The Supreme Court (SC) recently 

junked a petition to legalize same-sex

marriage in the Philippines, igniting a debate on LGBTQI+ rights and the
future of same-sex marriage in the Philippines.
The struggle of LGBTQI+ people and same-sex marriage in the Philippines is
one that is complicated and convoluted. The LGBTQI+ community is a pillar
of Filipino culture and society, stretching back to pre-colonial Philippines
when genderfluid babaylans were revered spiritual figures. While LGBTQI+
peoples have been seemingly accepted into society, the reality is that it’s a
superficial acceptance that limits them to remain in over-exaggerated
stereotypes and caricatures.
And when it comes down to the nitty gritty, the Catholic stronghold of Asia
still doesn’t seem ready for the next step toward total LGBTQI+ rights—
particularly when it comes to same-sex marriage.

MORE FROM ESQUIREMAG.PH

Supreme Court Dismisses Same-Sex Marriage on Grounds of "Lack of Standing"

Pending legalization of civil unions

In the Philippines, God is king, and the Catholic Church has staunchly
opposed same-sex marriages around the world. In response to that, civil
unions were formed as a way of legally recognizing a union between two same-
sex partners with the almost all the rights of marriage. Largely considered the
first step toward same-sex marriages, civil unions are making progress in the
Philippines after Speaker of the House of Representatives Pantaleon
Alvarez filed a bill to legalize civil unions for same-sex and opposite-sex
couples in 2017.
It was refiled in 2019, and supported by Senators Risa Hontiveros and Grace
Poe, yet Senators Tito Sotto and Manuel Pacquiao, who are vocal anti-same-
sex marriage advocates, have stated their plans to block the bill should it pass
the House and reach the Senate.

ADVERTISEMENT - CONTINUE READING BELOW 

With civil unions facing the opposition in the Senate, it’s not hard to imagine
the reception same-sex marriage will receive among the Philippines’
numerous conservative and Christian politicians.
Touching the very heart of the existing order is the issue on same-sex marriage or — more
accurately — unions. US-based Pew Research Center noted that the number of
governments which consider granting legal recognition to same-sex marriage are growing.
Around two dozen countries, mostly in Europe and the Americas, already allow same-sex
marriage. However, as of date, a marriage or union between two Filipino citizens of the
same sex is not legally recognized in the Philippines.

The issue once again found its way to national relevance after President Rodrigo Duterte’s
pronouncement. Reversing his 2016 campaign promise to support legislation allowing
same-sex marriage, President Duterte said that while he has no issue with anyone’s
sexuality, he believes that marriage should only be between a man and a woman. He
anchors this statement on Philippine laws, particularly Executive Order No. 209, otherwise
known as “The Family Code of the Philippines,” which governs the law on marriage.

While President Duterte’s change of stance was widely criticized by rights groups, it was
welcomed by the Roman Catholic Church, from which staunch opposition against same-sex
marriage largely comes. Philippines is known as Asia’s bastion of Roman Catholicism and
this heavily explains the church’s political influence over more than 80% of the population
who are its members.

The Family Code defines marriage as “a special contract of permanent union between a
man and a woman.” It further provides as one of the essential requisites that the contracting
parties “must be a male and a female.” It thus clearly prohibits same-sex couples from
entering into a contract of marriage. The same law mentions homosexuality and lesbianism,
but only as grounds to annul a marriage or to allow legal separation.

However, the 1987 Philippine Constitution, the supreme law of the land, neither
discriminates nor prohibits same-sex marriage. It provided only for the significance of
marriage, such that marriage, “as an inviolable social institution, is the foundation of the
family and shall be protected by the State.”

Thus, there is no impediment against legalizing same-sex marriage in the Philippines.

However, there needs to be an enabling law redefining, and changing the parties who may
contract, marriage.

Bills protecting the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) community, which include
the legalization of same-sex civil marriage, are not among those which the House of
Representatives prioritizes. As early as 18 years ago, a bill legalizing same-sex marriage
was filed by former Representative Etta Rosales, but it never progressed from first reading.
The same counterpart measure was sponsored by Senator Risa Hontiveros last year but it
only also reached as far as first reading. Numerous anti-discrimination proposals have been
served on the table but none of which was a success.

A country report initiated by the United Nations Development Program highlighted the fact
that while the Philippines is a signatory to many relevant international covenants promoting
human rights, the rights of the LGBT community are not always supported by the state.

It is a fact that same-sex activity is not criminalized in the Philippines and sexual orientation
is mentioned in various laws. However, national legislation is bereft of anti-discriminatory
laws which allow the LGBT community to fully exercise their fundamental rights to equality
and non-discrimination. Though there are victories in the form of ordinances passed by local
government units, such as Quezon City, Angeles, Cebu, Bacolod, and Davao, addressing
discrimination against the LGBT community, there is not much to revel in terms of the
latter’s opportunities to build a family.

Without marriage, same-sex couples suffer from substantially lesser rights compared to
heterosexual couples. There are legal issues involving the former’s adoption and custody of
children, hospital and prison visitation rights, management and transfer of properties,
medical and burial decisions, and entitlement to insurance proceeds. Same-sex couples
resort to certain legal, albeit limited, approaches to legitimize their union — adoption, which
is allowed if done by a single LGBT person; business partnership, to jointly own properties;
and a special power of attorney, to name a few.

In the landmark case of Ang Ladlad LGBT Party v. COMELEC, no less than the highest
court of the land recognizes “that practical solutions are preferable to ideological
stalemates; accommodation is better than intransigence; reason more worthy than rhetoric.
This will allow persons of diverse viewpoints to live together, if not harmoniously, then, at
least, civilly.”

Same-sex marriage is an issue that is still heavily debated upon. Grounds raised against it
range from moral to legal. However, the legal impediment against same-sex marriage can
be cured by legislation. There is no absolute prohibition against legitimizing — at least,
civilly — unions between two Filipinos of the same sex. Hence, it is legally feasible for the
legislative branch of the government — the Congress and the Senate — to enact a law
which legalizes same-sex marriage in the Philippines.

Our freedom to differ and, ultimately, our freedom to choose must not be limited by existing
laws, especially when there is nothing that prohibits legislation accommodating legitimate
calls for equality, which the Constitution itself enshrines.