POSITION PAPER Against Senate Bill 1271
- Category: Teachings & Articles
- Published: Thursday, 13 September 2018 01:16
- Hits: 193
By: Augusto A. Kho
Intercessors for the Philippines – Pangasinan Chapter
Dated: August 28, 2018
Senate Bill No. 1271
(In substitution of Senate Bill No. 935)
“An Act prohibition discrimination on the basis of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity or Expression (SOGIE) and providing penalties therefor.”
WE ARE STRONGLY AGAINST THIS PROPOSED BILL for the following reasons –
FIRST, it is CUNNING and DECEPTIVE.
Section 3, paragraph (b) talks on “gender expression” and (c) “gender identity.”
Gender cannot be legislated because it is inborn and natural. And it is being called “inherent rights.” Therefore, a man’s mere expression or “preconceived” identity can never alter what is natural.
SECOND, it is ANTI-FAMILY
Gender from Latin word “genus,” a 14th century term that refers to one’s race, stock or family. Perverting one’s gender violates the Family Code
Article XV, The Family, Section 1 states that: “The State recognizes the Filipino family as the foundation of the nation. Accordingly, it shall strengthen its solidarity and actively promote its total development.”
THIRD, it is ANTI-MARRIAGE
“Gender is the state of being male or female.”
To alter one’s sex or gender by the virtue of dubious legislation violates Filipino Marriage.
Thus SB 1271 violates the Civil Code of the Philippines, Executive Order No. 209, Article 1 which states that, “Marriage is a special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into in accordance with the law for the establishment of conjugal and family life. It is the foundation of the family and an inviolable social institution whose nature, consequences and incidents are governed by law ...”
In other words, no bill or law can be messianic to attack the family as unassailable institution.
FOURTH, IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
It is unfortunate that HB 1271 blatantly violates the Constitution.
To desecrate one gender is to desecrate the family as well which is very the basic foundation of the nation. The bill is no less but a subtle invasion to destroy the whole nation by the virtue of legislation.
Article XV, The Family, Section 2 states that, “Marriage as an inviolable social institution, is the foundation of the family and shall be protected by the state.”
Legislation must protect the family that makes and strengthens this nation. Any disputable legislation or a bill that will be approved by our honourable senators will be a creeping invasion to destroy this nation particularly the Filipino Family.
FIFTH, IT IS VAGUE AND IMMORAL
The bill is vague and immoral bill.
HB Section 3 (d) “Profiling – refers to subjecting a person or group of person to investigatory activities, includes unnecessary, unjustified, illegal and degrading searches, or other investigatory activities in determining whether an individual is engaged in an activity presumed to be unlawful, immoral or socially unacceptable,” is itself vague and immoral.
Also Section 5 (b) that mentioned the words, “lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgenders, intersex, or queers (LGBTIQs)” is profiling by itself. How could be a provision of a bill attacks the very bill which is being proposed to be legislated?
“For there is but one essential justice which cements society, and one law which establishes this justice. This law is right reason, which is the true rule of all commandments and prohibitions. Whoever neglects this law, whether written or unwritten, is necessarily unjust and wicked.”
Legislation is not by feeling but by right reason.
Atty. Rodelio T. Dascil, “An Introduction to Law” writes, “Law, in its general sense, is defined as the science of moral laws based on the rational nature of man, governing his free activity for the realization of his individual and social ends, demandable and reciprocal.”
In other words, any bill or legislation once it lacks moral substance is not a law according to Dascil. Therefore, any bill when it lacks moral merits has congenital infirmity.
SIX, IT IS UNETHICAL
Republic Acts 6713 also known as ““Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees.” Section 2, in the Declaration of Policy states that:
“It is the policy of the State to promote a high standard of ethics in public. Public officials and employees shall at all times be accountable to the people and shall discharge their duties with utmost responsibility, integrity, competence, and loyalty, act with patriotism and justice, lead modest lives, and uphold public interest over personal interest.”
According to Encyclopedia of Philosophy, “Ethics or moral philosophy is a branch of philosophy that involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong conduct.” Meanwhile, the field of ethics, along with aesthetics, concern matters of value, and thus comprise the branch of philosophy called “Axiology.”
In other words, should the honourable senators approved the said bill may violate the Code of Ethics.
A public servant is being described as the one who reinforces the law and never violates the law. As the maxim goes, “No one is above the law.”
SEVEN, IT IS ANTI-GOD
The bill is not only unconstitutional but anti-God as well.
In the Preamble of the Philippine Constitution, it says, “We the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of Almighty God….”
Preface, Page vii, “The Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines EXPLAINED” by Jose N. Nolledo (1992) writes, “All these, the Con-Com Commissioners had to take in strides hoping in the sincere thought that they could be effective instruments in focusing the need for a Constitution which is truly pro-God, pro-people, pro-poor and pro-Filipino.’
Jose Laurel Sr., said that by, “Imploring the aid of Divine Providence now appear as ‘imploring the aid of Almighty God,’ to make reference to God more personal and direct. And by invoking God in the preamble, “ the Filipino people ‘thereby manifested their intense religious nature and place unfaltering reliance upon Him who guides the destinies of men and nations.”
And in the State Policies of Article II and which reads, “The State values the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for human rights.” Nolledo explained that “A human person is created in the image of God. Every human life is valuable and must be uplifted,” which is inspired from the Scriptures that says, “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them,” (Genesis 1:27)
Why the 1987 constitutionalists invoked Almighty God in our document?
First, it explains that 1987 framers invoked Almighty God for a godly Constitution as an effective tool for all Filipinos regardless of race, tongue, colour, religion and others. And every Filipino is being protected under the Bill of Rights in Article III. While everyone has the right to exercise his or her feeling or expression, the Rule of Law however is not on the basis of feeling or expression or perception.
Second, it explains that gender is inborn, natural, divinely given and it is gift from God. Therefore, gender can never be legislated. To change or alter what is innate or generic on the basis of feeling, perception or legislation to perverts one’s identity is a blatant violation
to Natural Law and from Almighty God “who guides the destinies of men and nations” according to the Preamble of the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines.
It is our prayer therefore that the members of the Senate will have a self-reflection in the light of truth and justice in invoking God Almighty in their legislative agenda as enshrined in our 1987 Constitution.
AUGUSTO A. KHO
August 28, 2018