This House calls for the legalization of same-sex marriage in the Philippines to promote equality
and social justice.
BASIS:
AFFIRMATIVE/GOVERNMENT SIDE
Regarding the current motion, our team is in favor of it.
In other words, we are in favor of same-sex marriage becoming
legal in our nation. These three initials will serve as the
foundation for our claims, which we will support throughout our
speeches.
1. The negative connotation attached to the gay community is
actually removed by the enactment of the law of same-sex
unions. For the record, the Philippines is regarded as one of
among the most gay-friendly countries in Asia, but despite
this reputation, we can still observe that restrictions are in
place in our nation that are directed towards gay societies,
such as marriage between people of the same gender.
2. To respect the gay community's right to liberty regarding
same-sex marriage, as everyone has the right to their own
rights regardless of gender and the freedom to decide
whether or not to get married. nonetheless because of
obligatory regulations that forbid them from doing so, these
rights are ineffective in our country.
3. The gay community can begin to enjoy its rights in our
society by enacting changes to the laws pertaining to
marriage rights, as discrimination against them is not limited
to this issue.
Social change is a concept many of us take for granted or
don't really even understand. No society has ever remained the
same. (Southern New Hampshire University).
Is marriage a religious thing? No, it isn't. If you're asking if
it is specifically a Christian thing, as most people in my country
mistakenly presume, the first known recorded marriage is from
2350 BC in Mesopotamia.
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.
Laying out criticism against the policies on religious
objections, Friedman (2016) focuses on same-sex marriages and
other transgender rest-room concerns, Philippine Congress
approved a bill that protects the rights of the lesbian, gay,
bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community. On the third and
final reading of House Bill No. 4982 or the Sexual Orientation
and Gender Identity and Expression Equality (SOGIE) bill, 198-
0 of the representatives voted in favor of it; no one abstained. As
this paper seeks to elucidate the need for legalization of same
sex marriages across various jurisdictions, the article is of
importance in portraying the existing religious and societal
prejudices against LGBT.
The marriage of two people who are, according to
various definitions, of the same legal sex is referred to as same-
sex marriage. According to a report by Al Jazeera, just this year,
there have been approximately 1.3 billion individuals living in
37 different nations where same-sex marriages are accepted and
lawfully performed. Greece is the nation that legalized same-sex
marriage most recently. And now is the right time for the
Philippines to do so as well.
A lot has fought for their rights and equality. The blacks
have already won their fight, as well as women seeking for equal
and fair judgment. Now, the LGBT community, which continues
to grow and supporters, are battling for the same source. Each
individual has a civil right to marry someone who they love
including gays and lesbians. But it’s not just about the civil right,
LGBT want acceptance.
One argument in favor of allowing same-sex marriage
is that legalizing it, demonstrates the justice and equality of
people in society. From a human standpoint, individuals of the
same sex share the same to marry and seek happiness as others.
Considering that the law is created to defend human values; their
human rights cannot be denied. Matrimony is the aim. for many
individuals, and it also applies to those of the same sex.
Legalizing same-sex marriage demonstrates how far society has
come for the vast majority of people in identifying, assessing,
sharing, and developing empathy for those in their immediate
vicinity.
Those who are against legalizing gay marriage contend
that it will undermine the institution of marriage. However,
because they feel that homosexuals would undermine the good,
this argument is made against gays rather than against gay
marriage. Many nations have legalized same-sex marriage, and
this hasn't undermined the institution of marriage or done harm
to it. Gay couples should have the same rights as heterosexual
couples to marry each other if they truly love each other.
Religious groups and politicians have made it a point to
stop or delay the passage of any law that, in their view, promotes
homosexuality and “immorality.” This includes bills on same-
sex marriage and even reproductive health. Advocates, on the
other hand, would push for provisions each time the bills were
refiled, covering other forms of SOGIE-based discrimination.
Now known as the Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, and
Expression, and Sex Characteristics (SOGIESC) Equality Bill,
the current version filed in both the House of Representatives
and the Senate aims for equal access of the LGBTQ+ to basic
rights and services. The court, however, added that the 1987
Constitution in "plain text" imposes no restrictions on same-sex
marriage. The court also advised, that although this issue is
"ideally" for Congress to decide, it's still open to future similar
petitions with proper cases.
Senator Robin Padilla introduced Senate Bill No. 449
which proposed the institution of civil unions for both
heterosexual and same-sex partners, which does not require any
religious rites. The measure includes recognition of property and
adoption rights for same-sex partners.
The 1987 Constitution itself does not mention the
legality of same-sex unions or has explicit restrictions on
marriage that would allow same-sex partners to enter into such
arrangements.
Same-sex couples should have access to the same
benefits enjoyed by heterosexual married couples.
Paradoxically speaking the Philippines is now ready to legalize
same-sex marriage.
Same-sex marriages undergo rituals and proceedings
like heterosexual marriages before signing a marriage
certificate, while in same-sex civil unions there is no ceremony
 needed and it is just performed by signing a civil partnership
certificate in front of an authority and several witnesses.
Senator Robin Padilla introduced Senate Bill No. 449
which proposed the institution of civil unions for both
heterosexual and same sex partners, which does not require any
religious rites. The measure includes recognition of property
and adoption rights for same sex partners.
Allowing same-sex marriage would enable gays and
lesbians in the Philippines to marry the person they love and
would strengthen everyone’s rights. From a human rights
perspective, broadening civil marriage to couples of the same
sex demonstrates respect for the fundamental rights of equality
and nondiscrimination. It should be enshrined in Philippine law.
The Philippines should join countries including the
United States, South Africa, Brazil, Colombia, Argentina,
Uruguay, New Zealand, Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Portugal,
Sweden, and Ireland, all of which have enshrined marriage
equality in their laws. In Asia, lawmakers in Taiwan are mulling
a draft law that would legalize same-sex marriage.
The 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
NEGATIVE/OPPOSITION SIDE
Executive Order No. 209, s. 1987
The 1987 Philippine Constitution, under Article XV,
Section 2, considers and defines marriage as an inviolable
social institution that should be protected by the State.
As defined by the Family Code of the Philippines,
Article 1. Marriage is a special contract of permanent union
between a man and a woman Art. 2. No marriage shall be valid,
unless these essential requisites are present: (1) Legal capacity
of the contracting parties who must be a male and a female;
To begin with, our purpose is to represent the voices of
those who oppose same-sex marriage legalization. We would
first and foremost like to state the Philippine family code, which
came into effect on July 6, 1987. We oppose the motion at hand,
which calls for same-sex marriage in the Philippines, for three
main reasons.
1. To be clear, we oppose same-sex marriage, not same-sex
unions.
2. We wish to be supporters of upholding the Constitution's true
definition of marriage and its sanctity.
3. An ethical violation cannot be converted into a right granted
by the law.
According to the Social Weathers Stations (SWS) survey
held in March 2018 showed that 61% of Filipino's disagree with
the proposed bill to legalize same-sex marriage, 22% agree with
it, and 16% are undecided.
From the opposition that argues that same-sex
marriage cannot be allowed in the Philippines, I will go over
some issues regarding the effects of same-sex marriage on
Filipino families and their social structures, as well as potential
issues that could arise if the government and society are not
ready for same-sex marriage should it become legal in the
Philippines. These issues stem from the opposition's argument
that same-sex marriage cannot be permitted in the nation.
allowing same-sex marriage would undoubtedly have a
negative impact on a child's development in many ways, as
society would not be impressed by the contemporary viewpoint
of children raised by parents who share the same sex. Every
child has the right to have a mother and father. Parents of the
same sex cannot provide the essential security that children need
from society's critical gaze because they are also fighting for
their right to be treated equally.
In a manner comparable to the aforementioned one, there
is also the implication that permitting same-sex marriage will
undermine the goal of the family, which is to create a stable
family unit. Couples who legalized same-sex marriage would be
unable to conceive and would have to turn to adoption. That
would, in a way, be advantageous because a lot of needy
children would receive it, but accepting same-sex marriage
would have an impact on the population because fewer and
fewer couples would be able to procreate because there is no
way for two people of the same sex to become parents.
In line with this, the argument that encouraging
same-sex marriage is unlawful and unconstitutional has always
been made. This is primarily because it violates the Family
Code, enacted thru Executive Order No. 209, s. 1987, Art. 2.
No marriage shall be valid, unless these essential requisites are
present: (1) Legal capacity of the contracting parties who must
be a male and a female;
It is the cornerstone of the family and an untouchable
social institution whose nature, ramifications, and incidents are
regulated by law and not subject to agreement, with the
exception that property relations during a marriage may be fixed
by marriage settlements within the parameters set forth by the
Code." Since the law only recognizes marriages between a man
and a woman, allowing same-sex marriage renders it invalid.
The institution of marriage is highly valued by the
people in this nation, and the state has put protections around it
to preserve its eternity, linearity, and utmost purity. Marriage
also plays a major role in the security and stability of the nation.
Every individual within the community has a responsibility and
an interest in preventing the emergence of circumstances that
could threaten its foundation and ultimately result in its collapse.
The institution of marriage is highly valued by the
people in this nation, and the state has put protections around it
to preserve its eternity, linearity, and utmost purity. Marriage
also plays a major role in the security and stability of the nation.
Every individual within the community has a responsibility and
an interest in preventing the emergence of circumstances that
could threaten its foundation and ultimately result in its collapse.
Due to the misconception that homosexuality is immoral,
deviant behavior, and a lifestyle that does not fit social norms,
homosexuals continue to struggle for acceptance as normal,
respectable members of society. As same-sex marriage goes
against social mores, the majority of Filipinos are not
accustomed to the homosexual community's mentality and are
actively working to legalize it.
As I wrap up this speech, I just want you to keep in mind
two important points. One, same-sex marriage is prohibited by
law and the constitution. The second similar-sex marriages
would not progress as long as the political establishment permits
itself to be shaped by all Christian beliefs, regardless of the
Catholic Church of Rome. Marriage is not a right is it an
institution as stated in our constitution.