Proposed survey in aid of legislation

Having read Ed Sorreta's arguments in a previous post,
I thought maybe we should survey some of our constituents
in Quezon City on how they prefer to contend with the following:

(1) harmful effects of smoking,
(2) gout,
(3) frequent hangovers,
(4) lethargy,
and (5) fear of catching AIDS.

The pollster will ask which among the two sets of solutions is preferred:

/_/ Set # 1.

1. Use cigarette filters.
2. Take anti uric acid medication.
3. Alka-Seltzer to beat hangovers.
4. Lipovitan or Red Bull to stay fresh and alert.
5. Use condoms for protection against HIV/ AIDS.

/_/ Set # 2.

1. Don't smoke.
2. Watch your diet.
3. Drink moderately.
4. Take enough rest.
5. Understand what marriage means.

The survey results might be a good aid in legislation which our councilors might find useful.
I wonder what type of legislation though, and if it is even needed.

On the Epiphany

The story of the wisemen captures our imagination for many different reasons. The end of the story is most fascinating. We are told that the wisemen went home another way. They did it to avoid Herod. I always wonder about that other route home. Was it quicker? It seems like a longer detour. The story is saying that once you have really experienced Jesus, you can't go back to the old way of life. The encounter with Christ must bring about a turn. Changing one's life changes the way one takes.

Happy New Year!

QC Ordinance on Reproductive Health and Population Management

On the morning of December 18, 2007, the Committee on Laws of the Quezon City Council conducted its first public hearing on the Reproductive Health and Population Management Ordinance proposed by Councilor Joseph Juico (Dist. 1). The hearing was presided by committee chairman Councilor Jesus ‘Bong’ Suntay (Dist. 4). Also present were Councilors Dorothy Delarmente (Dist. 1), Joseph Juico (Dist. 1), Jorge Banal, Jr. (Dist. 3), Antonio Inton, Jr. (Dist. 4), and Edcel Lagman, Jr. (Dist. 4).

Seven speakers from both sides were given alternate turns to deliver a 10 min. speech. Below is the statement of bro Ed Sorreta which I reproduce in full:

“I am a father and represent many fathers who oppose the ordinance on Reproductive Health and Population Management proposed by Councilor Joseph Juico.

The 1st point that comes to my mind is “Can you make a legislation prohibiting our brother Muslims from having a 2nd or 3rd wife? Or an ordinance forcing Iglesia ni Cristo members to join unions or rallies?” The obvious answer is no, you cannot, simply because it is their belief and faith which is a basic human right. It is for this reason that no piece of legislation of this sort has ever been debated on the national and local levels.

Yet here you are with this ordinance that forces Barangay health workers and officials, public and private schools to implement a program that goes against the moral teachings of the Catholic Church. Otherwise, fines and imprisonment await those who refuse to tow the line. I hope you realize you cannot do this, especially when more than 80% of your constituents are Catholic! This ordinance will result in a conflict between the state and the Church as it compels Catholics to go against the teachings of the Church. Where is the freedom of choice that Sec 2C of the ordinance provides? The Catholic Church is obliged to speak out the truth, and be clear on her teachings against the use contraceptives (for good moral and temporal reasons, I might add). But does she excommunicate the suppliers of contraceptives, or does she ask the faithful if they use contraceptives before giving them communion? She does not because she respects the basic freedom of every person to choose what is right or wrong. After all, at the end of the day, each one will be held accountable to God alone. And so, contrary to what one of your lawyer speakers said, the Church does not impose, rather it is this ordinance with its punitive action that does unjustly.

The 2nd point is something very close to my heart since it will affect my children, grandchildren and future generations of my family. Part of the definition of Reproductive Health in your ordinance means ‘the ability to have a safe and satisfying sex life’. This is a component of the sex education curriculum being proposed for grade 5 to 4th year HS students, including the use of contraceptives and condoms to avoid HIV infection. This kind of teaching simply is inconsistent, for how can you tell our children not to smoke, and yet on the other hand, teach them how to use filters just in case they do decide to smoke? Additionally, how can you tell our kids to avoid premarital sex, but at the same time, teach them the use of contraceptives and condoms just in case? Who among you, parents, especially our young councilors, would approve premarital sex for your teenagers?

In this regard, I wish to pose these question to our vice-mayor and councilors, especially to Councilor Juico: “Is this something you want the schools to teach your grade 5 to 4th year kids?” If your answer is ‘no’, then there is no need for this ordinance. However, if you honestly think this type of lessons will be good for your children, I have no problem with that. It is your right to bring up your children the best way you see fit. I would suggest though that you do it yourselves. Teach your own children. Or if you do not feel competent to do this, maybe you can organize a summer class for parents who think the same way you do, and they can enroll there, together with their kids. That would really be freedom of choice. But DON’T TEACH IT TO MY CHILDREN! As much as I respect your parental right over your children, so do I expect you to respect mine. I am a Catholic who adheres to the teachings of the Catholic Church, especially regarding contraceptives and I wish to pass these on to my children and their children. By making these lessons compulsory in all public and private schools, you are stepping into my parental responsibilities. UULITIN KO PO – RESPETUHAN LANG PO TAYO! Is that too much to ask? In the end, if my kids get into trouble, the government will not be around for them.

In conclusion, I, together with many parents, unequivocally state that we oppose this ordinance on Reproductive Health and Population Management. We pray that you will respect our basic human right to our religious beliefs and our primary responsibility as parents to our children.”

(In all honesty, all seven speakers against the ordinance presented incontestable arguments, while those in favor had shallow justification. Some of them even seemed unprepared. It makes me wonder. Could it be that the hearings are moot and academic? Could it be that in reality, the ordinance will be legislated, whether we like it or not? I hope I am wrong.

But all the more for us to be vigilant in our prayers and in our action. Our families are under clear and present danger.)

Bible is clear?

The Bible is clear...
In most of our lively discussions, my evangelist friend always insists on this every time he has a chance.
It goes without saying that he is a clear Sola Scriptura proponent, and basically what he is saying is:

“If Scripture is studied in its entirety and in its proper context, the truth can be easily determined.”

I have extreme difficulty in coming to terms with this statement. Let me attempt to gather all the premise behind this:

1. First of all, you have to be sufficiently literate in order to do this. And very patient too. The bible contains 73 books (ok, ok – lets just say 66 for purposes of illustration). Over a thousand chapters and 31,000++ verses. But if you’re persistent enough and really read it for some minutes daily, you’ll cover the entire book in a year. A tall order for couch potatoes whose idea of serious reading is limited to newspaper headlines, sports pages, and TV programmes.

2. Next, you must have developed a certain degree of good cognitive, conceptual, analytic, synthesis, critical thinking, retentive and extrapolative mental capabilities in order to make sure you get the context right. When faced with arcane and apparent contradictions in verses, compare scriptures with scriptures and pinpoint all those related verses wherever they are, as the bible does not contradict itself. You will need an elephant’s memory for this.

3. Develop a fluent vocabulary in the language of the bible version you are reading. Be forewarned that there are many archaic words like rebuke, abideth, gainsay, glistering, - these are just a few of those. And so, be prepared to do some painstaking exegesis every now and then. Of course you may want to read the bible version translated in the local dialect you grew up with. I once tried to read the Tagalog version, and promptly gave up after a few tries. I felt like I was reading Greek.

4. Learn some of the historical culture of the biblical times. This would give you a more accurate insight into the comings and goings at the time. Remember, you were born in the 20 th century, in an era far removed from the time when the apostles walked the earth. The subtle nuances of the culture in that period of lambs, scrolls, famines, slavery and kingdoms might be completely lost on a person used to the environment of Corporate takeovers, the internet, wireless technology, Paris Hilton and McDonalds.

If you seriously consider at least all of the above, chances are you will get the truth right. In statistical terms, that would translate into a probability of 0.568 % . Yes, less than 1 percent probability of getting it right, after going through all that trouble. If our math teacher demands the equation for such an unremarkable figure, tell her that it is already an optimistic estimate. In the Philippines alone, excluding other countries, there are already 176 or so denominations who remain convinced that the bible is so easy to understand. Each one of them claims their own correct interpretation of the bible. Since all of them cannot be true at the same time, let’s just assume that at least one is.

"Understandeth thou what thou readest?" (Acts 8:30)

In Hope we are saved

Pope Benedict's recent encyclical "Spe Salvi" is just what we need at these times.

It has 49 parts, very rich in content and well worth the reading.
Largely philosophical and theological, it also touches on themes such as the role of political systems in building a better world.

Excerpts from "Spe Salvi" - Pope Benedict XVI

26. It is not science that redeems man: man is redeemed by love. This applies even in terms of this present world. When someone has the experience of a great love in his life, this is a moment of “redemption” which gives a new meaning to his life. But soon he will also realize that the love bestowed upon him cannot by itself resolve the question of his life. It is a love that remains fragile. It can be destroyed by death. The human being needs unconditional love. He needs the certainty which makes him say: “neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom 8:38-39). If this absolute love exists, with its absolute certainty, then—only then—is man “redeemed”, whatever should happen to him in his particular circumstances. This is what it means to say: Jesus Christ has “redeemed” us. Through him we have become certain of God, a God who is not a remote “first cause” of the world, because his only-begotten Son has become man and of him everyone can say: “I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me” (Gal 2:20).

27. In this sense it is true that anyone who does not know God, even though he may entertain all kinds of hopes, is ultimately without hope, without the great hope that sustains the whole of life (cf. Eph 2:12). Man's great, true hope which holds firm in spite of all disappointments can only be God—God who has loved us and who continues to love us “to the end,” until all “is accomplished” (cf. Jn 13:1 and 19:30). Whoever is moved by love begins to perceive what “life” really is. He begins to perceive the meaning of the word of hope that we encountered in the Baptismal Rite: from faith I await “eternal life”—the true life which, whole and unthreatened, in all its fullness, is simply life. Jesus, who said that he had come so that we might have life and have it in its fullness, in abundance (cf. Jn 10:10), has also explained to us what “life” means: “this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (Jn 17:3). Life in its true sense is not something we have exclusively in or from ourselves: it is a relationship. And life in its totality is a relationship with him who is the source of life. If we are in relation with him who does not die, who is Life itself and Love itself, then we are in life.
Then we “live”.

(emphasis mine)

On Breastfeeding

Good informational pdf document on breastfeeding.