Why We Should Celebrate Valentines Day?

Why We Should Celebrate Valentines Day? an ASWER to the "Shocking Truth About Valentines Day!"


Tanong: Selebrasyon ba ng mga Pagano ang Valentine's Day?

Sagot: 

Una sa lahat wala pong masama sa February 14, wala pong problema sa valentines day. 

Ang problema po sa mga tumutuligsa sa ating mga katoliko ay ang kanilang pag-intindi.

Nabasa daw nila sa bibliya na bawal ito. Ang tanong, saang talata sa bibliya na ipinagbawal ang valentine's day?

Nagbasa ka nga ng bibliya pero nabasa mo na ba lahat? 

Mahilig kasi ang diyablo gumaya ng mga bagay na nauukol sa Panginoon.

"Hindi ito dapat pagtakhan sapagkat si Satanas man ay maaaring magkunwaring anghel ng kaliwanagan."(2 Corinto 11:14)

Katulad na lamang ng December 25 kung saan nagsicelebrate tayo ng Christmas, pero Ang December 25 din daw ay kapistahan ng Sol Invictus, o kapistahan ng Araw, ayon sa paniniwala ng mga paganong Romano. At diyan daw kinuha ang petsa ng kapanganakan ni Jesus.

Peo bago pa ipinagdiwang ng mga pagano ang Sol Invictus ay kinilala na ng mga Kristiyano ang December 25 bilang birthday ni Jesus.

Ang kapistahan ng Sol Invictus tuwing December 25 bilang opisyal na ritwal ng paganong Roma ay noon lang 275 AD sinimulan ni Emperador Aurelian.

Kung babalikan natin ang mga naunang pahayag ukol sa petsa ng kapanganakan ni Jesus ay makikita natin na noon pang 183 AD (Theophilus) at 220 AD (Hippolytus) ay paniniwala na iyan ng mga Kristiyano.

Pwede pa nating sabihin na ang mga pagano ang nanggaya sa petsa na December 25 at hindi ang mga Kristiyano.

Kung kukuwentahin natin ay 92 taon pa bago sinimulan ang pista ng mga pagano na Sol Invictus ay may nasulat nang nagpapatunay na December 25 isinilang si Kristo.

Mali po talaga at walang batayan ang sinasabi ng iba na ang Pasko tuwing December ay pista ng mga pagano.

So, kagaya ng valentine's day na sinasabi din ng iba na sinicelebrate din ito ng mga pagano ay maliwanag na isa sa na naman itong pakulo ng diyabalo para guluhin ang mga taong nag-iibigan ng totoo.

Ano po ba ang isang bagay na ginagawa ng mga kristiyano na makikita natin sa valentine's day na hindi masama?

Ang mga mag-asawang nag-iibigan at ang mga boyfriend-girlfriend na sumusunod sa gusto ng Diyos ay tumutupad po sa sinasabi ng 
Panginoong Jesus.

"Kung kayo'y mag-iibigan, makikilala ng lahat na kayo'y mga alagad ko."(Juan 13:35)

Ang tanong, ano po ang masama sa valentine's day o february 14 kung ito po ay sinicelebrate ng tama at nagpapakita ng tamang pag-ibig ang tao sa kanyang kapwa tao?

Dahil inggit na inggit po ang diyablo sa ginagawa ng mga taong nag-iibigan dahil nga ang Diyos ay pag-ibig, gusto nya po itong guluhin at para maimpluwensiyahan ang mga taong walang kaalam-alam para mapasama ang valentines day.

Ipinagbabawal ba ng bibliya na bigyan ng halaga ang araw na ito sa paraan na gusto ng Diyos?

Hindi po!

Kung binibigyan natin ng halaga ang Valentine's Day sa paraan na gusto ng Diyos ay wala pong masama dito. 

"May nagpapahalaga sa isang araw nang higit kaysa ibang mga araw."(Roma 14:5)

Wala pong problema sa Valentine's Day kundi ang problema ay nasa mga taong kulang ang kaalaman at ang mga taong ayaw sumunod sa Diyos, Kung titignan natin sa isang Catholic Enyclopediahttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15254a.htm, ay binabanggit riyan ang Valentine's Day pero wala pong nabanggit riyan na pinaniniwalaan si Kupido kagaya ng pinaniniwalaan ng iba.

Dinagdagan na lang po ng mga taong hindi nakakaintindi at hindi nagbabasa ng bibliya. 

Tandaan po ng mga kapatid na nagsisicelebrate ng valentine's day, wala pong problema sa araw na ito at hindi po masama ang magcelebrate ng valentine's day, may mga ilan lang po sa mga bagay na ginagawa ng iba sa atin at nasanayan na hindi po dapat gawin at paniwalaan. 

Una, ang tungkol kay kupido na marami po sa mga kapatid natin ay naniniwala dito.

Valentine's Day would not be complete without Cupid --- (Wrong!)

Magiging Kumpleto Ang Lahat ng Oras Mo Sa Buhay hindi lamang ang Valentine's Day na hindi mo hinihingi ang tulong ni Cupid.
Hindi mo kailangan si Cupid sa Buhay mo para makumpleto mo ang Valentine's Day. Ang Kailangan mo ay ang Salita ng Diyos!

"But if you keep his word, God's love is made complete in you. This is how we know that we are in him:" (1 John 2:5)

We are speaking of Cupid, the God of Love --- (Wrong!)

Hindi si Kupido ang Diyos ng Pag-ibig, ito ay malaking pagkakamali na dapat ituwid!

Nag-iisa lamang ang Diyos ng Pag-ibig at SYA ang Diyos na ipinakikilala ng BIBLIA.

“Those who do not love have not known God, for God is love.” (1 John 4:8)

Sa Kanya Dapat humingi ng IDEAL Man or IDEAL Woman at Hindi kay Cupid...

"House and wealth are inherited from a father but a sensible wife is a gift from GOD."(Proverbs 19:14)

It is said that if Cupid shoots his arrow of love and hits 
you, that you will fall helplessly and madly in love with the 
next person you meet. --- (Wrong!)

Ito ang Gusto ng Diyos para sa ating lahat...

Matthew 6:33 “Set your heart first on the kingdom and justice of God and all these things will also be given to you.”

SET YOUR HEART FIRST ON THE KINGDOM and JUSTICE of GOD (Ibigay mo muna ang Puso mo sa Diyos bago sa magiging partner mo sa iyong buhay)

Dahil ito ang GUSTO ng DIYOS para sa atin...

"This is the covenant that I will make with them in the days to come - says the Lord - I will put my laws in their hearts and write them on their minds.” (Hebrews 10:16)

Gusto ng Diyos na buksan natin ang ating mga puso para sa Kanyang mga kautosan, upang bago ang mga tao umibig sa kanyang magiging ideal man or woman na ibibigay ng Diyos sa kanya, magiging handa ang mga tao sa mga magiging consequences at malalaman nila kung ano ang tama at mali.

In Roman mythology, Cupid is the son of Venus, the
goddess of love. In greek mythology, he was known as
Eros and was the son of Aphrodite. ---(Wrong!)

Bawal po ng Biblia ito, huwag po natin kikilalaning diyosdiyosan itong si kupido sapagkat mali po ito.

"My dear children, keep yourselves from idols."(1 John 5:21) 

Pangalawa, magcelebrate ng valentine's day at ibigay ang tamang kahulogan ng pag-ibig na ayon sa itinuturo ng Bibliya at hindi ayon sa paniniwala ng kautusan ng mga tao.

"Ang pag-ibig ay matiyaga at magandang-loob, hindi maiinggitin, hindi mayabang ni mapagmataas man, hindi magaspang ang pag-uugali, hindi makasarili, hindi magagalitin, o mapagtanim sa kapwa. Hindi niya ikinatutuwa ang gawaing masama, ngunit ikinagagalak ang katotohanan. Ang pag-ibig ay mapagpatawad, mapagtiwala, puno ng pag-asa, at mapagtiis hanggang wakas."(1 Corinto 13:4-7) 

This Is Authored by Bro. Lay Person Scripturist

QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE OF SENATOR SOTTO (On the Issue of Alleged Plagiarism)

This is the entire speech of Sen. Vicente Sotto III delivered on the senate as an answer to the alleged PLAGIARISM case that was filed by the RH Bill Advocates to the Ethics Committee. Copied from titosotto website

Senator Sotto.  Thank you, Mr. President. 

          Earlier today, a group of Reproductive Health (RH) advocates from different sectors filed an ethics complaint against this representation and asking me to apologize for plagiarism.  August 13 ba iyong unang turno en contra speech ng inyong lingkod, Mr. President?  Two or three weeks thereafter, iyong second turno en contra, third turno en contra, but they decided to file it now.

          Pero ilang ulit ko na pong nabanggit dati ito, kailangang ulitin ko pa rin sa ngayon.   Mukhang it is falling into deaf ears.   Ganoon po ang tingin ko.

          I will set aside the issue of Section 6 of the Constitution.   Itabi natin iyong isyu ng parliamentary immunity.   Although ang pinag-uusapan nga, sabi nga  nila, at pinag-usapan rin namin ni Senate President kanina, and his advice is, ang Congress kaya may parliamentary immunity sa kahit anong sabihin mo sa Kongreso ay para may elbow room ka dahil we are making laws.   Hindi ka puwedeng i-confine.  Kahit nga libelous o kahit anong sabihin mo rito, we cannot be held liable in any place.   Dahil iyon ang binibigay na elbow room sa legislative.  Iba po iyong pananaw sa academe.   Sa academe kasi iyong pangongopya, bawal, at kung anu-ano iyong bawal.   Pero dito po sa Senado, hindi po iyon.  Ibang usapan po iyon.  Pero huwag na iyon.  Isasantabi na lang natin iyong isyu ng Section 6.

          Doon ko po dadalhin sa isyu ng ibinibintang na plagiarism.   Kasi ang tingin ko po dito, what seems to be a simple case of probable misinformation has turned out to be misinterpretation.   And now, it has become a case of persecution.   Hindi ko po maintindihan iyong nangyayari  sapagkat parang obfuscation nga ang dating sa akin.  Imbes na sagutin iyong 16 na puntos na ni-raise ko noong tatlong turno en contra ko, ang ibinalik sa akin ay plagiarism.

          Ngayon, maliwanag doon sa tatlong turno en contra speeches ko, ilang ulit ko pong sinabi, and the Journal will bear me out, wala po akong sinabi roon na akin iyon.  At maliwanag na kontra pa nga ang ginamit ko.   Lahat ng sinabi ko tungkol sa medico, sa mga agham at sa kung saan-saan, ay hindi galing sa akin.   Ang plagiarism is to steal or pass off the ideas or words of another as one's own without crediting the source. 

          Mr. President, wala po akong inangkin.   As a matter of fact, kabila ng inangkin ang ginawa ko.  Papaano ako mag-a-apologize ng plagiarism, wala akong plinagiarize.   Sinabi ko ngang hindi akin.  Parang pinagpi-plead guilty ako sa murder, ay ang dapat na charge ay physical injuries.  Kung sasabihin lang sa akin na nangopya, mag-apologize ka nangopya.  Aba madali iyon.  Talagang kinopya, eh.  Pero hindi plinagiarize.   Iba iyon.   Maliwanag iyon.  Wala po akong ninakaw.

          I am sure na kopya ng draft ng speech  ko ang unang kumalat sa kanila kasi hindi kumpleto iyon.   Wala doon iyong ibang attribution o wala  rin doon iyong counter attribution or contra attribution na sinasabi ko.  Pero sa Journal ng Senado, nandoon po lahat iyan.   Kumpleto.   The Record of the Senate will speak for me.  Iyon po iyong isyu na sinasabi nila.

          Ngayon may bago pa in the case of the so-called Kennedy speech.  It appears that the Kennedy family has been misinformed to get them to say something about me.  Sapagkat ang pinadala yata na report doon ay yon lang part na tinagalog iyong lift from the inspirational line of Robert Kennedy.  At ang pinaalam nila doon, according doon sa nakausap namin sa foundation nila, ang pinarating doon ay minangle ko.   Hindi po totoo iyon.

          Let me explain the truth.   A Christian leader sent me through a text a reminder. It was a nice reminder used to inspire people. He even said that religious leaders used that as an inspirational line. I did not even know whose it was, except that it came from Derek Ross of the True Love Waits Foundation who espouses chastity and teaches all over the country. He is an American. When he gave me that line, I translated and delivered the message in Filipino because we found it fitting cap to what I was fighting for. 

So, Mr. President, I did not steal it or claim that it was mine. In other words, the worst thing probably that they could say is, that I copied it from a text of a friend. I did not really know where it came from but it was a nice inspirational line. Ang sabi nga nila ay kay Kennedy raw pala iyong linya na iyon.  Hindi ko po alam agad iyon.  Kung sa tingin, pati ng Kennedy family, ay kinopya ko, puwede, sapagkat kinopya ko nga roon sa text iyon.  But copying or imitation is the highest form of flattery.  But if it upsets the Kennedy family, well, then I am sorry. But that is not the intention that we had when we used it. 

Ito po ay isa sa  mga natabunan noong mga oras na iyon at uulitin ko po sa ating mga kababayan. Ipapaalala ko lamang po iyong sinabi ko noong huling speech na pilit nilang tinatabunan ng issue ng plagiarism. Nagugulat ako kasi ito pa namang mga tao ay mga aral pero hindi ko maintindihan kung saan galing, except that I know that lahat pala ay RH advocates.

As a matter of fact, nagtataka  rin ako at tinanong ko si Senate President  kung bakit iyong media advisory nitong mga RH advocate na ito ay nanggaling sa opisina ng Akbayan party-list congressman. Nagtataka ako at gusto kung tanungin ang Senate President. Ano ba ang koneksyon ng congressman at bakit makikialam sa pagfa-file sa Ethics Committee ng Congress sa isang senador?

Ang pinag-aralan ko po ay mababa lamang kumpara sa mga pinag-aralan nila.  Pero ako po ay hindi marunong manira at hindi ako nanghuhusga ng kapwa. Kung ginamit nila sana ang kanilang katalinuhan para sa pagbibigay-linaw tungkol sa RH bill, lalo na iyong 16 arguments ko, aba eh, mas makakatulong pa ito sa mga kababayan natin para maunawaan ito.

Kaya sa mga mahal kong kababayan at saka sa mga kasama natin sa Senado, ako po ay matagal na ninyong kakilala. Alam ninyo ang pinanggalingan ko, kilala ninyo ang pamilya ko, asawa ko, mga anak, mga kapatid, kilala ninyo pong lahat.  Alam po ninyo ang pinagdaanan ko, mga nagawa ko at mga natulungan ko.

Ito pong mga naninira sa akin at nag-iimbento ng mga multo ay hindi natin kilala.  Kaya hindi tayo puwedeng basta maniwala sa kanila. When the right time comes and when I have gathered enough evidence, I will expose the people behind this na nagmamanipula nito. Pati iyong mga kababayan natin  sa academe ay namamanipula nila para magamit nila rito.

Mr. President, they can call me names, they can mock me, they can accuse me of anything under the sun, but I will not change my position and I will always be against the distribution of contraceptives, condoms, IUDs promoting immorality to the young people.  I will always be against abortion.  I will remain steadfast and will stand firm in my position as long as I live.

          Thank you, Mr. President.

          The President Pro Tempore.  Thank you, Majority Leader. 

Joint statement of MTC-DOLE and CHED on the closure of non-compliant maritime education programs of the PMI, March 7, 2012

To All Concerned Seafarers, this is a must read article and warning to those institution who are always after the money and no longer considering the integrity and quality of Filipino Seafarers. . .


Joint press statement of the Maritime Training Council-Department of Labor and Employment and the Commission on Higher Education:

On the closure of non-compliant maritime education programs of the Philippine Maritime Institute

[Released on March 7, 2012]

The Philippines, a signatory to the Convention on the Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping (STCW), is in the spotlight of the international maritime community in view of the adverse findings of the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) regarding the country’s compliance with the requirements of the STCW Convention.

The EMSA had conducted its validation of the country’s maritime education, training, and certification system from April 12 to 23, 2010.

The Commission on Higher Education (CHED) enforces and implements the requirements of the STCW Convention for the education and training of Filipino seafarers who will be employed as officers on board seagoing vessels.

Hence, higher education institutions (HEIs) offering maritime education programs such as Bachelor of Science in Marine Transportation (BSMT) and Bachelor of Science in Marine Engineering (BSMarE) are subject to recognition and regular monitoring by CHED, pursuant to Regulation I/6 of the STCW Convention and Republic Act No. 7722 otherwise known as the “Higher Education Act of 1994.”

In the CHED monitoring conducted from the year 2006 up to 2010, the BSMT and BSMarE programs of the Philippine Maritime Institute (PMI) Manila and Quezon City (QC) were among those monitored and found to have been deficient in several areas of the standards set by CHED for maritime education.

Under existing laws, rules, and regulations concerning higher education, the failure of an HEI to maintain compliance with the requirements for the offering of a higher education program is punishable by closure through a phase out process of the program.

In 2006, the EMSA conducted an audit of the Philippine Maritime Training Council-Department of Labor and Employment (MTC-DOLE) member agencies composed of the Professional Regulation Commission, Technical Education and Skills Development Authority, and CHED, together with 15 maritime HEIs selected by EMSA in the year 2006, one of which was the PMI.

A follow-up audit was made in 2010 where 6 out of the 15 maritime HEIs, including PMI, were previously audited and visited.

After being apprised by the Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs on the possible adverse effects to the country’s Filipino seafarers and maritime workers, President Benigno S. Aquino III directed the above-concerned agencies to undertake all the necessary measures to correct the deficiencies discovered by the EMSA.

The Philippines is obligated to comply with the mandatory provisions of the STCW. Otherwise, it stands to be delisted from the roster of compliant states and face adverse consequences to its economy as a result of the European Union’s (EU) blacklisting of Filipino seamen. Such blacklisting would prevent Filipino seafarers from boarding EU member flagged vessels, which could adversely affect their employment. In 2011, Filipino seafarers employed by EU member flagged vessels remitted approximately $700 million based on Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas data.

Aware of the gravity of the situation, the Philippine government submitted before the deadline on August 26, 2011 its Compliance Report on the deficiencies noted by EMSA to the Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport (DG-MOVE) of the European Commission. The report contained the corrective measures undertaken by the government to eliminate the remaining deficiencies relating to monitoring of maritime education and training institutions, quality standards system, requirements for on-board training, implementation of the management level course, and improvement of the maritime training institutions’ equipment and facilities that the EMSA noted.

Among the corrective actions reported was the closure of the BSMT and BSMarE programs of PMI Manila and QC. Other Philippine maritime schools complied with the corrective actions on their deficiencies, leaving only three that have remained non-compliant as of May 2011.

As a member-agency of MTC-DOLE, CHED took as its last recourse the closure of deficient maritime programs of maritime schools that, after having been given ample time and opportunity, still failed to rectify the deficiencies noted by CHED and EMSA on their BSMT and BSMarE programs.

Records of the CHED show that PMI had been operating with several gross deficiencies, particularly on program administration, faculty, laboratory equipment, library, and research and development, as found likewise by the EMSA, and PMI had not been able to correct these despite several opportunities given to it from SY 2006 to 2007 even until the second semester of SY 2010–2011. Incidentally, it was one of three maritime schools that received closure orders on their deficient maritime programs.

The closure orders issued by the CHED prompted the PMI to file a civil case before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of QC to secure a temporary restraining order (TRO) and writ of injunction to prevent its implementation. First Vice Executive Judge Fernando T. Sagun Jr. denied the 72-hour TRO request because there was no compelling reason to grant the same:

After circumspect examination of the facts alleged in the instant Petition, the Office finds that Petitioner was not able to sufficiently show that an extreme urgency exists as to warrant the issuance of a 72-hour Temporary Restraining Order under paragraph 2, Section 5, Rule 58 of the Rules of Court, considering that the Closure Order through phase out of the subject matter of this case is still to take effect on the Second Semester of school year 2011-2012.

When the PMI’s case was raffled off to RTC QC Branch 87 presided by Judge Aurora Hernandez-Calledo, she likewise refused to issue a TRO, in an order dated October 28, 2011, ruling categorically that:

The Court, cannot at this time, convinced that indeed the plaintiff has a clear and unmistakable right to seek the relief prayed for. Petitioner failed to establish a clear right to the entitlement of the temporary restraining order because apparently there were deficiencies discovered during the investigation and inspection which was the basis of the issuance of the subject resolution ordering the phase out of Bachelor of Science in Marine Transportation (BSMT) and Bachelor of Science in Marine Engineering (BSMarE) programs of the PMI Colleges. It likewise failed to substantiate that it will suffer an irreparable damage than the damage that it will bring to the international reputation of graduates and the eventual withdrawal of European Union recognition of Philippine Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW) training and certification system.

PMI immediately moved for the reconsideration of the ruling of Judge Hernandez-Calledo while at the same time asking her to recuse. The case was subsequently raffled off to Judge Rosa Samson of RTC QC Branch 105.

In the meantime, the CHED National Capital Region Office assisted former PMI students in their transfer to other recognized maritime schools in the NCR and other regions. These recognized schools accepted PMI students due to the circumstances surrounding their plight. The CHED also requested PMI officials to expedite release of their transfer credentials in order to not further cause prejudice to the students.

On February 1, 2012, despite the evidence presented by the CHED, Judge Rosa Samson issued a “writ of preliminary injunction” enjoining the CHED from further implementing the closure orders on PMI’s BSMT and BSMarE programs until further orders of the court.

As a result of this court order, the MTC-DOLE and the CHED hereby jointly express and manifest the following serious concerns:

1. The EMSA audit conducted on Philippine maritime education, training, and certification system is a matter of national interest considering that any action or decision rendered by the European Commission based on the EMSA findings will determine the fate of Filipino seafarers as far as employment of these seafarers on European flag vessels is concerned.

2. The failure of the Philippines to rectify the deficiencies noted by the EMSA will trigger the European Commission proceedings on the withdrawal of European Union’s (EU) recognition of certificates issued by the Philippine government to Filipino seafarers, which may result to non-hiring of such seafarers on board EU member flagged vessels, as well as pre-termination of contracts of those on board.

3. The withdrawal of EU’s recognition could threaten the position of the Philippines in the International Maritime Organization (IMO) “White List” of countries that are compliant with the requirements of the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW Convention) and will definitely have a detrimental effect not only on the country’s reputation in the international maritime community but also on the nation’s economy.

4. The imposition of the closure order on PMI’s BSMT and BSMarE programs is in accordance with CHED’s mandate under the law considering that PMI, after having been given a series of extension of deadlines to rectify the deficiencies noted by both the EMSA and the CHED, still failed to do so. Under the conditions expressly stated in the government recognition granted by the CHED, the authority of PMI to offer the two courses subject of the closure order was without prejudice to withdrawal of the permit, in the event that PMI is found to be non-compliant with the CHED and STCW Convention minimum requirements. In the RTC proceedings, PMI did not even deny the noted deficiencies which are indicated in the CHED Reports bearing the signatures of PMI officials.

5. The closure orders issued against the two PMI courses are the last corrective measures that could be undertaken by the MTC-DOLE through the CHED to eliminate the deficiencies noted by EMSA on PMI’s BSMT and BSMarE programs, in view of the PMI’s failure to demonstrate and show proof that such deficiencies have been corrected before the deadline of August 31, 2011 given by EU to the Philippines.

6.That the issuance of a “writ of preliminary injunction” by the RTC Quezon City enjoining the CHED from further implementing the Closure Order on PMI’s BSMT and BSMarE programs could be looked upon as a nullification of one of the corrective actions submitted by the Philippines to the Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport (DG-MOVE) of the European Commission.

7.Therefore, pursuant to the constitutional mandate to protect and promote the right of all Filipino citizens to quality education, and in consonance with the international obligation of the Philippines as signatory to the STCW Convention which forms part of the law of the land, the MTC-DOLE and CHED shall continue to undertake appropriate measures to ensure that Philippine maritime education complies with if not surpasses the minimum local and international standards.

The MTC-DOLE and the CHED served notice that they will continue to combine their efforts in maintaining the standards of the STCW Convention to ensure the competence, efficiency, and integrity of the country’s labor force; to protect the Philippines’ preeminence in the world market for seafarers; and, ultimately, to prevent the Philippine economy from suffering a major setback as a result of non-recognition of Filipino certificates by the EU.

Reference: Philippines Official Gazette 

I was once sent my brother in that school.. He is actually one of those students who have been a victim of that INCOMPETENCE and SELFISH management of PMI Colleges. He suffered a lot from that shameful act of that institution but Luckily he was able to find another school which is good enough and certified enough to give him what he deserves as a dreamer. . 

Thanks For Dropping by. . . Have  a good Day Peeps. . . 

-TheSeductiveEmo ♥

AN OPEN LETTER IN RESPONSE TO THE 14 SIGNATORIES OF THE ATENEO STATEMENT

”House Bill 5043 on “Reproductive Health and Population Development” has occasioned enormous debate in the Philippines and was recently the subject of a position paper drafted by 14 members of the faculty of the Ateneo de Manila University. In their statement, these faculty stated their belief that the bill adheres “to core principles of Catholic social teaching: the sanctity of human life, the dignity of the human person, the preferential option for the poor and vulnerable, integral human development, human rights, and the primacy of conscience.” They believe these conditions of Catholic social teaching are met in Bill 5043. We, the undersigned Catholic academics, assert, however, that these Ateneo faculty are gravely mistaken in their presentation of the Church’s teaching.”The primary reason for these Ateneo Faculty members´ support of the bill seems to stem from their deep commitment to the Church’s long-held “preferential option for the poor.” Their position paper describes, heart-wrenchingly, the situation of the poor in the Philippines. High maternal mortality rates, inadequate and uneven provision of basic health care, lack of birth attendants, and lack of reproductive health information: such situations place an undue burden on the poor, and in particular on women. These women, like all women, desire to determine the number and spacing of their children, and ensure that proper nutrition, health care, and education can be provided for each member of their families. As Catholics, we have a clear obligation to ensure that all persons, particularly the poor, have the ability to exercise these basic freedoms.”As Catholic academics, we agree that we must support civic and governmental initiatives that can aid the poor. Nevertheless, a Catholic cannot support the Reproductive Health and Population Development bill in good conscience, because the primary provisions of the bill not only fail to recognize and support the dignity of the poor, but also stand in direct opposition to Catholic social teaching. The bill focuses primarily on providing services to curb the number of children of the poor, while doing little to remedy their situation, provide necessary health care or establish the grounds for sound economic development.”A few citations will serve to show how clear and unambiguous is the Church’s care for the dignity of the person, and in particular the poor, and how critical it is for us to heed her teachings in addressing the circumstances facing the Philippines today.”Rerum Novarum opens with the powerful reminder that “Man precedes the state” and for that reason should not be subject to the state’s regulation of his private matters. Populorum Progressio reiterates this sentiment, stating: "No solution . . . is acceptable which does violence to man's essential dignity; those who propose such solutions base them on an utterly materialistic conception of man himself and his life. The only possible solution to this question is one which envisages the social and economic progress both of individuals and of the whole of human society, and which respects and promotes true human values."[1]
”Perhaps no document speaks more powerfully in opposition to the main ideas in this bill thanHumanae Vitae: “Therefore we base our words on the first principles of a human and Christian doctrine of marriage when we are obliged once more to declare that the direct interruption of the generative process already begun and, above all, all direct abortion, even for therapeutic reasons, are to be absolutely excluded as lawful means of regulating the number of children. Equally to be condemned, as the Magisterium of the Church has affirmed on many occasions, is direct sterilization, whether of the man or of the woman, whether permanent or temporary.”[2]
“In reply to the claim that reproductive rights, contraception and sterilization are required in order to help the poor limit their family size and thus aid the poor by reducing the numbers of mouths to feed,Humanae Vitae states: “Others ask on the same point whether it is not reasonable in so many cases to use artificial birth control if by so doing the harmony and peace of a family are better served and more suitable conditions are provided for the education of children already born. To this question we must give a clear reply. The Church is the first to praise and commend the application of human intelligence to an activity in which a rational creature such as man is so closely associated with his Creator. But she affirms that this must be done within the limits of the order of reality established by God.”[3]”Artificial contraception can never be accepted by the Church as an action in conformity with the dignity of the human person because “each and every marital act must of necessity retain its intrinsic relationship to the procreation of human life.”[4] Further, it is never valid to argue, “as a justification for sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive, that a lesser evil is to be preferred to a greater one,[5]” as the authors of the position paper seem to suggest. While applauding efforts in the bill to provide information on both artificial and natural forms of family planning, the position paper then asserts that provision of contraceptives as essential medicines and fully covered sterilizations for indigent patients are measures that promote quality of life.[6] This statement directly contradicts Catholic teaching, which recognizes the use and promotion of artificial contraception and sterilization as intrinsically evil. Such actions can never be promoted or justified. “It is never lawful, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil that good may come of it – in other words, to intend directly something which of its very nature contradicts the moral order, and which must therefore be judged unworthy of man, even though the intention is to protect or promote the welfare of an individual, or a family or of society in general. Consequently it is a serious error to think that a whole married life of otherwise normal relations can justify sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive and so intrinsically wrong.[7]”
“The Church does not hold these positions to punish the poor, but rather because she recognizes that the poor have the same inviolable dignity and rights that all human persons share. What the poor need is not contraception and sterilization, but to experience authentic solidarity with those who, in responding to their innate dignity, work with the poor to enable them to develop their skills, improve their circumstances and cultivate lives that are marked by both interior and exterior freedom. This places a much more radical demand on those of us to whom much has been given (Luke 12:48); we must live and work with the poor in order to identify and enable the resources they require to live lives of authentic freedom.”Finally, Humanae Vitae warns us that "[c]areful consideration should be given to the danger of this power[8] passing into the hands of those public authorities who care little for the precepts of the moral law. Who will blame a government which in its attempt to resolve the problems affecting an entire country resorts to the same measures as are regarded as lawful by married people in the solution of a particular family difficulty? Who will prevent public authorities from favoring those contraceptive methods which they consider more effective? Should they regard this as necessary, they may even impose their use on everyone. It could well happen, therefore, that when people, either individually or in family or social life, experience the inherent difficulties of the divine law and are determined to avoid them, they may give into the hands of public authorities the power to intervene in the most personal and intimate responsibility of husband and wife.”[9]
“These statements of the Church and Magisterium have been retained in all subsequent documents and reiterated in documents too numerous to cite here.[10] These few, but clear, passages make it abundantly clear that no Catholic can in good conscience support Bill 5043. This Bill violates the Church’s teachings in the gravest manner.”Maternal and ObGyn health“Finally, it must be emphasized that there are two sections in the bill that should be applauded and expanded. Both Section 6 and Section 7 call for the expansion of midwives and birth attendants, as well as greater access to obstetric care. Such measures are critical to reducing maternal mortality and making progress toward the Millennium Development Goals, particularly MDG 5 (maternal health) and MDG 4 (infant health). Healthy mothers are the critical factor in assuring infant and child health.[11]”Unfortunately, these two sections are the weakest in the bill. Most of the reproductive health proposals of the bill are mandatory and supported through financial means, as well as through the creation of new government agencies to assure implementation. Sections 6 and 7 of the Bill, which provide the only concrete health care and services to prevent or eliminate maternal mortality, are not mandatory, and the bill earmarks neither institutional support systems nor finances for their implementation. The POPCOM, which is established in Section 5 to implement and oversee the commitments outlined in the bill, has nine specific areas related to reproductive health and reproductive health services, yet no explicit mention of any responsibility in the area of maternal and ObGyn care. This most important section of the bill - and the only section actually consistent with Catholic social teaching - has been entirely neglected in the allocation of responsibilities to the agency established to oversee its implementation.“A bill that responds to the situation of the poor requires us to respond to their full range of needs in order to facilitate integral improvement in their quality of life. This necessitates the creation of laws that guarantee the adoption of measures, at the national and local levels, that will lead to improved access to authentic development including the provision of basic health care and access to quality education. It is measures such as these that will enable the poor to develop and thrive, and that will affirm and respect the dignity of each and every human person. This bill stops short of assuring implementation of needed medical care, while emphasizing the adoption of measures that deny the dignity and freedom of the poor. As Catholics we have a moral duty to defend and support the poor; we must demand more from our legislators and from ourselves, placing ourselves at the service of poor, ready to commit to the necessary work, sacrifice and solidarity needed to establish and build societies that will respond to authentic needs while respecting the dignity and freedom of every human person.”

November 4, 2008[1] Encyclical letter Populorum Progressio, nos. 48-55: AAS 59 (1967), 281-284
[2] Encyclical letter Humanae Vitae, nos 14-15, (1968)
[3] Ibid, no. 16
[4] Ibid, no. 12
[5] Ibid, no. 14
[6] “Catholics can Support the RH Bill in Good Conscience”, Position paper on the Reproductive Health Bill by individual faculty of the Ateneo de Manila University, pp. 2-7, 15 October, 2008
[7] Humane Vitae, no 14
[8] Paul VI is referring to the control of reproduction and artificial contraception when he talks of “this power” being put in the hands of the state. This passage follows directly on a passage in which he discusses the problems artificial contraception poses within the marital union, and then expands to the consideration of problems that will result if the state is given the authority to regulate conception and birth.
[9] Humanae Vitae, no 17
[10] The Church's teaching on marriage and human procreation affirms the "inseparable connection, willed by God and unable to be broken by man on his own initiative, between the two meanings of the conjugal act: the unitive meaning and the procreative meaning. Indeed, by its intimate structure, the conjugal act, while most closely uniting husband and wife, capacitates them for the generation of new lives, according to laws inscribed in the very being of man and of woman."(38) This principle, which is based upon the nature of marriage and the intimate connection of the goods of marriage, has well-known consequences on the level of responsible fatherhood and motherhood. "By safeguarding both these essential aspects, the unitive and the procreative, the conjugal act preserves in its fullness the sense of true mutual love and its ordination towards man's exalted vocation to parenthood."(39) The same doctrine concerning the link between the meanings of the conjugal act and between the goods of marriage throws light on the moral problem of homologous artificial fertilization, since "it is never permitted to separate these different aspects to such a degree as positively to exclude either the procreative intention or the conjugal relation." (40) Contraception deliberately deprives the conjugal act of its openness to procreation and in this way brings about a voluntary dissociation of the ends of marriage." The Congregation on the Doctrine of the Faith quoting Humanae Vitae and Pope Pius XII in its "Instruction on the respect for Human Life and on the Dignity of Procreation" Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, February 22, 1987
[11] As cited in the Ateneo position paper, page 2.

List of Signatories

1. Prof Janet E. Smith
Father Michael J. McGivney Chair of Life Ethics
Sacred Heart Major Seminary, Detroit, MI.

2. Robert G Kennedy, PhD
Professor and Chair
Department of Catholic Studies
Co-Director
Terrence J Murphy Institute for Catholic Thought, Law, and Public Policy
University of St Thomas
Mail #55-S
St Paul, MN 55105

3. Richard S. Myers
Professor of Law
Ave Maria School of Law
3475 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor, MI 48105-2550

4. Romanus Cessario, O.P.
Professor of Theology
Saint John's Seminary
Boston, Massachusetts

5. Rev. Joseph W. Koterski, S.J.
Department of Philosophy
Fordham University
Bronx, NY 10458 USA

6. Theresa Notare, PhD
Assistant Director
Natural Family Planning Program
Secretariat for Laity, Marriage, Family Life and Youth
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
3211 4th St., N.E.
Washington, DC 20017

7. Fr. Basil Cole, O.P.
Dominican House of Studies
487 Michigan Ave NE
Washington DC 20017
bbcole@dhs.edu

8. E. Christian Brugger, D.Phil.
Associate Professor of Moral Theology
Saint John Vianney Theological Seminary
Denver, Colorado 80210, USA

9. SC Selner-Wright, PhD
Acting Chair, Philosophy Department
Acting Director, Pre-Theology Cycle
St. John Vianney Theological Seminary
Denver, Colorado USA

10. Dr. Mary Healy
Associate Professor of Sacred Scripture
Sacred Heart Major Seminary
2701 Chicago Boulevard
Detroit, MI 48206

11. Ångela Aparisi Miralles
Philosophy of Law Professor
Directora - Instituto de Derechos Humanos
Universidad de Navarra

12. Michael Rota
Assistant Professor of Philosophy
University of St. Thomas
St. Paul, MN

13. Michael Scaperlanda
Associate Dean for Research
Edwards Family Chair in Law
University of Oklahoma College of Law

14. Richard Stith J.D.(Yale), Ph.D.(Yale)
Professor of Law
Valparaiso University School of Law
656 South Greenwich St.
Valparaiso, IN 46383-4945
USA

15. Patrick Quirk
Associate Professor
Ave Maria School of Law
3475 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105-2550

16. Fr. Earl Muller, S.J.
Kevin M. Britt Chair in Theology/Christology
Sacred Heart Major Seminary
Detroit, MI, USA

17. Professor David Paton
Chair of Industrial Economics
Nottingham University Business School
Jubilee Campus
Wollaton Road
Nottingham NG8 1BB
United Kingdom

18. Dr. Eduardo J. Echeverria
Professor of Philosophy
Sacred Heart Major Seminary
2701 Chicago Blvd
Detroit, MI 48206

19. Jane Adolphe
Associate Professor of Law
Ave Maria School of Law
Ann Arbor, Michigan
USA, 48105

20. Teresa S. Collett
Professor of Law
University of St. Thomas School of Law
MSL 400, 1000 LaSalle Avenue
Minneapolis, MN 55403-2015

21. David Braine,
Honorary Research Fellow,
Department of Philosophy,
University of Aberdeen, UK.

22. Dr. Helen Watt
Director
Linacre Centre for Healthcare Ethics
London

23. Ligia M. De Jesus
Assistant Professor of Law
Ave Maria School of Law
3475 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor, MI 48105-2550
USA

24. Jacqueline M. Nolan-Haley
Professor of Law
Director, ADR & Conflict Resolution Program
Fordham Law School
140 W. 62nd Street
New York, New York 10023

25. William E. May
Michael J.McGivney Professor of Moral Theology
John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family
Washington DC

26. Evelyn (Timmie) Birge Vitz
Professor of French, New York University
Affiliated Professor of Comparative Literature, Medieval
and Renaissance Studies, and Religious Studies
19 University Place, #623, New York, NY 10003

27. Mary M. Keys
Associate Professor
Department of Political Science
University of Notre Dame
Notre Dame, IN 46556
USA

28. Mark E. Ginter, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Moral Theology
Saint Meinrad School of Theology
200 Hill Drive
St. Meinrad, IN 47577

29. Father Daniel J. Trapp
Professor of Sacramental Theology
Sacred Heart Major Seminary
2701 Chicago Boulevard
Detroit, MI 48206

30. Maria Fedoryka
Philosophy Department of Ave Maria University
Ave Maria, FL.

31. Dr Dermot Grenham
Graduate Teaching Assistant
London School of Economics
London

32. Dr. Michael Pakaluk
Professor of Philosophy
Institute for the Psychological Sciences
Arlington, VA 22101

33. Timothy Flanigan MD
Professor of Medicine
Brown University Medical School

34. Gerard Bradley
School of Law
Notre Dame University

35. Adrian J. Reimers
Adjunct Assistant Professor of Philosophy
208 Malloy Hall
Notre Dame, Indiana 46556
574-631-7384

36. Daniel Philpott
Associate Professor, Political Science and Joan B. Kroc Institute
for International Peace Studies
University of Notre Dame

37. Aneta Gawkowska
Assistant Professor, Sociology
University of Warsaw

38. Tom D’Andrea
Philosophy
Cambridge University

39. Peter Kreeft
Philosophy
Boston College

40. J. Budziszewski
Departments of Government and Philosophy
University of Texas at Austin

41. Habib Malik
Department of History, Lebanese American University
Beirut

42. Nicholas Eberstadt
Political Economy
American Enterprise Institute
Washington, D.C.

Ref: http://franciscotatad.blogspot.com/search/label/Ateneo%20Statement

What Makes You Beautiful - One Direction (The ADCS Cover)

The great encyclopedia of my time has this to say about the team building.

". .Team building is a philosophy of job design in which employees are viewed as members of interdependent teams instead of as individual workers. The overall goals of team building are to increase the teams understanding of team dynamics and improve how the team works together. Unlike working as a group, working as a team incorporates group accountability rather than individual accountability and results in a collective work product. . "

ADCS (Accenture Data Center Service) Team held its first ever team building which is quite far from Manila at  Crystal Beach Resort, San Narciso, Zambales on August 4-5, 2012. 

This is one of a kind experience that one cannot forget on his entire existence. I thought everything will be just like our team building before. I thought, AGAIN this is just a waste of time for all of us..as if we can say  "we can have it by our own.. or "its not a team building at all". All of those doubts were gone when we started to go across the Subic-Clark-Tarlac Expressway (SCTEx). The weather was not so good that time, a heavy rain is keep on bumping us from time to time and we are actually passing through the flooded roads. The rain gets even angry as we approach the City of Subic as we even experience a ZERO VISIBILITY from the WIND SHIELD of the LOSER car of our Team Lead (joke lang po. . .hahaha) but as we go against the bad weather, we're able to find the  the rainbow when we reached the center of Zambales and after a little bit more time, we're able to reached  the resort and the rest is HISTORY.

 At present, this is the most unforgettable team building ever happened to me and maybe the happiest team building of our team.  All of this of course cannot be happened without the help of our INDUSTRIOUS ORGANIZER Mr. Lyndon Sabio 

and the undying support of each and everyone of US. 

About the CRYSTAL BEACH RESORT?? I will highly recommend it to all of you guys.. hope you can also go there at least once in your entire life.. i swear.. its worth it.


And Having say that, all of our ACTIVITY there was SUMMARIZED in a SINGLE MUSIC VIDEO which i want all of you guys to watch.. The actors are the whole member of the our team. but the acting BOYBAND are ME (the lead Role) Marlon, JD and Richael while the CHIKAS are MITCH, EI, MARU and ANNA. 

Please watch it and dont forget to comment,Like and Share it. Thanks everyone for dropping by at seductiveemo's blog. Have great Day. . . Love You All.