Law on Premature Marriage, a discrimination against womenFrederick B. NebatenMarriage in Filipino culture is basically conservative and monogamous in nature since most of our law was based or adopted from the Divine Law of Christianism provided by the Holy Bible. As a result, we live by the commandments of God even in our marriage as written in the book of Exodus 20:7, Thou shall not commit adultery and Exodus 20:17, Thou shall not covet thy neighbors house, thou shall not covet thy neighbors wife, nor his maid servant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbors.Couples are bound by the Bible and the law to be faithful to their life-partner to the day of their death as cited on Mathew 19:5-6, For the man shall leave his father and mother and shall cleave to his wife, and they twain shall be one flesh. Wherefore they are no more twain but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.The law adopted the Biblical principle and stated in the Family Code under Article 1 marriage is a special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into in accordance with law for the establishment of conjugal family. Suggesting that marriage is a lifetime contract and can never be dissolved as any of the contracting parties may wish. Thus marriage can only be dissolved by death nor legal annulment, however the dissolution of marriage does not signal an absolute freedom for a Filipina citizen to remarry for the reason that Article 351 of the Revised Penal Code states that any widow who shall marry within three hundred and one day (301) from the death of her husband, or before having delivered if she shall have been pregnant at the time of his death, shall be punished by arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos. The same penalties shall be imposed upon any woman whose marriage shall have been annulled or dissolved, if she shall marry before her delivery or before the expiration of the period of three hundred and one day after the legal separation.Such law was promulgated most importantly for women who are not pregnant or women who are not sure whether they are pregnant from their previous marriage to avoid confusion on the paternity or filiation of any child that may be born under such circumstances. The question is why 301 days or ten (10) months when normal pregnancy lasts only nine (9) months. It is because the law accept possibility that a woman maybe in pregnancy for more than nine (9) months or retarded conception as in the case of U.S. vs. Dulay, 10 Phil. 305. For those who are pregnant during the death of their husband, the law applies only until delivery while disregarding women who in their first marriage proved that the husband was impotent or sterile.The purpose of the law in general was for the protection of any child in given cases to preserve their rights but such cases can now be easily resolved through science and with the use of medical technologies like DNA or Deoxyribonucleic Acid and Genetic Engineering, paternal or maternal lineage are now easy to distinguish making the existing law obsolete and turning it like discriminatory law against women.Moreover the law does not respond with countrys obligation on International Law on Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women, Article 16 mandates that, states parties shall take all appropriate measure to eliminate discrimination against women in all matters relating to marriage and family relations. Also there are remedies provided by the Family Code of the Philippines in resolution of the filiations of a child, Article 168 says that, if a child was born before the lapse of 180 days after the celebration of second (2nd) marriage is considered to have been conceived with her first (1st) marriage; and if a child was born after 180 days following celebration of second (2nd) marriage, whether within 300 days after termination of the first (1st) marriage or afterwards, the child is considered to have been conceived during the second (2nd) marriage.As Senator Nancy Binay told in an interview, Although there have been no known conviction for violation of Article 351 of the Revised Penal Code, it is high time that Congress takes the necessary step to abolish provisions of our laws which are antiquated and serve no other purpose other than to perpetuate discrimination against women.