Kaban ni Lino Labra: ANG PAGBUDHI PINAAGI SA PAKIGHILAWAS, KRIMEN?


HB 5734 entitled "An Act Defining Sexual Infidelity or Anti-Sexual Infidelity Act" is being pushed for approval before the Lower House. If enacted into a law, it would criminally punish married couple committing sexual infidelity. I have not read the Bill in its entirety and I don't know how the Bill defines sexual infidelity. Before the said Bill turned into to law, let me define Sexual Infidelity in my own vocabulary.

What is sexual infidelity? Accordingly, it is an act of having sex with another partner other than your legal wife or husband. Without giving much ado on the merits of the proposed legislation, I would rather delve into the social dimension of the purpose of the Bill than its legal underpinnings.

Notably, the sponsors of the Bill are generally women legislators--- the same group who succeeded in the enactment of RA 9262. Anti-Violence Against Women Act punishes all forms of violence against women from psychological to economic deprivation. Even if the proposed Bill intends to punish both the husband or the wife, the underlying reason behind this piece of legislation is to temper men in their philandering ways in the society. Like RA 9262, HB 5734 is pro-women measure but not necessarily anti-men. Legislations like RA 9262, Reproductive Bill and HB 5734 are women's responses to the prevailing social inequilibrium particualrly against chauvinism in our society. Record would show that a chapter in our human history, women had been secluded from the mainstream of the Oriental Society including the Philippines. While measures had been enacted to address this matter, yet remnants of women inequality are still very prevalent in the psyche of the modern society. And this piece of legislation, is a continuing medication purposely to equalize men and women in all aspects of human endeavor. And this time, they want sexual infidelity to be criminalized.

Sex is what makes creation pro life. Procreation is what makes living things alive. Without it, living things would become extinct. Sex is indespensable drive for the procreation in animals and in man's society. In the history of mankind, sex was free from moralizing and institutional restrictions particularly during the era of hunting and gathering society. Consequently, genetical defect and deadly sexual-related diseases reduced population growth and the quality of the survivors. To address this problem, marriage was institutionalized and the family was the fist institution that evolved in agricultural societies.

As it turned out, both marriage and family were quality control of the population to arrest genetic defects and to contain the spread of contagious bacteria such as the deadly venereal diseases to be transmitted from generation to generation. Hence, multiple sexual relationship was regulated but not prohibited. As quality control, marriage and family  had their historical causality in the medical and genetic problems of the early population.

Summarily, regulated sex is by origin not a moral issue but medical. This would explain why early societies including those mentioned in the Bible, fidelity was not an issue as to King Solomon who had several wives and concubines. It had become moral as an offshoot of the growing influence of universal religions like Christianity and Buddhism in the emerging civilization.

I write this piece in response to the query on my take on the proposed HB 5734 illegalizing sexual infidelity. When I read the report that the proponents were dead serious in pushing this Bill to be taken in the plenary session in Congress, I am beginning to worry right now for my partners in the office once this Bill would become into a law particularly the two ex seminarians whom I heard would decide to settle down for good anytime next year. I am also worried for the whole community of lawyers in Cebu on the possibilty that there will be mass prosecution against them for violating this Act if Gabriela would be true to her heroic struggle against the abuses of men to women.

Serioulsy speaking, I would consider this Bill   OA as in OVER-ACTING. Other than it suffers from inefficacy of historical understanding of our society, this Bill would be another useless legislation where violations would be rampant and the culprits are in public display of their impunity. Adultery and concubinage are the classic examples where it is a public knowledge that it is being publicly violated by showbiz personalities and politicians and yet this society has yet to see one of them being convicted and jailed. RH 5734 is anti-poor because like economic crimes, only the poor would usually go to jail as example.
  
Sexual infidelity is now more of a moral and legal issue than medical with the discovery of modern medicine and genetic science to address its concommitant effects to the quality of our modern population. Making it a criminal act is in effect unconstitutional. It violates FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION with NOBLE INTENTION and LIBERTY OF ABODE with 
HUMANITARIAN REASON to provide shelter to the homeless. For the ex seminarian partners, this Act would violate their constitutional right to ORGANIZE OUTREACH PROGRAM and SCHOLARSHIP FOUNDATION. Man is born with his free will. He is free to express himself by whatever means he pleases including sexual act. His free will is the mother of his conscience. His conscience is his anthena to his God whether or not his act is in accord with His will or the teachings of the Sermon of the Mount. No one will suffer on his sexual indiscretion but himself.

Having sex is human instinct and no law can moralize it neither can illegalize it. Adultery and concubinage are not crimes against sex but they are crimes against relationship. Anti Sexual Infidelity Act is a crime against sex. Therefore, it is not only unconstitutional but it is also a violation of natural law. For a healthy discussion on this issue, let me hear too your take on this delicate matter. Delicado ko ani. . . . madaot akong constitutional law.

 P.S. If you don't like this piece, you are in my company. If you like, you are my enemy.  He he he. . .



(Bug-os ang  pasalamat sa KAHAYAG ngadto sa nagsulat niining  artikulo  nga si ATTY. PAULINO  B. LABRADO, Senior Partner sa P.B. LABRADO  and PARTNERS. Magsusulat  ug magpaambitan siya sa iyang mga  hunahuna mahitungod sa  nagkalain-laing hisgotanan nga makita sa  maukiton niyang mata ug mga kasikas nga madungog sa  iyang maabtikong dunggan.)





Comments

D_Bystander said…
We are aware that even during biblical times we are told about some prominent figures having "multiple wives." Of course , the kings and other wealthy people like, Manny Pacquiao and a host of others, publicly acknowledged they engaged in "sex other than their wives." But the problem comes up and this is where I believe the framers of this proposed bill anchored their argument, when the man like a police patrolman and even those with higher ranks, if they try to get "extras" especially the beautufuls" they are expensive and this will cause corruption. But this is case to case basis. If you are rich and you can afford, that's okay. But even if you are rich and you are dependent on "Viagra" it is no good because viagra makes you blind. In that case I would rather be a "one woman man" than become a blind man.
Anonymous said…
I would rather go blind with viagra than not using viagra and get blinded without seeing the beauties of the world.
angkahayag said…
pagkanindot sa mga hunahuna...

Popular Posts