NEW YORK CITY — As of this writing, there has been no known mass movement from any organized LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender) group in the Philippines and abroad against Rep. Emmanuel “Manny” D. Pacquiao, except for the saber-rattling’s of showbiz’s Vice Ganda and Aizza Seguerra, among other members of the so-called “third sex” offended by Pacquiao’s “masahol pa sa hayop” (worse than animals) admonition on same sex relationship.
Pacquiao, 37, by the way, has apologized to those who may have been hurt by his statement even as he clarified he was referring only to their (sexual) acts not their persons, invoking the holy Bible.
Because Pacquiao is a celebrity, his words instantly turned into a tidal wave of Armageddon that, for a while, threatened to wallop his bid for the senate in the May elections this year.
Pacquiao may be sincere in his apologies, but the recent spat with the LGBT underscored his utter lack of understanding about the history of LGBT advocacy in the Philippines, with reference to the early existence of transvestites and gender crossing in the 16th and 17th century with the babaylan until their disappearance under Spanish colonialism and the emergence of different gender identities and sexual orientations in the 1960s.
As a legislator, Pacquiao should have been aware that the Philippines is signatory to many relevant International covenants promoting human rights, though LGBT rights are not always supported by the state.
Same-sex activity is not criminalized and sexual orientation is mentioned in various laws, it was reported.
The most important issue in terms of law is considered the lack of an anti-discrimination bill, which Pacquiao and his colleagues in the House of Representatives, should have endorsed in order to establish an LGBT desk in police stations and to allow same-sex couples to jointly own property.
In the absence of national legislation, anti-discrimination ordinances at the level of local government units and cities have been recently passed, according to the history and overview of the LGBT Rights in the Philippines.
Meanwhile, even Bible scholars differ on their interpretations of the Genesis 2: 19-25 “Adam and Eve:”
Pacquiao, a “born again” Christian, may have anchored his opinion on anti-gay Christian ministers who have used the argument of “In the beginning, God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve, nor Eve and Jane” as a crux to propagate the myth that homosexuality is “unnatural.”
Those who disagree with Pacquiao and other gay and lesbian bashers maintain that while the Bible in Genesis asserts that God made male and female, “this does not really mean that all males and all females need to end up with opposite sex partners.”
When talking about “what’s natural,” in the beginning, the first humans did not wear prescription glasses to see, use wheelchairs to get around, or attach prosthetic limbs to enhance mobility. Are all of those aspects of humanity “unnatural”? a group called Religious Tolerance asked.
“Many translations say that God makes Adam a ‘suitable helper/companion.’ While Adam already had all the animals of the world under his dominion, God saw that Adam was alone and he needed a ‘suitable’ helper, who just so happened to be first lady Eve.”
It explains further: “Relating this to our own lives, so many of us are surrounded by many ‘helpers’ and ‘companions,’ but, only a few, maybe one, are truly suitable to aid and comfort a person throughout his or her life.
“People who are gay or lesbian maybe surrounded by heterosexual mates who are perfectly ‘adequate’ helpers, but the ‘suitable helper and companion’ that God has made for them is not a person of the opposite sex.
“Plus, if gay people are not meant to be with their ‘suitable helper/companions,’ are they meant to be alone, without a helper? I believe God would say ‘no,’ according to Genesis 2:18.”