LEADERS of several faith-based organizations expressed disappointment after the House Committee on Women and Gender Equality approved in principle the measures prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or sex characteristics (SOGIESC) in a single hearing, without giving a lot of opposing groups the chance to present their positions.
Among those who expressed disappointment and opposed the committee-level speedy approval of the bills are the Philippine Council for Evangelical Churches (PCEC), Philippines for Jesus Movement (PJM), Intercessors for the Philippines (IFP), Jesus Is Lord Church Worldwide (JILCW), National Coalition for Family and Constitution (NCFC), Hustisya ng Tahanan, Gender Redeemed Philippines, Philippine Social Conservative Movement, Prolife Philippines Foundation, Christian for Nation Building, and Alliance for the Family Foundation.
“Our organization came prepared to take part in good faith, as citizens and as representatives of millions of Filipinos. These bills touch on freedom of religion, freedom of conscience, the education of our children, and the life of our families and churches. A measure of this weight deserves a full and fair dialogue with every sector it will affect. To close the deliberations while more of the affected sectors have not yet been heard is not the kind of consultation our people expect. We are asking only for a fair chance to be heard,” said PCEC Executive Director Bishop Noel Pantoja.
In a statement released online, the Philippines for Jesus Movement (PJM), stressed that a penal bill like SOGIESC which has impairing effects on a wide range of constitutional rights and has criminal penalties of imprisonment and fines must be sufficiently deliberated in a series of hearings.
“The proposed SOGIESC legislation raises serious questions concerning religious liberty, freedom of conscience, freedom of expression, parental rights, and the autonomy of religious and faith-based institutions, including churches, schools, and other organizations. These concerns are particularly significant in view of the proposed prohibited acts and their corresponding criminal penalties, including imprisonment and fines,” said PJM President Bishop Alconga.
“We are particularly concerned that the committee proceedings did not, in our view, provide sufficient opportunity for many organizations and stakeholders who have substantive reservations about the proposed measures to fully present their positions, articulate their concerns, and seek clarification on provisions that may have far-reaching consequences,” added PJM President Bishop Alconga.
The Leaders of the foregoing organizations emphasized the bill should not be summarily approved just because there are deliberations done in the past. The 20th Congress has new leadership, new members, new set of stakeholders, and new emerging issues which were not part of the past discussions.
The groups ask for the reconsideration of the committee approval and that further hearings be held because they have identified concerns with specific provisions of the bill, particularly on prohibited acts, which they wish to raise and discuss further in the committee.
About the Author
