This congressman is nothing but perversion!
DO NOT VOTE WINNIE CASTELO IN 2016!!!
TPC READERS IN QUEZON CITY! SPREAD THE WORD!!!
The blog of a group of Filipino Catholics and their frank commentary on anything that affects their lives as a citizen of the Philippines and as a Roman Catholics.
Showing posts with label anti-catholic RH Bill Pinoy politics pro-life condom use contraceptives. Show all posts
Showing posts with label anti-catholic RH Bill Pinoy politics pro-life condom use contraceptives. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 9, 2015
Quezon City Catholics should unite to UNSEAT Cong. Winnie Castelo
Aside from supporting the death law, RH Law, here is what Winnie Castelo, acting ala Santa Claus is giving away to employees of the House of Representatives.
Tuesday, June 16, 2015
The lies of Freemasonry
The video says that Freemasonry is not a religion. It only teaches and helps good men become better.
Oh really?
Not a religion yet they call their buildings TEMPLES.
I am a Catholic and my Church teaches me to be good and holy. So Freemasonry can do a better job?
The former chief justice says that Freemasonry helped him a lot especially in his career in the judiciary.
But of course!
Masons only help their own.
That's what this"brotherhood" is all about.
Just a reminder once again.
1). The Holy See on Nov. 26, 1983, issued “Declaration on Masonic Associations” reaffirming the Church’s position condemning Freemasonry. It also reminds that Catholics who join Masonic organizations are in a state of grave sin and are automatically to be denied reception of Holy Communion. Hey! Cardinal Kasper!
2). God as described in Masonic writings is an impersonal “Great Architect of the Universe,” not the personal God of the Patriarchs, the One True God of Revelation, the Father, the Son and Holy Spirit. The Masonic God is a god of Deism. They believe that God exists but their god does not meddle in the affairs of man. Remember how the Greek gods of Olympus behaved according to the tales?
3). Masonic writings were very clear to state that God has NOT revealed Himself nor His truths to us, nor that He ever established a Church. This is the reason why Masons are anti religion and anti Church. They were the ones behind the series of attacks against the Catholic Church during the war on the Reproductive Health Law
4). For Mason, Jesus Christ is merely a man, a great teacher, equal with Buddha or Mohammed. Masons do not believe that He is God. Equality and respect for religions, eh? That's what Masonry teaches so much so that it puts all religions and all religious deities on one equal plane/
5). Since all religions are equal, not one single religion possesses the truth and that all truth is relative according to Masonry. They reject objective, absolute truth and believe that a personal enlightenment is important. So where does that put the dogmas of the Catholic faith? Dumpster. Don't you see that this is all the work of Modernism?
6). Therefore, Freemasonry is promoted as the foundation of all religions. Freemasonry is in FACT a religion of Naturalism, a system of belief that makes human nature and human reason supreme in all things.
7). The initiation ritual of Freemasonry describes an initiate as one who is in darkness and seeks the light. And that light can only be found in the Lodge. A Catholic who is baptized and confirmed cannot be described as someone in darkness. But for Freemasonry, any person who has not learned the teachings of the Lodge is lost and in darkness. Can that be compatible with Christianity in general and with Catholicism in particular?
Therefore, the ultimate goal of Freemasonry is to lead a Catholic away from God’s grace especially manifested in the Sacraments instituted by Christ through His Church. Masonry denies Christ’s Divinity and therefore His role as our Savior and His Church's work of continuing His mission on earth.
Read more books written by former Masons who returned to the Church here. The one by John Salza is great!
Saturday, December 27, 2014
Wednesday, July 30, 2014
Woman aborts her baby...watch out for the spin!
From ABS-CBNNews.com
***
A woman on Wednesday claimed to have given birth prematurely inside a motel along Recto Avenue in Manila, but motel staff and police said she may have performed an abortion on herself.
The 34-year-old woman, who was five months pregnant, was brought to the hospital after her baby came out of her inside a room in Broadway Lodge.
The woman said she suffered contractions and then the baby came out. She said stress and depression may have caused her to give birth prematurely.
But motel room boy Aldrin Lantin is doubting the woman's claim.
He said the woman asked for a plastic container from him late Tuesday evening.
The baby was later found inside the container, with the placenta and umbilical cord still attached.
The woman said she and her 1-year-old child have been wandering around Metro Manila after her husband abandoned them last month.
She said they were from Pangasinan. Authorities said they will determine whether the mother indeed underwent abortion through the help of doctors. – reports from Kori Quintos, ABS-CBN News; and Zandro Ochona, dzMM
***
The woman claims stress as the cause of her "miscarriage"
How can she "miscarriage" if the placenta is still intact. A miscarriage doesn't happen that way.
What's the spin?
Pro contraception and abortion "women's" rights advocates will use this as evidence for more empowerment, which includes...
***
A woman on Wednesday claimed to have given birth prematurely inside a motel along Recto Avenue in Manila, but motel staff and police said she may have performed an abortion on herself.
The 34-year-old woman, who was five months pregnant, was brought to the hospital after her baby came out of her inside a room in Broadway Lodge.
The woman said she suffered contractions and then the baby came out. She said stress and depression may have caused her to give birth prematurely.
But motel room boy Aldrin Lantin is doubting the woman's claim.
He said the woman asked for a plastic container from him late Tuesday evening.
The baby was later found inside the container, with the placenta and umbilical cord still attached.
The woman said she and her 1-year-old child have been wandering around Metro Manila after her husband abandoned them last month.
She said they were from Pangasinan. Authorities said they will determine whether the mother indeed underwent abortion through the help of doctors. – reports from Kori Quintos, ABS-CBN News; and Zandro Ochona, dzMM
***
The woman claims stress as the cause of her "miscarriage"
How can she "miscarriage" if the placenta is still intact. A miscarriage doesn't happen that way.
What's the spin?
Pro contraception and abortion "women's" rights advocates will use this as evidence for more empowerment, which includes...
because these women are only forced into this situation that is why they opt abortion.
So when we empower women, we give them the choice to do whatever they want with their bodies, and that the State, or the taxpayers are bound to spend their money on this "empowerment".
Wait till you hear what Pope Francis has to say to these people.
Tuesday, April 15, 2014
Supreme Court decision on RH actually favors Pro-lifers
Which simply means, contraceptives that have a primary and secondary mechanism to kill the fertilized ovum is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
So?
Goodbye IUD!
Goodbye pills!
DKT, the maker of Trust condoms and pills and injectables, admits what their pills do!
Take note what is encircled.
"Trust pill stops ovulation, thins the lining of the uterus and thickens the cervical mucus. In combination, these actions prevent pregnancy." (emphasis mine)
Take note the words thins the lining of the uterus.
The thinning of the uterine wall prevents the fertilized ovum from being implanted and become viable.
That exposes the strategy of Edcel Lagman in the first place! For him, life begins at implantation, but the Supreme Court does not buy that.
The SC then effectively struck down the provision of RH that says:
"At this juncture, the Court agrees with ALFI that the authors of the
RH-IRR gravely abused their office when they redefined the meaning of
abortifacient. The RH Law defines "abortifacient" as follows:
SEC. 4. Definition of Terms. - For the purpose of this Act, the following terms shall be defined as follows:
(a) Abortifacient refers to any drug or device that induces abortion or the destruction of a fetus inside the mother's womb or the prevention of the fertilized ovum to reach and be implanted in the mother's womb upon determination of the FDA.
Section 3.0l(a) of the IRR, however, redefines "abortifacient" as:
Section 3.01 For purposes of these Rules, the terms shall be defined as follows:
a) Abortifacient refers to any drug or device that primarily induces abortion or the destruction of a fetus inside the mother's womb or the prevention of the fertilized ovum to reach and be implanted in the mother's womb upon determination of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). [Emphasis supplied]
Again in Section 3.0lG) of the RH-IRR, "contraceptive," is redefined,
j) Contraceptive refers to any safe, legal, effective and scientifically proven modern family planning method, device, or health product, whether natural or artificial, that prevents pregnancy but does not primarily destroy a fertilized ovum or prevent a fertilized ovum from being implanted in the mother's womb in doses of its approved indication as determined by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
The above-mentioned section of the RH-IRR allows "contraceptives" and recognizes as "abortifacient" only those that primarily induce abortion or the destruction of a fetus inside the mother's womb or the prevention of the fertilized ovum to reach and be implanted in the mother's womb.
This cannot be done.
In this regard, the observations of Justice Brion and Justice Del Castillo are well taken. As they pointed out, with the insertion of the word "primarily," Section 3.0l(a) and G) of the RH-IRR173 must be struck down for being ultra vires.
Evidently, with the addition of the word "primarily," in Section 3.0l(a) and G) of the RH-IRR is indeed ultra vires. It contravenes Section 4(a) of the RH Law and should, therefore, be declared invalid. There is danger that the insertion of the qualifier "primarily" will pave the way for the approval of contraceptives which may harm or destroy the life of the unborn from conception/fertilization in violation of Article II, Section 12 of the Constitution. With such qualification in the RH-IRR, it appears to insinuate that a contraceptive will only be considered as an "abortifacient" if its sole known effect is abortion or, as pertinent here, the prevention of the implantation of the fertilized ovum.
For the same reason, this definition of "contraceptive" would permit the approval of contraceptives which are actually abortifacients because of their fail safe mechanism.174
Also, as discussed earlier, Section 9 calls for the certification by the FDA that these contraceptives cannot act as abortive. With this, together with the definition of an abortifacient under Section 4 (a) of the RH Law and its declared policy against abortion, the undeniable conclusion is that contraceptives to be included in the PNDFS and the EDL will not only be those contraceptives that do not have the primary action of causing abortion or the destruction of a fetus inside the mother's womb or the prevention of the fertilized ovum to reach and be implanted in the mother's womb, but also those that do not have the secondary action of acting the same way.
Indeed, consistent with the constitutional policy prohibiting abortion, and in line with the principle that laws should be construed in a manner that its constitutionality is sustained, the RH Law and its implementing rules must be consistent with each other in prohibiting abortion. Thus, the word "primarily" in Section 3.0l(a) and G) of the RH-IRR should be declared void. To uphold the validity of Section 3.0l(a) and G) of the RH-IRR and prohibit only those contraceptives that have the primary effect of being an abortive would effectively "open the floodgates to the approval of contraceptives which may harm or destroy the life of the unborn from conception/fertilization in violation of Article II, Section 12 of the Constitution."
To repeat and emphasize, in all cases, the "principle of no abortion" embodied in the constitutional protection of life must be upheld.
The Supreme Court effectively banned contraceptives that have secondary abortive mechanisms, something which the contraceptive pill has.
And with this decision, this is how the pro-RH group reacted.
Classic!
So who is the real winner in the SC decision?
The unborn!
Because the SC has decided that contraceptives that kill the fertilized ovum or prevent the fertilized ovum from being implanted in the uterine wall are all abortifacients and are therefore in violation of the Constitutional provision of protection of life!
Beware folks!
Lagman et al will try to change this Constitutional provision.
Make no mistake about it.
The devil does not sleep.
Wednesday, April 9, 2014
RH Law constitutional....not really!
BAGUIO CITY, Philippines—The Supreme Court upheld Tuesday the constitutionality of the Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act of 2012 but nullified some of its provisions.
“The Court, after scrutiny of the various arguments and contentions of the parties…unanimously held that Republic Act No. 10354 is not unconstitutional,” high court’s Information Chief Theodore Te said, announcing a ruling that struck down more than a dozen petitions against Republic Act No. 10354 by church groups.
A total of 14 petitions were filed in the high court and a series of oral arguments was held to determine the constitutionality of the controversial birth control law that supporters said would transform the lives of millions of poor Filipinos, in a stunning defeat for the powerful Catholic Church. [Ha! You think!]
The Supreme Court first stopped the implementation of the law for four months after it took effect on March 18, 2013. It issued a status quo ante order after Pro-Life Philippines Foundation Inc. and Catholic Church groups questioned the law, saying it violated the constitutional provisions guaranteeing the right to life. Before the four months was over, the Supreme Court extended indefinitely its status quo ante order last July.
Sex education
The law requires government health centers to hand out free condoms and birth control pills, as well as mandating that sex education be taught in schools.
The law also requires that public health workers receive family planning training, while post abortion medical care is also legalized.
The Catholic Church had until Tuesday led a successful campaign for more than 15 years against any form of family planning laws in the Philippines. [Huh? They forgot the Magna Carta for Women?]
Unconstitutional
Among the provisions declared unconstitutional are:
• Section 7 which is about access to family planning, as well as Section A and A of its implementing rules and regulations . Section A requires private health facilities and non-maternity specialty hospitals and hospitals owned and operated by a religious group to refer patients, not in an emergency or life threatening case to another health facility which is conveniently accessible. Section B allows minor-parents or minors who have suffered a miscarriage access to modern methods of family planning without written consent from their parents or guardians; [Medical facilities operated by religious groups are free from government coercion to offer artificial contraceptives! And minors who have become parents need parental consent when requesting contraceptives! Boom!]
• Section 23 Punishable Acts (a) (1) and corresponding provision in the RH-IRR particularly Section 24 insofar as it punishes any health care provider who fails or refuses to disseminate information regarding programs and services on reproductive health regardless of his or her religious beliefs; [Health workers cannot be forced to violate their religious convictions! Boom!]
• Section 23 (a)(2)(i) and a provision in the IRR with regard to allowing a married individual, not in an emergency or life –threatening case to undergo reproductive health procedures without the consent of the spouse; [Ergo, spousal consent is still needed when availing contraceptives! Boom!]
• Section 23(a)(3) and the provision in the IRR which punishes any health care provider who fails and/or refuses to refer a patient not in an emergency or life threatening case to another health care service provider within the same facility or one which is conveniently accessible regardless of his or her religious beliefs; [If a health worker does not want to violate his religious convictions, you can't force them to! Boom!]
• Section 23(b) and the provision in the IRR which punishes any public officer who refuses to support reproductive health programs or shall do any act that hinders the full implementation of a reproductive health program, regardless of his or her religious beliefs; [this law is really a form of religious discrimination!]
• Section 17 on Pro bono services of indigent women and corresponding provision in the IRR regarding the rendering of pro bono reproductive health service, insofar as they affect the conscientious objector in securing PhilHealth accreditation; [health care providers are FORCED to give RH service! Ain't that slavery?]
• Section 3.01(a) and (j) of the IRR insofar as it uses the qualifier “primarily” for contravening Section 4(a) of the RH Law specifically the definition of abortifacient and violating Section 12 on right to life and protection of life from conception. [For violating right to life and protection of life from conception! Meaning pills and IUDs are gone! Too bad for RH supporters and funders!]
• Section 23 (a)(2)(ii) insofar as it penalizes a health service provider who will require parental consent from the minor in not emergency or serious situation. [this is a socialist law that is why it is outlawed by the SC!]
....
***
The landmark decision of the Supreme Court renders makes the RH Law a funding law and a public information campaign law. All punitive provisions have been stricken out and everything that coerces an individual to practice RH that may violate his religious convictions are gone. And the SC also rules against the use of artificial contraceptives that kill the fertilized ovum...but....it is still under the watch of the FDA which, IMHO, can be biased. Why? Can you still see Chinese medicines being sold? Yeah. That says it.
This law becomes a starting pistol for those who truly value human life from conception to natural death and the traditional family, to go out into the streets, or as Pope Francis put it "to get dirty". It is time to educate and catechize the masses who will be the primary audience of this constitutional law. And add to this the fact that our Catholic schools should stay true to their mandate of transmitting the teachings of the Church to their students and not be a mere venue for "academic freedom and discourse". St. John Paul II cemented the Catholic school's mission in the Apostolic Constitution "Ex corde ecclesiae".
St. Paul reminded Christians that they are meant for battle. He used the imagery of weapons for battle when he reminded the Ephesians about this (cf. Eph. 6:17). We are now to cower into our own hermitage or caves and pursue our own holiness by being fence-sitters and Facebook commentators. Don't just say "Let's pray." Say "Go out!" and "Let's teach and preach!"
"No one lights a candle and puts in under a bushel basket..." Whatever "light" you shine, share it! That is your vocation as a Christian! And the RH Law is one reason for you to go out!
PS: You think this blog is everything I have for the Church? Think again. I spend much of my time signing "papers" for so many...
“The Court, after scrutiny of the various arguments and contentions of the parties…unanimously held that Republic Act No. 10354 is not unconstitutional,” high court’s Information Chief Theodore Te said, announcing a ruling that struck down more than a dozen petitions against Republic Act No. 10354 by church groups.
A total of 14 petitions were filed in the high court and a series of oral arguments was held to determine the constitutionality of the controversial birth control law that supporters said would transform the lives of millions of poor Filipinos, in a stunning defeat for the powerful Catholic Church. [Ha! You think!]
The Supreme Court first stopped the implementation of the law for four months after it took effect on March 18, 2013. It issued a status quo ante order after Pro-Life Philippines Foundation Inc. and Catholic Church groups questioned the law, saying it violated the constitutional provisions guaranteeing the right to life. Before the four months was over, the Supreme Court extended indefinitely its status quo ante order last July.
Sex education
The law requires government health centers to hand out free condoms and birth control pills, as well as mandating that sex education be taught in schools.
The law also requires that public health workers receive family planning training, while post abortion medical care is also legalized.
The Catholic Church had until Tuesday led a successful campaign for more than 15 years against any form of family planning laws in the Philippines. [Huh? They forgot the Magna Carta for Women?]
Unconstitutional
Among the provisions declared unconstitutional are:
• Section 7 which is about access to family planning, as well as Section A and A of its implementing rules and regulations . Section A requires private health facilities and non-maternity specialty hospitals and hospitals owned and operated by a religious group to refer patients, not in an emergency or life threatening case to another health facility which is conveniently accessible. Section B allows minor-parents or minors who have suffered a miscarriage access to modern methods of family planning without written consent from their parents or guardians; [Medical facilities operated by religious groups are free from government coercion to offer artificial contraceptives! And minors who have become parents need parental consent when requesting contraceptives! Boom!]
• Section 23 Punishable Acts (a) (1) and corresponding provision in the RH-IRR particularly Section 24 insofar as it punishes any health care provider who fails or refuses to disseminate information regarding programs and services on reproductive health regardless of his or her religious beliefs; [Health workers cannot be forced to violate their religious convictions! Boom!]
• Section 23 (a)(2)(i) and a provision in the IRR with regard to allowing a married individual, not in an emergency or life –threatening case to undergo reproductive health procedures without the consent of the spouse; [Ergo, spousal consent is still needed when availing contraceptives! Boom!]
• Section 23(a)(3) and the provision in the IRR which punishes any health care provider who fails and/or refuses to refer a patient not in an emergency or life threatening case to another health care service provider within the same facility or one which is conveniently accessible regardless of his or her religious beliefs; [If a health worker does not want to violate his religious convictions, you can't force them to! Boom!]
• Section 23(b) and the provision in the IRR which punishes any public officer who refuses to support reproductive health programs or shall do any act that hinders the full implementation of a reproductive health program, regardless of his or her religious beliefs; [this law is really a form of religious discrimination!]
• Section 17 on Pro bono services of indigent women and corresponding provision in the IRR regarding the rendering of pro bono reproductive health service, insofar as they affect the conscientious objector in securing PhilHealth accreditation; [health care providers are FORCED to give RH service! Ain't that slavery?]
• Section 3.01(a) and (j) of the IRR insofar as it uses the qualifier “primarily” for contravening Section 4(a) of the RH Law specifically the definition of abortifacient and violating Section 12 on right to life and protection of life from conception. [For violating right to life and protection of life from conception! Meaning pills and IUDs are gone! Too bad for RH supporters and funders!]
• Section 23 (a)(2)(ii) insofar as it penalizes a health service provider who will require parental consent from the minor in not emergency or serious situation. [this is a socialist law that is why it is outlawed by the SC!]
....
***
The landmark decision of the Supreme Court renders makes the RH Law a funding law and a public information campaign law. All punitive provisions have been stricken out and everything that coerces an individual to practice RH that may violate his religious convictions are gone. And the SC also rules against the use of artificial contraceptives that kill the fertilized ovum...but....it is still under the watch of the FDA which, IMHO, can be biased. Why? Can you still see Chinese medicines being sold? Yeah. That says it.
This law becomes a starting pistol for those who truly value human life from conception to natural death and the traditional family, to go out into the streets, or as Pope Francis put it "to get dirty". It is time to educate and catechize the masses who will be the primary audience of this constitutional law. And add to this the fact that our Catholic schools should stay true to their mandate of transmitting the teachings of the Church to their students and not be a mere venue for "academic freedom and discourse". St. John Paul II cemented the Catholic school's mission in the Apostolic Constitution "Ex corde ecclesiae".
St. Paul reminded Christians that they are meant for battle. He used the imagery of weapons for battle when he reminded the Ephesians about this (cf. Eph. 6:17). We are now to cower into our own hermitage or caves and pursue our own holiness by being fence-sitters and Facebook commentators. Don't just say "Let's pray." Say "Go out!" and "Let's teach and preach!"
"No one lights a candle and puts in under a bushel basket..." Whatever "light" you shine, share it! That is your vocation as a Christian! And the RH Law is one reason for you to go out!
PS: You think this blog is everything I have for the Church? Think again. I spend much of my time signing "papers" for so many...
Monday, April 7, 2014
Prayer power against RH Law!
The Dioceses of Baguio and Bacolod and the Archdiocese of Lipa has also called for a prayer vigil.
How about the other dioceses?
Hmmm...
Thursday, March 27, 2014
Are you listening Ariel Rivera and Gelli de Belen???
From Ansel Beluso's Facebook account:
Tune in to Digma ng Buhay 6-7 P.M. tonight (Thursday) on Veritas 846 and listen to the testimony of an ex-gay living with HIV-AIDS who ruefully confirms that the condom is not a protection against sexually transmitted death traps. In his promiscuous past, he always used the condom whenever he engaged in his multi-partner sexually active gay lifestyle. Now, as he prays for a healing miracle, he cautions everyone against the false sense of security that the condom and all the other artificial contraceptives engender. He powerfully testifies, contraceptives can kill! Are you listening, Ariel Rivera and Gelli de Belen?
We all know celebrity couples Gelli de Belen and Ariel Rivera are the latest endorsers of the promoter of promiscuity and disease, DKT - Trust.
What so ironic about that commercial about "CHOICES" is that the only CHOICE not available there is abstinence and natural family planning method.
Why?
Duh!
DKT - Trust won't earn anything out of fidelity to spouse, chastity and discipline.
And when women start having cancer from the pills, homosexual men contracting HIV because of condoms, will the talent fee this couple received be even enough to foot the bill of the sick people who were convinced with their ad campaign and bought and used the products?
Celebrities, think twice before you endorse a product!
You have a very big responsibility to society!
And you and I answer to God after we die!
And you cannot escape that fact.
Are you still listening Ariel Rivera and Gelli de Belen?
Monday, January 27, 2014
Noynoy Aquino is mind-boggling!
from ABS-CBN News.
***
MANILA -- President Benigno Aquino III pitched anew the Reproductive Health Law, saying recent developments already call for the imposition of the measure that was halted by the Supreme Court.
“It’s happening, it’s a reality…the cybersex issue today. Is that not connected also? Two parents not able to adequately [respond to needs of their children]. Can I just say, ‘I see nothing, I will say nothing, I will not hear anything’? I couldn’t live [then] with my conscience,” he told ABS-CBN’s "Bottomline." [Just mind-boogling!]
The Catholic church and Malacanang are at odds over the law, that was recently stopped by the Supreme Court.
The President said his mother, the late President Corazon Aquino, could have swayed the Church with a better formula to break the impasse. “With me, I tried [reaching out to the Church],” he said.
More than a week ago, a joint effort from police around the world dismantled a pedophile ring that streamed live sexual abuse of Filipino children, some as young as 6, via the Internet.
Some of the children's parents were also allegedly involved the cases.
The rescue is part of Operation Endeavour, whereby British police works alongside counterparts in the Philippines and Australia.
The Church had a different take, however, with Manila Auxiliary Bishop Broderick Pabillo saying that Internet pornography patronage is due in part to the RH Law.
In a report from the CBCP News, Pabillo lamented the “culture of addiction,” which he blamed on the promotion of condoms, contraceptives, and the RH law itself.
***
Here is the logic of Noynoy Aquino.
If you allow condoms and contraceptives to be freely accessible to the public, especially the youth and the pedophiles, you stop internet pornograpy.
So then, if we legalize illegal drugs, it would minimize drug addiction.
If we legalize piracy, we would have no more pirated videos and music!
Just mind-boggling!
Did I mention that he was educated at Ateneo de Manila University?
***
MANILA -- President Benigno Aquino III pitched anew the Reproductive Health Law, saying recent developments already call for the imposition of the measure that was halted by the Supreme Court.
“It’s happening, it’s a reality…the cybersex issue today. Is that not connected also? Two parents not able to adequately [respond to needs of their children]. Can I just say, ‘I see nothing, I will say nothing, I will not hear anything’? I couldn’t live [then] with my conscience,” he told ABS-CBN’s "Bottomline." [Just mind-boogling!]
The Catholic church and Malacanang are at odds over the law, that was recently stopped by the Supreme Court.
The President said his mother, the late President Corazon Aquino, could have swayed the Church with a better formula to break the impasse. “With me, I tried [reaching out to the Church],” he said.
More than a week ago, a joint effort from police around the world dismantled a pedophile ring that streamed live sexual abuse of Filipino children, some as young as 6, via the Internet.
Some of the children's parents were also allegedly involved the cases.
The rescue is part of Operation Endeavour, whereby British police works alongside counterparts in the Philippines and Australia.
The Church had a different take, however, with Manila Auxiliary Bishop Broderick Pabillo saying that Internet pornography patronage is due in part to the RH Law.
In a report from the CBCP News, Pabillo lamented the “culture of addiction,” which he blamed on the promotion of condoms, contraceptives, and the RH law itself.
***
Here is the logic of Noynoy Aquino.
If you allow condoms and contraceptives to be freely accessible to the public, especially the youth and the pedophiles, you stop internet pornograpy.
So then, if we legalize illegal drugs, it would minimize drug addiction.
If we legalize piracy, we would have no more pirated videos and music!
Just mind-boggling!
Did I mention that he was educated at Ateneo de Manila University?
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
Pia Cayetano: RH Law author, also Abortion Advocate
How to simply explain her murderous advocacy.
Watch out for this language:
"Abortion is a woman's right to choose because it is her body. If her life is in danger, abortion should be permitted."
"Abortion is a woman's right to choose because it is her body. If her life is in danger, abortion should be permitted."
That is how these murderous, ASWANGS want it.
Speaking of aswangs, remember in Philippine mythology, they are evil creatures that love to eat babies.
So what makes these abortionists different from aswangs?
Makes sense no?
In the USA March for Life...
TEN THOUSAND people, 550 seminarians, 300 priests, 29 bishops, and 4 cardinals at the March for Life vigil mass...
While in the Philippines............
from the CBCP Website: Manila Archbishop Luis Antonio G. Cardinal Tagle belts out a song during a fundraising concert at the Meralco Theater, December 12. Dubbed “Patron of the Arts, An Evening with the Cardinal”, the concert showcased the best of Filipino talents who have distinguished themselves through award-winning performances here and abroad. The concert was organized by Jesuit Communications Foundation to raise funds for the ongoing renovation of the Manila Metropolitan Cathedral.
So what's big about December 12, 2012, the night this photo of the cardinal was taken?
Now let the gangs of Katipunan lynch me.
Thursday, January 16, 2014
These are the pro-abortion Filipinos
Isn't it that kidnapping is illegal?
Imagine an international conference of kidnapping to be held in the Philippines?
What would the government do?
Isn't it that dangerous drug manufacturing and distribution is illegal?
Imagine an international conference of dangerous drug manufacturing and distribution being held in the Philippines?
What would the government do?
Isn't it that ABORTION is ILLEGAL in the Philippines?
Don't imagine it. It is happening.
Pro-abortion groups and advocates aka Women's Right Groups or Health Advocates are gathering in Manila to push abortion as a REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH issue for Women.
DA HELL?!
Where is reproduction in there when you push for the murder of defenseless babies in their mother's womb?!?!
Know who the Filipinos behind this GATHERING OF HELL.
You'd be surprised that one of those who will speak in this conference goes by the name ATTY. ROMEO CABARDE. You know where he works? ATENEO DE DAVAO UNIVERSITY.
Read more about Cabarde here.
Ok, right now.
Where are the defenders of Archbishop Romulo Valles of Davao?
Yeah. I am issuing a PUBLIC CHALLENGE against Ednard Kim La Rosa.
Tell me what your archbishop has done to discipline this University and Cabarde!
When you remain silent to this promotion of EVIL and MURDER, you are an ACCESSORY TO THE CRIME!
So who are the pro-abortion Filipinos?
Those in the photo, the Filipino Freethinkers, "Catholics" for RH, Ateneo de Davao University, Romeo Cabardo, Beth Angsioco...
Add the names here.
This time, you can help this guy.
Imagine an international conference of kidnapping to be held in the Philippines?
What would the government do?
Isn't it that dangerous drug manufacturing and distribution is illegal?
Imagine an international conference of dangerous drug manufacturing and distribution being held in the Philippines?
What would the government do?
Isn't it that ABORTION is ILLEGAL in the Philippines?
Don't imagine it. It is happening.
Pro-abortion groups and advocates aka Women's Right Groups or Health Advocates are gathering in Manila to push abortion as a REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH issue for Women.
DA HELL?!
Where is reproduction in there when you push for the murder of defenseless babies in their mother's womb?!?!
Know who the Filipinos behind this GATHERING OF HELL.
You'd be surprised that one of those who will speak in this conference goes by the name ATTY. ROMEO CABARDE. You know where he works? ATENEO DE DAVAO UNIVERSITY.
Read more about Cabarde here.
Ok, right now.
Where are the defenders of Archbishop Romulo Valles of Davao?
Yeah. I am issuing a PUBLIC CHALLENGE against Ednard Kim La Rosa.
Tell me what your archbishop has done to discipline this University and Cabarde!
When you remain silent to this promotion of EVIL and MURDER, you are an ACCESSORY TO THE CRIME!
So who are the pro-abortion Filipinos?
Those in the photo, the Filipino Freethinkers, "Catholics" for RH, Ateneo de Davao University, Romeo Cabardo, Beth Angsioco...
Add the names here.
This time, you can help this guy.
Monday, January 13, 2014
The RH goons are at it again
Paid hack Raissa Robles is attacking the Church again, obviously Abortion money is fueling her journalistic excellence to just target the Catholic Church and never for once write anything against the Iglesia ni Cristo.
She wrote how the priests of Quiapo Church brought the revered icon of the Black Nazarene to the house of alleged pork barrel queen Janet Lim Napoles to her house while millions struggle to even touch the icon during the annual January 9 Traslacion.
If you need the real facts why the Black Nazarene is brought to Napoles, better head on over to The Monk's Hobbit and read all about it. Excellent defense from the good doctor!
And by the way, the Black Nazarene brought to Napoles is not the actual statue, nor the replica used for the annual Traslacion.
It is a replica owned by the Napoles family. Is there something wrong to get your own image?
Funny how Raissa Robles concocts these "facts".
All because of Abortion money from pharmaceutical companies and international agencies like the UN-WHO.
She wrote how the priests of Quiapo Church brought the revered icon of the Black Nazarene to the house of alleged pork barrel queen Janet Lim Napoles to her house while millions struggle to even touch the icon during the annual January 9 Traslacion.
If you need the real facts why the Black Nazarene is brought to Napoles, better head on over to The Monk's Hobbit and read all about it. Excellent defense from the good doctor!
And by the way, the Black Nazarene brought to Napoles is not the actual statue, nor the replica used for the annual Traslacion.
It is a replica owned by the Napoles family. Is there something wrong to get your own image?
Funny how Raissa Robles concocts these "facts".
All because of Abortion money from pharmaceutical companies and international agencies like the UN-WHO.
Sunday, December 29, 2013
This non-Catholic knows it right about when life begins
Funny thing is soome "c"atholics don't.
And they even question the magisterial authority of Humanae Vitae...
And most of them teach at Ateneo...
And one of them is a theology professor named Ruben Mendoza
Imagine him teaching our children that using contraception
Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty did not have a degree in theology.
But he has common sense.
And he knows when life begins.
Unlike the men and women of Ateneo blessed with abundant knowledge.
And they even question the magisterial authority of Humanae Vitae...
And most of them teach at Ateneo...
And one of them is a theology professor named Ruben Mendoza
Imagine him teaching our children that using contraception
Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty did not have a degree in theology.
But he has common sense.
And he knows when life begins.
Unlike the men and women of Ateneo blessed with abundant knowledge.
Wednesday, December 4, 2013
Laughed so hard after seeing this
Risa Hontiveros is a VETERAN LOSER.
But we must not let our guards down.
She is still at it.
She is behind the scenes pushing for euthanasia, homosexual marriage and abortion.
Don't mind that joker on that poster.
She's finding a hard time earning extra cash.
Saturday, November 16, 2013
Pray for Edcel Lagman
This man is hastening his trip to hell!
Another headache of a news from Interaksyon.com
***
Besides food, water, and shelter, the Philippine government should also consider reproductive health care services as among the needs of the victims of typhoon Yolanda, a former lawmaker and health advocate said. [What?!?!?]
Contraceptives, for one, are essential in evacuation centers, which the government should provide, according to former Albay Representative Edcel Lagman. [This maniac is trying desperately to make us believe that contraceptives are essential medicines! They are not!]
Lagman, one of the main authors of the Reproductive Health (RH) law, lamented that the implementation of the new law and its implementing rules and regulations (IRR) remain on hold because of a Supreme Court order.
"While the implementation of the RH Law and its IRR awaits adjudication by the High Court, the DOH (Department of Health) can make do with its general and residual health authority to address the maternal and newborn health concerns in the crisis situations as well as the contraceptive needs in the evacuation centers," he said in a statement. [The PR group of Lagman is working, obviously being paid for by the pharmaceutical companies who would benefit the most from this law, and of course including Lagman and Garin who got the udnersecretary post in the Health Department.]
According to Lagman, the RH Law provides for the "systematic and integrated provision of reproductive health care to all citizens, prioritizing women, the poor, marginalized and those in vulnerable and crisis situations.”
"The unprecedented disaster caused by Yolanda constitutes definitely a vulnerable and crisis situation," he added.
Quoted in a newspaper report, the World Health Organization (WHO) said it expects at least 12,000 babies to be born next month in the areas hardest-hit by typhoon Yolanda based on demographic statistics in the areas.
Julie Hall, WHO country representative, said the agency is concerned about the situation because pregnant women and newborn babies are vulnerable when it comes to disasters. [So when does the contraceptives come in here?]
Lagman said the RH law mandates the local government units and the DOH to ensure that a minumum initial service package for reproductive health, including maternal and neonatal health care kits and services as defined by the DOH, shall be given proper attention in crisis situations such as disasters and humanitarian crises.
“Temporary facilities such as evacuation centers and refugee camps shall be equipped to respond to the special needs of the following situations: normal and complicated deliveries, pregnancy complications, spread of HIV and STIs, and gender-based violence," he added. [Delivery facilities, no problem! I am for it. What about the condom suggestion of the condom minded Lagman?]
....
**
I did not print the other parts of the article as it just features the useless rants of Gabriela.
People...
Lagman is going to hell with this kind of attitude.
People are dying from disease and hunger and he thinks they need contraceptives because they still would be having sex in this terrible time!
He is just sick!
Plain sick!
What are our bishops doing against him? He is causing public scandal and they are not doing anything against him!
He remains a Catholic and the shepherds are not doing against this wolf in sheep's clothing!
Pray for him.
Thursday, November 7, 2013
Miriam Santiago teaches us ALL about being devout Catholics
This is what she said to suspected pork barrel scam mastermind, Janet Napoles Lim during today's Senate hearing.
Now let's paraphrase that shall we and let us turn the tables against her.
"Is it true that you are close to a certain Catholic congregation? Are you familiar with the Ten Commandments? Are you familiar with the commandment: You shall not steal? Are you familiar with the commandment: You should not tell a lie? And still, with the plunder case against you, you remain and consider yourself to be a devout Catholic?"
Now let's paraphrase that shall we and let us turn the tables against her.
"Is it true that you are close to a certain Catholic theology school, the MST? Are you familiar with the Catechism of the Catholic Church? Are you familiar Humanae Vitae? Are you familiar with the teachings about the Catholic Church against artificial contraception? And still, with theology degrees you keep on floundering, and by authoring the RH Law and publicly insulting the bishops and priests who uphold Catholic teaching you remain and consider yourself to be a devout Catholic?"
Honestly, I just watched the Senate hearing to see her rant her head off trying to tell everyone who listened and watched how a genius she is.
And look at the irony of it all!
Tuesday, July 23, 2013
The media is fooling you about the RH War!
This info was conveniently missed out by the paid lackeys in the Yellow Media of anti-Catholic Catholic president Noynoy Aquino.
From the Inquirer.
***
It’s all over but the voting for the 14 petitions at the Supreme Court questioning the constitutionality of the Reproductive Health Law—that is, if you believe media reports. With all the speculation going around, it doesn’t help that most media accounts have focused on how the first presenter, lawyer Concepcion Noche, was “rebuked” by the 15 justices. One account said the petitions faced dismissal because of the way Noche struggled through the four-and-a-half-hour ordeal. A law professor even wrote a postmortem for the anti-RH petitions, claiming they didn’t have a case. [Imagine that! A law professor! Ha! Ooops...I forgot about Brenda Miriam Santiago.]
But what really happened during the oral arguments on July 9? The following exchange, for instance, was never reported in the media:
Justice Roberto Abad: The Constitution, Section 12 Article 2, states that the state shall equally protect the life of the mother and the unborn from conception. This right to life belongs to the unborn, not the mother or the father. Did I exist when I was still in the egg as an egg alone?
Noche: Not yet, your honor.
Abad: But when the egg, when the ovum, is fertilized, is that the beginning of me?
Noche: Yes, your honor. That’s the beginning of you. The unique “you” that exists already at that point. The unique Justice Abad … not a justice yet then.
Abad: In 1987 before this (RH Law) somewhat changed the concept of conception, how did those who drafted the Constitution understand the meaning of conception?
Noche: Life begins at fertilization. It was only recently that that was redefined.
Abad: So in other words, all of us started as zygotes … and then developed into a human being. Conception means beginning, isn’t it? But it needs to be sustained to life by attaching itself to the uterus. And it’s not the business of my parents… It’s my right. If they violated my right, I would not have been born. As Justice Carpio says on this issue, if they believe that this law violates the right to life from the time of conception, that’s how we will decide it … on our understanding of when life begins.
Totally different picture. The issue is of course crucial, because the hormonal contraceptives to be funded in the billions by the RH Law are known abortifacients—they have a secondary action of harming the fertilized ovum when contraception fails. A recognition of the beginning of life at fertilization would render the RH Law unconstitutional.
To be sure, Noche agonized and showed signs of exhaustion. She was, after all, facing all 15 justices of the Supreme Court, but she stood her ground. At one point Justice Antonio Carpio called attention to her long pause, suggesting she had run out of answers. But Noche didn’t let it pass: “No, your honor, I paused because I was reading something.”
The rather tough approach by some justices notwithstanding, Noche’s arguments stood out in substance and even managed to get her interrogators to move on to another topic.
To Carpio’s position that the high court could not settle the issue of when life begins, Noche was firm that the Constitutional Commission was clear that conception referred to fertilization. To Chief Justice Lourdes Sereno’s suggestion that there were only a handful of ConCom members who maintained that belief, Noche said the Constitution was voted upon and ratified by the Filipino people.
In his turn, Justice Mariano Del Castillo remarked, “I concede that upon the meeting of the egg and the sperm there is life already. It should be protected.”
There were in fact more justices who believed there was no mystery as to the beginning of life. Justice Teresita de Castro was pragmatic: “Assuming that the woman is healthy and the egg has already been fertilized, is there anything that will prevent this fertilized egg from developing into a human being?”
To settle the matter, Justice Lucas Bersamin told Noche to submit data on the beginning of life and the effects of hormonal contraceptives for the court to take judicial notice.
Del Castillo asked what Noche thought should be the government’s responsibility for adverse effects of contraceptives given to women by its health workers. Noche replied that the government must shoulder all expenses related to their treatment.
Justice Jose Perez offered the view that the beginning of life was not even the biggest issue in the RH debate. Taking off from the opening statement of former senator Francisco Tatad, Perez told Noche that what was “constitutionally objectionable” was “the fact that the government itself is putting in money in order to allow the prevention of fertilization.”
De Castro pursued the issue of Tatad’s main argument that the RH Law was nothing but a population control program disguised as a health measure. “There is a provision saying that there shall be no demographic or population targets… But in another provision there is a need to conduct studies to analyze demographic trends, including demographic dividends from sound population policies. It would seem that the law is intimately connected to population control.”
Abad said the RH Law was an exercise of police power. “We cannot outlaw the storms or the typhoons … but a healthy woman with a healthy ovum and eggs… We poison the egg to disable it from receiving the sperm. That’s unconstitutional, that’s improper use of police power.”
Finally, De Castro observed that the RH Law was targeting the poor and the marginalized. “It would seem under this law that the poor should not be allowed to multiply.”
No case? It’s time we extracted substance from the noise of this long-drawn-out debate. The buck stops with the Supreme Court.
Chet Espino is a convener of Families Against RH. The audio recording of the July 9 oral arguments is on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7ehdk126S4&feature=youtu.be).
***
See the obvious silence of the media?
What do you expect in this time???
From the Inquirer.
***
It’s all over but the voting for the 14 petitions at the Supreme Court questioning the constitutionality of the Reproductive Health Law—that is, if you believe media reports. With all the speculation going around, it doesn’t help that most media accounts have focused on how the first presenter, lawyer Concepcion Noche, was “rebuked” by the 15 justices. One account said the petitions faced dismissal because of the way Noche struggled through the four-and-a-half-hour ordeal. A law professor even wrote a postmortem for the anti-RH petitions, claiming they didn’t have a case. [Imagine that! A law professor! Ha! Ooops...I forgot about Brenda Miriam Santiago.]
But what really happened during the oral arguments on July 9? The following exchange, for instance, was never reported in the media:
Justice Roberto Abad: The Constitution, Section 12 Article 2, states that the state shall equally protect the life of the mother and the unborn from conception. This right to life belongs to the unborn, not the mother or the father. Did I exist when I was still in the egg as an egg alone?
Noche: Not yet, your honor.
Abad: But when the egg, when the ovum, is fertilized, is that the beginning of me?
Noche: Yes, your honor. That’s the beginning of you. The unique “you” that exists already at that point. The unique Justice Abad … not a justice yet then.
Abad: In 1987 before this (RH Law) somewhat changed the concept of conception, how did those who drafted the Constitution understand the meaning of conception?
Noche: Life begins at fertilization. It was only recently that that was redefined.
Abad: So in other words, all of us started as zygotes … and then developed into a human being. Conception means beginning, isn’t it? But it needs to be sustained to life by attaching itself to the uterus. And it’s not the business of my parents… It’s my right. If they violated my right, I would not have been born. As Justice Carpio says on this issue, if they believe that this law violates the right to life from the time of conception, that’s how we will decide it … on our understanding of when life begins.
Totally different picture. The issue is of course crucial, because the hormonal contraceptives to be funded in the billions by the RH Law are known abortifacients—they have a secondary action of harming the fertilized ovum when contraception fails. A recognition of the beginning of life at fertilization would render the RH Law unconstitutional.
To be sure, Noche agonized and showed signs of exhaustion. She was, after all, facing all 15 justices of the Supreme Court, but she stood her ground. At one point Justice Antonio Carpio called attention to her long pause, suggesting she had run out of answers. But Noche didn’t let it pass: “No, your honor, I paused because I was reading something.”
The rather tough approach by some justices notwithstanding, Noche’s arguments stood out in substance and even managed to get her interrogators to move on to another topic.
To Carpio’s position that the high court could not settle the issue of when life begins, Noche was firm that the Constitutional Commission was clear that conception referred to fertilization. To Chief Justice Lourdes Sereno’s suggestion that there were only a handful of ConCom members who maintained that belief, Noche said the Constitution was voted upon and ratified by the Filipino people.
In his turn, Justice Mariano Del Castillo remarked, “I concede that upon the meeting of the egg and the sperm there is life already. It should be protected.”
There were in fact more justices who believed there was no mystery as to the beginning of life. Justice Teresita de Castro was pragmatic: “Assuming that the woman is healthy and the egg has already been fertilized, is there anything that will prevent this fertilized egg from developing into a human being?”
To settle the matter, Justice Lucas Bersamin told Noche to submit data on the beginning of life and the effects of hormonal contraceptives for the court to take judicial notice.
Del Castillo asked what Noche thought should be the government’s responsibility for adverse effects of contraceptives given to women by its health workers. Noche replied that the government must shoulder all expenses related to their treatment.
Justice Jose Perez offered the view that the beginning of life was not even the biggest issue in the RH debate. Taking off from the opening statement of former senator Francisco Tatad, Perez told Noche that what was “constitutionally objectionable” was “the fact that the government itself is putting in money in order to allow the prevention of fertilization.”
De Castro pursued the issue of Tatad’s main argument that the RH Law was nothing but a population control program disguised as a health measure. “There is a provision saying that there shall be no demographic or population targets… But in another provision there is a need to conduct studies to analyze demographic trends, including demographic dividends from sound population policies. It would seem that the law is intimately connected to population control.”
Abad said the RH Law was an exercise of police power. “We cannot outlaw the storms or the typhoons … but a healthy woman with a healthy ovum and eggs… We poison the egg to disable it from receiving the sperm. That’s unconstitutional, that’s improper use of police power.”
Finally, De Castro observed that the RH Law was targeting the poor and the marginalized. “It would seem under this law that the poor should not be allowed to multiply.”
No case? It’s time we extracted substance from the noise of this long-drawn-out debate. The buck stops with the Supreme Court.
Chet Espino is a convener of Families Against RH. The audio recording of the July 9 oral arguments is on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7ehdk126S4&feature=youtu.be).
***
See the obvious silence of the media?
What do you expect in this time???
Tuesday, July 2, 2013
"Daang Matuwid" shows it true colors.
What do you expect?
It's been planned all along!
And you still find this president laudable?!
Sheesh!
***
MANILA, July 2, 2013— Two Catholic Church officials said the plan to appoint former lawmaker and staunch advocate of a contraception law as Health undersecretary looks like political payback. [It is! Hano pa nga bah?!]
Lingayen-Dagupan Archbishop Emeritus Archbishop Oscar Cruz said that appointing former Iloilo Rep. Janette Garin as Health undersecretary only shows that the government is “pro-population control.” [And loves attack dogs!]
“It’s already very evident that the President (Benigno Aquino III) is anti-population,” said Cruz, who heads the Church’s National Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal.
“I think they are the same as far as population control is concerned. They are very much in agreement,” he added.
Mr. Aquino on Tuesday said the co-author of the controversial “Reproductive Health” bill will be an asset to the Health department because of her “extensive experience” as a doctor and a lawmaker. [extensive experience meaning being Aquino's loudest barking "female dog" (you get the drift) while she was at Congress. Seriously, she is so full of it! I was at Congress during Committee and Plenary debates and I can tell you that you can easily beat her arguments! If she can be a medical doctor, anyone can! Believe me!]
Fr. Melvin Castro of the CBCP’s Commission on Family and Life said Garin’s looming appointment is Aquino’s way to pay his debt of gratitude for pushing the RH measure.
“It is obviously payback time,” said Castro.
He said what they are more afraid of is the pushing of more anti-life measures under the current administration.
“Well entrenched in the Aquino government are the anti-natalist, anti-life, anti-family forces,” he said. (CBCPNews)
***
If you have Catholics like Aquino working like this against the Church, who needs the Iglesia ni Manalo or the Ang Dating Lalaki Church of Ateng Eli Soriano?
Who else needs them?
The devil is having a vacation right now. Or is he?
Look! The Catholic Benigno Aquino is doing the attack on Christ's Church on earth!
PS: Thank his Jesuit educators for his uninformed conscience which led him to push the contraceptive agenda!
It's been planned all along!
And you still find this president laudable?!
Sheesh!
***
MANILA, July 2, 2013— Two Catholic Church officials said the plan to appoint former lawmaker and staunch advocate of a contraception law as Health undersecretary looks like political payback. [It is! Hano pa nga bah?!]
Lingayen-Dagupan Archbishop Emeritus Archbishop Oscar Cruz said that appointing former Iloilo Rep. Janette Garin as Health undersecretary only shows that the government is “pro-population control.” [And loves attack dogs!]
“It’s already very evident that the President (Benigno Aquino III) is anti-population,” said Cruz, who heads the Church’s National Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal.
“I think they are the same as far as population control is concerned. They are very much in agreement,” he added.
Mr. Aquino on Tuesday said the co-author of the controversial “Reproductive Health” bill will be an asset to the Health department because of her “extensive experience” as a doctor and a lawmaker. [extensive experience meaning being Aquino's loudest barking "female dog" (you get the drift) while she was at Congress. Seriously, she is so full of it! I was at Congress during Committee and Plenary debates and I can tell you that you can easily beat her arguments! If she can be a medical doctor, anyone can! Believe me!]
Fr. Melvin Castro of the CBCP’s Commission on Family and Life said Garin’s looming appointment is Aquino’s way to pay his debt of gratitude for pushing the RH measure.
“It is obviously payback time,” said Castro.
He said what they are more afraid of is the pushing of more anti-life measures under the current administration.
“Well entrenched in the Aquino government are the anti-natalist, anti-life, anti-family forces,” he said. (CBCPNews)
***
If you have Catholics like Aquino working like this against the Church, who needs the Iglesia ni Manalo or the Ang Dating Lalaki Church of Ateng Eli Soriano?
Who else needs them?
The devil is having a vacation right now. Or is he?
Look! The Catholic Benigno Aquino is doing the attack on Christ's Church on earth!
PS: Thank his Jesuit educators for his uninformed conscience which led him to push the contraceptive agenda!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)