“Same Sex Marriage”

SAME sex understanding. Same sex friendship. Same sex collaboration. These and similar phenomena are not only logical but also acceptable, not only foreseeable but likewise comprehensible. Even same sex attraction is an on-the-ground reality. The fact alone that a man is said to be “gay” and a woman is qualified as a “lesbian”—does not necessarily diminish their human dignity, much less deny their human personhood.

In other words, in the light of reason and ethics, homosexuals remain integral members of society and wherefore remain entitled to respect and pursuant deference as human beings. 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—such as about the inherent nature and intrinsic finalities of marriage.

One thing is certain: The essential nature and consequent constitutive objectives of the realities of life and the truths of living are not subject to but opinions, popularity nor fashion. As such they remain whatever contrary belief, whatever opposite opinion or conviction certain individuals may have and hold. Among other things, this simply means that the nature of things remains as such—notwithstanding all contrary personal persuasions and legal provisions well included.

Thus it is that even in its elementary understanding, nature itself stipulates that: One, marriage is between a man and a woman. Two, marriage is for their spousal unity, sexual union and conjugal communion. Three, marriage provides them the standard possibility of the procreation and upbringing of children.

The conclusions from the above observations are obvious: First, there can be no marriage between two individuals of the same sex. Second, there can be no sexual union between parties of the same sex. Third, there can be no possibility of the birth of children between two persons of the same sex.

Question: What if two individuals of the same sex want to get “married”? Answer: Marriage is much more than simply wanting it. Question: What if the said two individuals in fact “got married?” Answer: Marriage can be a fact only for those with the constitutional capacity to get married. Question: What about the right to get married? Answer: The right to get married is precisely anchored on the personal ability and pursuant potentials of the subject parties to get married.

It might be good and proper to point out that not even any man and/or any woman can/may get married. The mentally impaired, the emotionally afflicted, the psychically incapable, the psychically impotent, the disabled from assuming and complying with the obligations essential to marriage and other incapacitating factors—all men and women suffering from one or more of the said personal liabilities are barred from contracting valid marriages.


OVCRUZ, JCD
July 4, 2011

KKK

WHAT is meant to stand for nobility and bravery, for group sacrifice and national redemption, now forwards vanity, shame and profanity in national leadership and governance. This big misfortune of the Philippines becomes even more painful and distressing during these days when a well known national hero is being given a special remembrance and proper tribute—a historical figure who has brought proper honor and legitimate pride to be the Filipinos as a people inspired by the genuine KKK. On the other hand, there is now the false and malevolent KKK that is leading the nation to perdition and bringing the people top exasperation.

“Kaibigan”, “Kaklase” and “Kabarilan”—this is the impious meaning of KKK during this time, in this country. Should the Philippines continue to be saddled not only with the calamities of nature but also with devastations brought about by one national leadership after another? Would the Filipinos continue to bear with the maledictions brought about by one national government after another? Could generations yet to come continue to accept and bear national public officials who are anything and everything except being trustworthy and dependable.

With apology to all those concerned but in deference to the message of truth and reality, the following perceptions beg recall—with the hope that the supposedly sovereign Filipino people would learn the lesson forwarded by their more recent sad national history: The immediate past two administrations successively stood for amorality and corruption unlimited. The present one brings to fore the incarnation of an incapable and wherefore incompetent administration. Objectively true or otherwise, it remains a painful fact that the Philippines is going everywhere except forward, is becoming anything but better.

There is nothing like upright, honest and dedicated national leadership that can bring a country to integral development. And for one reason or another, that good fortune and appreciated advantage have long since been illusive to the Republic of the Philippines. What could be the reason for this phenomenon of long standing in the Philippines scene? Is it because the Filipinos do not know how to choose their leaders? Or it is because their real choice has been frustrated one election after another?

Would that the exalted nature, inspiring significance and encouraging implications of the one and only KKK remain in the mind and heart of the Filipinos today—and their generations yet to come. Would that the disparaging and exasperating newly born KKK go away—the sooner and faster, the better.


OVCRUZ, JCD
1 July 2011