Who could be liable? Or, who is more liable? Who is more bashed? Chayra Ganal or Gretchen Diez?
On account of the hullabaloo created by the so-called discrimination by a female sanitation personnel against a transgender, signs of “Men”, “Women”, “All-Gender” (and a sign even for animals/pets) in the airport impressively caught my attention. My two cents of ethical judgment is salivating that these signs be made, too, in our own side of the world. We must first be correct before crying foul. Respect for distinction ought to be settled initially prior to prejudices. Not because it is popular will it become necessarily what is right. One cannot just be progressive by mindlessly drifting with the crowd. There is something deeper in being liberal than noisy slogans. Furthermore, politicians and those in the powers-that-be are to become politically correct first instead of just playing by gaining media mileage. Without all these, and perhaps some even more, we could just all be holding each other liable of discrimination.
I checked the Quezon City’s Gender Fair Ordinance. Among others, it stipulates about the requirement for all private and public establishments to “designate toilet rooms and lavatories labeled as all-gender CR.” When there is no designation of such, which type of distinction should we follow? Did the lady personnel discriminate or was she just acting rightly based on what is available yet? I stand with this hardworking lady. She was plainly doing her job by protecting real women who were already inside the CR. She could be the real victim here. Yet, nobody is brave enough to fight for her and walk with her cause either to Congress or to the Palace.
In fighting it out for the LGBTQ Bill called SOGIE, not a few claimed that support for the said measure calls everyone to be radical. I also suggest radicalism. In its truest sense though. Radical comes from the Latin word “radix” which means root. Hence, to become radical is going to the root or to the source. So, this question of gender, where will this eventually lead us? “… That from the beginning…. God made them male and female.”
Meanwhile, the Vatican has pointed out “an educational crisis” in gender ideology. The said Church document identifies a so-called gender theory which “leads to educational programs and legislative orientations that promote a personal identity and emotional intimacy separated from the biological difference between male and female.” In other words, it teaches that sexuality is not based bodily. In consequence, the belief that God made them male and female is rendered as passé. On this point, the Church aims to help Catholic school teachers to counter ideas which “deny the natural difference between a man and a woman”. Further, Catholic educational institutions are being tasked to launch path of dialogues concerning this hot-button issue.
But who will dialogue with whom? Will we be seeing LGBTQ in one round table with our Catholic teachers? Or with us, members of the clergy? But before we really do so, should we instead first talk among ourselves and ponder upon how have we gone in our accompaniment with the gay community who are very much part of the sheepfold that our Lord has entrusted to us? Have we listened much to them? When we really do not care even to respect them we ourselves will become liable for being mercilessly indifferent.
PS Indeed, the QC Bill has stipulated that all private and public establishments to “designate toilet rooms and lavatories labeled as all-gender CR”, have we seen one or two yet of this sign around? Who is more liable then?