Same Sex Marriage: A New Definition or a Threat in the True Definition of Marriage?
Chapter 1:
Introduction:
Marriage is simply defined as the legally and formally recognized union of two persons
as partners in a personal relationship specifically a union between a man and woman by which
they make their relationship public, official and permanent making a bond that putatively lasts
until death. And for a country that is influenced or population are mostly Christians, marriage or
the matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a
partnership of the whole life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the
procreation and education of offspring; and this covenant between baptized persons has been
raised by the Christ the Lord to the dignity of the sacrament.
However in this modern age time the true definition of marriage seems to be forgotten or
change as legalization of same sex marriage is one of the hottest issues were facing today.
Homosexual marriage or mostly known as the same sex marriage had been one of the issues in
our country as activist are increasing. This contradicts the belief or the natural law of marriage
that is accepted in the society as marriage is a procreation of children and that legal supports
given to marriage are given with that end in view.
Thus my intention for this paper is to show and know if homosexual marriage or same
sex marriage is possible to the Philippines and who are these activist and what are their points.
This paper also presents the advantages and disadvantages of legalizing same sex marriage and
its effects to the persons involved, to the society and to their family. And most especially what is
truly the true definition of marriage is it forgotten or was it changed?
Statement of the Problem
As the arising no. of activists for same sex marriage in the country, it is alarming as a
catholic country we are forgetting about the reality that marriage has always involved only by a
man and a woman. Thus making same sex marriage a threat in the conventional concept of
marriage— that is a marriage between a man and woman only. And in this modern age era is it
possible that the natural law or the true definition of marriage be changed?
Chapter 2: Research Findings
Significance of the Study
The results of this study are beneficial to the following:
To the society. This research is beneficial to the society as it can raise awareness to our
community and that it could create an impact to clear the misconception of marriage in our
country.
To the members of same sex marriage activists. This research can serve as an eye
opening to reality and make them realize what should be their fighting for and that they will be
aware on the impact and consequences of their actions in our society.
To the persons who were in same sex relationship. This could also help the same sex
relationship as for them to know what they are doing and that they could widen their perception
and knowledge to what they had entered to.
To the researcher. This research helps me as the researcher as it widens my perception in
life and made me aware in to one of the current issues we are facing not only in our country but
also world wide.
To the future researchers. This can serve as a reference for their study that is related to
this paper.
Questions:
1. What is Marriage?
Marriage is the legally and formally recognized union of two people as partners in a
personal relationship specifically a union between a man and woman. It is the process by
which two people make their relationship public, official and permanent. It is also the joining
of two people in a bond that putatively lasts until death.
There are three commonly held beliefs about what constitutes a marriage in the eyes of
God:
1. The couple is married in the eyes of God when the physical union is consummated
through sexual intercourse.
2. The couple is married in the eyes of God when the couple is legally married.
3. The couple is married in the eyes of God after they have participated in a formal religious
wedding ceremony.
God sketched his original plan for marriage in Genesis 2:24 when one
man (Adam) and one woman (Eve) united together to become one flesh:
Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife,
and they shall become one flesh. (Genesis 2:24, ESV)
In Malachi 2:14, marriage is described as is a holy covenant before God. In the
Jewish custom, God's people signed a written agreement at the time of the marriage to
seal the covenant. The marriage ceremony, therefore, is meant to be a public
demonstration of a couple's commitment to a covenant relationship. It's not the
"ceremony" that's important; it's the couple's covenant commitment before God and men.
2. What is same sex marriage?
Same-sex marriage is the practice of marriage between two men or between two women.
Although same-sex marriage has been regulated through law, religion, and custom in most
countries of the world, the legal and social responses have ranged from celebration on the one
hand to criminalization on the other.
Some scholars, most notably the Yale professor and historian John Boswell (1947–94),
have argued that same-sex unions were recognized by the Roman Catholic
Church in medieval Europe, although others have disputed this claim. Scholars and the general
public became increasingly interested in the issue during the late 20th century, a period when
attitudes toward homosexuality and laws regulating homosexual behavior were liberalized,
particularly in Western Europe and the United States.
3. What are the advantages and disadvantages of legalizing same sex marriage?
We already know what the LGBT community is to gain when same sex marriage is
legalized. What we don’t usually know, and what we should be finding out, is how it can
actually benefit society in general. After all, it is the majority that’s hurdling legalization of
homosexual marriages in most states. They are the ones who need the motivation to get
behind the rainbow flag. To do this, the LGBT community needs to convince them that same
sex marriage is beneficial not only for same sex couples, but for the society in general.
Here is a rundown of ways in which legalizing same sex marriage can be good for everyone:
1. A more accepting society. Everybody benefits from a society that’s more accepting and
less discriminating. In affirming the rights of a social minority such as the LGBT community,
we are also opening the way for other cultural, political, or any other minority group for that
matter. Just as racial equality brought about the rise of women’s liberation, genuine gay
liberation can in turn spawn liberation trends that can make our society a more stable one.
Furthermore, acknowledging the legality of homosexual relationships by allowing them
to marry reduces homophobia and violence against the community. The LGBT community
also has heterosexual allies that can be subject to discriminatory violence in places where
same sex marriage is illegal. The stigma associated with homosexuals and those that support
them will reduce gradually if same sex marriage is legalized. By normalizing the nature of
same sex relationships, we are creating a society that’s more accepting, more diverse, and in
effect, more democratic.
2. Rearing Mentally Untainted Children. The unfair treatment for homosexual couples harms
not only the couple, but the children they’re raising as well. By denying the parents basic
civil rights, we are also denying the children basic rights available to children of heterosexual
parents.
Because of the stigma associated with being gay, children with gay parents are also
subjected to bullying. It has long been established that bullying induces damaging effects to
children. They can grow up to be hateful, paranoid, or even bullies themselves. They can
grow up to be liabilities to society. By legalizing same sex marriage, we are rearing mentally
untainted children that can grow up to be successful individuals capable of bringing
development to the society as a whole. By staging gender equality, we are securing the next
generation. Who needs another generation of bigots?
3. LGBT Empowerment. Empowering the LGBT community may seem like a threat to the
non-LG members of society, but it actually is a positive thing. At present, the institution of
marriage is unavailable for same sex couples in 38 states. In addition to that, the federal
government also denies legally bound homosexual couples more than a thousand federal
rights and benefits that come with marriage. This exclusion adversely affects members of the
LGBT community in a wide array of ways.
It is to the general society’s benefit when homosexuals win the battle for basic equality.
Most LGBT people dedicate their lives to the struggle for gender equality, thus they are not
given the chance to grow as productive members of society. If they are just given this basic
right to marry, then they can re-channel their dedication and resources to things that can help
the society even more. Discrimination is an innately wrong act that harms both the giver and
the receiver.
4. A Significant Economic Boost. That the institution of marriage has been established as
beneficial to the economy means that same sex marriage is beneficial, too. After all, those
two are not at all different! The wedding and marriage industry is a large one that is able to
provide significant economic boosts. Allowing gay couples to marry also allows many
business providers to service them. In New York for instance, nearly 260 million dollars was
added into the economy in the year immediately following the legalization of same sex
marriage, it also affects tourism by attracting gay couples from states that do not allow same
sex marriage to stage the wedding in your state. As for our country the Philippines it is a
good idea though to help boost our economic status with tourism as our country is known for
its beautiful landscapes.
5. Upholding the American Psyche. The United States is internationally known for its
advancements in pluralism. What better way to uphold this reputation than by granting a
minority basic civil rights that the majority enjoys? At present, there are fifteen countries that
have moved past the United States in providing gender and marriage equality. This is very
sad and ironic considering that America supposedly is the foreground of “liberty and justice
for all.”
A good national identity and a strong international reputation benefit us all. This is a clearcut epitome of the argument that legalizing same sex marriage benefits everyone in society,
not just the LGBT. The government by the people for the people must note that providing
gender equality benefits the straight community as much as it does the LGBT community,
however unbeknownst it is to them at this point.
4. What are the disadvantages of same sex marriage?
1. It Is Not Marriage. Calling something marriage does not make it marriage. Marriage has
always been a covenant between a man and a woman which is by its nature ordered toward the
procreation and education of children and the unity and wellbeing of the spouses.
2. It Violates Natural Law. Marriage is not just any relationship between human beings. It is a
relationship rooted in human nature and thus governed by natural law.
Natural law’s most elementary precept is that “good is to be done and pursued, and evil is
to be avoided.” By his natural reason, man can perceive what is morally good or bad for him.
Thus, he can know the end or purpose of each of his acts and how it is morally wrong to
transform the means that help him accomplish an act into the act’s purpose.
Any situation which institutionalizes the circumvention of the purpose of the sexual act
violates natural law and the objective norm of morality.
Being rooted in human nature, natural law is universal and immutable. It applies to the
entire human race, equally. It commands and forbids consistently, everywhere and always. Saint
Paul taught in the Epistle to the Romans that the natural law is inscribed on the heart of every
man. (Rom. 2:14-15)
3. It Always Denies a Child Either a Father or a Mother. It is in the child’s best interests
that he be raised under the influence of his natural father and mother. This rule is confirmed by
the evident difficulties faced by the many children who are orphans or are raised by a single
parent, a relative, or a foster parent.
The unfortunate situation of these children will be the norm for all children of a same-sex
“marriage.” A child of a same-sex “marriage” will always be deprived of either his natural
mother or father. He will necessarily be raised by one party who has no blood relationship with
him. He will always be deprived of either a mother or a father role model. Same-sex “marriage”
ignores a child’s best interests.
4. It Validates and Promotes the Homosexual Lifestyle. In the name of the “family,”
same-sex “marriage” serves to validate not only such unions but the whole homosexual lifestyle
in all its bisexual and transgender variants.
Civil laws are structuring principles of man's life in society. As such, they play a very
important and sometimes decisive role in influencing patterns of thought and behavior. They
externally shape the life of society, but also profoundly modify everyone’s perception and
evaluation of forms of behavior.
Legal recognition of same-sex “marriage” would necessarily obscure certain basic moral
values, devalue traditional marriage, and weaken public morality.
5. It Turns a Moral wrong into a Civil Right.Homosexual activists argue that same-sex
“marriage” is a civil rights issue similar to the struggle for racial equality in the 1960s.
This is false, First of all, sexual behavior and race are essentially different realities. A
man and a woman wanting to marry may be different in their characteristics: one may be black,
the other white; one rich, the other poor; or one tall, the other short. None of these differences are
insurmountable obstacles to marriage. The two individuals are still man and woman, and thus the
requirements of nature are respected.
Same-sex “marriage” opposes nature. Two individuals of the same sex, regardless of their
race, wealth, stature, erudition or fame, will never be able to marry because of an insurmountable
biological impossibility.
Secondly, inherited and unchangeable racial traits cannot be compared with non-genetic
and changeable behavior. There is simply no analogy between the interracial marriage of a man
and a woman and the “marriage” between two individuals of the same sex.
6. It Does Not Create a Family but a Naturally Sterile Union. Traditional marriage is
usually so fecund that those who would frustrate its end must do violence to nature to prevent the
birth of children by using contraception. It naturally tends to create families.
On the contrary, same-sex “marriage” is intrinsically sterile. If the “spouses” want a
child, they must circumvent nature by costly and artificial means or employ surrogates. The
natural tendency of such a union is not to create families.Therefore, we cannot call a same-sex
union marriage and give it the benefits of true marriage.
7. It Defeats the State’s Purpose of Benefiting Marriage. One of the main reasons why the
State bestows numerous benefits on marriage is that by its very nature and design, marriage
provides the normal conditions for a stable, affectionate, and moral atmosphere that is beneficial
to the upbringing of children—all fruit of the mutual affection of the parents. This aids in
perpetuating the nation and strengthening society, an evident interest of the State.
Homosexual “marriage” does not provide such conditions. Its primary purpose,
objectively speaking, is the personal gratification of two individuals whose union is sterile by
nature. It is not entitled, therefore, to the protection the State extends to true marriage.
8. It Imposes Its Acceptance on All Society. By legalizing same-sex “marriage,” the State
becomes its official and active promoter. The State calls on public officials to officiate at the new
civil ceremony, orders public schools to teach its acceptability to children, and punishes any state
employee who expresses disapproval.
In the private sphere, objecting parents will see their children exposed more than ever to
this new “morality,” businesses offering wedding services will be forced to provide them for
same-sex unions, and rental property owners will have to agree to accept same-sex couples as
tenants.
In every situation where marriage affects society, the State will expect Christians and all
people of good will to betray their consciences by condoning, through silence or act, an attack on
the natural order and Christian morality.
9. It Is the Cutting Edge of the Sexual Revolution. In the 1960s, society was pressured to
accept all kinds of immoral sexual relationships between men and women. Today we are seeing a
new sexual revolution where society is being asked to accept sodomy and same-sex “marriage.”
If homosexual “marriage” is universally accepted as the present step in sexual “freedom,”
what logical arguments can be used to stop the next steps of incest, pedophilia, bestiality, and
other forms of unnatural behavior? Indeed, radical elements of certain “avant garde” subcultures
are already advocating such aberrations.
The railroading of same-sex “marriage” on the American people makes increasingly clear
what homosexual activist Paul Varnell wrote in the Chicago Free Press:
"The gay movement, whether we acknowledge it or not, is not a civil rights movement, not even a
sexual liberation movement, but a moral revolution aimed at changing people's view of
homosexuality."
10. It Offends God. This is the most important reason. Whenever one violates the natural
moral order established by God, one sins and offends God. Same-sex “marriage” does just this.
Accordingly, anyone who professes to love God must be opposed to it.
Marriage is not the creature of any State. Rather, it was established by God in Paradise
for our first parents, Adam and Eve. As we read in the Book of Genesis: “God created man in
His image; in the Divine image he created him; male and female He created them. God blessed
them, saying: ‘Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it.’” (Gen. 1:28-29)
The same was taught by Our Savior Jesus Christ: “From the beginning of the creation,
God made them male and female. For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother; and
shall cleave to his wife.” (Mark 10:6-7).
Genesis also teaches how God punished Sodom and Gomorrah for the sin of
homosexuality: “The Lord rained down sulphurous fire upon Sodom and Gomorrah. He
overthrew those cities and the whole Plain, together with the inhabitants of the cities and the
produce of the soil.” (Gen. 19:24-25)
5. Is it possible to legalized same sex marriage in the country?
Introduced by HONORABLE EDCEL "GREX" B. LAGMAN, the House Bill No. 3179
states that as an individual or collective citizen, there are inherent rights that we should enjoy
without any interference. All which are guaranteed by the constitution. Perhaps the most
fundamental tenet, not just in the Philippines but in other countries as well, is equality. From
which emanates a broad range of rights that anyone could assert and one of them is the right to
marriage. But the issue that is taking place in this modern day era is whether or not gay marriage
or same sex marriage should be allowed. In most part of the globe, the lesbian, gay, bisexual and
transgender community has been very vocal and vigilant in 'questioning their respective state's
lavv that deny them same sex marriage. This issue has put the government to come out with a
position once and for all. Some countries have begun recognizing same sex marriage. At present,
same sex marriage is legally recognized in Argentina, Belgium, Canada, Iceland, the
Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Spain and Sweden. In the United Stated, same-sex
marriages are not recognized federally, though same-sex couples can marry in six of the fifty
states and one district. There are still other cases waiting to be resolved either at the congress
level or at the Supreme Court. Some countries have already stood firmly at preserve the
conventional concept of marriage — that is a marriage between a man and woman only.
In the Philippines wherein the traditional culture is still very' much embedded in the
social fabric and the church has a certain degree of influence to the State affairs, gay marriage
has no place in the government agenda. But sooner or later, time will come when the congress
must face and debate on the issue of same sex marriage.
But before the advent of legal same sex marriage, society has been confronted by issues
involving property relationship of same sex live-in relationship. The absence of such legislation
may even result to violence as what has happened in many ended same sex relationships.
Thus, this proposed bill. The same is not about same sex marriage but about property
rights and obligations of Ovo persons of the same sex that opted to cohabitate with each other.
The law should also protect such relationship not only from third persons but even against each
other. After all, they should also be treated equally.
Summary
Same sex marriage has both advantage and disadvantages, however if we dig deeper
same sex marriage is a questioning threat to the conventional concept of marriage which is
between the opposite sex. Thus making it difficult to legalize it in our country as it would cause
problems in our society. Summarizing the current situation of our country, legalizing same sex
marriage in our country has a lot of work to do and even making it impossible as the society is
not yet ready for it.
Conclusion
As per conclusion same sex marriage in the Philippines is not legal and possibility for it
to be legalized is difficult. As the findings stated clearly that it is equality that we need and not
the legalization of same sex marriage as proof are showing that it has many disadvantage and the
society is not ready or doesn’t have the ability to allow it in our country. But then we are slowly
developing into a society that accepts and treat the LGBTQ community equally and with respect.
So same-sex marriage is a new family form that seems destined to gain increasing legal
and social acceptance. Same-sex marriage will produce more change in family law and continue
to reflect underlying shifts in gender norms and social practices across the population. These
household forms remain very much a set of works in progress, “incomplete institutions” in both
law and culture. That very incompleteness, however, also heightens the possibility that the
regulation of same-sex relationships will influence the law governing all family structures in
ways that we cannot yet foresee.
Bibliography
BAMFORTH, Nicholas; RICHARDS, David. Patriarchal religion, sexuality, and gender: a
critique of new natural law. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
CHAPPELL, Timothy. Natural law revived: natural law theory and contemporary moral
Philosophy. In: BIGGAR, Nigel. BLACK, Rufus (eds.). The revival of natural law:
philosophical, theological and ethical responses to the Finnis-Grisez school. New York:
Routledge, 2000. p. 29-52.
______. Natural law and natural rights. 2. ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011d.
______. Marriage: a basic and exigent good. In: FINNIS, John. Human rights & common good –
collected essays. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011e. v. III, p. 317-333.
AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE, PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW OF FAMILY DISSOLUTION:
ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS §§ 6.04-6.06, 4.09-4.10, 5.04 (2002).
. ESKRIDGE & HUNTER, supra note 100, at 702.
Katherine Shaw Spaht, Covenant Marriage Seven Years Later: Its As Yet Unfulfilled Promise, 65
LA. L. REV. 605, 612–13, 622 (2005).
Articles
Supreme Court junks same-sex marriage petition
ABS-CBN News
Posted at Sep 03 2019 02:39 PM | Updated as of Sep 03 2019 05:36 PM
MANILA - The Supreme Court has dismissed a petition that sought to allow same-sex marriage
in the Philippines.
In a decision penned by Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, the high court dismissed the same-sex
petition on account of lack of standing of petitioner Jesus Falcis, violation of principle of
hierarchy of courts and failing to raise actual, justiciable controversy.
The SC was also holding Falcis and his counsels in indirect contempt for forgetting "bare
rudiments of court procedure and decorum or worse, to purport to know them but really only to
exploit them by way of propaganda."
SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session
HOUSE BILL NO. 3179
Introduced by the HON. EDCEL "GREY" B. LAGMAN
AN ACT GOVERNING PROPERTY OWNERSHIP OF COUPLES OF SAME SEX
LIVING TOGETHER
Be it enacted by the Senate and the house of Representatives of the Phil,'ppines in
Congress assembled:
SECTION 1. Title This Act shall be known as the "Same Sex Property Relations Act".
SECTION 2. Coverage. This Act shall cover property relationship Of Persons of the
Same Sex actually living together as partners including its ownership administration and
dissolution.
SECTION 3. Registration of Same Sex Relationship. The provisions of this Act shall
be apphcable to person if the same sex living together as partners duly registered with the
Civil Registrar of the City or municipality where either one of the partners actually reside.
SECTION 4. In the absence of any written agreement the same sex partners shall be
deemed as co-owners or all the properties that they bring into their actual living together.
Properties acquired during their actual living together are also co-owned by the same Sex
partners. The date of registration ar their actual living together shall be deemed to be the date
of their actual cohabitation.
SECTION 5. Both same sex partners shall have the joint rights to the administration
and enjoyment of the properties co-owned by them. One of the Same sex partners or
administration in case the other becomes incapacitated or unable to properly administer the
properties or in case of disagreement the same sex partner who actually brought the propetty
to the live-in relationship, either by purchase or any mode of acquisition bf awnership shall
prevail and the other without prejudice to the right of the other partner to seek recourse from
the Court.
SECTION 6. In case of a written agreement governing the property arrangement of the
same sex partners such agreement must be submitted and registered in the civil registry where
the place or the live-in partner actually resides.
SECTION 7. In case, properties are agreed upon in writing to be the exclusive
property of either same Sex partners, said properties shall be considered as separate properties
and are exclusively owned by the Same sex partner to which it is attributed in the agreement.
SECTION 8. Causes of Dissolution of the same sex Co-ownership or Properties - The
co-ownership of properties of the same sex relationship shall be deemed dissolved if one of
them dies or chooses to terminate said same sex relationship. Such dissolution must he
registered with the civil registrar where the same sex partnership was registered by submitting
the death certificate of the deceased partner or a notarized document stating therein the cause
of dissolution.
SECTION 9. In case either same sex partner incurred any debt or financial obligation
arising from the contract or said partner is legally obliged to pay by provisions of the law or
court judgment, the co-owned properties may be subjected to answer for such claim,
SECTION 10. The Provisions Of Co-ownership shall be suppletory to this Act.
SECTION 11. EffectiVity, — This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its
complete publication in at least two (2) newspapers of national circulation