Friday, September 22, 2017


While optimism is a big blessing for people to have, to feel and to act accordingly, such a blissful perception appear to be not simply a big falsity to accept but also a profound delusion to have during these sad and saddening times.  When world civilization was coarse and crude, when nations were in isolation and ignorance, when people were then uncultured and uneducated, they were however not downright murderers, consummate thieves, much less looked at the killings of their fellow human beings as something rational  and normal.  Yes, the people of those pristine times were neither saints nor angels.  But neither were they downright inhuman in thinking and behaving as if other sectors of the human community were in fact less human and thus deserving of inhuman treatment.

How times have changed – for the worst!   How people look down and trample upon the dignity and rights of others who do not belong to their thinking, who do not subscribe to their principles, who neither accept their beliefs much less submit to their value system.  Their ultimate conclusion:  Away with those  who dare disagree with their – national, regional, international – convictions and consequent agenda.  Get rid of those who dare contradict their political, national value system, their regional policies, their international designs.

Racial discrimination  and bitter anger plus the deep seated unrest it brings, deadly terrorist attacks perpetrated even in presumably orderly, wealthy and peaceful Countries, consummated hatred of one Nation towards others plus available nuclear bombs, nuclear submarines and planes – these are some of the more signal realities in but some national territories, in certain regional areas and even international scene.  Really, something is wrong, very wrong – the ultimate victims of which are the people, irrespective  of their race, color and creed.  There then emerged the thinking and acting process that “If you are not with me, you are against me.”

In the national level:  If you are not with us, you are against us – irrespective of what the problem, the issue, the point of contention.  What we think, what we want and how we want it – never mind.  If you do not like the killings here and there, night and day – that is your problem.  So it is that human rights are realities only for the rich, for the powerful.

In the regional scene:  Power is right.  Ours is the might and wherefore we claim what we want – on land, in the waters and in the skies.  The weak and helpless – get out of our way.  Ours is the sea and all that is therein, all that swims and grows therein.  We say what we want, we get what we like.  Stay out of our way – or you suffer the consequences.

In the international horizon:  Ours is no less than nuclear power.  We have  missiles to prove it.  We have nuclear submarines.  In fact, we also fund terrorism that hates and kills people who go against us.  So it is that we train and fund suicide bombers.  The more people they frighten, they slaughter, the better.

So it is that something is wrong – very wrong.


Wednesday, September 20, 2017


“Work is a fundamental  right of man, a good for mankind and worthy of man because it is an appropriate way for him to give expression to and enhance his human dignity... By its nature, work is something necessary.  Work is needed to form and maintain a family, to have a right to property, to contribute to the common good of the human community.”  (Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, Lib. Ed. Vat. 2004)

Expressed in simple words and forwarded in plain thoughts, the Right to Life – which is fundamental to man – is more realistically concretized by his Right to Work.  And work does not only assure his food, shelter and clothing but also enhances his dignity as a human person.  Let it be well-noted that his own ingenuity and industry can make him find work here and there, of one kind or another.  This personal ingenuity of man however does not absolve the State from seeing to it that work is available for its citizens – preferably local than foreign in location.  It is worth noting that the more number of its citizens work – and the better paying their work is – the more taxes their government collect and the more public service it may give to the Country as a whole.

Certain observations are worth noting and remembering:

1.  As workers enhance their human dignity and consequent self-respect, someone workless is less respectable.  So is it too that somebody who does not want to work makes himself irresponsible if not downright despicable.  Wherefore, being workless or refusing to work undermines human dignity.

2.  Man is equipped to work with the possession of the mind to know, the will to make an option plus physical strength to work with.  People differ in their work, depending on their learning and skills.  But whatever kind of work – be it intellectual  and/or – is a tribute to the worker.

3.  Labor benefits not only the worker and his dependents but also capital itself.  The more money is earned and spent by workers, the more earnings capital makes – specially in the world of consumer goods.  Labor without capital and capital without labor are both losers.

4.  Capital comes in different forms such as cash assets, material goods, natural resources.  In the same way, labor is done in various ways such as manual, technical or managerial.  What is really important is that there is understanding and harmony between labor and capital for their mutual good.

5.  There are simple people but with profound thoughts about capital and labor.  They say that labor and capital should be well-united – or both become losers.  A worm lives when it is one whole.  Divide it and both parts thereof does.  Hence, separate capital and labor, and both become less in significance and value, more in debt and liability.

Philippines labor and capital, stay together – please!    

Monday, September 18, 2017

“YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY.” (Old Testament: Exodus 20:14) “YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY.” (Matthew 5:27)

It cannot be more clear, more plain and explicit, more emphatic and decisive.  Adultery it is:  Be it plain adulterous promiscuity or carnality between someone married and another still single.  Be it downright marital violation or conjugal infidelity of both parties married to other individuals.  More.  Adultery is something considered taboo by the Holy Book in no less than both the “Old”  and the “New” testaments – a sacred, serious and binding capital Mandate that has relevance not only in the hereafter and beyond but also in the here and now.

In plain and simple language:  A man and a woman opted for marriage.  The thus husband and wife bound themselves to marital fidelity not merely a decade or so but for life as long as both shall live, i.e., for a lifetime.  Translation:  Marriage is life-long.  And so it is that marital fidelity is likewise for a lifetime on the part of both the de facto husband and the wife – as well as all other women and men in relation to the said already married man and woman.  Adultery is already taboo when one of the parties therein is marriage.  It becomes more heinous and detestable when both the man and the woman concerned are married to other.  This is the height of adultery.

The formal and expressed, clear and simple mandatory observance of conjugal fidelity is worth not only knowing but specially so in remembering and de facto observing:  First, it is plain, clear and straight to the point .  Second, it is rational as well as ethical.  Third,  it is nothing less than a Divine Mandate not simply given once but in fact even repeated before and after year zero.  So it is that more than two thousand years later, the Command still stands, still binds.

The mandatory observance of marital fidelity – expressed affirmation and formal acclamation of conjugal loyalty – is but a principle of right reason and a posit of sound ethics.  So it is that the following should not get married at all, considering the inherent nature and implications, rights and obligations of marriage:  a.  Those who precisely do not want to get married nor believe in the basic nature and inherent attributions of marriage.  b.  Those who are not meant for marriage because of mental aberration and/or affective maladjustment productive  of psychological incapacity for marriage intents and purposes.  c.  Those  who subscribe to an irregular or erratic understanding of marriage such as individuals who believe  or subscribe to the so-called “Dissolution” of marriage which is but downright divorce, the observance of “Renewable Marriage Vows” which is a big joke, the emerging phenomenon of “Group Marriage” with its main feature of voluntary exchange of partners, and the like.  This is not to mention the flagrant contradiction of the so-called “Same Sex Marriage”.

What is not only offensive but also downright insulting is when those who subscribe  to, propose or even live such errant thoughts and behavior about marriage are supposedly “high” public officials in government.

Friday, September 15, 2017


The full  reality of a family as ordinarily perceived, understood and seen, has the following three constituent factors:  man/father, woman/mother plus children – all together considered as one intimate domestic community.  Marriage as qualified by the unifying and united unit of the spouses and the indissolubility of their union plus the actuality of their child/children they have brought into the world – this is when marriage in truth and in fact qualified as the ontological foundation of the family.

Sad but true, it would be downright hypocrisy to say that a soluble marriage for whatever cause is the foundation of the family, the premise of a domestic community.  With a soluble valid marriage for whatever cause or reason, fathers, mothers, children there can be.  But an honest-to-goodness permanently standing family, they are certainly not.  So it is that dogs and cats have their respective offsprings.  But domestic communities they do not form.  Reason:  Unless tied well and/or securely caged, the said paired dogs and cats ultimately part ways as a matter of course based on their instinct and pursuant action and behavior patterns.

For the interpersonal good of the spouses who totally and irrevocably gave each one to the other, and for the proper upbringing of the children born through their procreative union and also for the harmony and peace of society precisely composed of families, the marriage bond should not be made altogether dependent on but the personal decision of one or both of the spouses to hold on to or to get rid of.  Needless to say, the family being  a component of society affects the latter one way or the other – depending on the attributes or liabilities of the former.

Let it be expressly and categorically said that no mere human authority or power may abolish not only the natural right for men and women to get married but also to dare modify the essence and objectives of marriage as established by Natural Law and affirmed by Divine Law, do not give in to but mere human individualistic likes and personal dislikes about marriage.  The truth is that before the advent of any State, before the formation of any government, marriage has already been defined by ethics and morals – again – as stipulated by Natural Law and confirmed by Divine Law.

It is both sad and pitiful when there are certain public officials – whose existence and finality are precisely meant for the promotion of the common good, for the affirmation of public welfare – who are the very ones who author and/or promote legislations against the intrinsic nature and ontological finalities of marriage which is one-to-one for life.  There are indications that those politicians thus promoting the “Dissolution” of marriage for this and that cause have failed marriages, other de facto partners or the like.  So it is that they invent these and those novel terminologies all of which in fact simply means divorce.

So it is that for these politicos, the vision of the Constitution of the Philippines (State Policies, Section 12) plus the affirmation of the Family Code of the Philippines (Title 1, Article 1) are all nonsense.  Pitiful Filipinos having such psychologically incapacitated public officials.  

Wednesday, September 13, 2017


There is Good News when there is something  inspiring, fortunate, endearing.  There is Bad News when it brings to fore a painful event, a tearful happening, a shocking phenomenon.  There is even wrong or false news that forwards a mistaken information or report.  But specially during these times of quasi unlimited presence and use of communications media, something new – intentionally false, deliberately devious  - came to fore primarily in view of political advantage through the deliberate publication of what is false, unjust or deceptive.

For a start, “Fake News” – in plain and simple language with its likewise plain and simple understanding – means false information, misleading report, deceptive statement and the like.  The core content and intent  of “Fake News” is to mislead, to deceive, to delude those who read, hear or come to know it.  So it is that “Fake News” is much more in content, finality and intent that what is simply wrong or a mistake.  It is intentionally and primarily meant to deceive, to raise doubts, to cause trouble.  “Fake News” is very much more in nature and objective, in design and rationale than wrong reportage.  The naked finality and deliberate design of fakery of news is to cause predicaments, to disseminate bogus impressions against its targets – such as personalities, establishments and/or institutions.

“Fake News” in elementary and simple language is basically meant to subtly but deliberately undermine prominent entities or organizations, to cleverly destroy upright public officials or personalities, to smartly bring dead issues to fore, to ruin emerging prominent individuals or alliances.  Yes.  “Fake News” can be readily considered as the print and/or broadcast product not only of devious characters but also of sick minds and/or devilish individuals – usually for a fee, for a reward or from exoneration from public  condemnation or criminal liability even.  Yes.  “Fake News” is the arch-enemy of truth, justice and peace.  And yes, “Fake News” is definitely  the devil’s work – as the latter is  the king of lies and deceptions, the patron of murderers, crooks, thieves and all other anti-social individuals and  entities.

So it is that this and that mass and massive media enterprises are fast becoming masters in the dissemination of “Fake News” masked in genuineness and concern even when they are in fact fast becoming effective and shameful instruments  for the propagation of what is lie or false, what is devious or unjust.  There appear to be at least two leading examples of “Fake News”, i.e., when something is too good to be true or so bad to be real.  They may differ in kind or degree – but false, deceitful, malicious they remain.  It is not easy to know where they come from, who their authors are.  But:  Beware!  They are fast becoming masters in deception, in falsity, in malice – with all such liabilities having their manifold social impact.

Beware then of news in print and/or broadcast with strange content, with incredible message – in addition to the fact they are least expected.  Well written or announced they are.  But just the same, “Fake News” they remain, viz., too good or too bad to be true.  This is the essence of fakery:  To make truth as something false.  To make lies as something true.