CBCP wants anti-discrimination bill cleansed of provisions on gay rights

[sngbm87]

---

any and all laws that give favoritism, advantage, disadvantage, deny, single out, stereotype, or anything of the like is a VIOLATION of Civil Liberties and Freedom of Choice, Speech, Movement, Treatment, Services etc.

The laws are not meant to make someone more important or less important than the other.

They are not suppose to protect one group more than the others.

Laws here violate Parental Rights of the MOM and DAD in relation to the Child.

They also violate LGBT orientation people who are still human and shouldn't be degraded because of their personal choice. It only affects them and is a non-violent civil concern. The church won't be affected if two men wana marry. Many other religious institutes will honor and respect their wishes for a ceremony. The Catholic Church doesn't have to be fined or punished or imprisoned.

That is a PROPERTY RIGHT and RIGHT OF an Institution.

people have the choice to change places or areas of worship or meeting or discussion if they have that issue.

Just like Organizations and Businesses have their rights also.

[sngbm87]

LGBT should have the right to marry as well as have a family if the choose. It is their life and choice and not the government's RIGHT to intervene or dictate who you should marry or who is incharge in a family or who should lead or support or work or stay at home. Or who is more important for the child.

most if not ALL 1st World Countries have stated by law or court order that...MEN AND WOMEN are equal in parental rights, custody and authority and can not give up or avoid their responsibilities.

If LGBT are given the rights. Then what if TWO GAY MEN MARRY and ADOPT a child or are given power of attorney over a child in a scenario where the child has no where else to go? And the men are noncriminal offending...educated...well financed...experienced previous with children...hiv free...legally married.

Should they be stopped from having a family? No.

neither should men be dis-connected legally from their child.

And the Philippine Courts have ruled on this also as TRUE.

just not custodial rights and parental rights.



But insurance companies, organizations, etc...should give LGBT couples the same BENEFIT as Hetereosexual Spouses.

[sngbm87]

This should have been placed in the Philippine constitution in the beginning and never changed/altered or removed. Equal rights and non-discrimination to all regardless of anything.

[emow]

government should stay out into these kinds of issues...

[brian joshua]

but still, racism and discrimination issues is not about the free market again...

[brian joshua]

free market has nothing to do with discrimination

[emow]

^ well, the issue would dive into personal behavior of the people, and the people are the consumers and producers of the market... It can intrude into businesses in the way they conduct their transactions.... so what if a particular establishment is racist? people will naturally boycott that business and free market will make that business irrelevant, therefore it will dissolve...

[brian joshua]

In a truly free market, employers are still human. The fact that it is a free market does not mean that an employer's bias and racism is automatically eliminated in favor of money. People will always have prejudice and people will always discriminate. We have an intrinsic need to alienate others while embracing some.

[emow]

^ well, in the free market, a business that is prejudice against a particular consumer with regards to race, beliefs, etc...will lose potential profits... If the business is prejudice against hiring employees with regards to race, beliefs, etc... it may be robbing itseld of the opportunity of hiring a talented employee that will bring more success.... his competition might hire that employee and make his business less competitive...
that's the beauty of the free market, being a racist or prejudice is actually a disadvantage! The government need not pass a law about it...

[brian joshua]

of course...but then, discrimination will always seep in....unless, provided that the government regulates it and mandates that anything discriminatory will be liable for criminal charges well then, that settles it. hehe but i agree with you, the bill is enrolled because of personal interest, every bill has a politician's interest behind it...third ***? may even feel stepped on because of, although the bill is there, every right declared with is not absolute...