OPINION] Future challenges of our foreign policy

The government needs to listen to our people. China needs to hear from our people.

-Albert del Rosario

(Former foreign secretary Albert del Rosario delivered the following remarks at the ADR Institute on
December 7, 2018.)

As we contemplate what is happening around us, we find ourselves being bombarded every day with
news and images of a world seemingly out of control. There seems to be across the board disruptions in
so many fields at the same time. Long stable countries have disintegrated internally. Old alliances are
being called into question. A large-scale trade war is unfolding between major economic powers.

These trends raise both troubling and obscure questions. Are we on the verge of another nuclear arms
race cycle? How will we fare in the struggle for global economic dominance among some of our closest
foreign trade and investment partners? What must we do to manage the inevitable onslaught of the
results of the new wave of artificial intelligence captured in the Fourth Industrial Revolution? Is it
possible to have better global migration governance with hundreds of millions of our people on the
move, involving millions of our own OFWs?

It is easy to be overwhelmed. One of the distinctive features of our present times is growing uncertainty.
It would not be too much of an exaggeration to say that we are at the dawn of an Age of Uncertainty.
The comfortable policy certainties of the past have evaporated. We can no longer rely exclusively on
historical lessons.

With the daunting challenges to our foreign policy, our prime objective is to assert our rightful place in
the community of nations. It starts and must end with the global observance of the rule of law.

On an independent foreign policy

To pursue an independent foreign policy should not be a zero sum game. It is not a simple choice
between war or peace but about initiating new friendships and strengthening old ones in the spirit of
sovereign equality.

It is of utmost importance that we should stand strong in being able to

deliver the main pillars of foreign affairs:

First is National Security. The Philippines has to be able to ensure its

territorial integrity and independence as a nation-state. Its integrity as
a state can and has been threatened externally and internally.
Sovereignty is the touchstone of our actions, whether in defense of our
maritime territory, or to protect against domestic terrorists,
separatists and insurgents.

Second is enhancing Economic Diplomacy. The Philippines is a

developing nation with a growing population in Southeast Asia.
Whereas in earlier years, Southeast Asia had been beset by conflict
and instability, it is now known as the home of ASEAN, the fastest
growing region in the world.
As a developing nation, the primordial concern for us is to promote
inclusive growth, expand decent employment, improve technological
capabilities and elevate the general standard of living of the people.
This can best be done through improving the country’s
competitiveness in the context of a policy of economic openness and
regional integration.

But, in pursuing economic growth, we should not put all our eggs in one basket. We need all the help we
can get; and we need all the partners we can find.

Third is preserving the rights of our overseas Filipino workers. The total number of international migrants
in the world is estimated at some 280 million people. The Philippines accounts for only about 10 million
of those, but these have been vital for the economic well-being for our country. Hence, there must be
continuing emphasis in Philippine foreign policy on protecting the rights and welfare of migrant Filipinos
and, by extension, its profound interest in securing bilateral, regional and international migration
governance cooperation.

It is believed that there is now a cold war between the US and China
encompassing not only trade and cyber but also a renewed build-up of
military capabilities.

We have to encourage dialogue and trust-building among the major

powers to shield our region from their rivalry. This can be done by
providing venues to reinforce our areas of common interest in stability,
security and interchange. It is in this context that the Philippines
needs also to maintain our external security links with the United
States, our only mutual defense treaty ally, and with like-minded
countries such as Japan and Australia.

Keeping our defense ties strong is not taking sides. It is a conservative

position conducive to stability. It is important for us that a regional
security balance be maintained and that we avoid the unexpected. The
status quo need not be static, but a dynamic balance is needed to
account for everyone’s strategic concerns.

At any rate, the three pillars of our foreign policy – national security, economic development, protection
of Filipinos overseas – are covered at different angles in our multilateral agenda centered on the UN
system. National security, broadly speaking, is covered by the UN’s efforts in nuclear disarmament, other
arms control, counter-terrorism, counter-illegal narcotics and prevention of other transnational crimes.

In addition, the Philippines must continue its involvement in the United Nations system both in
established and new areas for cooperation, such as closing the digital divide and managing the so-called
Fourth Industrial Revolution. The purpose of this is to keep abreast of developments, to have a say in the
global governance of these issues and to tap fresh sources of knowledge, expertise, capacity building,
and assistance from the UN’s technical agencies.

On the need for governments to listen to their people

Before ending, allow me to revisit the subject of the South China Sea. I would like to share with you
some very interesting findings published by my good friend Mahar Mangahas in his column over the
weekend. His article reported the findings of a survey held early this November by the University of
Hong Kong’s Public Opinion Program (HKUPOP) led by Dr Robert Chung, a globally respected pollster.
There were 1,000 respondents in the study.
To quote the main heading of the report, “Most Hong Kong people hope to see different governments
follow the opinion of the people in settling the South China Sea disputes.”

The survey found that, of those who are aware of the issue, 58% of them considered it important for a
government to follow its people’s opinion in settling the South China Sea disputes.

In closing

For us Filipinos, this punctuates a growing clamor for government to listen. Accordingly, there was a
recent SWS survey that nearly 9 out 10 Filipinos are asking for government to assert the tribunal
outcome.

The voice of the Filipino people is becoming stronger and clearer.

The government needs to listen to our people.

China needs to hear from our people.

The community of nations needs to hear the Filipino speaking with one voice.

At day’s end, we need to adhere to the rule of law and stand for what is right.

In closing, amid most difficult challenges facing the new Secretary of Foreign Affairs, we respectfully
proffer to him our highest level of confidence that his leadership will result in the significant
advancement of our national interest among the nations of the world. – Rappler.com

he Philippines’ “Pivot” to China: A Review of Perspectives

by Edcel John A. Ibarra

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte surprised some observers when

he announced during a state visit to China in October 2016 that he has
“separated” from the US to be “dependent” on China “for a long time.”
Considering the rather bellicose tone of the previous administration
toward China, why is Philippines suddenly making a foreign policy shift
or “pivot” to China?

Foreign policy decision-making on the “pivot”

Focusing on the president as the decision-

maker, some analysts believe that Duterte is a rational actor who
understands realism and geo-strategy. Moving away from the US would
allow the Philippines to forge security partnerships with other centers
of power in a multipolar world. It would also help the Philippines avoid
becoming a collateral damage following an intensified China-US rivalry
in the South China Sea.

The US, albeit a treaty ally, has failed to give an unequivocal

assurance that it will back the Philippines in the event of a conflict
with China, especially in the wake of the 2012 Scarborough Shoal
standoff. American hesitation has been apparent in other instances
abroad, such as when it retreated from its red line in Syria; seemingly
grounded the pivot to Asia to a halt because of issues in Ukraine, Iran,
and the Islamic State; and showed low commitment to the Trans-
Pacific Partnership. On the economic front, the US has also been
largely inactive in the global infrastructure market, a sector where
China now presents itself as a key investor. China has already
demonstrated a capacity to accomplish major infrastructure projects,
like those in Africa and Central Asia. Duterte also realizes that the
Philippines cannot rely on ASEAN for diplomatic support on the South
China Sea issue.

In sum, therefore, China’s economic offerings present an acceptable

alternative to US reluctance in both security and economic matters
and to ASEAN’s fragmented support, thus prompting the “pivot.” In
doing so, the Philippines would simply be mirroring the careful
balancing the other Southeast Asian countries have long been doing
with the two great powers.

In contrast, other analysts argue that the president is acting on

bounded rationality, that is, limited understanding and inadequate
information. The geopolitical situation between China and the
Philippines has not changed: asymmetry remains in terms of military
and economic capabilities, and China still maintains artificial islands
in the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone. In fact, with the “pivot,”
China could get all it had wanted from the Philippines post-arbitration:
lack of hype on the ruling, possible reduction of joint patrols in the
EEZ, return to bilateral negotiations in managing the disputes, and
distance from the US.

These could, in turn, eliminate Philippine leverage against China. Even

considering economic relations, data from the Philippine Statistics
Authority shows that China is only the Philippines’ second largest
trading partner. Meanwhile, Japan, the US, and Singapore, which are
Philippines’ first, third, and fourth largest trading partners, are keen to
counterbalance an aggressively rising China. The same data reveals
that only about 10% of Philippine exports goes to mainland China (a
larger percentage goes to Hong Kong), while about 43% goes to Japan,
the US, and Singapore. Moreover, only around 16% of Philippine imports
come from China, while nearly half come from the US and its allies.

With regard to socio-cultural ties, most Filipinos in China are in Hong

Kong rather than in the mainland. As of June 2015, according to data
from the Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs, there are around
1,998 Filipinos in mainland China and 198,794 in Hong Kong. Moreover,
based on a Pulse Asia survey report, most Filipinos remain largely pro-
US and wary of China. Finally, on defense, the Armed Forces of the
Philippines have more extensive working experience with their US
counterparts than with their Chinese peers.

Like the “pivot” to China, the simultaneous shift to Russia may also
seem odd because the Eurasian great power accounts for less than 1%
of the Philippines’ total trade and is a statistically insignificant source
of foreign investment.
Meanwhile, another group of analysts emphasizes the president’s anti-
neocolonial ideology and domestically-oriented thinking. Duterte grew
up with a worldview blaming the US for a colonial legacy that brought
the Philippines many of its problems today and for continued covert
control over the country. The “pivot” would simply realize a desire to
be independent; therefore, it is more appropriately a “pivot away from
the US” than a “pivot to China.” Indeed, the simultaneous shift to
Russia would make sense as a component of a broader movement
away from the US.

In addition, Duterte’s background as a city mayor figures in his agenda

as president, with domestic issues, particularly communist and
separatist insurgencies and drug trafficking (which had been prevalent
in his home city, Davao), placing in higher priority than foreign policy
concerns that can tend to be abstract (like China’s unlawful
infringements of the Philippines’ maritime rights). Thus, the president
has also reoriented national defense away from maritime security
toward counterterrorism and anti–illegal drugs. Specifically, China’s
support on Duterte’s flagship war on drugs, which the US cannot
match because of its stance on human rights, makes the “pivot” more
attractive. This domestic orientation does not mean that Duterte is
indifferent to the South China Sea issue, but that he is mostly
interested in functional cooperation with China, especially the
utilization of fisheries and oil and gas resources.

Conclusion

There is seemingly no consensus on the Philippines’ foreign policy

shift to China. Analysts disagree on whether the “pivot,” essentially a
revitalization of relations with China, is an approach to manage the
South China Sea disputes or a means to become independent from the
US, or both. Some analysts take the official line of an independent
foreign policy as a signal that the motive is really to distance away
from the US. But for other analysts, the timing of the move – just three
months after the Philippines won a UN Convention on the Law of the
Sea arbitration case against China in July 2017 – suggests a
connection to the South China Sea disputes.

The differing perspectives may be pinned on one question: What

problem does the “pivot” intend to address? As in all rational
policymaking, the issues that the policy addresses and the outcome
that it wants to achieve must be clear. This is important to ensure that
the policy is understood by those who will execute it and to facilitate
policy monitoring and evaluation. Going through rational policymaking
is admittedly demanding, but it is necessary to determine if the “pivot”
is indeed the Philippines’ best option to pursue its national interests.

Philippine Initiatives to Address

Environmental Issues
One of the earliest notable recognition by the Philippine government of the importance of
sustainable development taking into consideration the environment was set out in the 1987
Constitution which stipulates that “The State shall protect and advance the right of the
people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of
nature.”
In 1991, the Philippines began to address the issue of climate change in its thrust to achieve
sustainable development with the formulation of the Philippine Strategy for Sustainable
Development. As a result, the country officially adopted the Philippine Agenda
21 which serves asthe nation's blueprint for sustainable development. During the same
year, government agencies and the Philippine Network on Climate Change were convened to
create the Inter-Agency Committee on Climate Change (IACCC) led by the Environmental
Management Bureau of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). The
Committee aimed at harnessing and synergizing the various activities undertaken by the
national government and civil society in response to the crisis posed by growing problem on
climate change.
The Philippine commitment to address global environmental issues was further manifested
by its support to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC) ratified on August 2, 1994 and the Kyoto Protocol, which was ratified on
November 20, 2003. As a signatory to the UNFCCC, the Philippines expressed adherence to
the principles of sustainable development and environmental preservation based on the
notion of equity and the unique capabilities of the participating countries. Article 3 of the
Convention states that states who have aligned themselves with the mandates set forth
“should protect the climate system for the benefit of present and future generations of
humankind, on the basis of equity and in accordance with their common but differentiated
responsibilities and respective capabilities.” In 2000, the Philippines forwarded to th
UNFCCC its Initial National Communication which enumerated the accomplishments of the country in
meeting the objectives of the Convention. The report presented the gains made in the fields of
greenhouse gas abatement and inventory. Also noted were significant achievements in strengthening
institutions and processes in relation to the mitigation, prevention and adaptation initiatives in the
country. Further, in adherence to the Kyoto Protocol, the Philippines adopted the Clean Development
Mechanism.

Also, the Philippines passed and implemented national measures that advance the international
community’s agenda pertaining to environmental preservation. Some of the major legislations enacted
were R.A. 8749 (Clean Air Act of 1999) that moves for an effective air quality management program that
will mitigate the worsening problem of air pollution in the country, R.A. 8435 (Agriculture and Fisheries
Modernization Act of 1997) that establishes that the Department of Agriculture together with other
appropriate agencies, should into account climate change, weather disturbances and annual productivity
cycles in order to forecast and formulate appropriate agricultural and fisheries programs, R.A. 9003
(Solid Waste Management Act of 2000) that aimed at providing a comprehensive solution to the
country’s garbage problem and R.A. 9275 (Philippine Clean Water Act of 2004) that moves for a
comprehensive water quality management scheme.

In 2007, Administrative Order 171 was issued to create a Presidential Task Force on Climate Change
(PTFCC). The task force is mandated to address and mitigate the impact of climate change in the
Philippines, paying special attention to adaptation, mitigation and technological solutions. In particular,
the task force focuses on improving compliance to air emission standards and acts tocombat
deforestation and environmental degradation.

More recently, R.A. 9729 (Climate Change Act of 2009) which aims to systematically integrate the
concept of climate change in the policy formulation and development plans of all government agencies
and units, to the end that the government will be prepared for the impact of climate change was
enacted also creating the Philippine Climate Change Commission (PCCC).

The PCCC, an independent and autonomous body attached to the Office of the President, shall be the
sole policy making body of the government to coordinate, monitor and evaluate the programs and action
plans relating to climate change. The PCCC has drafted the National Framework Strategy on Climate
Change 2010-2022 which is committed towards ensuring and strengthening the adaptation of our
natural ecosystems and human communities to climate change.

Global Issues: Gender Equality and Women’s Empowerment

You are here

Home Educators Educator Resources

RESOURCE TYPES

Article

RESOURCE TOPICS

Women & Gender

RELATED MATERIALS

Income-generating activities for women artisans in Peru

Strengthening the Collective Power of Female Leadership

The Budala Women's Group is on a mission to economically empower one another

SHARE THIS PAGE

Gender equality is a human right, but our world faces a persistent gap in access to opportunities and
decision-making power for women and men.

Globally, women have fewer opportunities for economic participation than men, less access to basic and
higher education, greater health and safety risks, and less political representation.

Guaranteeing the rights of women and giving them opportunities to reach their full potential is critical
not only for attaining gender equality, but also for meeting a wide range of international development
goals. Empowered women and girls contribute to the health and productivity of their families,
communities, and countries, creating a ripple effect that benefits everyone.

The word gender describes the socially-constructed roles and responsibilities that societies consider
appropriate for men and women. (Source) Gender equality means that men and women have equal
power and equal opportunities for financial independence, education, and personal development.
(Source) Women's empowerment is a critical aspect of achieving gender equality. It includes increasing a
woman's sense of self-worth, her decision-making power, her access to opportunities and resources, her
power and control over her own life inside and outside the home, and her ability to effect change.
(Source) Yet gender issues are not focused on women alone, but on the relationship between men and
women in society. (Source) The actions and attitudes of men and boys play an essential role in achieving
gender equality. (Source)

Education is a key area of focus. Although the world is making progress in achieving gender parity in
education, girls still make up a higher percentage of out-of-school children than boys. (Source)
Approximately one quarter of girls in the developing world do not attend school. Typically, families with
limited means who cannot afford costs such as school fees, uniforms, and supplies for all of their
children will prioritize education for their sons. (Source) Families may also rely on girls' labor for
household chores, carrying water, and childcare, leaving limited time for schooling. But prioritizing girls'
education provides perhaps the single highest return on investment in the developing world. An
educated girl is more likely to postpone marriage, raise a smaller family, have healthier children, and
send her own children to school. She has more opportunities to earn an income and to participate in
political processes, and she is less likely to become infected with HIV.

Women's health and safety is another important area. HIV/AIDS is becoming an increasingly impactful
issue for women. (Source) This can be related to women having fewer opportunities for health
education, unequal power in sexual partnership, or as a result of gender-based violence. Maternal health
is also an issue of specific concern. In many countries, women have limited access to prenatal and infant
care, and are more likely to experience complications during pregnancy and childbirth. This is a critical
concern in countries where girls marry and have children before they are ready; often well before the
age of 18. (Source) Quality maternal health care can provide an important entry point for information
and services that empower mothers as informed decision-makers concerning their own health and the
health of their children.

A final area of focus in attaining gender equality is women's economic and political empowerment.
Though women comprise more than 50% of the world's population, they only own 1% of the world's
wealth. (Source) Throughout the world, women and girls perform long hours of unpaid domestic work.
In some places, women still lack rights to own land or to inherit property, obtain access to credit, earn
income, or to move up in their workplace, free from job discrimination. (Source) At all levels, including at
home and in the public arena, women are widely underrepresented as decision-makers. In legislatures
around the world, women are outnumbered 4 to 1, yet women's political participation is crucial for
achieving gender equality and genuine democracy. (Source)

The World Economic Forum recently ranked the United States as 19th in the world on its gender gap
index. (Source) With women comprising less than one fifth of elected members of Congress, the report
identifies political empowerment as the greatest gender equity issue for the United States. The U.S.
ranked higher in economic empowerment, but women's earning power remains approximately 20%
lower than men's. (Source) Women in the United States have a very high ranking of educational
attainment, though, with high levels of literacy and enrollment in primary, secondary, and university
education. At present, there are more U.S. women attending college than men. (Source)

Globally, no country has fully attained gender equality.(Source) Scandinavian countries like Iceland,
Norway, Finland, and Sweden lead the world in their progress toward closing the gender gap.(Source) In
these countries, there is relatively equitable distribution of available income, resources, and
opportunities for men and women. The greatest gender gaps are identified primarily in the Middle East,
Africa, and South Asia. However, a number of countries in these regions, including Lesotho, South Africa,
and Sri Lanka outrank the United States in gender equality.(Source)

Around the world, Peace Corps Volunteers are working with communities to address gender equality and
empower women and girls. In 1974, Congress signed the Percy Amendment requiring Peace Corps
Volunteers to actively integrate women into the economic, political, and social development of their
countries. (Source) Many Peace Corps Volunteers implement the Camp GLOW program, or Girls Leading
Our World, to help girls develop self-esteem and leadership skills. Recognizing that men and boys must
be equal partners in achieving gender equality, Volunteers also teach leadership and life skills to boys
through Teaching Our Boys Excellence (TOBE) camps. Peace Corps Volunteers promote gender equality
and women's empowerment through health education, business development, and by raising awareness
of women's rights and contributions to their communities. Learn more about how Peace Corps
Volunteers are working with communities by visiting the Paul D. Coverdell World Wise Schools resources.

Are you in favor of (yes) or against (no) gay marriage?

Love is love and not your business Two people love each other, Two consenting adults want to get
married. Who are you and your opinions to say otherwise? So what if your religion doesn’t agree with
it. It’s none of your business. Not at all. Imagine not being able to marry your spouse because some
religious bigoted doesn’t want you to. It isn’t fair and it makes no sense.

RELIGION HAS NO PLACE IN POLITICA

Report Post

LikeReply00

Rescpect Church Holliness In a world dominated by humans we do not know what are the boundaries.
Being one of the LGBT, I am not into it, because as a person (not a human) I have to respect the
sanctity of marriage, wherein the holliness of the church has something to do with men is always for a
woman and woman is always for a man. But this is not the closure of one thing, that Love should
always be our first thing to remember ib everything we do. We were born not to be perfect but to be
true.

Report Post

LikeReply00

We are born to be true not to be perfect The bible content stating too that what you feel inside you
should bear it outside, So as a Gay we are just bearing what we feel inside to become a happy
individual to be a GAY!! And we want to be with the same Sex in the rest of our life to be with, as a
PARTNER

I'm a full blooded Roman Catholic, Is it Sin to love and to be loved in return?? We are born to be true
not to be perfect

Report Post

LikeReply00

Putin has the answer. Due as putin↓ ↓ ↓ ↓

Due to possibility that gays are born, make legal marriage ok. As long as people don't hurt others,
forcing other people how to live is wrong. Chruch is never gonna marry gays eitherway, because clasify
them as having a condition. Instead of discussing we should do more science and understand better
the brain and know if ppl can be born gay.

Due to possibility that gays are made tho, ban Gay propaganda like putin, because it is the same as
promoting human extinction. (gays dont have kids)

Report Post

LikeReply00

You only live once. Live to the fullest! Just like us, gays are humans too. We all deserve to be happy.
And I think there is nothing wrong with gay marriage. If that makes them happy then let them be. At
least they are not like any other people out there whose the scourge of the society! And mind you,
gays are very productive! So let us not be against them and treat each other equally :)

Report Post

LikeReply00

Why should it be banned for us to marry someone we love? Finding love is hard for a lot of people, yet
you are denying two people in love the right to be married? If your religion does not like it, then don't
marry someone of the same gender. But do not EVER use your religion to prevent someone else from
doing something they want to do. Marriage does not mean that you have to have children. There are
many heterosexual couples that cannot have children either. It isn't that you MUST support it. Just
don't ban it. It is banning love. Love is an emotion no one can live without. And just because I support
gay marriage does not mean that I am gay. Equal rights. I support equal rights and gay marriage comes
under our equal rights.

Posted by: ayounggirlReport Post

LikeReplyChallenge00

Yes, I'm in favor of gay marriage. I'm in favor of gay marriage because I don't believe sexual orientation
matters in a civil marriage. Most negatives seem to be religion-based,and religion should never play a
part in government decisions. I don't believe we have any right to deny a couple the rights that are
given to a married couple.

Report Post

LikeReply00

Let em go I think that there is nothing wrong with a person getting married to who ever they want to
spend their life with, whether it be the same sex or not. I think that they need to be able to get
married and I need to always be able to keep my guns.

Report Post
LikeReply00

I don't think the gov should be involved in marriage at all When my wife and I got marred, we had a
grate wedding at the Catholic church, we also got a peace of paper from the gov saying we were
marred . Guess which one we cared about? The impertinent commitment you make is to your wife
and o your God. Let everyone have a civil union and than do what you want according to your beliefs.

Posted by: RytheGuyReport Post

LikeReplyChallenge00

Who are you to tell them how to live there lives? Who are you to tell people they can't marry those
they love? They are people, and you are restricting their rights by saying they cannot marry. Marriage
is just a legal bonding between two people, if hetero people can do, so they should be able to as well.
Equal Rights.

Posted by: Comrade_Silly_OtterReport Post

LikeReplyChallenge10

I am not in favor of Gay Marriage. I am not in favor of Gay Marriage. Marriage was originally defined
as the legal union of two people of the opposite sex for the purpose of creating one family and for
creating children. Recently the definition of marriage has changed to include Gay marriages, or two
people of the same sex who wish to join in a union, but homosexual couples cannot procreate
therefore Gay marriage is a misuse of the concept of marriage.

Report Post

LikeReply01

No, I am against it. Gay marriage for me is a choice, and I really don't care if they choose to be publicly
gay. However, I am not going to outright support gay marriage just because it is so rebellious and
liberally game changing. We have a freedom to do what we want, but I am against it.

Report Post

LikeReply01

Do not confuse me with a hater. I merely think that homosexuality is wrong. And you must put
religion, whether pro or anti gay marriage. Because marriage has a religious foundation and
procedure. Now just because someone is gay doesn't mean they aren't my friend. It does not mean I
hate them. It just means that I have to disagree with you, and marriage is exclusively between a man
and a woman.

Posted by: saxmanReport Post

LikeReplyChallenge00

It’s not wholesome Heterosexual relationships are more wholesome than homosexual relationships.
God told Moses to spread the message that men should have sex with women and not have sex with
other men. It is important to consider religious texts when creating marriage laws because marriage is
a religious function. There are other reasons to oppose homosexuality besides religion. Homosexuality
is a lifestyle and gay men are more likely to do crystal meth than straight men, Which is harmful to the
well being of the homosexual. I have personally lived in one of the gayest areas of California for a
couple years and it’s not all pretty. The gay men there were more likely to engage in deviant behavior
such as having large differences between sexual partners and practicing nonconsensual sex. The gay
community acted like bullies on many occasions, Once ruining the career and reputation of a landlord.
There is nothing wrong with promoting something that would make society happier.

Report Post

LikeReply00

No, Ut goes against both natural law and religion The idea of two partners of the same sex having
intimate relationship with each other is wrong in my view. We were given the task of reproducing
while passing on the words of God through the ones he blessed in holy matrimony as husband and
wife with no mention of gay people being blessed or recognized by God. It is also unnatural for gay
people to feel attraction to each other as their body's consitution is incompatible with each other
through copulation given the hormones at work shoud not make them suitable with each other, Yet
they defy their nature which may have been caused mentally or psychologically.

Report Post

LikeReply00

No i'm disagree! God didn't make Adam and Steve, He make Adam and Eve. So same sex marriage
should not be legalized. Marriage is between a man and a woman, Not man and a man and woman
and woman. Therefore even a natural law has a completely disagree in this same sex marriage. How
about you? Are you agree with this same sex marriage?

Report Post

LikeReply00

We must stop this argument. Its a big No , when same sex marriage become legal , the morality of
people will descend and the sanctity of marriage is worsen the impurity of the mankind, this is wil
surely happen.

Romans 1:18-27 New King James Version (NKJV)

God’s Wrath on Unrighteousness.

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men,
who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in
them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are
clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so
that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God,
nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22
Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an
image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.

24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their
bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served
the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged
the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the
woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and
receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased
mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual
immorality,[c] wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-
mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of
evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving,[d]
unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are
deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them."

Someone will approve this to legal must put to eternal Death together with Satan..

In Revelation 21:8 New International Version (NIV)

"But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice
magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is
the second death.”

No. It doesn't make sense. The ritual of marriage is based on religious beliefs. The union of man and
woman to fulfill God's purpose of bringing children to the world. Marriage is a contract between God
and the couple that they will live their life within His laws and will grow a household who obeys His
laws. If they want to be united, the can just make up their own contract.

Report Post

LikeReply00

I'm against gay agenda. Gays are regular people but I'm against the left's fascist agenda in which they
use homosexuals as victims in identity politics. That is the problem with homosexuality, is that they
are easily manipulated to set up tyranny. I'm not religious, but religions still habe a lot of knowledge
and there is a reason all the successful religions are against it. It helps create fascism.

No, and absolutely not in favor of gay marriage I'm a proud muslim and my religion islam is not in
favor of homosexuality and gay marriage, in islam marriage must be only between man and woman
and most muslims must be well known of prophet Lut story, which shows how Allah destroys
homosexuals and turned their land upside down

Philippine Supreme Court

Considers Same-Sex
Marriage
Lawmakers Should Recognize Equal Marriage Rights
for LGBT Couples

Ryan Thoreson
The Philippine Supreme Court heard a long-awaited argument
on Tuesday that could open the door to same-sex marriage in
the overwhelmingly Catholic country.

The case, which was filed by a gay lawyer named Jesus Falcis
in 2015, urges the court to declare the marriage restriction in
the country’s Family Code – which limits marriage to one man
and one woman – unconstitutional. It also asks the court to
recognize marriage equality in the Philippines. Falcis argues
that the marriage restrictions violate his rights to due process,
equal protection, and forming a family under the Philippine
Constitution.

If the Supreme Court rules that the provisions of the Family

Code are unconstitutional and permits same-sex marriage, or
the national legislature enacts a law allowing same-sex
marriage, the Philippines will join Taiwan at the forefront of
Asian countries with marriage equality.

Beyond the Supreme Court hearing, the recognition of same-

sex partnerships has gained considerable steam in the
Philippines.

In the House of Representatives, Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez

filed a bill in October 2017 that would create civil partnerships.
The bill, HB 6595, would grant same-sex couples “[a]ll benefits
and protections as are granted to spouses in a marriage,”
including the ability to jointly adopt, inherit property, obtain
tax benefits, and share insurance, health, and pension
benefits. The bill was debated by a House panel in January
2018, but has not been voted on.

President Rodrigo Duterte has sent conflicting messages

about his views on same-sex marriage, indicating support for it
on the campaign trail, seemingly reversing his position in
March 2017, and then endorsing the idea again in December
2017.

As the Supreme Court deliberates over the same-sex marriage

case, lawmakers have an opportunity to proactively protect the
rights of LGBT Filipinos. In 2017, the House of Representatives
made history by approving a nondiscrimination law that, if
passed by the Senate, would protect LGBT people from
discrimination in employment, education, health care, housing,
public services, and other areas.

It should now show similar leadership in recognizing and

advancing the rights of same-sex couples.

PHILIPPINES
Only 2 in 10 Filipinos favor same-sex marriage – SWS
The results of a Social Weather Stations survey held in March
2018 also show that opposition to same-sex civil unions is
strongest in the Visayas and 'among single men who are
widowed/separated/divorced'
MANILA, Philippines – Only two in 10 Filipinos favor the
proposal to legalize same-sex unions in the predominantly
Catholic Philippines, according to a Social Weathers Stations
(SWS) survey held in March but released only on Saturday,
June 30.

The survey held from March 23 to 27 showed that 61% of

Fiipinos disagree with the proposed bill to legalize same-sex
marriage, 22% agree with it, and 16% are undecided.

SWS said in a statement that 1,200 respondents – equally

divided among men and women – were asked how much they
agree with the statement, "Dapat magkaroon ng batas na
magpapahintulot ng legal na pagsasama bilang mag-asawa ng
dalawang lalaki o kaya'y dalawang babae (There should be a
law that will allow the civil union of two men or two women)."

The nationwide net agreement score is -40, which SWS

classified as "very weak." This indicates that while the
Philippines is seen as "gay-friendly," majority of Filipinos are
not ready for same-sex civil unions.

SWS said that based on areas, opposition to the same-sex civil

unions was strongest in the Visayas which had a net
agreement score of a very weak -45 (21% agree, 66%
disagree). https://www.rappler.com/nation/206146-sws-same-
sex-marriage-survey-march-2018The pollster also said that by
religion, opposition was strongest among Iglesia ni Cristo
members at an extremely weak -64 (11% agree, 74% disagree).

Members of other Christian denominations were also strongly

opposed to same-sex marriage, with an extremely weak -55 net
agreement rating (15% agree, 70% disagree), followed by
Muslims at a very weak -48 (12% agree, 60% disagree), and
Roman Catholics at a very weak -36 (24% agree, 60%
disagree).

"Opposition to the civil union of a same-sex couple was

strongest among single men who are
widowed/separated/divorced, with an extremely weak net
agreement score of -70 (7% agree, 77% disagree)," SWS added.

The SWS terminology for net agreement is as follows: +50 and

above, “extremely strong”; +30 to +49, “very strong”; +10 to
+29, “moderately strong”; +9 to -9, “neutral”; -10 to -29,
“moderately weak”; -30 to -49, “very weak”; -50 and below,
“extremely weak.
The survey has sampling error margins of ±3% for national
percentages, and ±6% each for Metro Manila, Balance Luzon,
Visayas, and Mindanao. SWS said its survey question was non-
commissioned and "was included on SWS' own initiative and
released as a public service." The survey has sampling error
margins of ±3% for national percentages, and ±6% each for
Metro Manila, Balance Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao. SWS said
its survey question was non-commissioned and "was included
on SWS' own initiative and released as a public service."

Weeks before the survey was conducted, the Supreme Court

announced the date of the oral arguments on the petition to
allow same-sex marriage in the country. The survey results
were released days after the High Court ended the oral
arguments.

The proposed measure is at the committee level in the House

of Representatives, where it counts Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez
among its supporters.

President Rodrigo Duterte has also expressed support for the

measure. – Rappler.com

Philippine Development, Good

Governance, And The Pork Scandal In
Context
Cesar Polvorosa, Jr.

The pork barrel scandal is just the latest epiosde in the perpetual struggle for
good governance in the Philippines. Cesar Polvorosa, Jr. takes the longview.

The rise of a country fascinates historians, investors, economists, and researchers. The
Philippines, widely heralded as the next “Tiger” economy of Asia has recently been in the
spotlight for its stellar economic performance. Amid the continuing weakness of the global
economy, the country posted a robust economic growth of 6.8% in 2012 and 7.0% as of the
3rd quarter of 2013, maintaining its enviable status as one of the fastest growing Asian
economies.

There is a need, however, to temper exuberant expectations as the rapid growth has only been
very recent. Achieving development requires decades of respectable economic growth and
structural transformation. Economic powerhouses China, Japan, and South Korea advanced from
decades of blistering 8-10% annual growth. In stark contrast, the Philippines expanded at a
lacklustre yearly average of 3.3% from 1980 to 2012.

There is a pervading sense of déjà vu as well: The economy has been on this path more than
once and each time it proved to be a false dawn. For several years after World War 2, the
Philippines was considered a progressive Asian country second only to Japan. It was acclaimed as
a rising Newly Industrializing Country (NIC) in the 1970s and again in the mid 1990s.
Why is the country unable to ascend to a higher sustainable growth path? All economies are
buffeted by external shocks but for post-war Philippines, domestic upheavals were major crises of
governance that played a major role in derailing the economy. “Governance,” notes the IMF,
includes “all aspects of the way a country is governed, including its economic policies and
regulatory framework, as well as adherence to the rule of law.” According to the United Nations
Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP), good governance has eight
major characteristics: “It is participatory, consensus oriented, accountable, transparent,
responsive, effective and efficient, equitable and inclusive and follows the rule of law. It assures
that corruption is minimized…” The failure of Philippine governance to fulfill these eight
characteristics has time and again triggered socio political tumult with grave economic
repercussions.

Boom and Bust Cycles: Crises of Governance

The 1980s marked a major crisis of governance for the Philippines that culminated in the People
Power revolution of 1986. Average economic growth plunged to -1% in the period from 1983–
1987, which excluded would result in a 4.2% average growth for 1980-2012 instead of 3.3%.

The Ramos administration restored stability and boosted average growth to 5% and that
presidency is generally regarded as a rare period of relatively good governance for the
Philippines. The country was again hailed as an emerging NIC but that vision vanished with the
1997 Asian Financial Crisis. The country struggled to recover due to the turbulent Estrada
administration and the 2001 People Power 2 protests. The succeeding Arroyo government rode on
the global economic upswing of the mid 2000s and improved average growth to 5.7% in the
period from 2003 to 2007, though corruption scandals hounded the latter part of her term. In
short, the Philippine economy failed to sustain respectable growth during the past generation.

There were prolonged periods of uncertainty and two regime changes initiated by the Parliament
of the Streets. During the past 13 years, the country has ousted and prosecuted one president,
while investigating another. A Supreme Court Chief Justice has been impeached and ousted as
well. Clearly, the Philippine ship of state, often with an inept helmsman and crew members that
plunder from the passengers, is a decrepit vessel.

Like a malignant tumor, ruinous and predatory regimes need to be excised from the body politic
for the patient to live. The cost will be short-term economic disruptions, but in the long run the
resulting good governance will enable the country to fulfill its development potential. Without the
real cure, however, the crisis of governance will recur. What is the origin of this disease?

History Matters: Philippine Political Economy

An encompassing lens of analysis to explain Philippine underdevelopment is path dependency:
examining the role of history in the political and economic paths states take. Centuries of
colonization have created a society dominated by a small elite while the vast majority of the
people have been mired in poverty and servitude.

The Spaniards instituted the encomienda system—a feudal system patterned after the
governance template of their Latin American colonies. Extractive political and economic
institutions emerged that existed to benefit a small elite. This is not to essentialize the highly
diverse Latin American and Philippine societies, but only to highlight key historical parallelisms
based on common colonial experiences. Power concentrated in a small elite leads to weak
institutions, fragile governance structures, and distortions of market incentives. Exploitation and
unequal opportunities constrain social mobility as resources serve the oligarchy’s interests.
Political dynasties strive to cling to power. Corruption becomes embedded and institutionalized in
relations and transactions.

While the colonial rule of the United States ostensibly established democracy in the Philippines, it
gave an immense advantage to the entrenched economic and political elite that had the
resources to win elections and take advantage of new business opportunities. The perpetuation of
family interests once in political office was facilitated by the same unequal distribution of
resources that brought them to power. American economic policies in its Philippine colony
entrenched an oligarchy, while weakening the peasantry and the middle class.

Largely because of their colonial experiences, Latin American countries (and Sub Saharan Africa)
are the most unequal societies in the world, with average Gini Indeces of .52. The Philippines has
one of the highest income disparities in East/South East Asia with Gini Index of .43. High
inequality aggravates poverty levels, fuel wide spread resentment, health problems, and
sociopolitical instability.

Corruption and Underdevelopment: State Capture and Regulatory Capture

According to the IMF, “Corruption is a narrower concept than governance. It is often defined as
the abuse of public authority or trust for private benefit. The two concepts are closely linked.
Where there is poor governance, there are greater incentives and there is more scope for
corruption.

There is also a reverse link: corruption undermines governance to the extent that it distorts policy
decisions and their implementation.” Corruption also reduces the effectiveness of the
government as regulator of the economy and the enforcement of rules, regulations, and property
rights.

The most pernicious form of corruption is the pervasive and systemic abuse in the allocation of
public resources. Firms, interest groups, bureaucrats, elected officials etc. influence the rules of
the game through decrees and regulation concerning the allocation of resources. The system is
particularly insidious because of its veneer of legality, as is evidenced in the pork barrel system.

Given the historical context, can the pork barrel scandal be just the tip of the iceberg? Corrupt
practices that range from non payment of taxes, the bribery of officials for the creation ghost
projects have profound inimical effects as they starve priority sectors such as education,
healthcare, and infrastructure. Imported yachts, luxury cars etc. acquired by corrupt politicians
do not create local jobs and economic benefits. Investors bring jobs and technologies to other
countries while local entrepreneurs are hobbled by bureaucratic red tape, bribery, lack of
financing, and deplorable infrastructure.

The lost luster of public office stained by corruption attracts individuals with dubious
qualifications and unscrupulous morals. With the levers of power they gain a sense of entitlement
and impunity. The impoverished masses concerned with daily survival become vulnerable to vote
buying. Subsequently, the lack of opportunities in the domestic job market forces many to work
abroad, leading to brain drain and the break-up of families.

The wide-ranging and severe adverse impacts of systemic corruption have been underscored by
the magnified devastating effects of the Yolanda/Haiyan super typhoon. While the destructive
power of Yolanda/Haiyan is unprecedented, systemic corruption resulted in inadequate
infrastructure to prepare for the typhoon and the necessary communication and transportation
facilities for the subsequent relief operations. There were reports of bribes needed to move relief
goods from a port in Luzon to the Visayas. The perception of widespread corruption made many
Filipinos and foreigners hesitate to give donation money and relief goods.

Can cross country data show connections between corruption levels and the state of national
development?

The most widely used international measurement of corruption is the Corruption Perception Index
based on an annual survey by Transparency International. The Corruption Perception Index ranks
countries based on how corrupt their public sector is perceived to be based on a scale of 0 – 100,
where 0 means that a country is perceived as highly corrupt and 100 means it is perceived as
very clean.

A measure of a country’s average income is GDP (Gross Domestic Product) divided by the
population adjusted for purchasing power parity (PPP). Countries also use the United Nations’
Human Development Index (HDI), which measures a country’s well being using life expectancy,
education, and income indices. The index classifies countries under four Human Development
(HD) categories: Very High, High, Medium and Low.

By comparing Corruption Perception Index with GDP per capita incomes and the HDI for various
countries some insights can be gained about the relationship of corruption as an indicator of
ineffective governance with corresponding income and quality of life levels.

For historical, political and conceptual reasons, recent decades have seen little discussion of
population or demographic issues among development, environmental or sexual and
reproductive health and rights communities and advocates3J Stephenson, FC Crane, C Levy.
Population, development, and climate change: links and effects on human health. Lancet.
[Online]. 382(9905): 2013; 1665–1673. 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61460-9.

[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]

; some found these issues problematic, while others tended to focus on issues related to health,
choice and rights. In the 1950s and 1960s, control of rapid population growth was prominent in
the international policy discourse, while sexual and reproductive health and rights did not feature
as priorities. Partly as a legacy of discredited, coercive “population control” programmes,
population and demographic issues are still seen today as “difficult”, or likely to alienate. This
problem is compounded by the subject of safe abortion, which is often seen as controversial at
best, and potentially toxic in relation to other development priorities.

Another factor is the increasing orientation of sexual and reproductive health and rights activists
to frame their agenda in terms of health, choice and rights, placing the individual at the centre of
programmes, as opposed to prioritizing subjects such as demographic factors and contraceptive
prevalence, which are by contrast population-level concerns. It is also true that, while the 49 least
developed countries have the fastest growing populations,4United Nations Department of
Economic and Social Affairs. World Population Prospects: The 2012 Revision. 2013; UN: New York.

http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/index.htm

[Crossref] , [Google Scholar]

fertility levels are declining globally, as Hans Rosling5

http://www.gapminder.org/videos/dont-panic-the-facts-about-population/#.U2y_qShmhVA

[Google Scholar]

and others have documented, although they sometimes fail to link this trend to the increased
access to sexual and reproductive health and rights programmes, including family planning,
which have often helped to bring it about.

More recently, population dynamics, which include demographic trends related to urbanization,
migration, ageing, household composition, and age structure, as well as population growth, are
increasingly being discussed as part of the international development discourse. There is now
greater recognition, for example, that understanding and planning for factors such as
urbanization and migration are important for building resilience against the effects of climate
change, or anticipating and meeting the education, health care, and housing needs of growing
and changing populations. Nevertheless, it has proven difficult to develop consensus around what
aconsideration of population dynamics brings to the international development discourse. This is
partly because champions of a human rights approach to sexual and reproductive health and
rights are understandably wary of any kind of discourse about population that is aimed principally
at reducing birth rates, particularly among certain population groups, rather than upholding
rights and extending and expanding the potential of individual women and men to make
reproductive choices for themselves. Sexual and reproductive health and rights advocates can
therefore be reluctant to advocate increased attention to population dynamics, although, it could
be argued, such attention could raise additional resources for family planning programmes, which
could be implemented in ways that respect and protect human rights.

Sex education: Should children be given sex education in schools?

Sex education is the need of the hour I support the argument that sex education should be
included in the school curriculum. With the increase in the rate of child abuse, Harrasment giving
sex education is the need of the hour. In most of the recorded cases the child in unknown to what
is being done to him. Childrens have no knowledge of harassment as such. This being said the
curriculum should me made such that it remains in the boundaries of decency.

Posted by: equityReport Post

LikeReplyChallenge00

I agree on this A lot of kids don't have good parents that are role models , that why its good to
have sex education at schools. They need to learn this stuff , it important Plus when they enter
high school there going to learn biology which includes studies of the human bodies and sex.

Report Post
LikeReply00

Children should be given sex education in schools. Children should be given sex education in
schools. Too many young teens are ending up pregnant because they did not know how to
properly protect themselves from getting pregnant. Also, many teenagers end up with sexually
transmitted diseases- not because they were stupid, but because they did not know how to
protect themselves.

Arguments about sex education reflect a culture war, but it is one most families may be totally
unaware of. The war is generally carried on between advocates from two different sides — one
arguing for “abstinence education” and the other for “comprehensive sex education.” Decades of
research findings are used to argue for one over the other, though there is evidence that both
types can be effective (if only for a year) in positively influencing sexual behavior.

Often what is totally lost in the argument is the heart of the divide between them — that is, how
each actually views sexual intimacy. Researcher Matt Evans, who has been involved in evaluating
the effectiveness of sex-education programs for more than a decade, summarizes the difference
this way: Those who advocate for abstinence education view sexual intimacy as sacred, a divine
gift reserved for marriage. Those who advocate for comprehensive sex education view sexual
intimacy differently — as a natural urge that can, will and even should be explored and
expressed, so long as it is consensual and doesn’t lead to teen pregnancy or sexually transmitted
diseases.

One paradigm places sexual intimacy squarely in the context of how it impacts others, especially
marriage and children. The other paradigm, as described by Kristin Luker, "are all for sex within
marriage," but they view marriage "as just one among many acceptable options." Where
comprehensive sex-education focuses on sexual-risk reduction, abstinence education focuses on
sexual-risk avoidance.

At this point in the decades-long struggle, both abstinence education and comprehensive sex
education use similar methods to reach adolescents and influence their behavior. And both
groups feel their desire is to help teens be happy and reach their fullest potential, unhampered
by the potential problems of inappropriate sexual activity. But the underlying view of sexual
intimacy influences every aspect of how sexual decision-making is talked about. And that is why
parents should care about, know about and have a say in the assumptions that underlie how
sexual intimacy is taught to their children.

What are the 5 social issues nowadays in the Philippines?

Ad by Palo Alto Networks

Go beyond remote access VPN with GlobalProtect Cloud Service.

A scalable, cloud-based infrastructure that provides secure access to all apps. Learn more now!

Learn more at start.paloaltonetworks.com

5 Answers

Vicky Roberto
Vicky Roberto, former Graft Investigation Officer (Retired) Consultant at Office of the Ombudsman
Philippines (1991-2018)

Answered Jun 18, 2018

To enumerate, according to rank of most pressed issues and they are not only 5:

Extra judicial killings

Drugs

Quo warranto issued vs. the Chief Justice of the country

Poverty

Corruption as a result of #4

Crimes as a result of no.4

lack of job opportunities/meaningful employment

chinese occupation of the SCS

Political dysnasties

Traffic

Floods

lack of social and affordable housing

recounting of votes in the last VP election

loss of respect for authorities and other institutions

high cost of commodities

high cost of living

insurgency

killing of clergies

lack ofclassrooms

unaffordable education in private schools and universities

informal settlers

roads filled with potholes especially after the rains

undisciplined drivers esp. motorcycle riders

garbage collection

fake news and inept government officials and so on and so forth

TheNameIs Elle

Answered Apr 4, 2018

I think there’s a lot of issues Philippines is facing right now. Aside from corruption, there’s one
bigger. It’s not that known, but it’s the root of all. Our attitude.

We no longer care about anybody, whether we know them or not.

We think of ourselves highly rather than believing that we can innovate together, as a team.

We are lazy.

All

Edd Letana

Edd Letana, lives in The Philippines

Answered Jun 24, 2017

In my 40 years of life in the Philippines, it still the same issue and some more.

Corruption - from worst to a higher degree of worst. Politicians now are frickin’ justifying their
unethical and most of the time illegal activities. The hell do they think of Filipinos nowadays?
Idiots? Well I guess a fraction are.

Poverty - Culture of mendicancy and over reliance to government welfare. But it is also true that
opportunities are less or lacking since big businesses are being controlled by a few. Free trade is
being snuffed out by oligarchs.

Insurgency - The communist relics are trying to be sign...

Senator and boxing legend] Manny Pacquiao says we’re not human. They should just let us be.

– Edgar T., an 18-year-old gay high school student in Manila, February 2017

Schools should be safe places for everyone. But in the Philippines, students who are lesbian, gay,
bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) too often find that their schooling experience is marred by
bullying, discrimination, lack of access to LGBT-related information, and in some cases, physical
or sexual assault. These abuses can cause deep and lasting harm and curtail students’ right to
education, protected under Philippine and international law.

In recent years, lawmakers and school administrators in the Philippines have recognized that
bullying of LGBT youth is a serious problem, and designed interventions to address it. In 2012,
the Department of Education (DepEd), which oversees primary and secondary schools, enacted a
Child Protection Policy designed to address bullying and discrimination in schools, including on
the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. The following year, Congress passed the Anti-
Bullying Law of 2013, with implementing rules and regulations that enumerate sexual orientation
and gender identity as prohibited grounds for bullying and harassment. The adoption of these
policies sends a strong signal that bullying and discrimination are unacceptable and should not
be tolerated in educational institutions. But these policies, while strong on paper, have not been
adequately enforced. In the absence of effective implementation and monitoring, many LGBT
youth continue to experience bullying and harassment in school. The adverse treatment they
experience from peers and teachers is compounded by discriminatory policies that stigmatize
and disadvantage LGBT students and by the lack of information and resources about LGBT issues
available in schools.

This report is based on interviews and group discussions conducted in 10 cities on the major
Philippine islands of Luzon and the Visayas with 76 secondary school students or recent
graduates who identified as LGBT or questioning, 22 students or recent graduates who did not
identify as LGBT or questioning, and 46 parents, teachers, counselors, administrators, service
providers, and experts on education. It examines three broad areas in which LGBT students
encounter problems—bullying and harassment, discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation
and gender identity, and a lack of information and resources—and recommends steps that
lawmakers, DepEd, and school administrators should take to uphold LGBT students’ right to a
safe and affirming educational environment.

The incidents described in this report illustrate the vital importance of expanding and enforcing
protections for LGBT youth in schools. Despite prohibitions on bullying, for example, students
across the Philippines described patterns of bullying and mistreatment that went unchecked by
school staff. Carlos M., a 19-year-old gay student from Olongapo City, said: “When I was in high
school, they’d push me, punch me. When I’d get out of school, they’d follow me [and] push me,
call me ‘gay,’ ‘faggot,’ things like that.” While verbal bullying appeared to be the most prevalent
problem that LGBT students faced, physical bullying and sexualized harassment were also
worryingly common—and while students were most often the culprits, teachers ignored or
participated in bullying as well. The effects of this bullying were devastating to the youth who
were targeted. Benjie A., a 20-year-old gay man in Manila who was bullied throughout his
education, said, “I was depressed, I was bullied, I didn’t know my sexuality, I felt unloved, and I
felt alone all the time. And I had friends, but I still felt so lonely. I was listing ways to die.”