CHAPTER I

THE PROBLEM

Introduction

The LGBT or Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Community have

always been a sensitive topic in society, especially with the opposition of most

religions. There are even countries where it is illegal to be gay, bisexual or

transgender. To the extent that it is punishable by death in thirteen (13) countries

namely Sudan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Mauritania, Afghanistan, Pakistan,

Qatar, UAE, parts of Nigeria, southern parts of Somalia, parts of Syria and parts of

Iraq according to the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex

Association (Carroll & Mendos, 2017). At one point, homosexuality was considered a

mental illness as recognized by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Psychology

(Wetzel, 2013).

For a long time, people have been considered homosexuality as a form of

“deviant sexual behavior". (Messerli, 2009) However, evidence has shown that

homosexual relationships have already been existed for more than 600 years. (Bryner,

2007) Slowly, being gay became more acceptable, and homosexuals fought for more

rights, and eventually the right to marry.

Same-sex marriage is the legally or socially recognizable union and

commitment between two consenting adults of the same biological sex or social
 2

gender. It has existed throughout all of history. According to Random History (2011),

evidence exists that same-sex marriages were tolerated in parts of Mesopotamia and

ancient Egypt. Artifacts from Egypt, for example, show that same-sex relationships

not only existed, but the discovery of a pharaonic tomb for such a couple shows their

union was recognized by the kingdom.

With an increased in tolerance for homosexuality in the society, the

controversy over the legalization of gay marriage has been disputed among people in

many nations. While the many people believe that the legalization of gay marriage

will have negative impact on the society, gay activists claim that it is against basic

civil rights to prohibit them from marrying.

According to the United Nation of Human rights, human rights are rights

inherent to all human beings, regardless of gender, nationality, ethnic origin and

religious view etc. Everyone has the same right and freedom to do what they want, as

long as it does not cause harm to the society, and decision made by others should be

respected (Messerli, 2009). Gay marriage is the matter of civil and equal rights, and

the decision to get married should belong to the couple in love, and this should not be

regulated by the government (Anton, 2008). Even though many people are not

comfortable with homosexual relationship, the equality and dignity of gay couples

should be respected (Cline, 2010). In general, successful marriage encourages people

to have strong family values and improves the quality of living. The health benefits of

marriage have been observed around the world and studies have shown that marriage

improves people’s health, both physically and psychologically. (Gallagher, 2000)

 3

On the other hand, the absence of father or mother in a gay household often

causes social and financial problems. (Dr. Krause, 2010) In addition, children raised

by homosexual parents are continually exposed to homosexuality. As a result, they are

at a higher risk of becoming homosexual themselves and their behavior will be more

or less affected by the growing environment. (Robinson, 2008) On top of that, children

will have a greater chance to be discriminated and bullied by other classmates, and this

could have a negative effect on their development. (Robinson, 2008) With the rapidly

increasing single-parent family and divorce rate over the decade, the true meaning of

marriage has already been weakened. (Messerli, 2009) With accepting same-sex to

marry, it would further erode the respect for marriage. One of the main purposes of

marriage is to create the best environment for raising children. While gay couples do

not have the ability to procreate, only natural marriage can consistently provide a

stable and nurturing environment for the growth of the next generation. (Dr. Krause,

2010)

The researchers have observed that even if the topic of same-sex marriage is

openly up for debate in other countries, it is immediately shut down in the Philippines,

a country with the population mostly Christians and Muslims. Another observation is

that the voices of the youth are not easily heard in regards to the issue of gay marriage.

It is on this context that the study is conducted to be able to investigate the

extent of college students’ acceptability of same-sex marriage and their stand on the

legalization of gay marriage in the Philippines. The researchers have agreed to stay in

neutral ground regarding this issue to avoid bias in the study.

 4

Statement of the Problem

The main objective of the study is to investigate the college students’

acceptability of same-sex marriage.

Specifically, this study aims to answer the following questions:

1) What is the profile of the respondents in terms of (a) age, (b) sex, (c)

religion, and (d) ethnicity?

2) What is the extent of the college students’ acceptability of same-sex

marriage in terms of (a) social, (b) psychological, and (c) ethical?

3) Are the college students in favor of the legalization of same-sex marriage

in the Philippines?

Significance of the Study

The generalization of the present study would be a great contribution in raising

awareness on same-sex marriage and knowing the opinions of the next generation of

professionals regarding the matter. Results of this investigation could be highly

significant and beneficial specifically to the following:

To the NDTC students, they would have the opportunity to express their

opinions on where they stand with the topic of same-sex marriage.

To the LGBT Community, depending on the results, they will be informed on

where the college students of NDTC stand in regards to same-sex marriage and their

chances on having gay marriage legalized in the country.

To the NDTC school administration, they would be informed of the current

stand of their college students towards the legalization of same-sex marriage in the

Philippines.
 5

To the readers, through this study they will be knowledgeable on where the

college students of NDTC stand in regards to same-sex marriage and its legalization.

They will also be informed on the arguments of both sides of the international political

debate over marriage.

To the future researchers, this study will be able to serve as their citation and

guide for their investigation.

Scope and Delimitation of the Study

This study will investigate the extent of college students’ acceptability of same

sex marriage and their view about the legalization of same-sex marriage in the

Philippines. The respondents will be the randomly selected college students across

courses of Notre Dame of Tacurong College, who are enrolled during the second

semester of the school year 2017-2018.

Definition of Terms

For the purpose of reference, the following terms are defined operationally.

Acceptability refers to the psychological, ethical and social worthiness of same

sex marriage as viewed, accepted or welcomed by the college students.

Bisexual refers to an individual who is physically, romantically or emotionally

attracted to men and women and tend to enter same-sex marriage.

Ethical Acceptability is the worthiness of same-sex marriage as accepted the

college students in conformity of one’s values and moral standards.

Gays are men who are attracted to fellow men and tend to enter same-sex

marriage.
 6

Lesbians refer to women who are attracted to fellow women and tend to enter

same-sex marriage.

Psychological Acceptability is the worthiness of same-sex marriage in

accordance with the college students’ view or way of thinking.

Same Sex Marriage refers to the union of two people of the same sex like that

of a normal and lawful marriage.

Social Acceptability is the worthiness of same-sex marriage as accepted or

welcomed by society and the college students.

Transgender are people who change from their original gender and tend to

enter same-sex marriage.

 7

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This chapter presents the review of related literature and studies of this study

on the acceptability of same-sex marriage among college students.

History of the LGBT in the Philippines

Gender non-conformity in the Philippines pre-dates the arrival of the Spaniards

in 1521. Reportedly, from Spanish accounts of encounters between conquistadores and

the archipelago’s original inhabitants, crossing gender and transvestism were cultural,

exemplified by the babaylan. Also called bayoguin, bayok, agi-ngin, asog, bido,

binabae (Garcia, 2008), balian, balean, babay and balayan, the babaylan was a spiritual

leader, similar to a religious functionary, ancient priestess or shaman in English.

While the word babaylan is said to connote a woman, there were also male

babaylans – for example the asog of the Bisayan society during the 17th century – who

not only put on women’s clothing but also pretended to be women so that the spirits

listened to their prayers. These men, however, did not only wear the customary clothes

of women as well as assumed the demeanor of women, but were also granted social

and symbolic recognition as “somewhat-women”. Some were even “married” to men,

with whom they had sexual relations (Garcia, 2008).

References to gender expression were noted in the evolution of some words in

the Filipino language. As an example, an old word used to refer to effeminate men is

syoki, believed to be derived from the Hokkien (Minnan) words syo and ki to mean
 8

“with weak spirit”. It therefore infers that effeminate men are weak (Tan, n.d). In the

past, the term used to identify mainly crossdressing effeminate men was bakla, while

the female counterpart was tomboy.

To better understand the LGBT community in the Philippines, understanding

concepts of gender is necessary. According to Tan (n.d.), these concepts are

biologically based and related to roles in reproduction. As such, in the Philippines,

definitions used particularly for gays and lesbians “keep going back to a biological

dichotomy of a male and female… Both ‘tomboy’ and ‘bakla’ center on ‘inversion’, in

the sense of a male taking on female mannerisms, way of dressing and of a female

taking on male” (Tan, n.d.). Tan stated that, generally, “one could not be bakla, or gay,

if he was not effeminate, and one could not be tomboy, or lesbian, unless she was

masculine.” This way, a bakla was a “girl”, and as “girls”, they will not have sex with

other bakla (also considered as “girls”), as this was considered “tantamount to

lesbianism”. The tomboy, meanwhile, is “constructed as a man trapped in a woman’s

body” (Tan, 2001).

For many years, the bakla have organized themselves usually as neighborhood

organizations with low-income members, though they functioned mainly to provide

entertainment (Tan, 2001). One such community association was Sining Kayumanggi

Royal Family, established in 1968 to hold parties including beauty pageants (Tan,

2001). The presence of the bakla persisted into the 1970s, when many bakla entered

niche industries like fashion and entertainment. Also at that time, gay men called

Kakasarian formed a group that had members who were middle-class professionals.

Though it aimed to champion gay rights, this group folded after less than a year,
 9

supposedly because bakla themselves did not see the need to fight for gay rights (Tan,

2001). The emergence of the discourse on the “third sex” at that time also included

lesbians (Garcia, 2008).

It can be argued that the 1960s may be when the conceptual history of

Philippine gay culture started. It was then when swardspeak/gayspeak/baklese

emerged. This is said to be the “‘subcultural lingo’ of urban gay men that uses

elements from Tagalog, English, Spanish and Japanese, as well as celebrities’ names

and trademark brands” (Ricordeau, 2009). Also at that time, homosexuality related

writings that were Philippine-centric were published, including those from Victor

Gamboa and Henry Feenstra, and Lee Sechrest and Luis Flores (Garcia, 2008).

In the Philippines, prevailing LGBT concepts have been greatly influenced by

international media as well as local reinterpretations of LGBT people who spent time

overseas. The 1980s, for instance, saw gay men who were exposed to the Western

notion of “gay” starting to have relationships with other gay men, instead of with

heterosexual-identifying men, as the bakla used to do (Tan, 2001).

Since many of these gay men belonged to the middle- or upper middle-class,

this marked what Tan described as the “Philippine society’s class stratification being

reproduced in the gay scene” (Tan, 2001).

An important turning point for lesbian activism in the Philippines was when a

lesbian contingent, called Lesbian Collective, joined the International Women’s Day

march in March 1992 (Mohideen, 1996). This was the first demonstration attended by

an organized sector of the LGBT community in the Philippines.

 10

Policies and Laws about the LGBT

Non-commercial private same-sex activity between consenting adults is not

criminalized in the Philippines. The age of consent is set at 18, although contact with

minors (those under 18) is considered an offense if the minor consents to the act for

money, gain, or any forms of remuneration, or as the result of an influence of any

adult person. While same-sex relationships are not recognized, the Supreme Court

(SC) 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 (Ocampo, 2011). This means that consenting adults cannot be prevented

from engaging in sex in “hotels/motels” regardless of their sexual orientation or

gender identity. This Supreme Court decision means that LGBT people have a

legitimate claim on their right to privacy.

There are a number of laws that mention sexual orientation (i.e. Magna Carta

of Women, Magna Carta for Public Social Workers) or address same-sex relations (i.e.

the Anti-Rape Law of 1997 that covers same-sex relations in defining sexual assault).

For example, Article 46 of the Family Code that went into effect in 1987 mentions

homosexuality/lesbianism as a ground for annulling marriages, along with alcoholism

and drug addiction. Another law that affects the LGBT Filipinos, the Republic Act

(RA) 9262 (Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act) punishes violence

in intimate relations including those where both parties are women (R-Rights &

PLHCW, 2011). The RA 9262 portrays LGBT people negatively because their sexual

orientation and gender identity is associated as “socially bad or psychologically

detrimental”, similar to how alcoholism and drug addiction are portrayed by the law.
 11

There are laws that have reportedly been used by unscrupulous law enforcers

to extort from and harass LGBT people. These include the “grave scandal” prohibition

in Article 200 of the Revised Penal Code, as well as RA 9208 (Anti-Trafficking in

Persons Act of 2003). In Metro Manila, venues like bathhouses are frequented by men

who have sex with men (MSM). When raids happen, the MSM who are at these

venues are threatened with being charged with “grave scandal” of the said law. Many

MSM pay the extortion demanded by law enforcers and officers for fear of being

“outed” to peers and family members (IGLGHRC, 2011).

The absence of a comprehensive anti-discrimination law in the Philippines is

apparent even if antidiscrimination bills (ADBs) have been filed in both the Lower and

Upper Houses of Congress since the 1990s. So far, there are no intentions to pass

national anti-discrimination laws that exclusively seek to protect LGBT people.

Instead, the protection of LGBT people from discrimination is included in proposed

laws against discrimination based on race, ethnicity and religion. Politicians are

known to block these proposed laws because of their inclusion of LGBT people

(Manila Bulletin, 2012).

Worth highlighting is the confusion of Philippine courts regarding concepts of

sexual orientation and gender identity. For example, the SC used the terms “LGBTs”

and “homosexuals” as interchangeable even if not all LGBT people are homosexuals.

The Court also “seems to view ‘lesbians, gay, bisexuals, and transgender’ as

categories of sexual orientations… unaware of their gender identity aspects” (Ocampo,

2011).
 12

Policies that promote the rights of LGBT people include the Civil Service

Commission’s (CSC) Office Memorandum 29-2010 that forbids discrimination

against LGBT people who are applying for civil service examinations and the Revised

Policies on Merit Promotion Plan that inhibits discrimination in the selection of

employees based on various criteria including gender (Ocampo, 2011). However, such

policies remain few, or are not widely known.

ACCEPTABILITY OF LGBT IN THE PHILIPPINES

The Pew Research Center conducted a survey from 2 March to 1 May 2013 in

39 countries with 37,653 respondents. This survey showed that 73 percent of the

Filipino respondents said that homosexuality should be accepted by society with an

even higher percentage (78%) of younger respondents in the 18–29 age groups (Pew

Research Center, 2013).

LGBT Filipinos questioned the results of this survey, however, claiming that

LGBT Filipinos are tolerated only if they fit stereotypes. For Tan (2001),

“‘acceptance’ is conditional as long as the bakla remain confined to certain

occupational niches and fulfill certain stereotypes.” Garcia (2008) added that “when

visitors to the Philippines remark that Filipinos openly tolerate and/or accept

homosexuality, they invariably have in mind effeminate, cross-dressing men (bakla)

swishing down streets and squealing on television programme with flaming impunity.

To equate Philippine society’s tolerance for public displays of transvestism with

wholesale approval of homosexual behavior is naive, if not downright foolish.”

The worsening plight of LGBT Filipinos may also be seen in the number of

LGBT-related crimes in the country. In the first half of 2011 alone, the now-defunct
 13

Philippine LGBT Hate Crime Watch documented 28 LGBT-related killings (Ubalde,

2011). While noting the data, the Philippines’ Commission on Human Rights (CHR)

pledged to document LGBT-related hate crimes (Tubeza, 2013).

HISTORY OF SAME SEX MARRIAGE

Historians of same-sex marriage take great care to place the modern debate

over the legality of gay marriage into an historical framework (Random History,2011).

Evidence exists that same-sex marriages were tolerated in parts of Mesopotamia and

ancient Egypt.

In actuality, same-sex marital practices and rituals are less known in Egypt

compared to Mesopotamia, where documents exist for a variety of marital practices,

including male lovers of kings and polyandry. None of the recorded laws of

Mesopotamia, including the Code of Hammurabi, contain restrictions against same-

sex unions despite the fact that marriages are otherwise well regulated. (Eskridge,

1993)

During the 1970s and 80s, some gay activists in the US sued for the right to

marry, and a few same-sex couples even managed to obtain valid licenses and to wed.

But it was not until the 1990s that the modern movement towards marital equality

began to make headway anywhere, and only in 2000 did the Netherlands become the

first jurisdiction in the world to sanction same-sex weddings. (Dabhoiwala, 2015)

ACCEPTABILITY OF SAME SEX MARRIAGE

Social Acceptability

The promotion of equality and non-discrimination plays an extremely

important role in reducing homophobia and in affirming a minority group in society

which has for so long endured significant discrimination and stigmatization.

 14

Legalizing same-sex marriage communicates to millions of people across the country

that gay relationships are of equal value to straight relationship, thereby helping to

reduce intergroup prejudice and supporting cultural diversity (Lipp, 2016).

Equal allocation of marriage rights and benefits to same-sex couples assists

LGBT people in a practical sense and the elimination of relationship discrimination

helps promote psychosocial and physical well-being (Lipp, 2016).

Marriage, as an institution, helps to foster the wellbeing of children by

providing married couples with various rights, benefits and protections which can

strengthen relationship bonds and family units. Around the nation there are millions of

children being raised in households led by same-sex couples, many of whom are

denied the right to legally marry in their home state. The denial of equal marriage

rights unfairly disadvantages children who are raised by same-sex couples residing in

states where gay marriage is not legal or not recognized (Lipp, 2016).

This lack of support for LGBT families denies children within them the same

type of protections afforded children in “traditional” families headed by married

straight couples. The legalization of gay marriage helps to address this injustice by

supporting family stability and validating the worthiness of families led by same-sex

couples (Lipp, 2016).

According to Cline (2017), families are the smallest social unit in society and

trends in the family inevitably affect trends in society as a whole - and vice-versa, of

course. Same-sex marriages will help better integrate those couples and their

relationships into society. Ensuring that gay relationships are stable and receive

support will benefit the stability of society overall.

 15

Psychological Acceptability

Allowing same-sex couples to marry harms no one. Conversely, it

enhances the lives of millions of LGBT people and their families and also benefits

broader society economically, culturally, and politically (Lipp, 2016).

The Australian Psychological Society has urged federal parliamentarians to

change the law to allow same-sex marriage on the grounds of mental health and

wellbeing (Rout, 2011). According to Rout (2011), the body, which represents 20,000

psychologists across the country, yesterday urged a change in the Marriage Act, citing

evidence that marriage is beneficial for an individual's mental health and that harm is

caused by social exclusion and discrimination.

Stacey and Biblarz (2001) cited in Wilkinson (2005) notes that where there are

apparent differences, these can be seen as favourable to lesbian and gay parenting (e.g.

children of same-sex couples exhibit greater gender role flexibility and are more

accepting of sexual diversity than those of different-sex couples).

The BPS Lesbian and Gay Psychology Section’s (2003) support for the UK

government’s civil partnership proposals claimed that legal recognition of same-sex

couples would have psychological benefits, including ‘acceptance by parents of a

child’s sexual orientation of preference’ and ‘the inclusion of a same-sex partner into

the extended family of her/his significant other’.

Gay and lesbian individuals are at a heightened risk of mental disorders

and substance abuse as a result of being the victims of discrimination and social

exclusion. By supporting the right to marry, the Supreme Court of the United States of

America has taken a big step toward reducing this vulnerability. Prejudice and
 16

discrimination against gay and lesbian individuals are not going to go away because of

this ruling. But this is a critical step in the right direction (Routledge, 2015).

Ethical Acceptability

Many religious institutions and leaders favoring same-sex marriage also

actively engage in judicial processes (Messner, 2011). In a state court lawsuit claiming

a right to same-sex marriage under the California constitution, representatives from a

wide range of religious and faith organizations supported an “interfaith ‘friend of the

court’ brief” that was signed by hundreds of “religious associations, churches,

synagogues, sanghas, ministers, and rabbis across California and the nation.” Messner

(2010) also stated that far from disclaiming religious support for same-sex marriage,

professional gay-rights activists welcome and encourage it.

Many arguments for marriage focus on it as a natural, pre-political social

institution intrinsically connected to the vital public interest in the begetting and

raising of children (Messner, 2010). As Messner (2010) cited, “Across history and

cultures,” reports marriage scholar David Blankenhorn (2007), “marriage’s single

most fundamental idea is that every child needs a mother and a father. Changing

marriage to accommodate same-sex couples,” argues Blankenhorn, “would nullify this

principle in culture and in law.”

Lucchesi (2015) quoted Justice Kennedy of the United States’ Supreme court,

“No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies the highest ideals of love,

fidelity, devotion, sacrifice, and family. In forming a marital union, two people

become something greater than once they were. As some of the petitioners in these

cases demonstrate, marriage embodies a love that may endure even past death. It
 17

would misunderstand these men and women to say they disrespect the idea of

marriage. Their plea is that they do respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find

its fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not to be condemned to live in loneliness,

excluded from one of civilization’s oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in

the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right.”

According to Focus on the Family (2010), “We must "speak the truth in love"

(Ephesians 4:15). There is no place for hatred, hurtful comments, or other forms of

rejection toward those who experience same-sex attraction or identify themselves as

gay, lesbian or bisexual. Because we humans are made in the image of God, Jesus

teaches us to regard all humanity as having inherent value, worth and dignity -

including those affirming or adopting labels or behaviors which we believe the Bible

associates with sexual sin.” The priority of love for the Christian is unquestionable,

and the cause of love is advanced by telling the truth with grace and compassion.

(Focus On the Family, 2010)

Thomas Jefferson wrote in the United States of America’s Declaration of

Independence, “We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal,

that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among

these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." "The pursuit of happiness" can

be expressed differently by a range of people with various identities over time and the

right to that pursuit is immutable. (Zeigler, 2015)

 18

Conceptual Framework

Same-sex marriage, also known as gay marriage or homosexual marriage, is a

ceremonial union of two people of the same sex; a marriage or marriage-like

relationship between two women or two men. In this study, the extent of the college

students’ acceptability of same sex-marriage will be determined by: social

acceptability, the worthiness of same-sex marriage as accepted or welcomed by

society and the college students, psychosocial acceptability, the worthiness of same-

sex marriage in accordance with the college students’ view or way of thinking, and

ethical acceptability, the worthiness of same-sex marriage as accepted the college

students in conformity of one’s values and moral standards. The study will also

determine the college students’ stand on the legalization of same-sex marriage in the

Philippines. Figure 1 is presented to illustrate the conceptual framework of the study.

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework of the Study

Acceptability of Same-Sex
Marriage
Stand on Legalization of
 Social Acceptability
 Psychological Acceptability Same-Sex Marriage
 Ethical Acceptability

Figure 1. The Schematic Diagram of the Conceptual Framework showing the variables

of the study.
 19

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter discusses the methods that will be used in the collection and

analysis of data on the extent of college students’ acceptability of same-sex marriage

in terms of ethical, psychological and ethical.

Research Design

This study will use the descriptive research design. This will be used to

describe the profile of the respondents in terms of age, sex, religion and ethnicity. This

will also be used to determine the respondents’ extent of acceptability of same-sex

marriage and their stand on its legalization in the Philippines.

Respondents of the Study

The respondents of the study will be the college students of Notre Dame of

Tacurong College across courses who are enrolled during the second semester of the

school year 2017-2018.

Locale of the Study

The study will be conducted in the Notre Dame of Tacurong College on the 2nd

semester of the school year 2017-2018. NDTC is a Catholic school that offers primary,

secondary and college education and is located at Lapu-lapu Street, Tacurong City,

Sultan Kudarat. The City of Tacurong is at the center of Mindanao and the only city in

Sultan Kudarat.
 20

Sampling

The desired sample size for this research is 250 students and will be

determined through simple random sampling where the respondents will be chosen

randomly from 3rd year and 4th year across course.

Instrumentation

A researcher-made questionnaire will be used to gather information about

study. The items were derived from the related literature and studies. The

questionnaire will be composed of three (3) parts. Part I is about the profile of the

respondents in terms of age, sex, religion and ethnicity. Part II is on the acceptability

of same-sex marriage in terms of social, psychological and ethical which is composed

of twenty-four (15) items; eight (5) for the social acceptability, eight (5) for the

psychological acceptability and another eight (5) for the ethical acceptability. The

respondents will be made to respond to each item using a 4-point likert scale where 4

is Strongly Agree, 3 is Agree, 2 is Disagree and 1 is Strongly Disagree. Part III is a

question on whether the students are in favor of the legalization of same-sex marriage

in the Philippines.

Data-Gathering Procedure

The researchers will ask permission from the college deans, through a letter, to

conduct a survey to the randomly selected college students in NDTC through

questionnaires.

Once the request has been approved, the researchers will then gather the

respondents at the specific date and time permitted by the all the Deans. The

respondents will assemble in one available location within the campus.

 21

Then, the data collected will be kept confidentially, tallied and tabulated

accurately and without bias.

Statistical Treatment

This study will be using descriptive statistics. For the first and third research

problem, frequency and percentage distribution will be used for the age, sex, religion,

ethnicity and the stand of the respondents on the legalization of same sex marriage in

the Philippines.

For the second problem, the researchers will determine the extent of

acceptability by using the mean.

Analysis of Data

In finding the profile of the respondents and their stand on the legalization of

same sex marriage in the country, only the highest and lowest result shall be

discussed.

In analyzing the college students’ extent of acceptability on same-sex

marriage, the following range of scale and interpretation shall be used:

Scale Range Description Interpretation

3.25 – 4.00 Strongly Agree To a Very Great Extent

2.50 – 3.24 Agree To a Great Extent

1.75 – 2.45 Disagree To a Limited Extent

1.00 – 1.74 Strongly Disagree To a Very Limited Extent

 22

REFERENCES

A History of Gay Marriage. (2011, February 4). Random History. Retrieved 24

October 2017 from http://www.randomhistory.com/history-of-gay-
marriage.html
Anti-Discrimination Bill’s OK Delayed. (2012, 27 August). Manila Bulletin.
Retrieved 10 October 2017 from https://ph.news.yahoo.com/anti-
discrimination-bill-ok-delayed-105316925.html.

Biblical Perspective on Homosexuality and Same-Sex Marriage. (2010). Focus On

The Family. Retrieved 24 October 2017 from https://www.focusonthefamily.
com/family-q-and-a/sexuality/biblical-perspective-on-homosexuality-and-
same-sex-marriage

Blankenhorn, D. (2007, November 1). The Future of Marriage. Retrieved 24 October

2017 from https://books.google.com.ph/books/about/The_Future_of_Marriage.
html?id=O1XKYTeA0rQC&redir_esc=y
Carroll, A. & Mendos, L. R. (2017, May). State-sponsored Homophobia. A World
Survey Of Sexual Orientation Laws: Criminalisation, Protection And
Recognition, 12th Edition. Retrieved 24 October 2017 from http://ilga.org/
downloads/2017/ILGA_State_Sponsored_Homophobia_2017_WEB.pdf.

Cline, A. (2017, July 16). Moral and Social Arguments for Gay Marriage. ThoughtCo.
Retrieved 24 October 2017 from https://www.thoughtco.com/moral-and-
social-arguments-for-gay-marriage-250097.

Dabhoiwala, F. (2015, January 23). The secret history of same sex marriage. The
Guardian. Retrieved 24 October 2017 from https://www.theguardian.com/
books/2015/jan/23/-sp-secret-history-same-sex-marriage
Eskridge, W. N. Jr., (1993) A History of Same Sex Marriage. Faculty Scholarship
Series. 1504. http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/1504
Garcia, J.N.C. (2008). Philippine Gay Culture: Binabae to Bakla, Silahis to MSM.
Quezon City: University of the Philippines Press.
International Gay & Lesbian Human Rights Commission (2001). Philippines:
Commission and Court Send Mixed Messages on Transgender Rights.
Retrieved 10 October 2017 from https://www.outrightinternational.org/
content/philippines-commission-and-court-send-mixed-messages-transgender-
rights.

Lipp, M. (2016, February 2). 7 Ways the U.S.A. Benefits From the Legalization
of Gay Marriage. Huffington Post. Retrieved 24 October 2017 from
 23

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/murray-lipp/gay-marriage-is-great-
for_b_3370173.html.
Lucchesi, N. (2015, June 26). Here’s the Supreme Court’s Decision to Grant ‘Equal
Dignity’ to Same-Sex Marriage. The Village Voice. Retrieved 24 October 2017
from https://www.villagevoice.com/2015/06/26/heres-the-supreme-courts-
decision-to-grant-equal-dignity-to-same-sex-marriage/

Messner, T. (2010, July 20). Religion and Morality in the Same-Sex Marriage Debate.
The Heritage Foundation. Retrieved 10 October 2017 from
http://www.heritage.org/marriage-and-family/report/religion-and-morality-the-
same-sex-marriage-debate

Mohideen, R. (1996, May). Lesbian movement emerges in the Philippines. Green Left
Weekly, Issue 230. Retrieved 10 October 2017 from
https://www.greenleft.org.au/content/lesbian-movement-emerges-philippines.

Ocampo, M.B. (2011). “Sex” In The Workplace: Approaches To Sexual Orientation

And Gender Identity Discrimination In The Workplace Absent An Anti-
Discrimination Law. Philippine Law Journal, Vol. 86, 190–232.

Pew Research Center. (2013). The Global Divide on Homosexuality: Greater

Acceptance in More Secular and Affluent Countries. Retrieved 10 October
2017 from http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2013/06/Pew-Global-Attitudes-
Homosexuality-Report-FINAL-JUNE-4-2013.pdf.

Rainbow Rights Project Inc. & Philippine LGBT Hate Crime Watch (2011). The
Status of LGBT Rights in the Philippines, submission to the Human Rights
Council for Universal Periodic Review 13th Session. Retrieved 10 October
2017 from http://lib.ohchr.org/HRBodies/UPR/Documents/session13/
PH/CHRP_UPR_PHL_S13_2012_CommissiononHumanRightsofthePhilippin
es_E.pdf.

Ricordeau. G. (2009, February). Review of “Philippine Gay Culture: Binabae to

Bakla, Silahis to MSM”. Intersections: Gender and Sexuality in Asia and the
Pacific, Issue 19. Retrieved 10 October 2017 from http://intersections.anu.edu.
au/issue19/ricordeau_review.htm.
 24

Rout, M. (2011, December 23). Psychologists urge support of gay marriage as

beneficial to mental health. TheAustralian. Retrieved 10 October 2017 from
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/psychologists-urge-
support-of-gay-marriage-as-beneficial-to-mental-health/news-story/
8ab1ac32f89b62b1d0133a1bd9c698b7.
Routledge, C. (2015, June 26). The Psychological Benefits of Legalized Gay
Marriage. Psychology Today. Retrieved 10 October 2017 from
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/more-mortal/201506/the-
psychological-benefits-legalized-gay-marriage
Stacey, J. & Biblarz, T.J. (2001). How does the sexual orientation of parents matter?
American Sociological Review, 66, 159–183.

Tan, M.L. (2001). Survival Through Pluralism: Emerging Gay Communities in the
Philippines. Gay and Lesbian Asia: Culture, Identity, Community. Gerard
Sullivan & Peter A. Jackson (Eds.). The Haworth Press Inc. 117–142.

Tan, M.L. (n.d.). Filipino Keywords Related to Sexuality. Retrieved 10 October 2017
from https://aboutphilippines.ph/files/Philippines_Keywords_in_Sexuality.pdf

Tubeza, P.C. (2013, 30 July). CHR to document ‘hate crimes’ vs. LGBTs.
Inquirer.net. Retrieved 10 October 2017 from http://newsinfo.inquirer.net
/455573/chr-to-document-hate-crimes-vs-lgbts.

Ubalde, J.H. (2011, 27 June). Afraid: ‘Killings of LGBTs in Philippines on the rise’.
Interaksyon.com. Retrieved 10 October 2017 from https://propinoy.net/
2011/06/29/afraid-killings-of-lgbts-in-philippines-on-the-rise/.

Wetzel, K. (2013, January 29). Same-Sex Marriage: An Introduction. Retrieved 24

October 2017 from http://sites.psu.edu/kwetzrclblog/2013/01/29/same-sex-
marriage-an-introduction/comment-page-1/ .

Wilkinson, S. (2005, May). Same-sex marriage and Equality. The British

Psychological Society. Retrieved 10 October 2017 from
https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/volume-18/edition-5/same-sex-marriage-
and-equality.

Zeigler, C. (2015, June 26). Thank you, Thomas Jefferson, for making our marriage
possible. OutSports. Retrieved 24 October 2017 from
https://www.outsports.com /2015/6/26/8851241/gay-marriage-thomas-
jefferson-supreme-court
 25

APPENDIX A

Survey Questionnaire On The Notre Dame Of Tacurong College Students’

Acceptability Of Same-Sex Marriage

General Directions: Follow all instructions and answer honestly.

Part I. Respondent’s Profile

INSTRUCTIONS: Please fill in your basic information.

Name (Optional) ______________________________ Age: ______

Ethnicity/Tribe: __________________ Sex: ______

Religion: _______________________

Part II. Students’ Extent of Social, Psychological and Ethical Acceptability of

Same-Sex Marriage.

INSTRUCTIONS: To determine the level of agreement on the statements presented,

please answer by checking the box where:

4 - Strongly Agree 3 - Agree 2 - Disagree 1 - Strongly Disagree

A. SOCIAL ACCEPTABILITY 4 3 2 1
Same-sex marriage promotes equality and non-discrimination in
1
society.
Same-sex marriage promotes social well-being among LGBT
2
people.

3 Same-sex marriage promotes family stability.

4 Same-sex marriage validates LGBT family units.

5 Same-sex marriage can benefit society.

B. PSYCHOLOGICAL ACCEPTABILITY 4 3 2 1

1 Allowing same-sex couples to marry causes harm to no one.

 26

2 Same-sex marriage is healthy for two parties involved.

Same-sex couples are more accepting of their children’s sexual

3
orientation of preference.
Children of same-sex couples are more accepting of sexual
4
diversity than those of different sex couples.
The legalization of same-sex marriage will reduce the risk of
5
mental disorder and substance abuse on same-sex couples.
C. ETHICAL ACCEPTABILITY 4 3 2 1

1 It is possible to be religious and still support gay marriage.

The law regarding marriage should be changed to accommodate

2
same-sex couples.

3 The dignity of gay couples should be respected.

To legalize gay marriage is to pursue the greatest Christian

4
teaching, which is love.
Since all men were created equal by God, every person should
5
have equal rights and that includes the right to marry.

Part III. Student’s Stand on Legalization of Same-Sex Marriage in the

Philippines.

INSTRUCTIONS: Check the box of your chosen answer.

Are you in favor of the legalization of same-sex marriage in the Philippines?

YES NO

Thank you very much for your participation.

The Researchers