Sotto sees no need for ‘same-sex union’ law; House’s Zaldy Co pitches for one

Sotto explained that obviously, the Pope “used the word ‘ homosexual’ because he was referring to the individual [being oppressed in some families that disown them], not the pair.”

At any rate, Sotto added, what is termed as “same-sex union” is in fact “accepted here in the Philippines.”

He explained why: “We know that when two people live together, or we find out they’re living together, no one takes an issue with it, especially if they’re both unmarried, right? There’s no problem. What is there to legislate?”

Unless, Sotto added, “you just want to open the door for same-sex marriage. If that is your goal, then you must change the Constitution and the Family Code.” That, he said, might be the real goal, not the protection of civil rights, since, “under our civil rights [statutes], we are all equal, homosexual or not.”

‘Check what Pope said’

MEANWHILE, Sotto advised those now riding on the supposed remarks of the Pope to revisit the original Spanish replies he gave a controversial documentarist, whose use of such quotes is now being questioned.

The Catholic News Agency did an analysis of the documentarist interview’s transcript and showed that other papal comment s on homosexuality featured in

“Francesco” were compiled by heavy editing of the video footage of the Pope’s 2019 interview with a Mexican broadcaster which the Vatican had made available to the filmmaker.

“Francesco” presents Pope Francis saying the following, when asked on his approach to pastoral care: “Homosexuals have a right to be a part of the family. They’re children of God and have a right to a family. Nobody should be thrown out, or be made miserable because of it.”

While the pope did say those words on camera, he did not say them in that order, or use those phrases in immediate proximity, the CNA analysis pointed out.

continued from a8