MALAYBALAY CITY (MindaNews / 16 August)—In one of my columns many years ago, I quoted the line “Freedom is always for those who think differently” by Rosa Luxemburg, a Polish-German revolutionary thinker. That line is again worth remembering in light of the controversy generated by drag queen Pura Luka Vega’s “Ama Namin” (Our Father/The Lord’s Prayer) performance, which Christian believers, Roman Catholics in particular, deem sacrilegious and offensive to their faith.
Some local government units have in fact passed resolutions declaring Amadeus Fernando Pagente (Vega’s real name) a persona non grata.
The resolution of the Provincial Board of Bukidnon, one of the LGUs that declared Pagente a persona non grata, reads, “Not only is the viral video deemed blasphemous, it is also offensive, disrespectful, insulting, unacceptable, and outrageous to the Christian religion and belief.” Based on media reports, the resolutions by other LGUs across the country cited similar reasons for banning the drag queen in their areas.
When the State or any of its instrumentality penalizes individuals for their religious belief and practices, that’s persecution.
The same is true when the State goes after people who challenge certain tenets of any religion simply because their acts are deemed blasphemous and obscene. This is exactly what those LGUs did in passing the persona non grata declarations against Pagente.
It seems it didn’t cross the minds of the members of those local legislative bodies that what they’re doing may have bordered on violating the constitutional principle of separation of Church and State. This principle not only upholds freedom of religion but also protects the government from undue influence by religious institutions.
The LGUs issued those declarations in response to the sentiments of Christian believers, who felt gravely offended by Pagente’s performance. In other words, the action of our public officials was influenced by such sentiments.
Of course, anything that appears to contradict one’s belief, be it religious, political or cultural, often comes as offensive, insulting, etc. Yet, there’s no way to prove or disprove a particular belief. That’s why religion or faith, like politics and culture, will always remain an opinion, not knowledge, one fortified by “holy books,” rituals, and dogmas that are handed down as divinely inspired.
As an opinion, religion mustn’t act like an infallible body of science that has withstood a series of tests and processes of verification. What happened centuries ago in Europe, when religion held sway over science, throwing the continent into what history would call the Dark Ages, should serve as a lesson.
On the legal side, will the concerned LGUs arrest or drive away Pagente if the drag queen enters their provinces, towns, or cities? Their declarations are merely symbolic, not legally binding. In case you disagree, this is what the Bill of Rights (Section 6, Article III) provides: “The liberty of abode and of changing the same within the limits prescribed by law shall not be impaired except upon lawful order of the court. Neither shall the right to travel be impaired except in the interest of national security, public safety, or public health, as may be provided by law.”
Clearly, nothing in Pagente’s controversial performance poses risks to national security, public safety, or public health.
Pagente’s critics who wish to see her punished may invoke Article 201 of the Revised Penal Code, which sets penalties for acts that “offend any race or religion,” among others. If that happens, it would be interesting to see how the court would weigh this archaic provision vis-a-vis the constitutional guarantee on freedom of expression.
(MindaViews is the opinion section of MindaNews. H. Marcos C. Mordeno can be reached at hmcmordeno@gmail.com.)
