Position Paper on Civil Union Act

Change is the only constant in the world. It does mean that there is continuous evolving,
progressing, and inevitable creation of new ways of living that are significantly different
from the past. How can we ride on to the everlasting changes? We must adapt to the
changes that are happening in the world, or at least in our country because adaptability
is a way for a human to survive and to live. Moreover, it is a tool for everyone to
consider what should be given attention on a matter that affects the people of the
country and the society. What should we adapt to for us to have equality? At this
moment of time, we are still struggling on making a resolution on a matter that is timely
and paramount for the society to strived. But the initiative of the senator to
institutionalize the civil union of the same sex couple in attaining the Sec. 1, Article III of
the 1987 Constitution, which provides that, "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.", is a good step for progressing into life where discrimination
cannot foster and to normalize changes that are needed in our society to move forward.

It has been two decades since The Netherlands break the stigma of same-sex marriage
by legalizing it which open the discourse about the importance of recognizing same sex
couple on allowing them to register in marriage. Followed by Belgium, Canada, South
Africa, Portugal, Brazil, Taiwan, and even our former conqueror, Spain, whose dominant
religion is Catholicism, as it was they who instilled that religion in our country; ironically,
Spain legalized same-sex marriage while our country does not. Religion is the biggest
hurdle that strongly opposes the idea of legalizing same-sex marriage. In contrast, the
Pope supported civil unions for homosexuals, which is the head of the Roman Catholic
Church. Furthermore, our constitution guarantees the absolute separation of church and
state, so the arguments that "God only created men and women" and "Men are only for
women" shall not suffice to prevent Congress from passing this bill into law.
Family has evolved into various types of units; it can be two fathers with a child or two
mothers with a child, or it can also be two individuals without a child, or it can be a
mother and a child, or a man and his pet. Every person has a unique view of what a
family is, thus we shouldn't limit the definition by assuming that a family must reproduce.
There are many situations where females don't have the ability to reproduce due to
illness or they just don't like having children. This is now the time for our country to have
a legislative measure about same-sex marriage in order to provide accessible rights,
protections, and privileges, specifically the privilege to get an adoption, a right to give
consent to any medical treatment on behalf of their civil partner, insurance and pension
benefits, succession rights, decision-making on burial arrangements, and others that
have been enjoyed by a married couple. Allowing same-sex marriage in the country is
accepting the people of the LGBT+ community. A study in California with a total of
1000+ gay and lesbian respondents shows that same-sex couples who registered for
marriage are more happy than same-sex couples who live-in. Researchers discovered
that same-sex couples felt accepted and recognized through marriage, which in
particular enhanced their mental health. According to Statista Research in 2016, 60% of
their respondents know someone who is attracted to their same sex. As the LGBT+
population grows, the more we need to work to cover their needs and wants, rights, and
protections which this bill is trying to achieve. If passed, this might spark the passage of
other relevant legislation, leading the country to be more open and progressive that
could develop our society free from prejudice.

Finally, the word "marriage" shall not be limited to men and women because marriage is
based on love, respect, mutual understanding, division of labor, and equality, and not
solely on gender. The definition of marriage should be changed, and homophobia
should be removed from Articles 46 (4) and 55. (6) in the Family Code. Such changes
would not be an embarrassment or a shameful act by the state, but rather a necessary
change that gives people hope and security in knowing that they are heard and listened
to. Giving an option to our people to be happy must be done while accorded to the law.
We are all equal and we should have equal rights and opportunities to choose who we
want to live our life with.