LIBRT: Same sex marriage be allowed in the Philippines

FIRST NEGATIVE SPEAKERTo my co-debaters, adjudicators, professors, ladies and gentlemen, good morning. We, the affirmative side, strongly believe that same sex marriage must not be allowed for it is not beneficial, not practicable and definitely not necessary.Before I start my speech, let me address the errors committed by the affirmative side.______________________________________________________________________

Enumerate again your points first para clear sa judges.

First, the negative side pushes that if same sex marriage is allowed in the Philippines, discrimination cases will vanish. I beg to disagree, Your Honors. Discrimination, as defined in the Merriam dictionary, (CHANGE THIS. MAKE THE DEFINITION UNDER THE AN SC DECISION) is the practice of unfairly treating a person or group of people differently from other people. Teasing and social non-acceptance does not even fall as discrimination. Labor cases and such were only categorized as LGBT discrimination because the complainants belong to the same sex.

Second, the negative would have us believe that civil rights will be granted to the same-sex advocates such as the members of the LGBT community but in all reality, Your Honors, rights had been given freely to them. (mahusay ito) They are widely accepted here in the country. If we could just have a moment to look at the national scene, they are given recognition even though they’re gays. Vice Ganda, Boy Abunda, Aiza Seguerra. Recognition had been given, Your Honors. However, marriage is a different thing. Marriage is sacred as to how it is perceived by the Filipino people. According to the Family Code, it is the foundation of an inviolable social institution. In other words, it is unbreakable. It’s sacredness, as perceived by our culture, must not be easily affected by social issues such as this.

Third, as regards the valid classification, the decision must apply equally to all members of the class according to Quinto vs. COMELEC. Yes, it is already equal Your Honors, as proven by certain important Supreme Court decisions leaning to the benefit of the LGBT community. However, it has been classified by our Family Code that has been working for years. A man and a woman. This issue overall debunks the natural law which derives its force and authority from God. This is the supreme law. Dura lex sed lex. The law may be harsh but it is still the law. (I CAN SEE THE POINT BUT THE MANNER OF EXPLAINING CAN STILL BE IMPROVED.)

Fourth, the negative side is pointing out that the Church is not included in this issue. There may be a doctrine of the separation of the church and state but it is not necessary to just remove the church from this issue. According to US vs. Reynolds, the religious beliefs of the people and the secular belief of the state should be balanced. The strategic battleground here is the Constitution, not the Bible. Religion is not the issue here.

Sixth, Tolentino vs. Board of Accountancy. It states that the guarantee of equal protection, simply means that “no person or class of persons shall be deprived of

LIBRT: Same sex marriage be allowed in the Philippines

the same protection of the law.” (PAKIAYOS NG MANNER OF EXPLAINING). No one’s deprived another of anything here, Your Honors for there is already a valid classification as I have mentioned earlier. Ube lex non distinguit, nec nos distinguire debemus. When the law does not distinguish, we should also not distinguish.

Same sex marriage should not be allowed in the Philippines for it denotes disobedience on the natural law and violates the sacredness of marriage according to our culture.