Is that really so?

Justifying his decision, Ferrer cited verses from the Christian Bible and Islam's holy book, the Koran, as proof that homosexuality was immoral.

"We use the Bible and Koran to guide us in what is morally right and wrong. Maybe they are using another guideline," said Ferrer, who is a lay minister in the church.

FUCK YOU.

  
Anyways, 

After checking updates on my email account, I caught sight of this random link that says "Philippine gay rights party challenges election ban". I immediately clicked on it and read it's contents. Basically, it talks about how the Philippine commission of election banned a gay rights political party-list from participating in the next year's election.

The reason for the party-list being banned?

Because according to the holy books, homosexuality is immoral.

This is my take at this bias prejudice. 

Before anything else, I'd like to say that I am a Roman Catholic myself and that I do believe in God because I was brainwashed. What I'm trying to say is that, when I was very young, I did not know anything about God, morality and the difference between what is good and bad or right and wrong. I only knew them after someone has told me about it, letting me know that this is bad, this is good.

Now, in my own humble opinion, if that is your basis for morality, what about those things that are not in those holy books of yours? Let's have the Ten Commandments as an example. Below is a copy from the Internet (because I did not know all ten. Yes I know, I'm evil. )

The Ten Commandments
I am the LORD thy God. Thou shalt have no strange gods before Me.
Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain.
Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day.
Honour thy father and thy mother.
Thou shalt not kill.
Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Thou shalt not steal.
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife.
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's goods.

credits: thetencommandments.org

Let's have another example and a situation:

A is killed by B making B the suspect. B now is a sinner because he violated the Fifth Commandment which is Thou shall not kill. Here comes C avenging the death of A by killing B.


Now the question is, has C committed a sin and violated the Fifth Commandment?
Some will say Yes, but some will say No. Why? Because the only intention of C is to avenge the death of A. He did not intend to kill B but only end up doing it because it's the only way he can to get what he wants, which is vengeance.

In the Ten Commandments, there was nothing said about revenge. Right? Then, why is it that some people taking revenge, making revenge, or avenging a murder for instance is taken as wrong?

Now tell me? Is that really so? Just because what's written is "Man is for a Woman" and not Man for a Man doesn't really mean it is immoral for a Man to be with a Man too. It also applies for Women.

What I think is that, it was unfair for Commissioner Ferrer to ban the gay rights party-list from participating in the 2010 elections of moral grounds because his basis is prejudice.

The resolution went on to say that should the commission grant the petition, they will be “exposing" the youth to an environment that “does not conform to the teachings of our faith."

“We are not condemning the LGBT, but we cannot compromise the well-being of the greater number of our people, especially the youth," it said.

I'm sorry Commissioner but I think you are wrong. 
The youth of today knew better than that.

We all need a change. Because we can. Obama says so. Anyways, who knows?

Maybe the only way for our system to be uplifted is by appointing people who do not only believe in their faith, but those who also believe in what they believe is right. Someone who is open-minded and someone who accepts the reality. Not someone who's blind and is willing to be blind.

When will the Philippines reach that phase? Don't ask me, I really don't know.