AFFIRMATIVE SIDE RESEARCH

TOPIC:
● LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT: Same-sex marriage in the Philippines is to be deemed constitutional
GROUP 3:
● Speakers:
○ Annika Tan (Necessity)
○ Lori Ragil (Beneficial)
○ Veia Sidaya (Practicality)
○ Jeandel Loon (Rebuttal)
● Researchers:
○ Nichole Magtibay
○ Mikhaila Mira
○ Ceasar Banaag
○ Kirt Bernal
○ Adrianne Ramos
○ Kendrick Amodia
Links:
● Philippines: Supreme Court Rules on Same-Sex Marriage | Library of Congress
● Philippines Should Adopt Same-Sex Marriage | Human Rights Watch
● A Bond Between Man and Woman: Religiosity, Moral Foundations, and Same-Sex Marriage Attitudes
in the Philippines

Necessity (NIKA)

● Why is it necessary that same-sex marriage in the Philippines should be deemed constitutional?

● Points:
- Global Trend Towards LGBTQ+ Rights: By mentioning the legalization of same-sex marriage
in 32 countries, the sentence highlights the global movement towards LGBTQ+ rights and
equality. This signals that recognizing same-sex marriage in the Philippines would align with
broader international norms and standards.
- Efforts for Recognition in the Philippines: The sentence acknowledges ongoing efforts within
the Philippines to push for recognition of same-sex partnerships. This includes references to
initiatives such as the consideration of a bill for civil partnerships and the filing of a petition to
challenge the marriage restriction in the Family Code. These efforts demonstrate a growing
recognition of the need for legal recognition and protection for same-sex couples within the
country.
- Importance of Constitutional Recognition: By asserting that deeming same-sex marriage
constitutional is essential, the sentence underscores the significance of legal recognition in
upholding principles of equality and non-discrimination. This suggests that constitutional
recognition would not only provide legal protection for same-sex couples but also affirm their
equal status and dignity under the law.
- Allowing same-sex couples to marry strengthens families and communities by providing stability
and legal recognition to their relationships. Research has shown that children raised by same-
sex couples fare just as well as children raised by heterosexual couples in terms of emotional,
social, and academic outcomes. Legalizing same-sex marriage promotes family stability and
social cohesion, which benefits society as a whole.

● Speech/Statement:
○ Ladies and gentlemen, honorable judges, and fellow debaters, today we stand before you to
advocate for constitutionalizing same-sex marriage in the Philippines, a vital step towards
promoting equality, dignity, and human rights for all Filipino citizens. Our stance is not just
based on our personal and moral standing, but also firmly supported by legal basis, societal
evolution, and reputable evidence of the necessity such legalization brings.

First and foremost, the necessity of legalizing same-sex marriage lies in upholding the
fundamental principles of equality in our constitution. The Philippine Constitution states in Article
 III, Section 1, "No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of
law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws." This provision heavily
stresses the principle of equal protection, ensuring that all individuals are treated equally under
the law regardless of sexual orientation.

Denying same-sex couples the right to marriage perpetuates stigma and discrimination, which is
contradictory to the basic principles of our constitution. Legalizing same-sex marriage is not just
a matter of tolerance but it is also necessary to affirm the equal worth and dignity of all Filipino
citizens before the law. Legal recognition of same-sex marriage fosters identical positive
experiences as enjoyed by heterosexual couples and is indispensable in safeguarding the equal
dignity and respect that LGBTQ+ individuals deserve.

Furthermore, constitutionalizing same-sex marriage provides crucial protections for LGBTQ+

families. Marriage is more than just a symbolic gesture; it carries substantial legal weight and
grants tangible benefits and protections to couples. These include the right to property
ownership and the right to inherit the spouse’s estate.

Finally, legal recognition of same-sex marriage cultivates social progress and inclusion. It sends
a powerful message that LGBTQ+ individuals are valued members of our society, deserving of
equal rights and opportunities. By embracing marriage equality, we move closer to realizing a
more inclusive, diverse, and unprejudiced country.

In conclusion, the constitutionalization of same-sex marriage is not merely a matter of policy; it

is a moral imperative grounded in the necessity to bring the principles of equality, dignity, and
human rights to all Filipino citizens. By embracing marriage equality, we affirm the inherent
worth and humanity of all Filipinos, regardless of their sexual orientation. That is all, thank you.

NOTES:
● Article III, Section 5 of the Philippine Constitution also states that "No law shall be made respecting an
establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." By this, legalizing same-sex marriage
aligns with this provision by ensuring that religious institutions are not compelled to perform or
recognize marriages that contradict their beliefs. This means that while same-sex marriage may be
legalized at the civil level, religious institutions are free to adhere to their own doctrines and teachings
regarding marriage.
● Article III, Section 5 of the Philippine Constitution states “No law shall be passed abridging the freedom
of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition
the government for redress of grievances.”
●

Beneficial (LORI)

● Why is it beneficial that same-sex marriage in the Philippines should be deemed constitutional?
-
● Points:
- Constitutional Guarantee of Equal Protection: The Philippine Constitution ensures equal
protection under the law for all citizens, irrespective of gender or sexual orientation. By
legalizing same-sex marriage, the Philippines upholds this constitutional principle, affirming the
equal rights and dignity of LGBTQ+ individuals.
- Alignment with International Human Rights Standards: Legal recognition of same-sex
marriage aligns the Philippines with international human rights standards. Numerous countries
worldwide have acknowledged same-sex marriage as a fundamental human right. By following
suit, the Philippines demonstrates its commitment to upholding human rights principles and
promoting equality on a global scale.

- Demonstration of Commitment to Human Rights and Equality: Legalizing same-sex

marriage serves as a tangible demonstration of the Philippines' commitment to human rights
and equality. It sends a clear message that all citizens, regardless of sexual orientation, deserve
 equal treatment and respect under the law. By extending marriage rights to same-sex couples,
the Philippines affirms its dedication to creating a society that values diversity and inclusivity.
- Allowing same-sex coupjnfowjrerles to marry strengthens families and communities by providing
stability and legal recognition to their relationships. Research has shown that children raised by
same-sex couples fare just as well as children raised by heterosexual couples in terms of
emotional, social, and academic outcomes. Legalizing same-sex marriage promotes family
stability and social cohesion, which benefits society as a whole./

Actual Statement/Speech:
To the esteemed judges, debaters, and audiences today, a pleasant day. During my speech, I will be
tackling about the beneficiality and major advantages that same-sex marriage will bring to the country.

Firstly, according to a Sexuality research and social policy journal by Riggle EDB, Sexual minorities
who resided in states with equal marriage rights reported less identity concealment, vigilance, and
isolation than their peers in states without equal marriage rights. With laws that force people to hide
their sexual identities, they would suffer with poor social conditions and these conditions are major
factors that cause depression and anxiety. If same-sex marriage laws were constitutional, queer
communities would be less stigmatized by society and open to the world around them, thus, promoting
an equal and more interactive community. With the Philippines allowing marriage for same-sex couples,
it strengthens families and communities by providing stability and legal recognition to their relationships,
completely affirming the dedication of creating a society that values diversity and inclusivity.

Secondly, According to an article by Aparna Marthur, year 2015, after looking at data from 1980 to
2012, they found that among married-parent families, the median family income rose 30%, while for
unmarried parents, family incomes rose only 14% over the same period. Marriage brings stronger
family ties that can bring decent economic outcomes and increased financial gain. If same-sex couples
were to be granted the rights of marriage, they would have beneficial privileges and financial
opportunities and actively take a role in the socio-development of the country.

Thirdly, According to an article by Melissa McCall, J.D., year 2023, Same-sex marriage allows
homosexuals the parental right to take care of children. Same-sex marriage can bring the opportunity
for many more unparented orphans with a home and basic needs to grow up.

In consideration of the younger generations, it has been clear in research that children in the hands of
good parents, no matter the sexual or gender identities, fare well socially and mentally. Furthermore,
according to an article in Forbes by Robert Hart, published in 2023, children raised by sexual/gender
minority parents are outperforming their peers from traditional families, especially when it comes to
psychological adjustment and child-parent relationships.

In conclusion, same-sex marriage brings many benefits to society, mainly promoting the equality and
stability of the people, improving the nation’s socio-economic status, and building families and
communities. If same-sex couples were given the same rights as heterosexual couples, they would
have the capacity and liberty to participate in the development of the society instead of keeping them
locked away from favorable opportunities.

Practicality (VEIA)

● Why is it practical that same-sex marriage in the Philippines should be deemed constitutional?
 ● Points:
- The practical implications of legalizing same-sex marriage are profound and far-reaching.
Studies have consistently shown that allowing same-sex couples to marry leads to improved
mental health outcomes, greater financial stability, and stronger familial bonds. Legal
recognition of their relationships affords same-sex couples access to crucial benefits and
protections, from inheritance rights to healthcare decision-making, that are essential for building
stable and secure families. Moreover, legalizing same-sex marriage streamlines administrative
processes and reduces the burden on government agencies, promoting efficiency and fairness
in our legal system.
Actual Statement/Speech:
-

Rebuttal & Counter-arguments (JEANDEL)

● Potential counters and retorts from points of the negative side

● Points:
● Traditional Values Argument:
○ While it's important to respect cultural and religious traditions, constitutional principles of
equality and non-discrimination should prevail. Just as societal norms have evolved over time to
recognize the rights of women and minorities, so too should they evolve to recognize the rights
of LGBTQ+ individuals. The Constitution guarantees equal protection under the law, regardless
of sexual orientation or gender identity.
● Social Stability Concerns:
○ Legalizing same-sex marriage contributes to social stability by affirming the rights and dignity of
LGBTQ+ individuals and their families. Studies have shown that countries with marriage
equality experience positive social outcomes, including strengthened family bonds and
increased societal acceptance of diversity.
● Parental Rights and Child Welfare:
○ Research consistently shows that children raised by same-sex parents fare just as well as those
raised by heterosexual parents. Denying same-sex couples the right to marry denies their
children legal and social recognition, potentially harming their well-being. Legalizing same-sex
marriage ensures that all families, regardless of parental sexual orientation, have access to the
legal protections and benefits afforded by marriage.
○
● Religious Freedom:
○ Legalizing same-sex marriage does not compel any religious institution to perform or recognize
such marriages against their beliefs. Religious freedom is protected under the Constitution, and
churches, mosques, temples, and other religious institutions retain the right to define marriage
according to their doctrines. Civil marriage, as recognized by the state, is distinct from religious
marriage.
● Potential for Slippery Slope:

Legalizing same-sex marriage is a matter of recognizing the fundamental rights of consenting adults to
marry the person they love, regardless of gender. It does not open the door to other forms of marriage,
such as polygamy or incest, which involve different considerations and potential harms. Same-sex
marriage is distinct and should be evaluated on its own merits.

“Population helps continue reproduciing:

Many countries with legalized same-sex marriage have stable or growing populations, indicating that marriage
equality does not necessarily lead to population decline. Population trends are influenced by complex
demographic, social, and economic factors that go beyond the legal recognition of same-sex relationships.”

Script:

Good Morning, esteemed judges, honorable opponents, and fellow debaters!

In response to the points raised by the opposition, I will now emphasize the key concepts central to the debate
on why same-sex marriage in the Philippines should be deemed constitutional; Firstly, the necessity of
legalizing same-sex marriage is firmly supported by legal basis, societal evolution, and empirical evidence.
First is Legal Basis: The Philippine Constitution upholds principles of equality and non-discrimination. Article
II Section 11 states, "The State values the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for
human rights." so it means that Legalizing same-sex marriage is a logical extension of this principle, ensuring
equal rights and dignity for all individuals, regardless of sexual orientation.

Second is Societal Evolution: Over the years, discrimination towards LGBTQ+ individuals and relationships
have evolved significantly in the Philippines. There is a diversity of sexual orientations and gender identities
within society. Legalizing same-sex marriage reflects this societal progress and acknowledges the equal worth
of all relationships.

Thirdly, Empirical Evidence: It has shown that legalizing same-sex marriage has positive effects on the
mental and emotional well-being of LGBTQ+ individuals. It provides legal recognition and protections that
contribute to greater stability and happiness within relationships.

Legalizing same-sex marriage in the Philippines is not only constitutionally justifiable but also reflective of
societal evolution and supported by empirical evidence.It promotes a more inclusive and equitable society
where love and commitment are celebrated in all their diversity.

Furthermore, legalizing same-sex marriage is not just a matter of civil rights; it is a matter of upholding the
principles upon which our nation was founded. The Constitutional Guarantee of Equal Protection as Miss Veia
mentioned, demands that we treat all individuals equally under the law, regardless of their sexual orientation. It
is not just a legal imperative but a moral one. Let us stand on the right side of history and ensure that love and
equality prevail.

Legalizing same-sex marriage is beneficial according to the constitutional guarantee of equal protection
because it promotes equality before the law, prevents discrimination, protects fundamental rights, promotes
social cohesion, and safeguards against arbitrary and invidious discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Finally, same-sex marriage would fulfill the country's obligations under these treaties, including the right to
marry and the principle of non-discrimination. It would demonstrate the Philippines' commitment to promoting
human rights and equality on the global stage. By addressing practical considerations and embracing marriage
equality, the Philippines can move closer to realizing its commitment to human rights and equal treatment
under the law.

In conclusion, 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.

One more note: This is not an attack on people with same-sex attractions. All people, regardless of sexual
orientation, deserve to be treated with dignity and respect.

Thank you!
Interpellation counter-arguments

“Tradition and Culture”

In conclusion, while traditional interpretations of marriage may have historically been limited to heterosexual
unions, the principles of equality, fairness, and human rights compel us to reassess and expand our
understanding of this institution. Legalizing same-sex marriage is a natural progression towards ensuring equal
rights and opportunities for all citizens, and aligns with the evolving values of an inclusive and diverse society.

"Procreation argument/Statement”

The assertion that the sole purpose of marriage is procreation is overly simplistic and fails to acknowledge the
multifaceted nature of marriage in modern society.

Marriage is about more than just procreation. While procreation is certainly one aspect of marriage for many
couples, it is not the only purpose or defining characteristic of the institution. Marriage is also about love,
companionship, mutual support, and the formation of a lifelong partnership. Even many heterosexual couples
choose not to have children or are unable to conceive, yet their marriages are still considered valid and
meaningful. To reduce marriage solely to its reproductive function ignores the emotional and social dimensions
involved when entering a marriage.

Many same-sex couples choose to have children through various means, including adoption, surrogacy, or
assisted reproductive technologies. Legal recognition of their marriages provides stability and legal protections
for their families, ensuring that their children have the same rights and opportunities as children raised by
heterosexual couples.

In conclusion, the assertion that the purpose of marriage is solely for procreation overlooks the diverse reasons
why couples choose to marry and the many benefits that legal recognition of marriage provides.

- Do you agree that marriage serves purposes beyond just procreation, such as love, companionship,
and mutual support? Should marriage be defined solely by its reproductive function, or should it
encompass a broader range of factors?
- Do you think marriage be defined solely by its reproductive function? So you do know that there are
heterosexual couples who cannot conceive or infertile women in heterosexual relationships right? So
do you think marriages without children are void? If your argument is centered around procreation, by
your logic, Do you believe that even couples who choose not to have children or are unable to conceive
should not be allowed to marry? Exactly.
- Would you agree that the significance of marriage lies in the lifelong partnership and commitment
between two individuals, regardless of their ability or choice to have children?
- "If your argument is based on the premise that same-sex couples should not be allowed to marry
because they cannot procreate, how do you address the situation of heterosexual couples who are
unable to conceive due to health conditions or other reasons? Are you suggesting that these couples,
including infertile women, should also be denied the right to marry based solely on their reproductive
abilities? Isn't this approach inherently discriminatory, as it neglects the fundamental right to marriage
for individuals who, through no fault of their own, cannot fulfill traditional expectations of procreation?
Shouldn't marriage be based on the love, commitment, and partnership between two individuals, rather
than solely on their ability to have children?"

"Real families need to have man and woman parents"

This statement overlooks the diverse ways in which families, including same-sex families, can provide love,
support, and guidance to children. Here are several rebuttals to this statement:
You are viewing this argument in a traditional sense, which also pushes an anti-feministic approach. Since we
all know that modern families often exhibit a range of caregiving roles that are not strictly defined by gender.
Both parents, regardless of their gender, can provide emotional support, nurturing, and guidance to their
children. What matters most is the quality of parenting and the love and support that children receive, rather
than the gender of the parents.

Research has consistently shown that what matters most for children's well-being is the presence of loving,
supportive, and involved parents, rather than their specific gender roles. Children raised by same-sex couples
have been found to fare just as well as children raised by heterosexual couples in terms of emotional, social,
and academic outcomes. What truly defines a family is the love and commitment that parents have for their
children, not their sexual orientation or gender identity.

The assertion that only families with a man and a woman can provide proper direction and a sense of an actual
family overlooks the diverse ways families can thrive and provide love, support, and guidance to children.

“But the Philippine constitution states that marriage is between a man and a woman”

While it's true that the Philippine Constitution recognizes marriage as an institution between a man and a
woman, it's essential to understand that constitutional interpretations can evolve to reflect changing societal
norms and values.

Constitutions are not static documents. They can be amended to reflect evolving societal values and principles.
Throughout history, constitutional amendments have been made to rectify injustices and expand rights to
previously marginalized groups. Just as amendments have been made to guarantee equal rights regardless of
race or gender, the Constitution can be amended to include same-sex couples' right to marry, that is why we
are having this debate right now and why we are fighting for the affirmative side, to ensure the
constitutionalizing of equal protection under the law through the legalizing of same-sex marriage.

Societal attitudes towards LGBTQ+ rights and same-sex marriage have evolved significantly in recent years.
There is growing acceptance and support for marriage equality among Filipinos, particularly among younger
generations. Legalizing same-sex marriage reflects the changing values and attitudes of society and ensures
that the law is responsive to the needs and aspirations of all citizens.

“Church does not recognize same-sex marriage/Philippines is catholic”

The Philippine Constitution states in Article II, Section 6, "The separation of Church and State shall be
inviolable."This means that the government and religious institutions should not interfere with each other's
affairs.

While it is true that the Philippines has a predominantly Catholic population and that marriage is considered a
religious practice by many, it is essential to recognize the separation of church and state and the importance of
upholding principles of secularism and equal rights under the law.

Legalizing same-sex marriage does not infringe upon the religious beliefs or practices of those who oppose it
nor does it force the Church to recognize these marriages; we simply want to fight for its legal recognition and
benefits to couples who choose to enter into such unions. Churches and religious institutions have the right to
define marriage according to their teachings and traditions, but these beliefs should not dictate civil law, which
must uphold the rights of all citizens, regardless of their religious affiliation or beliefs.

"Civil Marriage vs Religious Marriage”

It's crucial to distinguish between civil marriage, which is a legal contract recognized by the state, and religious
marriage, which is a ceremony performed within a particular faith tradition. Legalizing same-sex marriage
would extend civil marriage rights to same-sex couples, allowing them to access legal protections and benefits,
while still respecting the autonomy of religious institutions to define marriage according to their beliefs.
“Respect religious freedom”

The Philippines is a diverse nation with citizens belonging to various religious traditions, not just Catholicism.
While the Catholic Church may hold certain beliefs about marriage, it's important to recognize that not all
Filipinos share these beliefs. Legalizing same-sex marriage acknowledges and respects the diverse range of
beliefs and values present in Filipino society, ensuring that all individuals have the freedom to live according to
their own conscience and identity.

“Same-sex marriage is not morally correct”

You cannot use morality as an argument, since although there is an objective aspect to morality, most of is a
basis of the subjective perspective and reasoning. Morality is subjective and varies among individuals and
cultures. What one person or group considers morally incorrect, another may view as morally acceptable or
even commendable. Imposing one particular set of moral beliefs on an entire society disregards the diversity of
perspectives and experiences that exist within that society.

Legalizing same-sex marriage does not cause harm to others or undermine the rights or well-being of
individuals or society as a whole. In fact, denying same-sex couples the right to marry can lead to tangible
harms, such as discrimination, stigma, and denial of legal protections and benefits, which can have negative
effects on the mental health and well-being of LGBTQ+ individuals and their families.

Morality is often linked to principles of fairness, equality, and justice. Denying same-sex couples the right to
marry based on their sexual orientation is discriminatory and unjust, perpetuating inequality and denying them
the same rights and opportunities enjoyed by heterosexual couples.

In conclusion, arguments against same-sex marriage based on morality are subjective and fail to consider the
diverse perspectives and experiences of individuals within society. Legalizing same-sex marriage aligns with
principles of equality, autonomy, and justice, ensuring that all couples have equal access to the rights and
benefits afforded by marriage, regardless of their sexual orientation.

“Family Code of the Philippines”

The Family Code reflects outdated and discriminatory attitudes towards homosexuality. The provision is a relic
of a time when homosexuality was stigmatized and criminalized, and it does not reflect the evolving
understanding of sexual orientation and gender identity.

Inconsistent with Constitutional Guarantees: The provision in question is inconsistent with the constitutional
guarantees of equality and non-discrimination under the law. Article III of the Philippine Constitution explicitly
prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, among other protected characteristics. Therefore,
any legal provision that discriminates against individuals based on their sexual orientation or gender identity is
unconstitutional and should be reconsidered.

Focus on Consent and Transparency: Marriage is based on the principles of consent and transparency
between partners. While it is important for individuals to be honest with their partners about their identity and
any relevant issues, such as drug addiction or alcoholism, singling out homosexuality and lesbianism as
grounds for annulment or legal action perpetuates discrimination and undermines the dignity of LGBTQ+
individuals.

Recognition of Same-Sex Relationships: The legal landscape regarding same-sex relationships has evolved
significantly since the enactment of the Family Code. In recent years, there have been calls for legal
recognition of same-sex unions and the extension of marriage rights to LGBTQ+ couples. Recognizing and
respecting the relationships of LGBTQ+ individuals is not only a matter of equality and human rights but also
reflects the changing attitudes and values of Philippine society.
“It’s not natural”
Nature itself exhibits a wide array of diverse mating and bonding behaviors across species, many of which do
not conform to the strict definition of marriage as between a man and a woman. In various animal species,
same-sex partnerships and parenting have been observed, indicating that natural behaviors are not limited to
heterosexual pairings. Therefore, using the concept of natural law to define marriage overlooks the complexity
and diversity of behaviors observed in the natural world.

“We already have a civil union. Why still have same-sex marriages?”

Civil unions may offer certain legal protections, but they fall short of providing full equality and recognition
compared to marriage. Same-sex marriage is about more than just legal rights; it symbolizes equality under the
law, providing comprehensive rights and benefits that civil unions often lack. Denying same-sex couples the
right to marry perpetuates inequality and sends a message that their relationships are less valued. Legalizing
same-sex marriage promotes social acceptance and visibility, ensuring that LGBTQ+ individuals have equal
access to marriage rights and constitutional protections.

“How about STDs or sexually transmitted diseases?”

This statement is actually very discriminatory. Because STDs can occur in any sexual relationship, regardless
of the partners' genders or marital status. The focus should be on promoting safe sexual practices and
comprehensive sexual health education, rather than unfairly targeting same-sex couples.

Population growth will decrease

Many countries with legalized same-sex marriage have stable or growing populations, indicating that marriage
equality does not necessarily lead to population decline. Population dynamics are influenced by a multitude of
factors, including birth rates, mortality rates, immigration, and economic conditions. Same-sex couples, by their
nature, do not contribute to population growth through natural reproduction, but they also do not directly
decrease population rates.

Questions for Interpellation

1. Do you agree with the Philippine Constitution Article III, Section 1, which states: "No person shall be
deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal
protection of the laws."
- If we agree that equal protection under the law is fundamental, is it correct to deny same-sex couples
the legal rights and protections that marriage provides to heterosexual couples?

2. Do you agree with Article II, Section 6 in The Philippine Constitution that states that "The separation of
Church and State shall be inviolable."
- So when deciding if same-sex marriage should be constitutionalized, we have to base it on religious
beliefs?
- But didn’t you agree that “The separation of the church and the state shall be inviolable?”
Meaning you agreed that the affairs of the state have nothing to do with the practices of the
church and vice versa?
- Do you believe that not all Filipinos share the beliefs of the Catholic church?
- So do you agree that in order to provide equal protection for all Filipino citizens, we do not
necessarily need to include the practices and beliefs of the Church and instead, focus on the
legal aspect of marriage and giving the rights to those who are due?
- Do you agree that it is fair to separate the Church and the state to respect those who do not have the
same religious beliefs as the catholic church?
- So do you agree that it is also fair to grant same-sex couples the same right to marriage since
we do not necessarily have to follow the teachings of the Church?
- So do you not agree that marriage is not only based on a religious aspect but also a
legal aspect that views all citizens as equal without having to involve any Catholic w
- doctrine in creating these laws?
3. Do you agree that we should prioritize ensuring that all individuals have the freedom to live according to their
own conscience and identity?
 - So do you agree that in order for Filipino citizens to practice their right to live in freedom according to
their own conscience and identity, we must also constitutionalize same-sex marriage in relation to this?

4. Do you agree that the purpose of the Philippine institution is to protect its citizens especially those
experiencing discrimination and marginalization?
- So do you also agree that in order to fulfill this principle, we must maintain a legal system that stops this
discrimination?
- So if you agree, do you also agree that we can achieve this by constitutionalizing laws that
protect and exercise the rights of those discriminated against, just like offering same-sex
couples the right to marriage?
- So do you acknowledge that denying already actively discriminated against same-sex couples'
legal rights to marriage is discriminatory?

4. Can societal attitudes towards marriage and LGBTQ+ rights evolve over time to reflect changing values and
beliefs?
- Considering the evolving attitudes towards marriage and LGBTQ+ rights globally, do you believe that
our laws should reflect these changing values to ensure inclusivity and progress?

5. Do you agree that legalizing same-sex marriage promotes inclusivity and acceptance of LGBTQ+ individuals
in society?
- If legalizing same-sex marriage fosters inclusivity and acceptance of LGBTQ+ individuals, shouldn't we
prioritize this societal benefit over adhering to traditional beliefs that exclude them?

6. Should the rights and freedoms of individuals be prioritized over adherence to traditional religious beliefs
when crafting civil laws?
- Shouldn't civil laws prioritize protecting the rights and freedoms of all citizens, even if it means
challenging traditional religious beliefs that may not align with modern values of equality and fairness?

7. Do you believe that denying same-sex couples the right to marry violates the principle of equal treatment
under the law?
- If denying same-sex couples the right to marry violates the principle of equal treatment under the law,
how can we justify maintaining a legal system that condones such discrimination?

8. Is it important to recognize and respect the diversity of religious beliefs and values present in Filipino society
when considering issues like same-sex marriage?
- Considering the diversity of religious beliefs in our society, shouldn't our laws be inclusive and
respectful of all citizens, regardless of their religious affiliations or beliefs about marriage?

9. Should legal recognition and protections be extended to all couples, regardless of their sexual orientation, to
ensure the stability and well-being of families?
- Given the importance of stability and well-being for families, shouldn't we extend legal recognition and
protections to all couples to ensure that they can provide a secure environment for themselves and
their children, regardless of their sexual orientation?

10. Can legalizing same-sex marriage contribute to a more just, inclusive, and equitable society for all
Filipinos?
- If legalizing same-sex marriage can contribute to creating a more just, inclusive, and equitable society
for all Filipinos, shouldn't we prioritize this positive societal outcome over preserving outdated beliefs
that perpetuate discrimination and inequality?