Tuesday, August 10, 2010

My Position On Divorce Bill

Ursua: When parties have been "separated in fact" for at least 5 years; reconciliation is highly improbable, that may be a ground for divorce.

MY RESPONSE: Pwede bang "When parties, as a result of mutually agreed separation, have been separated in fact for at least 5 years, and reconciliation is highly improbable, that may be a ground for divorce".

The rationality is to rule out those kases na PINALAYAS lang pero ayaw naman talagang makipag-hiwalay.

Ursua: When parties have been "legally separated" for at least 2 years; reconciliation is highly improbable, it is another ground for divorce.

MY RESPONSE: Pwede bang "When parties have been legally separated by a COURT ORDER for at least 5 years & reconciliation is highly improbable, it is another ground for divorce."

The rationality is to clarify the definition of "legally separated". By the way, kung merong definition ang Legal Separation, dapat meron ding definition ang Illegal Separation if there is such a thing.

Ursua: Dapat kahit anong relihiyon ka, the law of the state should not prefer one religious belief over the other.

MY RESPONSE: Pwede namang i-categorize eh. If your marriage certificate is signed by a religious, then you cant file a divorce. If your marriage cert is signed by a civil court, then pwede. Just let the market work and let's see kung saan ang preference ng tao.

Question of the day: Is the Philippines ready for divorce? If not, what alternative do you have in mind? ANC asks.

MY ANSWER: Why ask if Philippines is ready for divorce? Is Philippines married to someone?

Karen_DaviLa: There are only two countries in the world with no divorce: Malta, Philippines. Italy, the Vatican's home, has divorce.

MY RESPONSE: Give the global population a choice! Kung gusto nila magpakasal na walang divorce, sa Pilipinas sila magpa-kasal. Tulong yan sa economy natin pag maraming foreigner na magpapakasal dito sa Pinas!

My final comment in the Divorce Bill is simple. Please lang, just let the couple make a CHOICE at signing of Marriage Contract. Ang Marriage Contract Form ay lalagyan ng TICK BOX na pwede maka-choose ang couple YES or NO in DIVORCE OPTION. This way, walang gulo. Yung mga ikinasal before the approval of the Divorce Law, pwede magpa-kasal uli at mag complete ng bagong MARRIAGE CONTRACT FORM na merong DIVORCE OPTION tick box.

If the couple will tick YES in the DIVORCE OPTION of the Marriage License Form, pwede yan i-refuse ng Catholic na ikasal sa simbahan, so sa Civil na lang sila or sa ibang simbahan. Hindi pwede pilitin ang Catholic Church kung ayaw nila mag-kasal ng mga pabor sa divorce. I will stand to support the church on this.

QUESTION: Sir John, dahil walang divorce maraming nag-li-live in.

ANSWER: Maaring merong nag-li-live-in dahil walang divorce. Pero mas maraming nag-li-live-in kasi masyadong magarbo ang iniisip na kasal, nakakahiya daw ang civil wedding, eh wala namang pera. Kaya yan nag-live-in kasi mas tipid ang mag-renta ng kwarto kesa mag-motel tuwing gusto jumugjug. Yung iba dyan, walang balak magpakasal pero tawag nila sa pag-sasama nila eh premarital sex, nakakatuwa. It isn't premarital sex if you have no intention of getting married.

Senate divided over proposals to discuss divorce | The Philippine Star News Headlines


ANSWER: Sige! SHARE! Tingnan mo mayamaya merong Senador or Congressman na makabasa nyan at NANAKAWIN yang idea na yan (PLAGIARISM) na hindi man lang i-quote na ako naka-isip nyan.


Hi!... I like your article about Nine Types of Voters, it is an eye-opener of the cycle of corruption in our country. May I ask you a question? What is your opinion about a proposal that would mandate a 10-year limit on the validity of marriage contract? I read it in the internet about issues there in the Philippines. I am here in Australia, separated from my husband I left in the Philippines with my four kids, and I am already seeing someone here. Do you think that proposal is the best? (Lesley from Australia)

My Response: Thank you for your email. I see the word "expiration" in processed and packaged food. Various food have various preparation technique and various expiration periods.

I think there should be an extensive public consultation on the issue. The proponents of the proposed law must prove to me first that marriage becomes "rotten" in ten years before we think about implementing it for everyone to follow. The debate will be never-ending because various factors (impotence, menopause, etc.) will be talked about to come up with the "optimal" expiration years.

What I am thinking is, if the proposal was conceptualized because of the expensive annulment case proceedings, I would rather propose a counter-bill to put a price cap on the cost of annulment. To make the process speedy, we can also incorporate a provision that the annulment can be approved immediately if both the husband and wife will exchange a verbally denunciation of their love for each other for three times (partly following Muslim rules).

Equally important, I think it is just fair if the children of the couple (and parents too) must also be given power to approve or disapprove the proposed annulment of their parent's marriage because in our society today, there is a negative stigma on broken families. Of course, all separation of marriage will be subject to proper (fair and equitable) split of assets and liabilities, and of course it must have media publication.

I am also trying to look at the rationality of changing wives' names after marriage (appending their husband's surname). Eto na ang nakagawian, but personally I could not get the rationality of it. Wives changing names is a very tedious process and also confusing. I feel very uncomfortable with women having them to undergo a tedious process of changing their names in their passport, driver's license, bank accounts, etc after marriage, annulment, expiration, and divorce. I am not talking about eradication of this name change. We just have to talk about it so that we will be aware about this inconvenient name-changing thing that only affects women.

Most importantly, my personal advocacy would be to add another requirement before getting a License to Marriage License, and that would be a one whole day seminar on the Legal Aspect and Implication of a Marriage Contract.


Kung ayaw mo na sa Catholic doctrine on Reproductive Health and Divorce issues, please lang, be frank about it, express it, denounce the Catholic, don't go to church anymore, please make it fast. I hate it so much everytime i carry our own five pieces of portable chairs para may ma-upuan sa labas ng simbahan. Umaapaw na sa simbahan ang mga catholics, sobrang dami na. Unfair naman na nasa labas ng simbahan ang mga true catholics pero ang mga may peke na puso ay nasa loob front row pa ang mga animal na plastic. Kung hindi ka na susunod sa doctrina, umalis ka. Pag merong change sa puso mo sa future at makapag decide ka na susunod ka nanaman sa Catholic doctrine sa future, bumalik ka, may proceso naman yan eh.

Eto namang mga pari, pag kilala nyo na yang mga politikong defiant sa Catholic doctrine, paki-abisuhan na na huwag na muna pumasok sa simbahan kasi sayang lang yang upuan sa simbahan kung sila lang din ang uupo dyan.