Mozzel Callada

NECESSITY SPEECH-NEGATIVE SIDE

To our dear adjudicators, moderator, out worthy opponents,

ladies and gentlemen, a pleasant morning to you all. We, the negative
side strongly oppose the proposition: Let it be Resolved that divorce
be legalized in the Philippines. I, the first speaker of the negative will
discuss to you the necessity, the second speaker will discuss the
benefeciality and the third speaker will discuss the practicability of
the proposition.

For the necessity, this are the following reasons why divorce
should not be legalized in the Philippines:

For my first argument against legalizing divorce, proponents

often stress its importance as a necessary way out of abusive or
irreparable marriages. However, it is important to recognize that there
are already existing legal mechanisms such as legal separation and
annulment which address these concerns and ensure due process is
followed. The Family Code of the Philippines, particularly Articles 55
to 67, provides the legal framework for annulment. Legal separation,
governed by Articles 55 to 67 of the Family Code, allows couples to
live separately without terminating the marriage. This legal
mechanism already addresses situations where the continuation of the
marriage is detrimental. The introduction of divorce may not
necessarily be a better solution but could inadvertently lead to
unintended consequences including a potential surge in divorces
without adequately addressing the root causes of marital discord.

For my second argument, the Philippines has a unique cultural

and religious landscape heavily influenced by Catholicism. The
proponents’ call for legalizing divorce raises concerns about potential
clashes with these deeply ingrained values, risking societal divisions.
The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines explicitly acknowledges the
separation of the Church and the State (Article II, Section 6).
However, the influence of Catholicism is evident in legal matters,
including family law.Various legal provisions align with cultural and
religious values, reflecting a delicate balance between legal norms and
societal expectations. As we navigate this discussion, it is essential to
tread carefully when contemplating changes that have the potential to
impact the moral fabric of our nation.

For my last argument, the legalization of divorce is argued

to be in line with individual freedom. However, we must
balance this respect for individuals’ rights with the wider social
implications in our actions. The Constitution of the Philippines,
particularly the Bill of Rights (Article III, Sections 1-22),
outlines fundamental freedoms and rights of individuals.
However, legal systems often seek a balance between individual
freedoms and societal interests, emphasizing the importance of
maintaining public order, morality, and the general welfare.
Protecting the sacred union of matrimony even in times of
difficulty is considered a joint responsibility that helps to
maintain stability and unity within a society. Moreover, another
aspect of this debate is the potential economic implications
arising as a consequence of mass divorce. The economic
consequences of divorce can be observed in the potential strain
on the judicial system, impacting the efficiency of legal
processes. This is consistent with the economic principle that
efficiency is compromised when resources are overburdened.
The Family Code addresses the economic aspects of
marriage, including property relations (Articles 75-108),
indicating the legal consideration given to economic
implications within the context of marriage. A survey conducted
by the OCTA Research Group showed 51% of Filipinos were
against the legalization of divorce in the Philippines. The
"Tugon ng Masa survey," meanwhile, showed that 41% of the
respondents approved the legalization of divorce in the country,
while 9% are undecided. Divorce proceedings often involve
intricacies connected with splitting up property, legal battles,
and financial burden to both parties.
 In conclusion, legalizing divorce in the Philippines is not just an
issue of necessity. It is a step that threatens our societal values, family
stability and cultural cohesion. By calling for the preservation of the
existing legal alternatives and creating awareness about them, we can
address personal concerns while protecting societal interests. I
strongly oppose that legalizing divorce in the Philippines is necessary
in view that it can cause several issues such as moral, social,
economic and psychological issues. And with that, I rest my case and
I'm commiting myself for interpellation.