Update: According to a GMA News TV article, Secretary Valisno was misquoted by the CBCP article: “The DepEd is not putting the sex education program on hold. Sec. Valisno clarified that no such decision has been made,” Malaya said. “It appears that she was misquoted in the CBCP article.”
An assistant secretary working for the DepEd also confirmed this when I spoke with her briefly at this morning’s hearing on the petition for a temporary restraining order on DepEd’s pilot-testing program. She also told me that we (civil society) will be invited to the forum to discuss the sex ed modules. If I can’t get some seats for you guys, you can be sure I’ll represent.
The GMA article also says that the plan to upload the sex ed modules to the DepEd website has been cancelled because it might be accessed by those who are not old enough and be corrupted by it. DepEd, I know your modules are controversial, but I’m pretty sure those horny kids could find something more sensational to be corrupted by.
When the CBCP meddles in government, it’s almost always a contest between democracy and theocracy. It’s certainly been the case in their recent “partnership” with DepEd as sex ed consultants. We’ve all been rooting for DepEd and the democracy that their sex ed program represents. But the game is over; score one for theocracy.
Thanks to pressure from the CBCP, DepEd has decided to suspend its sex ed program until after CBCP has given the go signal. “We decided to hold sex education module in abeyance until a final decision is made on the consulting process.”
That was Education Secretary Mona Valisno. Before deciding to suspend the sex ed program, she attended a mass in Manila Cathedral. She sat in the front row while Archbishop Rosales delivered a sermon:
“All of us in this cathedral are either teachers or students or collaborators of church. Ang misyon ng kristiyano ay ganito: isang engkwentro kay hesus, hindi mo maaaring ipagpalit mo ‘yun. [This is the mission of a Christian: one encounter with Jesus, which you cannot replace with anything.] This is addressed to all the schools, let them meet jesus, the compassionate person.”
Any doubts that Secretary Valisno (and her department’s sex ed project) was the target of that sermon was erased by what Archbishop Rosales did after: In front of all the teachers and students in attendance, he gave her a potted plant , which according to him, symbolized the sanctity of life. To me what the action symbolized is this: democracy sacrificed on the altar of theocracy.
Immediately I was reminded of COMELEC’s decision to disqualify Ang Ladlad. Ang Ladlad was not allowed to run for representation on religious grounds — for the religious bigots who made the decision, members of the LGBT community are immoral and are a danger to the youth. Yet Ang Ladlad was able to run, thanks to the Supreme Court’s more democratic ruling, one that obviously bears repetition (emphasis mine):
“Our Constitution provides in Article III, Section 5 that “[n]o law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” At bottom, what our nonestablishment clause calls for is “government neutrality in religious matters.” Clearly, “governmental reliance on religious justification is inconsistent with this policy of neutrality.”
We thus find that it was grave violation of the non-establishment clause for the COMELEC to utilize the Bible and the Koran to justify the exclusion of Ang Ladlad. Rather than relying on religious belief, the legitimacy of the Assailed Resolutions should depend, instead, on whether the COMELEC is able to advance some justification for its rulings beyond mere conformity to religious doctrine. Otherwise stated, government must act for secular purposes and in ways that have primarily secular effects…
As far as this court is concerned, our democracy precludes using the religious or moral views of one part of the community to exclude from consideration the values of other members of the community.“
That decision was a victory not only for the LGBT community, but also for our country’s democracy, and the secularism that guarantees it. I hoped that the issue was controversial enough for the decision to echo in the halls of government much longer. But in less than three months, it appears the voice of secularism has already been silenced.
What’s happening now is essentially a repetition of COMELEC’s mistake. Even the language being used is familiar: “Anything that will not be in accordance with moral values then we will remove it,” said Secretary Valisno.
But who decides what is in accordance with moral values? Here’s an answer from an article on the CBCP website:
Valisno said they are willing to modify the contents of the program if the church should find topics that contradict Christian values.
Note that what Valisno actually said was “moral” values. But the indirect quotation on CBCP’s website makes it clear: as far as the CBCP is concerned, what is moral is what is Christian, and what is Christian is what the CBCP says it is.
So until the CBCP approves the sex ed modules, DepEds sex ed program is on hold. And from the CBCP’s initial assessment, it looks like sex ed is on hold indefinitely. Here’s CBCP spokesman Msgr. Pedro Quitorio:
“Marami kaming hindi sinasang-ayunan sa modules na ito. Sa pagtatantiya namin ay hindi ito pasado [There are many things in these modules we don’t approve of. This program will most likely not pass.],” he said.
I can only imagine what kind of program will emerge from the CBCP’s censorship process. But one thing’s for sure: it won’t be the sex education program that our country needs.
So as far as sex education is concerned, theocracy 1, democracy 0. But maybe the game is not yet over. Maybe it’s only half-time. Secretary Valisno said that her department would upload the sex ed modules to the DepEd website for public scrutiny, in a way employing the public as sex ed consultants. I’m not sure how, but if this is going to be worth the effort, they’re going to find a way for the public to have a valid voice in this debate.
This may be her way of evening the playing field, giving everyone a say. But I’d like to see it as her way of recruiting allies. In the first half, the DepEd was alone in facing the CBCP, Ang Kapatiran, and all those other Pro-lifers. The DepEd’s going to need our help. I’m in, and I hope so are you. Let’s win this for democracy.
but now its all dead
At bottom, what our nonestablishment clause calls for is “government neutrality in religious matters.” Clearly, “governmental reliance on religious justification is inconsistent with this policy of neutrality.”
———————————————————————
Wrong application. What it says is that anyone can establish or exercise a religion free of interference from the government. To say that religion or God must have nothing to do with the government's decisions is mindless. Philippines is not an atheist country. The 1987 Constitution took into consideration many Christian principles, especially regarding life and rights. Actually, its first words are, "We, the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of Almighty God, in order to build a just and humane society…" We are not even a purely secular country where the government is completely divorced with godliness. The State has no religion but the people has. President Noynoy is a Christian and that does not violate the principle that there should be no State religion; nor it would violate the separation of Church and State if P-Noy used Christian principles with his decision makings. Besides, presidents' inaugurations cannot be without Bibles. And are not flag ceremonies, whether in Malacañan or in municipal plazas start with a prayer? Who decided that?
Wilberg, read the constitution again.
“We, the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of Almighty God, in order to build a just and humane society…”
Where does it explicitly say that the God being addressed is the Abrahamic God at all?
And you are right about the Philippines not being an atheist country. It is as much a country of Christians as it is Catholics, Muslims, atheists, and agnostics. You are
"The State has no religion but the people has. President Noynoy is a Christian and that does not violate the principle that there should be no State religion; nor it would violate the separation of Church and State if P-Noy used Christian principles with his decision makings."
Noynoy is Christian by personal belief, but he is also a Christian who is now the leader of a people who are of mixed beliefs. It will be his responsibility to make decisions based on the good of these other demographics, and not simply those of other Christians.
In short, he will have to draw the line between his own personal beliefs (and biases, perhaps), for the greater good.
For example, President Obama has admitted that he is personally against the idea of same-sex marriages. But at the same time he also understands that to implement legislation against such matters is also against the US constitution.
"When the CBCP meddles in government, it’s almost always a contest between democracy and theocracy."
I do not agree. All Filipino citizens can rally against something that they think is not good and right for them. Whether the government will listen and make considerations is still up to them, although of course, there are always consequences. CBCP is speaking as the nation's conscience, but the people (or the government) will still do what they chose to do. This is not in anyway about theocracy. DepEd for example did not consider the parents and CBCP's "protest" for God's sake. They consider their objection not because they believe that it is coming from God but because they have to make the project less controversial or else it would be derailed completely. Again, they have their own reason, and it is not for the love of God.
"But who decides what is in accordance with moral values?"
Do you have your own answer? Morality is objective or else it is not morality. If morality is subjective then there is no real good or real evil. If you think it is good, then it is; if you think it is evil, so it is. Makes sense?
Democracy vs theocracy? Are you not yet born when Ninoy, Cardinal Sin, and Cory snatched back our freedom from the dictatorial regime? And is it not the Church that led Cory all through out her presidency and her fight for democracy? She was just a simple house wife, but not until the Church stood by her side and on her back.
"CBCP is speaking as the nation’s conscience, but the people (or the government) will still do what they chose to do."
I beg to differ.
If the CBCP is so for the people's conscience, then why did they ask us to vote a candidate simply based on whether they were for or against the RH Bill?
http://www.gmanews.tv/story/121869/bishop-tells-p…
They failed to tell us whether a candidate should be chosen for their myriad of other merits or, and instead seem transfixed on that single advocacy as their only real factor on whether they will make good candidates or not.
http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/colum…
That's not "speaking up for the nation's conscience." That's being narrow-minded.
[Democracy vs theocracy? Are you not yet born when Ninoy, Cardinal Sin, and Cory snatched back our freedom from the dictatorial regime? And is it not the Church that led Cory all through out her presidency and her fight for democracy? She was just a simple house wife, but not until the Church stood by her side and on her back.]
And Cardinal Sin has been dead for years, with Cardinals Rosales and Vidal now the ones calling the shots.
Their brand of CBCP seems to have no qualms about directly interfering with government legislation that's aimed at actually trying to alleviate our population problem, and yet can't seem to say much against the previous Arroyo regime, which was up to its neck in human rights violations and corruption scandals.
Have you heard Vidal's latest gushing about Arroyo?
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=58…
[main article: “…Archbishop Rosales did after: In front of all the teachers and students in attendance, he gave her a potted plant , which according to him, symbolized the sanctity of life.”]
Whatever the topic and distraction attempts of the Catholic posters here are : never forget the only reason the CNCP is against SexEd is the “sanctity of life” e.g. the continuation of the unchecked exponential population growth which is providing a supply of poor and uneducated easy to influence Catholic flock.
All other reasons of ‘not spoiling little kids’ (12-13 years old) for an organization like the Catholic church (Holy Sea/ Vatican) which own age of sexual consent is 12 years old or the upholding of family values granted from the constitution etc…are all red herring distractions. It is only about continuation of exponential population growth by objecting all kind of contraception.
[Wilberg says : “To say that religion or God must have nothing to do with the government’s decisions is mindless.”]
(1) Humans over time created at least 2850 gods in their own human image (from Apollo to Zeus) – so which god are you talking about here Wilberg and any proof its really your god ??
(2) Even the Bible states 2 gods when reading in the original Hebrew : El (or the used as plural Elohim) creator of the universe in 6 days in Genesis-1, and YHWH (Yahweh, Jehova) creator of Adam in garden Eden, then creator of animals then of Eve… in Genesis-2). Elohim advised Noah to load the ark with 2 animals each, Yahweh advised to load 7 animals of each domesticated species and differing advises …. YHWH was only the fertility god and only responsible for the limited area of Judea (the land of Jacob) and as Ugaritic texts on stone plate stated YHWH was just one of the 70 sons of the’ most high’ e.g. godfather Elyon. The assignments of Judea from the most high to YHWH (The Lord) can be still found in the Bible (Deut 32:8) by the way. So Wilbur in the name of which Biblical god do you allegedly claim to speak ?
(3) Do you have any reliable proof and evidence that your personal favorite god out of the 2 Biblical gods – out of all this gods invented from humans in the image of humans – is really the creator of the universe, and that the Bible text is really his unchanged reliable word and and not tampered with from mortal humans with own agenda?
(4) Do you have any proof that the Roman Catholic church is interpreting the Christian faith and the Bible exactly in the proper divine way for their RCC dogma, and the approx. 33,000 other Christians sects and their interpretation of god and the Bible are all totally wrong ?
(5) Do you have any proof and evidence that the CBCP for this specific topic of SexEd int the R of P is talking exactly in behalf of the claimed god and his holy book they are representing ?
Only if you Wilberg can answer all 5 questions with a clear ‘yes’ and provide evidence for it, then the CBCP has even a mandate to provide their surely divine guidance to the government of the RP. Only then you can try claim any 'absolute morality’ (srictly even then not – see Euthyphro dilemma) plus the proven unbroken chain of relaying this morality down from the creator of the universe is needed.
If just one condition is not reliable fulfilled and not supported by any evidence – whether the RP president is sworn in on the Bible or not – then the CBCP is just meddling for their own interest and are violating the constitution of separation of church and state.
I have to say, it is so easy for any theologian or serious student of the faith to answer your questions. Even a little unbiased research on your part would help you a lot.
[Twin-Skies says: “A public school is supposed to be a secular institution.”]
Also (and especially) a secular private school should be secular institution, but not so in the R of P.
The first elementary school my kids attended some years back (around 30,000 peso per year base fee) has a subject with evaluation called ‘love of God’ ! Not Catholic catechism, biblical history, religion … no ‘love of God’ as subject !
The next private international school now closed (90,000 Peso per year then) in its strategic mission statement or advertising : the special focus on Christian values as reason to choose the school.
When I picked up my boy this week from another private school, I had to wait because the class teacher is extending the closing by a longer (obviously Catholic) prayer session and this for a school attended from kids of international parents of multi culture, multi religion, other Christian denominations than RCC (or non religion) backgrounds.
Welcome to the Catholic Republic of the Philippines (CRP).
Well I have to tell about the CRP as ‘kano’….
Just because it happens here regularly doesn't make it right.
Indeed it is regular, but it just pisses me off …. choosing whatever available secualar (quite expensive private schools) and still get total Catholic childhood indoctrination without any (or much) alternative choices.
DepEd must be crazy. CBCP is definitely politicking again armed with its backward conservatism.
I can't believe DepEd!
Neither can I 🙁
"Valisno said they are willing to modify the contents of the program if the church should find topics that contradict CHRISTIAN values.'
What. The. Fuck.
A public school is supposed to be a secular institution. It is not beholden to the religious beliefs of the parents of its students.
By that reasoning, I have a feeling that DepEd would also suspend science classes should some creationist quack declare that the teaching of evolution is "against Christian values too."
What the fuck? Is that the attitude that we are expecting from the students of sex education? Would we expect that result from Memo 261?
"A public school is supposed to be a secular institution."
Public schools are not religious but it does not mean they are irreligious. Haven't you heard yet the line, "Angel of God, my guardian dear…"? I first heard it in a public school? Is that a violation of law?
"It is not beholden to the religious beliefs of the parents of its students."
Schools have moral a obligation to consider the religious beliefs of the parents. It cannot just teach anything and everything. It may or may not teach Christian religion, but it cannot discuss any subject matter that would offend a student or a parent's religious beliefs.
Any protest?
"Haven’t you heard yet the line, “Angel of God, my guardian dear…”? I first heard it in a public school? Is that a violation of law?"
If you want to be a stickler for details, yes it is.
Just because it happens regularly in a secular institution does not make it right. Now if it were a general moment of silence, that shouldn't be a problem.
[Schools have moral a obligation to consider the religious beliefs of the parents. It cannot just teach anything and everything.]
Of course it can't teach "everything and anything." A school is supposed to be there to teach its students the facts, not bullshit. I thought that goes without saying 😉
…unless you study at Liberty University.
[It may or may not teach Christian religion, but it cannot discuss any subject matter that would offend a student or a parent’s religious beliefs.]
So does that mean that a school that teaches evolution in science class has to stop the minute some parent protests because of their creationist beliefs?
Believe DepEd. They are personally a Catholics. Logically they have to follow and obey their faith, their religious leader.
Quite frankly, I doubt the CBCP holds as much sway as it implies it does:
http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/colum…
They claim to represent the sentiments of Philippine Catholics, and yet nobody seems to have voted for the candidates they fielded.
Well, this problem has been ongoing for such a long time:democracy versus theocracy….in our country, it had been an epic battle for democracy to thrive without the intervention of the Catholic church. Sex education is a must part of the curriculum and therefore be formulated in such a way as catering to the needs of the public. Let's just hope the Deped will make its decision on what it deems is right taking into consideration the social, economic and cultural aspects of the country. Above all, it must try its best to meet the demands of the present time.
Or the CBCP can just STFU, and let DepEd do its job.
"Let’s just hope the Deped will make its decision on what it deems is right taking into consideration the social, economic and cultural aspects of the country."
Read the memo and all the parallel documents and you will realize that simplistic hopes and suggestions are impossible, especially the cultural part.
What about Fr. Bernas? What's he gotta say about this meddling?
I guess its true, the church really have a really big hard on to screw with children.
The only way the church can be forced is IF all the other Secular Countries gunning for the Pope get leverage and start forcing them to stop meddling with reproductive health and sex education policies.
OR the Philippine or the Church is hit hard at the wallet: NO LOANS or Financial Aid unless the Philippines Honors its UN agreement for sex education.
Doesn't medling with DEP ED consider Politics? Doesn't that screw with their Non-taxable status?
"Doesn’t medling with DEP ED consider Politics? Doesn’t that screw with their Non-taxable status?"
No, it is not. CBCP is stirring the conscience, it is not commanding anything to anybody on the government. It has no political power as far as State politics is concern. An organization is not exempted from tax provided they will play dumb and stupid; it is not buying their freedom of expression and freedom of speech, nor it asks them to be silent about the truth. Whether taxed or untaxed, the mission of the Church will be the same: to speak.
"CBCP is stirring the conscience, it is not commanding anything to anybody on the government."
Conscience, or their own self-serving dogma?
I can already see how a sex ed class run by the CBCP will look like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0kJHQpvgB8
Classic 😀
So that's what the health, welfare, and future of our kids are worth to Rosales.
A fucking potted plant.
It better be weed XD.
I can't really trust the CBCP's news site on this matter, so I did a bit of digging around.
http://www.dailymirror.ph/June-2010/June062310/na…
On the plus side, despite Valisno's decision, the DepEd might be fighting back.
http://www.sunstar.com.ph/manila/deped-hits-sex-e…
"A fucking potted plant. It better be weed."
Supporters of this so-called sex education seem to show its results prior to its implementation.
And you apparently can't tell the difference between a serious comment and a humorous jab.
i am not surprised .. good luck sa pilipinas
trust a group of elderly (supposed-to-be) celibate men to know what and what not to teach to children about sex ed.
They shouldn't even have an opinion on this matter. The only sex they've had is with children.
That is a loser's comment. We are talking about principles here and not hostile sentiments that is not really coming from an authentic concern for others but from a disease called pride — that is thinking of oneself being better than others. And for the knowledge of this young person (or at least in mind), generalizing a class of people is a show of naiveté. Are all politicians corrupt? Do all teachers make money from their students? Are all lawyers liars? Do all businessmen and merchants cheat? Are all the apostles Judas? And since some of human beings are stupid, and you are a human being; are you stupid? I don't think you would completely agree. That is the point. And I hope all who read this are not stupid enough to miss it.
And are all priests morally upright?
The reason we have open hostilities towards the CBCP is because the institution of the Catholic Church has a track record for being hypocrites with regard to "morality."
The Pope himself demonizes atheists, and yet his institution is now reeling from the recent exposes on their systematic hiding of sexually abusive priests, while doing nothing to help the victims, or the local authorities in trying to arrest these offenders.
I'd call that self-serving, and prideful.