Points for Interpellation:

A. Regarding the use of US jurisprudence and other global models

Q: Would you agree with me that the US has recently legalized same sex marriage in its
jurisdiction?
Q: And by way of analogy, you believe that the legalization of same sex marriage in in
the US acts as a precursor for the Philippines to do the same?
Q: Are you aware of the international doctrine of separate jurisdiction?
Q: Are you not informed that the doctrine was used in the landmark case of Smith vs
Cantos?
Q: Are you aware that the Supreme Court in that particular case held that the Philippine
government in legalizing laws should not be influenced by global trend?
Q: And in addition, are you informed that the SC also ruled in that case that following
the doctrine of separate jurisdiction, a legalization of a particular act in other countries
does not mean that the Philippines should likewise do the same?
Q: Applying the doctrine, do you now concede that the Philippines should not use the
legalization of same sex marriage in the Philippines just because other countries like the
US did the same?
If YES: Thank you for conceding and helping the negative side establish its point.
If NO: Youre answer in not in consonance with the ruling of the SC.
B. Debunking the Separation of Church and State
Q: As gathered from your position as affirmative, you appeal for legalization of same sex
marriage free from the bias of religion, correct?
Q: In Article II, sec 6, the 1987 Charter grants separation of church and state, correct?
Q: Do you understand full well the meaning of this provision?
Side comment: Very good. Lets test that.
Q: Are you aware of the case of US vs Reynolds?
Q: Are you not informed that under such case, the SC ruled that the separation of
church and state DOES NOT mean that the State shall totally disregard the opinion of
the Church?
Q: Are you aware that under such ruling, the SC ruled that the obligations of the State is
not to close its ears against the Church, but to strike the balance between the States
interest and the interest of the people belonging to such religion?
Q: Do you know that under the case of Aglipay vs Ruiz, the SC declared that the Church
is not just a religious group, but also reflects the core value of the people?
Q: Are you also aware that in that particular case, the SC declared that religion is an
indispensable factor of the Filipino society?
Q: Following the rulings in US vs Reynolds and Aglipay vs Ruiz, do you now agree with
the High Tribunal that the true meaning of separation of church and state is not
separation in its plain meaning but the balancing of the interest of the State and
religion?
If YES: Very good. Thank you for cooperating with the negative side.

If NO: That would be to deny the statutory construction done by the Supreme
Court itself.
C. Same sex marriage is against the public morals
Q: The branch of the government that passes laws is the Legislature, agree?
Q: Are you aware that according to Art. 6 of the Civil Code which states that in the
exercise of persons of their rights, they must NOT be against Filipino morals, values
and customs?
Q: Are you likewise aware that if an act is against the law, public morals, customs, or
public policy, it shall be considered void?
Q: Right now, at this very moment, do you believe that the LGBT community has
attained acceptance from the Filipino society?
Q: Are you aware that in the most recent survey conducted by Pulse Asia, participated
by an estimate 10,000 Filipino respondents from all over the Philippines, a whopping
72% of the respondents expressed negative views about LGBT?
Q: Are you also aware that another survey, this time conducted by Social Weather
Station, revealed that 7 out of 10 Filipinos still do not recognize LGBTs as persons with
equal standing?
Q: Do you now acknowledge that as per the Pulse Asia and SWS surveys, the Filipinos
are not yet bestowing full acceptance of LGBT?
Q: Do you now recognize that full acceptance of LGBTs should first be attained before
legalization of same sex marriage should be legalized?
Q: Are you aware that a study conducted by University of the Philippines Center for
Anthropological Studies entitled Homosexuality in the Philippine Strata, published late
last year, proved that despite numerous pro-LGBT campaigns, the collective attitude of
the Filipino people towards LGBTs remain negative?
Q: Do you now concede that as per the mentioned resources, the Filipino society is yet
to recognize LGBTs and their rights?
Q: Do you agree with the recommendations in that study which said that education of
the public regarding the rights of LGBT should be done first to foster acceptance of
LGBT among the people?
Q: Do you realize that unless the societys dissident attitude towards LGBTs is changed,
then LGBTs cannot achieve full equality, even if you legalize same sex marriage?
If NO: Do you mean that legalizing same sex marriage will instantly make the
people recognize LGBTs? (regardless of the answer: You seem to be jumping to
unfounded conclusions Ms/Mr Speaker and that amounts as fallacy of hasty
generalization).
If YES: Exactly. Thank you for agreeing with the negative sides point.
D. Same sex marriage is against the law; amending the law must first be done.
Q: As mentioned in Art. Of the Civil Code, any act contrary to law shall be deemed null
and void, do you agree?
Q: The Family Code is the leading law regarding marriage in the Philippine context
correct?

Q: Are you aware that in Art 1 of the Family Code, marriage under the context of
Philippine Law means a contract between a man and a woman?
Q: Are you likewise aware that under Art 2 of the Family Code, one of the essential
requisites for a valid marriage to exist is the legal capacity of the contracting parties who
must be a man and a woman?
Q: Now do you recognize the fact that the Philippine law only recognizes explicitly
marriage between a man and a woman?
Q: And do you concede that if a marriage between a man and another man, or a woman
with another woman, it shall be against the stipulations of Art 1 and 2 of the Family
Code?
Q: And the Family Code is a law correct?
Q: And since same sex marriage in the status quo contravenes the provisions of the
Family Code, same sex marriage is against the law correct?
Q: And since same sex marriage is against the law, you recognize that under Art 6 of
the Civil Code, it shall be void ab initio and shall not produce any legal effect?
If YES: Thank you for recognizing that same sex marriage is illegal.
If NO: You are denying the express provisions of the law Ms./Mr. Speaker.
Q: And do you agree that in order for same sex marriage to be allowed, the law should
first be amended?
Q: And has the affirmative side proposed for an amendment of the law?
If YES: As far as your speeches are concerned, you did not.
If NO: Thank you for admitting that you failed to propose an amendment of the
law hence same sex marriage will still be deemed illegal.