The Church is under siege from politicians, and some white-knight “free thinkers” and some groups operating under the fringes of “Christian-based” churches, and the “publicity-crazed” church trespasser, Mr. Carlos Celdran because of its position on the controversial reproductive health bill under consideration in Congress.
But what is the reproductive health bill all about? It is about massive production of condoms, pills and sex literature so that the poor can benefit from them. Really? How about the benefit that will accrue to the big pharmaceuticals and their patron-politicians who get the lobby money from these multi-nationals so they can mass market these sex tools? It is being downplayed!
What infrastructure is tasked to implement this program? Government agencies, local government units including private employers. In the case of government units, the infrastructure is in place already, but you have to add more employees to implement the program. This is the upside but the downside is, you have to source money for their salaries.
The private employers are tasked to provide “free” information about this bill to their workers. But are they suppose to provide them free condoms and pills too? It is not clear about free provisions for condoms and pills, but the bill will involve the private sectors nonetheless, and therefore they will be forced allocate some budgets for this project.
The RHB is a subtle form of “lex taliones” principle which holds that only the fittest survives in the jungle. The object of the bill is to limit the population created by those who are not fit to procreate. Those who are not fit to procreate are the poor people in slums, ghettos and the poor farmers in the countryside. The rich have no problem procreating because they can always afford to raise their creations, it is therefore the poor that is being targeted by the bill. Eventually, the poor will be extinct in one or two generations because there will be nobody to replace them. The bill will preserve the resources for the rich by eliminating the poor people. The upper class gets the full benefit of this bill which is being assiduously marketed as pro-poor, and that to me is very sickening!
Now let us go to Mr. Carlos Celdran who trespassed the church property and called the prelates as modern-day Padre Damasos, in reference to the friar who was hated for his hypocrisy and for looking down at the Indios in Rizal’s novel, the Noli Me Tangere. He dressed himself in the attire of the genuine patriot and martyr and tried to drumbeat his political rage that the “church” should not interfere with the affairs of the government.
But did you hear Mr. Celdran protest when politicians queued at the backdoor of these “churches” so these church dignitaries and even the not so “dignified” ones in the likes of Jose Velarde and his minions give their much-sought-for endorsements? Is it all one-way for Mr. Celdran or should we educate him of the principle of “quid pro quo?” Would he raise the issue of separation of the church and state had the church thrown its support behind the bill? Probably not!
Jailed for offending the sentiments of the faithful and disturbance of solemn religious ceremony, Mr. Celdran would dispute his act being considered offensive and he would frame the debate on free speech. I fully agree with his position that he is not liable for disturbance of religious ceremony, however, he would be liable for trespassing. That he even raised the issue of free speech is annoying because he wants an untrammeled exercise of his speech but he would prohibit it to the prelates when they speak their minds opposing the proposed health bill.
He is free to wear a mocking attire of the great martyr and speak his abomination over the Church’s position on the bill in public plaza but he has absolutely no right to go into the Church’s property, abuse the faithful by his speech and excuse his conduct under the spectrum of “free speech”. The Church is not obliged to provide him a forum for his tirade. He can do it in a public forum designated for debate and free speech, but not on Church properties.
The immense publicity he has gathered for his antics is reflective enough of our destitute DNA make-up that we can always mistake a clown for a Patrick Henry or a Rizal look-alike. What a a hilarious screw-up!!!!
31 thoughts on “The Missed Issues On RHB and Mr. Celdran!”
“How about the benefit that will accrue to the big pharmaceuticals and their patron-politicians who get the lobby money from these multi-nationals so they can mass market these sex tools?”
Back at you. How about the benefit that will accrue the Catholic from the immeasurably destitute population that will serve as their monetary concession?
“And thus I clothe my naked villainy. With old odd ends stolen forth from holy writ. And seem a saint when most I play the devil.”
the church is better off with rich people sponsors than the poor who go to Sunday mass without chipping in single cent into donation boxes/baskets.
And yet the poor still chips in their last bit of centavo into the church coffers, hoping that they get a better life or at least a better afterlife.
i don’t think so.. the poor just go on sunday mass for the ritual and not to contribute to the church. even if they did, the church would be much interested on fat-envelopes coming from rich people.. it would have no moral compunction to get rid of the poor if the only object of the church is monetary… but it isn’t. the church is participating in the debate on moral ground not because the church wants more poor for financial gain when it can have more money for supporting the argument of the rich that only them have the right to procreate.
And what authority does the Catholic Church have over the issue? What about other people in the country like Protestants, Muslims, Buddhists, Agnostics and Atheists? Don’t they have a say in the issue. Besides, the church is supposed to be just a form of guidance. They’re not supposed to dictate what the masses should avail of. And even if this bill enacted, Catholics can simply choose not to avail of birth control agents. It’s not like anything is being forced.
That’s why we’ll always be a third-world country. We let organized religion dictate what we can or cannot do just like in the middle ages. We’re just like Iran in that way. Look at the progressive countries in the world like those in the West or East Asian ones. What they all share is that they have a secular society. Jesus himself never intervened with matters of the state, so why should the Church do so?
italy i think is more progressive than our country, but it is the seat of organized religion. the west is declining because it is veering away away from the Godly society it was as envisioned by their forefathers, with the abortion left and right going on. China is geting to be an economic power but at the expense of human rights.
the church had its bad era as well its glorious era but it is there, from my point of view, to herald the word of God.
the trapos, the protestants, muslims, buddhists, agnostics and atheists have their say on the issue that is why they tried to pass this RHB. Now, it is time for the Church to exercise the same speech by opposing it.
and what made you think that the masses need this bill? Did you have a one-to-one communication with all of them, or you were just seeing the most vocal among them?
I think the Catholic church’s got enough say on the matter as it is. They’ve been dictating the Filipino way of life since the colonial era. So I think other views and faiths deserve a chance. And like I said, those contraceptives and birth control agents aren’t being forced on the public so its still a matter of choice. If the Catholic population doesn’t want to avail of it then they can simply choose not to. Or is the Church so insecure about the faith of their follower?
if itsn’t being forced on the public why do you have a make a law out of it?
the church is dictating only on those who believe in the church, but those who do not believe, can disregard it or consider it as a merre suggestion. the believers consider the churh directive as a road to the correct path.
You condemn people like Mr. Celdran for trying to lecture on the clergy, but neglect to mention that the Catholic clergy itself abuses its rights when they use the pulpit to criticize government policies. So much for an organization that does not pay taxes.
Mr. Celdran hit the nail on the head when he wore that “Rizal outfit” and bore the Damaso placard. Dr. Rizal was a known critic of the Catholic Church’s abuse of power, which is why his novels weren’t taught in Catholic schools for a very long time.
For someone who claims to know about faith and God, you really haven’t read Romans 13:1-5 of the New Testament.
Really, RHB will exterminate the poor “Holocaust” style? You also neglect to mention that First World Asian countries like Singapore and Japan have low birth rates! So much for the rich not practicing safe sex.
You should really stop wearing that tinfoil hat over your head, mister. Mr. Celdran’s hat is much better looking. 🙄
japan and singapore are rich countries not because of population control but because their people are hardworking, with vision and right attitude…and like hongkong, corruption is not as endemic as in RP.
if you like Mr.Celdran better, wallow in it, but others like me consider him a clown.
I’m not sure on Japan, but first-person accounts of Singaporeans seem to refute this as almost unanimously agree that population control was the key to their progress. Once the population of Singapore became smaller and more manageable, they were able to able to enforce them better and discipline and order followed. As a drawback however, the populace sees their government as a group of thugs despite their high standard of living.
“if it not being forced on the public why do you have a make a law out of it?”
It’s a bill on legalization, not on imposition. WE’re not living in China with a 1 child policy and forced abortions. Besides, contraceptives are only a small part of the Bill, as it also promotes family planning, better sex education, and gender equality. Most importantly, there’s nothing in the bill that legalizes abortion.
“the church is dictating only on those who do not believe in the church, but those who believe do not consider it as an imposition but a direction towards the right path..”
And that is one of the biggest problem of the Catholic Church. It hegemonically forces it viewpoints on everyone else, acting as though they are the only holders of morality in this world. Self righteous notions like that are hardly any differently from fundamental Muslims that want to impose Sharia law across the world. And before the church talks of morality, they should tackle their own pedophile scandal first.
contraceptives are there already with or without the bill. the church is going against it because the govt. is making an official stand on how to end life. contraceptives are really abortificients, aside from the health hazards they bring. please expand your research to find out.
the church is using its pulpit to preach what it considers will guide the faithfuls to the right path. the non-believers are free to disregard it. the non-believers had been attacking the church on various websites. the church has a right to defend itself by using its pulpit. mr. celdran must use his own pulpit, which is his blogsite to advance his speech and not the church premises while a mass is being celebrated.
if pharmaceuticals can lobby for RHB passage, so the church can lobby against it by using its pulpit!
There was another famous person who use the church as his pulpit. Who was that again? Oh yes. Martin Luther. If it wasn’t for him, we’d still be living be living the hypocrisies of the Catholic Church.
Agreed with you Votom! The narrow-minded, fundamental Catholic church is the reason our country is still a third-world nation. Why should we listen to their teaching just under the rationality of “because we say so”? If we let people like that dictate our lives, then we can justify something like a modern-day crusades against the “non-believers”.
when you speak of a narrow-minded church you were talking of yourself as “broad-minded”. that is not a debate. that is a pissing contest. the church is clear that “contraceptions and condoms” are immoral because it could lead to promiscuity and and waylaid young people. while you argue that you have the right to choose. whether it is immoral or moral is beside the issue, you are only interested in your right to choose. you are not actually prevented to make your choice but you should recognize also that the church has the right to speak against your choice to prevent others from choosing the way you choose. its directive is being addressed to its flock not those outside the flock. RHB from its perspective will harm its flock and so it is making its position against it. as simple as that.
This is what the Church is really worried about:
Among all the arguments that I present, you only manage to answer my Singapore argument with a faulty one that is out of topic. Where in my last reply did I mention that Singapore and Japan became prosperous because of artificial population control? I was only replying to your original article.
Maybe you should read your own article again, as your slip is showing, mister. 🙄
maybe you should read your own comment. you were the one not really making an argument. if you say that singapore and japan, and i will include hongkong, prosperous, my take is that because people in these places are more hardworking, proud of their own race (country), with right attitude and lesser corruption. if you think they are prosperous because these people have safe sex, then we can leave it at that because apparently, we have our own sense of personal truth..
one named sotirios tried to post a comment in my personal blog and asked me why i was disbarred. i did not post it because it was malicious, but i answered him this way:
I am sorry I cannot approve your comment because it is not truthful. If you go to the website of the Supreme Court and look for the registry of lawyers, you will find that JOSE C. CAMANO from Sagnay, Camarines Sur is still listed as a lawyer, therefore I am not disbarred. As to what I did to merit disbarment, this, I cannot answer because I was not disbarred. If there is no malice in your comment, I can approve it. You can at least read my blog and my two motions for reconsideration (which are also in my blog, including my suspension) if you wished to be informed. But you would not want to be informed and wish only to spew your malicious venom. Besides that has nothing to do with the issue of RHB.
The right culture and low corruption index are only a part of what makes a prosperous country. Population control is also a another facet as overpopulation results in depletion of resources. Unless we are deluded enough to believe that we can encroach upon the “endless” wilderness and resources will never deplete. We have only one planet and it has its limits
precisely.. we want to limit the right of the poor to procreate so we can preserve the reosources for the rich… as i said, progress is about jettisoning the unproductive sector of the society (the poor begetting more poor children). it is lex taliones coming in different color. i read the bill in all honesty, hence my opposition. the germans through hitler has no more right to perform shoah, than any other modern society under the guise of population control.
It’s not about limiting rights of the the poor to procreate, its about making the poor more informed of the consequence of bringing up children they cannot afford to feed. And consequently these once poor people, can rise up from the poverty line. And the Holocaust analogy fits poorly into the mold as the Holocaust had more to do with venting Germany’s grudge against the Jews for the Treaty of Versailles, and for their lebensraum ideology, which was in fact for the growth of the German population. And anti-elitist (elite meaning proficient not wealthy) sentiments is another reason for this country’s intellectual downfall.
if the issue is population control, will the rich sign a compact with the poor that henceforth, children bearing will no longer be allowed across all members of the society for a period of 10 years.
i don’t think they will agree with it because the rich can always support their children, therefore the bill is only targetting the poor.
i said ‘lex taliones’ coming in another color, an admission that it was not at par with “holocoust” but it has the same purpose, the elimination of of the the inferior members of the society, whether for race-biased reason or for “class” preservation motivation.
that the bill is to educate the poor is similar to saying that “killing civilians” is simply “collateral damage”. its all a communication technique.
I doubt that the rich will bar the growth of the poor. In fact, it is more likely that they will promote their population as that would equate to more people who will avail of their goods. And why dowe pester the elite of our society with calls for acts of heroism when the burden of extra hard work in reality falls on the shoulders of the poor masses? Likewise, I still don’t see the Holocaust analogy as the goal of the bill isn’t to expel or eliminate the poor, but to uplift them and bring them above the poverty line. We aren’t expelling killing the poor en-mass like what the Nazis did with the Romas and the Jews. And many developed countries have already legalized health care bills of less water-downed caliber, and it has not become a Holocaust like what the Nazis did in World War II.
While I have a pro-life stance, I have to be pragmatic about the issue of abortion. Whether we like it or not abortion is around even without the RH Bill’s existence. And the one thing worse than an abortionist is an underground abortionist, who people might turn to if a legal abortion isn’t viable. And with a questionable reputation, you might lose two lives instead of one. Also unlike conventional doctors, you can’t sue them for malpractice without being caught in a legal crossfire as well, just by the fact that the victim chose the abortion even after knowing its illegal. This isn’t just the case for our country but for others as well. If you’ve seen the news recently, there are also cases such as these in Nairobi, Kenya, where women also die from underground abortionists, where utensils like knitting needles and table-wares are in the abortions. While the bishops of Kenya also wanted to ban abortion in any manner, I think this will have the reverse effect of driving more women into committing abortions. So while abortion is clearly a bad thing, not legalizing abortions also has its share of consequences. Though I’m thinking only hypothetically, if abortion becomes legalized, it might ironically deter people from taking it. From a psychological standpoint, abortions in this case would now be weighed more evenly among the choices for women who had unwanted pregnancies, rather than some tempting “forbidden fruit”. It would also help if the abortionists are within legal protocols, so that they have mandated to explain the consequences of have an abortion. Yes, the most ideal choice is still not having an abortion at all, but that is simply not going to be a reality. Ever. We have to make due with what we have and occasionally painful choices have to be made to avoid more deaths. Abortion is here to stay whether we like it or not.
the church is only speaking for the faithfuls.. anybody can go ahead with his/her choice.
True. Anybody can, and should go ahead with his/her choice. That’s why the RH bill is important for our country. It ensures that unbiased and complete info (pros and cons, including risks involved) regarding the choices that can be made are known to all.
I don’t really know what our Catholic Church is so afraid of. We can still preach about proper, natural family planning, and in fact that is also included in the RH bill.
However, the state has the responsibility to inform its citizens of what options they have with regards to family planning, regardless of religion. This is based on articles 6 and 17 of our constitution.
Pera pera lang yan. It’s all about your taxes to pay for somebody else’s genital well-being.
Property rights, as opposed to taxing (legally robbing) people, should be enough to determine the morality of RH Bill. All these religious brouhaha is just a nuisance
RH law is one step closer to communism. I don’t like that.