Affirmative Second Speaker

Dear adjudicators, co-debaters, fellow students of this great University, good day! Before I start my speech let me address the errors of the negative side. First, ___________________________________________________________________________. PLEASE HAVE AN ENUMERATION FIRST OF YOUR ARGUMENTS. Yung lahat ng nasa first, second and so forth, Ilagay mo muna lahat as enumeration. Para clear sa judges. Fill up-an mo ang pattern below: Going on to my part in this debate your excellencies. Legalizing same sex marriage is not only necessary, but beneficial under the following contentions: 1. First argument 2. Second Argument 3. Third argument and so fourth (One liner sentence lang ito lahat ha. Make sure you express your points clearly para maunawaan ng judges. This is very important since ito ang matatandaan ng judges.) Justice Kennedy once said “their hope is not to be condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization's oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right.” As the second speaker of the affirmative side, I will prove to you that allowing same-sex marriage is not only necessary but also beneficial and practicable. First, allowing same-sex marriage will grant rights such as property and succession rights. Under the Family Code, only the legal spouse by virtue of a valid marriage is entitled to the right to properties acquired after the marriage. Likewise, legally adopted children of a validly married couple, aside from their legitimate children, are considered heirs of their adopting parents. They are entitled to their parents’ properties upon the death of the latter. Intimate relationship between persons of the same sex could not be allowed to benefit under this law despite their earnest efforts to acquire common properties of their own. They can never be the beneficiary of their domestic partners in the public neither in the private insurance system of the country such as GSIS and SSS, nor as the recipient on the PAG-IBIG and PHILHEALTH benefits unlike the warranties extended to the legal spouses. Thus, it is clear that by granting same-sex marriage, similar rights will be equally afforded to them and they may comparably exercise the same privilege. Second, the state, following the doctrine of parens patriae, as cited by the Supreme Court in the case of Cabana vs Pilapil and People vs Baylon, is under an obligation to legislate laws which would protect the rights of its people. Under the existing Family Code, only a man and a woman are given the exclusive right to marry depriving same sex couple of the same opportunity. This discriminatory classification transgresses the right of an LGBT member to find real happiness within the boundaries of law. The LGBTs are created human of diverse physical and mental expertise, talent and competencies comparably parallel to both men and women but they were not given the equal opportunities enjoyed by the straight others. Unclassified, undistinguished and most of the times alienated in their very own country, isn’t it the proper time that our law be revisited, reviewed and revised? Let us all be reminded that the Civil Code of the Philippines, from which the Family Code was founded, was enacted on June 18, 1949 which is more than 50 years ago and only suit the needs of the generation before us. Laws must not only be responsive to the present aspiration but it must be appropriate to the challenge of changing times. The Family Code should be amended, or a special law must be made to give same sex couples an opportunity to be validly married to acquire the same legal status. Third, men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and have a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution. According to our first speaker, not allowing same sex couples to marry would violate the guarantee of equal protection which every single

one of us are entitled of equal rights. A lot of homosexual individuals are growing up with so many ordeals just by their choice of loving the same sex, what more suffering would they encounter in the future if the issue of the legalization of same sex marriage would not be resolved, now that the changing generation calls for it? This is the right time to take action and ask for amendments. The right to equality can no longer wait. Equality should not be made to wait for some procedural and legal technicalities. Lastly, in the case of James Obergefell vs Hodges, the US Supreme Court clearly enunciated that the fundamental rights guaranteed to people of different beliefs shall not hinder them from living together. Powerful countries such as Canada, France, Germany, Guam, Puerto Rico and United States have shown their support on this matter in passing a law legitimizing marriage between persons of the same sex. The Philippines has always aimed to be at par with these countries, and coming up with comparable idea indicates our readiness to compete globally if not just to merely adjust to the collective needs and sentiments of homosexuals in particular but mostly of our citizens in general. Yes to same sex marriage and no to inequality. Thus, we stand firm that same sex marriage is not only necessary, beneficial, and practicable but is imperative in challenging changes confronting us.