on the other hand this is what out nation come out:

LGBT rights in the Philippines

The Philippines is ranked as one of the most gay-friendly nations in Asia.The country ranked
as the 10th most gay-friendly in a 2013 global survey covering 39 countries, in which only 17
had majorities accepting homosexuality. Titled "The Global Divide on Homosexuality," the
survey conducted by the Pew Research Center showed that 73% of adult Filipinos agreed with
the statement that "homosexuality should be accepted by society," up by nine percentage
points from 64% in 2002. The main reasons for the high percentage of LGBT acceptance in the
Philippines are the archipelago's historic point of view and respect to gender-shifting and
non-based gender roles before the 12th century which have been inputted in indigenous
cultures prior to Islamization and Christianization and the current public mediums (television,
writings, radios, and social media) that have set a spotlight on the sufferings of countless
LGBT Filipinos in their own country due to colonial-era and colonial-inspired religions.

Family rights
Recognition of relationships
None
Restrictions
The Family Code of the Philippines defines marriage as "a special contract of permanent union
between a man and a woman". The Constitution of the Philippines does not prohibit same-sex
marriage.
Adoption
Allowed for individuals but not allowed for same-sex couples.

The LGBT community remains as one of the country's minority sectors today. Lesbian, gay,
bisexual and transgender people often face disadvantages in getting hired for jobs, acquiring
rights for civil marriage, and even in starting up personal businesses. Most non-heterosexuals
also have a higher rate of suicide and suicide ideation compared to non-
homosexuals.Acco-rding to an international research, 10% of the world's population are
theoretically part of the LGBT community, out or not, including 12 million Filipinos that may
experience discrimination based on who they are. This has led to the rise of the cause for LGBT
rights, defined as the right to equality and non-discrimination.A-s a member of the United
Nations, the Philippines is signatory to various international covenants promoting human
rights

Same sex marriage discrimination refers to singling out, distinguishing or making a

distinction of same sex couples when it comes to marriage. It's also the unequal treatment of
same sex individuals in marriage and other related areas. It's however worth noting that not all
unequal treatment amounts to discrimination in marriage among same sex couples or illegal
as indicated below.
Same Sex marriage discrimination also involves direct discrimination where a person is
treated worse for being in a civil partnership or marriage to another of the same gender.
Indirect discrimination also exists where employers for instance might have a policy that puts
same sex partners who are married at a disadvantage.
Discrimination is also observable when same sex married individuals are treated badly
for raising complaints about marriage discrimination or supporting another person for going
through the same.
Most of the largest religious institutions in the U.S. still stand against same sex
marriage such as Southern Baptist Convention, Mormon/Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints, Orthodox Jewish, Assemblies of God and the National Baptist Convention prohibit
clergies from officiating same-sex marriages. The government cannot discriminate same sex
individuals from going through civil marriage; it's a legal institution regulated and established
by the same government. However, clergy members and religious institutions are free to
refuse or decline performing marriage rituals and rites on anybody they want. This is where
same sex couples might be denied the permit to marry by some churches or faiths although a
huge number of churches officiate same sex church or faith based marriages.
In diverse states same sex couples and others wishing to get married can choose to get
married within a welcoming church or place of worship or by civil servants such as authorized
deputies or judges. While the constitution protects the right of the places of worship to do what
they want according to their beliefs, such cannot be imposed on others or religion cannot be
used to harm people, discriminate and break the law.
It’s the reasons why business owners and government officials cannot assert religious
belief to discriminate by refusing to follow a clear set law such as offering marriage licenses to
same sex couples. Rather than a religious freedom it’s discriminatory and unlawful. Many
States in the greater United States including localities but not all have prohibited bias in
compensation, hiring, termination, promotion, harassment and assignment of jobs due to the
sexual orientation of a person. Nonetheless, if a prospective employer or current employer
happens to be a faith based or religious association/corporation discrimination might be hard
to prove due to the right that such associations have under the same law. On the other hand, if
an employer refuses to offer same sex couples the same kind of employment benefits as other
different sex couples or individuals or simply refusal to accept or recognize same sex validity
it’s construed as a form of discrimination.
The law does forbid discrimination based on gender identity or sexual orientation
when it comes to providing employment benefits. Employment laws on the federal level also
stops employers from offering employees unequal benefits due to sexual orientation or just
gender. In July 2015, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ruled that
discrimination by employers against same sex and LGBT workers as a whole was a violation of
the Title VII of the Civil Right Acts of 1964, which essentially doesn't allow employment
discrimination of any form in terms of national origin, sex, religion, color or race.

Parental Rights

Discrimination against same sex couples in the adoption of children is illegal across
the United States. This is due to the legalization of the adoption right among same sex couples
who are legally married from June 2015. However, it's worth noting policies on same sex
married couple adoption does vary from one jurisdiction to the next. Once same sex individuals
get married, foster and adoption agencies cannot discriminate them on their desire to adopt
children.
In May 16th, 2013 the congress introduced an act known as Every Child Deserves a
Family stating that organizations dealing with adoptive and foster children care and receive
funds one way or the other from the Federal government cannot discriminate against same sex
married couples. They cannot refuse any of the partners even if they identify themselves as
LGBT the right to adopt or foster a child. However, since this is mostly applying to federally
funded institutions same sex partners are hugely refused the right to adopt by private
institutions. While the law in the U.S. generally allow married gay couples to adopt, those
seeking to adopt from other countries might be denied by foreign laws. Sam

It is advisable that same sex couples should avoid custody or parentage battles in a
court of law virtually in every state of the nation due to the harm it does on a child. It leaves
behind a lot of agony yet what should be agreed upon on legal custody issues is the physical
custody or the place the child stays, child support and visitation in the process saving each of
the parties involved lots of distress. In case you decide the legal system is the way to go
there’re things you need to remember.

Both same sex partners have legal rights to the custody of the child if:The child was
born in their civil union, registered domestic partnership or marriage in a locality or state
where parental rights are conferred on non-biological parents.The child was adopted by non-
adoptive or non-biological parent via a stepparent or second parent adoption arrangement or
through parentage action established a relationship with the child.Both same sex partners had
adopted the child jointly.

Things are however different if only one of the partners is the legal parent considering
in lots of states the second parent has zero rights and cannot seek visitation rights, physical or
legal custody of any kind.

Full equality will lessen stigma, ease stress and bring marriage’s mental health benefits
to all. Research shows that children raised by lesbian and gay parents develop in the same
positive ways that children raised by heterosexual parents do, and that same-sex couples are
just as capable of providing a supportive environment for children. Research also shows that
same-sex couples can effectively parent adopted children, When same-sex couples have the
opportunity to get legally married, they run out and say, ‘I do’. In contrast, civil unions and
domestic partnerships are not viewed as having the same emotional weight, social approval
and legal protections as marriage.“It’s clear that same-sex couples are voting with their feet,
in terms of which status they think is more important”.Laws that exclude lesbian, gay and
bisexual people from marriage cause stress, and that stress negatively impacts physical and
mental health. The experience of living with stigma, always being vigilant and constantly
needing to conceal your “authentic self” from disapproval and even violence exacerbates the
pressures that everyone feels in daily life.

People are against same sex marriage. We Filipinos have beliefs that we can marry the
opposite sex not same sex. So, for now its still undecided on the law if they can accept that they
can marry the same sex, but Geraldine Roman proposed civil union. Eventually, we are
religious people so we can't accept that changes about love. You can love one another but
marry the opposite sex. In other countries, they legalized same sex marriage. Same sex
marriage is between two people by a man to man and a woman to woman with ceremonies and
religous matter. It is considered to be a human right and a civil right as well as political, social
and religious issue. These two people are protected by the law. In terms of having a child, they
can adopt a child to have a happy family, but they need to fix the papers of the child for the
confirmation that it is their child. While Civil Union, you don't need a priest to be married, you
just need a people who are under by the law to marry your partner. In short, there are no
religious matter in case of Civil Union. There are no ceremonies in your wedding. But you are
also protected under the law. It's about LGBT rights , Geraldine Roman discussed about
equality between LGBT and straight people. Because we all know that they experiencing
discrimination. A civil union is also a legal status that provides many of the same protections
that a marriage offers to both same-sex and heterosexual couples. The biggest difference
between a civil union and a marriage is the fact that these protections are only recognized on
the state level.It recognize civil unions between same-sex couples, granting them virtually all
the benefits, protections and responsibilities that married couples have. They can have same
benefits and protection as married opposite couples. In short, they can live happier as a couple.

The main differences between marriages and civil unions concern how those unions are
treated by other states and the federal government. Marriage law is decided by the states, but
has implications in federal law. Spouses can file taxes jointly and have rights to each other's
Social Security and Medicaid benefits.

Civil unions, on the other hand, aren’t recognized under federal law -- unless they've
been converted to marriages.

Thus, couples in civil unions don’t have Social Security entitlement benefits through
their partners, individuals in a civil union with federal employees don’t have access to federal
employee benefits, and civil union partners of foreign nationals can’t submit family based
immigration petitions. If you’re in a same-sex civil union, you can now seek a marriage license
in any state and become eligible for benefits.

Also, since marriage law is decided by the states, each state gets to decide which out-
of-state marriages and unions it will recognize. However, all states must recognize same-sex
marriages.

In my opinion, we need to accept same sex marriage in the Philippines, because we all
want to feel loved, to accept by others and be bless by our God. We all want to marry in front of
our Lord in church. Why not giving them chance to do that? We're just equal so let them feel it,
because they also deserve it. They are very determined to fight for LGBT rights, so give it to
them. I know that it is not common to see people, who have a relationship with same sex, but
we don't need to avoid them just embrace it. Accept that there's love everywhere. Nothing is
impossible, so don't feel disgusted by seeing them. Give them love and appreciation, because
they are so brave to show to many judging people that they love their same sex.

Conclusion:

In ancient times bi-sexuality was common, but not viewed totally acceptable because it
was thought morally wrong, perverted many said. Being gay isn't bad it is just love most
people fall in love because of personality not gender it isn't a disease and it isn't abnormal it is
simply love there is no reason to shun it and there is no reason to praise it you can praise Love
is love is a great statement and i think that it it is just rude to hate on people for liking the same
gender. You don't know how bad one goes through if they're not straight. They have it way
harder and should not be treated bad like the way people are.Someone for coming out because
that is considered brave in this day and society because there is so much hate because this
doesn't happen often in our history.Marriage is people’s right. It is about the commitment
between two individuals. Everyone deserves enjoying their happiness. In political aspect no
one must take away there prevelage, couple with the same sex who wants to get married
should have the same rights as a couple with the different sex (tax cuts, adoption, etc Gay
parents do not have a big of an impact on children. It all depends on the act of the parent. So
my definition of marriage is the union of two people who are in love and agrees to bind
together legally.

References and Bigliography:

https://www.littlechapel.com/same-sex-discrimination-guide.html
https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/a-right-to-marry-same-sex-marriage-and-
constitutional-lawhttps://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/a-right-to-marry-same-sex-
marriage-and-constitutional-law
lawhttps://family.findlaw.com/domestic-partnerships/civil-unions-v-marriage.

- Lahey, Kathleen A., Kevin Alderson. Same-sex marriage: the personal and the political.
Insomniac Press, 2000. ISBN 1-894663-63-2 / 978-1894663632
-Dynes, Wayne R. and Stephen Donaldson. 1992. Homosexuality in the Ancient World. New
York, NY: Garland.
- Bullough, Vern L. (1976). Sexual variance in society and history. New York: Wiley. p. 53. ISBN
9780471120803.
- Hinsch, Bret (1990). Passions of the Cut Sleeve: The Male Homosexual Tradition in China.
- Hinsch, Bret. (1990). Passions of the Cut Sleeve. University of California Press. pp. 24–25
- Eskridge, William N. (Oct 1993). "A History of Same-Sex Marriage". Virginia Law Review.
- Hinsch, Bret. (1990). Passions of the Cut Sleeve. University of California Press. pp. 35–36.
- http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/62*.html
- Bruce L. Gerig, "Homosexuality in the Ancient Near East, beyond Egypt", in
HOMOSEXUALITY AND THE BIBLE, Supplement 11A, 2005
- Hubbard, T. K. (Spring–Summer 1998). "Popular Perceptions of Elite Homosexuality in
Classical Athens".
- "CHURCH FATHERS: Homily 4 on Romans (Chrysostom)". Newadvent.org. Retrieved 2012-
04-18.
- https://www.hrc.org/resources/stances-of-faiths-on-lgbt-issues-buddhism
- Neill, James (27 October 2008). "The Origins and Role of Same-Sex Relations in Human
Societies". McFarland – via Google Books.
- John Boswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality (1980)
- "Book the Fourth – Chapter the Fifteenth: Of Offences Against the Persons of Individuals".
Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England. Archived from the original on 7
September 2006. Retrieved 6 August 2006.
- McKenna, Neil (2003), "The Secret Life of Oscar Wilde: An Intimate Biography". (London:
Century)
- Dan Healey (15 October 2001). Homosexual Desire in Revolutionary Russia: The Regulation of
Sexual and Gender Dissent. University of Chicago Press. p. 3. ISBN 978-0-226-32233-9.
Retrieved 27 October 2012.
- https://family.findlaw.com/marriage/1993-the-hawaii-case-of-baehr-v-lewin.html
- https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Defense+of+Marriage+Act+of+1996

https://en.m.LGBT_rights_in_India
https://igfculturewatch.com/2004/03/18/gay-marriage-and-procreation/
https://www.columbiaobgyn.org/services/lgbtq-fertility-services
Same-sex marriage legislation in the United States
LGBT rights in India
LGBT rights in the Philippines