Cheryll Santos Leus was a non-teaching employee of St. Scholastica
College Westgrove, a Catholic institution. Sometime in 2003, she got pregnant out of wedlock; this prompted the school directress to ask her to file her resignation due to misconduct and immorality. Leus responded to this by stating that such act is not immoral; therefore not an actionable wrong. The issues that were raised in this case all revolved around the question of morality, and by what standard do we measure it?
Morality is commonly defined as the principle of right or wrong. Morals
are not societal postulates but rather is the basis of our laws. It serves as a “measuring stick” for acts that are deemed agreeable or contrary to societal norms. Article 21 of the Civil Code states that “Any person who wilfully causes loss or injury to another in manner that is contrary to morals, good customs or public policy shall compensate the latter for the damage.” Our Civil Code incorporates morals as a criterion for acts that causes injury or harm against another person. Morals is a referential principle that justifies what is right or wrong. But such principle is subjected to a certain standard, hence we can only identify what is morally right or wrong from a set of universal truths. Truths that are not relative or a product of personal preference. Therefore, a truth must be universally accepted for it to be considered a standard.
“Public and secular morality should determine the prevailing norms of
conduct, not religious morality.”1 The Court understood the need for a prevailing standard of morality. In this case, they held that public and secular morals should be the prevalent norm in measuring an act in accordance to our laws and jurisprudence. Public morals is defined as morality not based on religion but on popular ideas, sources of law, and common aspirations as expressed in policies, preambles and declaration of policies. 2 On the other hand, secular morality invokes the principles of which is deemed as reasonable or rational by man. In this case, the Court clearly made a distinction between two contrasting views on morality: the secular and the religious. This stems from the separation of the Church and State. This institutions are both fundamental in our society, but are confined within their separate jurisdiction. Therefore, the Church cannot overstep it’s boundaries on that which is of the State, and such is the same for the State. Hence, within the standard of secular morality the out of wedlock pregnancy of Cheryll Leus is not immoral. It is not wrong for two consenting adults, without legal impediment to marry, to conceive a child. Footnotes: 1 Leus v. St. Scholastica (G.R. No. 187226; January 28, 2015) 2 Philawsophia : Philosophy and Theory of law (2014)