 | s k y e c h i l l | |
Responsibility begins with the willingness to be cause in the matter of one's life. Ultimately, it is a context from which one chooses to live. Responsibility is not burden, fault, praise, blame, credit, shame or guilt. In responsibility, there is no evaluation of good or bad, right or wrong. There is simply what's so, and your stand. Being responsible starts with the willingness to deal with a situation from the view of life that you are the generator of what you do, what you have and what you are.
It is not the truth. It is a place to stand. No one can make you responsible, nor can you impose responsibility on another. It is a grace you give yourself - an empowering context that leaves you with a say in the matter of life.
- Werner Erhard | Start: | Feb 26, '10 10:00a | | End: | Mar 31, '10 |
Email: tickets@kindassault.com for ticket inquiries. Dear Carlos,
Why are South Korea, Taiwan, Japan and now China rich, and why is the Philippines poor? Demography is destiny. The dependency burden is the killer and the Philippines has one of the worst dependency burdens in the world.
Following is my story as a public health practitioner. When I was 36 I had lived in the Third World for half my life, in post-war Japan and Guam and the Philippines in the 1940s and 1950s, in Korea and Taiwan in the 1960s when they were impoverished, and in the Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, Nepal and Turkey in the early 1970s. I speak from experience. Nothing I say is theoretical or academic.
I am truly saddened that the Philippines has opted to be poor due not to "foreign oppression" but to lack of demographic understanding. I have to start out by telling you that I am old, but that will become apparent as you read through the narrative. My degrees are in Sociology and Anthropology from Cornell, and a Masters in Public Health from Berkeley. My story starts in post-war Japan. I was born before the Second World War. I visited the Philippines and Japan first in 1948 as a US military dependent. In the Philippines I saw a country climbing out of the ashes of the war, at about the same economic level as Japan where I saw first hand the destructive power of the carpet bombing of Tokyo. My guess then would have been that the Philippines would be a rich country in 60 years and that Japan would still be poor. Boy was I wrong!
I was in Asia again in 1954 and 1955, during and after the Korean War, when I was in high school. I noticed then that the Japanese were very intent on exactly reproducing themselves, not overdoing it in the reproduction department. The average family at that time had two kids and they invested heavily in their children. They put all their money in making sure that their children never went through what they had suffered, and they saw that the path to success was to have two children, invest in their kids' education, get them into good jobs and that would be their path to family, community and national economic security. From my first visits to Japan in 1948 to my last visit there in 2007 I have seen a country go from flat on its back to one of the very strongest economies in the world.
From 1967 to 1972, I was fortunate to work as a consultant in two countries where the governments used voluntary programs and succeeded in drastically reducing population growth with some measure of assistance from the international community. These were South Korea and Taiwan (although Taiwan is not literally a country, but a province of China). Their achievement is best measured by the Total Fertility Rate or Live births per average woman in her reproductive lifetime. In South Korea and Taiwan we took the TFR from above 5, which implies doubling every 20 years, to 2, which is replacement level, in a generation. In each country it is now well below replacement level. We did this through massive intervention as I will explain below. I then worked in one country where we failed miserably to achieve the desired fertility reductions, the Philippines, and I can tell you why we failed.
In each country I served formally as the Information, Education and Communication Consultant to the Ministry of Health, Family Planning Division. In each country I also served informally as a consultant to the Ministry of Education, where I helped with curriculum design. I was supported by foundation money.
We succeeded in Korea and Taiwan because there was a strong government push for reduced fertility and we were able to communicate this mind-set to every citizen, including school children and young adults, grown-ups of child-bearing age, and elders. Everyone could look around their peninsula or island and say, "This is enough."
In Korea and Taiwan there was first a trust in centralized government and in the top down process of distributing government largesse. This is an artifact of the Confucian system of respect for the hierarchy. The central government, the provincial government, the county and township and village governments were all saying the same thing. There was no organized opposition from any religious organization and there was no ethnic minority saying, "we are being outbred." Children were surviving at an unprecedented rate, and economies were in transition as people left the countryside where child labor was a plus, for the city where children were a financial burden. Education was free through middle school and everyone stayed in school as long as the family could afford.
The message was clear and repeated in road signs, in pamphlets, in curriculum and on radio and TV - "Girls and Boys are Equal, Two is Enough!" This was a really powerful and shocking statement, putting the word "Girls" in front of "Boys" and saying something so patently unsupported by historical observation, that two children would be enough. The shocking statements were explained by government officials and university professors and other respected leaders telling the media that in the new era you did not need 3 or 4 boys to continue the family name, and to bring the family into the modern era, that improvements in health care and opportunities for education made the two child family viable, and that the land and the economy could support those two children, but not three or more. There were no restrictions against birth control or abortion in either country.
After my success in Korea and Taiwan I was identified as a person who could help other countries through the demographic transition, and I was invited by the Philippine government to serve in a similar advisory capacity, from January 1972. Upon arrival in the Philippines I was asked by Dr. Conrado Lorenzo, Director of the Population Commission (PopCom) of the Government of the Republic of the Philippines to report on how the experience of Korea and Taiwan might help the Philippines. Unstated in this request was the implicit understanding that there was about $50,000,000 in immediately available foreign aid that could be gotten to support a plan that would have the same effect in the Philippines as we had in Korea and Taiwan.
My report to the Population Commission was not well received. Population Commission was broadly representative of the Philippine society with representatives from all the major government departments, including health, education, labor, social welfare, housing, etc. They wanted to achieve the replacement levels that they saw coming in both Korea and Taiwan and had brought me in to tell them how to obtain that result. They wanted to reduce the dependency ratio, the number of children that had to be supported by each working family. However, in the Philippines I was able to find 13 factors that mitigated against any such success. The government of Ferdinand Marcos was not universally trusted at every level. There were over 100 separate languages that were coded by the Census Bureau and many of these linguistic subgoups were afraid of being "outbred" by the others, particularly the politically dominant Tagalogs, who were not the numerical majority.
The Catholic Church was against the program, as was the most vociferous non-Catholic sect, the Iglesia ni Cristo, which was afraid of being outbred by the Catholics. Child mortality was high, health care was poor in the rural areas and the city slums, the gap between the rich and the poor was growing, there were few alternative roles for women besides wife and mother, and everyone had a relative in the US or knew someone who had a relative in the US, so they felt there was a place to send their excess children.
There was little access to any birth control except the rhythm method, and abortion was absolutely illegal. The PopCom clinics did prescribe pills and insert IUDs but the Church fought this movement through their Responsible Parenthood Council. Free education stopped before 6th grade for most, illiteracy was rampant, rural development was underfunded meaning no lights in the village, there was no adequate social welfare system to help those who did not have large families to support destitute citizens, basically life was a lottery and the more tickets you bought (children) the more likely you were to succeed.
Most telling were the responses in Knowledge, Attitude and Practice surveys in the three countries. In Korea and Taiwan most people automatically listed the keys to success in the following order:
1. Hard work
2. Education
3. Contacts (mostly school alumni)
4. Family
5. Luck
Filipinos usually ranked the steps to success in the following order:
1. Luck
2. Family
3. Contacts (mostly under the table or overseas)
4. Education
5. Hard work
My report concluded that until the society changed in every way, money sunk into family planning programs would be entirely wasted. That was not what the Popcom wanted to hear, and I was marginalized after that report came out.
Here is the crux of the matter.
In the mid 1960s South Korea and the Philippines had about the same population, about 30,000,000 and had about the same per capita income, around $1,200 per year.
According to the Population Reference Bureau South Korea in mid 2006 had a population of 48,500,000 and a per capita GDP of $21,800, and a TFR of 1.1, implying a population that will eventually fall by 2050 to 42,000,000, a population size which we may assume can be sustained at a high level of economic and social development indefinitely. South Korea has become a Developed Country.
The Philippines in mid 2006 had a population of 86,000,000 and a per capita GDP of $5,000, which is very poorly distributed, a TFR of 3.8, implying a population that will rise by 2050 to 142,000,000. The Philippines has become, in my estimation, a "Never to be Developed Country," not a "Developing Country."
Do you get the difference? Korea went from 30 million to 48 million, increasing by half, and the Philippines went from 30 million to 90 million, tripling in size. The experiment is OVER. High fertility over a long period of time CAUSES stagnation and poverty. Low fertility over a long period of time CAUSES economic growth. Having 3 or more children per woman is suicide.
China's economic success today is due to the lowering burden of a reduced dependency ratio. China has succeeded brilliantly in reducing fertility in a single generation through the One Child policy. China's TFR is now 1.6. Their population is now 1,300,000,000 and will not go much over 1,400,000,000 by mid-century. They are riding the boom of decreased dependency ratio. In the long term it is the dependency ratio that will determine a country's fate, since every added dependent above one or two is a drain on the family and on society. China is already importing Filipinos and Vietnamese to work in their factories.
With this information as a basis, can we begin to talk about effective means for solving the ongoing world population crisis? Countries like the Philippines, Bangladesh, Mexico and sub-saharan African nations still have 5 or 6 kids per woman during her reproductive lifetime. According to Population Reference Bureau the Less Developed World (without China) has a 2006 population of 4,028,000,000, growing at a TFR of 3.4, with a projection in 2050 of 6,545,000,000. That is 2,507,000,000 added mouths to feed in a world that is growing less food, catching less fish, increasing the size of deserts, losing entire fresh water sources, depleting ground water, becoming far more polluted and on the brink of swift ecological decline through global warming. That means we need to somehow accommodate an additional population of young people whose numbers will equal the entire world population in 1955. There is a limit to the carrying capacity of the planet. Are we rats? Who wants to live at the level of quality of life of the Philippine village when you could live like a South Korean or a Chinese?
Population is still the number one problem on Earth, since all other problems stem from the fact that there are just too many of us humans, and everyone wants the American lifestyle. We have pumped up everybody's expectations to an unsupportable level and now we need to face that fact. As Thomas Malthus said, "Nature will take care of the population problem in time, either through adjustments to the birth rate or to adjustments to the death rate."
So, Carlos, how do we proceed? Can the Philippines really afford not to take aggressive action to legalize and actively promote contraceptive use? I am so sorry to have seen this 60 year descent into population abyss for the Philippines when the surrounding countries went to the mountaintop in the same era.
Dave
Reposted from:http://celdrantours.blogspot.com/2008/11/letters-in-bag.html
This is a letter to Carlos Celdran from a Mr.Dave from Florida, a man who used to work as a consultant in the PopCom of the Philippines back in 1972. Dave offers a very interesting insight into how population management affects economic development. He also presents an interesting analysis on why it didn't work in the Philippine setting. Now remember, his experience is from more than 30 years ago. I am pleased to know though that a few things have changed for the better since he was here in the early 70's. Most interesting of all is that the Iglesia Ni Kristo is Pro-Reproductive Health nowadays, a huge shift from their position back then. - Carlos
Support the Reproductive Health Bill today.
|  | Come to the album launch of The DORQUES in Saguijo this Friday, November 14, 10PM.
www.thedorques.com
|
‘Ang ganda ng Pilipinas’ By Ma. Gabriela C. Tatad Philippine Daily Inquirer - Youngblood It was almost 6 a.m. as our car sped along the near-empty streets of Quezon City, we watched the sky begin to lighten, streaks of deep pink and purple rushing through it. The clouds were fixed in a way I had never seen before. It was so beautiful, and almost hypnotizing — the kind of sight that sets you at peace after a long day at work. Then, rather quietly, a friend of mine said: “Ang ganda. Parang wala tayo sa Pilipinas.” [“It’s so beautiful. It’s like we’re not in the Philippines.”] And just like that, the magic was broken. This is the sort of thing I hear quite often from different kinds of people in relatively similar situations. But whenever it is said, it is never spoken in disparagement. It is simply an honest observation, a reaction to what the eyes perceive. I have to say I can’t really blame people who react this way. And why should I, when we are constantly surrounded by traffic jams and humidity and squalor and “taong grasa”? Why, when there is always some kind of trouble caused by gangs and politicians as well as crime and injustice? With our eyes becoming so jaded, it becomes incredibly easy to forget that our country is not just a jigsaw of crowded streets. We forget that it is not all concrete and unresolved problems, but that it is also crawling with cool mountaintop communities, peaceful valleys, vast seas, unexpected sights, beautiful sunsets, toasty bonfires, urban cities, sandy beaches and rural towns full of people who think “Islander” slippers are the epitome of fashion. Earlier this year, I found myself in Camarines Sur province for a summer camp. One night, after transporting stuff from one house to another, my friend Peejay and I both lay down on the back of the pick-up during the trip home. We didn’t speak, and it was not because the movement of the pick-up mimicked that of an OSIM massage chair and left us practically half-asleep by the time the truck pulled out of the driveway. We didn’t speak because as the truck ran the expanse of the narrow provincial road, the water from the plantations shimmered in the dark, making the fields on either side appear like endless seas of glass. We didn’t speak because the stars danced with the clouds in the sky, and the wind whistled in our ears. In that moment, all I could do was lift my hands to touch the air, close my eyes, and think: “Grabe. Ang ganda talaga ng Pilipinas!” [“The Philippines is really beautiful!”] Last December, my friend Arah shot her short film, “Bugaw.” Based on a true story, it is about a husband and wife who are in such dire financial straits that the husband eventually becomes his wife’s pimp. It is the sort of heartbreaking tale that makes you wonder how this place we call home can be so cruel. We shot it in this little shack in Antipolo City, the same kind of makeshift house you could find somewhere along Commonwealth Avenue in Quezon City or deep in the bowels of Manila. It was common, complete with your usual walls styled from a mishmash of “yero” [G.I. sheet] and scrap wood. There was earth where there should have been a floor, and yet this house was lovelier to me than all of Versailles. The light came in through the galvanized walls like soft gold, and lent a sweet kind of charm to the little sea-foam green stovetop, the aging black kettle, and worn-out turquoise panels dotting the walls. It should have been incredibly depressing, but in that moment, all I could think was, “Grabe. Ang ganda talaga ng Pilipinas.” I’ve been blessed to have traveled to the other side of the world, and I still dream of seeing the rest of it. But I’ve been just as blessed to walk the less-than-pristine sidewalks of Katipunan Road, to tread water along the flooded streets of Abad Santos, to see art come alive at the Cultural Center of the Philippines, to eat, drink and be merry along Maginhawa Street, to laugh at the sketchy massage parlors that line the Kamias strip, to stop in the middle of my commute and have some penoy at Recto station, to roam Ali Mall in Cubao, Quezon City, just because I feel like it. And while I absolutely dislike “American Beauty,” there is one line from the film that rings true: “There is so much beauty in the world.” I believe much of that beauty lives here, with us, in our streets and across our landscapes. What is lacking is not aesthetics, but our desire to see and cherish what our little corner of the world has to offer, to get to know this place we are from, to appreciate the complexity, the dangers, the wild nature and the simple joys that litter the rest of the country. Let us open our eyes, hearts and minds, and allow ourselves to be surprised by the wonders that exist even in the ruins and landfills. Let us ride horses in Baguio City, harvest pearls in Zamboanga, and stop in Cebu for some unforgettable “lechon” [roasted pig]. Let us see, smell, taste, feel, learn, and listen. And in this journey, may we fall into the magic that makes us, quite rightfully, the Pearl of the Orient. It is my hope that one of these days, whether you are lying on a sunny beach with a fruity little drink or you are caught in the middle of a traffic jam amid a sea of red lights, wipers clicking back and forth at chubby, dark rain clouds, the beauty that surrounds you will take you by surprise. And that even as your toes touch the waters of Hawaii or your feet scrape the mountains of Kilimanjaro, the allure of home may haunt you in a way that makes you whisper, “Grabe. Ang ganda talaga ng Pilipinas.”
Ma. Gabriela C. Tatad, 22, is a film student at the Marilou Diaz Abaya Film Institute and Arts Center. | Start: | Sep 25, '08 5:00p | | End: | Sep 25, '08 7:00p | | Location: | Bulwagang Sala'am (Asian Center Conference Hall), University of the Philippines |
The global financial system is in deep crisis. Three of Wall Street’s “Big Five” investment banks have collapsed, Bear Stearns in March, and Lehman Brothers and Merril Lynch over the past two weeks. Other disasters include the seizure of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac by their regulator and, the shocking U.S. government takeover of a hopelessly illiquid American International Group (AIG). The remaining big investment banks, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs, are also in trouble, with the former trying to sell itself to a Chinese bank. The contagion has spread worldwide with stock markets falling dizziyngly, prompting the central banks of the U.S., Canada, the European Union, England, Japan and Switzerland to pump $300 billion of short-term funds into the markets. The emerging markets of the BRICs countries ( Brazil, Russia, India, and China) have “suffered their biggest sell-offs in years.” The Asian Development Bank warns that the turmoil in the West could affect economic growth in Asia. In the Philippines, the Central Bank announced that seven local banks have $386 million (P17.86 billion) investments in Lehman Brothers, whose bankruptcy is the biggest in U.S. history. T hese are Banco de Oro, Metrobank, RCBC, Standard Chartered (Phils), Bank of Commerce, and UCPB.The Economist sees the causes of today’s financial panic in “the buying of property at inflated prices in the hope that some greater fool will take it off your hands” and that Wall Street had “too much capital devoted to products of questionable economic utility.” The Guardian opined that “the financial markets have been exposed as a vortex of artifice, a land of mirrors in which nothing was real and now everything is shattered.” The use of U.S. taxpayer money to bailout bankrupt private firms is described by economist Nouriel Roubini as “socialism for the rich, the well-connected and Wall Street – where profits are privatized and losses are socialized.” But the extraordinary government interventions are also seen as a critical stab at the heart of free market capitalism and its rhetoric about the dangers of state incursions in the economy. Several questions desperately beg for answers. What are the real causes of the current financial turmoil? How long will it last? Are the foundations of global capitalism in danger? Given the volatility of the markets, the complexities of financial market transactions, and the lack of disclosure by corporate executives, is the situation actually worse than it appears? Is there a need for a new financial architecture? How does this crisis affect the Philippines? Are Philippine banks telling the truth about their exposure in the bankrupt firms? Are the ordinary Filipino’s bank savings safe? “We are finding the New7Wonders of Nature campaign to be excitingly different from the first one. So many breathtakingly beautiful, natural places are still quite unknown to many. From waterfalls to fjords, rainforests to mountain peaks, freshwater lakes to salt flats, we are discovering together the incredible beauty and variety of our planet.”Support the nominees from the Philippines! We have four nominees:
- Chocolate Hills
- Tubbataha Reef
- Puerto Princesa Subterranean River National Park
- Mayon Volcano
All of them are in the Top 12. Check the live rankings here. Vote now!
Spread the word! I have been under the weather for days now. I am still unsure as to what triggered it though. I know I have been smoking a lot lately, mostly because of Numi and her coldstone addiction =P Although, I don't think smoking alone caused this. It's weird because every year, just right before my birthday, I always get sick. My mom said this happens every year, it never misses. Strange.
----
It's my birthday soon and I'm going to Hongkong - again! I was there last year for my birthday as well. I don't really like the city that much, though I love to shop and eat there. And yeah, you can find the nicest shoes there too. This year, we're going for Joff's gig. While there, I'm planning to go visit the beaches of HK, for a change. Anyone who has been to any of the beaches in HK before? I need some real tips =)
I really hope people will be enlightened with this article. Read on.
THERE IS A CONTINUING campaign to discredit the reproductive health bill through misinformation. Straightforward answers to the negative propaganda will help educate and enlighten people on the measure.
The bill is not antilife. It is proquality life. It will ensure that children will be blessings for their parents since their births are planned and wanted. It will empower couples with the information and opportunity to plan and space their children. This will not only strengthen the family as a unit but also optimize care for children who will have more opportunities to be educated, healthy and productive. The bill does not interfere with family life. In fact, it enhances family life. The family is more than a natural nucleus; it is a social institution whose protection and development are impressed with public interest. It is not untouchable by legislation. For this reason, the State has enacted the Civil Code on family relations, the Family Code, and the Child and Youth Welfare Code. The bill does not legalize abortion. It expressly provides that “abortion remains a crime” and “prevention of abortion” is essential to fully implement the Reproductive Health Care Program. While “management of post-abortion complications” is provided, this is not to condone abortion but to promote the humane treatment of women in life-threatening situations. It will not lead to the legalization of abortion. It is not true that all countries where contraceptive use is promoted eventually legalize abortion. Many Catholic countries criminalize abortion even as they vigorously promote contraceptive use like Mexico, Panama, Guatemala, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Paraguay and Ireland. The Muslim and Buddhist countries of Indonesia and Laos also promote contraceptive use yet proscribe abortion. According to studies, correct and regular use of contraceptives reduces abortion rates by as much as 85 percent and negates the need to legalize abortion. Contraceptives do not have life-threatening side effects. Medical and scientific evidence shows that all the possible medical risks connected with contraceptives are infinitely lower than the risks of an actual pregnancy and everyday activities. The risk of dying within a year of riding a car is 1 in 5,900. The risk of dying within a year of using pills is 1 in 200,000. The risk of dying from a vasectomy is 1 in 1 million and the risk of dying from using an IUD is 1 in 10 million. The probability of dying from condom use is absolutely zero. But the risk of dying from a pregnancy is 1 in 10,000. The bill will not promote contraceptive mentality. The bill does not prohibit pregnancy. Critics are mistaken in claiming that because contraceptives would be readily available, people would prefer to have no children at all. Couples will not stop wanting children simply because contraceptives are available. Contraceptives are used to prevent unwanted pregnancies but not to stop pregnancies altogether. Timed pregnancies are assured. The bill does not impose a two-child policy. It does not promote a compulsory policy strictly limiting a family to two children and no punitive action shall be imposed on parents with more than two children. This number is not an imposition or is it arbitrary because results of the 2003 National Demographic and Health Survey show that the ideal of two children approximates the desired fertility of women. Sexuality education will neither spawn “a generation of sex maniacs” nor breed a culture of promiscuity. Age-appropriate RH education promotes correct sexual values. It will not only instill consciousness of freedom of choice but also responsible exercise of one’s rights. The UN and countries which have youth sexuality education document its beneficial results: understanding of proper sexual values is promoted; early initiation into sexual relations is delayed; abstinence before marriage is encouraged; multiple-sex partners is avoided; and spread of sexually transmitted diseases is prevented. It does not claim that family planning is the panacea for poverty. It simply recognizes the verifiable link between a huge population and poverty. Unbridled population growth stunts socioeconomic development and aggravates poverty. The connection between population and development is well-documented and empirically established. UN Human Development Reports show that countries with higher population growth invariably score lower in human development. The Asian Development Bank in 2004 also listed a large population as one of the major causes of poverty in the country. The National Statistics Office affirms that large families are prone to poverty with 57.3 percent of families with seven children mired in poverty while only 23.8 percent of families with two children are poor. Recent studies also show that large family size is a significant factor in keeping families poor across generations. Family planning will not lead to a demographic winter. UP economics professors in their paper “Population and Poverty: The Real Score” declared that the threat of a so-called demographic winter in the Philippines is “greatly exaggerated, and using it as an argument against a sensible population policy is a plain and simple scare tactic.” The National Statistical Coordinating Board projected that a replacement fertility of 2.1 children per couple could be reached only by 2040. Moreover, despite a reduced population growth rate, the effects of population momentum would continue for another 60 years by which time our total population would be 240 million. Humanae Vitae is not an infallible doctrine. In 1963, Pope John XXIII created the Papal Commission on Birth Control to study questions on population and family planning. The Commission included ranking prelates and theologians. Voting 69 to 10, it strongly recommended that the Church change its teaching on contraception as it concluded that “the regulation of conception appears necessary for many couples who wish to achieve a responsible, open and reasonable parenthood in today’s circumstances.” However, it was the minority report that Pope Paul VI eventually supported and which became the basis of Humanae Vitae. Even 40 years ago when the encyclical was issued, theologians did not generally think that it was infallible. Monsignor Fernando Lambruschini, spokesperson of the Vatican at the time of its release, said “attentive reading of the encyclical Humanae Vitae does not suggest the theological note of infallibility… It is not infallible.” Five days after the issuance of the encyclical, a statement against it was signed by 87 Catholic theologians. It asserted that “Catholics may dissent from … noninfallible Church doctrine” and that “Catholic spouses could responsibly decide in some circumstances to use artificial contraception.”
(Rep. Edcel C. Lagman of Albay is the principal author of the proposed Reproductive Health and Population Development Act of 2008.) First of all, the Reproductive Health Bill is NOT about abortion. In a nutshell, it is about the promotion of both natural and artificial birth control methods to help us control our population. It is about responsible parenthood, informed choice, birth spacing, and respect for life.It is about EDUCATION and EMPOWERMENT. I don't understand why the Catholic Church vehemently opposes it. This article by Fernando Fajardo argued the basic points surrounding this controversial bill: What exactly is the position of the Church? It says family planning is all right but only if it is done by natural method. All other methods that prevent a baby from being conceived, like the use of pills, are immoral. But then what exactly is immoral in the artificial method and moral in the natural method? The Church has much explaining to do.Let’s take the point of view of a yet unconceived baby. What is the difference for an un-conceived human being — or call it a pre-existing soul if you wish — whether his/her conception does not materialize because of either natural or artificial methods. The poor “pre-existing” mate is not conceived, and therefore not born, no matter whether conception has been avoided naturally or artificially. In other words: when you are waiting hungrily for a bowl of rice, does it make any difference for you whether this rice has either never been cooked (no sex) or been thrown to the pigs (natural birth control) or cooked and thrown away in a plastic bag (artificial contraceptives)? The outcome for the hungry man is always the same, that is: the rice won’t reach neither your mouth nor your stomach. Therefore my question, why then does the Catholic Church promote “natural” contraceptives and condemn artificial ones? Logically, if they are pro-life, “natural” means of contraception should also be banned, being anti-life, too. Add to this that they are saying that sex education in schools is not good or necessary for our students because “They will lose their innocence and period of latency. Let’s not disturb them.” Let’s just hope that the awakening sexual drives of our students will also be willing to keep to this clerical advice. Let me ask you further: why is it that the Catholic Church fears that the reproductive health bill will finally graduate to abortion? Here I have somehow lost the logic. A baby which has never been conceived can logically not be aborted. Therefore, any means that help people to avoid unplanned and unwanted pregnancies would consequently help to reduce the staggering number of abortions in this country, and anywhere else, for that matter. On the other hand, those who deprive the people from such means are consequently promoting an increased number of unwanted pregnancies, and subsequently an increased number of abortions, presently hundreds of thousands every year.” If you want to know more about the current national health situation of Filipino women and the legislative history of the bill, visit the website of The National Commission on the Role of Filipino Women.Reproductive Health is a basic human right. A right that all the men and women in the world must uphold and respect. If you are pro-life, pro-development, and pro-education and empowerment, join me and thousands of intelligent Filipinos support the Reproductive Health Bill. I love The Dark Knight! It is undeniably the best Batman movie, and one of the best movies I've ever seen.
The actors, the "acting", the lines, the cinematography - everything is perfect. Christopher Nolan deserves an Oscar for this movie. But what I love most is the irony - the promotion of hero-worship and yet its disparagement as well.
Batman is not a hero. They had to discredit him just to save the reputation of Harvey Dent, and save the entire Gotham City from degeneration. The people of Gotham shouldn't know about Harvey "Two- Face" Dent's killings because he is a hero in their eyes. And a hero is what the people of Gotham desperately need during desperate times.
I wonder how many real "heroes" were sacrificed in the history of the world. And I wonder if the "heroes" we now recognize truly deserve the honor and worship.
The movie offers a lot of thought-provoking ideas. Heath Ledger's performance was particularly penetrating and intense. His Joker character was pervasive and challenging at the same time, and he embodied it to perfection. Remember the part when Joker's voice was heard over the loudspeaker of two ferries, and he informs them that they are part of a social experiment? One ferry must press the button (detonator) and destroy the other boat by midnight, or else he will destroy both boats. One boat full of civilians and another boat full or prisoners, who will kill who first?
I love it when messages are presented in a subtle manner and people are left to make their own conclusions. This movie is jam-packed with meaning and significance and watching it was definitely a treat for me.
Have you ever wondered why poorer countries have more people than richer ones? In the Philippines, poor families usually have more children than rich families too. Curious, isn't it? It's also strange that in Catholic countries like Italy and Spain (which brought Christianity to our country), divorce, abortion, birth control, are legal and accepted. But in the Philippines, all these concepts are not just illegal but sinful. I can't help but associate our economic state to our state of mind. Is it possible that our level of education (as a people) affects our understanding of things? Are we allowing the Church to meddle with our political decisions too much? Are we too young as a country to stand up for what is legally right? Where developed countries are now debating whether to allow gay marriages or not, the Philippines on the other hand, does not even have divorce yet, or worse, no legal laws on birth control and contraception. Sometimes, I feel like we're back to the middle ages. Indeed it is difficult to think differently when you have been "conditioned" to think in a certain way. Almost all the schools and Universities in the country are managed by religious denominations. The Church remains powerful and actually dictates national policies and elections. But as this article in Inquirer.net surmises: The policy issue facing the national government, therefore, is not whether the bishops understand the plight of ordinary people or whether Catholic politicians can stand up to Church pressure, it is whether the country can balance population with resources.In the meantime, aside from a burgeoning population, we have to deal with poverty and hunger, unhappy couples who can't move on, 1.4 million unplanned pregnancies every year, deaths due to illegitimate abortion, issues on reproductive health and all the evils that come with them. I don't know about you but I think that our economic woes are reflections of our consciousness, as much as our decisions. Am went to Anawangin Cove last weekend. Now I wanna go too! Who doesn't after seeing these pictures? Click here. I haven't been to a beach with pine trees before. I've been to a lot without toilets ( Am said there's only one makeshift toilet there) but not one with pine trees! I've always associated pine trees with cold weather and not bright sunny beaches =P Apparently, Anawangin was only discovered around two years ago. The fine, white sand in Anawangin Cove is mainly Mt. Pinatubo lahar. Am said the cove didn't exist before the Mt. Pinatubo explosion. Wow, isn't it amazing how a big ugly tragedy like Pinatubo could create something as beautiful as Anawangin? Nature works wonders indeed. I've always loved beaches and I've been exploring remote islands since I was 16. No, make that 10. My mom used to bring me to all these secluded places when I was young and I guess I caught her virus and continued to do so when I entered University and gained my independence. I can proudly say that I've been to almost all regions of the Philippines and have seen how beautiful our country really is. No kidding.  All these Anawangin talks remind me of our trip to Camotes Island (Cebu) last summer. That place is beautiful too. I've uploaded some pictures so you can see what I mean ;) Anyway, I'm planning to camp out in Anawangin Cove and hike Mt. Anawangin with some friends here at the office soon. Wanna come?
My long weekend is ending, and tomorrow is going to be work as usual. I follow French holidays (because I work for a Swiss-Franco company) and it's great because the French love their holidays and they value them as much as their work. It is common to have long weekends such as now (It's Bastille Day in France) and you usually take Mondays or Fridays off. In May alone, we got three long weekends! Awesome, right? The French actually get two-three months vacation every year. Can you believe that? They believe that life is not only about work, and that there is more to life to value and enjoy. I think it is indeed very important for people to rest once in a while. We have to effectively manage the juggling act between paid work and other activities that are important to us, like spending time with family and friends, taking part in sports and recreation, or simply spending time doing nothing. Finding work-life balance is the only way we can reduce stress and avoid its harmful effects. So I'm going to enjoy the last few hours of my long weekend watching DVDs, eating, and spacing out. Viva France!  "It is always a happy occasion when one chances upon a winner, and an even happier occasion when that winner happens to be Filipino."As an addendum to my previous post about Koreans, I am sharing another article I found in Inquirer.net. Unlike the other article, this one highlights the quality of Filipino English teachers.Feliciano Jaime “Chito” Atienza, winner of The New York Times 2008 English for Speakers of Other Languages (Esol) Teacher of the Year award, has been teaching English to immigrants for two decades.The award is not only a personal recognition, he remarks. It recognizes all teachersin the Philippines and abroad. It should erase the stigma that Filipino teachers can’t teach English abroad, he says.He adds that sometimes, Filipinos are more capable of teaching the language than native English-speakers. Sometimes students understand Filipino teachers more easily than American teachers, whose pronunciations are slurred by regional accents and twangs.This is so true. I have always thought that Filipinos can teach English better to Europeans (especially French and Italians) because their first language sounds more Filipino. A French teacher who lives here in Manila affirmed this. He said he prefers to speak Tagalog (Filipino) instead of English because it sounds more like French. When he teaches French to his students, he even reminds them to pronounce the words like they would in Filipino and not in English.Theoretically speaking, Filipinos should be the best teachers for Asians (including Koreans) because we are more familiar with their first language (in terms of phonology) than Americans or other English-speaking countries. Filipinos also studied English in schools and did not just learn it through acquisition which makes us more familiar with grammar and structures. Also, Filipinos are mostly bilinguals or even multilinguals; there are a lot of languages and dialects within the country, depending on which region you are from. This makes us more attuned to learning and speaking new languages, and therefore, teaching them. No offense but most Americans only speak English and have never learned any other language except English.I think the best teachers are those who have once been students too, and that is true in both English and life. I was reading GMAnews.tv this morning and I came across this article: RP to Korea: Let Pinoys teach English in schools.
Apparently, Korea banned the Filipinos (together with other non-native English speaking nationalities) from getting work visas as teachers in their country, despite the fact that thousands of them flock here to learn English every year.
I work for a company that teaches English to Europeans (French, Italians, Russians, Germans, etc.) and reading about this pestered me a little bit =P
If the United States can hire Filipino teachers to teach English and other subjects in America, how much more Korea?
It's a big misconception to think that only "native speakers" can teach English. The best teachers, in English or in any other subject, are the ones who can actually teach - regardless of where they are from.
I have some friends who work for Korean English Schools and they always complain about how Koreans prioritize learning accent (especially American accent), instead of grammar and structure. They think that if you can speak with a "twang", you can speak English.
This is a big lie. Accent is cultural. If you want to speak English, you have to learn basic functions, grammar, and structure first. It doesn't matter if you speak with an American, British, or Filipino accent - as long as you are understood. Learning how to pronounce words correctly has nothing to do with accent.
I should know. Aside from teaching English, my job is to check and monitor lesson reports of English teachers around the world (including American and Canadian teachers). Believe me, hiring a native speaker is not tantamount to hiring an effective language teacher. Knowing how to speak the language is never a guarantee that you could teach it. If I were to teach Filipino, I would suck so bad.
I haven't updated my multiply blog in years. You must have noticed the date of my last post. Well, I'm trying to revive my writing career (through my blogs) this month and so I decided to update my multiply account too. I'm back! I just hope it won't be short-lived =PI'm happy that it is so much faster to upload pictures here now. I remember waiting for hours just to do this before. Today, I uploaded three albums and it didn't take more than 15 minutes!And oh, my new template looks fierce, lovin it!
| |
