Naturally, as has been repeated time and again in this blog, numbers do not make the truth. Even if the anti-RH side had lost this one, this blog and the anti-RH side will remain firm in their opposition to the RH bill and the forces behind it. Nevertheless, it is always good to have a lot of people on the side of righteousness.
The bill may be pro-life, but it's also pro to a life worse than death. I don't know which side is more ethical, but I do know that I'd rather not exist, than be where I know a few people have ended up because of all the things the RH Bill is trying to stop.
ReplyDeleteIpasa means Pro-RH bill. Ibasura means Anti-RH Bill which won the ABS-CBN Poll, so why are you saying "the anti-RH side had lost this one"
ReplyDeleteAnonymous:
ReplyDeleteWhat I said is, "Even IF the anti-RH side had lost this one". Your complaint would be justified only if I had written "Even THOUGH the anti-RH side had lost this one".
"The bill may be pro-life, but it's also pro to a life worse than death."
ReplyDeleteSorry, but your very first sentence is incoherent. The bill isn't pro-life. And granting, for the sake of argument, that it's pro-life, a law simply cannot, with all the coercive power available in the world, make it a certainty that every incoming life will be "worse than death".
"I don't know which side is more ethical, but I do know that I'd rather not exist, than be where I know a few people have ended up because of all the things the RH Bill is trying to stop."
The poor we will always have with us. Suffering there will always be -- it is part and parcel of the human condition. It is also subjective: one man's "life of suffering" is another man's reasonably happy existence. It also comes unpredictably: some people born to opulence have died with nothing, and some who were born with nothing to eat have died surrounded with luxury. The problem with the thinking behind your statement is that it implies that if people are born into a given set of circumstances, then they are fated (or doomed) to live and die in those circumstances. That is not always the case, which is why it should not be in man's power to second guess which lives will be worth living and which lives will not amount to anything good.
The most that we can do is MINIMIZE and LESSEN poverty and ALLEVIATE suffering. And, why do we do these? Why do we try to minimize poverty and alleviate suffering? It is because life is seen as something worth living. The attitude that "it is better not to exist than to suffer" is not only defeatist, it is an implicit denial of man's potential, and seriously undermines the very reason for trying to alleviate suffering.
the abs-cbn poll is not that accurate. the poll can be manipulated as it was done online. the truth is just around us. the anti-RH bill people only listens to what they would want to hear. just imagine, PNoY the president and Sen. M. Santiago are also catholics in religion yet they are open minded people that they are supporting the RH-bill. now, the catholics bishops are threatens to excommunicate the people who supports RH-bill as if all people in the philippines are catholics. anyway, PNoY the president and Sen. M. Santiago are not afraid of being excommunicated. is that how bishops responds to a matter not on their favor?threatens people?BTW,i'm a catholic too. and i'm frustrated with the way how catholic bishops is acting.
ReplyDelete"the abs-cbn poll is not that accurate. the poll can be manipulated as it was done online."
ReplyDeleteGiven that ABS-CBN is thoroughly pro-RH, if any manipulation would have been done, it would have been in order to jack up the pro-RH stats.
"now, the catholics bishops are threatens to excommunicate the people who supports RH-bill as if all people in the philippines are catholics. anyway, PNoY the president and Sen. M. Santiago are not afraid of being excommunicated. is that how bishops responds to a matter not on their favor?threatens people?"
1) It is the task of the bishops to safeguard the truths of the Catholic faith, and they have the duty to excommunicate heretics and schismatics and those guilty of procuring a successful abortion. Pick up your Bible and read the letters of the Apostles, and you will see how often and how sternly they condemned anyone who deviated from the teachings of the Church.
2) That having been said -- have the bishops threatened to excommunicate Noynoy? Have the bishops threatened to excommunicate Miriam? Have they even threatened to excommunicate anyone? Or have you been uncritically reading anti-Catholic propaganda and, like so many foolish Filipino Catholics, assuming that the propaganda is true because it is anti-Church? Be ashamed of yourself, if you're really Catholic.
@ Carlos Antonio Palad: Aquino Faces Threat of Excommunication
ReplyDeletehttp://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view/20101001-295320/Aquino-faces-threat-of-excommunication
My response to the last anonymous:
ReplyDelete1) The Philippine Daily Inquirer is not exactly known for its accuracy in reporting Church news, given its anticlericalism.
2) Granting that the article is accurate (which it is not, see below), the bishop makes clear that Noynoy's excommunication is "not a proximate possibility". Bishop Odchimar was merely responding to an "if - then" question. Discussing potential events is not the same as predicting them.
3) Bishop Odchimar has made it clear that he NEVER made the threat that Inquirer misrepresented him as making:
http://www.cbcpnews.com/?q=node/13302
As I expected, you've merely been drinking the Inquirer kool-aid. Grow up and learn that newspapers are just as biased and as inaccurate as any partisan political outfit.
Carlos, I applaud your way of handling the discussion... valiant and strong, yet maintaining objectivity. It seems that you have a keen eye in comprehension and a calm mind to retort in such a pleasant and honest yet striking manner.
ReplyDeleteKeep it up!
@Carlos Antonio Palad: Wag daanin sa rhetorics. Che.
ReplyDeleteFinal anonymous: Nagsalita ang nagmumura.
ReplyDelete