In 2020, a Pew Research Center survey showed that 73 percent of adult Filipinos agreed with the statement that “homosexuality should be accepted by society,” unchanged from 2013 and 64 percent in 2002. [155] [156] Support was higher among 18- to 29-year-olds at 80%, Catholics at 80%, and among the most educated at 79%. [157] Another 2014 study by the same organization titled “Global Morality” showed that Filipinos reject homosexuality when asked “whether homosexuality is morally acceptable, unacceptable or not a moral problem,” with 65 percent responding that it is “unacceptable,” with only 25 percent responding “acceptable” and 9 percent saying “it`s not a moral problem.” [158] Those fortunate enough to be able to marry legally enjoy significant mental health and well-being benefits. And there are adverse effects associated with it if this opportunity is denied. Laws on war relations, such as gifts due to marriage, legal separation, custody and maintenance, division of property, maintenance and spousal support, also apply to couples in civil partnerships. Any person registered in article 7 of the Family Code under administrative officials for marriages may also have civil partnerships. More than half of the countries that have marriage equality are in Western Europe. Same-sex marriage has been legalized in the Netherlands (2001), Belgium (2003), Spain (2005), Norway (2009), Sweden (2009), Portugal (2010), Iceland (2010), Denmark (2012), France (2013), the United Kingdom (2013), Luxembourg (2015), Ireland (2015), Finland (2017), Malta (2017), Germany (2017), Austria (2019) and Switzerland (2021). In a referendum in 2021, the Swiss public approved the “Marriage for All” initiative, which allows same-sex marriages from July 2022. Italy is the largest country in Western Europe where same-sex marriage is not legal; However, Parliament approved civil partnerships for same-sex couples in 2016. Despite the above studies that positively link marriage to well-being, it may be premature to definitively claim causality. The petition essentially asked the court to declare unconstitutional certain provisions of the Philippine Family Code, which define marriage as a union between a man and a woman, on equal grounds. Despite these Supreme Court decisions, a debate continues in the United States between legal equality advocates and individuals and institutions that oppose marriage equality on the basis of religious beliefs.
In June 2018, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Colorado baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple because of their religious beliefs, in violation of the state`s civil rights law. However, the court decided not to make a more comprehensive decision on whether companies have the right to deny goods or services to LGBTQ+ people on religious grounds. In June 2020, the court ruled that a 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibiting sex discrimination in the workplace also applies to discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. The decision protected LGBTQ+ employees from dismissal in more than half of the states where such legal protection did not previously exist. The EU does not require its members to recognise same-sex marriage, although a 2018 ruling by the EU`s highest court states that they must respect the right of same-sex couples to free movement and residence. A 2013 European Parliament report on human rights and democracy “encourages” EU institutions and member states to recognise same-sex marriage or civil partnership as “a political, social, human rights and civil rights issue” [PDF]; However, the EU is not in a position to impose such policy changes on its members. Hatzenbuehler et al. examined more than 34,000 lesbian, gay and bisexual participants and found empirical evidence of the negative health effects of discriminatory measures related to marriage equality.11 They surveyed participants in 2001 and 2002 on a number of mental health indicators and conducted the same survey in 2004 and 2005, after 14 states passed constitutional amendments limiting marriage to opposite-sex partnerships.
In the second group of reactions, participants reported significantly higher rates of psychiatric disorders, with an increase of 36% for each mood disorder, 248% for generalized anxiety disorders, 42% for alcohol use disorders, and 36% for psychiatric comorbidity. In the comparable control group of states without such changes over the same period, there was no significant increase in these psychiatric disorders.11 Regardless of prevalence, another limitation is the lack of prolonged longitudinal experience of the phenomenon of same-sex marriage, as it first appeared in Denmark in 1989 and more recently in the United States. Further studies and time are clearly warranted in the ongoing assessment of the broader implications associated with marriage equality. A survey of social weather stations (SWS), which took place between the 23rd and 27th centuries. In March 2018, it found that 22 percent of Filipinos supported same-sex unions, 61 percent were against, and 16 percent were undecided. [162] [163] However, this acceptance has not been reflected in legislation that would allow persons of the same sex to marry. A survey conducted by the Social Weather Stations (SWS) found that 61% of the 1,200 respondents are still against same-sex marriage. whereas, at the November 2009 Convention, the American Medical Association recognised that prohibitions on same-sex marriage contribute to health inequalities in the United States; Census data is limited by the self-reported nature of data collection, which depends on respondents` willingness to identify as gay. Although the census is presented as a process of collecting anonymous data, those who distrust the government or fear the possible consequences of public recognition of their orientation may not be able to properly report their orientation, resulting in incomplete reporting on LGBT prevalence.
In addition, U.S. Census questionnaires do not clearly define what it means to be gay. This lack of clarity can contribute to very different estimates of the true prevalence of gays and lesbians in our society. With estimates ranging from 2% to 10% of the general population, it should be noted that if “gay” were defined as same-sex attraction or experience, the prevalence would be significantly higher than if it were defined as gay by self-identification. LGBT people are also subject to laws or constitutional amendments supported by the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996, which defines marriage as a legal union exclusively between a man and a woman. The obvious conclusion is that same-sex marriage is somehow less valuable than heterosexual marriage; The underlying fear is often that marriage equality actually causes social harm. Being put in such a light contributes greatly to the phenomenon known as “minority stress”, which members of this community experience in their struggle for affirmation and acceptance in our heterosexist society. When it comes to education and general measures of success, the literature is not entirely unanimous. However, most studies have shown that with these measures, there is no difference between children raised by parents of the same or opposite sex.
A 2015 opinion poll by Laylo Research Strategies found that 70 percent of Filipinos disagreed with same-sex marriage, 14 percent were more likely to disagree, 12 percent were more likely to agree, and 4 percent strongly agreed. [160] In general, the 2015 survey found that 84% were against same-sex marriage and 16% in favour.