Our deepest and darkest pleasure

What's your pleasure? To be able to sleep soundly at night without ever having to worry about anything. 

What's your goal? To be able to serve the People and make them my philistines.

Where's my loyalty? To the law and the death of Ideals and dreams.

And our deepest and darkest pleasure? To see people live a life of comfort, free from the shackles of poverty of the mind, body and soul.

Been tired today. Had to go to the succor of my friend and represent him in court. And I lambasted the other counsel like swatting some fly. Easy. Very easy. Have'nt even lighted one Slim. Sucks.

Have'nt visited those lambs over at that site. Maybe they're just bleating. Or, maybe, just maybe, they're just eating grass. Lovely.

Need to meet someone tomorrow. There's this wealthy man who want my counsel. Well, really, am barred from serving him. Could have asked for 1 million just to sit there and listen. But, I can't. Maybe, need to go back to private practice? 

Nah. My deepest and darkest pleasure? To be able to inhale this sweet smoke while I suck the very brains and marrows of these lambs. Nice. Want some lamb chops?

The Voices of the Lambs

Fear is what caused civilizations and societies to crumble. When men fear the unknown, they resort to syllogisms, pantheism, Christianity, religion and the supranatural. They tried to explain things in ways which their imagination conceives. When something or someone successfully defeated them, they immediately surrender their rights and their liberties.

Such is the fate of men, especially those, whom I consider as "lambs". And who are they?

These are those who fear other men. Their fears are rooted in their inability to understand the world. It's either their DNA or their genes that betray them. 

What conquers people are not the glitter of wealth nor the sweet smell of power. No. It's the superiority of Ideas that claim lives or destroy societies. 

It's not flogging that killed those revolutionaries nor the beheadings of the Christian fathers that defeated pantheism in Rome. It was the victory of a superior Idea that changed Romans, from an idolatrous race to a superior one. 

That's why weak men shudder at the very presence of an Ubermensch. And when they find a group of Ubermenschs ruling them, fear suddenly snatches them. That very act of surrendering one's rights and liberties can be likened to death of the vilest of nature. For it corrupts the very core of men's spirits, transforming them into slaves and robots.

That's what happened with my apprentice Mr. Marocharim. And more of them will succumb to the brilliance of the Ubermensch. It's just a matter of time.

Mr. Marocharim's Dreams

Mr. Marocharim did not refute my answer to his post. Lest Mr. Marocharim forgets, this debate is not about “injustice”; nor about how “fractured” society is “along the lines of rich and poor,” “of (the) powerful” and “powerless”. No.

The core issue is about power, and the elite’s relationship with the governed (tsk,tsk, Mr. Marocharim, If i'm your Polsci teacher, I'll ask you to leave my class immediately and just plant kamote).

It is about state formation. It is about the relationship between those in government and the governed. What I cited are not fallacies; they are indeed, theories rooted in reality and in history.

I dispute his juvenile assertion that elites are not institutions. However, what I don’t understand is what he meant by this phrase “elites circulate”. Do you mean to say that elites are like “air” or the “wind”? My gulay, how “fractured” your logic is, my dear Padawan.

What you describe as “power” of the people is mere illusion. Your assertion that “the ruling class, by virtue of its economic power, will continually be in the struggle of those who oppose it…cannot resist the forces of change for long” is fallacious. Can you cite one successful people’s revolt which effectively dislodge the ruling class or the elites from power? Even in the Cuban Revolution of 1958 and that of Russia, they are all elite-led, even fostered a new clique after the Red Forces seized power. Did the “people” you described held some kind of power over the state and society? No. What power are you talking about? Probably, you’re talking about “liberties” which is a mile different from “power”.

And yes, I believe in what Foucault said that “when there’s power, there’s resistance” for surely, every thing in this universe has a dual quality. But, again, this is not the issue. Let me remind you that the issue is who holds the power and how this thing is being exercised.

Now, you cited the ballot as the physical manifestation of the social contract, yes? A contract is a meeting of the minds. Have you voted? When you placed the name of your candidate in that piece of paper, was there a Contract that was signed between you and your candidate? When you were writing, were you apprised of the terms of reference to govern the relationship between you and the candidate? Did you see any fine print there?

A ballot is simply an expression of an individual’s will. It is not an exercise of power; rather, it is an exercise of a right. You have the right to vote whoever you want. But if you tell me that exercise of a right is corollary to an exercise of power, that is erroneous thinking.

Laudable, but I respectfully disagree with the implications you raise. You did not answer my question, Sir; if the President should stay on the basis of a 7% growth rate last year, why is 7.4% of our people unemployed, 21.0% of our people underemployed, 16.2 million Filipinos are without electricity, 62% say they're poor, and parents eat their children's leftover chicken? It's been seven years; our people demand to "ramdam" the "kaunlaran."

With the data I have presented earlier, it is obvious that this positive economic growth does not - and cannot - justify the injustices suffered by our countrymen. The best barometer of economic growth is never numerical extrapolations from statistics, but actual situations that define whether or not the people enjoy the fruits of the economic growth you so hark.

Economic growth rates alone do not dictate development. A truly developed nation looks after the weakest of its members: trickle-down does not work You are stuck in a framework that as long as the graphs go up, it's all good. That is insufficient, HP. Yes, these economic accomplishments were the handiwork of a weak President given the fact that the few enjoy these benefits, and the many enjoy the scraps that fall from the table. The fact that we are an export-oriented, import-dependent nation is a cause for shame if GMA continues to develop stuff that are of little significance to the interest of the national polity, like call centers and memoranda of agreement to divide a nation.

On your last point:

"Why do I say that PGMA should continue her administration? Simple. Because we need a strong president. If we had a weak one, such as Erap, we could have, indeed be in the dumps right now. All of these things were accomplished despite constant destabilization attempts, smear campaigns etal against PGMA. With the interest of the nation at heart, PGMA and the rest of her team just pushed on, oblivious of all criticisms. That’s a good president for you. That’s strong leadership for you. That’s PGMA for you."

The fact that your President is oblivious to all criticism - or so you claim - is a manifestation of weakness. Pushing on without regard to criticism is:

a) The illusion that nothing is wrong
b) The delusion that Madam President is always right
c) That the people - the very people who made Government possible - are not important and insignificant.

If you say that we need a strong President, then I demand a stronger one. I demand a President who will change things, someone who can confidently tell me without a blink in the eye that the future is here, that the future is now, and it's all good. The high incidences of poverty and discontent in the Philippines demand a change of leadership and direction and vision as our Constitution allows. The fact that you claim GMA disregards criticism is an insult to the public, since criticism is a demand for the interest of the public good. That if the interests of the nation are at heart, why are there still the hungry among us? The poor among us? The people who suffer the indignity of standing stark contrast to their fellow men,

That, to me - and I'm not afraid to say it - manifests the presence of a fascist who disregards the public good in favor of a hold on power. Not a President.

Again, a poor exercise of logic. We are not talking about your “dreams”, your “demands” nor your sympathy for the poor. We are testing the validity of your statements. 

You did’nt directly refute my answer to your assertions. You have resorted to rhetorics, the kind I hear from dumb-witted activists marching in the streets and not knowing why they did it.

About having hungry people around, well, that we can’t really adequately explain. Can you explain why poverty exists? No one can. There are so many reasons why poverty exists. And it’s not solely because of a disparity in relationships.

I'm enjoying this. More of Mr. Marocharim's warped logic:

“The fact that there is a struggle against the injustices of the oligarch is itself a manifestation of power. While you so reflect a vision of Philippine reality from one side, you fail to see the other side: the struggle against injustice. These "destabilization attempts" are manifestations of the struggle against injustice: strikes, worker's movements, student movements, blogging. People are not sheep; they respond, react, struggle, and resist. You fail to acknowledge the agency of the masses. The fact that there is vocal resistance against Gloria Arroyo is proof that we exercise our agency. I, at the very least, do not mindlessly follow the President around like bleating sheep following Little Bo Peep.”

Whew. That was long. Yet, short in logic. Again, this is not the issue and unworthy of debate. This is plain and simple rhetorical conjecture. A struggle is not a manifestation of power. It is a form showing how people would act against your so-called “injustice”. It is like saying that when you kill a pig, it squeals. Of course it would. But, right now, do you hear the people “vocally” resisting Mrs. Arroyo? No. Do you have millions of Filipinos squealing like pigs waiting to be slaughtered? No. So, what’s the fuss about “struggle”, “resistance” ? If you equate this with the concept of “power”, you’re quite mistaken. The least that these things are, they are merely activities as an exercise of the right to assembly. Is this power? No.

Next....Mr. Marocharim, when will you be able to convince me to light my Slims? I've been wasting my time, some 2 minutes, destroying your arguments. Who'll make me light a Slim?

High Priest answers Marocharim. Cost: None. Sucks.

First assertion: The State as a Product of Social Contracts

“We are led by institutions in the form of the State, the branches of Government, religion, family, and so on and so forth. The personality who leads these institutions will shrivel up and die, yet the institution remains relatively constant and permanent. Yet it is important to note that the relationship between leaders and the populace is not solely a relationship based on authority, but a relationship based on mutual agreement: suffrage, voting, democracy, whatever you want to call it.

The idea is NOT that people NEED someone to tell them what to do. The reality is that we are all of different interests, and that for us to exist in peace and harmony - with our best interests in mind both as individuals and social beings - there is an apparent need for Government. That's its purpose: that's the social contract. In a nutshell, I voluntarily surrender some of my rights (i.e., lead myself in the affaird of government) to reap the benefits of being a member of society. People need someone to look for their interests.

The fact that Government still exists shows that, everywhere, people demand that their best interests - the common good - be looked forward to by those on the other side of the contract.”

My dear Jedi, this concept has been demolished already by such eminent theorists as Max Weber, Karl Marx, C.W. Mills, even W. Domhoff. This Lockian theory has been rendered inaccurate by later philosophers, since state formation or development is not a product of social contracts. Rather, states are formed through coercion, most especially by the ruling elites or cliques.

In fact, if we are to go to the fallacy being promoted by Mr. Marocharim, we will all be in a very stupid position. Did anyone of you, people in the web, signed a social contract the very minute you were born? Could you show me a copy of such “social contract”?

Social power rests in the control of key societal institutions—corporation, executive branch of government, the economy, the state and the military.

In reality, elites rule in their own interest, with the incompetent, apathetic and untrustworthy masses as their constituency. Elites are from the upper class and perpetuate themselves through selective recruitment and socialization to Elite values.

W. Domhoff, in his analysis of the US state model (which you so espouse in your piece) argues that even in the US, there is a corporate upper class that owns major business assets and controls the bulk of wealth, including major banks, corporations; major newspapers, radio, television and other mass media; elite universities; foundations; important advisory groups and organizations e.g. Council of Foreign Relations and Committee for Economic Development; executive branch of government, cabinet, judiciary, military and the regulatory agencies

This class by virtue of its economic power, also controls and influences important departments and agencies of the state and in this way becomes a governing class – the American business aristocracy. So, this is not a dreamy concept such as this “social contract”. I’m merely reflecting Philippine reality, which, my dear apprentice, has failed so badly to appreciate.

Second Assertion: Continuity is bad because of the record of the incumbent, citing economic figures.

Mr. Marocharim asserts that history demolishes the concept of continuity since PGMA allegedly did more harm than good. In his distorted logic, he says, to wit:

"What's so wrong with continuity? Simple: history. I believe that those who drafted the Constitution were gifted with enough foresight to realize that:

1. We do not want a repeat of Marcos in the 1969 elections.
2. We recognize the democratic right to suffrage (which is, in fact, part of the core of it).
3. We recognize that for this country to move forward, a change of leadership is necessary.

I'm all for working for the welfare of the people, but let's look at GMA objectively:

> 62% self-rated poverty from 2001-2003 (Mangahas, 2004: http://www.nscb.gov.ph/ncs/9thncs/papers/poverty_sws.pdf)
> 7.4% unemployment rate and 21.0% underemployment rate in July 2008 (http://www.census.gov.ph/data/pressrelease/2008/lf0803tx.html)

Let's look at more UN data in GMA's term as President:

> 91th in the world in terms of public expenditure on health, 1.4% of our GDP (http://hdrstats.undp.org/indicators/50.html), compared to 0.9% in military expenditure (http://hdrstats.undp.org/indicators/186.html) and 10% in debt servicing (http://hdrstats.undp.org/indicators/188.html)
> Only 72% of our population uses improved water sanitation (http://hdrstats.undp.org/indicators/60.html)
> 32,875,000 Filipinos are unemployed (http://hdrstats.undp.org/indicators/200.html)
> 16.2 million Filipinos are without electricity (http://hdrstats.undp.org/indicators/211.html)
> 120,000,000 people are internally displaced (http://hdrstats.undp.org/indicators/254.html)
> 89,639 people are in prison (http://hdrstats.undp.org/indicators/264.html)

I'll let the data speak for itself. If we look at these very objective numbers, then our country damn well sucks under the leadership of this President. If, in her seven years in Malacanang, we still have these problems and get beaten by Barbados, I don't know what is wrong. There is something wrong with how our Government runs this country, and there's something wrong with how the President runs this country. These are issues closer to the heart of the Filipino people even more than Ate Glo, and it's a damn shame that you support her while millions of people are unemployed, dying of dysentery for lack of an adequate water supply, and so on and so forth.

It is not a lack of confidence in the President that drives our country in the dumps. Rather, it is a lack of leadership: our hardworking President makes so many decisions about economies and recessions and yet, she insists on dividing our nation, push for the Great Debate on Charter Change or what, and fail - grossly - those who, by virtue of popular vote or trickery, voted for her in 2004.

Do you want these continuities to happen?

Now that I've shown you some of the statistical data at hand, please show me data that proves why the President should stay. I await your answer.

To answer this, let me compare the record of the previous administration (Erap’s) with that of PGMA.

Prior to 2001, economic growth has stagnated and at a negative growth. Political instability was widespread. Poverty incidence was at its all-time high. There was chaos and disorder. Foreign investments left in a hurry, leaving the country with so much deficit. Foreign and local loans ballooned to an astounding rate. I don’t need to cite all these figures to buttress the fact that from negative economic growth, we are now enjoying positive growth rates.

Last year, we saw 7% growth with a manageable inflation rate. Next year, despite the expected global economic slowdown, ADB and the WB projected a 4.3% economic growth. Not bad for a country that is export-oriented and import-dependent.

Don’t tell me that all of these things, these economic accomplishments were the handiwork of a weak president? And don’t even go telling me that “ our country in the dumps?” My dear young Apprentice, we’re not in the dumps. For if we are, you would be seeing negative growth rates. In truth, we’re not in the red.

Why do I say that PGMA should continue her administration? Simple. Because we need a strong president. If we had a weak one, such as Erap, we could have, indeed be in the dumps right now. All of these things were accomplished despite constant destabilization attempts, smear campaigns etal against PGMA. With the interest of the nation at heart, PGMA and the rest of her team just pushed on, oblivious of all criticisms. That’s a good president for you. That’s strong leadership for you. That’s PGMA for you.

Oh, answering your question did’nt even cost me one stub. Sucks. Next...

The ashes of so-called Progressive Thought

Progressive thought, as what writers in the 1920's say, is all about change. Change in what? Change in what people do. When you ask people what they think about change, they would always say that change is unchanging. Which is correct, if you think about it quite seriously. The more change we do, the least likely that things will, definitely change. Because we all would just go back to the original idea.

And what is this original idea, you may ask? It's the idea that people need someone to tell them what to do, tell them where to go, even tell them where to piss. In all human societies, people repose much trust to their leaders simply because people want to be led--plain and simple. For if people do not want to be led, then, what's the use of government? The fact that government still exists show that, everywhere, people recognize authority over them by the very government they built.

Change is unchanging. That's the law of the universe. And no amount of ranting nor so-called progressive thought would ever dispute that.

Oh, by the way, I'm writing this new post because I'm waiting for a decent answer from those whom I blasted over at Filipinovoices.com. 

As I wrote there, I have'nt even lighted one cigarette, hahaha! So much for progressive thought here in the Philippines. No sweat. Lucio Tan would not be happy with those writers over there. Why? Because they have'nt even provoked a smoker like me to puff those precious leaves. Hahaha!

Smoking is good. Yet, i've being deprived of this luxury by the writers of Filipinovoices. 

The sweet smell of Power

One writer named Mr. Benigno over at that site, Filipinovoices.com, seems to understand where I'm coming from. My writings may appear obnoxious or as radical as some may think it is, but deep inside us, we all think the same way. Or, in one way or another, savor the sweet smell of power.

Yes, power. Is it wrong to enjoy power? No. In our small nooks, we enjoy power. Power, as what a famed philosopher once said, is all about dominance. Of what, you would ask me? Well, its dominance on relationships. You can have power over your child. In the office, you have power over your underlings. Everyone, in one way or another, exercises some form of power over another. 

Is it not correct to even say that government officials do exercise power over their constituencies? When I was a local executive in a small town (I would not give Mr. Gagelonia the pleasure of "blowing me out of the water", hahaha! Such foolish things coming from a foolish mouth, I suppose), I used power for the benefit of the majority. I lead my police whenever there's a stakeout against petty criminals. You can say that I had my fair share of getting my hands dirty. But, did I enjoyed it? Yes, I'm saying with all honesty. I enjoyed all the trappings of power.

Power is all glam and glitter. You can have money (obtained legally, by the way) and you enjoy the comforts of life and the admiration of beautiful women. Such are the trappings of power. Those who don't have it, envy us. That's why we have these so-called oppositionists. They had their time but blew it. Now, they want a repeat of their perfumed life at the expense of public money. They hate us for enjoying our lives while they wallow in utter envy. These are the destabilizers I refer to here, those former government officials who had their day in Malacanang.

Is it bad to pray for this to last forever? No. 

 

Those who disagree with me, let them. But, deep inside every one, even every writer of Filipinovoices lurks a fascist, maybe not in barong, as what this stupid Mr. Patricio Mangubat wrote or this so-called smoke said today, but in some academic's clothes.

Some day, maybe I'll be fired from this job, but hey, at least I was able to say what I want to say. The future will prove me right. History will absolve me.

The Voices of Fallacy

First, I would like to correct the impression that PGMA wants to extend her term. What I meant in my earlier entries is this--we want her to. That's as brazen and honest we are about it. It's not that we benefit from it. No. Quite the contrary, we are heavily burdened by state matters that sometimes, the weight of governance seems quite too heavy. Me, I'm always writing opinions here in my office and have no time for prognostinations nor pseudo-intellectual debates.

What's so wrong with continuity? A 2020 proposition is as clear as day. It can be done through another president, although, I shudder at the thought of serving another president other than PGMA. I'm being prevailed to publish much of my thoughts on this subject, but I want to make clear that this is just my personal take on this, and in no way connected with whatever I'm doing for the sake of governance.

Likewise, I offer my hand of friendship to those who criticise PGMA. Let's move forward. We all want this country to prosper, right? Christmas is just around the corner and we have an economic crisis to solve---together. Let's puff our cigarettes together and work for the betterment of this country. Hey, we only have one.

However, short of asking, may we always look at PGMA's acts objectively? That's the least we can do. Tone down the fallacies, the accusations and work for the welfare of the people. I welcome comments such as what this DJB Rizalist character wrote here and those of Mr. Mangubat. I don't expect them to change tack, no, not in the immediate future, especially Mr. Mangubat whom I presume, has always worked for the ouster of PGMA. I'll not make a big fuss out of what he wrote against me, since I'm not a fascist. I'm just a lover of democracy. And being an Officer of the Law, I'll not judge him for writing such. Hey, we are in a democracy and in no way did I pursue a contrari view.

Having said that, let's work for the sake of this country behind one leader--PGMA. As I wrote over at FilipinoVoices, PGMA is a tireless worker. She wants stability. She pursues order.

Blasting Voices

I just counted the number of stubs in my ashtray--I puffed just two cigarettes answering all those writers over at FilipinoVoices. Blasting them away is easy. Stick with the issue. And they readily tire out. It seems to me that these so-called "intellectuals" are all heart and no mind. I mean, these tirades against PGMA have no basis in fact and in law. These are just meaningless rantings of a few who believe that they are always right and government is always wrong.

Working in government takes a lot of courage. You need to have the strong will to do what's right. You need insight. You need a steely will. And you just need to dismiss all these accusations against you simply because these ordinary citizens will never, ever, get it. That's the reason they're there and we're here.

PGMA did what she's supposed to do--try to resolve this pesky Mindanao issue. For decades, people have been clamoring the President for a definitive stand on this issue. Many sectors, especially those from the Left, share the same stand as that of Madame President. Yet, when she stood up and implemented what she thought then as the right thing, she was lambasted for it.

Governance is not as simple as one may believe it is. It's hard work. You put your entire mind and soul into it. And you're compensated, plain and simple. When you do a right thing, you're sure to meet people who'll chastise you for what you did simply because (1) their own interests were hit hard or (2) one or some of their friends were harmed by it. Government is a delicate balancing act. People will never understand the logic of policy-making.

Having said that, it's easy for people to criticize things which they don't really understand. Or they thought they did but never considered the rationale behind the act.

Like this charter change thing. People will never understand why we want PGMA to extend her term. Yes, I'm saying it here with all candor--we are for the extension of PGMA's term. We need her to continue what we've started and that is, create a society that promotes oligarchies. Plain and simple. I don't want to mince words. 

Come November, we will get what we want and people will just follow us. These ordinary people do not have the strength nor the will to oppose us. We know it from experience and from surveys. If the likes of the Black and White Movement and those minions of this dreamer named Mar Roxas think they can muster enough numbers to oust Madame from power, they're dreaming.

We will survive these anti-charter change moves and give ourselves another ten years to govern and straighten out this country. 

GSIS in dire straits

This is something for everyone out there in the Philippines, to worry about. Their state pension fund, the GSIS (the "Government Social Insurance System) has been severely hit by the global recession. Signs of a Fannie and Freddie Mac? Probably. Filipinos should fire whoever heads this GSIS fund.

Crash pummels GSIS foreign portfolio
By Daxim Lucas
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 02:58:00 10/18/2008
Most Read
MANILA, Philippines—The state-run pension fund Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) may have incurred more losses due to the sharp decline in stock prices around the world in recent weeks, an examination of its portfolio of stock holdings revealed.

The “global property securities” held by the GSIS also showed marked drops in their values in the weeks following the GSIS declared profits from its overseas investments.

One particular investment — in Helsinki-listed Citycon OYJ — showed an 85-percent drop in its value since the GSIS began its foreign investment program. Other property investments, such as in Brazil’s BR Malls Participacoes SA and Singapore-based property fund Capitamall Reit, showed declines of over 50 percent.

At the height of the global stock market meltdown last week, some of the GSIS holdings in its global investment program (GIP) lost more than three-fourths of their value, according to published stock prices.

The biggest losers in the GSIS portfolio included UK-based consumer credit firm Cattles Plc, which lost 77 percent of its value, Singapore-listed real estate investment fund CDL Hospitality Trust (down 71.7 percent), New York-listed Allied Irish Bank (down 73.8 percent) and the Royal Bank of Scotland Group (down 76.2 percent).

Other large losers included Singapore-based manufacturer Hong Leong Asia Ltd. (down 69.7 percent), China Coal Energy (down 65.7 percent) and the world’s biggest telecommunications firm China Mobile Ltd. (down 45 percent).

The GSIS has said it had acquired 123 stocks under the GIP. It listed its holdings in a paid advertisement published last week.

The GSIS earlier announced that its foreign investment activities began around April.

A survey of the performance of GSIS’ stocks showed that the prices of at least 82 stocks retreated in value from April 1 to Sept. 30, 2008 — the cut-off date for the pension fund’s published report — and only 15 stocks registered gains.

During this period, at least eight stocks lost more than half their value, with Cattles Plc performing the worst. Eleven other stocks on the GSIS portfolio lost between 30 and 40 percent during this period, and at least two stocks showed double-digit gains.

Earlier this year, GSIS allotted $600 million for foreign investments to be managed by ING Investment Management and Credit Agricole Asset Management.

GSIS president and general manager Winston Garcia earlier said the recent declines in stock markets around the world presented the pension fund with fresh buying opportunities. He said the investments were long-term in nature.

Its published investments last week also showed the GSIS earned the bulk of its declared gains from foreign exchange fluctuations — a result of the weaker peso against the dollar in which the investments were denominated.

The GSIS said it had earned P1.4 billion as of the end of September from an initial investment of P25.12 billion, for a return of 5.65 percent.

When computed in dollar terms, the figures showed that the pension fund may have incurred losses of as high as $48.9 million, or about P2.33 billion, using the latest foreign exchange rate.

In dollar terms, the GSIS may be actually losing eight percent as against a five-percent gain in peso terms.

As of late Friday, GSIS officials had yet to respond to the Philippine Daily Inquirer’s requests for clarifications on its foreign investmen

Comments on those who oppose the Reproductive Health Bill

Over here at the country which I consider paradise, people are up in arms over this controversial bill. Called the Reproductive Health bill, people from all walks of life are lambasting the bill for its alleged "anti-life" provisions. 

In between smokes, I've read the bill and for me, there's nothing wrong with it. It's actually a toned-down measure, meant to control the ballooning numbers of Pinoys. It's watered down to the point of irrelevance. I mean, is it the State's duty to protect its citizens and ensure that their future is safe? Imagine what it would be like here in Boracay if its filled to the brim? I mean, right now, this tiny island holds more than 20,000 people at one time. I'm not surprised that one day, I see this paradise under water.

Going back to this "debate" against the R-H bill, I found some of these oppositors as hypocrites. You guys, don't tell me that you do not use condoms? Don't tell me that not once in the past did you go to 7-11 and bought those goat skins? 

And when you did "it" the first time (sex, dummy!), were you uttering God or was thinking of God when you're humping your wife or your girlfriend? Of course not! You're thinking about her, right, and not some distant entity up there in the heavens, smoking as we speak.

Seriously, we need to take a closer look at this bill without our religious lenses. Reproductive health is not anti-Catholic. It's not anti-life. In fact, I think, it even promotes life. Promoting life means being responsible and this bill teaches Filipinos to be more responsible in their lives, especially this special thing called "sex".