LGBT partylist Ang Ladlad denied accreditation for “immorality”, “threat to the youth”
THIS JUST IN | OPINION
Ang Ladlad, the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) party list seeking a congressional seat in the upcoming May 2010 national elections, was denied accreditation by the national poll body, Commission on Elections (COMELEC), on the grounds of “immorality… (as per Quran and the Bible)” and “threat to the youth.” Again.
Last year, the Comelec also denied Ang Ladlad the chance to run for public office, citing “lack of merit” as the reason. The commissioners believe that Ang Ladlad lied about its scope of membership: “Contrary to petitioner’s allegation in its petition that its membership is national in scope, reports from our field offices reveal that it doesn’t exist in most regions of the country.”¹
This comes as a sad blow to the community and human rights activists who are eager to see the LGBTs represented in congress after decades of invisibility. Ang Ladlad would have been the first LGBT partylist to run for office and to draft pro-LGBT laws. Currently, there are no Philippine laws protecting the LGBTs against discrimination and hate crimes, and while there are the enlightened few who furthers LGBT’s concerns in congress, they are outnumbered by the outrageously insensitive and the uninformed.
R E S O L U T I O N ²
We resolve the verified petition1 for registration of ANG LADLAD LGBT PARTY (Ang Ladlad, for brevity) as a sectoral party under the party-list system of representation…
… This Petition must fail.
There are two (2) issues to be resolved in the present case, these are:
I. Whether or not the documents establishing the jurisdiction of the Commission and other documents can be admitted as evidence considering that the same were not formally offered; and
2. Whether or not petitioner should be accredited as a sectoral party under the party-list system of representation.
Despite an overwhelming presence in the media and other industries, LGBTs are still a minority in the largely-Catholic Philippines. The Comelec’s decision reinforces the fact the society still refuses to acknowledge the growing population of LGBTs in the country. While homosexuality is legal here (as it should be anywhere), we are merely tolerated and not accepted in a society that is highly influenced by the church that enforces a double standard of morality. It condemns homosexuality and refuses rights to single parents and the innocent illegitimate children , while it turns a blind eye on adultery and corruption by no less than the “leaders” of the country.
Anent the first issue, we hold that the evidence of petitioner may be admitted. The general rule when evidence is not formally offered is found in Section 34′, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court which forbids the courts from considering evidence not formally offered.
However, when evidence has been duly identified by testimony duly recorded and incorporated in the records of the case, the rule may be relaxed such that evidence not formally offered may be admitted.’
The exception may be applied to the case at bar. Petitioner, through its witness and President, Danton Remoto, sufficiently identified the pieces of evidence presented. The testimony was duly recorded and incorporated in the records of the case. Hence, the documents authenticated and testified on by witness Remoto are hereby admitted, although not formally offered in evidence by the petitioner.
Despite the foregoing, however, this Petition is dismissible on moral grounds. Petitioner defines the Filipino Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) Community, thus:
“”xxx 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:
“xxx refer to a person’s capacity for profound emotional, affectional and sexual attraction to, and intimate and sexual relations with, individuals of a different qender, 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 to 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 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: “0 my Lord! Help Thou me against people who do mischief!”"(29:30).”
“For ye practice your lusts on men in preference towomen ” ye are indeed a people transgressing beyondbounds.”(7.81). “And we rained down on them a shower(of brimstone): Then see what was the end of those whoindulged in sin and crime!” (7:84) “He said: “0 my Lord!Help Thou me against people who domischief!”"(29:30).”‘~
Wait. Where now is the line that separates the church and the state? Why does the Comelec choose to ignore the constitutional mandate that states government affairs and decisions should never be influenced or based on religious beliefs? How can we expect the Comelec to uphold a fair election when it is partial to church? You give us all the more reasons to run for office.
Why deny us, the LGBTs, of our right to representation? You dare accuse us of “immorality” and “threat to the youth”. What about the politicians who hogged public funds for self-serving projects, prioritized a boxing match over passing a bill that will benefit majority of the Filipinos, and openly display promiscuity as if it were badges of honor? Why, they are the ones who shouldn’t be allowed to run for office on the grounds of cheating and corruption, of lying to the public, of absolute and unquestionable immorality! Discredit them, not Ang Ladlad, which serves and represents the marginalized employees and entrepreneurs, the tax payers and responsible citizens of this country. You’ll do better at protecting the greater good by stripping the government clean of them.
We want a voice in the legislation. We shall seek solid support and votes of the LGBTs, its families, friends and allies because we cannot be ignored any longer. We want a fellow LGBT in congress to push for our rights; we ask for equal rights, not special rights. We demand that we be given the opportunity to run for office, because we need the Anti-Discrimination Bill to give LGBT Filipinos equal opportunities in employment and equal treatment in schools, hospitals, restaurants, hotels, entertainment centers, and government offices. We need to repeal the Anti-Vagrancy Law, which is used by unscrupulous police officers to extort gays. We want livelihood opportunities for the poor and handicapped LGBTs, proper care for the old and abandoned LGBTs, and legal aid and counseling available to LGBTs across the nation.
As correctly pointed out by the Law Department in its Comment dated October 2, 2008:
“The ‘ANG LADLAD’ apparently advocates sexual immorality as indicated in the Petition’s par. 6F: ’Consensual partnerships or relationships by gays and (2) serve no other purpose but to satisfy the market for violence, lust or pornography(3;) offend any race or religion; (4) tend to abet traffic in and use of prohibited drugs; and (5) are contrary to law, public order, morals and good customs, established policies, lawful orders, decrees and edicts; (3) Those who shall sell, give away or exhibit films, prints, engravings, sculpture or literature which are offensive to morals. (As amended by PD Nos. 960 and 969).”
Petitioner should be denied accreditation not only for advocating immoral doctrines but likewise for not being truthful when it said that it “or any of its norninees/party-list representatives have not violated or failed to comply with laws, rules, or regulations relating to the elections’!
Furthermore, should this Commission grant the petition, we will be exposing our youth to an environment that does not conform to the teachings of our faith. Lehman Strauss, a famous bible teacher and writer in the U.S.A said in one article that ”older practicing homosexuals are a threat to the youth”‘. As an agency of the government, ours too is the State’s avowed duty under Section 1312, Article I1 of the Constitution to protect our youth from moral and spiritual degradation.
Being gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender does not happen overnight. There isn’t a brief encounter that transforms the youth or any other person into becoming an LGBT. How is the Comelec protecting the youth by denying LGBTs a right to representation when a fraction of that youth are LGBTs?
Does the Comelec think the youth aren’t wise enough to decide on their own? Do you think they are easily swayed to change their sexual preference and gender identity? If so, then ask their parents and families — not us — why this is so. How was she or he raised? What was she or he like as a kid? If he grew up to be gay or queer, the parents must have known it, unless they were too busy looking the other way.
Someone, somewhere in your family or circle must be gay. How can you like them then abhor the rest of the LGBTs? Quit the hypocrisy, please. You know we are everywhere, and you can’t like one and hate the other.
We are not condemning the LGBT, but we cannot compromise the well-being of the greater number of our people, especially the youth.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, this Petition is hereby DISMISSED.
In time, the entire LGBT community, out and closeted alike, will muster the strength to stand up and fight for our rights, and there is nothing, absolutely nothing, you can do about it. Remember, even kings and empires fall.
“We’re here, we’re queer, we’ll never disappear”
- Baguio Pride March 2009 chant
¹ Manuel Quezon III. “Prove it’s a lie.” http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view/20070305-52869/Prove_it%92s_a_lie
² Quoted text are actual text of the Comelec’s ruling (.pdf) on Ang Ladlad’s partylist accredition, downloaded from the ABS-CBN News website
You might like these too:
REPOSTED: We are planning to have massive protest actions regarding this discriminatory Comelec decision and treatment against LGBTs. PLEASE join in solidarity with us. ATTEND the LGBT MEETING on SAT Nov. 14 9am-12nn, University Hotel, UP Diliman.
Leave your response!