12/06/2025
𝗦𝗲𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝗖𝗵𝘂𝗿𝗰𝗵 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗲: 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗖𝗿𝘂𝗰𝗶𝗳𝗶𝘅𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝗣𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗶𝗽𝗽𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗣𝗼𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗰𝘀
𝙱𝚢 𝚈𝚍𝚊𝚕𝚎𝚢𝚗 𝙳𝚎𝚕𝚊 𝙲𝚛𝚞𝚣 | 𝙴𝚍𝚒𝚝𝚘𝚛-𝚒𝚗-𝙲𝚑𝚒𝚎𝚏
During the last national midterm elections, several religious groups posted their endorsements among senatorial candidates. Significantly, the Iglesia ni Cristo, which has been doing this every election, has recently endorsed a candidate from the opposition, Sen. Bam Aquino. This endorsement included senatorial bets Ramon ‘B**g’ Revilla Jr., Sen. Pia Cayetano, Sen. Ronald ‘Bato’ Dela Rosa, Sen. B**g Go, Rodante Marcoleta, Sen. Imee Marcos, and Sen. Camille Villar. Six out of eight of their endorsements won the polls; it is undeniable that the official endorsements and reported distribution of sample ballots among the religious sector impacted the poll results. The list of endorsed senatorial candidates was composed of supporters from the Duterte Administration, and among them was one from the opposition. However, is it ethical to allow religious groups to officially endorse political bets? Where should the line on the separation of state and church be drawn? Most importantly, why this set of people?
Tracing the history of religions in the Philippines, before the Spaniards brought Christianity, Filipinos had their own version of religion and kingdoms that governed over the people. Culturally, the astronomical figures, nature, or animals were the gods that they worshipped, served, and prayed to. Catholicism became rampant by force, a truth that most people choose not to accept. Since the Spaniards brought Christianity to the Philippines through waging wars and killing those who refused to get baptized, they gained power and influence over the government that they tried to control and seize into one, despite the archipelagic geography of the country. Over time, more religions have established their presence in the Philippines, including Christianity, Islam, the remaining Indigeneous Philippine folk religions, Buddhism, and Taoism/Chinese folk religion, the top five religious sectors in the country (Pineda, 2024).
True enough, the right to freedom of speech is a right that has to be leveraged responsibly. Abuse of this right has led to misinformation, disinformation, threats, and manipulation of the uneducated and dependent. Some religious leaders choose to endorse candidates who guarantee financial support or political power to them, for their own selfish gains. Another reality that many refuse to accept because their leaders “𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘢𝘱𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘴𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘴.” In circumstances where one has different political views from their churchmates, they are often discriminated against and left out, which is why they are afraid to speak up and be true about who they want to vote for. Their leaders are responsible for creating such an environment where no one is safe. These leaders take advantage of their members’ dependence on them.
What the law says about this is vague, yet not untrue. The 1987 Philippine Constitution mentions the church and its supposed relationship with the state. Article II, Section 6 of the Constitution explicitly provides: "𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘦𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘊𝘩𝘶𝘳𝘤𝘩 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘣𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘷𝘪𝘰𝘭𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦." This ensures that the government and the laws it enforces in the country are 𝘂𝗻𝗯𝗶𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗱❟ 𝗻𝗲𝘂𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗹❟ 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗱𝗼 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗼𝗿𝘀𝗲 any religion; all religions are equal in the eyes of the law. Additionally, Article III, Section 5 of the Bill of Rights further emphasizes this principle: "𝘕𝘰 𝘭𝘢𝘸 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘣𝘦 𝘮𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘯 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘰𝘳 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘩𝘪𝘣𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘦𝘳𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘰𝘧. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘦𝘳𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘦𝘯𝘫𝘰𝘺𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘧𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘱, 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘳 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦, 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘣𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘥. 𝘕𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘣𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘦𝘳𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘤𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘭 𝘰𝘳 𝘱𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵𝘴," Providing the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause.
This begs the question, “𝘿𝙤 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙨𝙚 𝙡𝙖𝙬𝙨 𝙢𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙜𝙤𝙫𝙚𝙧𝙣𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩 𝙞𝙨 𝙖𝙡𝙡𝙤𝙬𝙚𝙙 𝙩𝙤 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙥𝙖𝙨𝙨 𝙡𝙖𝙬𝙨 𝙩𝙤 𝙘𝙖𝙩𝙚𝙧 𝙩𝙤 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙗𝙚𝙡𝙞𝙚𝙛𝙨 𝙤𝙛 𝙧𝙚𝙡𝙞𝙜𝙞𝙤𝙣𝙨?” Progressive bills about Reproductive Health, S*x Education, Divorce, and many others are still debatable in the country because of the influence of religion, despite the nation’s desperate needs for laws like these. Having enough power to hinder these progressive bills from becoming laws is deeply concerning and is a direct violation of Article III, Section 5 of the 1987 Constitution.
What should be done is to invest in meticulously studying the political landscape of the Philippines and everything related to it. In doing so, actual solutions with long-term positive effects can be shed light on. Experts like historians, cultural anthropologists, political scientists, and arts majors may give opinions and provide expertise on which issues and areas to be prioritized or need deeper study. It will lead to discovering the root causes of thousands of bills that are hindered from becoming enacted laws despite the nation’s desperate need for these enforcements, as well as the relation of Filipinos' religious beliefs, which should also be examined.
Researching and studying the Philippines’ political landscape can improve its present state by proposing new policies to be created, addressing the following: The vulnerability of faith practitioners who depend on their religious leaders in choosing electoral bets, and the consequences it may bring. Making voters’ education more accessible, needed to avoid depending on others’ endorsements, and make their own decisions as educated voters. Having a day dedicated to a national practice of researching the credentials of electoral candidates without compromising one day's worth of supposed earnings. Putting the religious groups in office, each sector fairly represented, including especially fair representation from nonbelievers. Lastly, it can define and specify the religious groups’ roles, especially during the campaign period, given that their influence cannot be dismissed.
This generation is living in a time when the separation of state and church is crucial, and the need to honor the law that explicitly states this is more visible than it ever was. Fair representation from every sector of society must be heard to ensure that no one is marginalized, discriminated against, and that their basic rights are granted. In a scene where moral compass and religious principles do not meet, 𝙬𝙝𝙞𝙘𝙝 𝙤𝙣𝙚 𝙙𝙤 𝙮𝙤𝙪 𝙛𝙤𝙡𝙡𝙤𝙬?
Illustration by: Asliah Gubat | Illustrator
