Divorce not about religion, says solon
‘I voted against the divorce bill not solely on the basis of my religion, but on the basis of what I believe are the natural, legal, and social purposes of marriage as an inviolable social institution.’
Daily Tribune‘I voted against the divorce bill not solely on the basis of my religion, but on the basis of what I believe are the natural, legal, and social purposes of marriage as an inviolable social institution.’
(FILES) House of Representatives
The contentious passage of the absolute divorce bill in the House of Representatives recently remains a flashpoint between religious and progressive groups.
Conservative groups and a significant number of lawmakers who were not supportive of breaking up a marital union deemed it a grievous act against God.
One of the backers of its passage, Manila Rep. Joel Chua, however, asserted that divorce should not be focused on religion, considering that the country is comprised of different faiths and customs.
In a statement on Friday, Chua said lawmakers must be inclusive when making decisions, especially about governance, which the matter of religion has nothing to do with.
“Governance is about what is right and just for everyone. We should give our people choices. Lack of choices is another form of poverty. Happiness is a right everyone should enjoy,” Chua said.
The lawyer-lawmaker likewise stressed that while the Philippines is a predominantly Catholic country, legalizing divorce should not be at the expense of the people who don’t share the same religious beliefs.
“I cannot impose my beliefs about marriage and divorce on them. But as a public servant involved in governance, I cannot, in conscience, participate in denying them the option of divorce when it is their choice to avail of it,” Chua said.
Meanwhile, Tingong Partylist Rep. Jude Acidre, one of the opponents of absolute divorce, told DAILY TRIBUNE that while respecting others’ religious beliefs is pivotal in society, nothing should stop lawmakers from being guided by their own religious convictions in the exercise of their political duty.
“I voted against the divorce bill not solely on the basis of my religion, but on the basis of what I believe are the natural, legal, and social purposes of marriage as an inviolable social institution,” Acidre said in a text message.
“But nonetheless, nothing prevents congressmen from deciding on the basis of their religious values. A good Catholic ultimately is a good Filipino, and creating a dichotomy between faith and politics will not serve the common good,” he said.
House Bill 9349, or the proposed Absolute Divorce Act, hurdled the divided House of Representatives by a slim vote margin of 131-109-20 before its adjournment sine die.
If passed into law, spouses would be allowed to secure an absolute divorce for the dissolution of an irreparably broken or dysfunctional marriage under specific grounds and judicial processes while sparing their children from pain and stress.
It would also allow former spouses to remarry.
In 2018, during the 17th Congress, the House also passed an absolute divorce bill, but its counterpart in the Senate languished at the committee level.
