IN HONOR OF MEMORIAL DAY: During World War II, President Franklin Roosevelt pledged that Filipinos who fight for the United States will be granted citizenship and military benefits. As a result, over 200,000 Filipinos fought side by side with American soldiers during World War II. Shortly after the war ended, that promise was taken back with the Recission Act of 1946. It was not until 2009 when President Obama signed a bill that would give Filipino World War II veterans a lump sum compensation of $15K ($9K for those living in the Philippines) to the less than 18,000 veterans who are still alive today. Yes, such an amount is not commensurate to the benefits they missed out on for over 50 years, but yet to this day a majority of them still have not received such meager compensation. So, LET US REMEMBER THE FILIPINO VETERANS WHO WERE NOT ONLY VICTIMS OF WORLD WAR II, BUT ALSO VICTIMS OF INSTITUTIONALIZED RACISM.
Possibly I have not worded what I said properly. I do agree with what you’re saying, somewhat. I do include intersectionality in my feminism, but most people who do use the term “egalitarianism” are cis, straight men (and here on tumblr, white) who cannot bear to think that for once the attention is not on them.
Thank you! :)
Thanks. Anyway, I am not choosing one side. I am advocating the rights of both men and women. What rights do you think men lack? Aren’t these lack of rights a product of patriarchy?
I am not going in for matriarchy if that’s what you think, but egalitarianism is bullshit. Click the link; I already explained why feminism is for equality.
I saw the billboard last night ofLuna Blanca in the GMA MRT station, and it disgusted me. I don’t even have to know the plot of this new GMA show to see how blatantly racist it is. If casting a Filipina-Canadian actress who’s light-skinned as a black character isn’t racist, I don’t know what is, considering the discrimination against Filipino Negritos here and the lack of Filipino Negrito actors and actresses in Philippine media. If you want a dark-skinned character, give the role to a dark-skinned actress.
And because in one promo shoot, Bianca King is not darkened, I fear that at the end of the show, they’ll make her character’s skin lighter, as some kind of solution, and imagine what kind of message that’ll send to all the viewers.
An anti-Reproductive Health bill group composed of members of the Catholic laity is seeking accreditation from the Commission on Elections (Comelec) to run under the party-list name Ang Prolife. While the separation of Church and State prohibits the registration of religious denominations and sects as political parties, the prohibition does not extend to organizations with religious affiliations or to political parties which derive their principles from religious beliefs.
In a Supreme Court decision on the petition for disqualification filed against Ang Buhay Hayaang Yumabong, a party-list group backed by the Catholic charismatic movement El Shaddai, the court remanded the case to the Comelec with the directive to immediately conduct summary evidentiary hearings under the following guidelines for screening party-list participants:
[I]n view of the objections directed against the registration of Ang Buhay Hayaang Yumabong, which is allegedly a religious group, the Court notes the express constitutional provision that the religious sector may not be represented in the party-list system. The extent of the constitutional proscription is demonstrated by the following discussion during the deliberations of the Constitutional Commission:
“MR. OPLE. x x x
In the event that a certain religious sect with nationwide and even international networks of members and supporters, in order to circumvent this prohibition, decides to form its own political party in emulation of those parties I had mentioned earlier as deriving their inspiration and philosophies from well-established religious faiths, will that also not fall within this prohibition?
MR. MONSOD. If the evidence shows that the intention is to go around the prohibition, then certainly the Comelec can pierce through the legal fiction.”
The following discussion is also pertinent:
“MR. VILLACORTA. When the Commissioner proposed “EXCEPT RELIGIOUS GROUPS,” he is not, of course, prohibiting priests, imams or pastors who may be elected by, say, the indigenous community sector to represent their group.
REV. RIGOS. Not at all, but I am objecting to anybody who represents the Iglesia ni Kristo, the Catholic Church, the Protestant Church et cetera.”
Furthermore, the Constitution provides that “religious denominations and sects shall not be registered.” The prohibition was explained by a member of the Constitutional Commission in this wise: “[T]he prohibition is on any religious organization registering as a political party. I do not see any prohibition here against a priest running as a candidate. That is not prohibited here; it is the registration of a religious sect as a political party.”
And the rest is history. With a Comelec that denied accreditation to the LGBT group Ang Ladlad based on “moral grounds” by quoting passages from the Bible and the Koran, it is no surprise that it did not choose to “pierce through the legal fiction” and instead dismissed the petition to disqualify Ang Buhay Hayaang Yumabong. And it should also not come as a surprise if Ang Prolife can ”go around the prohibition” and its application for party-list accreditation easily passes approval.
But all hope is not lost to the vanguards of secularism…
Read the full article on the Filipino Freethinkers website.
Pacquiao was scheduled to appear on the American entertainment show “Extra” with host Mario Lopez for an interview segment at LA’s “The Grove,” where the program regularly shoots live.
But because of Pacquiao’s widely circulated statement regarding homosexuals to the Conservative Examiner last weekend, “The Grove” decided to cancel the interview, and said later in a statement that Pacquiao was “not welcome at The Grove and will not be interviewed here now or in the future.”
yes good
Marriage is a right, or more specifically, a privilege. According to the Hohfeldian system for describing the form of rights, to say that one has a privilege-right to do something is to say that one has no duty not to do it. Do gay couples have the right to marry? No – not in this country, or at least not yet. While there is nothing in our Constitution that prohibits same-sex marriage, our Family Code requires that the contracting parties must be a man and a woman.
And this is why same-sex marriage advocates would be wasting their time if they try to convince the bishops of their so-called rights. Aside from the fact that the Church hierarchy could never go against its own doctrine, the fight should be brought where it belongs – in congress – to lobby our legislators into amending the Family Code by giving same-sex couples the right to marry…
Read the full article on the Filipino Freethinkers website.
