DEBATE

(DOCUMENTATION)
Lumabi, izel

Orias, Eunice

Cisneros, madeleine

Tidon, Eduardo

Beto, jaymar

Untong, Sophia shams

Orquiola, wendrei brent

Kuldas, archie

LEGALIZATION OF SAME-SEX MARRIAGE

AND

LOWERING OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY IN THE PHILIPPINES

 Legalization of same-sex marriage

(Before the starting of the debate, they were all reviewing and brainstorming
about their topics. We have the affirmative side on the right and the negative
on the left. )
(We the reporters, started it with an opening ceremony and discussed the
instructions.)
 (Torres to Boral)
We started it off, with the affirmative side. Here she is saying that
“Implementing the legalizations here in the Philippines would make the
homosexual people here in the Philippines happy and just.”
 ( Boral to Torres)
Then the negative side rebutted, saying that “We disagree in applying the
legalizations here in the Philippines because first of all, Philippines is next to
the world largest Roman Catholics living here.”
 ( Abayon to Castaneda)

The affirmative side says, “ Everyone has a rights in everything, they can
love each other, besides it is a human rights.”
 (Castaneda to Abayon)
Negative side. “Human rights you say? Basic fundamental, magbabago yun
based on House representative, proposal na mayroong 65,216 respondent,
16% are against same sex marriage, 48,000 ang favor , ibig sabihin labag
sakanila ang same-sex marriage.
 ( Panalondong to Orsal )
Affirmative side. “Lahat ng tao, pantay-pantay, walang mali ang magmahal
ng ka-uri, it’s their own decision, wala namang may patakaran na labag ang
magmahal diba?.”
 (Orsal to Panalondong)
Negative side. “Think outisde of the box, ang same-sex marriage, it is a
sacred marriage, it is not only marriage but includes the sacredness in its
aspect.
 (Madronero to Garcia)
Affirmative side. “walang batas ang nagsasabing bawal magmahal, besides
there is a law saying, on Article III section 1 Bill of Rights, “No person shall
be deprived of life, liberty, or property with due process of law nor shall any
person be denied the equal protection of law.”
 (Garcia to Madronero)
Negative side. “As what noel said earlier, marriage is sacred and by that it
really sucks to think that some people don’t take marriage seriously,
marriage is made for men and women, not men to men, nor women to
women and also it is prohibited because there are many religious beliefs out
there that marriage is only for men and women.
At the end of the argument, we did a verdict about the “Legalization of same-
sex marriage in the Philippines” and the negative side had won the
argument, because the affirmative side uses an emotional appeal which is
not valid when discussing an argument, whilst the negative side, focuses on
its absolute facts.
 LOWERING OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY IN THE PHILIPPINES

(Opening Ceremony that was started off by Wendrei Brent Orquiola, the
affirmative side on the right and on the left side we have the negative side.)
 (Cua to Gallo)
Affirmative side. “Philippines lowering the criminal liability is very a warming,
decreasing it to the lower age and increasing criminal acts, the children
should not be in prison but instead be in children welfare.”
 Negative side. “From 15 to 9 years old, do you think it will not affect the
child’s mentality? Under the proposed bill, children aged 9-15 below will face
criminal charges if found guilty of committing serious crimes.”
 (Ameril to Gabilan)
Affirmative side. “9-15 years old? At that age, for sure may alam nayan sila,
alam na nila ang mali at tama, no governization development needed, may
anak kana ba?
 (Gabilan to Ameril)
“Mas lalong mahirapang umunlad ang nasyon, dahil sa murang edad,
mararanasan makapasok sa bilangguan ang kabataan.”
 (Hermocilla to Palatan)

“Hahayaann mo nalang ba? Nilalagay sa bahay pag-asa ang taong gumawa

ng krimen? Let’s be fair walang justice dun, dahil iba na ang henerasyon
ngayon iba sa noon.”
 (Palatan to Hermocilla)
“Violence against children” UNICEF said, second chance to inform,
according to them, younger children needs to be protected not to put them in
a situation wherein they can’t handle, makakaapekto sa kinabukasan nila
yun.”
 (Rosas to Gongga)
“In this type of generation dapat niyang panagutan iyon, diba iba na ang
henerasyon na ating tinatangkillik?”
 (Gongga to Rosas)
“Diba si D. Jose Rizal na mismo ang nagsabi, na ang kabataan ang pag-asa
ng bayan, pano na magiging pag-asa ang mga kabataan kung pinapakulong
niyo without assurance? Asan na dun ang pag-asa? Wala na diba?.”
 (Lee to Tangan)
“Makikita naman yan sa evidences ee, atsaka hinde agad agad
pinapakulong, may due process nga diba? Oonga, tayo ang pag-asa ng
bayan, tayo mismong kabataan pero pano tayo magiging pag-asa ng bayan
kung ganito ang sitwasyon naten? Pano natin maipagmamayabang na tayo
ang ilaw sa dilim, kung tayo mismo ang gumagawa nang kasamaan--.”

(Tangan to Lee)
“Article 13, every child has the right and one has no capacity , know doing
wrong, and also it has not yet been fully develop. Lots of law implemented ,
act, 19 antivirus against children these will be regarded, these can be
manipulated a lot and a lot of institution to develop their moral--.”
The verdict has come and both teams won the argument about “Lowering
the Criminal Liability in the Philippines.”