LIBRT: Same sex marriage be allowed in the Philippines

FIRST NEGATIVE SPEAKER

To 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 samesex 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 theyre 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. Its 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
ones 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.