 |
 |
| ON THE OTHER HAND |
| GAGO versus TUTA
By Antonio C. Abaya Written April 29,, 2007 For the Standard Today May 01 issue As the election campaign winds down to the last two weeks, some new trends in our political life seem to be emerging. Popularity with the squealing masa seems to be diminishing as a major factor in electoral success. Senatorial candidates Richard Gomez and Cesar Montano have been consistently doing poorly in public opinion surveys despite their undiminished status as matinee idols of the film industry. This may have to do with the sea change in how the voters relate to politicians seeking their votes. By all accounts, very few people now attend political rallies, whether by the opposition or by administration candidates. So much so that some rallies, even in major population centers, have actually been cancelled because of low crowd turn-out. Most voters now apparently get their exposure to the competing candidates through electronic media, especially television, rather than in face-to-face encounters in public rallies. Which is a major improvement. Political rallies have in the past tended to be mere excuses for singing and dancing and joking to entertain the squealing masa. At least, on television, candidates are forced to come out with more substantive sound-bytes as they are pressed to give their opinions and positions on the burning issues of the hour. This is probably why Gomez and Montano have done poorly in the surveys, despite the enviable name-recall advantage that they enjoy. When pressed by TV anchors and reporters to react or comment, both Gomez and Montano have shown that without a script they are inarticulate and incoherent. They have nothing to say, and they don�t know how to say it. This campaign has also shown that saturating the airwaves with your political ads is not a guarantee of political support from the TV viewers. As of mid-April, senatorial candidate Prospero Pichay is said to have spent a staggering P109 million in TV ads, more than any other candidate. Yet he is also doing poorly in public opinion surveys. Another hopeful sign of improvement in our political culture. On the other hand, even the print editors and the TV anchors have failed to channel the debate on two major issues on which the candidates should be made to state their positions. Issue Number One is or should be Birth Control. Because they help form national policy, senatorial candidates should be made to state their positions on the use of artificial methods of birth control. This will separate the men from the boys, the women from the girls. Are they prepared to defy the Roman Catholic bishops on this issue? Or are they weak as lambs and soft as putty. According to a Pulse Asia survey of 1,800 adult respondents, taken from Feb. 28 to March 5, 76 percent said candidates �.should address family planning concerns, with 75 percent pledging to support those willing to fund such measures. The survey found out that support for family planning, including artificial methods of birth control, is nationwide: 71% in the Visayas, 72% in Mindanao, 74% in Metro Manila, 83% in the rest of Luzon . That support also cuts across socio-economic lines: 75% among the E, 77% among the D, and 73% among the ABC. (See my article Sexual Morality 2, April 17) Issue Number Two is or should be the dismantling of Political Dynasties. At least 10 of the 23 senatorial candidates belong to political dynasties and will oppose any move to this effect, or will give predictably vague and evasive answers, Media should press them on this point until they make a commitment, one way or the other. Amid the bewildering array of issues being raised by one side or the other, there is a need on the part of the electorate to focus and distill the issues to these two. Birth Control impacts on economic development, quality of life and the degradation of the environment. While no one is saying that a runaway population growth is the cause of poverty, it does make it that much harder to achieve economic progress when the population is multiplying like tilapia. In the 1970s, Thailand and the Philippines had more or less the same population, about 42 million. In 2006, there are 64 million Thais and 88 million Filipinos. Common sense says that it is easier to manage 64 million people than 88 million. The empirical evidence confirms that commonsensical notion. Thailand has a per capita income of $8,300, the Philippines $5,100, based on purchasing power parity. Thailand has a population growth rate of 0.68%, the Philippines 1.95%.Until the late 1970s, the Philippines was more prosperous than Thailand and the other countries in Southeast Asia . A runaway population growth rate, such as we have, strains to the breaking point the ability of the government - any government � to provide its people with adequate food, drinking water, education, housing, fuel and energy, and jobs. The resulting poverty breeds crime and urban squalor and filth, which leads to malnutrition and poor health and underachieving school children, to escape which millions of Filipinos have been forced to seek jobs abroad. Over-population compounds the problems wrought by global warming as lowlands are flooded, farm lands are destroyed by droughts and floods, water aquifers dry up, denuded hills are washed away by landslides, the air and the rivers are poisoned, weather disturbances become more severe, and new diseases stump medical science. Political Dynasties have a direct negative effect on good governance and the democratic ideal. That one family controls all or most of the political offices in its fiefdom makes corruption easier to commit and harder to control or reduce, as every captive public office easily becomes a window for rent-seeking, leading to fabulous wealth. Historian Fernando Zialcita emailed me citing the Spanish chronicler Antonio Morga in the 1600s that the barangays in that period revolved around a leading powerful family, and leadership was passed by the father to his son. So, with the proliferation of political dynasties, we are retrogressing politically back to the 17th century and beyond, even as we have retrogressed economically because of rapid population growth. Is there no end to our malaise? If I decide to vote on May 14, I will vote only for those senatorial candidates who will take strong and unequivocal positions in favor of birth control and against political dynasties. Everything else is fluff. And, oh yes, I had written that the opposition to President Arroyo has been so disorganized and pathetic that it is best to change its collective name from Genuine Opposition or GO to Gloria Arroyo�s Gulaman Opposition or GAGO. (See my article From GO to GAGO, March 18, 2007). The opposition is now complaining that the administration candidates have come out with a negative campaign ditty whose recurrent refrain is �GAGO Oposisyon!� In the spirit of fair play, I would like to suggest that the administration slate, made up largely of opportunistsand and turncoats, should change its name from Team Unity or TU to Talagang UTusan ni Arroyo or TUTA. And they can compose their own campaign ditty around TUTA. I suggest the melody of the Colonel Bogey March, also known as The Bridge on the River Kwai, a version of which the British sang to themselves to lift their spirits as the Luftwaffe bombed London during the Blitz. The immortal words were: Hitler, he had but one big ball./ Goering had two but very small. / Himmler had something sim�lar. / But poor old Goebbels had no balls at all. So it is GAGO versus TUTA. A pox on both your houses! Reactions to [email protected]. Other articles in www.tapatt.org and acabaya.blogspot.com OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Reactions to �GAGO versus TUTA� �You ought to be president of the US � More Reactions to �Sexual Morality 1� More Reactions to �Sexual Morality 2� As usual, you hit the issue right on the head. But up to now, I have not heard anybody from the President down to the least of the candidates say anything concrete about how to curb our runaway population growth. Everybody seems to be afraid of the Church. And why should this be? I am beginning to doubt many of the Church's teachings, although I love the Church, and I am a practicing Catholic. Look at how it turned around regarding the centuries-old concept of limbo and cremation. Unfortunately, the Church, with all its scholars and great minds, realizes its errors only very late in the day, and after the damage has been done. The Church's view on artificial contraception will see the light of day but then, it will already be too late and our population would have ballooned to catastrophic proportions. (Only Lito Atienza has a definite policy on population. Alas, his is also misguided like the Church's). For me, of the two issues you discussed, population explosion is the more urgent one that must be addressed. I do not know how you or I or others who think like us can convince the government or the powers that be to be more serious about the above issue, and just go ahead and defy the church. At the end of the day, as the bible mentions, there will be only one question God will ask when one has crossed the great divide, and that is : how much have you loved your fellow human being ; how much have you served the less fortunate. And if we love our fellow human beings, bringing children to the world and not being able to feed or care for them is certainly in defiance to the order of loving our fellow human beings. When are we going to wake up? When it is too late, as in everything we do in this country. WAKE UP, PHILIPPINES . LET US RALLY BEHIND ARTIFICIAL BIRTH CONTROL AND PUT DOWN OUR POPULATION EXPLOSION. THIS IS GOOD FOR US, AND I AM PRETTY SURE, GOD WILL APPROVE Ed Valenciaco, (by email), May 01, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww. Tony, You wrote: "When pressed by TV anchors and reporters to react or comment, both Gomez and Montano have shown that without a script they are inarticulate and incoherent. They have nothing to say, and they don�t know how to say it." You said it, Tocayo.! The original magic with which movie actors mesmerize their constituents [read that as FANS] which were produced by their movies as bida is no longer effective - thank heavens - and most Pinoy masa-kistas today are now perceiving the difference between politician/actors and the honest to goodness ones who are equipped with the substance, background and education to support their candidacy for the government post they are vying for. When Erap trounces the bad boys in his movies the script makes sure the bida stays victorious as he and his love object kiss, hold hands, and walk into the sunset....THE END! In politics, once the elected official wins, it is not the end but the beginning of his responsibility. He walks not into the sunset, .but into all kinds of day-to-day problems that he has to surmount and solve until the end of his term - years later. Such is the difference between movie acting and real life. Tony Joaquin, (by email), Daly City , California , May 01, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, The Party�s acronyms are quite appropriate for both. TUTA (Puppet) vs. GAGO ( Stupid) and either one, the voters can�t go wrong. From the very beginning, I was suggesting the creation of a strong party system of government where voters can install a party which programs and ideologies needed for to resolve the current issues. Like the Birth Control issue. We all know that a Liberal party (some kind of left leaning or a socialist party) is always in favour of social issues including the Artificial Method of Family Planning. The voters if at time consider Population Control is the Top issue during the campaign, then vote for the Party which is always have the ideologies in favour of Population Control. It didn�t happened in our case, because ours, The Freedom of Choice, all publicly funded, was won by court Challenges, that now the Government is encouraging parents to Reproduce by extending to one year the paid Maternity Leave, divisible between parents, including same sex couples (for adopted in case of males) whoever gets the most benefit. If I were voting in the Philippines Election in May, I�m still skeptical of candidates� promises, just because experience had shown that either they don�t keep their promises, or if they are in opposition, chances are their bills can not find its way to become laws. Regards, Victor Sanoy, (by email), Scarborough, Ont. , Canada , May 01, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hi Tony, This article is a bull's eye again. These subjects about birth control and political dynasties are the two most important subject matter to be discussed and solved by the political candidates. The solutions should be part of their respective platforms. Thank you for zeroing in also on political dynasties. I disagree with this kind of politics. These people tend to think that holding office by themselves is by the will of God. We are behind you, Tony, in this crusade of good government for our homeland. We wish you success in you undertaking. Thank you and best regards, Agustin Bacalso, (by email), May 01, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Mr. Abaya, One other interesting aspect of our electoral system is the consistently balimbing nature of our politicians. I think this is the only consistent part of any election in this country. Patrick de los Reyes, (by email), Tacloban City , May 01, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww LIFE IS PROBLEM SOLVING. NATIONS, CIVILIZATIONS PROGRESS IN DIRE NEED AND CRISES OF HUMAN SUFFERING THAT HAVE TO BE SOLVED, OR PERISH. BUT PROGRESS AT DIFFERENT SPEEDS, DEPENDING ON THE INTELLECT, ENLIGHTENMENT, CREATIVITY, LABOR, PRODUCTIVITY AND ENTERPRISE OF THE MASSES. OUR HUMAN PROBLEMS AND NATIONAL CRISES HAVE BEEN MADE WORSE,WITH OUR INDOCTRINATION AND ENSLAVEMENT BY OUR MYSTIC RELIGION,OF IDLE IDOL WORSHIP OF MYSTICAL DIVINITIES, AND DEMANDING MATERIAL TRIBUTE; CONCEIVED DURING OUR PRIMITIVE STAGE OF OUR HUMAN CULTURE IN THE ANCIENT TIMES, WITH DOGMAS THAT HAVE BEEN OBSTRUCTIVE, RETROGRESSIVE AND FRUITLESS TO OUR HUMAN PROGRESS, UPLIFTMENT AND ENLIGHTENMENT,THROUGH THE CENTURIES AND MILLENNIA, SINCE THE ANCIENT TIMES TO OUR MODERN AGE. YOUR ARTICLES AND DISSERTATIONS SERVE THE ENLIGHTENMENT OF OUR MASSES. YOU ANALYZE AND ELUCIDATE WELL ON OUR NATIONAL ISSUES, THAT HELP TO CONSTRUCT AND FORMULATE GOOD INDIVIDUAL OPINIONS, AND SHOULD REACH THE GREATER READERSHIP BY OUR MASSES. WE HAVE TO FOCUS AND EMPHASIZE MORE ON OUR GENERAL NATIONAL ENLIGHTENMENT- IN THE EDUCATION OF OUR MASSES OF VOTERS WHO ELECT OUR NATIONAL LEADERS- FOR OUR NATIONAL ISSUES AND PROBLEMS TO BE EFFECTIVELY RESOLVED. WHY DO WE HAVE MORE OF INCOMPETENT UNINTELLECTUAL POLITICIANS AND LEADERS, WITH THE GRAVITY OF OUR MANY SOCIAL AND NATIONAL CRISES THAT WE HAVE TO SOLVE, WHO STIFLE AND RENDER INEFFECTIVE OUR FEW HONEST INTELLECTUAL POLITICANS, AND WHO HAVE LITTLE TO SHOW IN THE PROGRESS AND UPLIFTMENT OF OUR POOR MASSES, BUT HAVE MUCH TO SHOW AND FLOUNT OF THEIR OBVIOUS IMMORALLY ACQUIRED GREAT PERSONAL WEALTH, IN THEIR GREED, AND IN THEIR PERPETUATION OF THEIR POWER IN POLITICAL DYNASTIES, TO THE DETRIMENT OF OUR MASSES OF POOR PEOPLE AND COUNTRY. MIRROR MIRROR ON THE WALL, WHO IS THE CAUSE OF THEM ALL? AND WHO DO WE SEE...BUT OUR OWNSELVES. WE ARE WAKING UP TOO SLOWLY, WE HAVE TO WAKE UP FASTER THAN WE ARE NOW, BEFORE OUR FAST-MULTIPLYING DESPERATE POOR MASSES, WITH SEX THEIR AFFORDABLE ENTERTAINMENT, AND OVER-POPULATION OVER-BURDENING, WILL BRING RADICAL SOCIAL AND GOVERNMENT CHANGE, AS PAY BACK.TO OUR INDIFFERENCE, EXPLOITATION AND ABUSES OF THE DEPRIVED POOR. THE PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT, WHERE THE PREMIER OR PRESIDENT IS ELECTED BY MINISTERS OF THE MANY CREATED DISTRICTS OF THE COUNTRY, AND NOT BY DIRECT POPULAR VOTE BY THE OUT-NUMBERING LESS EDUCATED, LESS KNOWLEDGEABLE MASSES OF VOTERS, IS THE BETTER FRAMEWORK TO WORK COLLECTIVELY FOR OUR NATIONAL PROGRESS. Rod Gabuya, (by email), Rolling Hills Estate, California , May 01, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww I'm so thrilled to know through your column that some political rallies are being canceled because of low crowd turn-out! Does this mean that the Pilipino voter is finally seeing through our politicians' palabas, and becoming mature? Hopefully, this could be the turning point of Philippine politics! Rome Farol, (by email), Highlands Ranch, Colorado , May 01, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hello Tony. This is my two cents worth. We face today the consequences of our political immaturity and neglect through the years. Because the electorate failed to set standards as the basis for their choices, they voted the wrong people to office. The political parties' selection of unqualified but "winnable" candidates, because of the electorate's mindlessness, is another culprit. Worse, the supposed holders of the public's trust have trifled with past elections by stealing the vote in collaboration with vested interests. Stupidity, irresponsibility and criminality make for a bad brew, thus, our being governed by people worse than ourselves. What we do on election day and during the counting will either nurse democracy to life or to its death. We reap what we sow. Rafael Alunan III, (by email), May 02, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, It is a good sign that fewer people are attending political rallies. Candidates will be forced to respond to issues that affect the voters, either on television, in print, or in public debates and interviews,. Candidates have to be articulate and logical; they have to be quick to offer a well-thought of solution or form an opinion to many problems affecting the country. They must be proficient in three R's. The days when rallies served as entertainment venues are over; political debates and interviews seen by many on television, either in real time or not, is the beginning of voters' education or political awakening. I do not have anything against people in the entertainment business or sports going into politics on the pretext of serving the people, but these entertainers and sports personalities have never been a catalyst of change; they have never brought substance to their work as a public servant, anyway. I CRY FOR MY HOMELAND WHO FALL FOR POLITICAL CANDIDATES WITH A LOVELY FACE BUT WITH AN EMPTY HEAD. Dr. Nestor Baylan, (by email), New York City , May 02, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww If you continue to call the GO candidates as GAGO, it will be best to clarify your definition of the TUTA as TARANTADO UNITY ni TANGANG ARROYO to be fair. Otherwise, you become another suspicious paid lackeys. Yuko Takei, (by email), Tokyo , Japan , May 03, 2007 (The difference between my Talagang UTusan ni Arroyo and your Tarantado Unity ni Tangang Arroyo makes me a�suspected paid lackeys� (sic)? Jesus Christ! Ang babaw mo naman. ACA) wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww I totally agree: family planning and dismantling of dynasties are two important issues that must be addressed by the candidates. On media exposure of candidates, I was surprised and disappointed that PDI printed (on its front page yet!) an article on Richard Gomez based on an interview with Lucy Gomez. Anyway, I am really getting extremely disillusioned with PDI because their competent reporting is all covered by too much advertisement. Should I now be loyal to Star or Standard? Pura Flor Isleta, (by email), May 03, 2007 (I would stay with PDI and Standard. There isn�t much choice around in these parts. Just don�t bother reading the garbage. And fire off an angry letter to the editor whenever they do something stupid. ACA) wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hi Tony, After going through your columns, the latest being GAGO VS. TUTA, I have come to the conclusion that indeed you present a viable solution to what ails the PHILIPPINES today. The only thing lacking is the execution. With the midterm elections upon us, regardless of how it is being run and the outcome, it is becoming increasingly apparent that in order for your ideas to have some significance, somebody out there should take it upon himself to religiously espouse and make a pitch for these ideas towards the government and the general electorate as well, although this task has been partly accomplished through the media via your columns. What better way to do it than run for public office? When elected, it will put that somebody in a much, much better position for implementation. Failure to do this, all those ideas will only look good on paper and worst lost to oblivion. To this end with due respect, I pose to you this question, �What would it take for you to run for senator or congressman or even President?� Or at the very least think of something that will somehow be able to sell your ideas to GMA or any senior politician for that matter. I know it is easily said than done, but then again it�s worth a try which brings to my mind one of my favourite fables which is summarized by this single question, �Who is going to volunteer and put the bell on the cat?� It is sad, but I guess everybody knows the answer to this particular question which was coincidentally the ending to the story. Regards, Noe Castanos, (by email), Toronto , Ontario , Canada , May 04, 2007 MY REPLY. Thank you for your thoughts. To answer your question, I am not interested in being congressman or senator. Speech-making and debating are not my passions, and I do not have the personality of a politician. . In 1998 and 2004, my good friend Nandy Pacheco urged me to run for president, but I declined because, without a political movement or party, I thought it would have been a waste of time. Several others since and up to the present, including total strangers, have made similar suggestions, but I have declined, for more or less the same reasons. When the Ang Kapatiran Party was approved by Comelec after the 2004 elections, Nandy also invited me to join and perhaps be a candidate in this year�s elections, but I declined because I could not on principle support a platform explicitly based on �the social teachings of the Church.� I do not agree with some of those social teachings. The late Blas Ople once included me in a 1989 column on what he said was his Ideal Senatorial Slate. But I gave my reply in my column titled Emperor, si. Senator, no. But I was not prepared for the following email from a total stranger, who began his post with: wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww �You ought to be president of the US ; too bad foreigners can�t run.� Consider this fan mail, Mr. Abaya. I am an American who recently moved to Kodiak , Alaska . There is a large Filipino population here, and I have befriended a few of them, which led to my discovery of your website. To make a long story short, I came across your page by accident a few weeks ago while researching Filipino religion, specifically the Iglesia ni Cristo, as a young convert of theirs had been asking me to attend the "one true church." Although the article of yours I originally came across had nothing to do with Iglesia, it did discuss religion and politics and caught my eye. I was impressed and added your site to My Favorites for later enjoyment. Today I decided to read some more of your articles, and was utterly blown away by your insights into world events and absolutely amazed by the article After Iraq : Iran or Syria ? from April 8, 2003 which could nearly be considered prophetic. You wrote: "If the democracy that the Americans are trying to impose on Iraq requires that the will of the majority must prevail, then the Shias must and will prevail: they want an Islamic state modeled on the theocracy of Iran (which is also ruled by Shias), they want the Americans out of their country, and they are implacably hostile to Israel. �If the Americans, like Saddam, were to suppress the Shias, they would have a revolution in their hands. If they goad the Sunnis and the Kurds to resist the Shias, they would have a civil war. Welcome to Iraq ." Oh, how I wish that the people who run this great country of mine had bothered to find out even exactly what a Sunni or Shiite was before they embarked on this massive foreign policy disaster in Iraq . I look forward to reading more of your articles in the future and wish you good luck in all of your endeavors. Brian Ketterer, (by email), Kodiak , Alaska , April 12, 2007 P.S. I did a little searching for articles regarding the Iglesia ni Cristo on your site but didn't find anything. If there is such an article that I missed please let me know, if not, you have one reader who would love to read your views concerning it in a future article. (Mr. Ketterer was �blown away� because, 19 days into the US invasion of Iraq, I wrote that a) the Americans will face civil war, and b) the next country that they will attack is Iran. (But I do not know what website to direct him to for more information on the Iglesia ni Cristo.� Can anyone please make a suggestion? ACA) wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hi Tony, You and Chuck Agustin should continue to throw the ideas around. So many good ideas that need wider audiencse, wider in the hope that some get implemented. Throw bigger nets and catch more. Thanks and regards. Chito Prat, (by email), May 04, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww More Reactions to �Sexual Morality 2� (April 17, 2007) Me? I just abstain. I abstain from listening to pronouncements from myopic clerics or encyclicals from franchise building Church elders. My condo is amply supplied with condoms, and I am sure I have no more than 3-4 children, maybe 5 at the most. Just a reaction to Mr. Fabella, Wow, one hour or say two hours for one week to attend Mass and hear the gospel is to much for him, but attending folk dance and joined bayanihan club is out of the question. It is not the Church that is controlling our minds but it is the other way around, it is us who control ourself and using our minds for whatever we want to do or to achieve whatever we want in our life. I must say that maybe one of these day when god give some burdens in your shoulder, that�s the time you will need and ask for some guidance. Some priest as you said is just like that but as a whole it is just a part or a portion and not all are bad . Good day and God bless. Armando Chavez, (by email), May 03, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Mr. Abaya,, I have a suggestion: Mr. Priest, we will follow your advice. We will not use contraceptives, condoms, etc. However, if we have more children than we can afford, will you allow us to go to your church for their meals and funds for tuition and clothes and part of our house rent? We will appreciate your reply. Lionel Tierra, (by email), May 04, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww I agree that a couple should be able to plan the size of the family. My wife and I have used the NFP method and it is this method that gave us our son after two daughters. For myself, it is a superior method, one which allows as much pleasure and enjoyment as one would want. It is however a discipline, otherwise we can easily deteriorate into being just an unthinking mammal copulating. Is it a way of separating us from the rest of the animal kingdom? Perhaps. It really is a problem when a husband comes home, late, drunk and horny. You can be sure NFP will fail no matter how often you teach the method. Is the method the problem? Or is it the husbands� continued neglect of being human, God's version of human. I have had my share of kneeling over the porcelain bowl, promising never to get so drunk again. My own belief is that the Catholic teaching is not in error. It may be in our appreciation and application of this teaching that we are in error. Guillermo Prat, (by email), May 04, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tony, I hope your population extrapolations are not based on The Population Bomb by Paul Erlich since it has been proven inacurate and not prophetic. (My extrapolations are based on common sense and fifth-grade arithmetic. ACA) One source to which I can refer you is The Vision of the Anointed by Thomas Sowell, esp. Chapter 4. In regards to your opinions on population and the Catholic Church, I would like to point out a few things that are common knowledge to those who think on these things.(You are imputing that I and others who don�t agree with you are �not thinking�? ACA) The basis of why "contraception" (birth control is more accurate) will never be accepted by the Catholic Church rests on three truths: 1) God is the author of life; (You will have to get used to the idea that not everyone on the planet accepts this premise. ACA) 2) human life begins at joining of the sperm and egg (conception/fertilization); (There is no joining of the sperm and egg when the couple use condoms, IUDs, tubal ligation, vasectomy, spermicides, some pills. ACA) 3) and therefore we do not interfere with this action between God and humanity by artificial means. The only true "contraception" is one in which sperm cannot meet the egg (such as in the above methods. ACA). The Original Pill was strong enough to stop ovulation when used properly all the time( if not, ovulation could occur in some cycles) when it came out in the 60's. Unfortunately, those pills were also maiming women by stroke and cancers and death. The "testing" they conducted in the "third world" was short in duration and we became the guinea pigs because the public wanted the pill. From the beginning, the Church knew about this. The possiblily of ovulation in the formulation of the pill, makes all the difference because it still lended itself open to conception. When women protested in the late 60's and early 70's that women were being hurt by the full strength pills, the formulations were weakened. When this happened, ovulation occured more often and the second effect of the pill came into play more often. That effect makes the womb inhospitable to implantation. Therefore, the already conceived child could not implant and does not survive.(abortion due to artificial "birth control" or abortion). If you read the reports on the action of the modern pills, you will see, in some, that this or that pill stops ovulation in only a percentage of months-say 50%. Artificial birth control not only interferes with the action of the Author of life, but causes the deaths of the smallest human lives. Protesting that we don't know whether or not there is conception is a rationalization. Don't think women's health is any safer with the weaker formulations, the same contraindications are present. Finally, when they took the full strength pill off the market in the US , do you know where they sent them to recoup their losses? The " Third World ". I saw that on the History Channel. And still, even with the acceptance and use of the pill, pregnancies occur. When pregnacies occur with women who did not want to get pregnant because they had decided to use birth control, abortion on demand was sought and made available in the USA in 1973. IUD's are not a healthful solution for the woman either for they have been shown to be deadly for the woman,(Lawsuit Precedents on record) and the baby that can be conceived, is destroyed by the iud action in the womb. Condoms and spermacide are the only true "contraception". But they are not only unreliable, but can cause allergy and in some cases anaphalactic shock. In addition many men won't use them. Tubal ligation and vasectomy are also unreliable as well as mutilation of the beautiful body given by God. (By that token, circumcision and cosmetic surgery are also �mutilation of the beautiful body given by God.� ACA) (So the intelligent and democratic solution is for all methods, both approved and disapproved by you, should be made available for all couples to choose from, without any pressure from anybody. The problem is you and the Roman Catholic Church want only YOUR methods to be allowed. What makes you different from the Taliban or the Communist Party? ACA) Because life comes from God, the only conclusion held by those who believe that life also begins at conception, is that we must not interfere artificially with God's action, but in faith accept those children God sends. Natural Family Planning fits that possibility and fits into God's plan for us. Men and women in cooperation with God works if you are unselfish and lovingly human as God wants us to be. Whether Catholics were lured into contraception during the 60's and 70's and priests who were mislead by modern philosophies justified them, or forgave them, or counciled them for the sake of "primacy of concience" etc. doesn't matter. What matters is those three things mentioned above in the third paragraph.Old men in white gowns in the Vatican have nothing to do with them except to teach the people the truth of them that comes from God. In the Lambeth conference in 1930, other Christian Churches accepted artificial birth control. Many now are learning about the action of the pill and action of God in their lives and do not accept birth control either. You see Mr. Abeya, just because a lot of people (meaning, hundreds of million Roman Catholics around the world. ACA) are "doing it" does it make it right? (A law that is ignored by most of those who are supposed to obey it becomes a dead law and is eventually buried and forgotten. Remember the moral law against lending money with interest? How many Christians do you think still feel bound by it? ACA) And further more, Mr. Abaya, you must remember the Muslims in the Philippines who are more adamantly pro-birth than Catholics. They must be counted in your 88 million-or are they? (Muslims are included in the 88 million Filipinos. But what does that prove or disprove? What is your point in raising that point? ACA) Shelah Hockman, (by email), Owosso , Michigan , May 03, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww More Reaction to �Sexual Morality 1� (April 15, 2007) (Copy furnished of email sent to newspapers and egroups) Dear Editor, I read with interest the article of Mr. Antonio Abaya (Sexual Morality 1) which dealt with his valid concerns about the unabated rise in population growth and the role religion plays to prevent or encourage its increase. The population of the earth has increased a great deal since the medieval times when the world economy was mainly agricultural, the human inhabitants of this planet so scarce and the need for more hands to till the vast fields that teemed with abundant resources more pronounced. Primitive agricultural methods required more hands to work the fields and the few people there were could not live longer due to diseases their lack curative knowledge thereof could not prevent their early deaths. Thus they had no choice but to procreate more, and more, and more. I have not read about any records about contraception then, and if there were, it surely would have not been used. The appropriate "go and multiply," commendation was taken at face value, the multiplication went unchecked while advancement in medical knowledge prevented many incidences of mortalities in infancy and prolonged life expectations as pestilences and mass deaths were checked. Until the time when population increase exploded into alarming levels as limited food supply and living space can no longer cope up with the growing number of consumers and dwellers. The advancement in agricultural methods as mechanized farming decreased the need for more hands and those who found themselves without a job sought employment in the service sector in the cities which became crowded with the influx of work-seekers from the provinces. This resulted in the emergence of mega-cities which then suffered from social ills such as crimes. The problem brought about by population increase was already evident in the early 19th century when the world was not yet as densely populated as it is now. English political economist Thomas Malthus saw that "population tends to increase faster than food supply ... " so he theorized that "... war, famine and diseases serve as natural restrictions of the increase." Many people should not be dying in wars, and from hunger and diseases just because others could enjoy enough food to eat and space to live in. But ways and means should be employed to prevent the birth of babies whose mouths their parents cannot feed, especially in poor Third World countries which governments cannot help its citizens or could not care less. In the Philippines many people die due to extra-judicial killings, and certainly, many also die for being famished and for utter lack of proper medical care, protection from all of which their government has failed to provide. Mr. Abaya was right in saying that the rich and developed countries ... have below-zero, zero population growth rates. Germany is one of them. The Federal Family Minister who is from the Christian Democratic Union, (its members are mostly Catholics), one of the two parties in the coalition government has been criticized by a bishop for her proposal to create nurseries that will take care of one-year-old babies so that their mothers can work, "pursue their careers and/or develop their own personalities," like Mr. Abaya wrote. One of the Catholic bishops criticized her plan as making mothers "ovarian machines," that would produce more babies. I agree with Mr. Abaya's statement that morality changes with time and place. Had those thinkers who made the admonition "Go forth and multiply," centuries ago foreseen the exponential multiplication of mankind we have today, they would have ordered differently. Ramon Mayuga, (by email), Essen , Germany , May 07, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tony. In the small book-filled room where I work these days, often completely alone for weeks on end, your writings are among my best friends. Usually, it would be very hard for me to rank them in order of preference. But probably because I started working on climate change issues in 1989, your Sexual Morality I must go to the top of my list. When may we expect Sexual Morality II? Alexandra York, (by email), May 11, 2007 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww (Unedited) Comment on the issue of birth control - WHY IS IT IMPORTANT? IS THERE OVERPOPULATION IN THE PHILIPPINES ? You say it here below, on the issue regarding BIRTH CONTROL. I searched the internet to find out IS THERE OVERPOPULATION? Not necessarily only in the Philippines to justify the importance of the issue on BIRTH CONTROL but worldwide, overall - again, IS THERE OVERPOPULATION? This, I came across as an answer - In other words, THERE IS NO OVERPOPULATION ANYWHERE ELSE. Read it, too. Elsa Bayani, (by email), May 01, 2007 Overpopulation: Is There Such A Thing? The rich grind the poor into abjectness and then complain that they are abjecThey goad them to famine, then hang them if they steal a sheep. -- Percy Bysshe Shelley The very first question that arises, in our search for the cause of widespread poverty, is whether it is the result of our own inexorable fertility. That was the theory of Thomas Robert Malthus (1766-1834), the English Cleric, author of the Essay on the Principle of Population and originator of the perception of economics as "the dismal science". Malthus reasoned that human population tends to grow at a geometrical rate, while our ability to prooduce subsistence increases at a merely arithmetical rate -- and so we find ourselves in an ever-deepening spiral of suffering caused by overpopulation. In Malthus's view this process could only be slowed by the "preventive check" of decreased fertility, or the "positive check" of increased mortality . The Malthusian theory was once thought to be quite sufficiently denounced, relegated to the status of a curious footnote in the history of economic thought. Henry George's chapters on poverty and subsistence in Progress and Poverty stand as the definitive marshalling of the abundant logical ammunition against it. At the end of the 20th century A.D., however, an increasingly influential crew of neo-Malthusians is bringing the theory back, adding that subsistence can only keep ahead of population growth at the cost of an unsustainable level of envronmental harm. Six point two billion people is a lot of people, no doubt about it. Is it too many? The neo-Malthusian view seems reasonable, especially when fortified by such statistics as these (published by the World Population News Service): � 600,000 square miles of forest cut in the last ten years � 26,000,000,000 tons of topsoil lost � 88 nations classified by the UN World Food Program as unable to provide enough food for their inhabitants � 960 million illiterate people; 130 million children lacking access to primary schooling the world's population increasing by nearly 100 million people per year These charts show one of the most troubling trends in world demographics. Ever-increasing numbers of people in the world�s poorest areas are moving into cities. This has placed great pressures on already-troubled nations. Does the fact that so many desperate people are moving into cities show that the world�s poorest nations are running out of land? Not at all. Huge tracts of farmland are used to grow crops for export. Often, the farmland that was once available to peasants has been bought up in multinational corporations, under the rubric of �global free trade�. The people can make no living, but at least the ruling regimes can service their international debts, and stay in power. Indeed, these statistics show that there is plenty of poverty. But do they indicate overpopulation? We mustn't let ourselves be bambooxled by numbers. A hundred million people is an increase of roughly half a percentage point. The Earth has the capacity to absorb such numbers. Today, vast capacities of the earth's resources lie unused. Still more arable land is being destroyed by unsustainable farming or settlement practices. And even more of the earth"s "carrying capacity" is being used to make weapons, or toys, or crops for export -- all manner of things that, despite the wretched poverty of most of the world's people, no one needs for survival. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization estimates the earth has the capacity to grow food for some 33 billion people. Critics will protest that such tremendous yields would require the dubious efficiencies of monoculture, petrochemical fertilizers and genetic engineering -- and that is probably true. Yet it is also true that, in all liklihood, we'll never need to grow anywhere near that much. Current UN estimates project a plateau population of between 9 and 11 billion people about midway through the next century (and it's worth noting that every time this top figure has been estimated, it has been lower). Modern "industrial" farming techniques make it easier to run large-scale, remotely-managed corporate farms, but they are not needed to create high yields of nutritious food. The total area or arable land in the world today, according to the CIA World Factbook, is 3.98 billion acres. The definition used is land that is under cultivation, or temporarily fallow (for less than five years) -- but it excludes abandoned land resulting from shifting cultivation. Enough arable land exists in India to give each person in the country approximately half an acre. In famine-ravaged Ethiopia , each person could have three-quarters of an acre of arable land. Africa , the poorest continent, has 20.2% of the world's land area, and only 13% of its population. North America has a whopping 2.1 acres of arable land per person! The statistics quoted above on deforestation and topsoil loss describe the consequences of land hoarding, not overpopulation. Around the world, deforestation and desertification result from peasants pushing into sub-marginal land while high-quality farmland is either held out of use entirely, or used to grow export crops. The situation is so acute in Brazil , for example, that squatters have been massacred simply for occupying remote, unused areas of privately-held ranches. A large, organized movement has grown around the peasants' demand simply to be allowed to use land that others have no (current) use for. Two factors consistently correlate with high birth rates: poverty and lack of education. It has long been known that when living standards rise in a community, birth rates tend to decline; this widely-documented phenomenon is called the "demographic shift". Recently, however, another kind of demographic shift has been observed. Where women have had access to education and media, birth rates have showed significant declines -- even when income levels had not increased. It is instructive to note, in the table below, the correlations between lower life-expectancy and literacy figures for women, and the standard measures of poverty. The most distasteful part of the recent spate of neo-Malthusian cant has been the notion that irresponsible poor people should be forcibly stopped from procreating, lest their hungry numbers start to wrest control of the resources held by more "civilized" sorts. In an economy where more energy and resources are spent in taking pictures of children than are used to feed children in the rest of the world, such advice is preposterous. It is true that the developing world cannot raise its standard of living to "western" standards, using the same wasteful methods, without causing horrible damage to the natural environment. However, it is also a fact that the long-term trend has been for more human satisfaction to be provided with less pollution. Environmentally sustainable technology for industry, food and energy production is available today. The reasons why it is not used extensively have more to do with politics and economics than with technical feasibility. It remains an unfortunate fact that the world's poorest, most corrupt, most disorganized and environmentally endangered nations are the ones with the highest birth rates (of course, they have fairly high death rates as well; Africa's population actually decreased in the late 1990s). So, the neo-Malthusians identify genuinely dire problems. But it is time we got it straight: poverty is not caused by overpopulation. There can never be such a thing as overpopulation in a world where ample resources exist to feed every new child -- but those resources are held idle, or devoted to frivolous uses. The miserable conditions that are misnamed "overpopulation" today are the result of poverty, not its cause. ......................... End of internet article .............................................. MY REPLY. Over-population is a relative term. Macau, Hong Kong and Singapore are over-populated relative to their land area. But they are not over-populated relative to their economic growth. Meaning, their economic growth rates far outstrip their population growth rates. In 2005, Singapore had an economic (GDP) growth rate of 6.4% and a population growth rate of only 0.51%..In the same year, the Philippines had a GDP growth rate of 5.1% and a population growth rate of 1.95%.. With stats like these, the Philippines will never catch up with Singapore (per capita GDP: $28,100), but will instead sink deeper into poverty. In the 1970s, Thailand and the Philippines had virtually the same populations: 42 million. Because of a pro-active population control program by the Thai government, but not by the Philippine, starting in the 1980s, there are now only 64 million Thais, but 88 million Filipinos. In 2005, Thailand had a population growth rate of 0.68%, versus 1..95% for the Philippines . Not surprisingly, Thailand has a per capita GDP of $8,300, based on purchasing power parity, compared to $5,100 for the Philippines . (All data from the 2007 World Almanac and Book of Facts.). OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO |