All about the ba(c)kla(sh)

By now, many Filipinos—from politicians and journalists to entertainers and activists to pastors and prelates—have weighed in on boxing icon and delinquent legislator Manny Pacquiao’s outrageous comments about gays and lesbians in relationships being worse than animals on various media, and on the unprecedented backlash the aspiring senator’s carelessly chosen words have generated.

As of this writing, the backlash continues to grow. Nike has already knocked off Pacquiao from its roster of endorsers, and several Western commentators and media outlets have condemned him. The halfhearted, pointless apology he posted on Instagram did little to undo the damage.

Then there is his possible disqualification from this year’s polls because of his scheduled fight—his last—with American Timothy Bradley on Apr. 10 (local time). That event will give Pacquiao more than two hours of airtime during election season—something the Commission on Elections forbids.

What do I think of the controversy? I’m actually glad it broke out.

Let me explain. Pacquiao’s remarks gave Filipino voters a small, unfiltered window into his mind—a valuable thing during election season. It allowed them to learn about his views on certain issues or groups—in this case, homosexuals, bisexuals and transgender people, who, whether you admit it or not, have enriched our nation. Much of their contributions, especially to culture, are positive and undeniable.

They’re not just skilled beautificans and couturiers; many of them are also talented artists and writers, committed actors and filmmakers, dedicated lawyers and doctors, hardworking businessmen and teachers, loyal law enforcers and military personnel, and even good public servants. There’s so much more to them than their gender and sexual preferences and, yet, that’s what a lot of people often seem to focus on, as if it’s their business. And Pacquiao calls them and their romantic relationships worse than animals?

And about that comparison: it’s plain wrong. As outraged social-media users have pointed out, same-sex activities among animals have already been documented, despite Pacquiao saying that none exists. Oh, if he only did a quick Google search on the subject before he put his foot in his mouth. That could have spared him the fine mess that he’s in now.

Poor politician

The comments also highlighted the boxer’s suitability as a senator. No one will argue that Pacquiao is a brilliant fighter and, by many accounts, a generous and modest man who, despite his amazing wealth and fame, hasn’t forgotten his humble beginnings. But as a politician?

Ask yourself: Would you, in all conscience, elect to the Senate a man with an appalling attendance record in the House of Representatives? Would you vote for a man who had very few or none of the bills he authored enacted? Would you even consider a man who seemingly regards his basketball and boxing commitments more important than his legislative duties? He may be God-fearing and have a genuine desire to help his constituents, but do these alone make him qualified to be a senator, whose sole job is to write beneficial measures and have them passed by Congress and signed by the President? Certainly not.

In a way, Pacquiao is like that one-time co-worker we probably know: immensely likable, popular, maybe a hit at office-sponsored parties and sportfests, but lousy at the job that he was hired to do. If you’re a business owner, would you even think of interviewing him for a position?

There’s no denying how much Pacquiao has changed since becoming an evangelical Christian, and his remarks obviously reflect this. His vigorous opposition to same-sex marriage is nothing new; he expressed this at least once before. Dismaying as his stance is, he has every right to oppose such unions as much as I—and many other people, and not just from the LGBT community—have every right to support them.

What I personally find unacceptable about his opposition is that he, a man of great influence who is seeking a more prominent role in government, justifies his position on the issue by citing polarizing Bible verses without regard for the context in which they were written. The Bible is not a collection of books delivered directly from heaven or divinely dictated and interpreted to a few chosen scribes; it was written over thousands of years by Middle Eastern men who lived in a time, and viewed the world in a way, that’s so different from ours.

Untold anguish

This vicious practice of indiscriminately quoting the Scriptures without framing it in the proper context has brought untold anguish to oppressed groups throughout history, among them the LGBT community. For centuries its members have been told that they are inferior, that they are an abomination, that they will go to hell, just because the Bible says so. That practice, among others, denied them the chance to lead fulfilling lives, stripped them of their dignity, led them to being ostracized and, in many cases, doomed them to die.

Is it surprising, then, that they responded to Pacquiao’s remarks the way they did?

That’s why the backlash gladdened me. Some have argued that it has gone overboard, but that only shows how empowered enough gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgendered people and their supporters are now in confronting a beloved international sports figure—and other similarly religious, high-profile people—and telling him that his comments are intolerable. That would have been unimaginable a generation ago.

In the age of Google, they will no longer keep silent, be bullied into submission, or shamed into acceptance. More and more people and institutions are on their side, and they know it. And we should be all the more glad—and grateful—for it. That means we have evolved—well, many of us, anyway.