Editorial: Ruling on

same-sex marriage
Monday, June 29, 2015

SO THE Supreme Court of the United States (Scotus) has ruled that its
Constitution guarantees a right to same-sex marriage? Should the Supreme
Court of the Philippines follow its US counterpart?
Thats an interesting question as the Philippines LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual
and transgender) community celebrated the 5-4 historic Scotus vote. Consider,
too, that a case is pending before the Philippine Supreme Court to lift same-sex
marriage prohibitions in the Family Code.

Last month, lawyer Jesus Nicardo Falcis III, who is openly gay, argued in his
petition before the Supreme Court that limiting civil marriages and the rights
that go with these to heterosexuals violates the constitutionally guaranteed
protection for equal treatment, undue interference to liberty rights and marital
autonomy.
Among the provisions of the Family Code Falcis assailed are Articles 1 and 2 that
define marriage as a special contract of permanent union between a man and a
woman entered into in accordance with law for the establishment of conjugal
and family life and which set as one of the essential requisites for marriage that
the contracting parties must be male and female.
But note that the Scotus ruling was a result of years, even decades, of struggle
in the US for gay rights and came at a time when 37 of 50 states had allowed
same-sex marriage and when surveys showed that majority, or about two-thirds,
of Americans favor such a marriage.
The situation in the Philippines is different, thus the outcome of Falciss case
could also be different. Even leaders of the LGBT community here admit that
legalizing same-sex marriage is one uphill battle. The Catholic Church has been
putting up a strong fight against any legislation that contradicts its teachings.
But while the Scotus ruling may not have an immediate legal effect on the push
in the Philippines for same-sex marriage, it can spark a discussion needed for
the further enlightenment of the people on the issue. An enlightened public is
important in resolving matters that are not only controversial but whose
resolution could be tradition-altering.
Published in the Sun.Star Cebu newspaper on June 30, 2015.

CRITIQUE
It is mentioned in the article published by Sun Star Cebu that marriage is defined as "a
special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into in accordance with
law for the establishment of conjugal and family life and which set as one of the essential
requisites for marriage that the contracting parties must be male and female. Same sex
marriage involves two homosexuals unionized which apparently contradicts the provisions of the
family code. The meaning and purpose of marriage is important. The disconnect between sex and
its intended purpose has resulted in dire consequences for society, especially its most vulnerable
members, children. Marriage is the beginning of family, the foundation of human society. By
design, one invaluable man and one invaluable woman come together and create new lives of
inestimable worth. The same biological reality that creates life is mirrored in the anthropological
reality that children need a mother and father. Marriage is the social institution that binds woman
and man in the kind of permanent, exclusive relationship that nurtures children into adulthood.
We are highly against LGBT marriage since it just turns out losing the true essence of
marriage. While homosexuality is generally becoming more widely accepted among liberal
minded people, same sex marriage is still a detrimental practice for the long-term good of society
here in the Philippines. If there are more people turning gay or lesbian for the fun of it, it would
affect the population not just in numbers, but also the psychology and cultural identity of the
children that are raised with same sex parents. The first argument against same sex marriages is
quite obvious: the human population will dwindle. Same sex marriages means that offspring
cannot be produced naturally. The married couple would have to opt for artificial insemination or

to adopt a child if they plan on building a family. The amount of affection that a set of same sex
parents may have on their child may differ from those born naturally, as the birthing process
releases hormones such as oxytocin that allows the mother to bond with the newborn. If there is a
rise in same sex marriages, it might lead to a decline in birth rates and quality of childhood life.
Having a child requires a balance in role model in order for the child to develop well. Some
homosexual couples have defined gender roles, but some may fall into different parts of the
gender spectrum. A man may not fully be a female due to his physical structure and
psychological make-up and vice versa. Hence, the parental roles for same sex marriages may not
be wholesome. Ideally, a child should both a male and female role model so that daddy issues
or other hidden psychological barriers dont build up. A mistake like this on a young life is
mostly irreversible, and the damage may be costly for the child in their later years. Furthermore,
same sex marriages are a violation to religious beliefs and old traditional values that support
procreation. Religions like Catholicism promote the creation of offspring freely, but same sex
marriages cannot do that. Additionally, it is generally considered a sin by Abrahamic religions to
be married to the same sex because of their inability to procreate. Cultural values would be lost
as people become too liberal, and the nucleus family image would be a subject in textbooks, but
not in practice. This will carry on to the next generation and so forth until traditional values are
forgotten. Same sex marriage is a difficult issue to tackle once you bring in the idea of raising
children. It is safer to go by conventional methods of different sex marriages so that future
generations are raised well.

CRITIQUE
IN
ENGLISH
BY
Real, Karen
King, Camille
Valeroso, Eunice
BS- ENTREPRENEUR 1
04/29/16

Submitted to: Ms. Leah Ibona