As requested.
http://www.mediafire.com/?d75k0wvdl8s2kmk
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Saturday, December 4, 2010
Thursday, December 2, 2010
CLE Creative Synthesis Groupings
3B
1- Tim Gemzontan, Paul Caluban, Kerwin Delos Santos, Agu Juanengo
2 - Paolo Dizon, Kendrick Santos, Ardi Ng, Gilbert Chua, Jaime Papa
3 - Kyle See, Ralph Legarda, Seth Marcelo, Paulon Fan, Percy Sen
4 - Francis Koa, Piggy Lim, Jeff Que, Jaime Santos, Gabe Penaloza
5 - Marc See, Charles Syjueco, Edward Cantor, T.Y. Co
6 - Mark Policarpio, Hadley Ang, Jeff Uy, Carl Hu
7 - Ashton Wong, Take Reyes, Ryan Matsuda, Jude See
8 - Kurvin Chua, Mycah Chua, Angelo Peza, Johnby Sultan, Matthew Sarmiento
3C
1 - Roy Co, Luis Cabatan, Hanston Balonan, Toby Manguiat
2 - Hadrian Ang, Jon Chantong, Iggy Lobregat, Patrick King
3 - Martin Chua, John Aw Young, Ephraim Go, Paul Chiok
4 - Jonathan Chenglay, Edric Ramos, Joshua Co, Graham Dy
5 - Ryan Chan, Ardi Ng, Jason Manabat, Kyle Pineda
6 - James De Ocampo, Stacey Lee, Jasper Arriola, Dudo Ancheta
7 - Carlo Rivera, Michael Tiong, Enzo Mendoza, Oliver Sun
8 - Kerby Tong, Bryan Solco, Eldrin Lee, Benny Dytoc
9 - Kevin Wong, Carl Ong, Felixon Saw, Stephen Yap, Jeron Teng
1- Tim Gemzontan, Paul Caluban, Kerwin Delos Santos, Agu Juanengo
2 - Paolo Dizon, Kendrick Santos, Ardi Ng, Gilbert Chua, Jaime Papa
3 - Kyle See, Ralph Legarda, Seth Marcelo, Paulon Fan, Percy Sen
4 - Francis Koa, Piggy Lim, Jeff Que, Jaime Santos, Gabe Penaloza
5 - Marc See, Charles Syjueco, Edward Cantor, T.Y. Co
6 - Mark Policarpio, Hadley Ang, Jeff Uy, Carl Hu
7 - Ashton Wong, Take Reyes, Ryan Matsuda, Jude See
8 - Kurvin Chua, Mycah Chua, Angelo Peza, Johnby Sultan, Matthew Sarmiento
3C
1 - Roy Co, Luis Cabatan, Hanston Balonan, Toby Manguiat
2 - Hadrian Ang, Jon Chantong, Iggy Lobregat, Patrick King
3 - Martin Chua, John Aw Young, Ephraim Go, Paul Chiok
4 - Jonathan Chenglay, Edric Ramos, Joshua Co, Graham Dy
5 - Ryan Chan, Ardi Ng, Jason Manabat, Kyle Pineda
6 - James De Ocampo, Stacey Lee, Jasper Arriola, Dudo Ancheta
7 - Carlo Rivera, Michael Tiong, Enzo Mendoza, Oliver Sun
8 - Kerby Tong, Bryan Solco, Eldrin Lee, Benny Dytoc
9 - Kevin Wong, Carl Ong, Felixon Saw, Stephen Yap, Jeron Teng
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
CCC Articles on Justice and the 7th / 10th Commandment
Nota bene: These articles might seem quite long; however, I just want you to go through it and highlight those things that we have discussed.
On the 7th Commandment
On the 10th Commandment
On the 7th Commandment
On the 10th Commandment
Guide To The Ten Concerns of Justice
1. Dignity of the Human Person. Belief in the inherent dignity of the human person is the foundation of all Catholic social teaching. Human life is sacred, and the dignity of the human person is the starting point for a moral vision for society. This principle is grounded in the idea that the person is made in the image of God. The person is the clearest reflection of God among us.
2. Common Good and Community. The human person is both sacred and social. We realize our dignity and rights in relationship with others, in community. Human beings grow and achieve fulfillment in community. Human dignity can only be realized and protected in the context of relationships with the wider society.
How we organize our society -- in economics and politics, in law and policy -- directly affects human dignity and the capacity of individuals to grow in community. The obligation to "love our neighbor" has an individual dimension, but it also requires a broader social commitment. Everyone has a responsibility to contribute to the good of the whole society, to the common good.
3. Option for the Poor. The moral test of a society is how it treats its most vulnerable members. The poor have the most urgent moral claim on the conscience of the nation. We are called to look at public policy decisions in terms of how they affect the poor. The "option for the poor," is not an adversarial slogan that pits one group or class against another. Rather it states that the deprivation and powerlessness of the poor wounds the whole community.
The option for the poor is an essential part of society's effort to achieve the common good. A healthy community can be achieved only if its members give special attention to those with special needs, to those who are poor and on the margins of society.
4. Rights and Responsibilities. Human dignity can be protected and a healthy community can be achieved only if human rights are protected and responsibilities are met. Every person has a fundamental right to life and a right to those things required for human decency – starting with food, shelter and clothing, employment, health care, and education. Corresponding to these rights are duties and responsibilities -- to one another, to our families, and to the larger society.
5.Role of Government and Subsidiarity. The state has a positive moral function. It is an instrument to promote human dignity, protect human rights, and build the common good. All people have a right and a responsibility to participate in political institutions so that government can achieve its proper goals.
The principle of subsidiarity holds that the functions of government should be performed at the lowest level possible, as long as they can be performed adequately. When the needs in question cannot adequately be met at the lower level, then it is not only necessary, but imperative that higher levels of government intervene.
6. Economic Justice. The economy must serve people, not the other way around. All workers have a right to productive work, to decent and fair wages, and to safe working conditions. They also have a fundamental right to organize and join unions. People have a right to economic initiative and private property, but these rights have limits. No one is allowed to amass excessive wealth when others lack the basic necessities of life.
Catholic teaching opposes collectivist and statist economic approaches. But it also rejects the notion that a free market automatically produces justice. Distributive justice, for example, cannot be achieved by relying entirely on free market forces. Competition and free markets are useful elements of economic systems. However, markets must be kept within limits, because there are many needs and goods that cannot be satisfied by the market system. It is the task of the state and of all society to intervene and ensure that these needs are met.
7. Stewardship of God's Creation. The goods of the earth are gifts from God, and they are intended by God for the benefit of everyone. There is a "social mortgage" that guides our use of the world's goods, and we have a responsibility to care for these goods as stewards and trustees, not as mere consumers and users. How we treat the environment is a measure of our stewardship, a sign of our respect for the Creator.
8. Promotion of Peace and Disarmament. Catholic teaching promotes peace as a positive, action-oriented concept. In the words of Pope John Paul II, "Peace is not just the absence of war. It involves mutual respect and confidence between peoples and nations. It involves collaboration and binding agreements.” There is a close relationship in Catholic teaching between peace and justice. Peace is the fruit of justice and is dependent upon right order among human beings.
9. Social Participation. All people have a right to participate in the economic, political, and cultural life of society. It is a fundamental demand of justice and a requirement for human dignity that all people be assured a minimum level of participation in the community. It is wrong for a person or a group to be excluded unfairly or to be unable to participate in society.
10. Global Solidarity and Development. We are one human family. Our responsibilities to each other cross national, racial, economic and ideological differences. We are called to work globally for justice. Authentic development must be full human development. It must respect and promote personal, social, economic, and political rights, including the rights of nations and of peoples It must avoid the extremists of underdevelopment on the one hand, and "superdevelopment" on the other. Accumulating material goods, and technical resources will be unsatisfactory and debasing if there is no respect for the moral, cultural, and spiritual dimensions of the person.
2. Common Good and Community. The human person is both sacred and social. We realize our dignity and rights in relationship with others, in community. Human beings grow and achieve fulfillment in community. Human dignity can only be realized and protected in the context of relationships with the wider society.
How we organize our society -- in economics and politics, in law and policy -- directly affects human dignity and the capacity of individuals to grow in community. The obligation to "love our neighbor" has an individual dimension, but it also requires a broader social commitment. Everyone has a responsibility to contribute to the good of the whole society, to the common good.
3. Option for the Poor. The moral test of a society is how it treats its most vulnerable members. The poor have the most urgent moral claim on the conscience of the nation. We are called to look at public policy decisions in terms of how they affect the poor. The "option for the poor," is not an adversarial slogan that pits one group or class against another. Rather it states that the deprivation and powerlessness of the poor wounds the whole community.
The option for the poor is an essential part of society's effort to achieve the common good. A healthy community can be achieved only if its members give special attention to those with special needs, to those who are poor and on the margins of society.
4. Rights and Responsibilities. Human dignity can be protected and a healthy community can be achieved only if human rights are protected and responsibilities are met. Every person has a fundamental right to life and a right to those things required for human decency – starting with food, shelter and clothing, employment, health care, and education. Corresponding to these rights are duties and responsibilities -- to one another, to our families, and to the larger society.
5.Role of Government and Subsidiarity. The state has a positive moral function. It is an instrument to promote human dignity, protect human rights, and build the common good. All people have a right and a responsibility to participate in political institutions so that government can achieve its proper goals.
The principle of subsidiarity holds that the functions of government should be performed at the lowest level possible, as long as they can be performed adequately. When the needs in question cannot adequately be met at the lower level, then it is not only necessary, but imperative that higher levels of government intervene.
6. Economic Justice. The economy must serve people, not the other way around. All workers have a right to productive work, to decent and fair wages, and to safe working conditions. They also have a fundamental right to organize and join unions. People have a right to economic initiative and private property, but these rights have limits. No one is allowed to amass excessive wealth when others lack the basic necessities of life.
Catholic teaching opposes collectivist and statist economic approaches. But it also rejects the notion that a free market automatically produces justice. Distributive justice, for example, cannot be achieved by relying entirely on free market forces. Competition and free markets are useful elements of economic systems. However, markets must be kept within limits, because there are many needs and goods that cannot be satisfied by the market system. It is the task of the state and of all society to intervene and ensure that these needs are met.
7. Stewardship of God's Creation. The goods of the earth are gifts from God, and they are intended by God for the benefit of everyone. There is a "social mortgage" that guides our use of the world's goods, and we have a responsibility to care for these goods as stewards and trustees, not as mere consumers and users. How we treat the environment is a measure of our stewardship, a sign of our respect for the Creator.
8. Promotion of Peace and Disarmament. Catholic teaching promotes peace as a positive, action-oriented concept. In the words of Pope John Paul II, "Peace is not just the absence of war. It involves mutual respect and confidence between peoples and nations. It involves collaboration and binding agreements.” There is a close relationship in Catholic teaching between peace and justice. Peace is the fruit of justice and is dependent upon right order among human beings.
9. Social Participation. All people have a right to participate in the economic, political, and cultural life of society. It is a fundamental demand of justice and a requirement for human dignity that all people be assured a minimum level of participation in the community. It is wrong for a person or a group to be excluded unfairly or to be unable to participate in society.
10. Global Solidarity and Development. We are one human family. Our responsibilities to each other cross national, racial, economic and ideological differences. We are called to work globally for justice. Authentic development must be full human development. It must respect and promote personal, social, economic, and political rights, including the rights of nations and of peoples It must avoid the extremists of underdevelopment on the one hand, and "superdevelopment" on the other. Accumulating material goods, and technical resources will be unsatisfactory and debasing if there is no respect for the moral, cultural, and spiritual dimensions of the person.
Monday, November 15, 2010
Guidelines on the RH Bill (Seatwork on the Hierarchy of Values)
1. Research on the Reproductive Health Bill. The following might be helpful for your group fact-finding:
Talking Points For Dialogue on the House Bill 96 issued the by Loyola School of Theology (just search for Fr. Gonzales' blog post on the Talking Points)
Church, Constitution, and the R.H. Bill by Fr. Joaquin Bernas, S.J.
"Standing By The Catholic Church by Dean Tony La Vina of the Ateneo School of Government" (I have posted this a few months ago)
The actual provisions of the House Bill 96
2.Determine the two arguments, those who are for passing the bill, and those who still question the bill. They have to list down the values that both of them promote and protect.
3.Come up with their own stand regarding the RH Bill. The following questions may serve as guide:
How do I understand the RH Bill?
If I will be given a chance to explain my stand, how would I explain it?
What can I do to make people aware of it?
4.Post your answers on your respective group blogs.
Talking Points For Dialogue on the House Bill 96 issued the by Loyola School of Theology (just search for Fr. Gonzales' blog post on the Talking Points)
Church, Constitution, and the R.H. Bill by Fr. Joaquin Bernas, S.J.
"Standing By The Catholic Church by Dean Tony La Vina of the Ateneo School of Government" (I have posted this a few months ago)
The actual provisions of the House Bill 96
2.Determine the two arguments, those who are for passing the bill, and those who still question the bill. They have to list down the values that both of them promote and protect.
3.Come up with their own stand regarding the RH Bill. The following questions may serve as guide:
How do I understand the RH Bill?
If I will be given a chance to explain my stand, how would I explain it?
What can I do to make people aware of it?
4.Post your answers on your respective group blogs.
Saturday, November 13, 2010
Required Readings To Be Brought To The Quiz
Snyder v. Phelps: Does Hate Speech Trump the Right to Mourn with Dignity?
Why Spewing Hate at Funerals Is Still Free Speech
Inside the Supreme Court's Free-Speech Showdown
Don't forget to bring these readings in our quiz. You may put personal comments and writings BUT NOT the notes in our discussions.
The Microsoft Word compilation of these documents (so you don't need to copy and paste) can be found in this link. Just download and print.
Why Spewing Hate at Funerals Is Still Free Speech
Inside the Supreme Court's Free-Speech Showdown
Don't forget to bring these readings in our quiz. You may put personal comments and writings BUT NOT the notes in our discussions.
The Microsoft Word compilation of these documents (so you don't need to copy and paste) can be found in this link. Just download and print.
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Prayer Service Grades
3B Group 1 - 30
3B Group 2 - 29
-depending on how you were graded by your leader, your score adjusts
-basically the only thing that I was able to see was that in the second group, not everyone was able to participate well. You also have to consider how the class participates.
3B Group 2 - 29
-depending on how you were graded by your leader, your score adjusts
-basically the only thing that I was able to see was that in the second group, not everyone was able to participate well. You also have to consider how the class participates.
H3 Final Class Standing
H3 Class Standing
Guys, here are your class standings. Kindly review
The first set of columns are your quizzes.
The second set will be your seatworks, which would include:
a)Nagai and others individual and group (first TWO COLUMNS, ten each)
b)Damaso and Discipleship
c)Rolando Mendoza and Sin
d)Worksheet 1
For a total of 50 points.
The third set is your discipline specific requirements, which include:
a)Reflection video
b)Worksheet 2
c)Prayer Service
The fourth is your creative synthesis.
Just do the math.
Meanwhile, you can check your reflection video scores here - http://www.mediafire.com/?34j3dulx1cboms6
While other activities are here - http://www.mediafire.com/?7xm5wshp24l1k1u
Guys, here are your class standings. Kindly review
The first set of columns are your quizzes.
The second set will be your seatworks, which would include:
a)Nagai and others individual and group (first TWO COLUMNS, ten each)
b)Damaso and Discipleship
c)Rolando Mendoza and Sin
d)Worksheet 1
For a total of 50 points.
The third set is your discipline specific requirements, which include:
a)Reflection video
b)Worksheet 2
c)Prayer Service
The fourth is your creative synthesis.
Just do the math.
Meanwhile, you can check your reflection video scores here - http://www.mediafire.com/?34j3dulx1cboms6
While other activities are here - http://www.mediafire.com/?7xm5wshp24l1k1u
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Grade Update (Quizzes)
Your grades
Class number guide
These are your grades for the first three quizzes. Overall, it's over 44, and with the fourth quiz added, it will be over 60. Those cells highlighted in red are those who are failing. I would recommend that they meet me for group tutorial of the whole course, and second, exert extra effort for the rest of the requirements to make up for your scores.
And class behavior would help.
-Mr. V
Class number guide
These are your grades for the first three quizzes. Overall, it's over 44, and with the fourth quiz added, it will be over 60. Those cells highlighted in red are those who are failing. I would recommend that they meet me for group tutorial of the whole course, and second, exert extra effort for the rest of the requirements to make up for your scores.
And class behavior would help.
-Mr. V
Saturday, October 16, 2010
Activity: Using Wise Judgment
A woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. The doctors figured out that there was one drug that might save her. It was a special form of radium that was recently discovered by one of the chemists in town. The drug was expensive to make, but the chemist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to make. He spent P4000 pesos, and he does not want to lower the price because he spent a lot of money making the drug. The sick woman’s husband went to everyone he knew to borrow money and tried every legal means, but he could only get together P1500. He told the druggist that his wife was dying, and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist insists that he has to make money out of it.
The husband now thinks that the only way to get that drug and save the life of his wife is to steal it. Would he do it or not?
Find out what he should do by answering the following:
1.What are the conflicting values involved? Use the table below to answer
Name at least 3 values at stake in his choices.
2.See reality clearly.
-What are the important pieces of information one must consider in this case?
-What are the risks involved?
-What is the good end that must be pursued in relation to (1)?
3.Figure out the good.
-What could be other possible means available to achieve the good end?
-What are possible consequences, alternatives? What about long term consequences?
-Evaluate the means based on conditions of prudential judgment.
-Will the action be taken the only means available? Will it cost the least possible harm?
-Will the means not compromise the good end being sought?
The husband now thinks that the only way to get that drug and save the life of his wife is to steal it. Would he do it or not?
Find out what he should do by answering the following:
1.What are the conflicting values involved? Use the table below to answer
| Option 1 | VS | Option 2 |
| Value 1 | VS | Value 2 |
Name at least 3 values at stake in his choices.
2.See reality clearly.
-What are the important pieces of information one must consider in this case?
-What are the risks involved?
-What is the good end that must be pursued in relation to (1)?
3.Figure out the good.
-What could be other possible means available to achieve the good end?
-What are possible consequences, alternatives? What about long term consequences?
-Evaluate the means based on conditions of prudential judgment.
-Will the action be taken the only means available? Will it cost the least possible harm?
-Will the means not compromise the good end being sought?
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Activity: Mapping Out The Conscience
1. In your groups, you will have to choose among these situations:
a.During the whole Saturday afternoon, you stayed in a local coffee shop in order to study for your upcoming quizzes in various subjects. As you were leaving, you suddenly noticed a small pouch bag at the table beside you. Seeing that no one was there on the table, you looked at what’s inside and saw that there are a thick wad of one thousand peso bills. The pouch bag does not have any label or identification, so it is impossible to return it to its owner. Suddenly, you remembered that you need to buy textbooks that could help in your studies. What would you do?
b.One of your best friends has just been warned by the school that he would face expulsion, because he was caught copying answers from his notebook during a CLE quiz. This means that if he cheats in any activity, he will automatically be expelled from school. A few days later, you had an activity in English where you are required to answer the questions individually and your seatmate will be responsible for correcting your work. Once you exchanged papers, you noticed that his answers are exactly the same as yours, even in the essay part of that activity. What are you going to do?
c.You hid a stack of sexually suggestive men’s magazines under your bed, and your brother knows it. One day, he got those magazines under your bed without informing you that he did. Unfortunately, he was caught by your parents reading those magazines and they planned to ground him for the weekend out of having those materials. Even though your brother was pointing out that the magazines were yours, your parents, out of anger, would not want to believe him. Would you take the blame and risk being punished, or would you just let your brother face the consequences?
d. Two of your best friends, a boy and a girl, are in a relationship. However, one day, the girl confides that she was secretly dating another boy, because she does not want his boyfriend anymore. However, because the boy was undergoing various problems involving his studies and his family, the girl requested that you keep it as a secret. On the other hand, the boy has completely no idea of what the girl is doing. Would you dare to tell the truth, or would you be faithful to your girl best friend?
e.You and your friends have a group work to finish during the weekend. On Friday morning, you all have agreed to distribute work among yourselves. You agreed that you will meet on Saturday morning. However, during Friday evening, you had a slight fever, and you immediately informed the group that you cannot attend. Fortunately, the group said that it is alright because you have already done your initial work and you will have a score for the group work. When you wake up in the morning, you noticed that your fever is gone and you feel totally well. Would you still go and help out with the group or would you rather stay at home and rest?
Fill up the following table:
b. How would our moral judgment change in these situations if ever our conscience is not properly formed? Will our decisions and answers be different if our consciences are:
i. Wrongly formed?
ii. Lax?
iii. Legalistic?
For each, state what you would have done if you have these kinds of malformed conscience.
c. What does this say about the role that the LISTEN process plays in connection to following one’s conscience?
a.During the whole Saturday afternoon, you stayed in a local coffee shop in order to study for your upcoming quizzes in various subjects. As you were leaving, you suddenly noticed a small pouch bag at the table beside you. Seeing that no one was there on the table, you looked at what’s inside and saw that there are a thick wad of one thousand peso bills. The pouch bag does not have any label or identification, so it is impossible to return it to its owner. Suddenly, you remembered that you need to buy textbooks that could help in your studies. What would you do?
b.One of your best friends has just been warned by the school that he would face expulsion, because he was caught copying answers from his notebook during a CLE quiz. This means that if he cheats in any activity, he will automatically be expelled from school. A few days later, you had an activity in English where you are required to answer the questions individually and your seatmate will be responsible for correcting your work. Once you exchanged papers, you noticed that his answers are exactly the same as yours, even in the essay part of that activity. What are you going to do?
c.You hid a stack of sexually suggestive men’s magazines under your bed, and your brother knows it. One day, he got those magazines under your bed without informing you that he did. Unfortunately, he was caught by your parents reading those magazines and they planned to ground him for the weekend out of having those materials. Even though your brother was pointing out that the magazines were yours, your parents, out of anger, would not want to believe him. Would you take the blame and risk being punished, or would you just let your brother face the consequences?
d. Two of your best friends, a boy and a girl, are in a relationship. However, one day, the girl confides that she was secretly dating another boy, because she does not want his boyfriend anymore. However, because the boy was undergoing various problems involving his studies and his family, the girl requested that you keep it as a secret. On the other hand, the boy has completely no idea of what the girl is doing. Would you dare to tell the truth, or would you be faithful to your girl best friend?
e.You and your friends have a group work to finish during the weekend. On Friday morning, you all have agreed to distribute work among yourselves. You agreed that you will meet on Saturday morning. However, during Friday evening, you had a slight fever, and you immediately informed the group that you cannot attend. Fortunately, the group said that it is alright because you have already done your initial work and you will have a score for the group work. When you wake up in the morning, you noticed that your fever is gone and you feel totally well. Would you still go and help out with the group or would you rather stay at home and rest?
Fill up the following table:
Moral Situation: ____________________________________________
Possible Decisions (name at least 3) | |
Primary Moral Principle | “Do good and avoid evil” |
Secondary Principles and Values That Have To Be Applicable and Evident In The Situation (think of the Ten Commandments and all other principles that could follow from them) | |
What should be done and why? |
Also, answer the following questions:
a. Why are we obliged to follow our conscience in these situations?b. How would our moral judgment change in these situations if ever our conscience is not properly formed? Will our decisions and answers be different if our consciences are:
i. Wrongly formed?
ii. Lax?
iii. Legalistic?
For each, state what you would have done if you have these kinds of malformed conscience.
c. What does this say about the role that the LISTEN process plays in connection to following one’s conscience?
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Dean Tony La Viña: Standing by the Catholic Church
Thirty-one years ago, in a theology course in Ateneo de Manila taught by the late Fr. Tom O’Shaughnessy S.J., I memorized all the major social encyclicals of the Catholic Church. Fr. Tom was the most organized teacher I ever had (he was also our Logic professor), and gave fill-in-the-blanks and other objective type exams that would test our knowledge of Church doctrine on such matters as labor rights, economic development, and yes population, family planning and contraception (all of which we now bundle together as reproductive health issues). He was also a recognized expert on Islam and exemplified tolerance and respect of other religions and points of views. I remember at first being disappointed in that course. I had looked forward that semester to learning about Theology of Liberation but instead we studied what seemed like obscure texts from the Pope in Rome, with Latin titles like Rerum Novarum ("On Capital and Labor"), Populorum Progressio ("On the Development of Peoples"), and the controversial Humanae Vitae ("Human Life").
Today, I am very grateful for Fr. O’Shaughnessy's course where I learned by heart and mind Catholic social teaching. This teaching would guide me in many decisions – from such personal matters as marriage and parenthood concerns to my approach to political issues such as human rights, environmental protection and social injustice. Knowing Catholic social teaching, and secure and confident in its truthfulness, also did something formative for me intellectually and professionally: it enabled me to engage with the modern world without fear and without antagonism for those who thought differently.
Having solid knowledge of Catholic social teaching enabled me, for example, to engage in a constructive manner in the Christian-Marxist dialogue in the 1980s without fear of being co-opted or manipulated. In the 1990s, as I studied and later on worked in the United States, I lived and worked with and among homosexual and lesbian friends and colleagues, an experience that challenged my fundamental beliefs about sexuality and family. Finally, in recent years in my work as an environmental lawyer and governance practitioner, without abandoning or compromising my Catholic beliefs, I have partnered with colleagues working on reproductive health. I have learned when to disagree with those that have different perspectives; more importantly, I have been able to identify common grounds that allow collaboration. Thus with Marxists, I can work with them on issues involving social justice; with homosexual and lesbian activists, on discrimination issues; and with reproductive health advocates, on maternal and children's health and on resource management issues. Common ground is achievable if all persons are motivated by good will and by charity.
Let's take the case of reproductive health. As first articulated in 1968 by Pope Paul VI in Humanae Vitae, the Church teaches that "responsible parenthood designates the intelligent and free manner the spouses have at their disposal to fulfill their mission of cooperating with God in the transmission of life.” As a result, every marital act that is intentionally rendered unfruitful such as abortion and the use of artificial contraception is evil in itself since it is contrary to the procreative purpose of marriage; results in the moral decay that ensues in sex without consequence; and harms true love and deprives God of His sovereign role as the supreme giver of life. As Pope John Paul II explained in his encyclical letter Evangelium Vitae, artificial birth control depersonalizes and exploits sexuality; thus the original import of human sexuality, which is the giving of self as a gift and acceptance of another, becomes distorted.
As I understand it, the Church teaching on reproductive health is above all about love – the love between husband and wife, love for children and family that is the fruit of that love, and ultimately the love of God that forgives us and that enables us to be faithful to the Word in spite of our sinfulness and scarce resources. This is a beautiful message and the Church should not be ashamed of it. But when this teaching is demeaned with such toxic statements as "all contraception is abortion" or "excommunication is a proximate possibility" (for the President), the message is lost and the Catholic Church is accused of being a bully with a medieval mindset.
To be honest, it has always perplexed me on why such a profound message of love is frequently delivered belligerently, often sliding into vicious name-calling (use of words like "pro-death", "baby-killers", etc.) for political gain. This in turn begets responses as we have seen in the protest of Carlos Celdran where what many considered as holy and consecrated ground was disrespected. Unless all of us – whatever side we are on this issue – step back and rethink our strategies, I am afraid we are on a slippery slope towards bigotry and even religious-based violence. It is clear to me that neither the Catholic Church nor Mr. Celdran and his supporters intentionally want this to happen but let us be forewarned that in many places in the world very bad things happen in the name of or against religion.
Does this mean that the Catholic Church should not seek to influence public policy on reproductive health? Of course not. If the Catholic Church is secure in its teaching, it should engage with the state and with the public on this subject with the following issues as paramount: (1) freedom of conscience - every citizen should be able to make informed decisions about their reproductive health options without coercion by state, church or other entity; (2) freedom of conscience also means the right of Catholic or other medical professionals to make professional decisions consistent with their respective beliefs without being forced to promote means that they consider violative of their individual consciences; (3) finding a consensus, based on scientific and cultural considerations, on how to communicate reproductive health options so that bias for or against one set of means is minimized; (4) establishing the best maternal and child care system possible so that maternal or infant mortality is reduced, if not eliminated; (5) working together to build prosperous, just and sustainable communities so that it does not matter even if our population, as expected sometime in the next five years, exceeds 100 million people. In all of these, we must be mindful that it is the poor that suffers most in our society's inability to find consensus in the issue of reproductive health and population.
Disagreements will remain despite a well-conducted dialogue where every one is in good faith. Agreement on the use of contraceptives, particularly those which the Church consider abortifacient but not considered as such by many in the medical community, is for example not likely. But there are democratic procedures to resolve this. The President must decide as a matter of constitutional duty what the executive department should do; what this means to him as a Catholic is up to the President and his spiritual director and is not for public debate. The President is not above all faiths, as his spokesman has said, but he is the President of all Filipinos regardless of their faith (including atheists). As for Congress, the House and the Senate should bring the reproductive health bill to a vote as soon as the dialogue is done. Citizens and their organizations, including the Catholic Church and other religious groups, can dissent from these policy decisions and make their views known through their votes in subsequent elections.
Realizing the immensity of responsibility that the Church teaching on conjugal and family life seemed to impose on married couples, I was initially shocked, even angered by it. The message of the teaching was lost in the language that proscribed contraception and implied that couples were not sovereign in their bedrooms. For many years, when I was still single, I struggled accepting this intellectually. That ended when I got married at the age of twenty-five. My wife and I together prayed and discerned what the teaching of the Church meant to us, why it was important to follow, and what resources were available so we could be faithful. Paradoxically, two minds and hearts were better than one in making this tough decision.
In the midst of this discernment process, we were also graced by an event that irrevocably changed our life as a couple: three months after getting married, my wife was operated on for an ovarian cyst and her doctor told us that we better have children right away if we wanted to have any at all. When that happened, we abandoned our well laid plans not to have children yet while she prioritized her career, I finished law school, and we built up savings from our meager salaries as a philosophy teacher and NGO worker. In that event and during our discernment process, the message of love that is the heart of the teaching became clear and we joyfully made the decision to obey the Church – to be always open to life and to use natural means to plan our family. The fruits of this decision are three sons – now young men as passionate about life and opinionated on issues (including this one) as us. How can we have any regrets?
Today, I am very grateful for Fr. O’Shaughnessy's course where I learned by heart and mind Catholic social teaching. This teaching would guide me in many decisions – from such personal matters as marriage and parenthood concerns to my approach to political issues such as human rights, environmental protection and social injustice. Knowing Catholic social teaching, and secure and confident in its truthfulness, also did something formative for me intellectually and professionally: it enabled me to engage with the modern world without fear and without antagonism for those who thought differently.
Having solid knowledge of Catholic social teaching enabled me, for example, to engage in a constructive manner in the Christian-Marxist dialogue in the 1980s without fear of being co-opted or manipulated. In the 1990s, as I studied and later on worked in the United States, I lived and worked with and among homosexual and lesbian friends and colleagues, an experience that challenged my fundamental beliefs about sexuality and family. Finally, in recent years in my work as an environmental lawyer and governance practitioner, without abandoning or compromising my Catholic beliefs, I have partnered with colleagues working on reproductive health. I have learned when to disagree with those that have different perspectives; more importantly, I have been able to identify common grounds that allow collaboration. Thus with Marxists, I can work with them on issues involving social justice; with homosexual and lesbian activists, on discrimination issues; and with reproductive health advocates, on maternal and children's health and on resource management issues. Common ground is achievable if all persons are motivated by good will and by charity.
Let's take the case of reproductive health. As first articulated in 1968 by Pope Paul VI in Humanae Vitae, the Church teaches that "responsible parenthood designates the intelligent and free manner the spouses have at their disposal to fulfill their mission of cooperating with God in the transmission of life.” As a result, every marital act that is intentionally rendered unfruitful such as abortion and the use of artificial contraception is evil in itself since it is contrary to the procreative purpose of marriage; results in the moral decay that ensues in sex without consequence; and harms true love and deprives God of His sovereign role as the supreme giver of life. As Pope John Paul II explained in his encyclical letter Evangelium Vitae, artificial birth control depersonalizes and exploits sexuality; thus the original import of human sexuality, which is the giving of self as a gift and acceptance of another, becomes distorted.
As I understand it, the Church teaching on reproductive health is above all about love – the love between husband and wife, love for children and family that is the fruit of that love, and ultimately the love of God that forgives us and that enables us to be faithful to the Word in spite of our sinfulness and scarce resources. This is a beautiful message and the Church should not be ashamed of it. But when this teaching is demeaned with such toxic statements as "all contraception is abortion" or "excommunication is a proximate possibility" (for the President), the message is lost and the Catholic Church is accused of being a bully with a medieval mindset.
To be honest, it has always perplexed me on why such a profound message of love is frequently delivered belligerently, often sliding into vicious name-calling (use of words like "pro-death", "baby-killers", etc.) for political gain. This in turn begets responses as we have seen in the protest of Carlos Celdran where what many considered as holy and consecrated ground was disrespected. Unless all of us – whatever side we are on this issue – step back and rethink our strategies, I am afraid we are on a slippery slope towards bigotry and even religious-based violence. It is clear to me that neither the Catholic Church nor Mr. Celdran and his supporters intentionally want this to happen but let us be forewarned that in many places in the world very bad things happen in the name of or against religion.
Does this mean that the Catholic Church should not seek to influence public policy on reproductive health? Of course not. If the Catholic Church is secure in its teaching, it should engage with the state and with the public on this subject with the following issues as paramount: (1) freedom of conscience - every citizen should be able to make informed decisions about their reproductive health options without coercion by state, church or other entity; (2) freedom of conscience also means the right of Catholic or other medical professionals to make professional decisions consistent with their respective beliefs without being forced to promote means that they consider violative of their individual consciences; (3) finding a consensus, based on scientific and cultural considerations, on how to communicate reproductive health options so that bias for or against one set of means is minimized; (4) establishing the best maternal and child care system possible so that maternal or infant mortality is reduced, if not eliminated; (5) working together to build prosperous, just and sustainable communities so that it does not matter even if our population, as expected sometime in the next five years, exceeds 100 million people. In all of these, we must be mindful that it is the poor that suffers most in our society's inability to find consensus in the issue of reproductive health and population.
Disagreements will remain despite a well-conducted dialogue where every one is in good faith. Agreement on the use of contraceptives, particularly those which the Church consider abortifacient but not considered as such by many in the medical community, is for example not likely. But there are democratic procedures to resolve this. The President must decide as a matter of constitutional duty what the executive department should do; what this means to him as a Catholic is up to the President and his spiritual director and is not for public debate. The President is not above all faiths, as his spokesman has said, but he is the President of all Filipinos regardless of their faith (including atheists). As for Congress, the House and the Senate should bring the reproductive health bill to a vote as soon as the dialogue is done. Citizens and their organizations, including the Catholic Church and other religious groups, can dissent from these policy decisions and make their views known through their votes in subsequent elections.
Realizing the immensity of responsibility that the Church teaching on conjugal and family life seemed to impose on married couples, I was initially shocked, even angered by it. The message of the teaching was lost in the language that proscribed contraception and implied that couples were not sovereign in their bedrooms. For many years, when I was still single, I struggled accepting this intellectually. That ended when I got married at the age of twenty-five. My wife and I together prayed and discerned what the teaching of the Church meant to us, why it was important to follow, and what resources were available so we could be faithful. Paradoxically, two minds and hearts were better than one in making this tough decision.
In the midst of this discernment process, we were also graced by an event that irrevocably changed our life as a couple: three months after getting married, my wife was operated on for an ovarian cyst and her doctor told us that we better have children right away if we wanted to have any at all. When that happened, we abandoned our well laid plans not to have children yet while she prioritized her career, I finished law school, and we built up savings from our meager salaries as a philosophy teacher and NGO worker. In that event and during our discernment process, the message of love that is the heart of the teaching became clear and we joyfully made the decision to obey the Church – to be always open to life and to use natural means to plan our family. The fruits of this decision are three sons – now young men as passionate about life and opinionated on issues (including this one) as us. How can we have any regrets?
Monday, October 11, 2010
Talking Points for Dialogue on RH Bill 96, filed 1 July 2010
*From the blog of Fr. Jessel Gerard Gonzales, SJ*
NOTE: This post is intended to stimulate meaningful and thoughtful dialogue on the Reproductive Health Bill (HB 96). Please post, discuss, and pass on. I intentionally highlighted in bold letters the intention of this article so that those who might sensationalize the issue (like the media, especially the Inquirer) will NOT miss it. In addition, the RH Bill we are talking about here is RH 96 filed on 1 July 2010. We are not talking about the others. Thanks.
_______________________
Issued jointly by Loyola School of Theology and the John J. Carroll Institute on Church and Social Issues Authors: Fr. Eric O. Genilo, S.J., Fr, John J. Carroll, S.J., and Fr. Joaquin Bernas, S.J.
Talking Points for Dialogue on the Reproductive Health Bill (HB 96; filed July 1 , 2010)
The polarization of Philippine society over the Reproductive Health Bill has been a source of discouragement and discontent among Filipinos. It is unfortunate that the debate has focused only on whether the Bill should be passed or rejected in its present form. Either option would not be good for Filipinos. The Church sees in the proposed Bill serious flaws that can lead to violations of human rights and freedom of conscience. It would not be acceptable to pass it in its present form. Total rejection of the Bill, however, will not change the status quo of high rates of infant mortality, maternal deaths, and abortions. It is a moral imperative that such dehumanizing conditions should not be allowed to continue. What is needed is a third option: critical and constructive engagement. By working together to amend the objectionable provisions of the Bill and retain the provisions that actually improve the lives of Filipinos, both the proponents and opponents of the Bill can make a contribution to protection of the dignity of Filipinos and an improvement of their quality of life.
The following are talking points and proposals for dialogue and negotiation on the objectionable portions of the Bill:
The Protection of Human Life and the Constitution
• The Church insists on protection of human life upon fertilization. The question to be answered by the State is if this is the same position it will take regarding the protection of human life.
• The Philippine Constitution says that the State will protect the life of the unborn upon conception. It is not specified in the Constitution whether conception means fertilization or the implantation of an embryo in the womb. The Constitutional Convention seemed to favor fertilization. The definition of conception will have a bearing whether contraceptives that prevent the implantation of embryos would be legally allowed or not. This definition of conception in the Constitution must be worked out both by medical and legal experts in order to determine the parameters of what reproductive services can be provided by the Bill.
Contraceptives that prevent the implantation of embryos
• At the center of the controversy regarding abortion and the RH Bill are IUDs and other contraceptive medications and devices that may have the possible effect of preventing the implantation of an embryo, which for the Catholic Church, is considered an abortifacient effect. [Contraceptives without abortifacient effects are treated differently in church teaching. They are forbidden for Catholics but other religious traditions allow them.]
• Proposal: The State first has to make a clear position whether it considers the prevention of implantation of an embryo as an abortion. If the State takes this position, there must be a careful and scientifically based evaluation of each of the medicines and devices provided by the Bill. Those contraceptive medicines and devices which are determined to have abortifacient effects are to be banned even now and regardless of whether the RH Bill is passed or not.
Age Appropriate, Value-Based, Integral Human Sexuality Education
• The mandatory nature of the sexuality education curriculum proposed by the Bill is a concern for the Church because it would compel Catholic educators to teach parts of the curriculum that may be unacceptable for Catholics. The Church is also concerned that the parents’ right to decide on the education of their children would be denied by such a mandatory curriculum for all schools.
• Proposal: For the purpose of protecting academic freedom and respecting religious traditions, should not the right of religious schools to write and implement their own sexuality education curriculum according their religious traditions be respected? For public schools and non-religious private schools, an appointed panel of parent representatives, educators, experts in child development and psychology, medical experts, and representatives of religious traditions can write the sexuality education curriculum and the DEPED can monitor the implementation. Parents with children in public schools should have the right to have their children exempted from the sexuality education class if the curriculum is not acceptable to them. The Constitution allows religious instruction in public schools only if the parents consent in writing. Should a similar provision be enacted relative to sexuality education? The Bill must also respect the conscientious objection of individual educators who refuse to teach a sexuality curriculum that violates their religious beliefs.
Providing Reproductive Health Information and Services for a Multi-Religious Society
• Even if the majority of the population of the country are Catholics, our democratic system should ensure that public polices are not determined solely by majority vote but also by a careful consideration of the common good of all, including non-Catholics.
• The Compendium of the Social Teaching of the Church rejects any imposition of norms by a majority that is discriminatory of the rights of a minority: (#422) “Because of its historical and cultural ties to a nation, a religious community might be given special recognition on the part of the State. Such recognition must in no way create discrimination within the civil or social order for other religious groups;” (#169): “Those responsible for government are required to interpret the common good of their country not only according to the guidelines of the majority but also according to the effective good of all the members of the community, including the minority.”
• It is the duty of various religions to teach their faithful and form their consciences about what their religious tradition allows and prohibits with regard to family planning. It is the duty of the government to provide correct and comprehensive information on all non-abortifacient (as defined by law) family planning methods that are available. Consciences will thus be better equipped to make informed choices according to their religious traditions.
• Proposal: There can be two separate parallel programs for providing information and training, one for NFP and another for artificial methods of family planning (with separate budgets). The separation of the programs will ensure that NFP will get adequate funding and those trainers who wish to teach only NFP for religious reasons will not be forced to teach artificial methods. The conscience of health workers and trainers should be respected. If a Catholic health worker or trainer conscientiously objects to teaching contraception methods, he or she should be allowed to teach only NFP methods.
Limits to the Anti-Discrimination Provision
• The current Bill prohibits the refusal of health care services and information based on a patient’s marital status, gender or sexual orientation, age, religion, personal circumstances, and nature of work. This provision must have parameters. For example, if a doctor refuses to administer an IUD to a minor who requests for it, would that be considered age discrimination?
• Should the provision apply equally to both in the public and private health care providers or shouldn’t private practitioners have more leeway in practicing their medicine as they see fit?
Employers’ Responsibility
• Employers should not be required to provide in their CBAs reproductive health services of their employees. To enforce this requirement would be a violation of the conscience of Catholic employers.
• Proposal: Such a provision is unnecessary because the general Philhealth medical coverage, which is mandatory for all employees, provides for such reproductive health services upon request of the employee. This allows employers with religious objections to contraceptives or sterilizations to avoid direct formal cooperation in the provision of such family planning methods to their employees.
Contraception as Essential Medicines in Government Health Centers and Hospitals
• The Church’s objection to this provision is that it appears to treat pregnancy as a disease.
• Proposal: The question of whether contraceptives are essential medicines should be resolved by a panel of objective medical experts such as the Philippine Medical Association. What contraceptives actually prevent diseases? It would be helpful to be able to present cases where the use of a contraceptive is a medically indicated treatment for a particular disease or emergency situation. If some contraceptives are ultimately decided as essential or emergency medicines that should be stocked in government health centers and hospitals, no contraceptives with abortifacient effects are to be allowed.
Freedom of Speech
• Proposal: The Bill’s provision that penalizes malicious disinformation against the intention and provisions of the Bill should be refined by a clear description of what constitutes “malicious disinformation,” or failing that, the provision should be scrapped.
Implementing Norms
• Proposal: The committee to be in-charge of the Bill’s implementing norms should have representatives from major religious traditions to ensure that the rights of people of various faiths would be protected.
The above proposals are intended to generate constructive and respectful dialogue leading to concrete actions that would correct the RH Bill. It is hoped that the parties involved in the RH debate would move away from hard-line positions and consider negotiations as a more positive step towards working for the good of all Filipinos, with special consideration for the unborn, the youth, women and families in difficult circumstances.
Finally, we can turn to the following Christian maxim as our guide in our search for answers and solutions regarding the RH Bill: “In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; and in all things, charity.” For things pertaining to protecting human life and dignity, we need to come to a consensus for the common good; for things that can be left to individual decisions without violating human life and dignity, we need to respect freedom of conscience of every Filipino both Catholics and non-Catholics; in all our discussions, we need to speak and act with charity and understanding as members of the same human family and community.
***************************************************************************
I encourage you to read other posts and articles about the RH Bill. Will post links later on.
NOTE: This post is intended to stimulate meaningful and thoughtful dialogue on the Reproductive Health Bill (HB 96). Please post, discuss, and pass on. I intentionally highlighted in bold letters the intention of this article so that those who might sensationalize the issue (like the media, especially the Inquirer) will NOT miss it. In addition, the RH Bill we are talking about here is RH 96 filed on 1 July 2010. We are not talking about the others. Thanks.
_______________________
Issued jointly by Loyola School of Theology and the John J. Carroll Institute on Church and Social Issues Authors: Fr. Eric O. Genilo, S.J., Fr, John J. Carroll, S.J., and Fr. Joaquin Bernas, S.J.
Talking Points for Dialogue on the Reproductive Health Bill (HB 96; filed July 1 , 2010)
The polarization of Philippine society over the Reproductive Health Bill has been a source of discouragement and discontent among Filipinos. It is unfortunate that the debate has focused only on whether the Bill should be passed or rejected in its present form. Either option would not be good for Filipinos. The Church sees in the proposed Bill serious flaws that can lead to violations of human rights and freedom of conscience. It would not be acceptable to pass it in its present form. Total rejection of the Bill, however, will not change the status quo of high rates of infant mortality, maternal deaths, and abortions. It is a moral imperative that such dehumanizing conditions should not be allowed to continue. What is needed is a third option: critical and constructive engagement. By working together to amend the objectionable provisions of the Bill and retain the provisions that actually improve the lives of Filipinos, both the proponents and opponents of the Bill can make a contribution to protection of the dignity of Filipinos and an improvement of their quality of life.
The following are talking points and proposals for dialogue and negotiation on the objectionable portions of the Bill:
The Protection of Human Life and the Constitution
• The Church insists on protection of human life upon fertilization. The question to be answered by the State is if this is the same position it will take regarding the protection of human life.
• The Philippine Constitution says that the State will protect the life of the unborn upon conception. It is not specified in the Constitution whether conception means fertilization or the implantation of an embryo in the womb. The Constitutional Convention seemed to favor fertilization. The definition of conception will have a bearing whether contraceptives that prevent the implantation of embryos would be legally allowed or not. This definition of conception in the Constitution must be worked out both by medical and legal experts in order to determine the parameters of what reproductive services can be provided by the Bill.
Contraceptives that prevent the implantation of embryos
• At the center of the controversy regarding abortion and the RH Bill are IUDs and other contraceptive medications and devices that may have the possible effect of preventing the implantation of an embryo, which for the Catholic Church, is considered an abortifacient effect. [Contraceptives without abortifacient effects are treated differently in church teaching. They are forbidden for Catholics but other religious traditions allow them.]
• Proposal: The State first has to make a clear position whether it considers the prevention of implantation of an embryo as an abortion. If the State takes this position, there must be a careful and scientifically based evaluation of each of the medicines and devices provided by the Bill. Those contraceptive medicines and devices which are determined to have abortifacient effects are to be banned even now and regardless of whether the RH Bill is passed or not.
Age Appropriate, Value-Based, Integral Human Sexuality Education
• The mandatory nature of the sexuality education curriculum proposed by the Bill is a concern for the Church because it would compel Catholic educators to teach parts of the curriculum that may be unacceptable for Catholics. The Church is also concerned that the parents’ right to decide on the education of their children would be denied by such a mandatory curriculum for all schools.
• Proposal: For the purpose of protecting academic freedom and respecting religious traditions, should not the right of religious schools to write and implement their own sexuality education curriculum according their religious traditions be respected? For public schools and non-religious private schools, an appointed panel of parent representatives, educators, experts in child development and psychology, medical experts, and representatives of religious traditions can write the sexuality education curriculum and the DEPED can monitor the implementation. Parents with children in public schools should have the right to have their children exempted from the sexuality education class if the curriculum is not acceptable to them. The Constitution allows religious instruction in public schools only if the parents consent in writing. Should a similar provision be enacted relative to sexuality education? The Bill must also respect the conscientious objection of individual educators who refuse to teach a sexuality curriculum that violates their religious beliefs.
Providing Reproductive Health Information and Services for a Multi-Religious Society
• Even if the majority of the population of the country are Catholics, our democratic system should ensure that public polices are not determined solely by majority vote but also by a careful consideration of the common good of all, including non-Catholics.
• The Compendium of the Social Teaching of the Church rejects any imposition of norms by a majority that is discriminatory of the rights of a minority: (#422) “Because of its historical and cultural ties to a nation, a religious community might be given special recognition on the part of the State. Such recognition must in no way create discrimination within the civil or social order for other religious groups;” (#169): “Those responsible for government are required to interpret the common good of their country not only according to the guidelines of the majority but also according to the effective good of all the members of the community, including the minority.”
• It is the duty of various religions to teach their faithful and form their consciences about what their religious tradition allows and prohibits with regard to family planning. It is the duty of the government to provide correct and comprehensive information on all non-abortifacient (as defined by law) family planning methods that are available. Consciences will thus be better equipped to make informed choices according to their religious traditions.
• Proposal: There can be two separate parallel programs for providing information and training, one for NFP and another for artificial methods of family planning (with separate budgets). The separation of the programs will ensure that NFP will get adequate funding and those trainers who wish to teach only NFP for religious reasons will not be forced to teach artificial methods. The conscience of health workers and trainers should be respected. If a Catholic health worker or trainer conscientiously objects to teaching contraception methods, he or she should be allowed to teach only NFP methods.
Limits to the Anti-Discrimination Provision
• The current Bill prohibits the refusal of health care services and information based on a patient’s marital status, gender or sexual orientation, age, religion, personal circumstances, and nature of work. This provision must have parameters. For example, if a doctor refuses to administer an IUD to a minor who requests for it, would that be considered age discrimination?
• Should the provision apply equally to both in the public and private health care providers or shouldn’t private practitioners have more leeway in practicing their medicine as they see fit?
Employers’ Responsibility
• Employers should not be required to provide in their CBAs reproductive health services of their employees. To enforce this requirement would be a violation of the conscience of Catholic employers.
• Proposal: Such a provision is unnecessary because the general Philhealth medical coverage, which is mandatory for all employees, provides for such reproductive health services upon request of the employee. This allows employers with religious objections to contraceptives or sterilizations to avoid direct formal cooperation in the provision of such family planning methods to their employees.
Contraception as Essential Medicines in Government Health Centers and Hospitals
• The Church’s objection to this provision is that it appears to treat pregnancy as a disease.
• Proposal: The question of whether contraceptives are essential medicines should be resolved by a panel of objective medical experts such as the Philippine Medical Association. What contraceptives actually prevent diseases? It would be helpful to be able to present cases where the use of a contraceptive is a medically indicated treatment for a particular disease or emergency situation. If some contraceptives are ultimately decided as essential or emergency medicines that should be stocked in government health centers and hospitals, no contraceptives with abortifacient effects are to be allowed.
Freedom of Speech
• Proposal: The Bill’s provision that penalizes malicious disinformation against the intention and provisions of the Bill should be refined by a clear description of what constitutes “malicious disinformation,” or failing that, the provision should be scrapped.
Implementing Norms
• Proposal: The committee to be in-charge of the Bill’s implementing norms should have representatives from major religious traditions to ensure that the rights of people of various faiths would be protected.
The above proposals are intended to generate constructive and respectful dialogue leading to concrete actions that would correct the RH Bill. It is hoped that the parties involved in the RH debate would move away from hard-line positions and consider negotiations as a more positive step towards working for the good of all Filipinos, with special consideration for the unborn, the youth, women and families in difficult circumstances.
Finally, we can turn to the following Christian maxim as our guide in our search for answers and solutions regarding the RH Bill: “In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; and in all things, charity.” For things pertaining to protecting human life and dignity, we need to come to a consensus for the common good; for things that can be left to individual decisions without violating human life and dignity, we need to respect freedom of conscience of every Filipino both Catholics and non-Catholics; in all our discussions, we need to speak and act with charity and understanding as members of the same human family and community.
***************************************************************************
I encourage you to read other posts and articles about the RH Bill. Will post links later on.
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Tracking Down The Disorders: H3 CLE Performance Task
Instructions:
Choose a cultural disorder (bullying, cheating, stealing ONLY) and then treat them as sins.
Do the following things:
1-Read on available literature
-research. Find journals, articles, cases, etc.
-find out the various causes and effects of the disorder you have chosen
2-Interview
-Students
-Formators – teachers, ODS, SC, APF, Security Personnel
-Summarize findings and compare with (1)
3-Subject to 3 Dimensions
-table format
-based on (1) and (2)
-summarize by evaluating the morality of the action
4-Make a project proposal
-something concrete and doable, something that we can execute for the remaining weeks of school
-we can do something more than just posters and display stuff, although these ones are acceptable as well
-make them SPECIFIC, MEASURABLE, ATTAINABLE, REALISTIC, and TIME-BOUND.
GOOD LUCK!
Choose a cultural disorder (bullying, cheating, stealing ONLY) and then treat them as sins.
Do the following things:
1-Read on available literature
-research. Find journals, articles, cases, etc.
-find out the various causes and effects of the disorder you have chosen
2-Interview
-Students
-Formators – teachers, ODS, SC, APF, Security Personnel
-Summarize findings and compare with (1)
3-Subject to 3 Dimensions
-table format
-based on (1) and (2)
-summarize by evaluating the morality of the action
4-Make a project proposal
-something concrete and doable, something that we can execute for the remaining weeks of school
-we can do something more than just posters and display stuff, although these ones are acceptable as well
-make them SPECIFIC, MEASURABLE, ATTAINABLE, REALISTIC, and TIME-BOUND.
GOOD LUCK!
Sunday, September 5, 2010
Introduction to Sin - The Case of Mendoza
1. As a group, investigate on the hostage-taking which occurred last August 23, 2010.
2. Answer the following questions:
a. Identify the important people in the botched hostage taking scene (i.e. Rolando Mendoza, the SWAT, PNP, and the negotiators, the Ombudsman, the “usiseros,” the Chinese nationals, the media, etc.)
b. Instruct the groups to organize themselves and look into the involvements of those in the hostage crisis (Google Documents can be used so that there would be simultaneous updating of what they are working on.)
c. What happened? Summarize the turn of events leading to the death of the tourists and the hostage-taker.
d. How were the characters involved in the hostage-taking?
e. What were the reasons attributed to the action of each of the individuals?
f. What should they have done as individuals, in terms of being moral? Were there other choices of action which could have been done?
g. In terms of being moral, how did each of them fare?
Post this (posted through the blog) tomorrow night. On or before 11:59pm.
2. Answer the following questions:
a. Identify the important people in the botched hostage taking scene (i.e. Rolando Mendoza, the SWAT, PNP, and the negotiators, the Ombudsman, the “usiseros,” the Chinese nationals, the media, etc.)
b. Instruct the groups to organize themselves and look into the involvements of those in the hostage crisis (Google Documents can be used so that there would be simultaneous updating of what they are working on.)
c. What happened? Summarize the turn of events leading to the death of the tourists and the hostage-taker.
d. How were the characters involved in the hostage-taking?
e. What were the reasons attributed to the action of each of the individuals?
f. What should they have done as individuals, in terms of being moral? Were there other choices of action which could have been done?
g. In terms of being moral, how did each of them fare?
Post this (posted through the blog) tomorrow night. On or before 11:59pm.
Activity: Living Out The Beatitudes
1.Sit by groups.
2.You will have to analyze a case for each group.
Group 1 - Leonard learns that he has a cancer that cannot be cured. He does not want to go through a possibly slow and painful death. He asks his physicians that he give him pills that will end his life possibly. As his doctor, what would you do?
Group 2 - Gary and Susan’s house in an all-white neighborhood is up for sale. An African American couple has offered to buy the house at a good price. Gary and Susan have heard rumors that if one home on the block is sold to African Americans, all property values will go down. Their friends on the block will be furious with them if they sell to the couple. Should they tell the couple their offer is not high enough?
Group 3 - Philip is with a group of friends laughing about how insecure one of their classmates is. Should he join in?
Group 4 - Daisy is an employee in the city hall who is in charge of keeping track of the different financial records which show the flow of money in the city hall. While checking the different transactions, she noticed that there was one record where the city officials released a check amounting to fifty thousand pesos, all going to the officials’ personal account. She reported it, and the next day, she found a bundle of cash on top of her table. This was sent by the officials who said that if she let them go with what they did, she will receive cash as a reward. What should she do?
Group 5 - While Joe was walking at the corridor, he found out that one H1 students was bullied by big H4 students who belong to another class. He wants to help that poor H1 student, but chances are if he protects that student, he will be bullied as well and be branded as a “tattle-tale.” Given the situation, should he proceed with protecting the student?
Group 6 - Billy, a young high school student, is known for giving good advice to everyone. One day, her friend Tara approached him and talked to him personally. She revealed that she had sex with her boyfriend a week ago and that she found out that she was pregnant. She also added that if her parents found out about it, she will stop schooling and will be sent away from the house. She thinks that the only way to get out of this situation is aborting the poor child. Considering the situation, how can Billy help Tara?
Group 7 - Matthew bought a new Macbook which he will use in school. He showed it to Lucas, his best friend, who in turn, asked to borrow it because he needs a computer to work on his reflection paper. A few moments later, while Lucas was using it, the laptop’s software crashed and, worse, it fell to the ground and was damaged. Lucas approached Matthew and told him what happened. What should Matthew do?
Group 8 - After the second quarterly exams, Ernest’s friends invited him to play computer games during the whole afternoon. However, he noticed that he has to help his mother prepare the house for an important family event to be held the next day. Even though her mother does not require him to help out, he sees that all the things needed to be prepared could not be handled by his mother alone. How should Ernest spend his afternoon?
Group 9 - Bernadette did a research paper on the evils of plagiarism, and when she presented it, she won an award for it. When her friend Cloud read the research paper, he noticed that there were several lines copied by Bernadette in which she did not cite sources, and therefore, she committed the crime of plagiarism. What should Cloud do?
3. Answer the following questions (to be posted on your blog):
a.What Beatitude could help in coming up with responses to the situations presented?
b.How is this Beatitude needed in that situation? What should the person involved do in line with keeping up with the life of a Beatitude?
c.In your own context, what concrete way can you live up to the Beatitude that the situation is pointing to? Present a different situation that you might encounter and show a concrete response to that situation.
4. Answer this question to sum up everything that you have tackled: Is living a life of Beatitude something that is needed in order to become a disciple? Can we become disciples without it? Why or why not?
2.You will have to analyze a case for each group.
Group 1 - Leonard learns that he has a cancer that cannot be cured. He does not want to go through a possibly slow and painful death. He asks his physicians that he give him pills that will end his life possibly. As his doctor, what would you do?
Group 2 - Gary and Susan’s house in an all-white neighborhood is up for sale. An African American couple has offered to buy the house at a good price. Gary and Susan have heard rumors that if one home on the block is sold to African Americans, all property values will go down. Their friends on the block will be furious with them if they sell to the couple. Should they tell the couple their offer is not high enough?
Group 3 - Philip is with a group of friends laughing about how insecure one of their classmates is. Should he join in?
Group 4 - Daisy is an employee in the city hall who is in charge of keeping track of the different financial records which show the flow of money in the city hall. While checking the different transactions, she noticed that there was one record where the city officials released a check amounting to fifty thousand pesos, all going to the officials’ personal account. She reported it, and the next day, she found a bundle of cash on top of her table. This was sent by the officials who said that if she let them go with what they did, she will receive cash as a reward. What should she do?
Group 5 - While Joe was walking at the corridor, he found out that one H1 students was bullied by big H4 students who belong to another class. He wants to help that poor H1 student, but chances are if he protects that student, he will be bullied as well and be branded as a “tattle-tale.” Given the situation, should he proceed with protecting the student?
Group 6 - Billy, a young high school student, is known for giving good advice to everyone. One day, her friend Tara approached him and talked to him personally. She revealed that she had sex with her boyfriend a week ago and that she found out that she was pregnant. She also added that if her parents found out about it, she will stop schooling and will be sent away from the house. She thinks that the only way to get out of this situation is aborting the poor child. Considering the situation, how can Billy help Tara?
Group 7 - Matthew bought a new Macbook which he will use in school. He showed it to Lucas, his best friend, who in turn, asked to borrow it because he needs a computer to work on his reflection paper. A few moments later, while Lucas was using it, the laptop’s software crashed and, worse, it fell to the ground and was damaged. Lucas approached Matthew and told him what happened. What should Matthew do?
Group 8 - After the second quarterly exams, Ernest’s friends invited him to play computer games during the whole afternoon. However, he noticed that he has to help his mother prepare the house for an important family event to be held the next day. Even though her mother does not require him to help out, he sees that all the things needed to be prepared could not be handled by his mother alone. How should Ernest spend his afternoon?
Group 9 - Bernadette did a research paper on the evils of plagiarism, and when she presented it, she won an award for it. When her friend Cloud read the research paper, he noticed that there were several lines copied by Bernadette in which she did not cite sources, and therefore, she committed the crime of plagiarism. What should Cloud do?
3. Answer the following questions (to be posted on your blog):
a.What Beatitude could help in coming up with responses to the situations presented?
b.How is this Beatitude needed in that situation? What should the person involved do in line with keeping up with the life of a Beatitude?
c.In your own context, what concrete way can you live up to the Beatitude that the situation is pointing to? Present a different situation that you might encounter and show a concrete response to that situation.
4. Answer this question to sum up everything that you have tackled: Is living a life of Beatitude something that is needed in order to become a disciple? Can we become disciples without it? Why or why not?
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Take Home Activity
1. Read Chapter 32 of Noli Me Tangere (The Sermon)
2. Take a look at the character of Fr. Damaso.
3. In your blog, answer the following:
a-What is the brand of morality by which Fr. Damaso lives on? You may cite evidences in the parts of the novel before chapter 32.
b-Is he truly living the life of a disciple? Use the five characteristics of a disciple to answer this question. Cite textual evidence (as indicated in Chapter 32).
c-What can be said about Fr. Damaso's brand of morality and his being a disciple? Connect your answers in a and b.
2. Take a look at the character of Fr. Damaso.
3. In your blog, answer the following:
a-What is the brand of morality by which Fr. Damaso lives on? You may cite evidences in the parts of the novel before chapter 32.
b-Is he truly living the life of a disciple? Use the five characteristics of a disciple to answer this question. Cite textual evidence (as indicated in Chapter 32).
c-What can be said about Fr. Damaso's brand of morality and his being a disciple? Connect your answers in a and b.
Monday, August 23, 2010
Reading Assignment # 1
-Read the following passages:
1- Mk 8:34-38
2- Jn 8:31-32
3-Jn 15:5-8
4-Jn 13:34-35
5-Mt 28:18-20
-Bring your Bible
-What does it mean to become a disciple?
1- Mk 8:34-38
2- Jn 8:31-32
3-Jn 15:5-8
4-Jn 13:34-35
5-Mt 28:18-20
-Bring your Bible
-What does it mean to become a disciple?
Group Activity Number 1 (Individual and Group Seatwork)
Assign one member to research on each of the following:
A-St. Maximilian Kolbe
B-Dr. Paul Takashi Nagai
C-Archbishop Oscar Romero
D-The Missionaries of Charity
Answer these questions (to be submitted on h3cle10@gmail.com ; subject: YRSECTION LAST NAME ACT1) – 2-5 sentences/question.
1-Who is he/are they? What made him/them famous? What work did he/they do? When and where did he/they live?
2-What were the challenges and situations during their time? What was the PREVAILING RESPONSE of the people during that time?
3-How did he/they respond? How different was it from the decision of the majority? What can you say about their responses?
4-Are they consistent with Christian morality? How?
Regroup and share common distinctive characteristics.
Make a BLOG POST answering these questions (2-4 sentences)
1-What are common among them?
2-What reason is apparent why they chose and acted the way they did? Is there a common factor?
3-What can you say about the kind of persons they were before their distinct responses?
4-What insight can you derive from these persons, in terms of their lives and responses?
Send the link of your blog to h3cle10@gmail.com
A-St. Maximilian Kolbe
B-Dr. Paul Takashi Nagai
C-Archbishop Oscar Romero
D-The Missionaries of Charity
Answer these questions (to be submitted on h3cle10@gmail.com ; subject: YRSECTION LAST NAME ACT1) – 2-5 sentences/question.
1-Who is he/are they? What made him/them famous? What work did he/they do? When and where did he/they live?
2-What were the challenges and situations during their time? What was the PREVAILING RESPONSE of the people during that time?
3-How did he/they respond? How different was it from the decision of the majority? What can you say about their responses?
4-Are they consistent with Christian morality? How?
Regroup and share common distinctive characteristics.
Make a BLOG POST answering these questions (2-4 sentences)
1-What are common among them?
2-What reason is apparent why they chose and acted the way they did? Is there a common factor?
3-What can you say about the kind of persons they were before their distinct responses?
4-What insight can you derive from these persons, in terms of their lives and responses?
Send the link of your blog to h3cle10@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)