Dear
lovely people, the door hasn’t yet closed about RH- Bill, and here we go again
with another heated feud between the congress and the church. Last week the “Divorce-Bill”
is being pursued by partylist representatives in order to empower women, and
give them a way out from unsuccessful, torn marriages. Women, doesn’t that sound lovely? Doesn’t that sound great to empower you through this “bill?” Of course yes, but it’s not the
answer to the problem.
My
friend who is a lawyer said that women have greater number of laws (compared to
men) surrounding them, helping them, protecting them, and empowering them to be
productive, independent and courageous against narrow-minded men who may act
like professional pugilists when drunk and wasted. Enacting these laws would
provide women a peaceful sanctuary for living and for realizing their careers. However
existent, these laws are still poorly executed even by the Department of Social
Welfare and Development (DSWD) and other agencies concerned.
So
the answer, lovely people, is not the Divorce Bill endorsed by Gabriela and
Akbayan but the strict execution of these laws. If we
could just keep the women’s desk up in 24 hours in every police precinct; if we
could just mobilize women through proper education and livelihood training; if
we could utilize government agencies such as the Public Attorney’s Office to
cater to the demand of battered wives; if we could make use of gender
advocates to teach them of the existing cultural biases between women and men; if
we could strengthen local ordinances penalizing pugilist-husbands and drunken
masters, then it’s highly probable that we don’t need Divorce Bill at all.
On
the contrary, if we pursue this, then marriage will be nothing more like
changing clothes, undermining the sanctity of its process. We will keep on
changing husbands and wives until we realize that we only need to commit to one
person in our entire life. If we ask about broken marriages, well, they are
there. They happen. They're inevitable. The least we could do to avoid this is to
undergo a stringent process before marriage such as seminars, short course on
spouses’ responsibilities, and a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) which covers
civil law and other laws on marital aspect. In this way, the tendency for divorce will be very minimal, avoiding a scene as that of an unresolved jigsaw puzzle.
***
P.S. This time, I’m with the Catholic Church. I
hope this will make me an “even” Catholic again. Tabla! Hehehe
I don't believe in marriage. So it goes without saying that I don't believe in divorce neither. As much as I like my friends falling in love and stamping marriage permanently in their foreheads, I would hate to see the Divorce Bill pass. With the psychology of most marriage couples, it is an easy way out and its the children who suffer.
ReplyDeleteMarriage is not for the faint of heart. Divorce is. :)
On the contrary, I believe that marriage is inevitable. it's one of the most primordial ceremony fashioned by our culture, labeling us atop kingdom mamalia and highlighting our potency for commitment and rationalization. So yes, i believe in marriage. And believing in it shuts all my reason for Divorce, unless necessary measures has to be applied for torn marriages. But there's annulment to settle with. what's the difference between the annulment and divorce anyway for us to pursue the DBill? Hehehe
ReplyDeleteAnd yes Marriage is not for the faint of heart...and so is Divorce. Both requires a lot of courage to indulge in it.
ReplyDeletehahaha! then that makes you not just Catholic but a true Christian! ;)
ReplyDeleteI'm happy to read your stand on divorce, of how you value the sanctity of marriage. I must admit that I am a bit worried that this bill might pass as Filipinos at present are trying to be 'practical.' I see families and friends with broken marriages, almost breaking and are products of broken homes. Sometimes I would wish for one to just simply be freed and be able to move on. But I also dwell on the thought that what about the commitment made for 'better or worse.' Yes there are those who realize that they were 'not meant for each other' but what about those who are actually 'meant for each other' only that they have to undergo such challenges?
Anyway, basta, divorce is NOT the solution! and thank you totomel for enumerating those better options for 'protecting women.' Hmmm... let me add one more suggestion, they should all review ANNULMENT before they jump into divorce so they would clarify among themselves what they really want. Guess divorce is just created to divide us again. tsk tsk tsk
actually Im not totally against Divorce Neng, it's just that there are better ways to settle things without adhering to divorce . employing the power of law on matters such as persecution in toto is one. then there's always annulment...at least it will save the couple from changing spouses right away and may have a little time to think things out. who knows, divorce may never be an answer after all.
ReplyDeleteWoi bagong bihis pala tayo ngayon ah. What happened to the old hangout in Wordpress?
ReplyDeleteDivorce? Well, I've been married six years and... that's why I'd like to say, "No comment." Hehehe
Kakaligo lang Maam.hehehe.I migrated na into blogger eh and I love it here better than in wordpress.
ReplyDeleteHehehe, no comment rin ako dyan. Im sure you are very happy with your family to think of such silly word.hehehe
I am not Roman Catholic though I be a Romano, but I'm with you on this one, Mel. =P
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, I'll say it again: The new layout is so neat!
I'm coming from the other end of the table -- only because of a personal experience. Am I being selfish? Maybe. But it's difficult to see people close to my heart get torn apart because of marriage. It might have had been their fault once upon a time, but I think it's just unfair that they have to suffer for it for the rest of their lives.
ReplyDeleteYes, divorce is not the solution to every thing. And it should not be taken lightly. Thus, we have to establish guidelines so people won't misuse it. There is annulment, but then how many people can afford it? And how about cultures that recognize divorce -- such as the Muslim community and the Indian community? Should we deny them of this? In terms of compensation annulment may not be sufficient in some cases. If there is enough punishment when the husband beats the wife, how sure are we that the husband will not repeat the act? Is it not cruel to let her stay in that marriage when she can find perhaps happiness elsewhere?
Then again, these are just my thoughts. I may be wrong. :)
Not sure if my last comment got across the web so I'm posting to check if my internet's failing me again. I hope you don't mind. :)
ReplyDeleteHi Kert ! =)
ReplyDelete1. I could only say that the church has a little fault on this as far as annulment remains expensive. The church also needs to re-evaluate its guidelines and has to consider things on case to case basis.
2. The Divorce Bill has to go through a series of dialogue. There are existing laws we could employ to protect the welfare of women. Strengthening these laws and enacting them will mitigate, if not to resolve marital issues.
3. The church and the state have to consider yet culture and ethnicity, which calls for a deeper study and cooperation between the two.
4. Dialogue is the word here. Examination follows.
5.I may be wrong with these all.hehehe
6. Thank you for swinging by again. It's been so long =)
@ Mira: And I'll say this once again: The layout is too easy to take compared to your heart breaking musical piece.hahaha
ReplyDelete@Mira: And lest i forget, you no longer be a Romano anytime soon =) hahaha.
ReplyDelete