Supreme Court issues TRO for Ang Ladlad
MANILA, Philippines (UPDATED) - The Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday stopped the Commission on Elections (Comelec) from disqualifying the group Ang Ladlad as a contender in the party-list elections.
The tribunal issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) stopping Comelec from delisting the controversial group of lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgenders (LGBTs) for the May 2010 elections.
The merits of the case, however, have yet to be tackled by the Supreme Court.
The High Tribunal would have to decide before January 25, the day when the Comelec is scheduled to print the ballots.
Ang Ladlad elevated the case to the SC after the Comelec, citing moral grounds, disqualified the political party last December 2009.
The Comelec en banc stood by the decision of the Second Division, which first disqualified Ang Ladlad in a resolution issued on November 11 last year.
In its petition, Ang Ladlad accused the poll body of violating the Constitutional guarantee against using religion as a benchmark for the exercise of one’s political and civil rights.
This guarantee emanates from the separation of church and state.
Aside from this, Ang Ladlad said the Comelec’s decision was a clear violation of the country’s obligation under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. As a party to the covenant, the Philippines should ensure the protection of the rights of all Filipinos, regardless of sexual preference.
Ang Ladlad estimates that around 10% of the 49 million registered voters are LGBTs.
Ang Ladlad wants representation in Congress in order to push for the anti-discrimination bill, which would help promote equal rights for LGBTs in society.
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
Share your views
Even Jesus is rumored to be gay
Whats the big concern?
Comelec cannot be arbiter of morality and cannot disqualify an applicant on the basis of religious argument. period
Justify LADLAD?
You're talking about discrimination in society because of specific sexual preference. Even the title of "LADLAD" is discriminatory.
Common ex-guys,ex-girls,x-men and x-women how can you say that there is discrimination, are you watching the tv lately and from all the programs all I can see are gay, lesbian and 3rd kind hosts. Need I have to mention that they work at some of the top tv stations.
Why push through with a bill or law for your own specific purpose, I say not for them to be involved in politics.
The Law does not discriminate based on gender or sexual preference but it discriminates those who take advantage of it.
" Kudos to SC" Let the people Decide...
Congrats s Ladlad... and to SC "Great job!"
@ushldcallme
ang galing! im not homophobic naman, pero i like what you presented... =)
Biased and Laughable COMELEC.
COMELEC is blatantly biased by basing its decision not on civil rights but on its own religious beliefs. It is even more laughable because we all know that a lot of our politicians are corrupt, liars, cheaters and thieves. So where does COMELEC stand with these truly immoral acts?
NO !!to ANG LADLAD
Lets us not forget the being a Homosexual is a lifestyle, and NOT A WAY OF LIFE...so why would We, the rest of the country be subjected to their lifestyle..it is after all a deviant behavior, WAKE SUPREME COURT AND SEE IT FOR WHAT IT IS...
keep on going!
Expose the religious BIGOTS..
Supreme Court issues TRO for Ang Ladlad... 10%...
(websource: http://www.catholic.com/library/Homosexuality.asp)
.....
The Ten Percent Argument
Homosexual activists often justify homosexuality by claiming that ten percent of the population is homosexual, meaning that it is a common and thus acceptable behavior.
But not all common behaviors are acceptable, and even if ten percent of the population were born homosexual, this would prove nothing. One hundred percent of the population is born with original sin and the desires flowing from it. If those desires manifest themselves in a homosexual fashion in ten percent of the population, all that does is give us information about the demographics of original sin.
But the fact is that the ten percent figure is false. It stems from the 1948 report by Alfred Kinsey, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. The study was profoundly flawed, as later psychologists studying sexual behavior have agreed. Kinsey’s subjects were drawn heavily from convicted criminals; 1,400 of his 5,300 final subjects (twenty-six percent) were convicted sex offenders—a group that by definition is not representative of normal sexual practices.
Furthermore, the ten percent figure includes people who are not exclusively homosexual but who only engaged in some homosexual behavior for a period of time and then stopped—people who had gone through a fully or partially homosexual "phase" but who were not long-term homosexuals. (For a critique of Kinsey’s research methods, see Kinsey, Sex, and Fraud, by Dr. Judith Reisman and Edward Eichel [Lafayette, Louisiana: Lochinvar & Huntington House, 1990].)
Recent and more scientifically accurate studies have shown that only around one to two percent of the population is homosexual.
....
Congrats! LADLAD!
Congrats, Mr. Danton Remoto! Keep fighting for the rights of your group. The Supreme Court has proven time again its integrity and unbiased decisions. Mabuhay!