What the Baguio Brouhaha has Shown Us

They really think this helps??

If the June same-sex commitment ceremony held in Baguio City showed us anything, it showed that the Philippines still has an incredibly long way to go on matters of LGBT rights.  Not just on marriage equality, but even on the most basic level of understanding and tolerance.

The threads of comments that appeared on Philippine online newspapers, in tweets, and even on this very blog, were a taste of the vitriol that still exists at the grassroots level.  Many were downright cruel and amounted to anonymous online gay-bashing; some were statements based on ignorance, coming from people who genuinely just don't know any better.  Some were based on fiercely held personal religious convictions that people are entitled to, and are unlikely to change.

Upon reading, hearing, and seeing the reactions of the likes of bishops Cenzon, Cruz, and Bacani, I was neither surprised nor impressed.  If all they can do is hurl insults at their fellow man (such as calling LGBTs and straight Christians who support them "mentally defective" and "abnormal," and calling simple commitment ceremonies "kadiri" (gross)), they make themselves look far worse and childish than my words ever could.  But when I heard two members of the Baguio City Council publicly chastising the couples, watched them sign their names on an "anti-same-sex marriage petition," and then read of the Council's investigative steps to declare the same-sex couples involved as persona non gratae (unwelcome persons) within Baguio, I was sickened.  I literally had a sick feeling in my gut.

Archbishop fretting...but "not paranoid"

Former Lingayen-Dagupan Archbishop Oscar Cruz is a busy man these days.  But he's not busy feeding the poor, visiting the sick, building shelters for homeless Filipinos, or going about other Christ-like works that could be of great help to his nation and his flock.

No, Cruz is busy worrying about and speaking out against women's right to reproductive health, and of course, fretting over the prospect of LGBT Filipinos some day being treated as equals before the law.

The prelate has "warned" that passing the RH bill would lead to bills calling for divorce legalization and same-sex marriage (as if those would be bad things).  He identifies the bill as part of a "tripod of social maladies," which includes abortion, divorce, and same-sex unions.  Funny, but I think the status quo is a tripod of social maladies:  treating sexual minorities like second-class citizens, forcing couples to remain together by the power of the state, and telling women what they can and cannot do with their own bodies.

Philippine Anti-Discrimination Bill: Necessary and Long Overdue

This post is partially in response to the following comment posted by ''Gary45.''  Since I was already planning to write about the anti-discrimination bill, I'll use this comment as my starting point:

"You said: "Gay rights are non-existent in the Philippines".  Really?  Are gays not Filipino citizens?  Our Constitution already guarantees respect for human rights (section 11), the rights of workers (section 18), equal access to public services (section 26), equal employment opportunities for all (section 3 article XII), and even against threats on libel, slander and sexual harassment in the Penal Code.  Merit is the basis for employment.  Education, work record, experience, performance.  If a gay is fired for wearing too much lipstick he/she (?) can make a complaint to DOLE or DOJ.  New laws and more laws aren't necessary when we already have laws for this and that, regardless of the implications to religious liberty. ..."

Excellent comment and excellent point.  Your insensitivity on the matter, however, is disappointing.  It's unfortunate that you refer to gay men as "he/she."  It is also highly unlikely that a gay man would be fired for wearing lipstick since gay men don't wear lipstick.  Some male-to-female transgenders do, however, so perhaps they are the ones to whom you are referring.

The proposed Anti-Discrimination Bill pending in Philippine Congress (House Bill 1483), is an extremely important piece of legislation.  At first glance, the points raised in the above comment may make it seem that such a bill is unnecessary.  In a perfect world that may be true, but the last time I checked Earth isn't perfect and neither is humanity, which is why the majority of democratic countries today have some form of anti-discrimination law protecting their LGBT citizens.

Anti-Discrimination = the Death of Free Speech / Freedom of Religion?

The very important comment left in the previous post, "We accept you...as long as you never find fulfillment", reads as such:

"I think it is a big question mark for you to say gay marriage would not impact on religious freedom.  I have read alot of articles about that exact thing happening in other countries with lawsuits etcetera.  I did even read about your country where a pastor has been arrested for saying homosexuality is a sin and he is in prison.  That doesn't sound like democracy and a free country to me. ...You cannot deny that this issue has negative implications for Christian speech.  That is why I am skeptical about it all.  Not because I am anti-gay but becuase [sic] I fear for the end of free speech and religious freedom."

Given the nature of the comment, and my inability to answer it effectively in the limited space provided for comment replies, I decided to address it here in it's own post.  It's quite important and worth taking a close look at.

First off, I absolutely understand your point and I agree that freedom of speech and of religion must be protected.  This is not negotiable.  These freedoms are firmly enshrined in democratic constitutions, including the constitutions of both Norway and the Philippines.  I must correct you, though, on the pastor to whom you refer.

Political Ambiguity?

I received a good email question from a Filipino-American asking:  "Where do the political parties in the Philippines stand on LGBT rights and marriage?  It's impossible to find anything out from any of them!"

Welcome to the world of Philippine politics, my friend.  I'm left scratching my head as well.

Trying to get solid answers on issues (especially social issues) is extremely difficult because the parties aren't ideologically strong.  Their platforms or agendas tend to be quite vague and general, if they even list a platform at all.  It's quite strange to me actually -- I don't know how the people are able to make clear-cut decisions on whom to vote for if they can never get any clear-cut stands out of the parties.  Perhaps they merely vote based on the popularity and likability of the individual candidates rather than on the issues.

Philippine House of Representatives

Of the seventeen parties currently holding seats in the Philippine House of Representatives, only one, to the best of my knowledge, officially has gay rights as part of its platform:  Akbayan Citizen's Action Party.  They were actually the party that first filed the anti-discrimination bill back in 1999.  Unfortunately they're also one of the smallest parties, having just two representatives (out of 287) in the current House.

Another party, the Liberal Party of the Philippines (LP), has just one mention of fighting discrimination based on (among other things) sexual orientation, tucked within the long "Social program policy" page of its website.  That's all it says though -- no specifics, no details, no list of bills supported, opposed, or proposed which would aid in the fight against said discrimination.  But that's not uncommon in Philippine politics.  You basically have to guess, because you're more likely to be abducted by aliens than to get a definitive answer from them on LGBT issues (...or divorce, or the reproductive health bill, or abortion...)  But hey, at least they actually mentioned the words "sexual orientation."  That's a lot more than other parties do.  It's a nice first step I suppose.