The Thing About Divorce...

As we all know, Philippine law does not provide for divorce inside the country, and it remains the only UN-member state beside Vatican City without legal provision for divorce. The only exception is with respect to Muslims, who are allowed to divorce in certain circumstances according to their religion. For majority non-Muslims, the law only allows for annulment of marriages.

The Civil Code of the Philippines asserts that it is binding upon citizens of the Philippines, even if living abroad. If a legally married Filipino citizen obtains a divorce outside of the Philippines, that divorce would not be recognized inside the Philippines. This can lead to complications when Filipinos divorce outside the Philippines.

Where a non-Filipino is married to a Filipino citizen and a divorce is obtained abroad by the non-Filipino spouse, the Filipino spouse can remarry under Philippine law, even if the non-Filipino spouse acquired foreign citizenship after the marriage.

The process of annulment is a complex and an expensive one, costing around ₱150,000–200,000, which is about an average net annual salary in the Philippines.

According to a survey conducted in 2017 by the Social Weather Station (SWS), 53% of Filipinos agreed legalizing divorce, while 32% support outlawing it.

As of March 20, 2018, a bill allowing divorce has passed its 3rd and final stage, soon to be allowing divorce in the Philippines. However, there is still a staunch opposition in the Catholic Church.

So, how can we have a divorce law while pleasing the Catholic Church?

Let's have an idea from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, also known as Mormons. The church teaches that in addition to civil marriage, which ends at death, a man and woman can undergo a celestial marriage in a temple performed by priesthood authority, whereby the marriage and parent–child relationships resulting from the marriage will last forever in the afterlife.

How can we apply this principle in our divorce laws? Here's how:

We all know that marriage cannot just be done by an ordained priest or minister, but also by judges, mayors, military commanders, consul-generals or any other person authorized by the government. Therefore, I propose that there must be two kinds of marriage contracts, one issued by the government, the other issued by the church.

If a couple is married in a civil wedding (presided by a government official), the contract will be temporal because they are only married by law. Therefore, divorce can be applied to them should circumstances resulting to the failure of their mariage arise.

However, if a couple is married by an ordained priest or minister, the contract will be spiritual because they are now married under God. Therefore, their marriage will be permanent, and will not be nullified by any divorce law. The only times this type of marriage will be nullified via annulment process when:

1. One of them is proven to have committed adultery (or caught on the spot)

2. One of them is abusive to the other and/or to their children, and

3. Any other circumstances that violated the Family Code.

Thus, it is practical for a couple to have a civil wedding first, and then renew their vows in a church wedding if both of them are sure enough that they will be together until their last breath.

And since I am also supporting same-sex marriage, I think my proposition will also benefit same-sex couples because they can be married civilly and enjoy the same rights given to heterosexual couples. However, out of respect to the Christian denominations, a church wedding will not apply to same-sex couples.

So there you have it, my two cents regarding divorce. Your thoughts?