SOGIE Bill: Tool for Social Integration or Source of Christian Discrimination?

by Ronald R. Cruda – Christian Ethics 3 (Special Class)

Introduction

Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity and Expression (SOGIE) BILL has recently
captured the attention of the entire country. While it has been filed and deliberated in the
Philippine Congress for quite sometime, the interest of the people on this bill spiked having
been triggered by an isolated incident regarding an alleged discrimination of a “male
transgender” who was denied to use a comfort room designed for women on a particular
shopping mall. Cause-oriented groups advocating for the passage of the said bill capitalized
on the incident as a means to thwart the alleged discrimination of the LGBT community in
our present society and pushed to establish the ripeness and propriety of passing the bill
into law.
From the public discourses made by the authors and sponsors of SOGIE, it can be
deduced that for a society to espouse freedom of expression and attain true equality, every
individual should be afforded with liberality to decide their identity which include gender
and sexual orientation. Along with this recognition, it imposes to the government necessary
support to further the promotion of equality, acceptance, and integration of these select
individuals to the mainstream society should SOGIE be part of the law of the land. It is the
premise of these advocates that time has change and social values and morality should go
along with current realities and social behaviors. Clearly, the passage of the SOGIE bill will
redefine and provide that gender is not a biological or a natural occurrence but has to
become a matter of choice of the individual. Such integration in our statutes henceforth
manifests the intention of the people to depart from the dogmatic definition of gender to a
more dynamic and “inclusive” manner. Should this bill comes to fruition, the people
through their respective lawmakers will ultimately define sexual orientation and gender in
accord to the demands of societal and cultural norms.

Main Arguments

1. The voice of the people is the voice of God. (Vox Populi, Vox Dei)
On the event that SOGIE bill shall pass into law, there is a valid assumption that the
people find such law as the best policy that our society should tread to go forward. It is
therefore logical to presume that the law promulgated by the people is also the will of God.

1
This presumption however calls for a thorough inspection and review as there can be
fallacies involved in arriving such a conclusion.
“Vox Populi, Vox Dei” is a rather popular statement often used to justify that a
decision made by the majority or unanimously by the people also reflects the will of God.
The application of such statement can oftentimes be abused when it is applied to any issue
in a different context coupled with the lack of proper discernment. This often happens
when it is purposely used to justify a decision rather than being used as a parameter to
arrive at a justified conclusion.
To my mind, the statement “Vox Populi, Vox Dei” applies only to situations when
there is uncertainty, doubt and insufficiency of express instruction from ethical standards
espoused by the word of God. Absence of such instruction shall mean that God gives the
option to the people to choose out of their conscience and based on relevant teachings in
the Scriptures. However, there are matters which from the start of creation are fixed and
governed by natural law. These matters have been established as the core of humanity and
cannot be amended nor changed in any manner, form or expression.
Sex and sexual orientation are from the start is strictly based on the biological
differences between males and females and is set by nature. In the story of creation, God
made man and woman and nothing in between. Sex is defined by genetics and even an
intentional mutilation of a person’s genitalia in any form does not alter the true nature of
one’s sex. Physical attributes are only superficial manifestations of gender but what is more
telling is the principal and not the accessory. The person will still be identified and will
remain by the sex that nature had provided. In retrospect, no matter how or what people
may do, when it is very clear that God expressly defines the subject or issue, it can not be
subject to any discussion because it is considered as the fundamental law on the matter.
Hence, to suggest that the passage of SOGIE bill provided that it is the will of the
majority also translates to the desire of God for its people is a gross falsity mainly because
there are laws in the scriptures and nature that evidently limits or contravenes to that
notion.

2. The need of SOGIE Bill to pursue social integration and enhance inclusiveness.
The purpose of legislative acts and laws are to ensure the general welfare of the
public. It is to maintain order in the midst of chaos and to afford every sector of society
protection, liberty and ample environment to grow. Along this line however, laws are
designed to some extent in regulating acts and certain expressions in order to protect the
rights of others. Simply put, the exercise of one’s person rights end when such exercise will
step on the rights of others.

2
 It is in the context of the regulation of the exercise of rights where SOGIE law may
instead of paving the way for LGBT’s social integration may result to resistance from the
general population. When extending special rights to the LGBT community, there are
numerous basic societal norms that has to be and will be challenged. To say the least,
pandoras box will be opened and permutation of different conditions may arise when
another set of norms will be enforced. The LGBT members may enjoy new rights in their
favor but some if not most members of the other sectors of society may in turn be
discriminated much less oppressed.
The natural law of having only male and female as a classification of sex does not
discriminate the LGBT community nevertheless, it only imposes certain limitations to
promote morality, decency and a just social order. Such limitations are similar to other
norms which also impose distinct limitations to pursue order, harmony and understanding
in a very diverse social background. To single out LGBT rights as superior to the rights of
the general population is in effect discriminatory to everyone which cultural practices,
religious affiliations and beliefs are not in consonance to the LGBT’s claims. Hence, the
purpose of having a SOGIE law in order to effectuate the integration of LGBT in the society
is defeated by the fact that it would only build walls instead of harmony. To put premium
on the rights and privileges of a certain segment of society would likely lead to chaos and
further misunderstanding. Thus, it is a fallacy to state that the proposed bill will help to put
the order of things in a better position.

3. Christian ethics on the issue of discrimination.

It is the contention of SOGIE advocates that the passage of the bill into law is
railroaded by the church, the clergy and other religious institutions mainly because the
Philippines is a Christian country. The advocates claim that Christians are somewhat
inconsistent on their message of love, acceptance, forgiveness and inclusiveness in the
subject related to the LGBT Community. It pointed out that not to allow an individual to
choose his/her own sexual identity in the context of religion is a form of discrimination to
him/her as a being also equally created by God. Because God allowed the person to feel the
way of the opposite sex, then God being an all-understanding God will look through the
individual holistically and not superficially. That being a creation of God, they have all the
right to be accepted of their person and the church and the religious can not deny
acceptance of their existence.
These claims of discrimination are anchored on the premise that individuals have an
infinite freedom of choosing their sexual identities in disregard of the basic tenets of
Christianity. That God’s kindness and encompassing forgiveness overwhelms the
transgression of changing one’s sexuality in contrary to their physical nature. In addition,
the act of the Church and Christians to discriminate members of the LGBT is unjustified or

3
“unchristian-like” since instead of welcoming them to the fold, they are allegedly treated as
outcast.
To say that it is imbued in Christian Ethics to discriminate members of the LGBT
community is completely untenable. To teach people not to fall on the temptation of
identifying oneself to the sex other than what nature has provided is not per se
“discrimination” but a form of guidance to the rightful path. Christians as shepherds of their
fellow being are called to preach what is right or wrong. By purely expressing and
enforcing natural law and sharing the teaching of the Holy Scriptures, the LGBT is rather
embraced by the Christian community. This show of love means to encourage and enjoin
them to control their earthly urges and not fall out of the grace of God. The ethical
standards practiced by Christians is not to discriminate but to remind everybody that God
tends to his flock by not letting anyone to go astray. If Christians will not be proactive to
address significant issues such as sexual and gender identity, it would be a remiss to their
responsibility of preaching the word of God. In the book of Genesis, Christians are called to
be stewards of God’s creation. To be an effective steward, it is not always tolerance that
shows love and compassion but more importantly it is through discipline and deep
understanding of our faith that the love of God is best manifested.

4. Unconstitutionality of the SOGIE Bill

Congress may pass the SOGIE Bill into law but still a question of its constitutionality
may be invoked. The Philippine Constitution, Family Code, Civil Code, and other statutes
have expressly provided that only male and female are recognized sex and gender in the
country. In addition, a person is not allowed to change sex because he/she wanted to or
he/she has been surgically operated as provided in several jurisprudences. Clearly, the
SOGIE Bill is constitutionally infirm and that the framers of the constitution have in their
minds to prohibit any change of sex or sexual orientation as a choice of an individual. It is
the intention of the state to leave not to the decision of any individual the choice of sex as it
may erode the norms and morality of the society in consideration to the predominantly
Christian population of the country.

Conclusion
To answer the question whether SOGIE Bill is a tool for social integration, it is in the
contrary as discussed above. While it may give more freedom to the LGBT community and
foster the feeling of inclusiveness towards their end, it may however alienate other sectors
of society and will result to more discord as to the harmony among different social strata.
To break the status quo and introduce controversial and generally unacceptable norms
may even result to chaos and may even redefine our values. The revision of the society’s

4
ethical standards thereby pause a risk to completely erode the established sense of
morality.
On the issue whether Christian ethics promote discrimination to the LGBT
community is unfounded. The claim that the SOGIE Bill being inconsistent with Christian
ethical standards is enough proof of the presence of discrimination is irrelevant in the
context of Christian stewardship. It is accepted that indeed the SOGIE Bill runs counter to
the teachings of Christ but the notion of non-acceptance is not geared to discriminate but to
shepherd the lost and the weary. To be passive on the subject will further reject the LGBT
community to their downfall. The opposition of the SOGIE bill is in fact borne out of love
and compassion to those who are confused as to their gender and sexual orientation.
Hence, it is for the purpose of providing spiritual guidance to those who seek the truth and
for the hope that every person shall conform to the word of God that SOGIE bill should be
rejected.