THE LEGALIZATION OF SAME SEX MARRIAGE AS ASSESED BY CITHM STUDENTS

S.Y. 2011-2012

A Thesis Presented to the

Faculty of the College of International Tourism

And Hospitality Management

LYCEUM OF THE PHILIPPINES UNIVERSITY

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Bachelor of Science in Tourism

By

Ang, Dianne Marie M.

Bayot, Donalynne B.

October 2011
 CHAPTER 1

THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

INTRODUCTION

In our generation today, homosexuals have been widely accepted by the majority may it be a gay
or a lesbian. People have come to recognize the existence of the "third sex" and through time they have
also accepted “same-sex relationships" in our society. But controversies and arguments arise when
homosexuals started proposing the idea of legalizing "same-sex marriage".

The issue on legalizing same-sex marriage has been going on for decades. It has received a lot
of objection and opposition since it contradicts the accustomed meaning of marriage as a "union
between a man and a woman". Though there have been few countries which have approved or have
begun to legally formalizing marriage between same sex marriage like Canada, Italy and etc. Still the
majority of countries do not recognize this kind of marriage.

The researchers pond this issue because it has always been an informal situation in the society. It
is a fact that homosexuals are common subject of discussion among genders and up until now, they are
not well accepted in their own living environment and are discriminated. It is very interesting and
controversial that led the researchers to study the said issue.

BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Marriage has usually been a commitment between the male and female. But nowadays, various
countries around the world recognize the union between same sexes. In many cultures the issue of same
sex marriage has ignited a firestorm of controversy in the press and living rooms.

Same-sex love, as Plato's symposium shows, is as ancient as human love, and the question of
how it is recognized and understood has overwhelmed every human civilization. And today in a number
of foreign countries, laws extending civil marriage to gay and lesbian couples have been enacted. In
2001 the Netherlands opened civil marriage to gay couples and allowed them to adopt children as well.
Belgium followed suit in 2003, although it did not go as far as the Netherlands: gay couples have no
adoption rights in Belgium. Most other European countries only allow for some kind of registered
partnership with some degree of protection. By now most legal systems in Europe provide some kind of
status, even in Catholic countries like Spain. Some states of the United States have followed and
provided registries for same-sex partnerships and grant them certain rights.

The Philippines is one of the most Catholic or church influenced country in the world. It has
always been advocated in keeping the laws of God. The critics of same sex unions have also gone
beyond debates and discourse for the past. Many Filipino homosexual’s has been protesting for their
freedom rights to consider the union between same sex relationships. Until now, the government has no
grant given for this plea. According to the family code of the Philippines or executive order 209,
“Marriage is a special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into in
accordance with law for the establishment of conjugal and family life." Not meeting this requirement
will make the marriage invalid.

(http://www.chanrobles.com/executiveorderno209.htm)

The expectations for the study are to lead to more open-minded students and for them to be ore
knowledgeable to the situation. Moreover, be able to tabulate answers without unbiased conclusions, and
to know the status of the legalization of same sex marriage in our country.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

 This study aims to determine the assessment of CITHM students of Lyceum of the Philippines
University on the legalization of Same-Sex Marriage in the Philippines.

1. What is the demographic profile of the students?

1.1 Age

1.2 Gender

1.3 Religion

1.4 Course

2. How do respondents assessed the legalization of Same-Sex Marriage in the Philippines?

2.1 Morality

2.2 Acceptability

2.3 Expectations

3. What measures can the government undertake on the legalization of same sex marriage?

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

This study aims to assess the percipience of CITHM students of Lyceum of the Philippines
University regards to the legalization of Same-sex Marriage in the Philippines.

1. To know the demographic profile of the respondents.

2. To identify the perception of the students towards same sex marriage.

3. To determine policies and the measures that the government will undertake on the issue
regarding same sex marriage.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

This study will benefit the following groups of people:

Students. To be informed about the current status of same sex marriage in the Philippines .

Future Researchers. As a raw material or background for future reference

Society. To have better understanding on the situation of homosexuals.

Government. The recommendations of the researchers would help them recognize what
measures to be undertake to the issue on the legalization of same-sex marriage.

SCOPE AND LIMITATION

This study will focus on how students of Lyceum of the Philippines University perceive the
legalization of same sex-marriage in the Philippines. It will be limited to the output of the respondents
from the selected CITHM students, which will be coming from the registrar that will provide such as
data, and information that will come out from the distributed survey questionnaires, as well as the
information from literatures that will be cited and reviewed.

The researcher will use the random sampling method in selecting the interview-questionnaire
method to serve as the instrument for this study.

DEFINITION OF TERMS

Conjugal. Of or relating to the married state or to married persons and their relations.

Gay. It refers to a male homosexual.

Homosexual. In connection with human beings, homosexuality includes sexual thoughts, feelings,
fantasies and overt sexual acts involving a member of one's own sex. The term "homosexual" is more
specifically applied to a person who regularly practices overt sexual acts with members of the same sex
past adolescence into adulthood.

Legalization. To make legal or lawful; authorize or sanction by law.

Lesbian. Pertaining to or characteristic of female homosexuality.

Marriage. Legally, it is a binding contract between the two parties that joins together their possessions,
income, and lives.

Protest. A formal declaration whereby a person expresses a personal objection or disapproval of an act.

Relationship. Is an emotional or other connection between people.

Same Sex Marriage. A similar institution involving partners of the same gender.

Self-Flagellation. Beating as a source of erotic or religious stimulation whacking, beating, drubbing,

licking, thrashing, trouncing, lacing - the act of inflicting corporal punishment with repeated blows.

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW of RELATED LITERATURE and STUDIES

This chapter presents the literature and studies which are found relevant to the study.
These where made by foreign and local researchers which were reviewed and presented in this chapter.
These convey different point of views on the legalization of same sex marriage.

FOREIGN LITERATURE

Baha'i faith is the youngest of the world's independent religions stated their belief on
homosexuality. Sexual activity between persons of the same sex is known from many places far and near
throughout history. A classic comparative study of sexual behavior patterns in 1951 found that
homosexual activity was considered socially acceptable and normative for certain people in 64 percent
of the seventy-six societies studied. Moreover, institutionalized homosexuality is known among peoples
from parts of Africa and Asia, among North and South American Indian tribes, among peoples on the
islands of the Pacific, including New Guinea, and among the Australian aborigines; it also occurs as a
religious theme among the ancient Greeks, the Celts, and the Romans, in ancient Arabia and Sufism, in
feudal Japan, and in various Indo-European traditions.

In contrast to the ritual significance given homosexuality in some indigenous cultures and
religions, the Semitic religions have all condemned homosexuality. A homosexual act between two
consenting adult males is an abomination (Lev. 18:22), punishable by death (Lev. 20:13). Talmudic law
extends the prohibition, but not the penalty, which is limited to flagellation, also to lesbianism. Rabbinic
sources advance various reasons for the strict ban on homosexuality - regarded as a universal law among
"the Seven Commandments of the Sons of Noah". It is an unnatural perversion debasing the dignity of
man. Such acts frustrate the procreative purpose of sex, and also damage family life, by the homosexual
abandoning his wife. Jewish law holds that no hedonistic ethic, even if called "love", can justify the
morality of homosexuality any more than it can legitimize adultery or incest, however genuinely such
acts may be performed out of love and by mutual consent.

In Christianity, homosexuality is condemned in the strongest terms as a sin alongside other

sexual vices (Rom. 1:27, 1 Cor. 6:9, 1 Tim. 1:10), although Christian attitudes have varied over time.
The Qur'an describes homosexuality as an "impious act" (7:79) and there are Hadith that allege that
Muhammad said both the passive and active agent should be killed. On the Day of Resurrection, the
man who sodomises another will suffer eternal damnation, unless he obtains pardon through repentance.

On the article "Obama Administration Drops Defense of Anti-Gay Marriage Law" of

foxnews.com, The Obama administration announced that it will no longer defend the federal law that
defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. The reason behind this is that Holder said
members of Congress may step up to defend the statute, but the Justice Department "will cease defense."
He noted that the congressional debate during passage of the Defense of Marriage Act "contains
numerous expressions reflecting moral disapproval of gays and lesbians and their intimate and family
relationships. The Human Rights Campaign called the decision a "monumental" move against a law that
"unfairly discriminates against Americans."

Barbara Goldberg (2011) shared about New York's same-sex marriage law that sets off waves of
engagements. In her article it was stated that "In the minutes and hours after the law was passed and
signed by Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo late on Friday, sparkling rings were offered and
accepted and champagne corks flew to kick off wedding plans likely to add an estimated $284 million to
the state's economy, according to a report by the Independent Democratic Conference." She added, “The
most populous state to approve marriage equality legislation, New York is the sixth state to legalize gay
nuptials, joining Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont and the District of
Columbia. Civil unions were approved in Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois and New Jersey. Same sex marriage
is banned in 39 states."

Does the Constitution protect the right to same-sex marriage? Taking a careful look at the issue,
Evan Gerstmann looks at the legal debate, and asks whether, in a democratic society, the courts, rather
than voters, should resolve the question. Gerstmann also asks whether such a court-created law could be
effective in the face of public opposition. Evan Gerstmann argues that this problem is one of the most
significant constitutional issues facing society because it challenges society's commitment to true legal
equality. After graduating with honors from the University of Michigan Law School in 1986, Evan
Gerstmann practiced law in New York City for five years. Subsequently, he completed his Masters and
Ph.D. in Political Science at the University of Wisconsin. He studies the interaction between law and
politics. He has published a book on constitutional law, The Constitutional Class: Gays, Lesbians and
the Failure of Class-Based Equal Protection (University of Chicago, 1999), as well as articles on
subjects ranging from freedom of speech to how criminal law affects victims of domestic violence.

Many same-sex couples want the right to legally marry because they are in love — many, in fact,
have spent the last 10, 20 or 50 years with that person — and they want to honor their relationship in the
greatest way our society has to offer, by making a public commitment to stand together in good times
and bad, through all the joys and challenges family life brings. Many parents want the right to marry
because they know it offers children a vital safety net and guarantees protections that unmarried parents
cannot provide. And still other people — both gay and straight — are fighting for the right of same-sex
couples to marry because they recognize that it is simply not fair to deny some families the protections
all other families are eligible to enjoy. Currently in the United States, same-sex couples in long-term,
committed relationships pay higher taxes and are denied basic protections and rights granted to married
straight couples. Among them:

Hospital visitation. Married couples have the automatic right to visit each other in the hospital
and make medical decisions. Same-sex couples can be denied the right to visit a sick or injured loved
one in the hospital.

Social Security benefits. Married people receive Social Security payments upon the death of a
spouse. Despite paying payroll taxes, gay and lesbian partners receive no Social Security survivor
benefits — resulting in an average annual income loss of $5,528 upon the death of a partner.

Immigration. Americans in bi-national relationships are not permitted to petition for their same-
sex partners to immigrate. As a result, they are often forced to separate or move to another country.

Health insurance. Many public and private employers provide medical coverage to the spouses of
their employees, but most employers do not provide coverage to the life partners of gay and lesbian
employees. Gay and lesbian employees who do receive health coverage for their partners must pay
federal income taxes on the value of the insurance.

Estate taxes. A married person automatically inherits all the property of his or her deceased
spouse without paying estate taxes. A gay or lesbian taxpayer is forced to pay estate taxes on property
inherited from a deceased partner.

Family leave. Married workers are legally entitled to unpaid leave from their jobs to care for an
ill spouse. Gay and lesbian workers are not entitled to family leave to care for their partners.

Nursing homes. Married couples have a legal right to live together in nursing homes. The rights
of elderly gay or lesbian couples are an uneven patchwork of state laws. Home protection. Laws protect
married seniors from being forced to sell their homes to pay high nursing home bills; gay and lesbian
seniors have no such protection.

Home protection. Laws protect married seniors from being forced to sell their homes to pay
high nursing home bills; gay and lesbian seniors have no such protection.

Pensions. After the death of a worker, most pension plans pay survivor benefits only to a legal
spouse of the participant. Gay and lesbian partners are excluded from such pension benefits.

Why aren’t civil unions enough? Comparing marriage to civil unions is a bit like comparing
diamonds to rhinestones. One is, quite simply, the real deal; the other is not. Consider: Opposite-sex
couples who are eligible to marry may have their marriage performed in any state and have it recognized
in every other state in the nation and every country in the world. Couples who are joined in a civil union,
for example in Vermont, New Jersey or New Hampshire, have no guarantee that its protections will
travel with them to other states. Moreover, even couples who have a civil union and remain in Vermont,
New Jersey or New Hampshire receive only second-class protections in comparison to their married
friends and neighbors. While they receive state-level protections, they do not receive any of the more
than 1,100 federal benefits and protections of marriage. In short, civil unions are not separate but equal
— they are separate and unequal. And our society has tried separate before. It just doesn’t work.
Marriage State grants marriage licenses to couples. Religious institutions are not required to perform
marriage ceremonies. Civil Unions State would grant civil union licenses to couples. Couples receive
legal protections and rights under state law only. Civil unions are not necessarily recognized by other
states or the federal government. Religious institutions are not required to perform civil union
ceremonies.

“I believe God meant marriage for men and women. How can I support marriage for same-sex
couples?” Many people who believe in God — as well as fairness and justice for all — ask this question.
They feel a tension between religious beliefs and democratic values that has been experienced in many
different ways throughout our nation’s history. That is why the framers of our Constitution established
the principle of separation of church and state. That principle applies no less to the marriage issue than it
does to any other. Indeed, the answer to the apparent dilemma between religious beliefs and support for
equal protections for all families lies in recognizing that marriage has a significant religious meaning for
many people, but that it is also a legal contract. And it is strictly the legal — not the religious —
dimension of marriage that is being debated now.

Granting marriage rights to same-sex couples would not require leaders of Christian, Jewish,
Islamic or any other religious leaders to perform these marriages. It would not require religious
institutions to permit these ceremonies to be held on their grounds. It would not even require that
religious communities discuss the issue. People of faith would remain free to make their own judgments
about what makes a marriage in the eyes of God — just as they are today. Consider, for example, the
difference in how the Roman Catholic Church and the U.S. government view couples who have
divorced and remarried. Because church tenets do not sanction divorce, the second marriage is not valid
in the church’s view.

The government, however, recognizes the marriage by extending to the remarried couple the
same rights and protections as those granted to every other married couple in America. In this situation
— as would be the case in marriage for same-sex couples — the church remains free to establish its own
teachings on the religious dimension of marriage while the government upholds equality under law. A
growing number of religious communities bless same-sex unions, including Reform Judaism, the
Unitarian Universalist Association and the Metropolitan Community Church. The Presbyterian Church
(USA) allows ceremonies to be performed but they’re not considered the same as marriage. The
Episcopal Church, United Church of Christ and the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism allow
individual congregations to set their own policies on same-sex unions.

"I strongly believe children need a mother and a father." Many of us grew up believing that
everyone needs a mother and father, regardless of whether we ourselves happened to have two parents,
or two good parents. But as families have grown more diverse in recent decades, and researchers have
studied how these different family relationships affect children, it has become clear that the quality of a
family’s relationship is more important than the particular structure of families that exist today. In other
words, the qualities that help children grow into good and responsible adults — learning how to learn, to
have compassion for others, to contribute to society and be respectful of others and their differences —
do not depend on the sexual orientation of their parents but on their parents’ ability to provide a loving,
stable and happy home, something no class of Americans has an exclusive hold on. That is why research
studies have consistently shown that children raised by gay and lesbian parents do just as well as
children raised by straight parents in all conventional measures of child development, such as academic
achievement, psychological well-being and social abilities. That is also why the nation’s leading child
welfare organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Family
Physicians and others, have issued statements that dismiss assertions that only straight couples can be
good parents — and declare that the focus should now be on providing greater protections for the 1
million to 9 million children being raised by gay and lesbian parents in the United States today.

Granting same-sex couples the right to marry, therefore, would enable the millions of same-sex
parents raising children today to give their children what every child deserves – the safest, most secure
environment possible, with all the legal protections that our country has put in place. “This is different
from interracial marriage. Sexual orientation is a choice.". "We cannot keep turning our backs on gay
and lesbian Americans. I have fought too hard and too long against discrimination based on race and
color not to stand up against discrimination based on sexual orientation. I've heard the reasons for
opposing civil marriage for same-sex couples. Cut through the distractions, and they stink of the same
fear, hatred, and intolerance I have known in racism and in bigotry."

According to Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., a leader of the black civil rights movement, was writing
in the Boston Globe, Nov. 25, 2003. Decades of research all point to the fact that sexual orientation is
not a choice, and that a person’s sexual orientation cannot be changed. To whom one is drawn is a
fundamental aspect of who we are. In this way, the struggle for marriage equality for same-sex couples
is just as basic as the successful fight for interracial marriage. It recognizes that Americans should not be
coerced into false and unhappy marriages but should be free to marry the person they love — thereby
building marriage on a true and stable foundation. "Won’t this create a free-for-all and make the whole
idea of marriage meaningless?"

Many people share this concern because opponents of LGBT equality have used this argument as
a scare tactic — but it is not true. Granting same-sex couples the right to marry would in no way change
the number of people who could enter into a marriage (or eliminate restrictions on the age or familial
relationships of those who may marry). Marriage would continue to recognize the highest possible
commitment that can be made between two adults, plain and simple. "How could marriage for same-sex
couples possibly be good for the American family – or our country?”. ”We shouldn’t just allow gay
marriage. We should insist on gay marriage. We should regard it as scandalous that two people could
claim to love each other and not want to sanctify their love with marriage and fidelity."

Does Thailand recognize same sex marriage? The short answer: No. It should be noted that
Thailand is one of the most tolerant cultures in the world, particularly regarding gay rights. That being
said, there is no process under Thai law for legalizing a relationship of two people who are of the same
sex. In many countries, a legal partnership known as a “civil union” is used to legitimize a relationship
between two people of the same sex. In Thailand, there is no “civil union” mechanism for providing
legal protection for a same sex couple. That being said, Thailand marriage registration is often not a
method employed by a couple who wishes to have an ongoing relationship. It is quite common in
Thailand for a couple to have a marriage ceremony (customary or religious), but never actually register a
marriage in Thailand with the local Amphur office (District Office). Therefore, as a practical matter Thai
same sex couples can maintain a domestic relationship in a manner similar to different sex couples who
choose not to legalize their union.
At the present time there does not appear to be any political movement to legalize same sex
marriage in Thailand. For those who wish to protect their same sex loved one, legal mechanisms such as
a Thai will can assist in providing legal benefits usually accorded to those in a different sex relationship.
LOCAL LITERATURE

According to Victoria Dizon Urieta on her thesis entitled "Perceptions of homosexuals

and other people" at the De LaSalle University, 1998, Homosexuality has been considered a deviant
behavior because of the fact that it is immoral and its lifestyle does not conform to society's standards.
Majority of the people in the Philippines are not used to the mindset of the homosexuals who are
pursuing the law towards the legalization of same-sex marriage because it is against the mores. In
addition to that Philippines is a Catholic country with strong beliefs on unity of man and woman as
stated in the bible.

On the article seen at the Philippine Star newspaper entitled "Same sex marriage issue paves way
for anti-discrimination bill" by Artemio Dumlao, In Baguio City ,Philippines – Christian groups led by
the Catholic Charismatic Christian Movement believes that the same sex marriage controversy is a
“grand design” by some sectors to push House Bill 1483 (Anti-Discrimination bill) filed by Bayan Muna
party-list Rep. Teodoro Casino. According to the group, the same sex unions officiated by the
Metropolitan Community Church (MCC) here on June 29 have been pitting family members against
each other, the opposing Catholic Church and other Christian groups versus the proponents and even
government officials caught in the controversy.

The critics of same sex unions have also gone beyond debates and discourse as the city council
here is poised to declare MCC’s Myke Sotero and two others who officiated the wedding as persona non
grata and is contemplating a case against them.
 In Vincent Cabreza’s column in Inquirer Northern Luzon, The fifth Baguio Gay Pride
celebration, which was led by homosexuals dressed as fairies and “Goddesses of Equality,” proceeded
on Sunday despite heavy and continuous rains.The parade honored the solemnization of the unions of
eight gay couples, who were “wed” by pastors of the Metropolitan Community Church at a local bar on
Saturday. Cyrene Reyes, one of the Baguio Pride Network organizers, said the parade also celebrated the
legalization of same-sex unions in New York, where the 1969 Stonewall riots were ignited by a standoff
between a gay community in Greenwich Village there and the New York police. The Stonewall incident
inspired the international gay rights movement, which fought for laws criminalizing gay discrimination
and which pushed co-habitation rights of same-sex couples. But a measure that would legalize same-sex
unions in the Philippines, as well as a law that would allow them to adopt children, “is farthest from our
minds at the moment,” said Bayan Muna Rep. Teodoro Casiño.
Casiño was here to draw support for House Bill No. 1483 (Anti-Discrimination Act of 2010), a
measure penalizing people who discriminate against homosexuals.
Casiño said HB 1483, if passed, would also make the state recognize other sexual orientations.
This bill is the third measure that proposes to update Philippine standards on sexuality and domestic
relationships, next to the more controversial Responsible Parenthood, Reproductive Health and
Population and Development Act of 2011 (HB 4244) and the Divorce Bill (HB 1799), according to
Casiño. He said the Catholic Church has described the confluence of these civil rights bills as an assault
on morality.“But there was no deliberate design to advocate all these bills at the same time in Congress,”
he said. “We only have three years [to promote civil rights legislation of this nature], and we are glad
when Congress finally discusses them on plenary, like the RH bill.” Casiño said activist lawmakers have
been competing with their colleagues, “and just seeing our bills selected for hearing by congressional
committees is already a thrill.”

There have been failed attempts to legislate laws on discrimination, reproductive health and
divorce, “but these ideas have generated a healthy public support this year,” which have prompted
Congress to address these concerns, Casiño said.These are relatively easier measures to pass, compared
to proposals for legitimizing same-sex unions, and laws allowing same-sex couples to adopt children
“which are too far beyond our [society’s] understanding.” He said the most important consequence of
pursuing these measures would be to widen the public constituency that believe in gay rights,
reproductive health and divorce for battered women as legitimate concerns.
Casiño said he would seek a congressional inquiry into hate crimes against gays uncovered by
the Philippine LGBT Crime Watch, an online organization linked by social networking site, Facebook.
He said the group claimed that 97 homosexuals have been murdered in the country since 1996. “These
reports are culled from news reports so we need to determine whether the murders are directed against
gay individuals,” he said.

In Philippine Daily Inquirer, Jocelyn R. Uy wrote that Catholic bishops wants government to
stop same sex marriage rites. “A wedding is a holy union of a male and a female. It must be solemnized
and registered with the civil registrar… those who got ‘married’ and who led the ceremony have mental
problems,” said Cenzon. He urged the national government to take the necessary steps against same-sex
marriages as they violated the Civil Code of the Philippines. “Even the Baguio local government is
condemning this kind of act,” added the bishop. According to Archbishop Emeritus Oscar Cruz,
homosexuals remain as integral members of the society who must be respected, but they must also
remember about the “inherent and intrinsic finalities of marriage.” “In the sphere of faith and morals,
homosexuals must be loved such as by pointing out and reminding them of the pertinent and existent
realities and truths,” said Cruz in a statement.
Cruz, judicial vicar of the National Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal, has emphasized that nature
itself has stipulated that marriage is between a man and a woman and the institution of marriage
provides them the standard possibility of procreation and upbringing of children. “The conclusion from
these observations is obvious: there can be no marriage between two individuals of the same sex, there
can be no sexual union between parties of the same sex and there can be no possibility of the birth of
children between two persons of the same sex,” he said. Cruz also warned that the sacredness of
 marriage, the values system and the family life of Filipinos would crumble if the country emulated other
nations permitting same-sex marriage and even divorce.

The bishops were reacting to the ceremony held to supposedly celebrate the unions of seven
lesbian partners at a local bar in Baguio City on Saturday. The ceremony, which also stirred the city’s
evangelical community, was led by pastors of the Metropolitan Community Church, a Christian church
ministering to homosexuals.

According to Ige Ramos of Philippine Daily Inquirer, in the Philippines, same-sex unions will
never be legalized as long as the political sector continues to allow itself to be influenced, not just by the
Church of Rome, but also by all Christian faiths. This was never more evident than during a recent
debate among presidential candidates, when all revealed their true colors by stating that they did not
fully approve of the long-delayed Reproductive Health bill. This I view not as a reflection of their
principles, but rather what they felt their fundamental Christian voters wanted to hear. And therein lies
the hypocrisy!

Consider also the moralistic stand taken by the Comelec when it initially refused to accept Ang
Ladlad as a legitimate political party, on the grounds that they spread? Immorality? One has to wonder
what those righteous people in the Comelec are so concerned about. Whether you consider it immoral or
not, homosexuality is not a chosen lifestyle. It cannot be passed on or inflicted upon others, nor is it like
some disease that can be contracted. To put it simply, you either are or you aren’t It is genetic and
nothing in this wide world will ever change that.

Acceptance, of course, is something else. It is an ironic fact that despite the various churches?
Continued and even obsessive, condemnation, homosexuality and indeed same sex partnerships are
generally accepted in our country. What is needed, however, is for the populace to stand up and be
counted by demanding that civil rights be granted to all, regardless of sexuality or faith. And hare’s a
thought; it’s just possible you may be fighting for the future rights of your own children.

SYNTHESIS

The present study talks about Catholic bishops who want government to stop same sex marriage
rites.

In Philippine Daily Inquirer, Jocelyn R. Uy wrote that Catholic bishops want government to stop
same sex marriage rites. “A wedding is a holy union of a male and a female. It must be solemnized and
registered with the civil registrar… those who got ‘married’ and who led the ceremony have mental
problems,” said Cenzon. He urged the national government to take the necessary steps against same-sex
marriages as they violated the Civil Code of the Philippines. “Even the Baguio local government is
condemning this kind of act,” added the bishop. According to Archbishop Emeritus Oscar Cruz,
homosexuals remain as integral members of the society who must be respected, but they must also
remember about the “inherent and intrinsic finalities of marriage.” “In the sphere of faith and morals,
homosexuals must be loved such as by pointing out and reminding them of the pertinent and existent
realities and truths,” said Cruz in a statement.

Philippines is a religion-oriented country, it is a common situation when the church make public
orders for the sake of Catholicism.
Same sex marriage is socially recognized marriage between two people of same sex. On the issue
of same sex marriage, of course, Catholic Church is not favor in it. They stand on the marriage or union
between man and woman.
 The church understands that homosexuals are also human and have feelings and need to be
respected but on their side, these homosexuals should also remember that they are Catholic and have the
responsibility to obey God’s will.
There are several debates on senate, news, and online. Same sex marriage shouldn’t be legalized
here in the Philippines not only for the fact that we are the dominant Catholic country in Asia but
because Filipinos valued marriage a lot and respect its meaning and its purpose in the cycle of life.
Furthermore Filipinos are applying in their culture the Christian virtues and that includes marriage.
Marriage is not something that relies on someone’s happiness or wishes. It is sacred and not immoral. In
our living society today, people respect other’s sexual preference but tying the knot to a same sex, we
are not ready for it.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT

 The demo profile of  Interview  The Perception to

student respondents. the Legalization of
 The government’s Same Sex Marriage
recognition on of the CITHM
student’s  Survey Students of Lyceum
perception. of the Philippines
University
 Analysis

Figure 1 Research Model

The first box shows that the subject title of the study which is The Percipience to the
Legalization of Same Sex Marriage of the CITHM Students of Lyceum of the Philippines University .

On the second box you will see that the researcher will conduct an interview, survey and analysis
in gathering data.

The third box shows the future output of the conducted research.

CHAPTER III

Methods of the Study

This chapter presents the research methodology, research design, research instrument, population
and sample frame, data gathering, and synthesis and statistical treatment used in the study.

RESEARCH DESIGN

The study investigates how CITHM students assess the legalization of same sex marriage, based
on their age, course, religion, sexual preferences and gender. For the study, the researchers employ the
descriptive method analysis. To define the descriptive type of research, Creswell (1994) stated that the
descriptive method of research is to gather information about the present existing condition. The
emphasis is on describing rather than on judging or interpreting. The aim of descriptive research is to
verify formulated hypotheses that refer to the present situation in order to elucidate it. Through this
method, the researchers will be able to gather information about the perception of CITHM students
regarding the legalization of this pond.

PARTICIPANTS OF THE STUDY

The total population of CITHM is 8,016 students, according to the registrar’s data. Our sample
formula is the Slovene’s Formula. A total of 100 respondents were asked to participate which was
advised by the thesis adviser due to lack of time. To achieve pertinent information, certain inclusion
criteria were imposed. The participants qualified for sample selection must be senior students of the
Lyceum of the Philippines University under the college of CITHM. This qualification ensured that the
participants have better understanding on the current issue of the legalization of same sex marriage,
making the survey items easy for them to accomplish. The study also aimed to determine whether they
agree or disagree with the issue of same sex marriage's legalization.

Simple random sampling was done for the sample selection. This sampling method is conducted
where each member of a population has an equal opportunity to become part of the sample. As all
members of the population have an equal chance of becoming a research participant, this is said to be
the most efficient sampling procedure. In order to conduct this sampling strategy, the researcher defined
the population first, listed down all the members of the population and then selected members to make
the sample.

INSTRUMENTATION

INSTRUMENT USED

To conduct the study, the researcher first made the draft of the questionnaire contain the
questions that would probably give vital information for this research. Questionnaires composed of
personal information and questions that would define the answers. The type of questionnaire used by the
researchers is the close or fixed alternative; on the other hand limit the respondents to choose among
specific alternatives. It was first validated by our thesis adviser to ensure the validity of each item
contained. Item analysis was done by the researchers. Initial testing was done on August 27, 2011,
Saturday. The result of initial testing found to be not enough for the final questionnaire that is why
another testing were conducted with the results of initial and second testing. Finally, the items for each
questionnaire were found to be enough items for final set of questionnaires.

VALIDATION OF INSTRUMENT

For the researchers to be able to test the validity of the instrument or evaluation tool used
in this study, they chose 5 respondents to answer the questionnaire. These respondents are not part of the
actual study process. After the questions have been answered, the researcher asked the respondents for
any suggestions or any necessary corrections to improve the instrument further. Based on the assessment
and suggestions of the sample respondents, the researchers then modified the content of the
questionnaire. The researchers excluded irrelevant questions and changed vague or difficult
terminologies into simpler ones so as to make the survey more comprehensive for the selected
respondents.

DATA GATHERING PROCEDURE

 After gathering all the completed questionnaires from the respondents, total responses for each
item were obtained and tabulated. In order to use the likerts-scale for interpretation, weighted mean to
represent each question was computed. Weighted mean is the average wherein every quantity to be
averages has a corresponding weight. These weights represent the significance of each quantity to the
average. To compute for the weighted mean, each value must be multiplied by its weight. Products
should then be added to obtain the total value. The total weight should also be computed by adding all
the weights. The total value is then divided by the total weight.

As this study required the participation of human respondents, specifically human resource
professionals, certain ethical issues were addressed. The consideration of these ethical issues was
necessary for the purpose of ensuring the privacy as well as the safety of the participants. Among the
significant ethical issues that were considered in the research process include consent and
confidentiality. In order to secure the consent of the selected participants, the researcher relayed all
important details of the study, including its aim and purpose. By explaining these important details, the
respondents were able to understand the importance of their role in the completion of the research. The
respondents were also advised that they could withdraw from the study even during the process. With
this, the participants were not forced to participate in the research. The confidentiality of the participants
was also ensured by not disclosing their names or personal information in the research. Only relevant
details that helped in answering the research questions were included.

Statistical Treatment Of Data

After the questionnaires will be answered, the profile of the respondents will be taken, according
to age, gender, course, religion, and sexual preference. To be able to get a description of the profile of
the respondents, the data coming from each item mentioned above will be placed in tabular form with
the indicated percentage as well as the frequency. This will show assessment of CITHM students on the
legalization of same-sex marriage.

The formulae that will be used in this study are:

1. Percentage
This was used as a descriptive manner to show the relationship between two magnitudes.
The formula for this is;

% = f x 100
N
Where:
% = the percentage
f = frequency
N = Total number of respondents

2. Weighted Mean

This is a statistical tool that refers to the over all average responses or perceptions of the
respondents.

WM = ∑ fx /N

Where:

WM = Weighted Mean

F= frequency

X=scale

∑ fx = Sum of the product of the frequency and the unit.

 N = Total number of respondents

Interpretation was based on the Likert’s Scale Method

Mean Value Scale Verbal Interpretation

4.50 – 5.00 5 STRONGLY AGREE
3.50 - 4.49 4 AGREE
2.50 – 3.49 3 NEUTRAL
1.50 – 2.49 2 DISAGREE
1.0 – 1.49 1 STRONGLY DISAGREE

3. Composite Weighted Mean

This is the average of the weighted means. The formula for composite weighted mean is:
CWM = ∑WM
N

Where:

CWM = Composite Weighted Mean ∑= Summation sign

WM = Weighted Mean

N = Total number of category in each factor

CHAPTER IV

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This part of the research presents the data gathered through the use of the research instrument, the
survey questionnaire. The presentation, analysis, and interpretation of the data follow the logical order of
the questionnaire. Presentation of the results from the respondents is done using appropriate presentation
techniques.

Table presentation of the results is use in this chapter in order to add clarity on presenting the
result. Numerical value, in percentage format is also used to support the interpretation. Data analysis is
also presented in this part of the study. Quantitative analysis is used to analyse the data through the use of
numerical values.

1. Demographic Profile of the Respondents

The following table shows how the respondents are distributed according to their age,
gender and nationality.

FIGURE 1.1

Distribution of the Respondents According to Age

 Figure 1.1 presents the
frequency and
percentage
distribution of the
respondents as to their
age among 100
respondents, 72 or
72% are ranges from
17-20 years old, 28 or
28% are ranges from
21-24 years old and 0
or 0% range from 25-
28 years old.

Based on the figure above, majority of the respondents are ranging from 17-20 years old while
the 21-24 years old bracket has the least number of respondents.

FIGURE 1.2

Distribution of Respondents According to Gender

Figure1. 2 presents the profile of respondents in terms of gender.. As revealed by the figure, 29 out
of 100 respondents are male and 71 of the respondents are female. This implies that majority of our
respondents are female.
 Figure 1.3

Distribution of Respondents According to Religion

Figure 1.3 shows that 83% or majority of the respondents’ religion is Roman Catholic. 9% or 9
respondents’ were Christians. 3 respondents’ are from Iglesia ni Kristo which represent the 3% of the
graph. 5% of the respondents came from other religion such as Pentecostal and Back to Christ.

Figure 1.4

Distribution of Respondents According to Course

 Figure 1.4 presents that 52 or 52% of the respondents are taking Bachelor of Science in Tourism,
25% or 25 of the respondents are taking Bachelor of Science in Cruise Line Management students and
23 or 23 % of the respondents are from Bachelor of Science in Hotel and Restaurant Management.

2. Factors that influence the Assessment of CITHM students towards the Legalization of Same
Sex Marriage in the Philippines

The following table shows the factors that influence the youth’s preference for
Legalization of Same Sex Marriage in the Philippines.

Table 2.1

Weighted Mean According to Morality

VERBAL
MORALITY MEAN VALUE
INTERPRETATION
a. It is against my
4.21 Agree
religious beliefs.
b. It is against the law of
4.43 Agree
God.

c. It is against the mores. 4.11 Agree

d. It is alongside other
sexual vices. 3.91 Agree

TOTAL 4.17 Agree

Table 2.1 presents how morality affects the respondents’ perception towards the Legalization of
Same Sex Marriage in the Philippines. With a mean value 4.21 the respondents agreed that same sex
marriage is against their religious beliefs and also having a mean value of 4.43 that it is against the law
of God indicates that majority of the respondents are religious and their beliefs in the teaching of the
church is strong.

They also agreed that legalizing of same sex marriage is against the mores and is alongside other
sexual vices, with a mean value of 4.11 and 3.91 for the latter. This means that the respondents’ thin k it
is wrong and not normal.

Table 2.2

Weighted Mean According to Acceptability

VERBAL
ACCEPTABILITY MEAN VALUE
INTERPRETATION
a. Homosexuals are
3.61 Agree
acceptable for me.
b. Having a same sex
relationship for me is 3.45 Neutral
completely immoral.

c. I support homosexual 2.31 Disagree

lifestyle and same sex
marriage.

d. Same sex marriage

should be legalized in the 2.32 Disagree
Philippines.

TOTAL 2.92 Neutral

Table 2.2 presents that acceptability of the respondents on the Legalization of same sex
Marriage. The respondents agreed that homosexuals are acceptable for them with a mean value of 3.61.
In our generation today, homosexuals are welcomed and accepted by our society already. The
discrimination among gay and lesbian people had lessened now days.

With a mean value of 3.45 the respondents answered neutral on the thought of same sex
relationship being immoral. They still could not decide whether being on a same sex relationship is right
or wrong.

However having a mean value of 2.31 the respondents disagreed that they support homosexual
lifestyle and same sex marriage and lastly they also disagree on legalizing same sex marriage. This
proves that majority of the respondents cannot accept the legalization of same sex marriage.

Table 2.3

Weighted Mean According to Expectations

VERBAL
EXPECTATIONS MEAN VALUE
INTERPRETATION
a. Same sex marriage
shows fairness and equality
2.65 Neutral
among people, especially
the third sexes.
b. Same sex marriage be 2.43 Disagree
given the same benefit that
normal marriage do.

c. Same sex marriage

improves people’s lives. 2.37 Disagree

d. Same sex marriage

creates better harmony in
the family than normal 2.23 Disagree
marriage.

TOTAL 2.42 Disagree

Table 2.3 presents the expectations of the respondents towards the legalization of same sex
marriage. The respondents answered neutral on same sex marriage shows fairness and equality among
people, especially the third sex with a mean value of 2.65. Based on the results the respondents are not
particularly clear on what base should equality be measured if were talking about homosexuals.

However, the respondents disagreed on same sex marriage be given the same benefits that
normal marriage have with a mean value of 2.43 and on Same sex marriage improves peoples’ lives
with a mean value of 2.37. The shows that the respondents still are not open on legalizing same sex
marriage in the Philippines.

Lastly, the respondents also disagreed that same sex marriage creates better harmony in the
family than normal marriage with a mean value of 2.23. They still believe normal marriage offers better
family life than that of same sex marriage gives.

Table 3.1

Rank of Measures

MEASURES MEAN VALUE RANK

a. Legalization of Same
Sex Marriage after 2 years 3.02 4
of living together..
b. Same sex marriage to
be allowed only for ages 2.36 2
21 and above

c. Marriage requirements 1.73 1

should include
authorization or consent
 from both family sides..

d. The government should

require 500,000 Php
marriage fee for the same
sex couple to get an 2.86 3
authorized marriage
contract.

Table 3.1 presents the ranking of the policies that the respondents thinks the most important if ever same
sex marriage be legalized in the Philippines. The top choice was marriage requirement should include
authorization or consent from both family sides to be able to show that everyone in their family agrees to their
marriage decision. Second policy thaw was chosen is that same sex marriage should only be allowed for
homosexuals who are twenty one years of age to ensure that they are not minors. Third most important policy
that was ranked by the respondents is that the government should require 500,000 pesos marriage fee for the
same sex couple to get an authorized marriage contract. And the weakest policy for the respondents was;
marriage between same sexes will only be genuine after two years of living together.

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the general statement of the research about the findings of the study and it
is in these findings that determine whether the objectives of the study have been answered.

CONCLUSION

The researchers come up with the following conclusions:

1. The demographic profile of the respondents

Majority of the respondents in this study are female with an age of 17-20 years old. It is safe to
say that the assessment on the legalization on same sex marriage are mostly dominated in the point of
view of females but still, this will not overlook the data gathered regarding the perception of the male
respondents in the study. And also nearly everyone of the respondents’ religion is Roman Catholic. The
largest parts of the respondents are students of Bachelor of Science in Tourism.

2. The perceptions of students towards the Legalization of Same Sex Marriage in the Philippines

2.1 Morality

Most of the respondents of this study believe that same sex marriage is against their religious
beliefs and it is against the law of God. It is very much understandable since Philippines is a very
religious country with 80% of its population belonging to the Roman Catholic Church thus
religion holding a central place in the life of most Filipinos. The respondents also consider that same
sex marriage is against the mores and it is alongside other sexual vices.
 2.2 Acceptability

Majority of the respondents agrees that homosexuals are acceptable for them. But most of the
student respondents cannot decide whether same sex relationship is immoral or not, and are neutral
in supporting the homosexuals’ lifestyle and same sex marriage. Most of the respondents strongly
disagreed in legalizing the same sex marriage in the Philippines.

2.3 Expectations

The large number of respondents cannot decide or cannot weigh their answer if same sex
marriage shows fairness and equality among people, especially the third sexes. They also cannot
decide whether same sex marriage should be given the same benefits as normal marriage have. In
addition, they cannot decide whether same sex marriage improves people’s lives. But in the later
part, most of them strongly agreed that same sex marriage creates better harmony in the family than
normal marriage.

3. The policies and programs that the government can undertake on the Legalization of Same Sex
Marriage

We have concluded that the if ever the Legalization of same sex marriage be approved in the
Philippines, their first priority for the requirements to those who are in a same sex relationship that
wants to get married is that they should have consent or authorization on both family sides. Secondly
is that both gay people should b of the age 21 years old and above so that the government is rest
assured that the people involved are mature enough and are of their proper mind to make the
decision. The government should also require 500,000 Php marriage fee for the same sex couple to
get an authorized marriage contract. And lastly Legalization of Same Sex Marriage should only be
given after 2 years of living together, by doing so they will be sure if their marriage can last long or
if they are really compatible with each other.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the findings and conclusions of the study, the following recommendations are proposed
by the researchers:

If the legalization of same sex marriage were to be approved by the government, the following
recommendations were to be presented:

1. Information Drive

Based on the study, majority of the respondents disagreed with the legalization of same sex
marriage. In order for the people to not rally or be against this anymore, information drive is the
solution. Through this, they will be educated and made understood on the advantages of legalizing same
sex marriage in the Philippines like this shows equality to people.