II.

Social and Religious Influence in the Philippines

Despite the influence arising from globalization and Westernization, the Filipino culture
remains to be conservative when it comes to sexual orientation and gender identity. Filipinos’ view
on the matter is largely affected by how it is perceived at home, by what is taught in school, in
church and similar religious institutions, by the media, the internet, public policies, law, and effects
of modernization.

The Philippines, being a predominantly Christian country, recognizes that the only sexual
behavior morally and legally acceptable and appropriate is heterosexual intercourse within
a monogamous marriage. However, polygamous marriage as practiced by some Filipino minority
groups and by Muslim communities in the Mindanao, is allowed as long as the men of these
population are financially capable of supporting their multiple wives.

In the case of Ang Ladlad LGBT Party v. Commission on Elections, GR. No. 190582, April
8, 2010, the Commission on Elections (COMELEC), in dismissing the Petition for registration of
Ang Ladlad in the party list system, stated that:

x x x This Petition is dismissible on moral grounds. Petitioner defines the

Filipino Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) Community, thus: x x
x a marginalized and under-represented sector that is particularly disadvantaged
because of their sexual orientation and gender identity. and proceeded to define
sexual orientation as that which: x x x refers to a person’s capacity for profound
emotional, affectional and sexual attraction to, and intimate and sexual relations
with, individuals of a different gender, of the same gender, or more than one
gender.” This definition of the LGBT sector makes it crystal clear that petitioner
tolerates immorality which offends religious beliefs. In Romans 1:26, 27, Paul
wrote: For this cause God gave them up into vile affections, for even their women
did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the
men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another;
men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that
 recompense of their error which was meet. In the Koran, the hereunder verses are
pertinent: For ye practice your lusts on men in preference to women “ye are indeed
a people transgressing beyond bounds.” (7.81) “And we rained down on them a
shower (of brimstone): Then see what was the end of those who indulged in sin
and crime!” (7:84) “He said: “O my Lord! Help Thou me against people who do
mischief” (29:30).

Respondent suggests that although the moral condemnation of homosexuality and

homosexual conduct may be religion-based, it has long been transplanted into generally accepted
public morals. The COMELEC argues:

“Petitioner’s accreditation was denied not necessarily because their group

consists of LGBTs but because of the danger it poses to the people especially the
youth. Once it is recognized by the government, a sector which believes that there
is nothing wrong in having sexual relations with individuals of the same gender is
a bad example. It will bring down the standard of morals we cherish in our
civilized society. Any society without a set of moral precepts is in danger of losing
its own existence. We are not blind to the fact that, through the years, homosexual
conduct, and perhaps homosexuals themselves, have borne the brunt of societal
disapproval. It is not difficult to imagine the reasons behind this censure –
religious beliefs, convictions about the preservation of marriage, family, and
procreation, even dislike or distrust of homosexuals themselves and their
perceived lifestyle.”

Our attitudes toward LGBTs may be traced in the way people view a woman and a man,
their respective qualities, norms regarding gender in a particular society, as well as their roles.

Before, it was difficult for LGBTs to come out and admit of their sexual orientation and
gender identities because of the ridicule that they might get from the public and from their very
own families. Some have reportedly experienced heterosexism, especially at home, in school, and
religion. This may include being tagged as “bakla”, being subject to bullying, and being considered
abnormal.

In a research conducted by Aguiling-Dalisay and her colleagues (2000), it was found that
being gay was considered by participants as “sinful” and antithetical to being a “real” man. It may
appear that homosexuality is tolerated in the Philippines, but the law, public policy, and public
morals still uphold the traditional notion of gender identities and preclude a biologically born male
to assume that of a female and vice versa in so far as civil rights and obligations are concerned.

III. Constitutional Provisions Relating to LGBT Rights in the Philippines

Justice Robert A. Jackson once said: “[f]reedom to differ is not limited to things that do
not matter much. That would be a mere shadow of freedom. The test of its substance is the right
to differ as to things that touch the heart of the existing order.”

Equal Protection

Article III, Section 1 of our Constitution provides “nor shall any person be denied equal
protection of the laws”.

The equal protection clause guarantees that no person or class of persons shall be deprived
of the same protection of laws which is enjoyed by other persons or other classes in the same place
and in like circumstances. In Central Bank Employees Association, Inc. v. Banko Sentral ng
Pilipinas, we declared that “In our jurisdiction, the standard of analysis of equal protection
challenges x x x have followed the ‘rational basis’ test, coupled with a deferential attitude to
legislative classifications and a reluctance to invalidate a law unless there is a showing of a clear
and unequivocal breach of the Constitution.” While it is posited in the case of Ang Ladlad LGBT
Party v. Commission on Elections that majority of the Philippine population considers homosexual
conduct as immoral and unacceptable, there is no law which exists to criminalize homosexual
behavior or expressions or parties about homosexual behavior.
Freedom of Expression and Association

Section 4, Article III of the 1987 Philippine Constitution provides “No law shall be passed
abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably
to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.”

The Court ruled in the case of Ang Ladlad LGBT Party v. Commission on Elections that
“Freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society, and
this freedom applies not only to those that are favorably received but also to those that offend,
shock, or disturb. Any restriction imposed in this sphere must be proportionate to the legitimate
aim pursued. This position gains even more force if one considers that homosexual conduct is not
illegal in this country. It follows that both expressions concerning one’s homosexuality and the
activity of forming a political association that supports LGBT individuals are protected as well.”

The Court went on further to state that “We do not doubt that a number of our citizens may
believe that homosexual conduct is distasteful, offensive, or even defiant. They are entitled to hold
and express that view. On the other hand, LGBTs and their supporters, in all likelihood, believe
with equal fervor that relationships between individuals of the same sex are morally equivalent to
heterosexual relationships. They, too, are entitled to hold and express that view.”

Dignity, Equality and Human Rights

Section 11 of Article II of the 1987 Philippine Constitution provides “The State values the
dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for human rights.” Further, Section 1,
Article III of the same Constitution provides “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or
property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the
laws.”
 Clearly, the Philippines commits itself to upholding the dignity, equality and human rights
of all persons. LGBT rights are human rights. Sexual orientation and gender identity are integral
aspects of who we are and should never lead to discrimination or abuse.

Family

Section 1, Article XV of the 1987 Philippine Constitution provides “The State recognizes
the Filipino family as the foundation of the nation. Accordingly, it shall strengthen its solidarity
and actively promote its total development.”

Section 2 of the same Article provides “Marriage, as an inviolable social institution, is the
foundation of the family and shall be protected by the State.”

The Family Code defines marriage as “a special contract of permanent union between a
man and a woman.” It further provides as one of the essential requisites that the contracting parties
“must be a male and a female.” It thus clearly prohibits same-sex couples from entering into a
contract of marriage. The same law mentions homosexuality and lesbianism, but only as grounds
to annul a marriage or to allow legal separation.

However, nothing in Article XV or other provisions of the Constitution limits the definition
of marriage as between a man and a woman. Thus, there is no impediment against legalizing same-
sex marriage in the Philippines. It only takes the enactment of a law to legalize the same.

Privacy

While same sex marriages are not yet recognized, the Supreme Court in the case of City of
Manila vs. Perfecto Laguio and Malate Tourist Development Corporation (G.R. No. 118127), has
invalidated government regulations that infringed on the sexual relations of consenting adults,
stating that these violated the privacy rights and personal dignity of individuals. Thus, consenting
adults cannot be prevented from engaging in sex in “hotels/motels” regardless of their sexual
orientation or gender identity. This leads to the conclusion that LGBT people have a legitimate
claim on their right to privacy.

Gender Recognition

Under the 1987 Philippine Constitution, there exists no provision nor prohibition regarding
the determination and registration of a person’s sex and the changing of the same based on one’s
gender.

But not like in other jurisdictions where citizens can change their documents easily through
an administrative process, changing entries that are not “clerical errors” in a birth certificate is not
a matter of right in the Philippines. This is, however, true as far as the Rules and Jurisprudence are
concerned. Thus, allowing change of sex in one’s birth certificate based on gender recognition
may still be legalized through legislation.

In the case of Ang Ladlad LGBT Party v. COMELEC, the Court recognizes “that practical
solutions are preferable to ideological stalemates; accommodation is better than intransigence;
reason more worthy than rhetoric.

“Our freedom to differ and, ultimately, our freedom to choose must not be limited by
existing laws, especially when there is nothing that prohibits legislation accommodating legitimate
calls for equality, which the Constitution itself enshrines.”
References:

Hunt, Dee Dicen and Cora Sta. Ana-Gatbonton.Filipino Women and Sexual Violence: Speaking
Out and Providing Services, cpcabrisbane.org

Florante, JJ. "Religious and Ethnic Factors Affecting Sexuality". International Encyclopedia of
Sexuality. Archived from the original on 2013-05-08.

Manalastas, EJ and Del Pilar, Gregorio E.H., Filipino Attitudes toward Lesbians and Gay Men:
Secondary Anaysis of 1996 and 2001 National Survey

Hojilla, K. Same-sex Maarriage and Its Legal Hindrance in the Philippines, ACCRA Law
Publications, June 23, 2017