I applaud at the Supreme Court's landmark decision to uphold "live-in" relationships depending on one's religion. With a vote of 9 pro-judges against 5 dissenters (with one abstaining), this reflects the high level of maturity of our Supreme Court system for it only upholds one's freedom of religion. It's only because our SC judges are wise enough to realize that a democracy like ours should never be retrofitted with narrow and baseless Christian mores. It should be "each unto his own beliefs" for one's marital practices may not apply to others. For instance, while Muslims are exempted from polygamy and concubinage, the rest will just have to tread Christian lines lest they want to go against the law. And what about Buddhists? Hindus? or Jehovah's Witnesses? Their beliefs cannot subserve to those of Catholics' but rather should be treated fairly and on a secular basis. I hope this will pave the way to more pro-choice decisions that will uphold man's basic and inalienable rights such as freedom of religion.
As as for SC Chief Justice Panganiban, shame on you for forcing your narrow Christian morals on others not of the same religion. Shame! But then again, that's why there was a need for a vote- so every decision will not be swayed by the opinion of one man.
4 comments:
i second that! time for us to move on and let not religion be part of the sate and law. im a devout christian but yes, we must think progressively and if we truly are a democratic country, all the secs must be recognize.
aaaaah, hyprocrites still live among us even in today's age and times.
What is it about this country!? Duh. Stuff like these aren't even supposed to be voted on.
Just one word -- RESPECT.
(if I was God, no wonder I'd let the Philippines suffer, because filipinos are too 'maarte', whatever happened to responsible freedom?).
yuri: ur right, unfortunately the church is as backward as the inquisition.
vina: yup, and the prez is the biggest one of them all.
kiko: i think God has answered your prayer harhar
Post a Comment