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!!!!