Secularism vs. Theocracy: Filipino Freethinkers at the Congressional Hearing on the RH Bill

Ken and I attended the recent congressional hearing on the RH Bill. I was to give a speech as a resource person representing the Filipino Freethinkers.

At first, I was afraid that my short talk on the importance of secularism in deciding the RH Bill would not be relevant. But my fears were allayed as soon as the representatives  and resource speakers started talking.

Anti-RH advocates kept referring to Catholic teachings not only on moral distinctions but even on scientific definitions. Legislators — even the Pro-RH ones — argued about what the Pope’s recent statements on contraceptives really meant, as if this had any relevance to the issues. To add insult to injury, they had Jo Imbong of the CBCP give us their official interpretation.

It was only when Dr. Sylvia Claudio spoke that secularism was brought into the discussion. She was answering a question posed by Rep. Rodolfo Biazon: Does anybody disagree that life starts during fertilization? After answering the question, she reminded the audience that not all Filipinos are Catholics, and that passing the RH Bill will benefit all Filipinos, especially women, regardless of religion (or lack thereof).

But her reminder seemed to fall on deaf ears. Rep. Biazon continued to ask the same question, as if Dr. Claudio hadn’t said anything, and the other representatives and speakers kept making arguments based on religious premises.

When my turn came to speak, I made sure to emphasize what most in the room seemed to forget: our government is a secular one. Which is why it came as a surprise when Willy Arcilla, who spoke in an individual capacity, claimed that the Philippines is not a secular state.

What he said would have been funny if it weren’t for the Anti-RH individuals there who agreed with him, and the many misinformed Filipinos who seem to think the Philippines is a province of the Vatican. I will not spoil any more of what he said so that you can understand the shock and disgust that I experienced listening to him.

Transcripts and more insights will be added as updates to this post soon. For now, here are the speeches I mentioned above. I hope that the combined sense of my speech and Dr. Claudio’s is enough to counter the irrationality of Willy Arcilla’s calls for theocracy. Enjoy!

Dr. Claudio – Pass the RH Bill (mp3)

Red Tani – Is the Philippines a democracy or a theocracy? (mp3)

Willy Arcilla – The Philippines is NOT a Secular State (mp3)

101 comments

  1. Sad to say…. PINOPROMOTE NIYO ANG RH BILL PERO SA US AYAW NA NILA NG CONTACEPTIVES AT SA IBANG BANSA KASI ANG DAMING CONSEQUENCES…. This is a deception from the devil…

  2. I hate this governement! PAG ELEKSIYON HALOS MAGKANDARAPA KAYONG HUMIHINGI NG ENDORSEMENTS SA SIMBAHAN AT IBANG RELIHIYON…. PAG NASA POSISYON NA KAYO…. SASABIHIN NIYO SEPARATION NG STATE SA GOVERNMENT…. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT MORALITY HERE…. ALAMIN NIYO MUNA SIDE EFFECTS NG MGA CONTRACEPTIVES BAGO KAYO MAKIPAGBALITAKTAKAN… NGAYON LANG AKO NAKAKITA NG MGA SOLONS N DUMB…

  3. The Philippines is not overpopulated…. dito lang tayo sa city nagsisiksikan…. pumunta ka sa mga provinces…. ang daming bakanteng lote…. stupid to say na overpopulated tayo…. E KUNG KAYA YUNG MGA PERA NA GAGASTUSIN SA PAGBILI NG CONTRACEPTIVES E IBIGAY NA LANG SA MGA MAHIHIRAP… MARAMI KAYANG MAKIKINABANG! This RH Bill speaks about GREED and CORRUPTION. Magkano ba ang binayad sa mga Congressman at kay Noynoy para ipasa ito…

  4. [Japan has more than 250,000 suicides a year Kevin.]

    And how is that connected to the reproductive health bill?

    [Please let us all be honest to admit that not all the clergymen were as evil as the fictitious Damaso. How about the good Fr. Florentino who comforted a dying Simon in El Filibusterisimo? 🙂 ]

    Of course not all clergymen are evil – there are several good examples I can still recall as being decent human beings. However, this good deeds does not excuse the systemic corruption and hypocrisy within the Vatican itself, as well as the CBCP. You tell us to remember Fr. Florentino, how about remembering Padre Salvi?

  5. Dear All,

    Thank you for your comments. Allow me to expound. The gentleman from Freethinkers asked the question "Is the Philippines a Secular Democracy or is it a Religious Theocracy". I believe that the answer is neither. The answer is the Philippines is a Religious Democracy. A democracy is not violated if it embraces faith. Rather, it is violated when a specific religion is imposed on the people (this is clearly not the case since the good gentleman also cited there are hundreds of different religions allowed to exist in the Philippines). Democracy is also violated when faith is punished for its belief. That is what the Church, pro-lifers and anti-RH advocates are rejecting. Because anyone can buy a contraceptive and there is no law against buying one. The RH Bill however will spend a tremendous amount of money buying and distributing contraceptives which is unconstitutional.

    I advised the good gentleman to review the 1987 Constitution whose very first line on the very first page in its eloquent preamble says unequivocally, "We the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of the Almighty God." In a Religious Democracy, it is not uncommon for the predominant faith to influence society and government.

    Mga kababayan, we should not be fighting each other. Church and State should be working together as allies not adversaries. The real enemies are the universal vices or capital sins of Greed and Avarice, Lust and Licentiousness. The solution? Very simple. Because I've seen it work and I've made it work. Profit-Sharing. Workers who are part-owners are more productive. When the poor become middle-income, the rich become wealthier. We are not a poor country at all, but we have obscene levels of income inequality. The poor don't need more sex or artificial contraception. They need higher pay.

    So what would it be then? Condoms or Prosperity from Profit-Sharing?

    Finally, I know you are atheists who don't believe in God. That's OK. God still believes in you all. 🙂

    • You may notice that nowhere in the Constitution does it state that the "Almighty God" you keep citing is your God—the one consistent with your Catholic beliefs. Is this Constitutional Almighty God the one whose son is Jesus Christ and part of the Trinity or is this Almighty God the one of the Jews, who subscribe to no such trinitarian faith? Is this Almighty God the one of the deists' whose God does not interfere in the lives of human beings and does not murder seed spillers or answer prayers?

      You see, kind sir, with all these contradictory beliefs about what God's nature is or his views on what people should be doing with their bodies, you cannot argue that the RH bill equates to flouting God's commandments. Which God are we talking about? The contradictions between religions attest to this—the God of Abraham is NOT any of the Gods of the Chinese Shenists. Your Catholic God is not necessarily the God of the Constitution. It may easily be the God of the Zoroastrians or of the Pastafarians, one of the Gods of the Romans, or of the Egyptians. If you believe that the Almighty God in the Constitution is the one worshipped by Catholics on Sunday, but not the one praised by pantheists when they bask in the orange glow of a sunset, please tell us. While you may believe that God cares about what people do naked in the privacy of their own homes, there are those who don't believe in a God who would concern himself with such things when nuclear proliferation and xenophobic violence threaten our very existence.

      While some of your suggestions might be valid, if given some scrutiny, as in the redistribution of wealth that you mention in your speech, your claim that the there is a simple solution for the country's problems is disingenuous. Many solutions can be done in conjunction towards the goal of a prosperous Philippines. Added to that, your presentation of a false dichotomy between sex and decent wages betrays a troubling disconnect on your part not just from logic but from the realities of everyday life in the Philippines.

      While I am sure you are sincere and you mean well when you tell us that God believes in us atheists, please be mindful of the fact that there are those of us who do not share your faith. There are also those of us who find the entire concept of a God, one who spends even just a single moment worrying about sexual indiscretions instead of alleviating starvation and disease, appalling and shameful. Also, I would like to know how you are capable of making any claims about what God believes. When did he tell you these things and how?

      Thank you, Mr. Arcilla.

      • Dear Garrick Berecero,

        Peace be with you. 🙂 The Philippines will never succeed or prosper without God-centered leadership. Please admit the failure of freethinking and freemasonry that was the bedrock of the 1898 Revolution. So unlike the success of the American Revolution where God was enshrined in the Declaration of Independence and the Star Spangled Banner up to the Pledge of Allegiance and their legal tender. Haven't we given freethinking enough opportunities to prove itself? God is not in our National Anthem nor is God in Panatang Makabayan. That's why we've never been blessed with peace and prosperity. Even People Power has failed twice because it was never People Power, but PRAYER POWER. Just ask Cardinal Sin who mobilized the people and Fr. James Reuter, S.J. who controlled the underground media Radio Bandido or the nuns who stopped the tanks with their rosaries and the faithful who held images of Mary. Correct or not? 🙂

        • Sir, with all due respect, we've already given "god-centered leadership" a try for nearly 500 years in the Philippines already since the Spaniards first began their christianization of our islands in the 1500's… yet here we are, consistently one of the poorest and most corrupt countries in Asia… yet ironically "proudly" the most Catholic country in the region.

        • Your lumping together of freethinking and freemasonry simply betrays a vast ignorance about what these two things even mean. Freemasonry requires its members to declare belief in a supreme being.

          As I pointed out elsewhere in the comments to you, the Declaration of Independence or any of the founding American documents say nothing in support of your Catholic and Christian God. As in the Treaty of Tripoli made by the American founding fathers said, "The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."

          Here are some choice quotations from American founding fathers and leaders:

          "I have found Christian dogma unintelligible. Early in life I absented myself from Christian assemblies." – Benjamin Franklin

          "I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved — the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!" – John Adams

          "The clergy, by getting themselves established by law and engrafted into the machine of government, have been a very formidable engine against the civil and religious rights of man." – Thomas Jefferson

          "Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise, every expanded prospect." – James Madison

          "My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them." – Abraham Lincoln

          But this is just to succumb to the distraction that you set up.

          You believe that prayer works. Prove that it does and win 1 million dollars from the James Randi Foundation. Go share the profit from this to the poor that you want to help. You'll probably win a Nobel too.

          Oh, and please, if you're going to reply, do address my points instead of raising irrelevant ones. Is the God of the Constitution the God of the Catholics? Is the God of the Constitution the one fully present at the point of consecration during the Mass? And how did your God tell you that he believes in us?

        • [God is not in our National Anthem nor is God in Panatang Makabayan. That's why we've never been blessed with peace and prosperity.]

          As Wes stated, we were under a Spanish government that was under heavy friar control prior to our becoming an independent nation. In those 500 years of colonial rule, our people starved, were treated as 2nd-class citizens, and were figuratively raped of their pride.

          500 years of Catholic rule you lying asswipe – where was our prosperity then?

          • The Petition of March 1888 http://www.nhi.gov.ph/index2.php?option=com_conte

            "On March 1st (or the 3rd) 1888, around 300 residents led by a group of gobernadorcillos of Mania’s suburbs, chief among them the Filipino lawyer and gobernadorcillo of Santa Cruz named Doroteo Cortes, wound their way through the districts of Manila to the office of the civil governor of Manila to present a petition with some 810 signatures, addressed to
            the Queen of Spain seeking the expulsion of all friars from the Philippines. "

            Blissfully Ignorant, Delusional or Virtue less in the Pursuit of truth. Such eloquence(WA speech) is narcissistic in the sense to think the idea is right by the legitimacy of Religiousness and Boot Licking "God" instead of actually gathering facts, reading up on history and looking at reality at how it is and not how one wants it to be.

            Its like answering a math equation with God wills it!, the battle cry of the crusades, (oldenburg)

        • Willy blames lack of belief in God in creating negative effects in world events.

          Gee, where have I heard that before?

          Pat Robertson? http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/01/p

          Or was it Cleric Hojatoleslam Kazim Sadeghi? http://articles.cnn.com/2010-04-20/world/iran.pro

          Willy, look at the millions of urban poor whom you so think should be spared the "evils" of an RH program. Most of them are Catholics and Christians. Most of them pray regularly, and sincerely believe with every fibre of their being that God will somehow uplift them from their plight.

          And yet they starve.

    • [That is what the Church, pro-lifers and anti-RH advocates are rejecting. Because anyone can buy a contraceptive and there is no law against buying one.]

      *Ahem* Lito Atienza would beg to differ:
      http://www.pcij.org/stories/2005/pills.html

      It is ironic that you would claim that the gov't should not coddle one religion over any other in RP, and yet most of the more blatant examples of this breach of church and state come from Catholics who try to impose their theology on their communities.

      Your church cries foul over the government clamping down on their attempts to influence legislation, and yet yet we hear nothing from you when it's your own religion that is clearly in violation of the offense you're throwing a hissy fit over. Or have you forgotten the recent attempt of Odchimar ever-so-subtly saying that the president would be excommunicated for his attempts?
      http://alxjm.com/2010/10/01/catholic-church-threa

      If there is anybody here who is clearly in violation of the constitution, it's your group. What we freethinkers simply hope for is that the RCC's self-proclaimed special privileges be stripped, and they be treated with the same degree if authority as any other religious organization here.

      [ The RH Bill however will spend a tremendous amount of money buying and distributing contraceptives which is unconstitutional. ]

      Willy, the constitution doesn't say anything about contraceptives being unconstitutional. It does say that abortions are illegal, but that's another matter entirely); nice try attempting to con us into that false equivalence,though 😉

      And if I may add, why are you so obsessed with pointing out the money to be spend on contraceptives. A good portion of the bill is aimed at establishing an education program for filipinos regarding their choices.

      And really, if we're going to talk about wasting money, here's my question to you: How many mouths do you think your church could have fed with the hush money they tried to send to the children they raped 😉
      http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1

      If you want to bitch about wasting money, 10 million is a shitload of cash to keep a child rape victim quiet. And that was just the first one I could grab off a google search. Now imagine how many more there are with the recent expose in the Netherlands:
      http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2010/12/09/re

      Or getting back to the topic of money, how about the RCC's recent money laundering investigation?
      http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSRMELKE60G20100

      That's a lot of money, Willy – do you think the RCC could share some of that with us?

      [In a Religious Democracy, it is not uncommon for the predominant faith to influence society and government. ]

      We're a democracy. Full stop.

      Now kindly stop attempting to append any additional self-serving clause to what a democracy is. And even if Catholics are the dominant faith of the country, that doesn't matter. You are clearly mistaking argumentum ad populum for what a real democracy is.

      A democracy, at its core, is not simply a matter of following the whims of the majority vote – that's just mob rule. A democracy is intended to protect the rights of the minority – by giving them the same set of rights that the majority enjoy.

      Religions by its very nature divisive – how many times have we seen examples in history of organized religion being used by one group or another as an excuse to claim their supremacy over others, denying basic rights to those who don't believe in the same gods as they do?

      [So what would it be then? Condoms or Prosperity from Profit-Sharing? .]

      I agree with Garrick – you're trying to create a false dichotomy here by implying that sex education (It's not just about the condom, dumbkopf) and Profit-Sharing are mutually exclusive principles. They can be both seen parts of a greater strategy for poverty alleviation.

      [Finally, I know you are atheists who don't believe in God. That's OK. God still believes in you all. ]

      Well of course he does. If he didn't, we'd kill a kitten/fairy every minute 🙂

      • Dear Twin Skies,

        Please open your eyes to the evils of RH Bills in other countries. Open your mind to the teachings of the Church, the world's longest-lasting institution of any kind (more than 2,000 years). Open your heart to the love of God. You can do a whole lot more with your passion turned into love for God and man, who is made in the image and likeness of God, rather than your passion turned into hatred. It's not good for your health. 🙂

        May God enlighten you as He did Saul on his road to Damascus. 🙂

        • yeah TwinSkies, why don't you?
          In fact, why don't you try all 3,700 currently identified gods and goddesses one at a time just to be fair about it? Too bad YHWH is at the very bottom of the heap if you go at it alphabetically though, just goes to show, some gods are smarter than others

        • [Please open your eyes to the evils of RH Bills in other countries. Open your mind to the teachings of the Church, the world's longest-lasting institution of any kind (more than 2,000 years). Open your heart to the love of God.]

          I spent eight years of my life studying CLE in grade school and high school. I spent two of my four years in college studying theology, having to survive verbal debates with my professors who fancied that format over a written exam.

          Eight years. That was more than enough time for me to come to understand the limitations of Catholic Theology, and to understand that it does not add up. That does not include the four years or so of reading I did after that that prompted me to discover all the skeletons in the RCC's closet, the same skeletons that are being brought into light with the likes of the Murphy investigation in Ireland.

          In short Willy, I have indeed tried to open my mind to your institution. I really tried, and you'd be surprised at how much I to defended it when I was still a (liberal) Catholic. In the end, I would not in good conscience follow an institution that was batshit enough to do something like this:
          http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,188

          You ask me to open my heart Willy, I ask you to open your eyes. Your religion is rotten to the core, and you're a fucking ignorant twat to not see what is happening around you. Wake up.

          [You can do a whole lot more with your passion turned into love for God and man, who is made in the image and likeness of God, rather than your passion turned into hatred.]

          Cut the patronizing rubbish. You don't come off as friendly – you're condescending, as if handling a petulant little child.

          Given how willingly you distort facts to your own ends (In God We Trust in the Declaration of Independence ring a bell?) I ask you – who wouldn't be angry. I have a very low tolerance for liars and self-righteous pricks, more so the sort that candy-coat their bullshit with flowery rhetoric and out-of-context data. If you're concerned for my health, then I ask you to be more truthful in your words, and not be a gobshite

          And not to brag Willy, But I consider myself quite healthy. I run regularly at the Pasig marathons (prepping for the 10 km run for 2011), and I practice both arnis and boxing quite regularly.

          I am currently helping my sister prepare for her Palarong Pambansa for February 22, while I myself am preparing for the Elorde Gym's UKC boxing competitions this May, under their heavyweight boxing division.

          Given I'm overweight, but considering I can outlast most people half my weight, that's not a big issue.

          [Open your mind to the teachings of the Church, the world's longest-lasting institution of any kind (more than 2,000 years).]

          The institution of slavery was around for much longer than that. Shall we respect the teachings of that as well?

          [Please open your eyes to the evils of RH Bills in other countries.]

          Do provide us with links to the "Evils" of Reproductive Health/Sex Education programs. A rudimentary Google search usually turns up stories like this: How it's religious meddling that's the actual evil in the matter:
          http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/20

  6. This guy (Willy arcilla) has no grasp of reality! The sad thing is the Congress gave him a standing ovation. It makes me wonder if our congressmen really have brains?

  7. "It was only when Dr. Sylvia Claudio spoke that secularism was brought into the discussion. She was answering a question posed by Rep. Rodolfo Biazon: Does anybody disagree that life starts during fertilization?"

    religious beliefs on the side, when does really life begins, at fertilization or implantation?

      • it is a simple question of when does human life begin, is it after fertilization or after implantation?

        article 2, section 12 of our constitution is clear that the life of the unborn shall be protected from conception.

        the explanatory note of the primary author, edcel lagman, is also clear about the bill, "that this bill does not only protect the life of the unborn from the moment of implantation but that of the mother as well."

        • Assuming that the contraceptives to be implemented will also induce an abortion.

          And frankly, I'd still side with the woman's rights over that of the embryo.

          Do keep your fetus fetish to yourself. This is not the first time we've called you out for being a gobshite.

          • i take it that you have nothing to say about how the RH Bill goes against the principles set forth in the constitution in regards to the protection of human life from the moment of conception.

          • And apparently, you have nothing to say about respecting the rights of the woman's decision in the matter.

          • the topic has nothing to do with "moral" or "dogma", it has everything to do with our constitution. and our constitution is clear about protection of human life from the moment of conception- that includes everyone and by that the constitution means women as well.

          • [i take it that you have nothing to say about how the RH Bill goes against the principles set forth in the constitution in regards to the protection of human life from the moment of conception. ]

            if I say yes, then will you make sure that every woman who's had a miscarriage in RP will be arrested for manslaughter? 😉

          • "if I say yes, then will you make sure that every woman who's had a miscarriage in RP will be arrested for manslaughter? ;)" -twin-skies

            where you got that from discussing our constitution in regards to protection of the unborn is still a mystery to me.

          • Just following your lead, o' omniscient one. You're the one who's dead-set on trying equate contraceptives with abortions, and in the forums, abortions with murder.

            Following your logic, it's quite easy to see where your reasoning will lead.

          • "Following your logic, it's quite easy to see where your reasoning will lead." -twin-skies

            let us stay on topic. the constitution is clear the protection is from the moment of conception and not implantation. the primary author of the bill is clear on his explanatory note and that makes the bill unconstitutional.

          • http://www.ncrfw.gov.ph/index.php/laws-legislatio

            "It upholds equality before the law of men and women and recognizes the role of women in nation building. The state also recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall equally protect the life of mother and life of the unborn from conception. It can be argued, therefore, that despite the anti-abortion policy of the Constitution, when the life of the mother is in danger she can opt for therapeutic abortion."

          • the life of a mother in danger is not brought by pregnancy itself but by a disease or a condition that the mother may have. we do not need the RH Bill to be a law in order to "legally" save the mother's life.

            Any treatment of that condition is to be administered and this is already being done/practiced in our country. it is not abortion that treats the mother but the process of treating the condition which in some cases may have caused the termination of the pregnancy.

          • [we do not need the RH Bill to be a law in order to "legally" save the mother's life. ]

            But we do need measures to ensure that minimize the odds of them ending up in said situation in the first place. Prevention is better than the cure, as the saying goes.

            Now as for your rather oversimplified undestanding of when "human life" begins, Dra. Sylvia Claudio clears that up quite nicely with one of her recent blog posts:
            http://pleased2subvert.blogspot.com/2010/12/scien

            "This argument alone is is more an example of the lack of scientific and philosophical training of those who espouse it. It is not an argument that should be dignified in the public debates. I know that certain advocates of this position are doctors, scientists and philosophers. But I have no fantasies about the guarantees that academic degrees confer. “Nil admirari”, my philosopher mother used to say. Admire no one. Certainly I am unhappy when people use their academic degrees to claim they are speaking the truth when they are not.

            So let's see what science says and what logic demands. Science tells us that the argument that “contraceptives prevent the implantation of the fertilized ovum” is an unsupportable generalization. I cannot go into the scientific literature for purposes of brevity, but many lay people know that the condom prevents fertilization. Looking at the literature, there is SOME evidence that some contraceptives MAY prevent implantation of the fertilized ovum as possibly ONE OF SEVERAL mechanisms for their contraceptive effects.

            But even if we were to concede this rather flimsy basis for their claim that modern contraceptives prevent implantation, it is a misrepresentation to say that these are abortifacient. There is a wide-ranging consensus in the scientific community that pregnancy begins at implantation. An abortifacient, by definition, terminates pregnancy prematurely. Thus, none of the contraceptives are abortifacients."

          • her statement is self-contradicting in itself.

            "there is SOME evidence that some contraceptives MAY prevent implantation of the fertilized ovum as possibly ONE OF SEVERAL mechanisms for their contraceptive effects. "

            and then she moves on to conclude

            "An abortifacient, by definition, terminates pregnancy prematurely. Thus, none of the contraceptives are abortifacients."

            on another note, when she said "There is a wide-ranging consensus in the scientific community that pregnancy begins at implantation.", there really is nothing that is changed. until there is a conclusive evidence that human life does begin at the moment of implantation only then will anything be open for reconsideration.

            in any case, the issue here is on this thread is what our constitution is clear about which is the protection of human life at the moment of conception and not implantation.

          • [there really is nothing that is changed. until there is a conclusive evidence that human life does begin at the moment of implantation only then will anything be open for reconsideration. ]

            And while we wait for you to finish waffling around with your philosophical conondrums, more women die from unnecessary pregnancies and their following complications.

            [in any case, the issue here is on this thread is what our constitution is clear about which is the protection of human life at the moment of conception and not implantation. ]

            You left out the first half that grants the same rights to the women. Was that intentional? In fact, not once have I seen you seem to be worried about the repercussions of forcing them to endure a pregnancy.

          • "But we do need measures to ensure that minimize the odds of them ending up in said situation in the first place. Prevention is better than the cure, as the saying goes. " -Twin-skies

            We do but we do not need the RH Bill for that. Our constitution is clear about that as well. We do have laws in placed and there is nothing that prevents our state or anyone else to provide health care for women.

          • [We do but we do not need the RH Bill for that. Our constitution is clear about that as well. We do have laws in placed and there is nothing that prevents our state or anyone else to provide health care for women. ]

            But at the same time, nothing mandating a single, coherent education program, of which we sorely need.

  8. JESUS CHRIST IN HIS HOLY STICK! WHAT THE FUCK?!?!!? The Philippines IS a secular state according to the Philippine constitution, It's written there that there is a complete separation of the church and the state. … but… it is not seen in practice, our country is still controlled by the church, in which it is really fucked up. I mean COME ON LADIES AND GENTS! haven't the government learned its lesson during the Spanish occupation here in the Philippines? Maybe… just maybe… either they forgot about it or they are so convinced or rather scared of the church that's why they let the church meddle with the affairs if the government… tsk2x

    • Its also in the constitution that abortion is a matter clearly dictated by the church. It has no further provisions and it is a means to end any form of discussion or conversation regarding that. We are now in the 21st century and abortion/population management is more of a societal matter than it is a religious one!

  9. This guy (Willy arcilla) has no grasp of reality! The sad thing is the Congress gave him a standing ovation. It makes me wonder if our congressmen really have brains?

  10. It is sad that those idiots are representing many innocent people. I wish good Catholics stand up and speak up against those people…

  11. "The Church needs us. Jesus needs us… As the only English Catholic country in the world, the Vatican will be proud if the Filipinos will keep fidelity in the teaching of the church." If this doesn't prove that theocracy in the Philippines has lost its charm on issues that improves Filipino lives, I don't know what does.

    If theocracy really worked, corruption will be the least of its concern. There's no need to remind the vices of gluttony, jealousy, greed, etc if they really succeeded in moralizing the Filipinos under 300 years of Catholic teaching. But justice, happiness and contentment can only be attained in the afterlife and only if we follow the teaching of the church here on earth.

    We are secular society. Otherwise, the fanatics will not feel insecure of its hold on the people's decision and resort to lies just to earn the believer's sympathy.

  12. Another point to counter regarding Arcilla's assertion that a large population is beneficial to a country. It can be, given the right circumstances.

    While we do have a large population with a large youth demographic, the problem that Arcilla fails to see is just how many of these people are actually going to be productive members of society.
    http://synopsis.i.ph/blogs/synopsis/2009/05/16/th

    I know I sound ruthless here, but I have to be pragmatic: The bulk of our youth are poorly educated; you don't have to go far from your local public schools to know that we are short on textbooks, classrooms, and even shorter on the number of qualified teachers who can properly impart their knowledge to our youth.

    The fact is that our educational system is overpopulated, and ill-suited to create a capable, intelligent workforce. For our education to work, like it or not, we will need to think about an RH program.

    For Arcilla to simply say that more people automatically equates to more productivity is being intellectually dishonest. Ironic given his position as head of a business consultancy firm.

  13. Good point. I wonder how the other faiths feels about Arcilla's statement about RP being a Catholic country. It's almost as if he pretended they did not exist.

  14. @Red

    Just finished listening to your segment.

    Well done. You've said a lot of what I would have said. I'd probably have stabbed them with the recent sex abuse scandals, but that'd probably be off-topic.

    No offense dude, but methinks you've gotta try taking oratory lessons. Arcilla had a far clearer and better rehearsed rhetoric, and while I think his statements are absolute bunk, I have to admire his delivery of it XD

    Just listening to the applause makes me wonder what kind of people are in the room though.

    • If you were there you'd understand. Arcilla was reading from three or four pages of paper. I was looking at the faces of the audience — the representatives, Arcilla, the Anti-RH crowd, the Knights of Columbus guy — while I was delivering my speech, a speech I only finished composing in my head moments before I got to speak. I could've written a speech and read it to ensure that I'd be the most eloquent speaker in the room, but (1) I didn't have time to prepare and (2) I would've been as boring as any of the other speakers who simply read from three pages of paper (except Dr. Claudio, who although she also read from a sheet of paper it was still spontaneous because she composed it moments before she got to speak. And needless to say, Arcilla was entertaining not because of his eloquence but because of the patent absurdity of his claims). I guess I didn't want to pass up the chance to say it to their faces. On hindsight, I think that although I sacrificed some stuttering, I made the right choice of choosing to be spontaneous and direct and in your face. My speech might not have worked as a recording, but I feel that it worked well live.

      • [a speech I only finished composing in my head moments before I got to speak.]

        You did an impromptu speech?

        I take that back then – you did an excellent job 😀

        I just wish this was a debate – It would be fun to watch each of Arcilla's points disintegrate under pin-point questions from you and Kenneth. Most of these Pro-Lifers and so-called moralists don't stand up too well to scrutiny and reason, as the recent Debmski vs. Hitchens debate indicates.

      • @Red

        Excuses are excuses.

        Arcilla had a well prepared written speech while you were cramming to construct your speech, why? Were you not told that you have a slot on that session? Knowing that you might have a chance to speak before the committee, a handy speech is a plus.

        Dr. Claudio was not boring in reading her paper. Reading a well prepared speech does not necessarily bored the audience.

    • Still, it was a good effort nonetheless, given the circumstances.
      Lessons learned for everyone, keep a snappy emergency speech handy at all times

      Maybe the cool people of SPIT can give a workshop on impromptu performances 🙂

  15. Some initial comments after listening to Arcilla:

    0. He's heavy on rhetoric and dramatic flair, but fails to logically connect his points or back up his assertions. He's obviously quite practiced at giving speeches. Too bad it's mostly bullshit.

    1. He's raising a strawman by emphasizing the RH Bill is all about contraceptives.

    It is not. Contraceptive use is only part of the RH Bill as a whole – most of it has to do with a comprehensive sex education program to teach children thoroughly about their sexually, and to teach young adults to be more responsible in their choices and their sexual activity. Contrary to Arcilla's assertion, the RH Bill IS about love. Responsible love.

    Arcilla says the bill is pro-death, well quite frankly, so is preventing people from having access to information that could have prevented them from having kids that they cannot provide for. While Arcilla's off on his Quixotic escapade lambasting responsible parenthood, real people – women and children in particular – are dying every day because of complications at childbirth, malnutrition, illness, and in most cases, all three.

    Where is his compassion for them?

    2. Arcilla's invoking God's Wrath is dead wrong. Let me enumerate why:

    We're among the most corrupt countries in Asia… http://www.pinoygigs.com/blog/2010/03/philippines

    We have some of the highest incidences extrajudicial killings in the region… http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/na

    We're being ordered around by a church that's plagued with sex scandals… http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4336636.stm

    We can't even convict a mass murderer… http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/12/01/10/witnes

    And despite all these other atrocities happening in our nation, Arcilla think that God will throw a hissy fit over somebody who decides to wear rubber?

    There's a quote for people like Arcilla:

    […what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.]

    Okay, so that was ripped off from Billy Madison (starring Adam Sandler), but you get my point 😀

  16. One of the brightest Filipino that ever lived, Juan Luna, argued that the Philippines should NOT have a state sponsored religion. Secularism has been in Philippine debates more than a century ago, but the smartest Filipinos have always argued and defended that the Philippine constitution NOT sponsor a religion. I am a Catholic, like 80% of Filipinos. Alienating 20% of non-Catholics is the most unChristian and dumbest thing our country will ever do. We love all Filipinos whether they be Muslim, Buddhist, Protestant, Aglipay or Iglesia….whether they are brown, white, dark, or green…we should love them all – 'coz Jesus loved everybody, even his enemies. As for the RH bill – all the smart people of the world – UN, ADB and advanced nations support this. RH bill is not a religious argument – its basic common sense.

    • @Angel

      It amuses me that people like Arcilla keep referring to Clinton's statement regarding our population, when a reproductive health doctor – and a reputedly credible one – sent us a letter shortly after CLinton to explain why we needed an RH program:
      http://www.newsflash.org/2004/02/hl/hl110246.htm

      A trained medical professional with decades of experience, and whose entire career literally revolves around the current subject matter, or one sound byte from a former US president who was most famous for a blowjob he got in the White House?

      Who should we be listening to?

      On a side note, I do admire Clinton's work with the US economy, but that's another topic altogether.

  17. this is one of the reasons why i want this country to be atheistic in governance,…like japan and sweden,…300 years of catholic tyranny???!! pfffffft, it doesn't approve that much as the thousands of years of medieval, dark ages in europe,…

    • Japan has more than 250,000 suicides a year Kevin. Please let us all be honest to admit that not all the clergymen were as evil as the fictitious Damaso. How about the good Fr. Florentino who comforted a dying Simon in El Filibusterisimo? 🙂

        • Dear Twin Skies,

          Without a God, people fall into despair when faced with economic crisis. Despite our poverty, we don't have that many suicides. That's because you find God specially among the poor, whom He loves in the same way Jesus healed them and fed them, loved them and preached to them. Our faith is one of our strongest traits, as the Blessed Virgin Mary said in her apparition in Batulao last December 8, 2010 (the Feastday of the Immaculate Conception), when she appeared to and conversed with the mystic and visionary Emma de Guzman, whose face was covered by golden glitters. If you want more signs of God's gentle mercy and unconditional love, please come to Monte Maria in Alfonso, Cavite, where atheists like you from Japan and China, Muslims and Hindus are getting healed by Fr. Fernando Suarez. 🙂

          • I'd like to see a medical report confirming that Fr. Suarez has succeeded where no other man has, provided evidence for the supernatural. This would shake science to its very foundations, if true.

            I invite you to receive for our fair nation the 1 million dollars offered by James Randi to anyone who can show that the supernatural is indeed a real thing. Since you advocate helping the poor and do not believe that Fr. Suarez is a charlatan who preys on the ignorance and desperation of the sick, please take the 1 million dollars for the sake of the poor people of our nation. http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge….

            I await with bated breath.

          • [Without a God, people fall into despair when faced with economic crisis. Despite our poverty, we don't have that many suicides.]

            Do kindly tell us how being godless makes one more likely to turn to despair in tough economic times. I've met more than my share of atheists enduring the economic recession in the US – many of whom have suddenly found themselves jobless due to the financial problems – who aren't exactly sinking into despair given their predicament.

            Their absence of a belief in the supernatural makes them more self-reliant in their abilities, and while they are a cynical bunch, I do respect the integrity with which they carry themselves given their situation. So please, do your fucking homework before you go making broad generalizations like that.

            You also failed to take into account the number of Filipinos in RP who live well below the poverty line, and rather than committing suicide, are facing the prospect dying either from starvation or disease.
            http://www.foodjustice.net/ahrc-archive/statement

            Japan's suicide rate isn't brought about by godlessness either, as you'd try to lead us to think. It's a cocktail of social issues and their workaholic atmosphere, or mounting expectations for cram students from their overbearing parents that lead to their suicide rates. The fact is it's a mix of factors that lead one to commit suicide, and you're being disingenuous in trying to oversimplify it to mere "Godlessness" that causes these deaths.

            [Our faith is one of our strongest traits, as the Blessed Virgin Mary said in her apparition in Batulao last December 8, 2010 (the Feastday of the Immaculate Conception), when she appeared to and conversed with the mystic and visionary Emma de Guzman, whose face was covered by golden glitters. ]

            Let me get this straight – you're actually celebrating the fact that we have a reputation for being gullible when it comes to religion, and for not taking the time to use sound reasoning and skeptical inquiry to ascertain whether said miracles are true or false?

    • Dear Kevin the Anti-Catholic,

      Quite the contrary, this country has been founded on a Godless philosophy. If you go back to the Philippine revolution, there was absolutely no invocation of nor attribution to the power and glory of God by the revolutionaries. And this I believe is why the 1898 Revolution failed. Pls note the clock monument across Rizal monument that attributes the Philippine Independence to Freemasonry. So the truth is that it is Freemasonry, embraced by the early founders, that has failed us.

      This is in stark contrast to the US Declaration of Independence that stated "In God We Trust."

      God bless you Kevin.

      • [Quite the contrary, this country has been founded on a Godless philosophy. If you go back to the Philippine revolution, there was absolutely no invocation of nor attribution to the power and glory of God by the revolutionaries. ]

        And what sparked the Philippine Revolution? Corrupt priests and friars 😉
        I'd hardly blame the revolutionaries for staying the hell away from religion if their most frequent taste of it came from Damaso-types.

        [This is in stark contrast to the US Declaration of Independence that stated "In God We Trust." ]

        The US doesn't favor any one religion over another either, if I recall 🙂

        Just about the only people there at agree with you are Right-wing pundits and religious fundamentalists, and quite frankly, the US thinks they're fucking nuts too.

      • The United States was founded by deists and freethinkers, such as Thomas Jefferson, the principal author of the Declaration of independence, who said this about your Lord and your Blessed Virgin Mary, "The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as his father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter."

        I think you'll find that if you type Ctrl+F and scan the Declaration of Independence you will find no mention of "In God We Trust." I hope this stops you from lying about this again. Isn't that against one of the ten commandments?

    • There is only one God, Twin-Skies. The Catholic Church is universal. The 2nd Vatican Council has already proclaimed that non-Catholics can also be saved and go to heaven on their own merits. 🙂

      • I got news for you Willy. Your church has no more authority to judge other non-Catholics than any other religious organization. Less, given your church's consistent track record for hiding sex offenders.

        • Dear Twin Skies,

          Jesus has warned us all, "Judge not so you may not be judged." RE: Sex Offenders, while we don't deny that, we also believe there is no honor in exposing the sins of others. That's why Jesus challenged everyone who wanted to stone the adulteress woman, "He who is without sin let him cast the first stone."

          Let me share with you an insight why I personally believe that Christianity is supreme. It is the only religion that preaches "Love your enemy" — a tenet Jesus preached and practiced to the end.

          Anything else? 🙂

          • By your reasoning, anyone can create a better religion than Christianity by jettisoning its despicable doctrine of eternal torture and focus only on loving one's neighbors.

            Also, nice try in ignoring the fact that Twin-Skies was not referring to the sex offenders themselves but your Church's undeniable part in hiding the rapists and moving them to other parishes where they raped even more children. While the rapes are horrendous, the even more disgusting part is that the Church you pledge allegiance to commended the bishops who refused to cooperate with the proper authorities to bring the rapists to justice.

          • [RE: Sex Offenders, while we don't deny that, we also believe there is no honor in exposing the sins of others. That's why Jesus challenged everyone who wanted to stone the adulteress woman, "He who is without sin let him cast the first stone." ]

            Willy, quote mining the bible as if it were relevant to the discussion doesn't make you look smarter. It makes you look like a delusional, self-righteous prick. As for "honor," tell me, where is the honor in systematically hiding sex offenders?
            http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/10/world/europe/10

            Your church has been found on multiple counts to be guilty of these crimes, and instead of actually trying to bring these offenders to justice, your church has had them hidden away from parish to parish, and on more than one occasion attempted to bribe the victims with hush money
            http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/church-hush-mon

            Your church is the criminal here, not the victim, which makes it all the more irrelevant that you'd use the incident of Jesus protecting a woman from being stoned by an angry mob.

            If I were to use your own story, your church would be closer to the angry mob that wants to stone the women. They're the senseless, dogma-driven rabble of embittered old men still living in a patriarchal, bronze-age mindset that think of women as nothing more than as property, and would do anything to put them in their place, namely their heels.

    • Dear Twin Skies,

      Thank you for admitting that God is in the constitution and therefore PH is a Religious Democracy whether we like it or not.

      Now, for your 2nd question, Christians believe there is only One God, and we happen to be a predominantly Christian country.

      Hope that answers your question?

      Peace be with you.

      Willy Arcilla

      • [Thank you for admitting that God is in the constitution and therefore PH is a Religious Democracy whether we like it or not. ]

        And thank you for showing us that you are a bloody ignorant twat who gets his kicks from being a patronizing asshole. While the constitution guarantees your free exercise of religion, it does not equate to you asking for legislation that would specifically favor any one religion, regardless of your numbers. Fr. Joaquin Bernas the constitutionalist was also quite explicit in this regard as well.
        https://filipinofreethinkers.org/2010/06/30/is-the

        [That is the “separation part” of the constitutional command. The other part is the “free exercise clause.” Both are embodied in one sentence which says: “No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

        …the negative command of the Constitution is addressed not to bishops or priests but to the state and those who exercise state authority. As to bishops and priests, the pertinent part of the constitutional command is the guarantee of the free exercise of religion.]

        Let me ask you this question: If the Philippines were a predominantly Muslim/Hindu/Satanist state, would you still be so inclined to state that we should follow the majority's faith in all legal matters?

  18. By listening to Willy Arcilla…. (What a Sh#$%!!) What a Crap!
    The Philippines is not a Secular State…. I can't think of anything to say to those narrow minded people like them… have they ever try.. or even have a peek on what was written on the RH Bill.. It doesn't say anything that all Filipino were suppose to be using contraceptive.. It's our Choice! … If we want to use then the Government will provide us some help.. if you you don't want.. then theres nothing to argue about it..

      • Nobody is forcing you to support contraceptives. If the education program's lessons are not to your liking, you are well within your rights not to listen to them.

        The problem is that your group has no problems forcing people to follow their theology's stance on reproductive health.

        • the 'sex education' is mandatory. once the bill becomes a law, it will be unlawful, punishable with fine and imprisonment, for the parents to opt out. every parent will be forced to have their children exposed to this mandatory education regardless of their desire to delay or to even want to teach the children themselves rather than letting the state expose their children to such "education".

          • Kindly read SEC. 22., Prohibited Acts, before you start rambling again you fucking twat:

            Nowhere does the bill state anything about penalizing parents for teaching their kids their own views on sexuality at home. Now if you'd bothered to read the bill, you'll notice that the bill seeks to penalize and imprison health service workers who act unprofessionally, or act based on their personal prejudice (gender, race, RELIGION).

            I can understand that an idiot like you, who thinks that medieval sexuality is the best thing that happened to mankind, would be horrified at the prospect of the government doing their job, and teaching some common sense into your offspring, but quite frankly, you don't have my sympathy.

            In fact, if you had kids, I'd probably have you charged with child abuse if you try to force them to follow your religion under threat of your authority as a parent.

            Fuck off, you nitwit. We've been arguing this same issue for months, and you're too fucking stupid to get the point into that thick skull of yours.

          • "Nowhere does the bill state anything about penalizing parents for teaching their kids their own views on sexuality at home. " -twin-skies

            not at home but in school. parents should be able to opt out should they choose to exercise their constitutional right- free from any conflict such as a mandated sex education at school.

            " can understand that an idiot like you, who thinks that medieval sexuality is the best thing that happened to mankind, would be horrified at the prospect of the government doing their job, and teaching some common sense into your offspring," – twinskies

            the rearing of children is not the government's job. our constitution is clear on the matter of their development of moral character. it is "The natural and primary right and duty of parents in the rearing of the youth" in which the state is limited to providing support.

      • I disagree with you there.

        If anything, it's dogma that dehumanizes and destroys. Whether it's political, religious, or otherwise I think that a fanatical attachment to an ideology is what leads to ruin.

        As we say in the gaming and anime community – flaming fanboys/girls ruin it for everybody 🙁

        This is most evident in fundamentalists and fanatics of every belief.

Leave a reply

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here