REPORT Secularism Violations
PoliticsReligionSociety

Statement Regarding New Peso Bills

the Editors
the Editors

There has been recent controversy regarding the new peso bills the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (Central Bank of the Philippines or BSP) will be releasing. Various factual errors have been brought up such as the rare blue-naped parrot on the new P500 bill having a yellow beak and green tail feathers, instead of red and yellow, respectively. On a map found on the P1000 bill, the Tubbataha reef was misplaced.1

Regarding these errors, Fe dela Cruz, a spokesperson for the BSP has said that, “In choosing the design… we are always guided by our commitment to enrich the appreciation and knowledge of the Filipinos we honor on our banknotes…”1

On Radyo Inquirer, dela Cruz also said that the BSP will be evaluating the criticisms regarding the errors on the new bills saying, “pwede namang palitan (it can be changed).”2

While it is laudable that these mistakes are going to be attended to, there is one gross oversight that has yet to be addressed. New bills will be containing this direct quotation from the Christian Bible: “Pinagpala ang bayan na ang Diyos ay ang Panginoon (Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord),”3,4 which comes from Psalm 33:12. This statement can be found above the seal of the Republic of the Philippines.

Original image from GMA news blog, used under fair use. Emphasis by the editors.

This is a flagrant transgression of the non-establishment clause of the Philippine Constitution, which states that, “No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Clearly, this is a situation where the government is endorsing a particular religious tradition. While there is an undeniable Catholic majority in the Philippines, our nation also has citizens who are Buddhist, Hindu, Sikh, Pagan, and non-religious. The emblazoning of this Biblical verse on Philippine currency is an affront to the religious diversity of our country and the separation of Church and State guaranteed by our Constitution.

In its decision against the COMELEC’s order to bar Ang Ladlad from running as a party-list during this past year’s national elections, the Supreme Court said 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.“5 We see in this overtly Christian statement on the new Philippine peso bills another example in a long-running trend of religious bias on the part of certain sectors in our government.

The quotation from the Christian Old Testament and its placing on legal tender is a manifest violation of the Constitution and the right to religious freedom of the country’s citizens as it forces even non-Christians to participate in the distribution of explicitly Judeo-Christian material. As a body that represents all of its citizens, Christian or not, the Philippine government must be a secular one; it cannot champion the religious beliefs of any particular faith.

We hereby call upon the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas to remove the quotation from the Bible from all legal Philippine tender.


1 Agence France-Presse. Philippines in uproar over error-filled peso bills, <http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/nation/view/20101219-309872/Philippines-in-uproar-over-error-filled-peso-bills> (2010).
2 Zamora, F. Twitter / @ fe zamora: BSP to evaluate criticisms …, <http://twitter.com/amfezam/status/16681407044657152> (2010).
3 Bauzon, B. C. V. New peso bills feature younger-looking faces, <http://www.manilatimes.net/index.php/top-stories/34272-new-peso-bills-feature-younger-looking-faces> (2010).
4 Lardizabal-Dado, N. New Generation Philippine Peso bills (updated), <http://www.thepoc.net/blogwatch-features/10615-new-generation-philippine-peso-bills.html> (2010).
5 Castillo, M. C. D. Ang Ladlad LGBT Party vs. Commission on Elections, <http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/april2010/190582.htm> (2010).

Related content

117 comments

  1. This statement found in Psalm 33 is actually acceptable not only to Christians but to the Jewish and Muslims as well, as the Psalm is part of the “required” readings of these groups. And if you are Buddhist or Hindu, you wouldn’t be disturbed by it since it doesn’t matter really for these religions as money is nothing for them. And if you are a true atheist, it doesn’t matter as well, because you don’t believe in the existence of any god. So, what’s the fuss really? Your debates are just empty rhetoric. Peace!

  3. leave that quote alone!

    it’s time for everyone to recognize the power of God. assert His lordship’s contribution in this nation’s economy, government, and money! Ahuramazda clearly blesses everyone of you.

    according to the sacred texts,

    “nations hu kneel n His glory wont feel any prick but ricivs all d perks there is.” – Hawaians 15:32 of the new world version

  4. Keep the quotation, its about time God’s people come out from hiding and worship Him publicly. Turn your back on God and His devine protection will surely be gone from you.

    Romans 10:9-10 ESV

    Because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.

    God bless the Philippines and make it the country who prospers in your everlasing glory. Help those who need You and strengthen those who love You, that they may continue to serve You in which brings us comfort, love, peace, fulfillment, righteousness and joy.

  5. Mga kaibigan wala namang masama sa naisulat sa ating pera!Pinagpala Ang Bayan Na Ang Diyos Ay Ang Panginoon.Wala namang makikitang kamalian bagkus tumutumbok na ang ating Inang Bayang Pilipinas ang tunay at wagas na pinagpala ng ating mahal na Panginoon.Marami kasi sa atin ang makikitid ang pangunawa ni hindi maintidihan ang ibig sabihin o ipahiwatig sa ating lahat na mga Pilipino.Hindi ba kayo masisiyahan na

    ang ating Inang Bayang Pilipinas ang siyang pinagpalang Bayan ng ating mahal na Panginoon!Nakasulat na iyan sa biblia o di tumutugma na ang PROPESIYA na ang Pilipinas ang pinagpalang bayan ng ating Panginoon sa takdang panahon.Hindi naman malaking issue iyan kung tayo ay marunong umintindi ang mahirap iyong taong makaintindi.

  7. FOR ME ITS IS NOT BAD.. BECAUSE PHILIPPINES IS ONE OF THE BLESSED COUNTRY,, WE ARE FREE TO WORSHIP GOD, AND GOD REVEAL SOMETHING NEW TO US THAT HE WILL COMING SOON,,AND PHILIPPINES IS ONE OF THE CHOSEN COUNTRY BLESSED BY GOD…

  8. As if no one will notice that they took it from the bible, the one who drafted that should be sued for plagiarism
    ROFL

    Bottom line: shows how theocratic the Philippines is…
    Article 2 Section 6: The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable
    ROFL (again)

  9. Whether we accept it or not, our country will only be bless if we acknowledged God as our source of strength. it is a choice between being with Him or against Him. If you dont acknowledge Him, then don't accept Him, if you do, then do it. He (the one who puts the quote in the money) is only laying the truth(for us, it is the truth) it is still your choice whether you accept it or not.

    • Yun nga ang problema eh. For you it is the truth. For us it is not. Therefore, the "one who puts the quote in the money" is only laying your truth and not ours. But we are all Filipinos. This is what we have in common, not our religion but our citizenship. So why acknowledge only the truth of some Filipinos and in the process deny the truth of other Filipinos? Ano, kayo lang bang mga Kristiyano ang pwedeng tawaging Pilipino? Eh kaming mga Buddhist? Mga atheista? Porke't bang minority kami wala na kaming boses? Porke't bang minority kami hindi na kami kinikilalang mga Pilipino? Eh kung kayo ang nasa lugar namin?

    • What a sad insecure God—requiring worship from tiny little humans who comprise but one of millions of species in a tiny blue orb in some obscure corner of space. Then, if he doesn't get loved by individuals from this one species, he threatens them? Whoever you believe your petty and tiny God is, you don't seem to think highly of him.

      • They also seem to think he's a poster boy for dysfunctional and cruel parenting. Something bad happens – let's say you get date-raped – and that's apparently "God's way of teaching you how to be strong, faithful and brave in the face of adversity." Would you let your child be harmed/killed if it was in your power to prevent it? Would you allow this in order to teach him/her a valuable lesson? No? This imaginary father-in-heaven would.

        • This common supposed solution to the problem of evil is actually quite sad because you don't really want to tread on the false consolation derived by believers from their religion. Some people who survived Katrina and were surveyed said that the disaster that killed hundreds of people, drowning them in their homes, only strengthened their faith. What a contemptible idea, thinking that the suffering of others was ordained in the heavens for your personal spiritual growth.

  10. a law or a rule is made for the greater good for the greater people. thats the faith in which this country chose foundry upon. every logical mind has a default state for it to work and to achive its aim. this countries faith in the bible and its teachings is the framework to achive its greater good for the greater people. come'on, the bill is not disregarding the minorities. kamote yung kaisipan ng iba dito..basta may maicomment lang:-P

  12. Psalms 33:12-13 refers to the Israel and the Jewish people since it is in the Old Testament (other nations at that time considered Baal as their god, Osiris, Mythras, Zeus, etc). You should see it like this:

    <Blessed> <is> <the nation whose God is the Lord> <,> <the people He chose for His inheritance> <.>

    the nation whose God is the Lord = Israel
    the people He chose for his inheritance = Jews

    I don't know why the Philippine government is praising/worshiping Israel and the Jews. I also can't understand why people believe that they're gonna do bad things without God. And friends, the Bible is about 2000 years old, half of it a little bit older. Why do we base our lives in the writings of desert dwellers, herdsmen who were primitive who considered whales as fishes and bats as birds? The BSP could've included a quote about time management, or the golden rule. Or, as Donovan from FB suggested, "The Philippines is worth dying for. Or better, The Philippines is worth living for."

  13. I don't really see too many people giving a howl on what is written on our notes… the vast majority doesn't even notice what are contained in them. I don't see the phrase creating any division as it doesn't get read anyway. The ones who create division are those who scrutinize too much details, making a fuzz over such small matters.
    There are more important matters that must be brought up to government. Free-thinkers should focus their minds on essential matters that will actually uplift the lives of Filipinos as individuals and as a nation. Think CREATIVELY and recommend practicable programs that can put more of these bank notes in the pocket of every Juan. There are too many Filipinos who couldn't even catch a glimpse of the 500-peso bill, let alone reading whatever is written on it.

    • If it matters at all to you, the quotation appears on all bills, even the P20 ones. Also, it doesn't really matter whether this is a worthy battle to wage or important enough to distract us from our efforts in alleviating poverty and AIDS in Africa. The point of this article is that the act was not only illegal, it is unconstitutional and the matter should be rectified. Does it matter if people notice the words? No. It only matters if it is illegal or not.

  14. I think that technically, the Central Bank may have the right to do that if you are just going to base it on the constitution phrase: “No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
    I can see no law being made here. Just the freedom to put what they think majority of Filipinos believe. Don't get me wrong, me too is an atheist.

    • yes, you are right. I think the author might have cited the wrong clause here.

      Article III Section 5 of the Bill of Rights has three distinct provisions:

      1. Non-establishment Clause – No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
      2. Freedom of Religion Clause – The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed.
      3. No Test Clause – No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights.

      The article should have cited #2 instead of #1 because there is a clear violation of giving preferential treatment to a specific religion

    • No. The non-establishment clause is interpreted as to mean more than laws directly passed by Congress. It was cited by the Supreme Court in Ang Ladlad vs. COMELEC, even though the COMELEC did not, and could not, pass any laws against Ang Ladlad.

  15. The people's apathy is the deluded system's asset to unity in today's world. Unproductive consciousness is an evident disgrace to the Promethean possibilities of reason. Contentment to the pleasure of thinking is armchair activism's best friend. Reason begets reason, movement begets movement – we must make a move in this stupefied colonial mentality that keeps us Filipinos!
    Liberty and Reason!

  16. Our cause is a bit noisy already, so I think it would be a big deal if we at least cross out the lines and write short liner pick-ups that could give rise to consciousness-raising. The new money will be released next year, I think, though ginagamit ko na yung mga napa-Aguinaldohan ko*, so on that big circulation stage we could declare once a week, every month an action week for this action.
    In this action, you don't have to be a member of something. In the spirit of solidarity and direct action we could, at least make a difference in this shit. Kaya natin to mga kasama; a split second of decision is a very big impact para sa ganitong action.
    "Walang kinalaman ang Diyos sa pagbuo ng ating Bayan!"
    "Malayang pag-iisip ay walang kinikilalang Kathang-isip!"
    "ibigay ninyo sa Bayan ang para sa Bayan, at sa Diyos ang para sa Diyos!"
    "Huwad na Simbahan! Walang Pera sa Kalangitan!"

    *binigyan ako ng tita ko ng Aguinaldo, pero tinanggap ko. ok given na na Pasko, pero hindi naman ako sound-good look-good na sasabihin "senxa na tita, hindi ako naniniwala sa Diyos". Hindi naman ako saksi ni Jehova para mag-inarte ng ganyan.

    • Then why not add something Hindu or Scientologist as well? The point is, no religion should have to be given prominence on our money. As for secular statements, pretty much everything else on the bill is secular: serial number, name of the country, etc.

  18. How about making a Defacing The New Bills Campaign?

    Since they are pushing through with this "God" trend with the money… How about, Crossing it out and putting "Allah Akhbar!" or "In Thor we Trust" as an expression of disgust. That should get their attention if we sign a lot of those in the New Bills, since it's being circulated.

  19. I believe the more appropriate bible quote should have been:
    “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s”

    God has no place in such earthly matters like money. Christians should be mortified that the name of their Lord is being used in vain by engraving it in one of the most corruption-inducing inventions of man.

    What's next? bible quotations in condoms?

  20. What I'm interested to hear from fellow freethinkers is:

    1) What can we do to change this?

    2) How far should we go in our efforts to change this?

  21. "In fairness though, I don't think that quote refers to the Christian God."

    Technically, it doesn't necessarily favor Christianity. Psalm is a part of the Bible but it is also a part of Sacred Judaic texts. Judaism is definitely not the same as Christianity. Now the Judeo-Christian god is also the same Abrahamic god the Muslims worship (traditionally speaking). The verse, then, may cover Islam in lieu of the linkage. Since the words were not properly credited to Psalm, then technically the words favor not just Abrahamic faith but monotheism. So technically, the words show favoritism towards monotheism over polytheism. But “monotheism” and “polytheism” are not specific religions; they are merely descriptive terms acknowledging existence of at least one deity. So technically speaking, there may be no religious discrimination at all in this.

    • So if you worship many gods, since you're technically not one monolithic religion, it's okay to ignore your right to not involve yourself in the distribution of monotheist material?

      This "no citation" argument is bunk and a thinly-disguised attempt to support a preconceived conclusion—that this isn't a big deal. What if our money had this quotation without citation?

      "Once again the songs of the fatherland roared to the heavens along the endless marching columns, and for the last time the Lord's grace smiled on His ungrateful children."

      This could be construed as a non-sectarian theistic statement, if you have to play that game. At the risk of invoking Godwin's law, this is a quotation from Hitler. Now, would you be so willing as to have this, on the face of it, harmless sentence on our money? If not, then you must concede that it's not just superficial content that is being debated here. Words have meanings beyond face value. Quotations imply much more than the words lifted from a source.

      • Hi Garrick!

        I cannot speak for polytheists on this matter, but whether they think the distribution of monotheistically biased material is objectionable, I think, is a matter of individual value judgment.

        I think the “no-citation” action was actually a cunning way to weasel out of the favoritism charge. Whether we are okay with it or are disgusted with such a scheme doesn’t matter. What matters is what we can prove. Can we prove that this is unconstitutional? Well, there appears to be a hole they can exploit. I don’t think we can effectively win a case based on guilt by association. We have to go with the merits of the case.

  22. well kung tatanggalin na rin lang ang quote de tanggalin na rin yung calendaryo natin kase base siya sa pagdating ni Hesus sa mundo. We cannot deny God's existence. Every check we write we acknowledge that Jesus exists.

    • The fact that we base our calendars on the supposed birth of Jesus is no proof for God's existence. It's just proof of the Roman Catholic Church's power and influence. And writing checks will not make the divinity of Jesus true, either.

    • We cannot deny Thor's existence every time Thursday rolls around. Every time we write down the day, we acknowledge that Thor exists.

      • yeah Thor!!

        "my god has a hammer, your god was nailed to a cross"

        … and everytime we teach astronomy and name the planets, we give honor to the Roman gods as well, god forbid the church issue a decree to rename all the celestial bodies as well into christianized names too

    • Actually, the date was based on a couple of Pagan festivals set in the same time period – early Christians basically pirated the holiday date to attract more pagans to their faith. Taking Jesus out of the equation also simply means we'll re-label the holiday…though Horusmas doesn't have the same ring to it 🙁

      A Happy Hogswatch to you 🙂

    • We should base the posts here on things that can be tested, or grounded using mortar and pestle and a bit of liquid nitrogen. The days of the week, planets, and other s_its are named from, you know these stuffs guys. However, IT DOES NOT confirm their existence. Even my neighbor is named after my idol Jesus.

      About the topic, they should remove those words on our money.:)

      Enjoy the vacation guys! 😀

    • The BC/AD notation is only based on a 6th century ESTIMATE of Jesus' birth year. In fact Matthew and Luke contradict each other in pegging the actual year of birth of Jesus of Nazareth. The two gospels have a ten-year difference.

  25. People who are saying that it doesn't matter, or that it's okay for the Biblical quotation to be on Philippine money because "In God We Trust" is on American money are making two important mistakes. One is they're implying that if the U.S. does something, it's a good idea for the Philippines to do it too. I'm an American, but I can say DON'T MAKE OUR MISTAKES!

    The other mistake is that it will continue to erode your constitution's guarantee of freedom of and from religion. Our American national motto used to be "E Pluribus Unum," which means "From many, comes one." That's a wonderful motto, bringing us together. But during the 1950's the U.S. and the Soviet Union were beginning to really face off, and people were scared. Ruthless American demagogues like Senator Joe McCarthy spread paranoia about godless communists infiltrating everywhere in America, and anyone who was accused as being a "commie" lost their jobs and careers. Many innocent people were ruined.

    So the spineless politicians who didn't want to cross McCarthy scrambled to show how religious and patriotic they were, and they pushed a bill through that changed our national motto to "In God We Trust." Ironic, since nobody trusted anybody else at the time. It is completely unconstitutional, violating the First Amendment. But now we're stuck with it. The Supreme Court just recently upheld it's continuing based on very weak and questionable arguments.

    We have never been as united as we were when our motto was about unity. Our divisions are steadily getting deeper. Don't let your Catholic version of McCarthyism and your expedient politicians make the same mistakes.

    Resist this creeping theocratic trend . Once you get it into your government or onto your money, you'll never get it out.

    • Even here people use the "In God We Trust" motto to use the United States as a shining example of a flourishing Christian democracy. When in truth, the American espousal of secularism is one of the great values that made it "the land of the free." It is a shame that many commenters here, not just in this post, readily use the motto without understanding the xenophobic motivation, which you pointed out, that got the it instituted in the first place.

  28. Ang gusto lang naman namin ay freedom from bias and favoritism eh, gano kahirap bang intindihin yun???
    Kasi naman sanay na tayo sobra sa lahat ng uri ng corruption, nepotism at padrino dito sa bansa na ok lang sa atin ang palakasan.

    Guys, DEMOCRACY IS NOT MAJORITY RULES. San nyo ba napulot yan? Democracy is about the small people being treated fairly and equally with the same rights as everyone else. Kung gusto nila ilagay ang pangalan ng Panginoon sa pera, dapat ilagay din ang lahat ng mga diyos at diyosa doon. Nasan na si Bathala? si Maria Makiling at ang mga anito na sinasamba ng mga katutubong Pilipino?

  30. Secular thinking and behavior promote unity and inclusiveness. For example, the phrase could have been "Pinagpala ang bayan na may malasakit sa isa't isa." Religious and non-religious people will probably identify with values like this that appeal to our common humanity. On the other hand, religious thinking and behavior, when imposed on everyone (all of us will use these bills), tend to surface or exacerbate divisions, as illustrated by the opinion that the biblical verse is ok because Christians are the majority in our country.

  33. The thing is, no matter what religion the Filipino belongs to, he is deeply spiritual. His spirituality has crept into not only his culture, but into his history, his laws and his national identity. That is what the phrase tends to represent. No matter who the 'Panginoon' would refer to, Filipinos (or at least majority) believe the nation under His or Her control is blessed indeed. After all, the phrase 'Awit 33:12' isn't there to restrict its interpretation.

    And, the phrase could very well be a security feature. The nine-word 41-character phrase would have to have the right font, size, spacing, and placement on the bill.

    • I'd like to see some studies that show that all Filipinos are deeply spiritual regardless of religion and that this spirituality always involves a "Panginoon." Nevertheless, this is a moot point since the issue is a matter of constitutionality, not on personal feelings on the matter.

      We also have a history of animism, psychic surgery, and mythical monsters. Where are the kapres and anitos in my money?

      Another security feature could be the number pi up to the 58th digit with a precise font, size, spacing, and placement. There could also be a watermark of the face of Redford White at the bottom right corner inscribed in a heptagon with its vertices on exact Cartesian coordinates.

    • I am a Filipino and I'm not spiritual. I don't believe that a nation under "His or Her control is blessed." Can you stop speaking in absolutes?

  34. A little food for thought for the commenters who insist on following the "majority wins" argument – citing that since the majority of voters in RP are Christians and Catholics, everybody else has to comply to their standards, here is a little speech the late Ted Kennedy gave at Liberty University, of all places:
    http://savannahnow.com/forums/religionphilosophy/…

    "The separation of church and state can sometimes be frustrating for women and men of religious faith. They may be tempted to misuse government in order to impose a value which they cannot persuade others to accept.

    But once we succumb to that temptation, we step onto a slippery slope where everyone’s freedom is at risk. Those who favor censorship should recall that one of the first books ever burned was the first English translation of the Bible.

    As President Eisenhower warned in 1953, “Don’t join the book burners…the right to say ideas, the right to record them, and the right to have them accessible to others is unquestioned — or this isn’t America.” And if that right is denied, at some future day the torch can be turned against any other book or any other belief.

    Let us never forget: Today’s Moral Majority could become tomorrow’s persecuted minority."

    A little litmus test for you guys – if the tables were turned, and the Gov't is now mostly of another religion, would you still be demanding we simply follow the majority decision to post phrases like "All glory to the Hypnotoad", "Blood for the Blood God!", "Ramen!" or "Cthulhu Fhtagn"?

  36. Taray ng post na ito! May 'K' kang mag-suggest para alisin ang Bible quote sa pera? Di ba in a democracy the majority rules? Eh di ba 'majority' ng Pilipino Kristiyano, not necessarily Katoliko? Oh, so ano ka ngayon? Etchosero?

    • Majority rule is not an argument when the constitutionality of an action by the government is being discussed. The Constitution has safeguards built in to it to prevent exactly the tyranny of the majority that you are proposing.

      • It's always the majority who rules kahit saang sitwasyon. Even in Supreme Court. The majority vote always rule. In Congress or Senate those who have the numbers rule and so is in this country. While we respect the minority, like the Muslims, there is no way that they (the minority) can impose their will on the majority because the majority wont tolerate such. This is of course should still be based on the laws that is commonly held by all. Otherwise, the minority cannot insist something that will affect the majority. Things simply dont work that way dear.

        • And the proposal here is that this quotation on the new peso bills is unconstitutional. If it is deemed as such, as it should be, the personal feelings of the majority do not matter. The majority of citizens cannot simply vote away the rights of the minority of other citizens because there is a constitution that protects both the rights of the majority and the minority.

        • Actually, you have it the other way around. A democracy is meant to give equal rights to the minority as that of the majority, and guarantees that these rights cannot simply be voted away because of a majority vote.

          A good example of this can be found in the recent repeal of Proposition 8: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-1087509…

          If we followed you shallow understanding of a democracy women wouldn't be able to vote, and black would still be second class citizens as well – the majority was against giving them rights after all, at least several decades ago.

          • As far as religious tolerance in this country is concerned I dont really see any problem…so why make an issue of this in the first place. Bakit ba kailangan pang pagtalunan yung paglalagay ng Bible verse sa pera? I mean if we are all God-fearing and revering people, bakit nagiging isyu pa ito? Puwera na lang kung atheist yung nag-su-suggest nito.

            And even if that is so, the right of the majority cannot be simply put aside. Although the minority is given due respect, it is still the interest of the majority that PREVAILS.

          • The problem is we are NOT all "god"-fearing people. There are Filipinos, patriotic Filipinos, who disbilieve the existence of gods. Don't you see a problem with that? Some Hindu Filipinos not only believe in one god but many others. Buddhist Filipinos don't believe in any. What that line in the money does is excluding all other Filipinos who does not subscribe to the same god as you do.

            When we fail to protect the rights of the minority, then we have a failed as a Republic. That's why we have the Bill of Rights, checks and balances and the Constitution so that we won't have TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY.

            And guess what? Section 5 of the Bill of Rights state that "No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." which this money is in clear violation of.

    • yan nga yun kinakatakot ni Aristotle sa democracy eh kaya ayaw nya nun (ideal para sa kanya yun "polity" where the majority rules for the benefit of all, not just for the benefit of the ruler, i.e. the majority). Tyranny of the majority is still tyranny and unjust. It does not consider the rights of the minority. We are (ideally) a liberal democracy, not just a mob-rule democracy. Try reading up Rawls.

  37. sana nilagay na lang nila na "“Pinagpala ang bayan na ang Pera ang Panginoon" e yun naman talaga ang katotohanan, mas madaming nagagawa pa ang pera kesa sa dasal.

  38. Aside from the fact that the statement comes from a "religious book", it's also clearly bullshit. Superstition has kept our people poor and ignorant, and vulnerable to those who use religion to gain power and money. Yes, I'm talking about you, corrupt politicians who like to talk about how "God-fearing" you are.

    • Can you tell me why it's important that the majority believes in (a) god/s? Scandinavian countries are by and large secular yet they enjoy the highest standard of living in the world.

  40. Do you realize even the US bank notes have the lines "IN GOD WE TRUST" with pretty much every denomination and coins that they have? I think the author of this article is just plain over-reacting and stupid. Get over it.

    I don't care whatever is written on my money. What's important is that it's legal tender. Period!

    • As mimimarquez noted, this phrase is worse than "in god we trust" since it is implicitly supporting a specific version of god.

      The US bank notes didn't have "in god we trust" until the era of McCarthyism made their legislators go a bit crazy. If we have the chance to nip our government from implying support for a religion then I'm taking it.

      Having "In God We Trust" on the US bank notes has helped build up the myth that America is a "christian nation" in the minds of believers. How much harder would our fight for a secular nation be if a biblical phrase is on our legal tender?

    • people "get over it" way too often. our typically pinoy indifference played a major part in what our country is today. people need to think about things more. yes, this is a little thing compared to other issues like the RH bill, but it's still important. the inclusion of a religious quote in our country's legal tender is both unconstitutional and unfair to people of other faiths (and atheists and agnostics). people who say "i dont care basta may pera ako" are lower than pond scum in my opinion.

  41. hindi po ito masyado big deal… tlagang marami na lang umeepal at bobo sa atin… bakit sa dollar may nakalagay "in God we trust" anu ibig sabihin nun…

    daming epal p#$%^&@ niu…..

    • naku, ayan na… lumalabas na ang tunay na pagka-kristiyano ng mga iba dyan…
      tsk, tsk…

      pano ako mag "trust" sa God na yan kung ganyan ang ugali ng mga sumasamba sa kanya…

    • Hahahahaha…this guy's a great ambassador of his faith! Let's all give him a round of applause shall we? Thank you erwin for continuing to show us the light! 😉

  42. eheh. you should havent forgot the ISLAM (for muslim) faith brother. nwe muslim is of the 3 major religion (christianity, jew and ISLAM) in the universe. currently and statiscally, the fastest growing religion in the world, today and still growing.. fyi

  43. It is clear. The catholic CEO's has a hand on this one. Not to mention our current president is a very religious kid.

    Hindi na ba sila nakuntento? Ang dami dami na ngang simbahan sa bawat kanto (mas marami pa sa iskuwelahan at ospital)… Halos mandatory na ang pagdadasal sa mga public establishments like public schools, senate & conress. Pati nga mga "panunupa" natin kasama ang diyos. May special place na nga ang mga Katoliko pag dating sa policy making. Tapos pati ba naman ang pera natin gusto nilang angkinin.

  44. There should be a line to seperate the church from the state in this case using the quote from the Bible as long as they didn't put the source (Psalm 33:12) I dont see there anything wrong with that.

    • If the quotation read, "I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men." without citing 1 Timothy 2:12, would you have any objections?

    • Leaving the source doesn't make it right either because the quote itself says "Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord" It actually makes it worse that there is no citation because it now seems like the government said it, in simpler terms the passage says Blessed are the Christians because it is the Christians that call the Lord, God. I am Catholic but I have been taught to respect other faiths, I have worked in communities all over the country and personally interacted with our brothers and sisters from various religions as well as the Atheists,if the is one thing I have learned it's that our country needs to respect all beliefs regardless of what the majority is.

      The only reason we need to remove that passage is because we need to respect the fact that not every Filipino calls God Lord, there are those that call him Allah, others worship Buddah, others worship the trees, the stones, the mountains and we need to respect each of them so that they too can respect us

      • Well, we can print mantras of other faiths/non-faiths on paper. Or not at all, because the real issue here is government ideology, not simply faith in a God. One can argue that the present government needs an ideology of moral ascendancy. That is what the Biblical verse should mean for those not Christian. I think it was put there because, for the new dispensation, the moral ascendancy of government is important. 'Moral' does not necessarily mean 'religious', as philosophers will tell you.

        I would like to say that the Freethought community in the Philippines should have more than just knee-jerk reactions to societal problems. Or else, we will end up like America (i.e. more of the same, except we become richer).

        • correction po: if we don't react sa mga ganitong bagay, we'll end up like Iraq, not America… na lahat ng mga bagay controlled ng religion

        • Benjo, why can't the government aspire to moral ascendancy using a secular phrase? Philosophers have done that for centuries, is our government so backward it can't do the same?

      • Hindi ba 'mark of the beast' tong yellow ribbon shit na eto. Heheh.
        Pati Christmas posters sa LRT, nilalagyan nila ng yellow ribbon.
        I can't even begin to tell you how WRONG that is…

        • Well, given that this Yellow President the Philippines has is going against the dictates of the Church when it comes to the RH Bill, one can raise the notion that Noynoy Aquino is an antichrist in lieu of 1 John 2:18-19… “Little children, it is the last hour: and as ye heard that antichrist cometh, even now have there arisen many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they all are not of us.” 🙂 hehehe

    • Given the highly diverse religious traditions of the country and of the world, the list was not intended to be exhaustive. This is exactly the point this post is making. The country has too many religions for the government to just side with the dominant one. This is why the government must be secular, so that it can equally protect the rights of all the faiths and those without faith.

      • Instead of saying that the author forgot to mention our Muslim brothers in the south, you're telling me that the author intentionally left them out, to make a point?

        um, ok?

        • To a degree, yes. The point was that there are so many religions that it is as pointless as it is tedious to list them all down. They all deserve equal protection under the Constitution and none of them have a privileged position, not even Islam.

          • There were many reasons, include the one you proposed, put forward during the discussion with the editors. However, the real point is that it doesn't matter even if Scientology or Jainism were mentioned and Islam was not. It shouldn't matter because there are hundreds of religions just in the Philippines. None of them deserve greater prominence over the next one. They are all equal in the eyes of the law and none of them have to be mentioned every time the word "religion" is said.

            To succumb to the demands of the people to give importance to one specific religious tradition just because it's one of the "major religions" is the exact problem we are having now with the unconstitutional paper bills circulating as we speak.

  48. [“ Vic said: …. (to Roland): Then you really don’t understand. Just consider death penalty…in Israel’s Histroy “]

    I understand exactly what your invoked Romans 16:17-19 as your proposed guideline for school education is telling : do whatever the religious person is telling you – otherwise you are against god – no own critical thinking allowed. And what on earth has the death penalty in ancient Israel to do with SexEd in the RP – attempted distraction from the topic !

    So it seems you are one of the evangelical fundamentalist of whatever denomination (or J.V.), who often reject to enroll their kids to any school because of “religious reasons” like mixed gender classes, SexEd, teaching of evolution, not total focus on the Bible for all school subjects …etc.. as seen in Christian fundamentalist circles in Europe and especially the USA.

    [Vic said: “ I’m not against to scientific, biological education of human reproduction as it was in the past decades. But if it will go beyond that – then it’s a different story “]

    So you have no clue what exactly is the content of the SexEd curriculum is – but you are totally against it because the church says so.

    What is wrong when children in their starting puberty gets proper biological training of egg & sperm production, Gametes – DNA, Menstruation cycle, fertility periods, a short wrap of microbiology with focus on sexual transmitted diseases and the like. Every educated modern country in the “First World” has this school education in their curriculum – tell the children what is going on in their own bodies during puberty, during pregnancy, explain the inner organs of the body including testes and ovaries.

    To avoid child molestation (in modern countries) already kindergarten kids are taught that private parts are private especially for others (uncles or strangers), sometimes with a special puppet show to conduct the message, but this is not part of the planned SexEd for 11-13 year old kids here.

    [Vic said: “ Isn’t any religion want’s their people to love their God all their minds, all their hearts and all their life? (unless you are atheist) – I will respect your own view.”]

    Not sure what I should make out of this ambiguous statement e.g. are you respecting every view as long it is somehow religious (Muslim, Hindu, Wicca, Poseidon, the big pumpkin) ??? Or unless you are atheist I will respect you …. Anyway a site topic.

    And what on earth has the desire of humans to love their specific invented god to do with the teaching of SexEd ??

    First : Do you have any evidence for the existence of your personal favorite god possibly the Judean fertility god YHWH as son of godfather Elyon “the most high” – just one out of at least 2850 human invented gods ?

    Second: Do you have any evidence that your personal favorite god wants all Christian children to stay uneducated in biological/medical matters of reproduction ? Please provide proper notarized documents signed from YHWH ! Not your personally distorted Bible verses twisted into a meaning to support your own agenda, before twisted from the priest of your parish (of whatever sect), before translated into English to push a specific agenda, before floating around as different versions full of spinning from scribes with an own agenda, before even “original” versions contain more copy errors than words, before written down in the first place based on gossip, hearsay and personal inventions of first authors who were uneducated goat herders in the desert.

    So as long you can’t provide any reliable evidence that the creator of the entire universe himself disapproves SexEd as proposed from the DepEd in the RP, all your invocation of god to support your personal agenda, your problem with sexuality or at least dislike of SexEd in general – is just that: your personal private opinion supporting the personal stance of sexual dysfunctional male virgins in retirement age wearing women dresses and funny hats claiming special privileges because of it.

    So why not let the scientific experts of biology and medicine in conjuncture with education experts and psychologists decide about the proper teaching of the subject here ?!?

    PS: for anyone interested in the neuroscientific explanation of the “god and myself think that” or “what would Jesus do” …. here a nice article: http://scienceblogs.com/notrocketscience/2009/11/…

Leave a reply

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

SUBSCRIBE

Stay Updated

Subscribe now

REPORT

Secularism Violations

Report here

one who forms opinions on the basis of reason, independently of tradition, authority, or established belief; one who doubts or denies religious dogma

Contact us at [email protected]

© 2021 Filipino Freethinkers. All rights reserved.

Menu

Blog

Featured Articles