Our nation was founded on a bedrock principle that we are created equal.

This is the
opening sentence in President Obama’s speech after the US Supreme Court recognized that their
Constitution guarantees marriage equality.

Ladies and gentlemen, our dearest adjudicators, good day!

Our group firmly affirm the resolution that same-sex marriage is legalized in the
Philippines since this is a human rights issue, not a religious one, a question of maintaining love
and not allowing partners who feel that love to pass by.
 
The Pew Research Center study, titled "The Global Divide on Homosexuality," found
that 73% of adult Filipinos agreed that "homosexuality should be accepted by society," up from
64% in 2002.

Their research also showed that, despite having a religiosity rating of 2.4, where 3 is the
highest, 73% of them feel that homosexuality should be accepted.

Take, for example, China. Taiwan was the first Asian country to make same-sex marriage
legal. Taiwan's top court, the council of grand justices, declared preventing gay couples from
marrying, violated "the people's right to equality". “Sexual orientation is an immutable
characteristic that is resistant to change” the Supreme Court stated in its decision.

The lack of divorce legislation, the expensive expense of getting married, and the rising
acceptability of live-in arrangements and same-sex partnerships were some of the explanations
identified in the Philippines for the 30-percent drop in the country's marriage rates during the
previous 12 years.

According to Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) data, the number of registered

marriages—solemnized in religious, civil, and tribal ceremonies—in 2015 was the lowest in the
previous 25 years.

Religious and civil unions both declined. Marriages in Catholic ceremonies, for example,
plummeted 11% between 2010 and 2015, while those conducted by judges or mayors fell 16%.

So, what is it that is luring people away from this institution, which remains a precious
sacrament and valued institution in this Catholic world's majority country?

The high cost of getting married, the growing acceptance of alternative living
arrangements such as cohabitation and same-sex marriages, rapid urbanization and changing
mores, as well as the lack of a divorce law that makes getting out of a legal union difficult, have
all been cited as deterrents to couples marrying.
 After the United States Supreme Court allowed same-sex marriage in all 50 states, the
majority of Filipinos seem unconcerned about whether the same policy should be enacted in the
Philippines. According to an online survey conducted by INQUIRER.net, 41.2 percent of
respondents, or 9,100 out of 22,085 totaled votes, said "I don't care" whether the Philippines
should follow suit.

This was somewhat higher than the 39.2 percent (or 8,658 respondents) who felt the
country should allow same-sex marriage. Sex unions. Meanwhile, 19.59 percent of the total
ballots cast, voted "no."

In reality, Catholicism is not a barrier to marriage equality and other LGBT-inclusive

civil legislation. Spain, which introduced Catholicism to the Philippines through its 15th-century
colonization, is the third country to allow same-sex marriage.

Laws should not only conform to the present but also anticipate the future.
Homosexuality is not an illness that can be prevented or stifled. Because sexual orientation crises
are inevitable why not allow same-sex marriage to help guide the future?

Furthermore, if the other side believes that "marriage" should not be granted to gays and
that a civil union should be granted since it produces the same result, we would respond with the
same rationale. If the civil union has the same results as marriage, why not name it marriage and
legalize it?

Marriage is not only for procreation, otherwise infertile couples or couples not wishing to
have children would be prevented from marrying. The ability or desire to create offspring has
never been a qualification for marriage. From 1970 through 2012 roughly 30% of all US
households were married couples without children, and in 2012, married couples without
children outnumbered married couples with children by 9%. 6% of married women aged 15-44
are infertile, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  In a 2010 Pew
Research Center survey, both married and unmarried people rated love, commitment, and
companionship higher than having children as “very important” reasons to get married, and only
44% of unmarried people and 59% of married people rated having children as a very important
reason. As US Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan noted, a marriage license would be granted to
a couple in which the man and woman are both over the age of 55, even though “there are not a
lot of children coming out of that marriage.”

This is not a question of what is ethically acceptable, morally good, or ethical. We

disagree with the notion that the government should be divided between these unrelated subjects.
Religious debates about homosexuality and what is morally acceptable have no place in national
policy, just as the Bible's support for slavery and the subjugation of women does not. This is a
fundamental tenet of the separation of religion and state. Being gay is not as unusual as being
left-handed. And if it is the sanctity of the marriage, then divorce should not be considered since
it undermines the holiness of marriage more than forging a marriage of the same sex.
 Filipinos keep bragging about how they are a family-oriented race while discriminating
against gays who want to start their own families, and that, ladies and gents, is what we call
hypocrisy. One cannot accept the concept of "family-oriented" while opposing same-sex
marriage.

With this, I rest my case. Good day everyone!