A Philosopher's Life

My final assessment of the May 2010 Elections

2010-05-12T12:39:00.001+08:00

The Prediction:

I didn’t vote for the leading candidates Aquino and Binay but it does not necessarily mean that I don’t like them and actually, I expect these candidates to win based on my prediction. Here is simple explanation why those two candidates are leading. Based on my research and observation, three of the most popular voting trend are Aquino – Roxas, Estrada – Binay, and Aquno – Binay. More than 60% of the voting population voted for these tandems. Less than 60% of the voters voted for these tandems: Gordon – Bayani, Teodoro – Roxas, Villar – Legarda, and Teodoro – Binay. Less than 10 percent of the voters voted for the other tandems. Here are my rough estimates of the percentages of the tandems: (Note: This is just an estimate and not accurate)

Aquino and Roxas - 30%
Estrada and Binay – 26%
Aquino and Binay – 10%
Villar and Legarda – 15%
Teodoro and Roxas – 6%
Teodoro and Binay – 2%
Gordon and Bayani – 3%
Villanueva and Yasay – 2%
Other Tandems – 7%

If we will observe the tandem votes, it appears that the preference of Aquino and Binay tandem is the main turning point of the election and I think that it is self-explanatory. However, it is not yet sure win for Binay because the margin of votes is less than 1 million.

The Strategy:

- - - Presidential and VP race:

In the past surveys, Roxas was leading very high against other candidates that made him complacent and lessen his campaign. The LP focused more on Aquino in that time. It was too late for Roxas to recover his big lead because of Binay’s good strategy and political marketing. I think that if Roxas did better in his campaign, he shall maintain the big lead against Binay and the rest. It is just a matter of strategy.

The fall of Nacionalista tandem in votes is not surprising because their TV ads do not anymore appeal to the most of the voters. Villar even used his mother and some celebrities like Willie and Dolphy, which I believe, pulled him down. Those kinds of TV ads will not translate into votes. It is the same with Legarda; her TV ads are obviously insincere. Binay’s TV ads are more believable than hers. The lead of Estrada against Villar is not surprising. Many of the Nacionalista supporters shifted to Estrada. They have the same platforms but Estrada’s TV ads are more believable than Villar’s in the point of view of the ordinary people. In fact, the parents of the child who endorsed Villar in Tondo voted for Erap.

Teodoro’s positive campaign is impressive but not enough to gather massive votes. He has the qualifications and good platform but those are not enough. Two main reasons why Teodoro did not win are: (1) his link with PGMA and (2) unpopularity. I know that it appears that he is very popular among the students and faculties of high class institutions and those who are active in the internet. Most of the people in that class, including us, only talk and discussed among themselves/ourselves that gives us the illusion that Teodoro is very popular. We forgot that more than 50% of the Filipinos are not in this class and even don’t know who Teodoro is. All they know about Teodoro is his link to PGMA. Complicated platforms do not appeal to the ordinary people unlike Aquino’s “kung walang corrupt, walang mahirap” which is very clear.

The remaining candidates' TV ads especially Madrigal and Fernando’s can only be described by one word: FAIL. Their lost is self-explanatory.

--- In the Senatorial Race

In the senatorial race, the most important key of winning is image and name recall. Most senatorial candidates who are leading have good advertisements and their names are easy to recall. I'm pretty sure that those senators who are leading are not included on the top 6 list of those who voted them. Different voters has different top senators that's why, most of our preferred senators are not winning. If the voters have already chosen their top senators but they still lack some slots to fill the 12 slots, the voters will just vote those who they remember popular and credible particularly those old names we saw on the leading top 12.

In my case, my top senatorial candidates are Tamano, Hontiveros, Lacson and Bello. All of them did not enter the top 12. Hontiveros ranked 13 because his advertisement is good and she is quite popular but the top 12 (I'm not sure of Guingona) are more popular than Hontiveros. I also voted Palparan for the reason that really don't like Satur Ocampo. That's 5 all in all. The other 7 candidates who I voted entered the top 12. Those candidates belong to the class of candidates I mentioned in the previous paragraph. Another 5 candidates who are Drillon, Recto, Osmena, Enrille and Sotto are just my secondary choices which I believe to be competent enough to be on the Senate in spite of old names. Two slots are still unfilled. I have the option of not filling those but I decided to vote for Bong Revilla and Lapid just for an experiment. I just like to test if they will still win this election. Then, I was just surprised the Bong Revilla acquired the top spot and that proves my theory.

For the record: my 7 out of 12 senatorial candidates are currently on the Top 12. If Hontiveros luckily entered, it will be 8. :)

In my Political Science years in La Salle, the very basic thing that I learned - that in Politics, there is no good and bad... it’s all about strategy and marketing.

Final Message:

Yes, I did not vote for Aquino (I voted for Teodoro and Roxas) but as I said earlier, it does not necessarily mean that I don’t like him as president. The main criticism against him is not having any law legislated while others have good track records in making laws. But the presidency is not law-making and therefore, it is irrelevant. Aquino may appoint good advisers and cabinet members to supplement his lack of experience. I don’t like the attitude of many people saying that Filipinos are stupid for voting those kinds of candidates including Lapid, Revilla, Estrada and Sotto in the senate. Remember, Vox populi, vox dei. We are in a democracy. We have different opinions. Our opinions are equal with one another. We cannot say that our votes are more superior to the other votes just because we are students of law or studying in La Salle, Ateneo, UP and other prestigious universities. All we have to do is to accept and believe to those who won because the people have chosen them. The Constitution did not mention of any track record requirement in electing our officials. Let’s give chance to our newly (probably) elected president and be unattached to your extreme fanaticism on your own candidates. Let us move on and help the government.

Something to think about

2010-02-26T03:35:00.000+08:00

It's been a while after my last entry.

My life has changed a lot - from a complex life to a more complex one. All I want is just a simple life but I really do not know why life is getting more complicated. Maybe, a simple life does not really exist; it is just a ideal fantasy of most people. Everyday, I never stop thinking. I never stop hypothesizing. I never stop wondering. I never stop worrying. No more peace of mind on my part. Now, it is only one month before the final exams. I don't have any idea.

Kahit ngayon, hindi pa rin nawawala sa isip ko na swerte lang kung bakit ko naipasa ang mga subjects ko noong 1st year. Hindi naman talaga ako magaling. Swerte lang talaga. Mauubos din ang swerte ko. Nararamdaman ko na.

I lost all the confidence. I starting to lose hope.

Kung swerte man yun, masasabi ko din na malas din ang nangyari sapagkat kung 'di man ako para sa pag-aaral ng law, sana hindi na lang pinatagal.

One big question is: It is a choice or destiny?

Honestly, I do not know the answer. Nauubusan na ako ng mga sagot.

I'm just hoping that none of my theories are correct.

The only reason for me to keep holding on is the support. The support of my friends. Thank you Superfriends for all your support. I really appreciate those.

The Island of Santo Tomas

2009-09-04T19:59:00.000+08:00

Photo c/o The Varsitarian

Famous lines from Squall Leonhart

2009-08-27T09:44:00.002+08:00

During the Dollet mission
Squall: I stand by the captain's decision.
Seifer: ... Captain's decision? You want to wreak some havoc too, don't you?
Squall: It's a good opportunity to test my training. Thanks to you, I feel like I can take on anyone. Even if they do fight dirty, like you.

In the "secret spot", discussing Quistis's demotion
Squall: Are you done yet...? I don't wanna talk about it. What am I supposed to say about other people's problems?
Quistis: I'm not asking you to say anything. I just want you to listen.
Squall: Then go talk to a wall.

Following the first Laguna vision
Selphie: What a relief! Everything's cool with me! Hee! I had such a nice dream!
Squall: (I had a dream, too. It wasn't nice though... I dreamt I was a moron...)

Talking to Rinoa about wishes
Squall: (Think what you want... Reality isn't so kind. Everything doesn't work out the way you want it to. That's why...) As long as you don't get your hopes up, you can take anything... You feel less pain. Anyway, whatever wish you have is none of my business.

Thinking about Seifer, believing he has been executed
Squall: (I liked him... wasn't really a bad guy... He was one of us... Seifer... You've just become just a memory. Will they... Will they talk about me this way if I die, too? Squall was this and that. Using past tense, saying whatever they want? So this is what death is all about... Not for me. I won't have it!!!) ... I'm not having anyone talk about me in the past tense!

Before the sorceress assassination mission
Squall: (Right and wrong are not what separate us and our enemies. It's our different standpoints, our perspectives that separate us. Both sides blame one another. There's no good or bad side. Just 2 sides holding different views.)

Following Irvine's blocked shot at Edea
Irvine: ... I'm sorry.
Squall: It's ok. Your aim was perfect. Just leave the rest up to me. I'm goin' in for the sorceress. Irvine, Rinoa, just be ready to back me up. Take care of Rinoa.

During Seifer's interrogation concerning the real purpose of SeeD
Squall: SeeD... (... A code name for Balamb Garden's elite mercenary force... SeeD... Combat specialists......???) ...Don't you already know?
Seifer: I'm not a SeeD. There must be some kind of secret you're given when you become a SeeD!
Squall: There's nothing. Even if there were, you think I'd tell you?
Seifer: You're on my 'tough-nut-to-crack' list. Didn't think you'd talk that easily.
Squall: ... Geez, I'm honored.

Trying to figure out how to save Balamb Garden from missiles
Squall: Sir, I'd like to handle whatever it is that you're planning.
Headmaster Cid: And why is that?
Squall: (... I don't know... Because you might screw up... Because I want to do more than announce the evacuation. Because this place is important to me, too. Because I want to find out your plan. Because this is my home. I have too many reasons. I don't know why... Who cares?) My feelings have nothing to do with it, sir.
Headmaster Cid: Heh heh, Quistis was right. You do have a hard time expressing your feelings.
Squall: (Why bother. And what is this? Why am I being judged?) Sir! Please tell us your plan!

Following the battle with NORG
Squall: Forget about it for now.
Rinoa: I can't believe you said that. I think what just happened is really serious.
Squall: What's the point of talking about it now!? You don't know what's going on, either! This is crazy. I don't know what's goin' on anymore. I feel like a helpless puppet being manipulated in some major scheme.
Immediately after Ellone is taken by the White SeeD
Squall: (Why do people depend on each other? In the end, you're on your own. I've made it this far by myself. Sure, I couldn't do a thing when I was a kid... I've depended on others, but... I'll be the first one to admit that I'm here because of other people. I'm fine by myself now. I have all the skills I need to survive. I'm not a child anymore. That's a lie. I don't know anything. I'm confused. I don't want to depend on anyone. How can I do that? Someone tell me... Someone? So I'll end up depending on others after all.

Speaking to Mayor Dobe and his wife Flo in Fisherman's Horizon
Flo: We believe that any problem can be settled by discussion. If you reach a mutual understanding there is no need to fight.
Squall: (No argument there. Trite, and dull as hell, though.)

Trying to console Selphie about the loss of the Spring Festival
Squall: (Man, she's really down.) Come on. I'm sure you can still do something.
Selphie: ... Squall... being sensitive? That's weird. You're the last person I expected to cheer me up. I must really look depressed.
Squall: (What's so weird? I care just like everybody else. It's just that there are too many things that can't be helped. So why bother talking about everything.)
Selphie: Uh-oh! There you go again into your own little world. And you're not gonna share anything, huh?
Squall: ... Yeah, whatever... (Why is she teasing me? I was just trying to help.)

While reminiscing about time spent in the orphanage as children
Squall: I was always waiting for 'Sis' to come back.
Young Squall: I'm... all alone. But I'm doing my best... I'll be ok without you, Sis. I'll be able to take care of myself.
Squall: (... I didn't turn out ok at all.)

In Trabia, discussing what must be done next
Squall: I guess that's it... We're fighting.
Rinoa: ... You guys are fearless.
Squall: (Fearless? I don't think that's quite right. If you think too hard, you become lost... I think that's what everyone's afraid of...) I wish we didn't have to fight, either.

Speaking to everyone during the battle with Galbadia Garden
Squall: ...... Everybody. This is Squall. How's everyone doing? You're all probably too tired to even stand up after all the fighting. But I want everyone to listen to me... We still have a chance to win, and I need your help. This is going to be our final battle. We're going to attack them before they come in again. To do that, we're going to head straight into their Garden. So I want everyone to prepare for a major collision. Take care of all the junior classmen. Irvine, Quistis, Zell, and Selphie will lead the attack into their Garden. As for everyone else, please support them if you can. SeeD was formed to fight the sorceress; at least, that's what I heard. And Garden was created to train SeeDs. So this battle is Garden's destiny and also our destiny. It's a grueling battle, and I'm sure you guys are all exhausted. But I don't want to have any regrets. I don't want anyone to look back and regret this day. So just this once, I want you guys to give everything you've got! For yourselves and for me!

While walking with comatose Rinoa from Fisherman's Horizon
Squall: (I wonder what everyone's doing...? They're probably laughing at me. Or maybe they're angry...?) What do you think? To tell you the truth... I worry too much about what others think of me. I hate that side of me... That's why I didn't want anyone to get to know me. I wanted to hide that side of myself. I hate it. Squall is an unfriendly, introverted guy. It made it easy for me when people perceived me that way. That's a secret between you and me. Got that?

can't think of anything

2009-08-23T19:17:00.002+08:00

My mind is empty.
My heart is empty.

Things are getting vague.
Darkness construes.

I can't think.
I don't believe.

Uncertainty and illusion conspire.
Confusion litigates.

Too much ideas.
Energy is lacking.

Everything is absurd.
I need to discover the proper direction.

What do angels dream of?

2009-08-20T07:32:00.002+08:00

A Scene from Crisis Core:

Angeal: I've become...a monster. A monster's objective is usually world domination or revenge.

Zack: You're wrong. Those aren't the wings of a monster.

Angeal: Well then, what are they?

Zack: Angel's wings.

Angeal: I see. Then what should an angel fight for, Zack? What do angels dream of?

Zack: Angeal...

Angeal: Angeals dream of one thing...

Zack: Please, tell me.

Angeal: To be human.

Calling

2009-08-20T00:59:00.001+08:00

Calling

Vocals: Leah
Lyrics: SAWA
Composition: Ishimoto Takeharu
Arrangement: Ishimoto Takeharu

Calling
You hear the
Calling

Let me go
Gravity
What’s on my shoulder?
“Little by little, I feel a bit better”

Let me know
Set me free
I feel a bit older
Just once more unto the breach
“Dear friend, once more”

Wake up
Leave your hesitation
Wake up
Time for us to realize
Wake up
Show appreciation
Wake up
Time for us to realize

Calling
Someone is
Calling

Wait and see
Empathy
You’re not the only one
“Little by little you’ll feel a bit better”

Lucky me
Destiny
You are on my side
Just once more unto the breach
“Dear friend, once more”

The first experience to lead

2009-08-07T21:33:00.003+08:00

Aside from academics, this one pressures me even more.

I am the type of person who is comfortable in working alone. I hate interferences and conflicts. The decisions are just for myself and dislikes the concept of accountability by myself.

Suddenly, I was chosen to lead my classmates. I'm not sure if I can bear this responsibility. Dealing with my classmates and my professors are not easy considering that it's my first time. Maybe, it is very easy for others who has the previous experience; but in my case, I don't really know.

All important announcements are my responsibility for my classmates' right to information. There are times that I have to make big and on the spot decisions affecting my classmates in case of time constraints. I should have proper sense of management and a wide foresight. All errors shall be shouldered my me.

To obtain the best results, I believe that doing it all by myself systematically is the proper way. But I think that I stand wrongly. Getting the concurrence of every class members and the professors (considering that they are lawyers and magistrates) needs some sort of skills which I'm trying to learn for now.

My conscience will really torture me if a wrong decision will be pronounced by myself. Everybody seems to be blaming me even if I already did my best that I can to resolve the issue. They will tend to ask why is it like this or like that, how did it happen, will this push through, and other critical questions.

But, it is not yet the end.

One concerned classmate of mine said:

"Tulungan lang pare, 'wag mong sarilinin."

A brief review on US-released Nintendo handheld consoles

2009-07-27T04:29:00.008+08:00

This is a tribute on Game Boy's 20th Anniversary.

In 1989, after it was released in Japan, the Game Boy conquered the United States. Having just dot matrix graphics, in that time, I already found it very interesting. I was playing it for hours especially the Super Mario Land. With that kind of indigenous graphics, Super Mario Land as well as the Tetris can still be considered classics.

The, Pokemon Red/Blue came into the picture as well as the Gameboy Pocket. Its CPU is just like the original Game Boy and the only difference is its smaller size and LCD screen. Pokemon Red/Blue is the first RPG I've ever played and one of may favorite game of all time. People can trade Pokemons using the link cable. There are other Pokemon which are released compatible to the system which are Pokemon Yellow (story is similar to Red/Blue) and the 2nd Generation Pokemon Gold/Silver.

After that, Game Boy Light is released in Japan but not released in the US. It graphics is just the same and the only difference is the back light wherein playing is already possible even in the dark. Unfortunately, I was not able to acquire it because aside from it being a Japan-only release, Nintendo only made a few copies of that model because of the upcoming release of the Game Boy Color.

Speaking of Game Boy Color, of course, its more prominent feature added is the colored graphics as well the enhanced CPU. Games like Tomb Raider and Super Mario Bros. Deluxe were released in that era but the most popular game on that time is the Pokemon Crystal, a revised version of Pokemon Gold/Silver. Super Mario Bros. Deluxe is the remake of the original Super Mario Bros. in NES of Famicom.
After a long time of Game Boy Color's dominance, a very different Game Boy was released which is called the Game Boy Advance. It has now a wider screen and a more powerful CPU which can also play all the games of the original Game Boy and Game Boy Color. The position of the buttons also changes putting it on the side of the screen. Remakes of Super Mario Games (Super Mario Bros. 2, Super Mario World, Super Mario Bros. 3) are also released with better graphics. The 3rd Generation Pokemons are born in the released of Pokemon Ruby/Sapphire.

After few years, a more sleek Game Boy Advance was released called the Game Boy Advance SP. Having a flip style, its CPU is just like the original Game Boy Advance in addition of a back light. In this era, the Pokemon Emerald, also belonging to the third generation, was also released. Remakes of Final Fantasy Games (1, 2, 4, 5 and 6) and Pokemon Red/Blue (Titled as Pokemon Leaf Green/Fire Red) was also released.

The Last Game Boy called the Game Boy Micro is the smallest Game Boy ever made. Comparable to the size of a mobile phone, it has brighter back light and sharper graphics. It can play all Game Boy Advance games, but now, can not play the Original Game Boy and Game Boy Color games. This is the end of the Game Boy line.

In 2006, Nintendo released a brand new handheld console called the DS. It has more powerful CPU comparable to Nintendo 64. The most prominent feature of this one is the Dual Screen wherein the lower screen is a touch screen. It made interactive gaming possible. The most popular game of this system is the New Super Mario Bros. and Mario Kart DS. Lawyering games like Phoenix Wright series were also released. Remake of Super Mario 64 was released as well as Final Fantasy III and IV in 3D graphics. Good Castlevania games were also released. DS is the rival of the PSP.

With the release of the 4th Generation Pokemon (Pokemon Diamond/Pearl), a new design of DS was released called the DS lite. Its CPU is just like a original DS with new design, lighter in wieght, and brighter screen. The Legend of Zelda the Phantom Hour Glass, The World Ends With You, and Rhythm Heaven are the most popular games in the Era.

After the Release of the latest Pokemon game, Pokemon Platinum, DSi was released. It is a more enhanced version of DS with much brigher screen and louder sound. It has camera with various features and music player with music editor. It has also built-in internet feature and downloading games called the DSiware is also possible. It is also called the PSP killer. Next year, the remake of Pokemon Gold/Silver will be released called the Pokemon Heart Gold/Soul Silver.
Now, that I've completed the US-released Nintendo handheld consoles, in this time I'm wondering if what will be next for Nintendo. A Nintendo DS phone? A Wider Screen? A More Powerful CPU like the PSP? I'm really excited for the next Nintendo Console and I hope that I'm already lawyer in that time so I can easily afford to buy it. :)

The terror ends...

2009-07-21T18:42:00.007+08:00

Through amicable settlement with the help of the Student Council, my complaint, in behalf of the class, against the "terror" professor turned-out fine. :)

The professor has already explained his side and we assume that he already understood our side.

Thank you for those people in the Civil Law Student Council who helped us in the resolution of this problem.

With that, all statements against that professor in my previous blog entries are hereby REPEALED. :)

After the class, we went to dapitan square and have our first 2AA drinking session. :)

***extra curricular updates.

- - elected as one of the batch representatives ---> more responsibility...
- - still making the lay-out of our Student Council news letter --> I hope that it'll be fine...

Why Shouldn't I drop?

2009-07-19T20:31:00.005+08:00

It's 12:33 AM. I gave up reading...

I'm not yet finished reading and understanding the cases in Labor Relations Law.
- Rights of the the Members of Labor Organizations.
- Remedies in case of violation of rights.
- Unfair Labor Practices.

My mind is very tired and sick of reading these following words:
- Labor Organization
- Union
- Med Arbiter
- Bureau of Labor Relations (BLR)
- National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC)
- Labor Arbiter
- Reyes Trajano
- Ferrer-Calleja
- Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE)
- Secretary of Labor and Employment
- Federation
- Local Charter
- Independent Union
- Unfair Labor Practices
- Labor Code
- Omnibus Rules
- Voluntary Arbitration
- Certification Election
- Petition for Certification Election
- Employees
- Employer
- Union Security Clauses
- Closed Shop
- Union Shop
- Modified Union Shop
- and other related words

A number of my classmates dropped the subject.
- - for these concurring reasons - -
- - WE DO NOT LIKE THE STYLE OF THE PROFESSOR - -
- - Aside from he only terrorizes us, WE ARE NOT LEARNING SOMETHING - -
- - UNFAIR - -
- - The saying of 1 MILLION UNITS - -

I decided. I WILL NOT DROP.

I really understand why my classmates dropped.

BUT...
I have more compelling reasons for my self why not to drop.
As I contemplate, I thought of these reasons...

1. I survived my 1st year not using my full effort and skills without failing a single subject.
--- This only means that I can do better this year than the previous year.
--- All I have to do is to add more effort and my the improvement of my skills will follow.

2. I got a grade of 87 percent in my Labor Standards class to a professor who has a better credentials than my present instructor and has a strict standards in grading.
--- Why should I be afraid to a professor who only knows is to terrorize?

3. I'm the class president. I should be a role-model. I should be strong.
--- Our class should stand strong. I don't want to fail them. We should fight!

4. My friends in the Faculty of Civil Law are always there for support!
--- We can do this together! United we are strong!

5. Aside from being a Thomasian. I must not forget that I'm a La Sallian!
--- It is a shame for me, being a La Sallian, that I will just give-up with this small trial!
--- ANIMO! xxx and never shall we fail!

All contradictions from my previous blog entries are hereby repealed! lolz

It's now 1:42 AM... Time to sleep... The new morning is waiting for me. :)

A Crucial Stage

2009-07-15T04:13:00.008+08:00

I am now in the stage of contemplating if my decision of studying law is right.

I know that most of you know that I just a happy-go-lucky person who hates reading and studying.

A conventional law student, as they said, should be reading and studying much which I'm not doing. They say that a law student should be studying at least more than 50% of their time which I failed to do.

Yes, I know that I have a lot of time to study. But I'm not really comfortable doing it.

Reading lots of cases...
Memorizing provisions of law...
NO WAY

With that way of attitude, it seems that I can't survive in the Faculty of Civil Law.

I'm just studying 1-2 hours a day and that's it.

In my first year, I don't know why I survived with that kind of study habits considering more that half of my classmates, who studies a lot more than I do, were debarred from UST.
PS: I didn't fail a single subject...

I'm really wondering why.

Maybe, I'm just LUCKY... I'm NOT BRILLIANT anyway...

I repeat... I HATE READING (cases) AND MEMORIZING (provisions).
I can't force myself to do so...

I cannot make myself a conventional law student. I'm trying to do but I really can't do so!

I'm still allowed to drop subjects before August 3rd.
I'm still thinking about it...

Question: Should I really act as a "conventional law student" in order to survive?

So tired...

2009-06-27T14:11:00.002+08:00

Last night, I went to the birthday dinner of a high school friend in Quezon City after my evening law class. It was fun and happy seeing my high school friends after a long time.

Have some games.
Have some drinks.

I got home for about 4am this morning.

I went to school at 8am.

I was called for the recitation in Negotiable Instruments Law.
I was called for the recitation in Labor Relations Law.
I was called for the recitation in Public Corporations.

GRAND SLAM!!!

Reasoning...

2009-06-25T08:28:00.001+08:00

What is the reason why am I doing these things?

None. I don't need a reason. I know what to do.

The world is too big to find the reason of its existence. We are just a small part of this big world.

stressed...

2009-06-22T20:19:00.001+08:00

3 hours of Law on Property... movable, immovable...
Sobrang bilis...
Article 415 - Article 439.
Isang meeting lang 'yun.
Buti na lang hindi natawag.

On our way home,
Sinubukan namin ang Roxas Blvd. route.
Akala namin, may left turn papuntang Vito Cruz...
'Yan tuloy, sa MoA pa kami naka-ikot.
Pero ok lang 'yun...

Sapagkat mas nakaka-pressure ang Labor Standards Law bukas...
1 Million Units!!! (hoping for the class suspension)
...and Criminal Procedures...

Anong mas nakakatakot? Law Recitation o Multo?

2009-06-21T19:56:00.004+08:00

May nabasa akong isang blog na nagsasabing may nagpaparamdam daw sa room 141 ng UST Main Building. Ang room 141 ang aming silid-alaran noong 1st year at maging ngayong 2nd year. Ang balita daw ay may namatay na isang mag-aaral ng Pharmacy sa naturang silid na naka-upo sa may bandang likuran. Sa may bandang likuran din ako naka-upo. Marami na daw kaso ng pag-paparamdam ang naging usap-usapan sa Main Building ng UST tulad nang pagpapakita daw ng isang espiritu na hugis pari.

Medyo nakakatakot ang mga ganoong usapan lalo na't isang hot spot ang aming silid-aralan.

Ngayon, saan ba dapat mas matakot? sa recitation na mahirap sagutin o sa multo na talagang nakakakikilabot?

Who is the legal counsel in that case?

2009-06-20T13:10:00.001+08:00

Ano bang klaseng tanong yan?

2nd year law is a joke anymore...

2009-06-18T19:53:00.001+08:00

Now, I realized that 1st year law is just really the start and a lot easier than second year.

From 3 or 4 major subjects in 1st year to 7 damn major subjects in second year!!!

...more cases... ...less relaxed subjects...

...less time for leisure... ...more time spent for studying...

If the mortality rate of in 1st year is 57%... how about 2nd year which is a lot more difficult?

Despite of all those things, all I need to do is to study, study, study and study...

I might disappear in the social realm on the following days...

My last night in Batangas before I go back to Manila

2009-06-13T18:33:00.001+08:00

June 15 is fast approaching.
It's time to be ready for my comeback to the Faculty of Civil Law.

Vacation is officially over.

I can feel the shift.

I just packed my things (clothes and gadgets). I'll be going to Manila tomorrow. I'll be going away from hometown for a while.

Too bad, my room renovation is not yet done. Probably, I can only use my soon-to-be-newly-renovated room on October after the first semester.

My second year in the Faculty of Civil Law is a new chapter of my life. My 1st year block is now dissolved because of the debarment (kick out) of most of my former classmates. I'm assigned to a new block. ...not quite a major adjustment...

Things to look forward:

New classmates... that's for sure... but there are still former classmates of mine who survived... less than 15, I think...

College friends... I can probably see/visit them again... Kim, Ina and company in Makati... Maybe more often time with Brian and Ponch because their schools (San Beda and Baste) are just nearby... Selle, a friend of mine from LSPO, who is an incoming freshman in the Faculty of Civil Law... I'm also looking forward for the incoming UAAP games! ANIMO La Salle still!!! :)

Highschool friends/barkada... hoping to hang-out with barkada, Joshua, Jerahmeel and Jade, who are now Manila based, hoping that Carl and Gerard can go to Manila also... together with my other highschool friends. :)

New subjects... Criminal Procedure, Property, Labor Relations, Land Titles and Deeds, Sales, Public Corporation, and Negotiable Instruments... Quite tough but I'll do my very best! Study harder!!!

Most of all, My condominium in Vito Cruz Towers :) 36 inches LCD TV with cable, faster internet connection... landline... fastfood delivery... :)))

Reasons why we should not be afraid of that "UNWISE" CON-ASS Resolution

2009-06-05T15:49:00.004+08:00

I don't know why many people are on panic with the House Resolution on CON-ASS. They even organize rallies and protests.

CON-ASS shall not prosper because of the following reasons:

1. Senate will surely not allow that. The only problem will be if the Supreme Court decided of jointly and not separately voting.

2. If it overcomes the Senate, there is still a plebiscite so it is still the people who will decide if it will prosper. When is the plebiscite?

3. The time is not enough.

My 1st semester 2nd year law school schedule

2009-06-03T17:21:00.002+08:00

Classes Starts on June 8, 2009

Monday:

06:00pm - 09:00pm Properties

Tuesday:

06:00pm - 07:00pm Criminal Procedure
07:00pm - 09:00pm Labor Relations

Wednesday:

06:00pm - 07:00pm Criminal Procedure
07:00pm - 08:00pm Vacant
08:00pm - 09:00pm Properties

Thursday:

06:00pm - 08:00pm Sales

Friday:

06:00pm - 08:00pm Land Titles and Deeds
08:00pm - 09:00pm Negotiable Instruments Law

Saturday:

10:00am - 12:00pm Negotiable Instruments Law
12:00pm - 01:00pm Labor Relations
01:00pm - 02:00pm Vacant
02:00pm - 04:00pm Public Corporation

Legal Philosophy: Should laws be made or found?

2009-05-24T21:20:00.004+08:00

There are two conventional kinds of law: the natural law and the statutory law. Natural law, obviously, should be found because the nature mandates that law and not the human race. It is alleged to be the “Law of God” or divine law. The statutory law is the laws that are enacted by the legislative branch of the government and, obviously, it is made. It can be declaring, commanding or prohibiting something. Aside from the two conventional types of law, there is what we call the common law or case law. The common law is usually not written in codes such as the Civil Code and Revised Penal Code. It usually came from the customs and traditions of the people. The case laws (e.g. David vs. Arroyo) are those cases that are resolved by the Supreme Court. The doctrines from the cases resolved become part of the law of the land. That also resolves the ambiguous words of the statutes.

Many legal philosophers focused on the Division of Classes (Greek), Social Contract (Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau), General Will (Kant), and Division of Powers (Montesquieu). Those legal structures are based on the societal situations of their respective eras. They found solutions on the problems of their respective societies then made, construct and proposed theories.

Many of the statutory laws are derived from natural laws. It is natural in all cultures that killing people is not proper therefore the laws on crimes against person are made. Natural law is the basis of the statutory law and natural law should be found. Therefore laws should be both found and made. The cycle does not end there. Case laws are still on way that finds ambiguity on the made statutory laws and clarify them. Therefore, even if the law is already made, we should still find some solutions to the legal problem. One example is the voting system of Philippine congress on the constitutional convention. Section 3 Article XVII of the 1987 constitution reads:

“The Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of all its Members, call a constitutional convention, or by a majority vote of all its Members, submit to the electorate the question of calling such a convention.”

It is clearly written that the Congress’ 2/3 vote is needed but let us bear in mind that we have two houses of congress, the Senate and the House of Representatives. The constitution did not provide if they will vote jointly or separately. If they vote jointly, the Senate will be outnumbered by the House of Representatives. The Supreme Court should resolve that legal issue even if it is already written and made.

Top 10 "Alanganin" na TV Commercials

2009-05-06T09:08:00.003+08:00

This is just for fun. No hard feelings. :)

Number 10:

The Manny Villar Commercial

"Ang Lumaki sa Hirap, Tumutulong sa Mahihirap."

I admit that helping OFW is good but why does he need to spend a lot of money just to show off that he is helping those OFW?

Number 9:

The Tang Commercial

"Tubig Pasahayshin, TANGgaling!"

I wonder how a small sachet of Tang could fill the whole water system. Eh di walang lasa yun! hahaha.

Number 8:

Milo Sports Clinic Commercial

Bakit hindi naka-green si Chris Tiu? Eh Green ung color ng uniform ng Milo Sports Clinic... lolz :)

Number 7:

The Smart Commercial

"We're Helping Sports."

What's the connection?

Number 6:

The Makati Commercial

"Ganito kami sa Makati."

Makati is a good city. I'm just hoping that Binay's programs are feasible in the whole Philippines. Hope lang... hahahaha

Number 5:

The NDCC Commercial, Teves and PAGCOR

The commercial that warns the people on disaster is good but the face of the Secretary is not necessary in the commercial.
May buhat pa siyang bata! hahaha

The government programs that they show is good but showing their face with Manny Paquiao is questionable.

Number 4:

Senator Lacson's Anti-corruption Commercial

Anti-corruption? Words comming from a present senator promoting anti-corruption?
Natawa na lang ako!!! hahaha

Number 3:

Mar Roxas' Pedicab Driving

"Itabi mo... ako na."

I can slightly forgive other politicians' commercials... at least, they show some sort of advocacy. How about pedicab driving? It's a pure showing off! hahaha

Number 2:

The Tide Commercial

"Isa higit sa dalawa."

I think, it should be 1X > 2Y and not 1 > 2. That's all!!!

Number 1:

The LBC Commercial

"Spell Remittance... Capital LBC!!!"

WTH!!! OMFG!!!

Napa-iling na lang ako... Tsk Tsk Tsk...

*It's up to you if you will still believe on those advertisements. Happy watching. :)

Loveless (Crisis Core)

2009-05-05T11:00:00.002+08:00

    Prologue:
             When the war of the beasts brings about the world's end
             The goddess descends from the sky
             Wings of light and dark spread afar
             She guides us to bliss, her gift everlasting.

    Act I:
             Infinite in mystery is the gift of the goddess
             We seek it thus, and take to the sky
             Ripples form on the water's surface
             The wandering soul knows no rest.

    Act II:
             There is no hate, only joy
             For you are beloved by the goddess
             Hero of the dawn, Healer of worlds.

                Dreams of the morrow hath the shattered soul
             Pride is lost
             Wings stripped away, the end is nigh.

    Act III:
             My friend, do you fly away now?
             To a world that abhors you and I?
             All that awaits you is a somber morrow
             No matter where the winds may blow.

                My friend, your desire
             Is the bringer of life, the gift of the goddess.

     Act IV:
             My friend, the fates are cruel
             There are no dreams, no honor remains
             The arrow has left the bow of the goddess.

                My soul, corrupted by vengeance
             Hath endured torment, to find the end of the journey
             In my own salvation
             And your eternal slumber.

             Legend shall speak
             Of sacrifice at world's end
             The wind sails over the water's surface
             Quietly, but surely.

     Act V:
             Even if the morrow is barren of promises
             Nothing shall forestall my return.
             To become the dew that quenches the land
             To spare the seas, the skies
             I offer thee this silent sacrifice.

My Essential Gadgets (Blog Format)

2009-04-08T17:19:00.004+08:00

With this modern age, gadgets make our life easier and comfortable.
Here are the gadgets which are very useful and important to me. :)

1. Ipod Nano - My music player. Its 8-gigabyte capacity fit all the music I want.

2. Canon Digicam - I love taking pictures and I always bring my cam anywhere when there are events.

3. Nintendo DS - A hand held video game with dual screen (touch screen on the buttom). The graphics is not like of the PSP but it has many interactive games like Rhythm Heaven, Classic Games like Super Mario and Pokemon.

4. PSP - It's a very famous portable game console to all Filipinos. Its games have good graphics but the controls are conventional unlike the interactive DS. My most favorite in this system is the Dissidia: Final Fantasy. It can also run retro games of Gameboy and Super Nintendo using the Emulators.

5. 600 GB external hard drive - This is very useful to me because I love downloading music and movies which occupies a large space on my laptop. I also store my DS and PSP games on it.

6. Toshiba laptop - It is the heart of all may gadgets. Without it and the internet connection, all my gadgets are useless because I use it to download music and games and upload my pictures. I can also get a vast information with this using the internet like current events, new games, anime and many more. I can also contact my friends through YM and other networking sites like Facebook and Multiply.

7. Nokia 6300 - With all this gadgets mentioned, who needs a very high tech phone? The only purpose of my phone is to send and receive a text messages and call.

Album Format: http://master386.multiply.com/photos/album/177/My_Essential_Gadgets

END and CHANGE.

2009-04-01T17:24:00.002+08:00

There are only two entities that neither CHANGE nor END and those two are the ideas of CHANGE and END.

END does not CHANGE nor END.

CHANGE does not END nor CHANGE.

Everything CHANGES and ENDS.

Life CHANGES and ENDS.

Love CHANGES and ENDS.

Friendship CHANGES and ENDS.

A period, a condition or an era CHANGES and ENDS.

But an END or CHANGE of something means a new start of something else. The overlapping of END and the new start which is supposed to be ended by the former is very difficult. It is called hang over and the failure of moving on. The new start will not be efficient if the supposed END is not yet ended. I experienced many overlapping wherein I surpassed many but trying to work on others. It's really difficult because of the many past attachments that is a vast unnecessary baggage.

The best way to do which I'm thinking about for the last few months is to accept the END and embrace the new start. Refrain from overlapping because CHANGE is inevitable which is out of our control.

My Video Game Line up this Summer :)

2009-03-27T05:03:00.002+08:00

At Last! Summer Vacation and a two months continuous break from law school!!
Therefore, it's gaming time for me!!!

Here are my line up of games for the summer:

For Sony PSP:

1. Resistance Retribution
2. Valkyrie Profile
3. Star Ocean 1
4. Star Ocean 2
5. Chrono Cross (PSX)

For Nintendo DS

1. Chrono Trigger
2. Valkyrie Profile: Covenant of the Plume
3. The World Ends with You
4. Suikoden Tierkreis
5. Ninja Gaiden
6. Grand Theft Auto China Town
7. Pokemon Diamond/Pearl
8. Pokemon Platinum
9. Final Fantasy IV

Just an advice for other law students...
Don't think of law school when it's summer vacation otherwise, you'll not be able to enjoy it because you're thinking of the exam results and final grade. :)

That's all and Happy Vacation to Everyone ^_^

Renouncing my interest to Politics

2009-02-21T11:20:00.002+08:00

From this day on, I announce that I renounce my interest on the field of Politics due to the obvious indecency and immorality of the same.

In these days, in most of the cases, the major purpose of politics is not anymore for public service but for fame and power. Even if I have a degree in Political Science but I see politics in the Philippines not anymore a field of decency and integrity, I'm withdrawing my dreams to be involved and work for politicians sapagkat sobrang nakakawalang gana na.

Anything that I studied in my undergrad courses are just mere theories and infeasible studies that is not anymore effective in our society considering the behavior of most of the Philippine politicians. I really have a big dream for these country but I think that I should find another way other than the political path because it's a very hopeless path.

Even if I don't adhere to any religious affiliations, I am a man of law and justice. In my earlier years, I believe that politics is the partner and can go hand in hand with justice but now, I feel the other way concluding that POLITICS (not the field of political science per se) IS THE ENEMY OF LAW.

As I along with my fellow law students observe, the politicians are the number 1 violators of law. They are the one making laws but they often don't follow the same. They even make laws that is advantageous to them.

One example is a certain senator who is also a graduate of the said most prestigious law school (of course, it's not UST) who sends to jail (for contempt and disobedience) a witness who is alleged to be lying. In the first place, lying is not a ground for contempt in senate proceedings for the Revised Penal Code enumerates the grounds:

1) if the witness is summoned and the same disobeyed
2) if the witness rejects to be sworn or be in solemn affirmation
3) if the witness REJECTS TO ANSWER LEGAL QUESTION
4) if a person prevents the witness to be summoned
5) if a person incite the witness to disobey the summon

Lying is not enumerated in the crime and we have a principle in criminal law which says expressio unius est exclusio alterius (what is not included shall be excluded). The witness answered the question and the law does not distinguish if the answer is truth or not; the witness will just violate the law if he refuses to answer the question. Another point is that only the courts has given the power to determine if a person is lying or not and absolutely, SENATE IS NOT A COURT.

That means that the detention of that witness has no legal ground and therefore, that senator should be charged for arbitrary detention. The problem is that a legislator is immune of charge if the penalty is lower than six years. Arbitrary detention has a penalty less than six years so the senator is safe and that is a clear manifestation of abuse of power. The main purpose of these senator is not public service but gaining publicity to acquire more fame and power. Many politicians are doing this due the fast approaching of the 2010 election and not very known to the public the that these politicians violates the law.

That example is just one of the vast instances of the politicians violating the law and other example may be found on my previous blog entries. The same is also true to the executive department (not just the legislative and the oppositions) of the government which everyone (I hope) already knows and understands.

I'm really tired of these things!

The Philosophy of False Hope and Idealism

2009-02-08T15:02:00.001+08:00

False hope is defined as prestation promised to be true or circumstance assured to be a fact in the future which is caused by person's luck dependent minds that strongly believes in certainty of a very uncertain future event.

False idealism is defined as the state of absolute perfection and and denies relativity and failure.

A lot of people is depending on this what we call the false hope because this gives them courage to positively go on in their lives. People who believe in the certainty of the uncertain have ideals plans in life, knowingly impossible, still continue to hope but most often they fail. The idea of a Plan B is mostly not considered by them because of their idealism (or we can also say, false idealism). Unplanned Plan B always lead to the doom of a person's life and recovery is very hard.

Even though that there are a lot of ways achieving or consummating a plan or dream, people who adheres false idealism don't know considers those other ways because at the first place, they don't even know that there are other ways. The darkness of idealism devoured their creative minds that results to linear thinking.

Not all events in our lives are result of our efforts. There are events that are simply impossible to happen no matter how much effort we exert because their are other great factors like intellectual capacity, physical appearance, or even special skills or talent which is inherent to a person. All persons are unique and gifted with one or more of those mentioned but if a person is not gifted by a certain characteristics and that is a requisite on what dreams he/she whats to consummate, there is really a big problem. No matter how much effort one exert, if his/her inherent characteristics and plans are not compatible, most probably, that person shall fail.

The first thing to do is not to know what we want in the present (wants changes as times goes by), but to know what is our inherent talents or skills (it is really hard to do and it really takes time). After successfully doing so, that is the time to contemplate about knowing your self. Think about the plans which are compatible with your inherent capabilities and surely, success is just an inch away from your position.

Not all hopes are will happen and not all dreams are ideal. It may be ideal to the majority (majority who adheres to false idealism), but you are certain that what you are pursuing is not impossible and purely achievable.

The Paradox Between Political Science and Law

2009-01-10T14:28:00.002+08:00

If we will have to analyze the function of a lawyer (prosecutor, defense counsel or magistrate as the case may be) and a political scientist (political analyst or politician as the case may be), we can see a very different points of view on the issues. A political scientist's function is to plan and create laws and policy to promote the welfare of the society while a lawyer does his best to promote justice by proper application of the law.

In the issue of criminal justice (in general) in the Philippines:

A political scientist would say that the Revised Penal Code (which is made in the 1930's) should be amended because first of all, there are many loopholes in our penal system; the penalties of distiero and civil interdiction is so obsolete and in fact, the penalty of interdiction in the Spanish penal law (where our revised penal code was patterned) is already repealed. That law is really outdated. Another thing is the name of the penalties! What the hell is that reclusion perpetua, reclusion temporal etc? Those terms should be changed into ordinary terms that ordary people would understand.

In the lawyer's point of view, no matter how obsolete those laws are, there are still the law. the only job of a lawyer to follow them how illogical they are. If you want change, it is the job of the congress to change it. But however, those people in Sentate and House of Representatives are just making themselves popular and not making important laws that our countries need. The lawyers cannot do something about the change in law becasue that's beyond their job.

In the issue of the senate investigation on Bolante, Lozada, et al:

A political scientist (most but not all) would say that the senate is doing a good job of knowing the truth. They are doing something good for the benefit of our nation. Those ombudsmen are very slow in doing those investigation that's why Senate can be a good forum for it.

In that issue, a lawyer would argue that those senators are just abusing there powers. Yes, they have the constitutional power to investigate but it is for the aid of legislation. Where's the legislation anyway? After the investigation of Lozada, did they do any legislation? Those people in congress are just doing it for the aid of there election. They (senate) are already accusing their witness (Bolante) guilty without the final judgement of a judge. If fact, there is a ground that the detention of Bolante is abitrary which is punishable by Article 124 of the Revised Penal Code.

In the issue of the Alabang Boys:

A lawyer would comment on the issue on this manner: The prosecutors shouln't prejudged in the alleged bribery. The case is dissmised by the DOJ is the grounds that the buy-bust is void because o improper procedures. In criminal procedure, if the buy-bust operation is not properly done, the case shall be dismissed by the prosecutor. The media men even agravates the issue by not knowing the law first before reporting on the national television. If we will review the reports of the media, it seems that the prosecutor is one doing wrong because all they know to to expose issues and often not thinking if they reports is proper or not.

A political scientist would say that it is clear that criminal justice here in the Philippines is just for the rich. If a poor (who doesn't have money to pay lawyer and don't know his rights are) is illeglly arrested, he will still go to jail for sure.

In the issue of presedential pardon:

(There is a case that there are military men who were convicted in final judgement but pardoned by the president after one day of conviction.)

A political scientist would comment that it is so unjust to pardon those people. Where's the justice in that case?

A lawyer would say that it's the prerogative of president and no one can question it. Lawyers do not protect the president herself, but rather just protecting the president's constitutional power.

Disclaimer: Not all lawyers and political scientist would argue what is written above. Those are just some of my thoughts as a graduate of political science and a student of law with some insights of my proffesors in both fields.

Being a law student is really a major shift of point of view from the field of political science. But in a way, I can say that it isa also an advantage because I'm exposed in the different sides of the issues.

Now, it's up to us if what will be our opinion and how we will think regarding on those issues.

Different Circles

2009-01-07T17:46:00.001+08:00

The human society is made up of so many circles which can be permanent or temporary. In my experience, most of the circles are just mere temporary and only few remains permanent. In some cases, there are individuals who are trying to enter a circle even though it's obvious that they are out; in other words, "losers." Sometimes, there are instances (which is inevitable) that certain individuals are kicked-out of the circle for obvious or sometimes poetic reason. If we will have to wiegh, the latter is more painful than the former. One of the most famous remedy of the latter is go back to his/her former circle that he/she already abandoned. In the case of the former, I cannot think of any remedy based from experience because it seems that no circle accepted him/her or he/she don't like to be part of the other circle saving the circle he/she really wanted to be belonged. It's really unfortunate but that's reality. All dreams are not destined to be met. Losers will always be losers if they don't make a major change and realization in their life. Past is past while present is present but (the most important) past will never be present.

On My Plans for 2010 - Senator Escudero

2008-12-03T17:30:00.001+08:00

lifted from Senator Fracisco Escudero's Blog
http://www.chizescudero.com/chiz/Downloads.php

On My Plans for 2010
December 2, 2008, 12:29 am

Dahil sa mga naglalabasang surveys na kasali ako sa top 5 ng mga presidentiables, marami ang nagtatanong kung nangangarap daw ba akong maging presidente ng Pilipinas sa 2010. Ang masasabi ko lang ay oo. May pangarap ako tulad ng sinumang pulitiko siguro ngayon na humawak ng mas mataas na puwesto. Ang maganda sa pangarap, ito ay libre at hindi kailangang bayaran. Subalit ang mahalaga sa akin ay hindi kung ano ang gusto ko. Gusto ni ganito na tumakbo, gusto ni ganyan na tumakbo. Hindi mahalaga kung ano ang gusto kong takbuhan. Ang mahalaga, ano ba ang gusto ng ating mga kababayan na tatakbuhan ko o gusto ba nila akong tumakbo sa darating na halalan.

Ang mga kababayan ko ang humahawak ng desisyong ito at hindi ako. Subalit kung ipriprisinta ang pagkakataon, hindi ako tatalikod at hindi ko pababayaan ang pagkakataong manilbihan sa mas mataas na kapasidad, para sa mas nakatataas ding interes ng mahihirap nating mga kababayan.

Subalit napakaaga pa upang sagutin ang mga katanungan kaugnay sa halalan. Ni hindi pa nga ako lubusang kuwalipikado na tumakbo sa 2010 dahil ang minimum age sa pagtakbo bilang presidente ay 40 anyos. Kamakailan lang ako sumapit sa edad na 39. Sa isang taon pa ako sasapit sa edad na 40. Sa ngayon, mahirap pang sumagot sa isang tanong na hindi pa naman ako kwalipikadong sumagot.

Qualified na po ako na tumakbo sa 2010 ngunit hindi pa ako nagpapasya. Subalit kung tatanungin ninyo ako kung gusto ko ba o hindi, gusto ko at bakit ba hindi? Subalit panahon ang makakapagsabi kung tutuloy nga ba ako o hindi. Gusto ko sanang mabigyan ng ganyang pagkakataon habang bata pa ako, dahil kung hihintayin ko na tumanda ako na kasing tanda ng ibang pulitiko, baka pareho na rin nila ako at wala na akong pinagkaiba. Ngayon habang pinanghahawakan ko ang mga paniniwala, prinsipyo at paninindigan, nais ko sanang mabigyan ng ganyang pagkakataon na makatulong sa ating bansa.

Ngunit king sino man ang susunod na pangulo natin, ang dapat pagtuunan ng pansin ay tatlong bagay lamang. Trabaho para sa mga Pilipino, dito man o sa ibang bansa. Sapat na suweldo para matustusan ang pangangailangan ng mga kababayan natin. At abot-kayang presyo ng bilihin para sa gayon hindi magutom at maghirap ang ating mga kababayan. Tatlo lamang ang dapat pagtuunan ng pansin, walang labis, walang kulang.

Kung saka-sakaling mapagdesisyunan ko na tumakbo bilang pangulo at palaring magwagi, ang gagawin ko ay yung kabaligtaran ng ginagawa ni Pangulong Arroyo sa maraming bagay. Partikular na ang pagtitiyak na mayroong transparency at accountability sa pamahalaan. Ang sama ng loob ko sa gobyerno ito ay simple. Mayaman ang Pilipinas at may pera ang gobyerno. Hindi nga lang nakararating sa mga tao at hindi nararamdaman ng tao. Huwag nilang sabihing kulang ang pera at hindi nila kayang serbisyuhan ang pangangailangan ng ating mga kababayan, dahil kaya at dapat pwede. Kinakailangan lamang ay isang tapat na pinuno na nalalaman ang kanyang ginagawa.

Sa sinasabi kong ito, hindi nangangahulugan na nangangampanya ako o tatakbo ako, sinasabi ko lang kung ano ang dapat at nararapat.

Dalawa lamang ang plano ko para sa ating bansa. Una, hindi ako magnanakaw. Pangalawa, tunay na gagampanan ko ang nararapat na trabaho at obligasyon ng gobyerno sa ating mamamayan. Iyan ay ang bigyan sila ng pagkakataong umasenso at gumanda ang buhay upang ang mahirap ay hindi kailangang mamatay na mahirap. Ito ang trabaho na dapat gampanan ng pamahalaan, saan man, sino man ang nakaupo.

Darating ang panahon para sa pamumulitika, ngunit hindi ngayong araw ang pahanong na ito. Sa mga maagang nangangampanya at maagang nagdeklara, at maagang sumigaw na sila'y tatakbo, sila na lamang at hindi ako sasabay sa kanila. Sa dami at lalim ng problema na kinahaharap natin sa ngayon, ito na lamang ang ating harapin muna. Sa pagdating ng araw ng kampanyahan at araw ng pamumulitika, tinitiyak ko sa inyo na palagi akong sasama at palaging sasabak sa pamamahala ng kapasidad bilang patunay at pagkilala na dapat manilbihan ang mga nakakabatang henerasyon. Hindi na namin hihintayin na kami ay tumanda pa. Darating po ang panahon na ito ngunit hindi nga lang po sa ngayon.

1st year 1st semester grades

2008-11-23T05:29:00.001+08:00

At last. The Office released our grades!!!
My grades are not that high. The only information that I will give is that I don't have a failing mark and I'm not in probation. My QPI is above 78 (QPI below 78 will be subject to probation).
I feel that the second semester shall be trice more difficult so need to work more harder to save me from debarment.

Senate inquiry in aid of legislation?

2008-11-15T15:05:00.001+08:00

I'm very annoyed how some of the senators act nowadays.

This is an excerpt from a news report in inquirer:

Retired police comptroller Eliseo Dela Paz admitted Saturday sole responsibility for the alleged unauthorized release of the P6.9 million from the Philippine National Police (PNP) intelligence fund.

But Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago refused to believe Dela Paz's claim, which she called "heroic."

"Your own office, Mr. Dela Paz, is saying that you are guilty of violating applicable laws when you ordered, and verbally at that, the release of P7 million. Do you agree or not?" Santiago said.

"I agree your honor," Dela Paz said.

Santiago was citing the results of the PNP initial investigation into the Moscow incident, which stated that "The only basis for the release of P7 million from the confidential intelligence fund from the PNP was the verbal instruction of Police Director Dela Paz. Therefore it could not be denied that irregularity attended the use of government funds."

"Do you agree that your superior official, such as the PNP chief [Director General Jesus Verzosa] and the DILG [Department of Interior and Local Government] secretary [Ronaldo Puno] should be absolved, and instead, all blame and guilt should be pinned on you? Do you agree with this situation? Because in effect that is the consequence of this statement in the PNP report" Santiago asked.

"The release of the P10 million for the travel expenses for the supposedly contingency fund is based on my instructions," Dela Paz said.

"That's very heroic. You are assuming all guilt. But I have to tell you as a lawyer and a former trial judge that you are facing a regular sentence of 20 years or more than that. Are you ready to do that? Go to jail 20 years, leave your wife your child, your vision impaired child, just so other people can be free? Because I refuse to believe, Mr. Dela Paz, that you are the sole perpetrator of the crime or offenses stated in these two reports. I believe you are part of a bigger conspiracy and that…you are willing to assume responsibility for others. That seems for me to be the most humanitarian view of the situation," Santiago said.

read more: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/nation/view/20081115-172406/Dela-Paz-takes-blame-for-Moscow-mess

Section 21, Article VI of the Constitution reads:
"The Senate or the House of Representatives or any of its respective committees may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation in accordance with its duly published rules of procedure. The rights of persons appearing in, or affected by, such inquiries shall be respected."

It is very clear that the respective committees of senate has the power to conduct investigations on any matter provided that it is in the aid of legislation. Some of us are amazed on the superbness on how the senate conducts its investigation. There are two famous investigation at our present times: The ZTE issue and the Fertilizer Scam issue. And now, the issue of General De La Paz. There are no indicators that these senators are making these investigations in aid of legislation. Why are they conducting these hearings? The always answer is to know the truth. Then, where is the legislation then? Nothing I suppose. I'm not opposing the idea that knowing the truth is not important. But this things should be made in the proper forum. The proper forum for these should be the ombudsman and the courts. The result of senate investigation will not hold any bearing at all because first of all SENATE IS NOT COURT. SENATE IS A LEGISLATIVE BODY AND NOT JUDICIARY. Senate can only be judiciary in nature when in time of an impeachment trial. Currently, the Office of the Ombudsman (which I know, the proper agency for that) is conducting currently the investigation on the issue of Police Director De La Paz. If the senate is also conducting an investigation, IT IS REDUNDANT AND JUST WASTING TALENT AND RESOURCES. There are alleged secret intent why some senators are conducting those investigations. One of those is for the sake of political marketing which they easily exposed to media when investigating on those such contreversial matters. The 2010 elections is fast approaching. You know what I mean. My last concern that really annoyed mo is the statement of Senator Santiago address to Police Director De La Paz:

"Go to jail 20 years, leave your wife your child, your vision impaired child, just so other people can be free? "

It's very personal and unethical... Pati 'yung pamilya niya dinamay pa. Maybe, some of you will say that I wrote this entry because a friend of mine is affected. I not saying that Police Director De La Paz is guilty or not in that matter because the investigation of the ombudsman is not yet through. Pero kahit saan niyo tingnan from legal basis, political science basis or even moral basis, maling-mali talaga ang gingawa nila... Kelan kaya magbabago ang pouitika sa Pilipinas?

My Collection of Law Books

2008-11-12T06:53:00.001+08:00

Law School is not yet over for me!!!!

2008-10-24T12:41:00.001+08:00

I'm now officially enrolled for the second semester in law school and this is my schedule:

Monday:

6:00 pm - 7:00 pm Legal Writing
7:00 pm - 9:00 pm Obligations and Contract

Tuesday:

6:00 pm - 9:00 pm Constitutional Law

Wednesday:

6:00 pm - 9:00 pm Obligations and Contract

Thursday:

5:00 pm - 6:00pm Legal Writing
6:00 pm - 8:00pm (Vacant)
8:00 pm - 9:00pm Criminal Law 2

Friday:

NO CLASSES!!!!

Saturday:

11:00am - 12:00pm Roman Law and Philosophy of Law
12:00pm - 1:00pm (Vacant)
1:00pm - 3:00pm Labor Standards

The exact figures of my grades are not yet released. The office told me that all my subjects except PERSONS are all passed because our grade in persons is not yet given by the professor to the office. I'm still eligible to enroll in just in case I fail that subject (PERSONS) because I passed the rest. BTW, in UST, PERSONS is not a prerequisite to OBLICON. I don't care if I have a failing subject or be in probation because law school is really hard. The important thing is the fact that I'm not yet kicked out from law school. I'm really happy today because I successfully enrolled for the second semester despite that the grades are not yet released.

The Finals of the Law First Semester is Over....

2008-10-15T21:42:00.001+08:00

SPEECHLESS!!!!!!!!!

It's really hard to speak.

I don't know what should I feel.

It's very different from the College Final Exams.

Enough Said.

Quality Officiating....

2008-10-01T18:14:00.003+08:00

Grabbed the forum Archerpride.com

username: brandon33

Sports For All
By Philip Ella Juico
Philippine Star-September 30, 2008

Perhaps had PHILSPORTS been used properly and not junked by those who assumed office at the PSC after June 30, 1998 and others who followed years later, there probably would have been quite a number of high-quality accredited basketball referees who would not have ruined an otherwise exciting championship game between De La Salle and Ateneo last Sept. 25.

I had hoped that referees numbered 12, 15 and 19 who nearly spoiled the De La Salle-Far Eastern University on Sept. 14 would not officiate in succeeding UAAP games. Luckily not one of them refereed in the first game of the best-of-three series between De La Salle and Ateneo on Sept. 21. Ateneo won the first game and officiating was adjudged satisfactory.

But alas, referee number 12 (why can’t the UAAP amend its so-called house rules and have referees names and numbers printed on referees’ uniforms?) identified as Bobby Mendoza, reappeared in Game Two of the series and, together with colleagues Magpantay (number 28) and Roel Tolentino (number 14) deftly showed how it is to take a giant leap backward in the field of basketball officiating. Several former players and practicing coaches noted the inconsistent calls of the three, particularly Mendoza and Magpantay.
(End of Philippine Star Sports Column).

QUOTE (Bobby Cabral @ Sep 28 2008, 08:20 PM)

By now, you would have experienced gale force winds in Katipunan. Or you would have read articles in newspapers or blogs proclaiming the greatness of this season 71 edition of the Blue Eagles, Rabeh, Chris Tiu, Buenafe et al. They will also criticize our Archers as pikon and lacking class for not receiving their runner-up trophy, so perhaps we should be prepared with the facts.

1. While UP is the host of Season 71 and they selected the Narvasa Brothers (both former Blue Eagle varsity players) and were directly responsible for the referees.

2. Commissioner Chito Narvasa penalized La Salle and Coach Franz Pumaren during the first La Salle-Ateneo regular season game for not wearing his ID and gave two free throws to Ateneo. This inspite of Coach Pido Jarencio of UST being shown not wearing his ID during the earlier game and not being penalized.

3. During two regular games during the season, one versus FEU and the other against UST, referees who called technical fouls against La Salle's opponents were punished by Narvasa after the game with a termination and one with a suspension.

4. During the the final championship game, Buenafe, Jobe and other Ateneans could be seen taunting and trash talking but were not penalized.

5. The referees called 29 fouls on the Archers and only 13 fouls against the Blue Eagles. They awarded 28 free throws (18 which were converted) to Ateneo and only 8 free throws to the Green Archers.

6. The phantom finger of Rico was not clearly evident and since there was no reaction from the Eagles, it must not have happened.

7. The Green Archers were in the dugout during the awarding and no official from the UAAP called them out to receive their award.

Finally, if the Ateneans wanted to win with honor, they FAILED to do so. The Ateneo community should have asked the Narvasas to inhibit themselves due to their school history and obvious bias towards La Salle. I will concede the first three La Salle-Ateneo games in Season 71 to the Blue Eagles. But we will never know the outcome of game 2 of the Championship series.because the referees panicked when La Salle reduced a 15 point deficit to three in less than five minutes. Animo La Salle!!!

Nobody told us to get our trophy, says Franz

2008-09-28T14:28:00.001+08:00

Nobody told us to get our trophy, says Franz
By Abac Cordero
Philippine Star - Saturday, September 27, 2008

It wasn’t really on purpose that La Salle failed to accept the runner-up trophy last Thursday at the Big Dome following a very painful loss to Ateneo in the UAAP finals.

Coach Franz Pumaren said as the hurting Green Archers locked themselves inside their dugout after the game, nobody really told them that it was time to receive their trophy.

(Related stories on Page 15)
“Nobody told us to come out and accept the trophy,” said Pumaren yesterday. He was no longer as bitter as he was right after Ateneo clinched the title with a 62-51 win.

“Of course we were feeling bad but we were never really told to come out,” said Pumaren, who rued the officiating in the game that turned out to be the last of the season.

According to Pumaren, UAAP president Sergio Cao of host University of the Philippines decided to hand the champion’s trophy to Ateneo, amid all the celebration going on in the court, even if La Salle had not accepted theirs.

“I was told Mr. Cao told Fr. Bernie Oca (of La Salle) that they did not bother to call us because they felt that we were feeling really bad. That’s why we were not told to come out anymore,” said Pumaren

Pumaren said it has already happened in the past that the runner-up team in the UAAP was no longer asked to come out and accept the trophy.

The Green Archers, their coach added, have already accepted defeat.

“We’re okay now. In fact we’re already looking forward to next year,” said Pumaren, adding that from the Big Dome the Green Archers had a sumptuous dinner in a Chinese restaurant in San Juan.

Last Thursday’s match was the last game for JV Casio in the UAAP, and probably also for Rico Maierhofer who might turn pro since he’s about to finish his studies.

“Whatever Rico’s decision is we have to respect. We will not hold him back. He has played for La Salle for so long and he has given us a title (2007). He’s ripe for the PBA,” said Pumaren.

Pumaren raised the fact that during game the Blue Eagles were awarded 28 free throws (making 18) off 29 fouls called on the Green Archers.

“And compared to us, we were awarded only eight free throws during the entire game where Ateneo only had 13 fouls in 40 minutes of play,” he said.

“It’s quite a disparity. But that’s how the competition goes,” he said.

What a terror professor would say

2008-09-19T08:30:00.001+08:00

This is an indicator that a law professor will cold bloodedly flank students indiscriminately:

A professor of mine in Persons and Family Relations with a suspicious smile said (essentially) that:

"You know class, it's not yet the end of the world if it happened that you have been debarred from this University. Don't Lose hope. You can still pursue your dreams in other law schools. I have classmates here in UST that finished their law in other schools due to debarment. but still, they are also lawyers like me."

Interpretation: Assume that I will flunk you because I'll really do and that's the general rule. But remember that there are always exception to the general rule.

Black says Al-Hussaini a cinch for MVP plum

2008-09-19T06:15:00.001+08:00

Philstar.com - Tuesday, September 16

Whatever happens in the balloting, Ateneo's Rabeh Al-Hussaini, in the eyes of his coach, Norman Black, is this year's Most Valuable Player.

The 19-year-old center, who has shown tremendous improvement this season, has played a major role in leading Ateneo to this year's finals against bitter rival La Salle.

Al-Hussaini was closely behind Santo Tomas slotman and reigning MVP Jervy Cruz in the statistical points race but is expected to draw the votes from league officials, team votes and media votes.

The statistical points form 50 percent of the total grade, with 15 percent each from the teams (players and coaches) and league officials, and 20 percent from mediamen regularly covering the UAAP.

The awarding will take place during the finals.

"Personally? It's a no-brainer. I mean I'm not saying Jervy hasn't been dominant but Rabeh led his team to the finals. It (choice) should be an easy one," said the Ateneo coach.

"The last I heard being the most valuable player really is based on how you produce for your team and whether you can make your team win or not," added Black.

The last player from Ateneo to win the MVP award was Enrico Villanueva in 2002 when the Blue Eagles defeated the Green Archers for the title. It was also the last time the two teams met in the finals.

Black, known as "Mr. 100 Percent" in the PBA where he played for so long as an import, said this year's choice should be down to Al-Hussaini, teammate Chris Tiu and La Salle's JV Casio and Rico Maierhofer.

He said Cruz, the heavy-bodied, hard-working center from Santo Tomas, deserves the award, too, but his failure to lead the Tigers even to the Final Four should settle the issue.

"A good point is the reality that they're (UST) not running in the finals. If Jervy made it to the Final Four I can say that hands-down he should be the MVP of the league," said Black. - Abac Cordero (Philstar News Service, www.philstar.com)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Search:
HomePhilippinesAsia PacificWorldBusinessEntertainment & LifestyleSports
Copyright © 2008 Yahoo! Southeast Asia Pte Ltd (Co. Reg. No. 199700735D). All Rights Reserved.

An Essay on Philosophy of Person

2008-09-18T09:16:00.001+08:00

What is to be a person? For me a being is a person if s/he is exists. How do we know that a person exists? For me, a person exists not only because of the existence of his/her body but also the existence of the man’s true self or identity (or being authentic), and also knows what his/her potentials/opportunities (apply/use it) and limitations (be aware/accept it) as a person (that gives way to freedom) including what is the person made of and the most important, to be a subject and to be free.
The Body and the Soul
The article about the Experience of My Body and the Body as an Intermediary said a crucial point that the spirit is embedded to our body; and in that point counts as one way to determine what a person made of. We should know the relationship between our body and spirit in order to understand what a person really is. Others said that our material body is just a shadow of our real selves which is they called spirit/soul. But, where did that soul came from? What is that soul? Can anyone prove empirically that spirit really exists separate from our body? The answer is I don’t know. The article said that soul and body works together and without body, soul is nothing. Yes, a person is nothing without a body because s/he cannot do what he wants, s/he cannot talk, cannot express his/her love to others, or maybe s/he cannot think. Cannot think? Who does the thinking process? Is it the body or the soul? A body has a brain that does the thinking process. The brain sends message to all parts of the body to do an action and also it interprets what the five senses had sensed. The brain also stores memory and in-charge on our emotions like love, anger or others care of the hypothalamus. So if the brain is doing that, so what is now the role of soul? Is it possible that the soul does what the brain’s doing like storing of memory, thinking and others? Are the psychologists sure that the brain does it? How can we determine that the brain is thinking? How can we prove that soul really exists? How about the person who has mental disorders? Where is their soul? Are they still aware of their identity? I don’t know. The only thing I know is just one of them is true that either the brain or the soul is the one in-charge in our thinking process and memory. No one is certain about that like what in the movie, The Exorcism of Emily Ross; the defense lawyer said that it is possible that Emily Ross is really possessed by a demon but it is equally possible the she has only a psychological disorder. If the brain does it, that means that if a person dies, the soul is nothing but an empty and absurd object because the identity is stored in the brain. But it is also possible that the body is just a puppet of the soul and if a person dies, the identity of the person still exist in the soul. So, in the statements, “I am my body” and “I have a body,” I think that only one of them is the reality but no one is certain about it. I think that crucial point is still unanswerable for this moment but there is a possibility that one day, the real answer on that matter will arrive but let us also don’t remove the possibility that this issue will not be resolved forever and just accept the incompleteness of knowledge about what really a person is made of.
Authenticity and Relationship
The next issue is about the authenticity of the person. Martin Bubber’s exposition of an I-Thou relationship helpful to encourage people to be authentic. As I mentioned a while ago, one way to be considered existing is to be authentic. The I-Thou opposed to the I-it relationship where only one party considers him/herself a subject and treats other as an object. This relationship hinders the freedom or the other party treated as object. Freedom also one important aspects of existence as also mention a while ago. If one does not let others free, that person who treats others as object may be also treated as object by the others because of his/her inconsideration. And that inconsideration may be threat to his/her freedom. Example, a guy considers her girlfriend as object. In that case, the guy’s command to his girlfriend should be obeyed and or else, you know what will happen next. The girl may rebel against his boyfriend and can also do blackmail against the guy for example, splitting-up. That blackmail is already a threat to the guy’s freedom. That is what may happen in an I-it relationship. They should allow each other to be their selves and respect each others beliefs. There should be a dialogue not a monologue. Another point the Buber tells about being our own selves to everyone and in Filipino context, “plastic”. I think that a person’s identity is confusing if that man has different personalities to each person he knows. Those persons who are “plastic” and hypocrite are not trustworthy. An example would be, if a guy appears to be a Tapat (a DLSU political Party) supporter on a Tapat supporter friend and a Santugon (Rival of Tapat) supporter to a friend just to please or not to hurt the feelings of both of them. Then it happens to be that the Tapat person and the Santugon person are best friends but the guy doesn’t know about that. So if the best friends talked about who the guy supports, there will be misunderstanding on all of them three which can be a threat on their friendship. But, if the guy told the truth, I think, quarrel will be evaded and if the friend becomes angry to the guy for not supporting the party, I think that that friend is not a real friend for not respecting one’s belief. We should accept and consider the reality on ones identity no matter what painful it and we are lucky for knowing that truth because at least, we know the real identity of the person than the other and truth always sets us free. That is the importance of authenticity towards freedom that is one factor for the existence of a person.
Absurdity and Meaningfulness of Life
Now, the next point is the idea of Albert Camus about the absurdity of life which is one of person’s limitations. That point is very important for us because knowing what really life is will give us more freedom. The point said that life has no meaning at all and we must accept the reality that it is it. Many people are attempting the real and absolute meaning of life but I think those people are just wasting their time of doing so. The most common answer to the question of the people of what’s the meaning of life especially the Christians is our life should be offered to God. I think that those people are just fooling themselves telling that they are depending on God and that depending to a God is what Camus called a philosophical suicide. That other people who depend to a God is just escaping from the reality and finding out some sort of security by creating to their minds a being not present in the material world. Just like one philosopher named Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche told “Live Dangerously,” we should accept the reality that we cannot do anything beyond the present reality can offer. Camus also said that life is incomplete that’s why it’s absurd. But, it is not advisable to commit suicide knowing that life is absurd; that act is also a form of escape from the reality. We should just accept life as absurd. We should not hope for miracles or anything that is more likely impossible to happen in our situation. “Less hope less pain.” OK, miracles may happen but we are not certain of that. We must expect for the worse and if it happens to be that miracle occurred, I think that’s more advantageous for us not expecting for it rather than expecting for it but it didn’t happened at all. We should just depend on whom/what we are sure to be existing like family/friends, money and others. Thou that absurdity of life is a limitation for us, a person should also know what is his/her potentials/opportunities and one of those is the point of Viktor Frankl about the ability of the person to give his/her own meaning of life. That meaning of life is highly subjective and it cannot be determined/studied by psychologist, social scientists, theologians or even philosophers because there is no such thing as absolute meaning of life. We could be considered as object if conform for being determined. We ourselves are only one can determine what’s the meaning of life. That meaning of life we made will motivate us on pursuing our plan/dreams in life. Camus is correct that life is absurd but we have the freedom to put meaning of it. If we conform to the meaning of life psychologists or theologians give, I think that our freedom is violated in that sense. As a mention a whole ago, one factor of existence is to be free. We should realize/be aware of the range our freedom. We are free to make meaning of our life and we are also free not to give meaning on it. We are free and there is nothing wrong if we want our life to be meaningful/worthwhile or not as long as those don’t interfere others freedom which is the limitation of our freedom.
History and Freedom
The next point about our potential/opportunity is the point of the article of Historicity that our future is not determined by something like fate and will of God. All things that already happened in the past is unchangeable and if there is a bad thing that happened to us is also because of us or other people but not God or Fate. I think it is just an excuse if we that “it has to be” we failed an exam. But if it happened that we studied better before the exam or we got a better luck maybe, we passed that exam. Another one, when a couple had a break-up, the girl may probably said that “we had a break-up because God has a better girl for me” which is very illogical. It is right to say that the cause of the break-up is either the guy doesn’t like the girl anymore or there is a problem in their relationship. I think the girl only tell that reason about God’s will because maybe she can’t accept the reality the guy really don’t like her anymore. Now, enough with that Fate or God thing and let us go on the potential/opportunity what can historicity brings us. We have the freedom of on our future because we are the one deciding for our future and we should take advantage of it. We should improve/change what’s wrong in our society. We should use our own freedom and not rely on God/Fate because if we just rely on that, no improvement might happen. But there’s a limitation on this that we must aware of which is we cannot improve/change what is not existing in short, nothing comes from nothing. We can improve our technology like cars and cell phones because they exist already, but we cannot teleport on one place to another for now, because we don’t have idea of how it will work. But it may be possible because we may focus on that already because we have our technology and commercial establishments. Those things can help because it saves time. We can now focus on other things instead of farming and walking because we have already our supermarkets and automobiles. We should take advantage of our potentials in order to improve and make a better world.
Death and Afterlife
Another limitation that a person has is Death. Many of us are afraid of it but we should accept it and prepare for it in order not to be unpeaceful if we die. Though no one knows if there is an after life or none, there is a way for are essence to exist without our material body after we die and that is to live life with others. If we die in that way, our family and friends will remember our essence because we been part of their reality. Though death is said to be a “big joker of life” wherein we may die with our task in this world remained unfinished, those loved ones we left may continue what we had started. But if we choose to live in isolation, if we die, are essence will also be perished and our task will be unfinished forever. But there is nothing wrong with that because it’s our choice as long as we can take its consequences. Persons living in isolation may be lucky if it happens that there is an afterlife because we will not absolutely vanish in the case. A death maybe is a test of love because you still love that person whom we don’t know if s/he is still existing or not, don’t know if that person who dies still remember us. Remember, no one is certain if what will happen to us after death. There is a possibility that our awareness of our identity also vanished together with our dead body. It is also a possibility that our soul reincarnate to a new identity as Plato and Hindus believe and what will happen is our past identity will be forgotten already. But the best possibility for us is what the linear point of view like Christians believe that we have a spirit that has an eternal life after death. In that case, our identity and freedom remains. Thou, Camus proposed that we should expect for the worst but, it is still up to us of what to expect however, remember that it’s our choice and we have no right to blame other being or something if things goes terrible. In the statement that death is a statement of freedom, I think that no one is certain about that because as I said earlier that no one is certain about our situation about death. How can we be free if we don’t exist anymore after death? But if it happens the Christians are correct, there would be no problem about our freedom.
The Absolute Thou or God
The last point I know which is also important is the point about the absolute thou. It is an important point because we can’t deny that most people incorporate that absolute thou in their lives and rely on Him. I think it is already predictable of what is my stand about it based on what I had said earlier - that is the agnostics stand wherein no is certain if that absolute thou or others called God really exists. I admit that I’m one of those Agnostic people that does not stand for neither God exists nor not. The question is where do we get their strength of moving on of our desperate life if it happens to be that our friends and family is on anymore present on our side? Is that God or absolute thou enters to our life or it is just a psychological ability of a person to move on? Both of them are possible, right? Again, I will mention Camus proposal that we must only rely on what we are certain. But, what if God really exist? Blaise Pascal, a mathematician, theologian, and a philosopher said that to believe in God is a bet. He said that when a man happens to believe in God and it also happen that he when he died, he saw that there is no absolute thou existing. What will happen to that man who lived a life of morality and followed God’s will? Nothing will happen, right? But what if he doesn’t believe that God exist and he did all the sins and crimes then it happened to be that God really exists. What will happen to that man? I think that that man is in big trouble because he will be sanctioned according to the divine law. In short, Pascal is trying to tell us that it is safer to live as if God exist than live in a Non-Godly way. Even though I’m an agnostic, I should choose the way how I will live and that’s to live as if God exist for the reason that I will loose nothing if I do moral acts and not doing immoral acts which is according to God’s will. I’m not proposing that all of us should do so. It is still up to us if we take the risk of not believing or live safely by believing because we are free. There is nothing wrong if what you want choose of the two as long as we intervene on others freedom because remember that we are not alone in this world and we must consider others as well. Example, if we choose to live as if God does not exist, it means that we can do any crime we want like to kill or to rape. But, others have the freedom to live/survive and to be virgin. We should consider those freedoms before doing something wrong. So if that’s the case, we might think that the only thing we can do is what is not evil. If we are thinking in that way, we are wrong about that. We can commit suicide without violating others freedom, right?
Summary and Conclusion
Now as you have noticed, my philosophy of the person focused on options and uncertainty. As I mentioned on the first paragraph, to be a person is to exist and to exist to be a subject and be free. I also mentioned about the limitations to be aware of and accepted and those are the absurdity of life, death, and the consideration that others also exist. On the other hand, I also mention our potentials and opportunities which to be used/applied and take advantaged and those are the person’s ability to give meaning to life and the ability to make our own history/to improve and change the world if necessary. I also mentioned of being authentic in terms relationships with others that gives way to freedom and subjectivity. About on what is a person are made of, I think that we should still work on it. And lastly, the issue about the absolute self will help us decide of what kind life we should live. We should live life on our own ways and not what is prescribed by other people. We are given options to help us decide and if there are no options present, I think that is a threat against our freedom. There is no absolute way on how to live life. We make/control our life. We are the scriptwriter of our life! And in that control subjectivity of life enters. If there is only one way/ there is an ideal way of living life, I think it is a stereotype and that stereotypic way of life has no difference in an objective way of life which is obviously against the subjectivity of the person.
I believe that in order to recognize our true selves is to know what is possible and not what the fact is. I believe that facts lessen our freedom because a facts change as times goes by but possibilities don’t. For me, we should be doubtful of what is fact because it the way for us to give birth little by little of the answer to the mystery of what is really being a person. For me, philosophy of the person is a continuous search and I don’t know when this search will come into and end.

God and Atheism

2008-09-17T18:06:00.001+08:00

Atheist philosophy plays a big role on the study and analyzing religion particularly the existence and dependence of human kind on a higher being called God. Though the ideas of those atheists contradict theists belief on the way we look on God and religion, we can not deny that those kinds of philosophy have valid points that we can consider to reflect on. We should be open minded before we totally reject their ideas without studying and analyzing first their ideas because we have no right to reject ideas which we do not have the knowledge of it. Some of the known atheists are Ludwig Feuerbach which known for his idea of anthromorphism, Friedrich Nietzsche and his Ubermensch, Karl Marx and Marxism, Jean Paul Sartre and Existentialism, and Albert Camus and the absurd. I will try to discuss their points one by one and I will give my analysis for those points.

The first philosopher that I will discuss is Ludwig Feuerbach. According to him on his book “The Essence of Christianity,” men have different perceptions and definitions about God. It is the case because men are not born perfect and they are projecting in their minds a being which they could depend on. Being that can fill the inadequacy of their ability and possessions. Being that can make them feel perfect because of the belief that that being is helping and doing ways to solve some sort of troubles in their lives. And that being he is trying to say is God. An example would be, a bar examinee who is not that intelligent who will take the bar exam, to fill up his weakness, we will ask for God’s help to give him the right intelligence to pass the bar exam instead of trying to pass the exam on his own abilities. Another is a girl who needs comfort because her boyfriend left him. She would seek comfort by praying to God to make her feel better because of that weakness of not feeling well in that certain situation. That situation is what he call athromorphism will men project on their mind a being which is a perfect version of their own. Feuerbach has a conclusion of theology is only anthropology because the attributes of God that men are trying to project is just a mere idealized version of man. If in the Bible it is said the God created man in his own image and likeness, Feuerbach would say that man created God on his perfected version. Those points of Feuerbach really make sense because I realize that God should not be a pain killer and crutch to the inadequacy and compensation to human limitations.

The next philosopher is Karl Marx which is obviously the main proponent of Marxism. Marxism explains about the exploitation of the ruled class by the ruling class and one main weapon of the ruling class to rationalize their exploitation is religion. He said the religion is the opium of the masses. Because of religion, the workers let the capitalists exploit them because of the belief that there would be a reward from God afterlife if they experience suffering on earth. They work willingly without complains because of that belief. In the Philippines, it started when the Spaniards came here and introduced Christianity and that’s the start of exploitation using religion as weapon. And it is still the case in the Philippines in the present. As we see, Filipinos are very religious and just accept the exploitations of the capitalists. They don’t fight for their rights like not receiving enough wages because of the belief of getting a reward from heaven due to the suffering in earth. I think that the masses should open our minds on that they are already being exploited without knowing it and they should not allow the capitalist to exploit them in that way. They should rethink if God really gives reward on the sufferings and allow the capitalist to exploit them. I think that if he is really a God, He will not allow this kind of exploitation and that belief of religion having a reward on the suffering and allowing the capitalist to exploit the workers is very illogical and stupid.

The next would be Friedrich Nietzsche who is famous in his line “God is dead.” God had died in Nietzsche’s world and He did not claim the responsibility for the killing, but he was enthusiastic about celebrating the wake. The Modern world was also inhospitable to heroes, the half-gods, and godlike men who might redeem life through their greatness. For him, the bane of modern life was just a denial of the heroic, the denial of all greatness, the deprecation of all striving. His purpose was to instill a passion of greatness in a world without God. There is a problem on morality if religion or God not exist but Nietzsche has a solution for that. He said that there are two kinds of morality: The master morality and the slave morality. Slave morality is the kind of morality that many people has. Morality on that manner is driven by rewards and punishments. Many people are just doing good acts and avoiding bad acts because of the rewards and sanctions they would get in doing so. It is like when a man is doing the the Ten Commandments say because it is written and it is the law. If there is no law particularly the divine law, those people who practice slave morality would do evil things as they do because there is no one who is looking at them. An example would be when a girl saw a chocolate on the refrigerator and she knows that that chocolate is not hers she still eats the chocolate because she don’t know who is the owner of that chocolate. But when her sister came and looks for the chocolate in the refrigerator, she asked if who eat her chocolate. The girl replied that she eats the chocolate because she doesn’t know if who is the owner of the chocolate at that time and she also don’t know that her sister owns it. In that particular case, we should consider even without rules or people who is looking for us, we should still do the right thing. We should have a self honesty. Another example is when you are next in line in the ATM then the person withdrawing money at your front is finished. When you see the machine, you saw the machine is saying that “Do you want another transaction?” not yet inserting your card. That means, you could withdraw the money of the person in front of you earlier that easy. What would you do? Withdraw the money because no one will know that that thing happened or just push the button “No” because you know what is right to do even though no one can notice that you will be doing such crime. As Nietzsche said, we should have self-honesty and not be practicing slave morality. According to Nietzsche, to be a “superman/ubermecsh,” a person should Transvaluate the values and practices the master morality wherein man should act reasonably regardless of rules, rewards and punishments. We should do the right thing because it is right and not because of the rewards we could receive from God.

Jean Paul Sartre will be next in line with his existentialist philosophy. Existentialism promotes authenticity and the main opposite of authenticity is conformity. Conformity, as existentialists say, is the lost of identity because you are doing things because you want it to do but you are doing things because you like to be accepted by the society by doing what society said you to do. I believe that I should not be dictated by society but rather, I and only myself should dictate myself on what should I do and I hope to other person it applies. In conformity and lost of principle, I believe that the sense of responsibility of a person deteriorates because in conforming, the person tend to blame society or his family if why he is doing those particular things. Example would be when I guy is a two timer and it also happened that his father adulterates in the knowledge of the guy. The tendency of the guy is to blame his father’s adultery to rationalize his action of two timing. I think that the guy has no right to blame his father because it is the guy’s choice to have a two time relationship and his father’s choice. I believe that the guy’s action is irrational if he blame his father for it. The two beings has there own separate lives and dictating his son or conforming on his father is an irrational decision. I don’t say that we cannot imitate. The guy may imitate his father as long as it is own choice and he will take the responsibility for it and not on his father. It is also true in conforming in the rules of the Church such as being virgin before marriage. Let us make these two virgins, Virgin A and Virgin B, as examples. Virgin A is virgin because she is said that in is in the rule of the Church while Virgin B is virgin because she wants it to be a gift for his future husband. I think that Virgin B is better than Virgin A because she doesn’t do good did just because the rules says so but she does good things because it is her choice. Virgin B is authentic. Sartre also emphasizes that existence precedes essence in the case of human beings. We are not like ball pen that has already an essence which is used as writing material before it is made. Man has no manufacturer unlike ball pen that does have. And that said manufacturer which is believed by many is God. Man is the script writer of his own life and it is contracting on the ideas of God’s plan and God’s time. Man is condemned to be free and all the things happened in our life are the choices we made and not the plan of God. Example in an exam, you pray to God that you wanted to pass but you didn’t study. You will absolutely fail the exam in that case because you are the one who chooses not to study and it is not the choice of God. Another thing is the concept of death due to accidents. Some say that he died because it his already to die as God’s time said. Sartre says that there is no such thing as accident because that man chooses the way he drives, what car he would use, what way he will take, what speed he will run and many more. Sartre even says that death except for the absolute death is in our hands because we choose our lifestyle, we choose what we eat, we choose whether we will take the medicine or not, and finally we can do suicide. The main point of Sartre’s philosophy is that we should not blame God on the misfortunes we had because we ourselves are the one who chooses the decisions that lead to that misfortunes.

Now, the last point is the idea of Albert Camus about the absurdity of life which is one of person’s limitations. That point is very important for us because knowing what really life is will give us more freedom. The point said that life has no meaning at all and we must accept the reality that it is it. Many people are attempting the real and absolute meaning of life but I think those people are just wasting their time of doing so. The most common answer to the question of the people of what’s the meaning of life especially the Christians is our life should be offered to God. I think that those people are just fooling themselves telling that they are depending on God and that depending to a God is what Camus called a “philosophical suicide.” That other people who depend to a God is just escaping from the reality and finding out some sort of security by creating to their minds a being not present in the material world. Just like Nietzsche told “Live Dangerously,” we should accept the reality that we cannot do anything beyond the present reality can offer. Camus also said that life is incomplete that’s why it’s absurd. But, it is not advisable to commit suicide knowing that life is absurd; that act is also a form of escape from the reality. We should just accept life as absurd. We should not hope for miracles or anything that is more likely impossible to happen in our situation. “Less hope less pain.” OK, miracles may happen but we are not certain of that. We must expect for the worse and if it happens to be that miracle occurred, I think that’s more advantageous for us not expecting for it rather than expecting for it but it didn’t happened at all. We should just depend on whom/what we are sure to be existing like family/friends, money and others according to Camus. God should not be an escape route if we could not think of anything anymore.

Now, I already discussed the points of those atheists but this is the question: Do those points can prove that God does not exist? I think that the answer is no because though those points are true and logical, they don’t have empirical evidences to disprove God’s existence just like what agnostics say. What they have are just reasons on why we should not depend on God or why God is contradicting to freedom. I admit that those points make sense and true and I think that we should change a bit our actions towards God. God will understand what we do if He is really a God.

La Salle v. Ateneo: UAAP Finals Game - An insight

2008-09-16T08:27:00.001+08:00

On the 21st of September 2008, The Arch-rivals of Philippine College Basketball will once meet again in the UAAP championship game for the fourth time with the standing of 2-1 in favor of Ateneo.

In the outcomes of the game, Norman black is very confident in his team that they will grab the championship trophy which I partly agree. I admit that the Ateneo team this year is far better than last year while the De La Salle team is a bit inferior compared to last year's team.

In this season, UST, UE, FEU and La Salle are considered quasi-equals in tems of team strenght. If there are differences, they are just minors unlike if we will compare it to the Ateneo team. Fortunately, the DLSU is the lucky one who made it to the finals.

Of course, a La Salle v. Ateneo game in finals will be a big event compared if the finals match would be FEU v. UE, UE v. La Salle or FEU v. Ateneo. But more people are anticipating that Ateneo would grab the crown because of its performance in the season.

If we will compare the players of the Ateneo and La Salle, Ateneo has an advantage on both front court and back court players even the bench players but it does not mean that DLSU can not match those players. The more important thing is strategy.

The play of Ateneo somewhat like the profesional basketball style wherein they do not use the full court press but just making a zone defense on the inside court. Using Rabeh and Baclao, that play seems to be very effective. The main weapon of Ateneo is the defense. In terms of offense, all their players can attack any where they want. There are shooters like Chris Tiu, Esqueta and Salamat. Inside scorers like Baclao and Rabeh and other good offenders like Buenafe and Long. In my opinion, Ateneo will just make few adjustments.

On the otherhand, De La Salle should make the major adjustment on their team. In this season, La Salle wins by fastbreaks and traps. They make points through turn overs. While Ateneo has an advantage in height, De La Salle players are relatively more advantage in terms of speed. But this play of DLSU has been already remedied by Coach Black.

This some measures that La Salle can do to have a chance against Ateneo:

1. Casio should score.

2. Definitely, no double teams because all players of Ateneo can attack if they are free.

3. Ferdinand and Villianueva (Including Walsham) should priorities defense than offense in guarding Rabeh and Baclao.

4. Malabes or Webb (substitution) should guard Chris Tiu (and the other guards) as thier primary task and just give the offense to Casio, Barua and Mangahas.

5. Rico Meiorhofer should be reserved until 3rd or fourth quarter because of the foul troubles.

6. Rico Meiorhofer should do both defense and offense in the fourth quarter.

7. Casio, Barua and Mangahas should be consistent in their shooting.

8. Simon Atkins and LA Revilla should do good assists to Casio, Barua and Mangahas and nevermind the scoring. LA Revilla's speed would be a factor.

9. Casio should not play point guard.

10. Mangahas should take advantage of his faster speed against Buenafe.

11. Webb should be the primary guard of Chris Tiu.

12.Last but not the least, Jack Santiago's style of play should prevail because honeslty, Pumaren's play is not anymore effective against Ateneo unlike in the time of Ryan Arania v. JC Intal. Jack Santiago has a 2-0 record. (Just kidding :P)

That's All. Good Luck both teams. But because I'm a La Salle Alumni, I should say:

ANIMO LA SALLE!!!

People who share my birthday =)

2008-09-15T21:18:00.001+08:00

October 13

Just type your birthday in wikipedia.

1162 - Leonora of England, Queen of Castile (d. 1214)

1244 - Jaques de Molay, Grand Master of the Knights Templars (d. 1314)

1474 - Mariotto Albertinelli, Italian painter (d. 1515)

1566 - Richard Boyle, 1st Earl of Cork, Irish politician (d. 1643)

1613 - Luisa of Medina-Sidonia, queen of Portugal (d. 1666)

1696 - John Hervey, 2nd Baron Hervey, English statesman and writer (d. 1743)

1713 - Allan Ramsay, Scottish painter (d. 1784)

1714 - Pieter Burmann the Younger, Dutch philologist (d. 1778)

1768 - Jacques Félix Emmanuel Hamelin, French explorer (d. 1839)

1820 - John William Dawson, Canadian geologist (d. 1899)

1821 - Rudolf Virchow, German physician, pathologist, biologist, and politician (d. 1902)

1853 - Lillie Langtry, British actress (d. 1929)

1862 - Mary Kingsley, English writer and explorer (d. 1900)

1876 - Rube Waddell, American baseball player (d. 1914)

1878 - Patrick Joseph Hartigan, Australian Roman Catholic priest (d. 1952)

1880 - Sasha Cherny, Russian poet (d. 1932)

1887 - Jozef Tiso, Slovak politician (d. 1947)

1890 - Conrad Richter, American novelist and short story writer (d. 1968)

1895 - Mike Gazella, American baseball player (d. 1978)

1900 - Gerald Marks, American songwriter (All of Me) (d. 1997)

1902 - Arna Wendell Bontemps, American writer (d. 1973)

1904 - Wilfred Pickles, English actor and broadcaster (d. 1978)

1907 - Yves Allégret, French film director (d. 1987)

1909 - Art Tatum, American jazz pianist (d. 1956)

1909 - Herbert Block, American cartoonist (d. 2001)

1911 - Ashok Kumar, Indian actor (d. 2001)

1915 - Terry Frost, English artist (d. 2003)

1915 - Cornel Wilde, American actor (d. 1989)

1917 - George Virl Osmond, Osmond family patriarch (d. 2007)

1917 - Burr Tillstrom, American puppeteer (d. 1985)

1918 - Robert Hudson Walker, American actor (d. 1951)

1920 - Laraine Day, American actress (d. 2007)

1921 - Yves Montand, Italian-born singer and actor (d. 1991)

1923 - Cyril Shaps, English actor (d. 2003)

1923 - Faas Wilkes, Dutch footballer (d. 2006)

1925 - Lenny Bruce, American comedian (d. 1966)

1925 - Margaret Thatcher, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom

1925 - Gustav Winckler, Danish singer (d. 1979)

1926 - Ray Brown, American jazz bassist (d. 2002)

1926 - Walter "Killer" Kowalski (wrestler) Canadian Wrestler (d. 2008)

1927 - Lee Konitz, American jazz saxophonist

1931 - Eddie Mathews, American baseball player (d. 2001)

1931 - Raymond Kopa, French footballer

1932 - Jack Colvin, American actor (d. 2005)

1933 - Raynald Frechette, Quebec politician and judge (d. 2007)

1933 - Queen Narriman, second and last wife of King Farouk and mother of their only child King Fuad (d. 2005)

1933 - Baron Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales

1934 - Nana Mouskouri, Greek singer and politician

1937 - Sami Frey, French actor

1938 - Hugo Young, English journalist (d. 2003)

1939 - T. J. Cloutier, American poker player

1939 - Melinda Dillon, American actress

1940 - Pharoah Sanders, American saxophonist

1941 - Paul Simon, American singer and musician (Simon and Garfunkel)

1942 - Jerry Jones, American football team owner

1942 - Pamela Tiffin, American film actress

1942 - Bob Bailey, American baseball player

1943 - Mike Barnicle, American newspaper columnist

1944 - Robert Lamm, American musician (Chicago)

1945 - Christophe, French singer

1945 - Dési Bouterse, Surinam politician

1946 - Edwina Currie, British politician

1947 - Sammy Hagar, American singer (Van Halen)

1947 - Jerry Trupiano, American sports broadcaster

1947 - Alan Wakeman, English saxophonist (Soft Machine)

1947 - Sammy Hagar, American musician

1948 - John Ford Coley, American musician

1948 - Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan, Pakistani musician and singer (d. 1997)

1948 - Ted Poe, American politician

1949 - Tom Mees, American sports broadcaster (d. 1996)

1949 - Patrick Nève, Belgian racing driver

1949 - Marisol Malaret,Miss Universe 1970

1952 - John Lone, Hong Kong actor

1953 - Pat Day, American jockey

1954 - George Frazier, American baseball player

1954 - Claude Ribbe, French historian

1954 - Mordechai Vanunu, Israeli nuclear technician

1956 - Chris Carter, American television producer

1957 - Reggie Theus, American basketball player and head coach

1958 - Maria Cantwell, American politician, junior senator from Washington

1958 - Jair-Rohm Parker Wells, American musician and composer

1959 - Marie Osmond, American entertainer

1960 - Joey Belladonna, American musician (Anthrax)

1960 - Tim Brewster, American football coach

1960 - Ari Fleischer, former White House press secretary

1960 - Peter Keisler, acting United States attorney general

1961 - Doc Rivers, basketball player and head coach

1962 - T'Keyah Crystal Keymáh, American actress

1962 - Kelly Preston, American actress

1962 - Jerry Rice, American football star

1963 - Colin Channer, Jamaican writer

1963 - Chip Foose, renowned automotive designer and fabricator

1964 - Niè Hǎishèng, Chinese astronaut

1964 - Christopher Judge, American actor

1964 - Marco Travaglio, Italian journlaist

1965 - Johan Museeuw, Belgian cyclist

1967 - Scott Cooper, American baseball player

1967 - Trevor Hoffman, American baseball player

1967 - Steve Vickers, English footballer

1967 - Kate Walsh, American actress

1968 - Tisha Campbell-Martin, American actress and singer

1968 - Carlos Marin, Spanish baritone (Il Divo)

1969 - Rhett Akins, American country singer

1969 - Nancy Kerrigan, American figure skater

1969 - Cady McClain, American actress

1970 - Serena Altschul, American reporter

1970 - Mel Jackson, American actor and R&B musician

1970 - Paul Potts, British Opera singer and winner of Britain's Got Talent

1971 - Sacha Baron Cohen, English comedian

1971 - Billy Bush, American TV host

1971 - Pyrros Dimas, Greek weightlifter

1972 - Summer Sanders, American swimmer

1973 - Brian Dawkins, American football player

1973 - Peter Dumbreck, Scottish race car driver

1973 - Matt Hughes, American mixed martial artist

1973 - Nanako Matsushima, Japanese actress

1974 - Hawick Lau, Chinese actor and singer

1974 - Joseph Utsler, American rapper (Insane Clown Posse)

1975 - David Kennedy, American musician (Box Car Racer, Angels & Airwaves)

1977 - Gareth Batty, English cricketer

1977 - Paul Pierce, American basketball player

1977 - Kiele Sanchez, American actress

1978 - Jermaine O'Neal, American basketball player

1979 - Wes Brown, English footballer

1980 - Ashanti, American singer

1980 - Magne Hoseth, Norwegian footballer

1980 - Scott Parker, English footballer

1980 - Jon Micah Sumrall, American singer (Kutless)

1981 - Ryan Ashford, English footballer

1981 - Kele Okereke, lead singer of Bloc Party

1982 - Ian Thorpe, Australian swimmer

1984 - Frank Simek, American soccer player

1984 - Misono, Japanese singer (formerly Day After Tomorrow)

Google search your name =)

2008-09-15T06:10:00.001+08:00

Type in the following and choose the choice (that makes sense) that appears on the list.

1. Type in "[your name] needs" in Google Search:
Earl needs to know, that his message is loud and clear, and we will march with him every step of the way.

[huh? napakalalim naman nito... hehehe]

2. Type in "[your name] looks like" in Google Search:
Does Ronnie Vannucci Jr. look like Earl From My Name Is Earl?

[another ambiguous result]

3. Type in "[your name] loves" in Google Search:
Earl loves it.

[loves what? maybe playing PSP/DS, collecting stuffs or reading law cases.. whatever]

4. Type in "[your name] says" in Google Search:

Earl Says: "Hinduism is a false religion" is not a lie.

[If I say that, I should also say that Christianity is also a false religion so It's more appropriate saying that All religion is true.]

5. Type in "[your name] does" in Google Search:
Amazing Earl Does it again!

[I hope that it's passing the law exams.]

6. Type in "[your name] hates" in Google Search:
Earl hates married life.

[enough said]

7. Type in "[your name] goes to" in Google Search:
Earl Goes To Paris.

[not excited]

8. Type in "[your name] wants" in Google Search:

Earl Wants To See You In Prison.

[I can do that if I'll be a prosecuting attorney but I always dream to be a defense attorney.]

9. Type in "[your name ]is" in Google Search:
Earl is in your extended network.

[a friendster jargon??? hahaha]

The Factor of Religion on the Philippine Anti-Death Penalty Law

2008-09-14T18:30:00.002+08:00

I. Introduction

Death penalty is a major world issue. Many organizations and institutions like Amnesty International and the Catholic Church advocate for its abolition. Many countries like the Philippines remove the penalty of death in their existing laws and one of the alleged main factors of its lifting is religion. In the world, as released by Amnesty International (2008), there are 135 out of 197 countries have abolished the death penalty in law or practice while 62 countries preserve and employ the death penalty, most often as a retribution for people convicted of murder. At least 1,591 people were known to be executed in 25 countries during 2006. The 91 % of all identified executions in 2006 happened in China, Iran, Pakistan, Iraq, Sudan and the USA.

By definition, Capital Punishment, also called as Death Penalty, is the legal infliction of death as a penalty for violating criminal law. Throughout history people have been put to death for various forms of wrongdoing. Methods of execution have included such practices as crucifixion, stoning, drowning, burning at the stake, impaling, and beheading. Today, capital punishment is typically accomplished by lethal gas or injection, electrocution, hanging, or shooting (Zimring, 2006).

This paper is a study of religion and politics in the Philippines in a broader sense wherein the factor of religion will be examined through the methods of content analysis and philosophical/scriptural approach of the history, actions, arguments and statements of the actors who are related to the decisions of death penalty from the news articles, previous studies and transcript of legislative procedures. This paper seeks to determine if religion is the main factor in the decision of abolishing the death penalty in the Philippines. The analysis of the facts will focus on two branches of government that are involved in the decision making process in the abolition of death penalty which are the legislative and the executive branch. The Philippine and Church History on death penalty will be also presented and compared because on those events trends will be better understood. Arguments and theories on death penalty will be also presented and analyzed and also see how religion has influenced those arguments. The paper is not made to make a stand on death penalty but just to see the impact of religion in it. However, it may help the readers to make a stand on the issue. This paper will also help in answering some questions regarding the separation of Church and State in the Philippine context.

However, there are several limitations of the study. One of these is the restricted access to the full records of the Philippine legislature. In that case, secondary materials such as worldwide web postings, and other publications within the public sphere were used. Another limitation is the assurance and sincerity of the press statements of the actors involved because this paper strongly relies on the news articles and documents regarding death penalty that are available.

II. History of Death Penalty in the Philippines

The imposition of the death penalty in the Philippines has an exploitive history. For the most part which is from 1848 to 1987, it was used to restrain the liberties, freedoms and rights of the Filipino people. In recent history, however, the death penalty was imposed again as a hasty response to what has largely been seen as rising criminality in the country (Pabico, 2006). But later on, the Senate and House of Representatives voted to abolish the death penalty (Datinguinoo, 2006) and approved by the President afterwards.
The Mamamayang Tutol sa Bitay-Movement for Restorative Justice (MTBMRJ) has provided a comprehensive history report of death penalty in the Philippine context.
In the Spanish Period (1521-1898), Spanish colonizers brought with them medieval Europe’s penal system, including executions. The Death Panalty during the early Spanish Period took various forms including burning, decapitation, drowning, flaying, garrote, hanging, shooting, stabbing and others. Capital punishment was preserved in the 1848 Spanish Penal Code and was only imposed on locals who challenged the established authority of the colonizers. From 1840 to 1857, recorded death sentences totaled 1,703 with 46 actual executions. Filipinos who were death penalized include Magat Salamat in 1587; Gomez, Burgos and Zamora who were garroted in 1872; and Dr. Jose Rizal, who was shot last December 30, 1896. All of them are now considered as heroes (MTBMRJ, 2006).
In the American Period (1898-1934), the American colonizers, adopting most of the provisions under the Penal Code of 1848, maintain the death penalty. When the Penal Code was revised in 1932, treason, parricide, piracy, kidnapping, murder, rape, and robbery with homicide were considered capital offenses and warranted the death penalty. The Sedition Law of 1901, Brigandage Act of 1902, Reconcentration Act of 1903, and Flag Law of 1907 were enacted to sanction the use of force, including death, against all nationalist Filipinos. Macario Sakay was one of those penalized by the capital punishment through public hanging for leading a resistance group. The capital punishment continued to be an integral part of the pacification process of the country by the Americans (MTBMRJ, 2006).
Recorded or documented cases of executions through the death penalty are not available during Japanese Occupation (1941-1945) just because extrajudicial executions were widely practiced as part of the Japanese’s conciliation action to the country (MTBMRJ, 2006).
In the Post-World War II (1946-1965), Espionage was added to the list of capital offenses while the Anti-Subversion Law called for the death penalty for all Communist leaders. However, no executions were recorded for any captured communist leader. For this period, 35 people were executed for offenses that the Supreme Court labeled as “crimes of senseless depravity or extreme criminal perversity (MTBMRJ, 2006).”
In the Marcos Regime (1965-1986), deterrence became the official justification for the imposition of the death penalty. This is the same justification used for the declaration of Martial Law in 1972. The number of capital crimes increased to a total of 24. Some crimes which were made punishable by death through laws and decrees during the Marcos period were subversion, possession of firearms, arson, hijacking, embezzlement, drug-related offenses, illegal possession of firearms, illegal fishing, and cattle rustling. Citing the famous death penalty cases in that period, Jaime Jose, Basilio Pineda, and Edgardo Aquino were executed for the gang rape of movie star Maggie dela Riva in 1972. In spite of prohibitions against public executions, the execution of the three was done in full view of the public. There are nineteen executions took place during the Pre-Martial Law period while twelve (12) were executed during Martial Law. Also in this period, Senator Benigno Aquino, Jr. was sentenced to die by firing squad for charges of murder, subversion and illegal possession of firearm in 1977. The last judicial execution under the Marcos years was in October 1976 when Marcelo San Jose was executed through electrocution. Comparable to the reasons for the imposition of capital punishment during the Colonial Periods, the death penalty during the Marcos Regime was imposed to subdue rebellion and social disturbances (MTBMRJ, 2006).
After the EDSA revolution during the time of President Corazon Cojuangco Aquino (1986-1992), the Death Penalty was abolished under the 1987 Constitution. The Philippines was the first Asian country to abolish the death penalty for all crimes. All death sentences were reduced to reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment. In 1988, the military started lobbying for the imposition of the death penalty for crimes committed by the CPP-NPA (MTBMRJ, 2006).
In the time of President Fidel Valdez Ramos (1993-1998), high profile crimes are increasing, counting the murder of Eileen Sarmenta and Allan Gomez. That created public impression that heinous crimes were on the rise. The Ramos administration again imposed the death penalty by virtue of Republic Act No. 7659 (See Appendix 6) in December 1993 to address the rising criminality and incidence of heinous crimes. In that period, the Death Penalty Law lists a total of 46 crimes punishable by death and 25 of these are death mandatory while 21 are death eligible. Then later on, Republic Act No. 8177 (See Appendix 7) mandates that a death sentence shall be carried out through lethal injection (MTBMRJ, 2006).
In the time of President Joseph Ejercito Estrada (1998-2001), Leo Echegaray was executed in February 1999 and was followed by six other executions for various heinous crimes. In 1999, the bumper year for executions, the national crime volume, instead of abating, ironically increased by 15.3 percent or a total of 82,538 (from 71,527 crimes in the previous year). Estrada issued a de facto moratorium on executions in the face of church-led campaigns to abolish the death penalty and in observance of the Jubilee Year (MTBMRJ, 2006).
In the time of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo (2001-present), she publicly stated that she is not in favor of executions. But due to the rise in crimes related to drugs and kidnappings that targeted the Filipino-Chinese community, she announced that she would resume executions “to sow fear into the hearts of criminals” so Arroyo lifted the de facto moratorium issued by Estrada on December 5, 2003. Even as executions were set to resume on January 2004, this did not push through by virtue of a Supreme Court decision to reopen the Lara-Licayan case. Since then, the administration has been issuing reprieves on scheduled executions without actually issuing a moratorium. With the amendment of Republic Act No. 8353 - Anti-Rape Law of 1997 (See Appendix 8) and Republic Act No. 9165 - Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs act of 2002 (See Appendix 9), there are now 52 capital offenses, 30 of which are death mandatory and 22 are death eligible. On April 6, 2006, President Arroyo declared a commutation of 1000 Death Sentences. The big decision comes when Senate and House of Representatives voted to abolish the death penalty last June 6, 2006 with the Senate Bill No. 2254 (See Appendix 11) with 15-0 votes and House Bill No. 4826 (See Appendix 12) with 119-20 votes; the President immediately signed it afterwards to be a law last June 24, 2006 (MTBMRJ, 2006). It is now called the Republic Act 9346 – An Act Abolishing the Death Penalty in the Philippines (See Appendix 10).
I. Religious History and Arguments on Death Penalty
Most major religions in the Philippines are Christian in terms of faith and one of the major foundations of their faith is the Holy Bible. In that Sacred Scriptures we can see instances and stands regarding the use of death penalty in crimes. In the Bible, the history of the early Jewish Tradition wherein Christian faith came from was written.
In the Old Testament of the Bible, particularly the Mosaic Law, most of the crimes were punishable by death. The crimes indicated in the Bible that were punishable by death are following other religion (Exodus 22:20), a stranger entering the temple (Numbers 1:51), proselytizing (Deuteronomy 13:1-10), communicating with the dead (Leviticus 20:27), black magic (Exodus 22:18), adultery (Leviticus 20:10), incest (Leviticus 20:11), bestiality (Leviticus 20:15), prostitution (Leviticus 20:13), sexual activity before marriage (Deuteronomy 22:13-21), being seduced if engaged (Deuteronomy 22:23-24), rape of an engaged woman (Deuteronomy 22:25), prostitution (Leviticus 21:9), murder (Leviticus 24:17/ Leviticus 24:21), kidnapping (Exodus 21:16), human sacrifice (Leviticus 20:2-5), cursing parents (Exodus 21:17), abusing one's parents (Exodus 21:15), careless handling of an animal (Exodus 21:29), stubbornness and rebellion (Deuteronomy 21:18-21), blasphemy (Leviticus 24:16), working on Saturday (Exodus 35:2/Numbers 15:32-36), ignoring the decision of a priest or judge (Deuteronomy 17:12), perjury (Deuteronomy 19:15-21), accidentally killing a pregnant woman (Exodus 21:22-23), male who was not circumcised (Genesis 17:14), eating leavened bread during the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Exodus 12:15), manufacturing anointing oil (Exodus 30:33), engaging in ritual animal sacrifices other than at the temple (Leviticus 17:1-9), consuming blood (Leviticus 17:10), eating peace offerings while ritually unclean (Leviticus 7:20), waiting too long before consuming sacrifices (Leviticus 19:5-8), Sexual activity with a woman who is menstruating (Leviticus 20:18), going to the temple in an unclean state (Numbers 19:13), persons teaching another religion (Deuteronomy 13:1-11), a prophet whose prophecy does not come true (Deuteronomy 18:22), gluttony and excessive drinking (Deuteronomy 21:20). This shows that in the early Jewish tradition, death penalty is already legal and said to be according to God’s law.
The God in the Old Testament is said that He has done direct death execution by himself like the story of Great flood in the book of Genesis (ReligiousTolerance.org).
However, a contradicting punishment was also shown in the book of Genesis, first was in the murder of Cain’s brother wherein God disallows death penalty with this passage from Genesis 4:11-15:
"And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand; ...a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth. And the LORD said unto him, therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him."
That statement contradicts this passage from Genesis 9:6 saying that murder is punishable by death, the passage said:
"Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man."
Even in the New Testament, Jesus Christ has no concrete stand regarding death penalty. Jesus stated that the Mosaic Law (supports death penalty) shall be retained in Matthew 5:17-19 by saying:
"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one title shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."
Contrary to that, in John 8:3-11, Jesus Christ intervened in an execution of a woman guilty of adultery by saying:
"He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her."
In this case, it is impossible to prove that the Bible can be a basis of abolishing or retaining death penalty because of its inconsistency of stand. It is the Church officials themselves who has the decision of the stands of various Christian sects and not the Bible itself.
In the Early Roman Empire era, Christians were target of death penalty because Christianity at that time is considered as an illegal religion until Constantine came into the picture. But in that case, the situation was just reversed wherein Christian kills the non-Christians. There are also issues of Christians killing fellow Christians because of doctrinal differences (Mergivern, 1997).
In the Medieval Period, death penalty in the Christian community is still acceptable and they often apply it on the heretics. Medieval Theologians and Philosophers like St. Thomas had the stand agreeing in death penalty (Mergivern, 1997). Aquinas’ (1254) main argument says common good is more important than the life of one person. Part of his book (Suma Contra Gentiles) stated:
“Now the Physicians quite properly and beneficially amputates a diseased organ if it threatens the corruption of the body. Therefore, the ruler of the state executes pestiferous men justly and sinlessly, in order that peace of state may not be disturbed.”
In the reformation period, the Protestants will for change does not forbid death penalty while the Catholic Church still imposed the capital punishments on the heretics until the shift of Vatican I to Vatican II occurred. In Vatican II, the view of the Catholic Church in death penalty has slowly reversed and countries like Italy and Germany started to abolish that sanction (Megivern, 1997).
For the stand of the Catholic Church in the Philippines, the CBCP's position on the death penalty is based on the thinking uttered by the Holy See, most lately in the 1995 Papal Encyclical, Evangelium Vitae or Gospel of Life. In this account, Pope John Paul II brought the Church the closest it has come to calling for a ban on capital punishment by stating that: in modern societies, cases of justifiable capital punishment are 'practically non-existent'. He noted that:

“.... there is a growing tendency, both in the Church and in civil society, to demand that it (the death penalty) be applied in a very limited manner or even that it be abolished completely. The problem must be viewed in the context of a system of penal justice ever more in line with human dignity and thus, in the end, with God's plan for man and society.”

In the same statement the Pope also referred positively to the abolition of the death penalty when, speaking of 'signs of hope', he cited:

“…. growing opposition to the death penalty, even when such a penalty is seen as a kind of 'legitimate defense' on the part of society. Modern society in fact has the means of effectively suppressing crime by rendering criminals harmless without definitively denying them the chance to reform.”

With the observance to the issue of death penalty, CBCP President and the Arch Bishop of Jaro Anghel Lagmadeo (2006) stated that:

“The control of criminality as well as the reform of society is a common responsibility of the government, church and civil society. Corruption, immorality and poverty breed criminality. Therefore, less of these would mean less criminality. Crime breeds crime. The rehabilitation and reformation of pardoned criminals must also be assured for the continuing peace and harmony in society.”

However, Archbishop Angel Lagdameo acknowledged the country was facing rising crime rates but said:

"We (CBCP) believe that we should find another way of defending society that will obviate the need for the death penalty, which only brings out the worst in us all."

In relation to previous statements by Archbishop Lagmadeo, the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church states:

“The Church sees as a sign of hope a growing public opposition to the death penalty, even when such a penalty is seen as a kind of legislative defense on the part of society. Modern Society in fact has the means of effectively suppressing crime by rendering criminals harmless without definitively denying them the chance to reform… The growing aversion of public opinion towards the death penalty and the various provisions aimed at abolishing it or suspending its application constitute visible manifestation of a heightened moral consciousness.”

According to the Chairman of CBCP-ECPPC Bishop Pedro Arigo (2006), "we don't have to kill people only to show that it is bad and criminal to kill" while the Lingayen-Dagupan Archbishop Oscar Cruz (2006) stated that though the government has the power to enforce penalty on convicted criminals, the government has still no right to take the life of human persons by death penalty. He strongly stated:

"The life of any human person is not given by the government, is not owned by the government, and may not be wherefore taken away by the government,"
Cruz also posits that with the abolition of death penalty, crime will continue to happen not because of the lifting of the law and he stated:
"… but rather on account of evil human tendencies, due to weak police work and slow wheel of justice if not triumph of injustice. Human justice is not always just. This is especially true in this country where the ignorant, the poor and the helpless do not only have less in life but also less in law. Those condemned to death by the courts of the land by and large come from practically those living in poverty and want."
Also according to the CBCP, their decision is not purely doctrinal in stand, and it is a pastoral one. But like all pastoral stand, it is based on Church doctrine.
With regards to death penalty the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) No. 56 states:
“… if bloodless means are sufficient to defend human lives against an aggressor and to protect public order and the safety of persons, public authority must limits itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity with the dignity of the human person."
IV. Arguments from non-religious sectors
The arguments from non-religious sectors like politicians and non government organizations (NGO) are very important in the decision for the removal of death penalty because they can influence in the decision making process of it.
From an Inquirer Report (2006), Albay Representative Edcel Lagman, a co-author of the House Bill 4826, the bill that proposes to abolish death penalty, cited the following reasons why capital punishment should be abolished:
• It violates the ultimate right of a person to live.
• The death of a criminal in the hands of the State will diminish rather than uplift the human spirit.
• The death penalty is viewed as a “cruel, degrading, and inhuman” punishment.
• The enforcement of the death penalty did not comply with the law which requires the existence of “compelling reasons” to justify its imposition.
• It has not been proven that the death penalty will be a deterrent to crimes. Lagman pointed out that although the crime rate in the country was high between 1987 and 1994 when there was no death penalty, its restoration in 1994 did not stop the upsurge of criminal offenses, particularly kidnapping, rape, and drug trafficking.
In fact, Lagman’s two brothers (Hermon Lagman and Piliemon “Ka Popoy” Lagman) are victims of heinous crimes and that does not stop him in making sponsoring that anti-death penalty bill (Mariano, 2006). Lagman stated:
“Not all families of victims of heinous crimes believe that the only way the perpetrators can atone for their wickedness is to pay for it with their lives. Despite the death of my two brothers, my family and I are unwavering in our opposition to capital punishment. The viciousness experienced by my brothers in the hands of their killers will not be wiped away by the execution of their executioners. A grievous wrong cannot be righted by state-sanctioned murder. The horror of those crimes will not be diminished by the equally horrific image of poison being pumped into the criminal’s veins. We do not honor life when we demand for the blood of murderers, rapists and drug lords. Killing is wrong, no matter who does the killing (Mariano, 2006).”
Lagman counter-argued the idea of death penalty deterring crime by saying:
“Of the total inmates on death row, 60 percent were aware that capital punishment was in force and effect in the Philippines before they committed their crimes. Clearly, the death penalty has failed as a deterrent to crime nor is it the panacea to lawlessness. Rather, it perpetuates a culture of violence and continues to sanctify vengeance virtue (Mariano, 2006).”
He also said that the stand against capital punishment among the victims of heinous is not unusual by stating:
"This stance by victims of capital crimes is not uncommon. Corretta Scott King, the widow of Martin Luther King Jr., former President Corazon Aquino, Rep. Salacnib Baterina, whose father was murdered before his very eyes, and even basketball great Michael Jordan, whose father was also murdered, are all staunch opponents of the death penalty (Mariano, 2006).”
A survey has been conducted by the Coalition Against the Death Penalty in the Philippines (Amnesty International, 1997) and it says that the death penalty is being applied inexplicably against the poor, disadvantaged and ill-educated. However, the numbers were not released. There is a severe realization that the patterns of the past seem just to be repeated. A study of the pre-abolition period resulted that of the 82 prisoners executed between 1926 and 1976, 92 % came from the lower socio-economic sector (Amnesty International, 1997).

According to the Pro-Life Philippines (2005), Capital punishment is not the answer to increasing criminality. Actually, the death penalty has no place in a civilized society, much less in a society which proclaims obedience to democratic principles and to endorsement of human rights. It has been renowned that the source of all human corruption lies in the impunity of the criminal, not in the control of punishment. Pro-life strongly posted that it is not the harshness of punishment that deters the commission of criminal acts, but the assurance of punishment.

According to the Amnesty International (1989), death penalty does not have the capability to reduce crime or political violence and there is no convincing evidence that is uniquely able to protect society from crime despite of many scientific studies of the relationship of death penalty and crime rates. Based on the crime statistics from the Philippine National Police (PNP), there is no big difference on the crimes rates (Rape and Murder) before and after the implementation and/or abolition of Death Penalty. (See Appendix 3). The Amnesty International also posits that death penalty is used improperly against the poor and against racial and ethnic minorities, imposed and inflicted arbitrarily, irrevocable punishment that results to execution of the innocent, and violation of fundamental human rights.

Theories have been proposed in favor of death penalty and the first theory is deterrence wherein it is necessary to kill offender to discourage other people from committing crime. It maybe a plausible argument in the first glance but there are no empirical evidence to prove that. It is said that murder is committed with extreme passion overcoming reason meaning, a person does not think of death sentence before committing the crime (Amnesty International, 1989).
Another theory is preventing prisoners from repeating their offenses. Obviously, when a person dies, he cannot repeat the crime that he did because dead people has no ability to do so. But in reality, a study has been made that people who gained parole charged by death penalty crimes like murder seldom repeat their crimes (Amnesty International, 1989).
The next theory is the retribution wherein it says that criminals should be killed no because of deterrence and incapacitation but because for the criminal to repay his evil deed. But, in this argument, unfairness and bias is seen in reality wherein not all criminal charged with murders are executed especially for those rich people that can afford to win cases. The poor people are the common executants of death penalty (Amnesty International, 1989).
Public opinion is one of the strongest arguments of the propagators of Death Penalty. In the United States, Gallup Poll (2004) is saying that more people of any religion practicing and not practicing are strongly in favor of death penalty (See Appendix 4). An Online Survey is being conducted by Lawrence Hinman (2001) of University of San Diego. The survey is still going on in the present and as of now, the respondents is 5449. The survey has five (5) questions (See Appendix 5) about the stand on death penalty. In the survey, many agreed (32.75%) and strongly agreed (22.15%) that death penalty’s purpose is to payback on the offender while more agreed (42.92%) and strongly agreed (35.75%) that death penalty’s purpose is to deter crime. However, in the issue of its morality, it seems that the respondents have no common stand.
But, the Amnesty International (1989) has two responses to the high support of the public in death penalty. First is that human rights should never be dependent in public opinion. For example, torturing a person is not allowable even if the public supports it. The second response is that public polls on death penalty are not often based on complete pertinent facts, and also, the results of the surveys can vary depending on how the questions that have been asked. If the public is well informed about the issue, they might support the abolition of death penalty.
Various anti-crime groups in the Philippines are against the abolition of death penalty practically because of the fear of increase of crime rates and injustice to the victims of heinous crimes (Toms, 2006). Dante Jimenez of Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption, whose members are relatives of heinous crimes, stated:
"This government is siding with criminals and not the victims. Now some victims of heinous crimes may resort to hired killers to get justice. Victims of heinous crimes do not have, any more, the legal weapon to penalize those who have hurt them, who have inflicted harm to their loved ones. (Toms, 2006)"
Jimenez suspected that Mrs. Arroyo removed the death penalty law just to please Pope Benedict XVI in their meeting after the approval of the law (Toms, 2006). He added that the move comes at a bad timing, when terrorists, criminal syndicates and kidnappers are vigorous while the police and justice system is not effective. Ha also said that the government didn’t consult their group about the issue (Bakshian, 2006).
According to a GMA report (2006), Surigao del Norte Representative Ace Barbers wants the death penalty to be reimposed because of many political killings involving politicians, labor union leaders, prominent personalities, mediamen, lawyers, and judges since the abolition of death penalty. According to Paranaque Representative Roilo Golez, 111 cases of these political killings are high profile and one of these is the case of Abra Representative Luis Versamin Jr. who was killed last December 12. Barbers posited that the death penalty law had in no way given a chance to prove its effectiveness because of the postponement of most executions of death row convicts. Indeed he also stated:
"I don’t agree with the arguments presented by the pro-life groups during the debates to repeal the death penalty law, saying that the law was not effective to prevent heinous crime from happening. (GMA News, 2006)"
Now that different arguments from different sectors has been already been presented, the question of the validity of death penalty is still unclear but those arguments from different sectors that are against death penalty has common argument that it doesn’t really deter crime but those who are for death penalty, they say that crime is rising because of its abolition and the victims must be given justice.
V. Analysis of the Recent Philippine Executives’ Statements and Actions on Death Penalty
Executive actions were very important on the decisions made concerning death penalty because they have the power to approve veto the proposed bills made by the Senate and House of Representatives. The president has also the capacity to suspend the law or give the executive clemency. In this part, the actions of the recent Executive branch of the Philippines regarding death penalty will be discussed and analyzed.
In the time of Corazon Aquino, a Commission debate has been took place about the abolition of death penalty. Throughout the Constitutional Commission’s debate, the Catholic Church played a major role, positing for respect for life and calling for efficient reformative measures to be one of judicial errors, and the prolonged suffering the death penalty imposed on the prisoners and their families (Amnesty International, 1997). The decision to abolish the death penalty was based on these four main arguments expressed in the debates of the Constitutional Commission:
• that capital punishment, even if not carried out, was inhuman because it traumatizes not only the prisoner but also his family;
• that there was no solid evidence to show that the death penalty had acted as an effective deterrent against the commission of serious crimes;
• that life was a divine gift and as such should not be put in the hands of a human judge;
• that modern penal systems favored reformative rather that vindictive punishment.

It is noticed in the third argument, the word “divine gift” is present that is usually associated to religion and the argument sounds like a teaching in religion. The fourth argument is saying that we should give chance for the people to change for the better and we can associate that in the religious teachings that to forgive others because God forgives.

In the time of President Ramos, the Roman Catholic Church (82 per cent of those on death row in that time are Catholic) have played a consistently important role in seeking to question prevailing political and popular opinion suggesting that the answer to criminality, especially appalling heinous offences, is the execution of prisoners (Amnesty International, 2007). In July 1997 the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) responded to a government announcement that the first executions would take place in early 1998 by stating that the official push for executions was:

"...an implicit admission of the government's failure and utter helplessness in enforcing the law, improving the judicial system and setting up a truly reformative prison program. (Amnesty International, 2007)."

The CBCP also made clear their conviction that:

“The government has once again chosen to turn a blind eye to those who will ultimately be executed -- the powerless and helpless majority "(Amnesty International, 2007).

In the case of Fidel Ramos, it is clear that the removal of death penalty in his administration is not in his business. The religious sectors’ voices are not effective to influence Ramos in abolishing death penalty because of two factors. First is that he is from the military particularly constabulary that are responsible in solving crimes in the Philippines. In history, the military was lobbying to impose death penalty for the crimes committed by the CCP-NPA during the Aquino period. That means, military people are not really against that punishment. Second is the fact Ramos is not a Catholic (he is a Methodist Christian) that removes him from the jurisdiction of the Catholic Bishops. Though the Methodist Christians stood against death penalty, the Protestant Christians has less conservative regulations than the Catholics that gave Ramos more the opportunity to bring back the death penalty.
The Estrada administration advocated the death penalty as the antidote to crime in the first part of his administration. The reason behind that was that if the criminals will be afraid to commit crimes if they see that the government is determined to execute them. Oppositions maintained that the death penalty is not a deterrent and that there have been studies already debunking the deterrence theory. Legislators and politicians refused to heed the recommendation of the Supreme Court for Congress to review the death penalty riding on the popularity of the pro-death penalty sentiment (Lamban, 2000).
On June 25, 1999, Estrada announced that rapist Eduardo Agbayani would die that day. Forty-five minutes later the president wavered. Estrada had received an appeal from Bishop Teodoro Bacani then Estrada (at home at that time) called the injection room but he got a busy signal, then a fax tone. By the time an aide raced to the official palace hotline, Agbayani was dead (Gluckman, 1999). In that case, the influence of the Catholic Church is clearly seen in the appeal of Bishop Bacani.
In the year 2000, Estrada issued a de facto moratorium on executions in the face of church-led campaigns to abolish the death penalty and in observance of the Jubilee Year (Pablico, 2006) and attempts to reconcile with its long feud with the Catholic Church (Tagayuna, 2004). Now, it is clearly seen in this situation that at first, Estrada was in favor of the death penalty but just because of the observance of the Jubilee year which is associated to religion and attempt of reconciliation of his feud with the Catholic Church, Estrada lifted the policy.
In the case of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, she brought back the death penalty because of increase of certain crimes then later on commuted 1000 death sentences last April 15, 2006, an Easter Sunday, announcing:
"On the occasion of Easter, it is my honor to announce our policy to commute the death penalty to life imprisonment."
The factor of religion is clearly seen there because it was announced on a very important day in the Catholic Church. The move was criticized by anti-crime groups and political opponents who accused the embattled President of seeking the Church's approval because the Catholic Church, a vocal critic of President Arroyo, has been leading a campaign for the abolition of the death penalty. The Manila Standard (Maragay and Pelovello, 2006) reported that the Catholic Church is against the Arroyo’s promotion of the People’s Initiative in amending the constitution that time. In relation to that issue, Senator Rodolfo Biazon stated and asked:
“This commutation is a political move, not a humanitarian move. Is this an attempt to woo the Church back?
The Palace defended its stand and portion of Ignacio Bunye’s speech says:
"The President's decision came after deep contemplation and reflection in the field of Christian values. The people's power to forgive under both the Bible and the Constitution can change a nation for good, especially at these times that cry for compassion and reconciliation."
That statement of Bunye strengthens the claim of the Religion factor in Arroyo’s decision of commuting death sentences because of the presence of the words “Christian values” and “Bible” in the statement.
At that time, The CBCP commends on the President's announcement, but restated its call for the government to abolish the death penalty in legislation. In relation to that, in a Union of Catholic Asian (UCA) News report (2006), Rodolfo Diamante, Executive Secretary of the CBCP-Episcopal Commission on Prison Pastoral Care (ECPPC), are doing their job in lobbying for the bills that would abolish the death penalty and stated that:
"We have already solicited a great number of congressmen's and senators' commitments to have the death-penalty law abolished."
But Diamante worried about the public perception (figures are not available in the source) saying that more Filipinos are in favor of the death penalty due to the general perception that this penalty is a crime deterrent action and in that case, The ECCPC are not just lobbying in the Congress but also parishes schools and communities. Since its 2006 in that time, another worry of Diamante is the pressure from the pro-death penalty groups that might change their minds because of the upcoming 2007 elections (UCANews, 2006). In that situation, it seems that the Catholic Church really pushed hard on the abolishment of death penalty. In July 24, 2006, the president signed the approved bills of the Congress. A meeting was held with Pope Benedict XVI afterwards to reaffirm the country’s special ties with the Vatican (Javellana-Santos, 2006) and it seems to be a good timing after signing the anti-death penalty measures. With that, President Arroyo may please the Pope and that indicates that the satisfying the Vatican seems to be a very important matter to the President.
Apparently, a car bomb explosion happened six days before the approval of the bill. With regards to the incident, the president just stated:
“We will never be intimidated by these treacherous acts, and we shall fight terror as seriously as we embrace peace and development. We will not relent until the total defeat of terrorists in every part of the country. We have taken a strong hand against the threats to the law and the republic, but at the same time we yield to the high moral imperatives dictated by God to walk away from capital punishment. (Javellana-Santos, 2006)”
As seen in the statement, the word “God” is present wherein that indicates and manifests the religious factor in the decision of lifting the death penalty in the Philippines by the President.
VI. Analysis of the Philippine Legislative’s Statements, Actions and Decision on Death Penalty (13th Congress)
The President cannot execute a formal law without the proceedings in the legislative area of the government and this is how crucial the role of the House of Representatives and Senate in abolishing the death penalty in the Philippines.
In the proceedings done in the House of Representatives, the bill on abolishing death penalty (See Appendix 11) was approved on third and final reading, certified as urgent by Malacanang, abolishing the death penalty in the country in the vote of 119-20. The transcript of the proceeding in the House of Representative did not become a basis on this analysis because of poor archiving system of the House of Representatives and that limits the study. The information is just from the Lower House press release (congress.gov.ph).
In these proceedings in the Lower House, the impact of religion was not so clear though former House Speaker Jose de Venecia stated that the abolition of death penalty is in consonance with the trend in the European Union and the canons of the Catholic Church. As seen in the situation, the canons of the Catholic Church were used as basis but it is just the opinion of the House Speaker not de Venecia is that part of drafting the bill. Going back few years, in the 9th congress, de Venecia approved the bill of imposing death penalty on heinous crimes. A clear inconsistency is clearly showed in this situation and other political motives might be possible in making that turnabout decision of him.
The major arguments why the House of Representatives decided on the stand against death penalty are the following:
• It is not deterrent to crime;
• Judicial error
• death penalty is retributive justice, therefore vengeful and barbaric;
• it is the ultimate cruel and inhuman punishment;
• it is irrevocable;
• it shuts out rehabilitative justice;
• it raises the likelihood of criminals becoming more violent for fear of being convicted by death sentence; and
• it is anti-poor.
Among those arguments, the only item that is linked with religion is the shutting up of rehabilitative justice which is according to the Church encyclical during the late 1980’s called Rerum Navarum which promotes that kind of justice.
International Relations of the Philippines is also as factor because it is also stated in the measure's proponents that the Philippines is already violating international treaties, covenants and policies by "mere implementation" of the death penalty.
Statistically, during the 13th congress, 180 of 230 members of the House of Representatives are Catholics, 23 are Non-Catholic Christians, 12 are Muslims and 15 are not indicated. House Bill No. 4826 was sponsored by Representatives Orlando Fua Jr., Roberto Cajes, Salacnib Baterina, Edcel Lagman, Jesus Crispin Remulla, and party-list Reps. Loretta Ann Rosales, Mario Aguja and Rene Velarde who are all Catholic in Religion. With that situation, Catholics are the most dominant in terms of religion and that can be considered as a main indicator of the decision making process (see Appendix 1).
On the other hand, in the senate proceedings, the main arguments on why death penalty should be abolished are almost the same reasons what the House of Representatives do have. The most prevalent reasons are the failure of deterrence, poor judiciary and its being anti to the poor people.
In the third reading of the Senate Bill regarding death penalty (See Appendix 12), the decision was settled by landslide votes for the abolition of capital punishment. With the 15-0 vote with one abstention by Senator Jingoy Estrada due to his involvement of a capital punishable case, the senate formally approved the bill abolishing death penalty.
In the transcript of the senate proceedings happened from June 1st to 7th of 2006 (See Appendix 13), out of approximately 17000 words that discussed the issue on the death penalty, there are only 332 words in the statements are considered religious in terms of approach. Those statements that manifest religious tone are the following:
“Recent statistics shows that there are only a handful of countries that are still implementing this barbaric means of retributive justice called “the death penalty”. These few include China, Yemen, Iran, Iraq, the U.S. in some states, and our country, the Philippines, that prides itself as the only Christian country in Southeast Asia.” – Aquilino Pimentel Jr.
“And so, Mr. President, we suggest that to continue with the death penalty makes a mockery of our so-called “Christian and civilized tradition” that sanctifies life as a gift of the Almighty Who holds in His hands the absolute power of life and death over His creatures not only because He is All-Knowing, but also because He is All Just.” -- Aquilino Pimentel Jr.
“Death penalties, Mr. President, no longer have any place in a modern, decent Christian society. Let us pass this bill into law and join the ranks of enlightened societies, wise, compassionate, forgiving and Christ-like in dealing with our brothers and sisters.” – Francis Pangilinan
“For the above reasons, Mr. President, I say again, I hesitatingly and haltingly support the abolition of the death penalty, and pray and hope that in some future time, hopefully, sooner than later, our hearts and minds become attentive to the injustice that is perpetrated around us, and at the same time, pay attention that we must also give justice to those who are victimized by the perpetrators of heinous crimes by making sure that they suffer penalties not only in jail but we are sure that they are the same people that perpetrated the offense” – Sergio Osmeña III
“Sa isang bayang Kristiyano na tulad ng Pilipinas, ang patuloy na pag-iral ng parusang kamatayan ay labag sa simulaing nagbibigay halaga sa buhay ng tao. Tanging Diyos lamang at wala ng iba pa ang may karapatan sa buhay ng bawat isa.” – Manuel Villar
“Kung tayo ay nananalig sa kapangyarihan ng Poong Maykapal na baguhin ang puso ng isang nagkasala upang maging karapat-dapat ng tanggapin ng lipunan, huwag nating payagan na bawian ng buhay ang isang nilalang gawa lamang ng isang mabigat na kasalanan.” – Manuel Villar
Out of 17 senators who speak their stand on death penalty, only four (4) senators as mentioned above had included religious perspective in their stand. Those religious statements emphasize the act of forgiveness, God’s goodness and Christian Morality. The other thirteen (13) used pure practical, empirical and statistical perspective like it improbability of deterring crimes. Though only three (3) senators (Pia Cayetano, Flavier and Pangilinan) are Non-Catholic in that roster, the considerable influence of the Catholic Church or even Christianity in that session cannot be claimed in that case (See Appendix 2).
VII. Integration and Conclusion
With that all facts presented and study done, it is a fact that religion is a clear factor on the abolishment of death penalty in the Philippines however, in the question of religion as the main factor of lifting of capital punishment in this country, as of now, it is hard to claim that religion is the main factor because of the following reasons:
First, the stand of religion is inconsistent. Just looking at the Bible, the inconsistency of stand is already evident and even Jesus Christ manifest contradicting stand as seen in John 8:3-11 and Matthew 5:17-19. In beginning of Church history, early Christians killed the heretics and other people who are against the Church and that is contradicting to the teachings of the Church in the present. It is illogical be influenced by something on making a clear stand if the stand of the influencer is unclear.
Second, the Church and the Philippines has common grounds in history of death penalty. They both evolved from the stand of capital punishment as deterrence of committing crimes to capital punishment as an immoral/unethical action and not effective of deterring crimes. With that pattern, it can be concluded that society evolves by itself; even without the existence of religion, the Philippines will still come in to the point of abolishing death penalty. It is said that principle/morality can exist even without religion according to a German Philosopher named Friedrich Nietzsche (1866).
Third, most reasons of abolishing death penalty are not exclusively religious. Dominating reasons are: not deterrent to crime, poor justice system in the Philippines, and anti-poor. The three (3) leading reasons mentioned are practical in nature and those can be argued by non-religious people.
Last but not the least, another possible main factor aside from religion is political interest. In an outside look, it seems that the action of Joseph Estrada’s de facto moratorium during Jubilee year and Arroyo’s commutation of death sentences are indicators of the influence of religion in their actions with regarding death penalty. But, looking closely in the situation, those can be questioned why did Estrada lifted the death penalty during the year that is very important to the Church and why did Arroyo commutated death sentences in a day that is also important to the Church. If Estrada and Arroyo are sincere of their actions, they can do that on the different day which is not important to the Church. Another thing, when Arroyo signed the bill against death penalty, a meeting with the Pope came afterwards. Another possibility is that the uses of religious words such as “God” and “Christian Values” on press statements may not be sincere; politicians use those words to get the affirmation of the Church. With those actions, including the legislators, there is a possibility that they just want to please the Church for the sake of political interest. In 2006, the Church is against the people’s initiative that Arroyo is planning to change the constitution. Also, 2006 is a very crucial year for the politicians because of the 2007 elections and that makes it logical to claim that politicians involved in the issue only wants to get the support of the Church for their political interests.
With those four (4) reasons given, it is now clear that the facts presented in this paper are not yet sufficient to prove that religion is the main factor in the decision of abolishing the death penalty in the Philippines.

Bibliography:
Aljazeera. (2006). Philippines moves to ban death penalty. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http:// english.aljazeera.net/English/archive/archive?ArchiveId=23377.
Amnesty International. (1989). When State Kills… The death penalty v. human rights. London: Amnesty International Publications.
Amnesty International. (1997). PHILIPPINES: THE DEATH PENALTY Criminality, Justice and Human Rights. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://www.amnesty. org/en/alfresco_asset/3c4ccf0f-c667-11dc-9af1-b1d22f3b300e/asa350091997en.pdf.
Amnesty International USA. (2006). THE PHILIPPINES DEBATES ABOLITION OF THE DEATH PENALTY. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://blogs.amnestyusa.org/death-penalty/archive/2006 /05/17/1p4ftb6jj3ifl.htm.
Amnesty International. (2007). Death sentences and executions in 2006. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://www.amnesty.org/en/alfresco_asset/f26bf9b2-a2a8-11dc-8d74-6f45f39984e5/act5000 42007en.html.
Amnesty International USA. (2007). THE 2006 death penalty statistics. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://www.amnestyusa.org/document.php?lang=e&id=ENGACT500122007.
Asian Center for Human Rights. (2003). HUMAN RIGHTS RECORD OF THE PHILIPPINES: SPECTACULAR ON PAPER. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://www.achrweb .org/reports/philippines/ Philippines-01-03.pdf.
Bakshian, D. (2006). Philippines Abolishes Death Penalty. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2006-06/2006-06-26voa10.cfm?CFID=11295 232&C FTOKEN=66803155.
Catholic Bishop Conference of the Philippines. (2006). Church lauds abolition of death penalty. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://www.cbcponline.net/html/news1-june7.html.
Catholic Bishop Conference of the Philippines. (2006). Church reiterates call for death penalty abolition. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://www.cbcponline.net/html/news1-apr17.html.
Carrol, J. (2004). WHO SUPPORTS THE DEATH PENALTY?. Gallop Poll. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=1266&scid=.
Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines. (2007). The Philippine Experience in Abolishing Death Penalty. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://www.chr.gov.ph/ MAIN%20PAGES/about%20hr/ advisories/pdf_files/abolishing%20death%20penalty.pdf.
Cruz, M. (2006). Death Penalty freeze flayed. Manila Times. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://www .yehey.com/news/Article.aspx?id=98724.
European Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights. (2007). Evaluation on the Abolition of Death Penalty Projects. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://ec.europa.eu/ europeaid/where/worldwide/eidhr/documents/eidhr_evaluation_death_penalty_final_report_4april07_en.pdf.
Flores, N. (2006). Anti-crime crusaders want Panganiban’s claim probed SC Echegaray ‘error’. Inquirer. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://services.inquirer.net/print/print .php?article_id=6395.
Fortuna, J. (2006). Sharing Edcel’s Stand on Death Penalty. ABS-CBN News. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/storypage.aspx?StoryId=36644.
GMA News. (2006). Barbers wants death penalty reimposed. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http:// www.gmanews.tv/story/24247.
Hinman, J. (2001). Ethics Survey: Death Penalty Report. Retrieved April 1, 2008 from http://ethics.sandiego.edu/ActiveWebSurvey/SurveyReport.asp?nSurvey=19&From=.
House of Representatives of the Philippines. (2006). Press Release on the Abolition of death penalty. Retrieved April 1, 2008 from www.congress.gov.ph.
Javellana-Santos, J. (2006). Philippine Death Penalty Law Is Dead. Arab News. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://www.arabnews.com/?page=4§ion=0&article=83422&d =8&m=6&y=2006&pix =world.jpg&category=World.
Laijas, E. (No Date). Is Capital Punishment Just?. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/storypage.aspx?StoryId=36644.
Lamban, S. (No Date). Death Penalty in the Philippines. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://www. philsol.nl/A00a/Pahra-deathpenalty-mar00.htm.
Marangay, F., et. al (2006). Anticrime groups slam death penalty reduction. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://www.manilastandardtoday.com/?page=news04_april17_2006.
Marangay, F., et. al (2006). Repeal of capital punishment next. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http: //www. manilastandardtoday.com/?page=news01_april18_2006.
Mariano, D. (2006). Not all crime victims favor death. Manila Times. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://www.yehey.com/news/print.aspx?id=99972.
Mergivern, J. (1997). The Death Penalty: An Historical and Theological Survey. New York: Paulist Press.
Office of the President of the Philippines. (2006). Statement of Secretary Ignacio R. Bunye Re: Commutation of Death Penalty. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://www.op.gov.ph/news.asp? newsid=14929.
Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance (No Date). Retrieved April 1, 2008 from http://www.religioustolerance.org/.
Ornellas, L. (2007). Death Penalty Arguments: Pros and Cons. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http:// www.prodeathpenalty.com/OrnellasPaper.htm.
Senate of the Philippines. (2006). Transcripts of Plenary Sessions Regarding Death Penalty.
Taguyana, A. (2004). Capital Punishment in the Philippines. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://www. hawaii.edu/cseas/pubs/explore/vol5no1.html.
Pro-Life Philippines. (2006). Why does church oppose death penalty. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://www.prolife.org.ph/page/death_penalty1.
Pro-Life Philippines. (2006). Philippine position of hierarchy. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://ww w.prolife.org.ph/page/death_penalty2.
Pro-Life Philippines. (2006). The cruelty of death penalty. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://www. prolife.org.ph/page/death_penalty7.
Pro-Life Philippines. (2006). When state kills. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://www.prolife.org.ph /page/death_penalty6.
Pro-Life Philippines. (2006). Death Penalty in Practice. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http://www.pro life .org.ph/page/death_penalty5.
Pro-Life Philippines. (2006). Alternative to capital punishment. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from http:// www.prolife.org.ph/page/death_penalty4.
Union of Catholic Asian News. (2006). Philippine Catholic Church continues death penalty repeal push. Retrieved 25 January 2008 from www.ucanews.com.

A Crucial Midterm Political Law Question

2008-09-05T17:44:00.001+08:00

5. A (Chinese father) and B (Filipino mother) were married on February 14, 1972. Thier child born on January 17, 1973. IS the child a Philippine citizen? Does the child need to perform an act to acquire or perfect his Philippine citizenship? If so, is the child a natural-born Philippine citizen? (10%)

My Answer:

The child is not a Philippine citizen because his mother is already a Chinese Citizen at the time of birth. The child is not already under paragraph 3, Section 1 of Article 4 of the constituition because it only covers those who are born before January 17, 1973. He is not also covered by the provision those who have Filipino mother or father because the mother is already a Chinese Citizen (Note: before January 17, 1973, Filipina who marries a Chinese man will terminate her Filipino Citizenship according to the Chinese law because the 1935 constitution does not protect the citizenship of a Filipina who is married to an alien). The child need to perform an act to aquire or perfect his Philippine citizenship through naturalization that means, he is not a natural-born because natural born only includes paragraphs 1-3 of the Section 1, Ariticle IV of the Constitution.

Score: 10/10

For the record, only two of us got a full credit in that question, the other one is an accountancy proffessor in UST. I just got 79% in political law but it is not bad anymore because the professor in that subject is rumored to be a terror and a number of the members of the class didn't make it to the passing grade. As of now, I just got three midterm results and the other two are just 1 unit subjects. (Legal Research: 86%, Law and Values: 83%) The results of the othr two important (Criminal Law 1 and Person and Family Relations Law) subects are not yet released.

I hate losers...

2008-09-03T19:45:00.001+08:00

I don't have to elaborate on this. You know the definition of a loser and you know who you are. That's all.

2012: End of the World?

2008-08-30T17:17:00.003+08:00

Today, there is a conspiracy of theories that many cultures, religions or even scientists recognized for the possibility of the 2012's doomsday. I'm not an advocate of the possibility of the end of the world because I believe that the future is not yet determined. But relatively, I may say that the thoeries that many civilizations, sectors or field had produced is alarming. The alegged indicators of the world's end are the following:

- Drought
- Floods
- Famine
- Hurricanes
- Tsunamis
- Earthquakes
- Volcanic Eruptions
- Global Warming
- Famine
- Human Suffering
- Disease
- Disregard for Human Life
- Wars
- Rumors of War
- Increased Terrorist Attacks
- Increased Nuclear Threat
- The Emergence of Anti-Christ --> http://www.bible-prophecy.com/antichrist.htm

Ancient Civilizations has Prophecies that:

December 21, 2012 will the end of days according to the Mayan Calendars.
----> http://www.december212012.com/articles/mayan/4.shtml
----> http://survive2012.com/why_2012_maya.php

The Hopi Indians see a great purification of earth.
----> http://www.december212012.com/articles/Hopi_Indians/A_Hopi_Prophecy.htm

Great Predictions said that:

A devastating asteroid will come according to Nostradamus.
----> http://www.december212012.com/articles/Nostradamus/Comets-future.htm

Atlatis will return according to Edgar Cayce.
----> http://www.edgarcayce.org/ancient_mysteries/atlantis_mysteries.html

The end of history is predicted by the Chinese's "I-Ching," one of the most reliable oracle in China.
----> http://survive2012.com/why_2012_fractal.php

The Catholic Religion's basis:

The Bible foretells of the coming apocalypse as written in the book of revelation. This is what they also call "the Rapture."
----> I assume that every reader knows about this thing.

St. Malachy predicted that the current Pope is the last legitimate Pope.

----> Read:

"One of the best known Catholic prophets to predict that the Pope after John Paul II would be the last was Irishman Maelmhaedhoc O'Morgair who is better known as simply St. Malachy. According to the prophecies of St. Malachy, who was born in 1094, the line of Pontiffs has come to an end. St. Malachy, canonized by by Pope Clement III on July 6, 1199, undertook to list in advance the proper succession of Roman pontiffs from Celestine II to "the end of the world". St. Malachy prophesied that there would be 112 Popes after Celestine II. John Paul II, who just died, is number 110. Pope number 111 would be the "False Prophet" mentioned in St. John's Revelation and who will deliver the Roman Catholic Church to Satan. Number 112 will NOT be a legitimate Pope. It will be the "Grand Anti-Pope" or the Anti-Christ who is also known as the "Abomination that Causes Desolation" mentioned in Daniel 9:27, 11:31, 12:11 and Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14. The Prophecies of St. Malachy conclude thusly: "In the final persecution of the Holy Roman Church there will reign Peter the Roman, who will feed his flock among many tribulations; after which the seven hilled city (Rome) will be destroyed and the dreadful Judge will judge the people"."

----> http://www.december212012.com/articles/religion/3.shtml

The various field of Science has this positions:

There will be Polar Shift according to Albert Einstein.
-----> http://www.december212012.com/articles/Albert-Einstein/Polar-Shift-by-2012.htm

NASA confirms that intense solar storms are coming.
-----> http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/10mar_stormwarning.htm

Earth will complete its 26,000 year wobble.
------> http://www.tvo.org/cfmx/tvoorg/theagenda/index.cfm?page_id=401&action=viewthread&forum_Thread_id=4985&forum_id=44

Our Sun will align with the plane of the milky way.
------> http://2012wiki.com/index.php?title=Galactic_Alignment

This article is not to persuade everyone that there will be an end of the world. This is just to inform that there are certain theories existing about world's end. Other people may find a lot of flaws in those theories but "The only definite thing about the future is uncertainty."

It's up to you to decide, to criticize, to believe, to be vigilant or to investigate.

I repeat, this is not a persuasive article and I'm not an advocate of the this "End of the World" theory.

And another thing, I really don't care if this is true or not. I really don't care if the world ends tomorrow or next week. I really don't care and I'm not afraid of it.

Considering DLSU Law

2008-08-29T18:43:00.003+08:00

I'm currently studying in UST Faculty of Civil Law and I'll give a fair comparison of the two law schools.

1. Duration
UST has 4 year curriculum while DLSU has 3 years. Therefore, in both schools, I can possibly take the bar exam on 2012.

> Decision Abstain

2. Degree
UST offers L.L.B. degree while DLSU offers the J.D. Honestly, I really don't care about the J.D. vs. the L.L.B. thing. The important is that both degrees can qualify a Filipino Citizen to take the bar exam.

> Decision Abstain

3. Time Established
UST is the oldest law school in the Philippines while DLSU is the newest. The date of establishment is an immaterial area of comparison if where is the better law school.

> Decision Abstain

4. Academic Performance
As of now, I don't have the basis of comparing this because DLSU law school has not yet started its operation.

> Decision Abstain

5. Cost
Obviously, DLSU has higher tuition fee then UST but money is never a factor for me as long as I get the proper education I need.

> Decision Abstain

6. Transportaion
From my residence, DLSU is a lot nearer than UST because DLSU is just a walking distance.

> 1 point for DLSU for that instance

******

It is said that DLSU law will just accept 90 students for next year so the entrance exam is, I think, not an easy one. There are still many factors that are to be considered aside from those mentioned. As of now, I still have no decision if I'll stay in UST or transfer to DLSU. No one really knows what happens next.

I completed the National Pokedex in Pokemon Diamond!!!

2008-08-24T07:13:00.003+08:00

One of My favorite provisions in the New Civil Code

2008-08-19T18:18:00.001+08:00

Article 26. Every person shall respect the dignity, personality, privacy and peace of mind of his neighbors and other persons. The following and similar acts, though they may not constitute a criminal offense, shall produce a cause of action for damages, prevention and other relief:

(1) Prying into the privacy of another's residence;

(2) Meddling with or disturbing the private life or family relations of another;

(3) Intriguing to cause another to be alienated from his friends;

(4) Vexing or humiliating another on account of his religious beliefs, lowly station in life, place of birth, physical defect, or other personal condition.

Studying Law brings back my Very Cold Heart

2008-08-18T11:39:00.005+08:00

Without noticing it, when I start stuying law, little by little, the emotional part of me weakens as days goes by.

I never feel happiness.

I never feel sadness.

I never feel love.

I never feel pity.

I never care for strangers.

All inside me is a cold heart.

A cold heart that never loves

A cold heart that fears no one and nothing

A cold heart that is full of will

A cold heart that is driven by justice and retribution

A cold heart that never forgives

A cold heart that is full of pride

I act without tighing emotions.

I act without considering values.

But I assure that I don't act violating the rights of other people.

In my present state, my mind is saying that strong emotions is not right for me.

Strong emotions will just make me weaker and uncertain.

I'm not cruel, I'm just logical.

I still care for my friends and family but never driven by emotions.

I just need to do my duty to study and finish what I've started.

I clearly know what I want because there's no emotions bothering me.

Dura lex sed lex (the law may be harsh but it is still the law)

Lawyers are not necessary in an Ideal Word

2008-08-17T11:48:00.006+08:00

Article 19 of the New Civil Code of the Philippines states:

"Every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the performance of his rights and in the performance of his duties, act with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith."

Imagine if every person will comply on that Civil Code provision. It will be a peaceful and ideal world that most of us wanted. No more chaos, everyone is honest, no one will take advantage on others, no more prejudice and injustice, and most specialy, everybody is happy.

If that will be the case, laws will not be significant anymore because everyone performs according the ideal flow of life which is peaceful. If there's no more threat of danger and security becasue people are all good, making laws is already unessissary.

The question big question is:

Is it possible that every person can comply with that Civil Code Provision? Is it possible to attain a perfect and ideal world?

My answer is a big NO. If I believe that this perfect world is attainable, I will not waste my time stuying law becasue in an ideal world, laws will not be violated and services of the lawyers are immaterial anymore. No one will commit crime, not will couple will fight and file for annulment, there will be no more problems on wills and succession, rights of all persons will be considered, no more politicians will cheat on the elcetions, a question on citzenship is anymore a question, everybody will be honest, all obligations and contracts will be consumated properly, labor and transportation issues will not exist, people will pay proper taxes and polititians will use those taxes properly, and such other laws will not anymore be questioned nor violated.

I, being a law student, bring with me the belief of the impossibility of a perfect and ideal world. It is inevitable in a society if not all persons, but at least some to commit felonies, offenses or inflict damages to other persons. That’s why implementation of law is necessary.

My Present Life =)

2008-08-14T17:43:00.002+08:00

Welcome to the Island of Santo Tomas

2008-08-14T17:38:00.003+08:00

Just an ordinary and "mababaw" intellectual conversation

2008-08-12T17:01:00.003+08:00

I have a hobby of arguing with people (even though it's not my real stand) just to have a topic for arguing...

This is one of those conversations with my friend. She always seriously argue with me but just in the intellectual level:

Earl : bigla ka nagonline ah
Earl : hahaha
Friend: nina pa actually hehe
Friend: invi lang
Earl: ahhhh
Earl: haha
Earl: walang nagbantay samin kanina
Earl: nag-gayahan lang kmi sa exam
Friend: seryoso?
Friend: bad kayo
Friend: masama cheating
Friend: tsk tsk
Earl: kahit naman sa bar may cheating din eh
Earl: nasa nature na yun ng mga lawyer
Earl: kung walang cheating, bkit pa kelangan ng mga lawyer kung lahat ng tao sumusunod sa batas
Earl: kung lahat ng tao mabuti
Friend: ano ba trabaho ng lawyer
Friend: to preserve justice
Friend: ur argument is nonsense
Friend: parang sinabi mong dapat magdumi ang tao sa kalye
Friend: para saan pa ang metroaids
Earl: kung malinis ang kalye hindi na sila maghihire ng metro aids
Earl: bkit pa maghihire if malinis?
Friend: un nga e.. that's nonsense
Friend: so ur saying dapat magdumi ang tao?
Friend: nakakatwa nman ung logic na un
Earl: hindi
Friend: ur saying kasi na dapat may cheating
Earl: nasa nature lang ng tao ang magdami
Earl: magdumi
Friend: if that is part of man's nature, bakit hindi lahat ng tao nagdudumi
Earl: hindi nga
Friend: so that is not part of man's nature
Friend: it's a choice earl
Earl: hindi rin
Friend: you're contradicting urself
Earl: religion niyo na rin ang nagsabi na nakatakda na kung sinung pupunta sa langit sa sa hell
Friend: you said hindi nga man's nature, pero sinabi mo man's nature
Friend: ano ba talaga
Friend: nope earl
Friend: who said nakatakda na
Friend: there's no such thing
Friend: ang belief naming christians, it's always man's choice
Earl: basahin mo ung old at new testament
Friend: can you pls point it out
Friend: saan sinasabi nakatakda na kung sino masasave and sinong hindi
Earl: may nakalagay dun na there's a man that who will betray the messiah in 25 silver
Earl: silvers
Earl: kung hindi gagawin ni judas un, sinung gagawa?
Friend: he is the son of the devil my dear
Earl: o so bago ma ipinanganak si judas son of devil na siya
Earl: that's the point
Friend: he's different from other people
Earl: nakalagay din sa old testament the mamatay ang messiah and will resurrect after 3 days
Earl: kung hindi siya pinatay ng mga tauhan ni pilate
Earl: sinung papatay sa kanya?
Friend: so you're saying that everything you do is already planned out for you
Friend: ?
Friend: you have no freedom na?
Earl: i don't know
Earl: panu ko malalaman?
Friend: pano mo malalaman?
Friend: so why are you assuming na planado na lahat
Friend: nakatakda na lahat
Earl: eh kasi nangyari sa bible eh
Friend: if d mo lam kung may freedom nga o wala
Friend: it's a choice to be saved earl
Friend: Jesus died for everyone, but it's man's choice whether to accept it or not
Friend: so hindi totoo na nakatakda na kung pupuntang heaven or hell ang isang tao
Friend: parang ganito lang iyan,
Friend: binigyan kta ng regalo, it's your choice kung ttnggpin mo o hindi
Friend: kahit pagpilitan kong ibgy sau, kung di mo rin ttnggpin wala rin
Friend: dba?
Earl: pero kung may choice... bkit lahat ng phropechy sa old testament, nangyari sa new testament?
Earl: kahit itanong mo ba sa religious authority
Friend: hehe talaga?
Earl: walang prophecy sa old testement na hindi nangyari
Friend: church nagssbi na nakatakda na sino mppuntang heaven or hell?
Earl: nakalgay sa revelation
Friend: btw earl
Friend: sa alam ko tama ka, old testament im not so sure a
Friend: but sa alam ko, nappuntang hell ang karamihan, kasi lahat nagssin diba... that's why they had to offer sacrifices pa as an atonement
Friend: but sa new testament earl, Jesus came right?
Friend: through Jesus everyone has been saved
Friend: after He came, lahat nasave (given na they accept Jesus Christ)
Earl: pero may nakalagay sa revelation na may dadating na nilalang may may tatak na 666
Friend: sa old testament, oo, lahat nappuntang hell ata, and they needed sacrifices para mabawi ung sin
Friend: true earl
Friend: prophecies ng bible talagang mangyyari
Friend: but ung example mo lang nina is mali
Friend: coz u said nakatakda na sino mappntang hell and sino mppntng heaven
Earl: nalagay sa revelation un
Friend: tama un earl
Friend: d ko kinequestion ung revelation
Friend: it's about to happen really really soon
Friend: and lahat ng prophecies sa old testament totoong nangyari nga sa new
Friend: but ung argument mo nga lang na nakatakda sino mappuntang heaven and hell nakatakda na
Friend: un ang mali
Earl: and syempre hindi natin alam kung sinu ung mga tao na pupunta sa heaven at sa hell
Earl: si God lang ang nakakalam nun
Friend: nope earl
Friend: remember Jesus died for our sins
Earl: eto isa pang example
Friend: through His blood, we have been saved... as long as we accept Him as our savior we're already saved
Friend: ako i'm sure i'm going to heaven
Earl: naniniwala ka ba na kapag namatay ka oras mo na?
Earl: and si God lang ang nakakalam kung kelan ka niya kukunin
Earl: and si God lang ang nakakaalam kung panu ka mamamatay?
Friend: God is in control of everything
Friend: so yes
Friend: kasi earl
Friend: all im saying is
Friend: ok
Friend: tama ka
Friend: there are a lot of things beyond man's control
Friend: totoo un
Friend: maraming mga bagay na nakatakda na
Friend: i agree
Friend: but i'll say it again
Earl: eto... panu kung tinakda ni God na mamamatay ka dahil sa murder?
Friend: i find it wrong lang ung sinabi mong nakatakda sino mappnta sa heaven and hell
Earl: syempre God is in control
Friend: oo
Friend: God meant for it to happen
Friend: talagang he designed my death that way
Earl: someone will kill you
Earl: kung lahat ng tao mababait
Friend: earl
Earl: wala ng papatay sayo
Friend: man's nature is sinful
Friend: but there's always a choice
Friend: you can choose not to lie
Friend: you can choose not to cheat earl
Friend: ito na lang tanong ko
Earl: but nakatakda na nga may papatay sayo eh
Friend: be honest
Friend: bigyan kta ng P 1M wag kang magccheat sa exam mo
Friend: magccheat ka o hindi?
Friend: oo o hindi lang earl
Earl: sige hindi na ako magchecheat
Friend: see... it's always a choice...
Friend: yes i agree
Earl: but i don't say na choice ko un
Friend: it's man's nature to be sinful, but there is always a choice
Earl: kc may circumstance na nangyari kung bakit hindi ako magcheat
Friend: earl... there is a choice not to accept the P1M and to cheat
Earl: there's a situation that happened for me not to chaet
Friend: hehe
Earl: but there's also a chioce not to kill or not
Friend: but still you didn't cheat
Earl: tingnan mo sa revelation
Friend: the bottom line earl is that man has a choice
Earl: sabi dun maglalaban ang mga bansa
Earl: kaya magsisimula un
Earl: there's a choice na hindi maglaban-laban ang mga bansa
Earl: pero mangyayari pa rin sabi ng revelation
Friend: paulit2 tau earl haha
Earl: so there's no choice na hindi maglaban-laban ang mga bansa
Friend: ano ba sinabi ko.. totoo ung revelation
Friend: lahat dun naktakda
Friend: i agre
Friend: i agree
Friend: ang sinasabi ko lang diba, hindi nakatakda ung heaven or hell for one person
Friend: ok?
Earl: if that's true... therefore wala tayong choice
Earl: panu kung pinili lahat ng tao na maging mabait
Earl: eh di wala ng revelation db
Friend: hehe
Friend: like what you said nga
Friend: it's man's nature to sin
Friend: and all im saying is, if you want not to sin
Friend: you can
Friend: it's man's nature to be bad
Friend: but if one wants not to be bad, kaya rin
Earl: so there's no choice for the people to do sin in order to fullfil god's plan
Friend: so hindi nakatakda lahat earl
Friend: ikaw na nagsabi kanina
Friend: Earl Masacayan: but there's also a chioce not to kill or not
Friend: ur contradicting urself earl
Earl: if you will see it idealy
Earl: kung walang bible, pwede pa ung argument na un
Earl: 2 lang ung situation na pwedeng magcomplement
Earl: 1st situation: God does not exist so people have choice.
Earl: 2nd situation: God control so people have no choice
Earl: na encounter mo na ba ung existentialism sa philo?
Earl: that every person has choices
Friend: why do we have lesbians and gays, kung male and female lang ang totoong choices
Friend: ang argument kasi jan diba
Earl: to be male or female is not a choice
Friend: ang tao either masculine lang (male) or feminine (female)
Friend: all im saying is earl
Friend: hindi lahat black and white
Friend: may gray area
Friend: =)
Earl: haha remember, i'm not a christian so joke time lang ung sinabi ko...
Earl: gusto ko lang makipag-argue... hahahahaha... i believe that people have choice
Friend: i know.. kaya naintndhn ko kung hindi mo rin lam ung ibang concepts. hahahaha
Earl: =)

*****change of topic na******

Final Fantasy I-XIII AMV

2008-08-09T14:59:00.003+08:00

This Video was made by yours truly.
I hope you enjoy. =)

Difficult Questions...

2008-08-05T21:21:00.001+08:00

1. Why do some people dream even though their dreams are impossible to attain?
2. Why do some people insist that they attain a particular goal even though its obvious that they cannot do it.
3. Why do some people are very proud of their achievements even though their achievements cannot make any difference in their life status?
4. Why do some people are planning in idealistic manner that often ends up to a failure?
5. Why do some people are very conventional to false dictation and norms of the society?
6. Why do some people are not considerate to other possibilities?
7. Why do some people are very meticulous in their choice and not aware of the limitations of their abilities?
8. Why do some people are considering simple things as big deal?
9. Why do some people are look for their worth even though they know that they are really worthless?
10. Why do some people tries to prove something for their self even though that it is impossible to prove it because there is nothing to prove?
11. Why do some people can not live on their own?
12. Why do some people can not decide of other plan even though their first plan has already failed and really impossible to achieve?
13. Why do some people are looking for the trend of others persons' failure in order to think that their failure is just normal?
14. Why do some people still insist to be included in the best circle even though that their qualifications are not sufficient to attain that status?
15. WHY DO SOME PEOPLE RATIONALIZE THEIR FAILURES IN ORDER TO MAKE THEMSELVES FEEL BETTER EVEN THOUGH IT'S VERY ILLOGICAL?

Bored of playing your games in PSP? Try some retro games in your PSP!!!

2008-08-03T16:40:00.008+08:00

,I'm already bored of playing the recently released games in PSP. When I'm surfing the net, I discovered that we can already play games for the older consoles like Gameboy, Nintendo and Playstation. These are my top picks:

Final Fantasy VII (Playstation) - One of the greatest RPGs in Playstation history and made RPG included in the mainstream video gaming. This series has the most number of sequels and prequels like Crisis Core, Advent Children and Many more!!!

Contra (Nintendo) - One of the pioneers on action shooting game. It has a very simple game play that everybody would enjoy.

Super Mario Wolrd (Super Nintendo) - One of the greatest Super Mario innovations. Yoshi is introduced in this game and a more complicated world awaits for adventure.

Tetris (Gameboy) - One of the most popular games in our childhood. Many of us play this game even the "brickgame."

Super Mario Brothers (Nintendo) - The beginning of all Mario Brothers games!!! There's no doubt that almost everyone of us had played this classic game.

Super Mario Land (Gameboy) - A portable Super Mario game that everyone who owns a Gameboy loved to play.

Super Mario 3 (Nintendo) - A more complicated Super Mario game than the first. In here, Mario can now fly and explore a bigger world with lots of secrets. Some of us even mastered all the secrets of this game.

Pokemon Emerald (Gameboy Advance) - The most popular game in Gameboy Advance or even in the Gameboy history together with previous versions (Blue, Yellow, Red, Crystal, Silver, Gold, Sapphire and Ruby). This is a more complicated Pokemon game because of the addtion of many Pokemons. There are complicated evolution process and others are needed to be traded form other versions. (This game is also essential to complete in Pokedex in Pokemon Pearl/Diamond/Platinum in DS).

Chrono Trigger (Super Nintendo) - One of the greatest RPGs in video game history. It started the gamers love for RGP games. With long gameing time, many RPG gamers had enjoyed playing this game.

Legend of Zelda (Nintendo) - One of the greatest classic games ever. With its great soundtrack and interesting gameplay, No one will ever tell that is game does not belong to the hall of fame classic.

You can download these emulators for PSP in this site:
http://www.pspiso.com/showthread.php?t=171256

The Father of Filipino Philosophy

2008-07-31T12:15:00.001+08:00

Dr. Florentino T. Timbreza

Recognized as the Father of Filipino Philosophy
1st Filipino to author the 1st book on Filipino Philosophy (Pilosopiyang Filipino)
Co-author of the 1st and only Encyclopedia of Philosophy in the Philippines (Ensayklopidiya ng Pilosopiya)
1st Filipino to present and defend a dissertation paper in Filipino for a doctorate degree in Philosophy
1st Filipino author to translate the Tao Te Ching of Lao Tzu in Filipino language (Ang Tao Te Ching ni Lao Tzu sa Filipino)
Philosophy Professor, De La Salle University Manila

QUOTE
"I look forward to the day when Filipino Philosophy shall be taught in many classrooms all over the country."

source: http://firstfilipino.blogspot.com/2007/12/florentino-timbreza.html

Mind of a lawyer VS. Effort of a law student

2008-07-30T15:11:00.001+08:00

The ideal mind of the lawyer is the mind that easily understands and masters all the provisions of all laws and knows how to apply it in all circumstances. It is very logical and philosophical that can argue in every point of view of the cases and provisions. It does not make any logical errors when it comes to law. It is very critical in evidences and may reverse disadvantageous cases.

The ideal effort of law student is briefly defined as reading, reading, reading and reading a lot of cases, and memorizing, memorizing, memorizing and memorizing all the provisions of laws. Another thing is patience. The 80 percent of time should be allocated in reading and memorizing.

A lawyer can survive just with the "mind of the lawyer" while a law student should have both the "mind of a lawyer" and the "effort of a law student." But, a person cannot be a lawyer if s/he did not became a law student.

For a law student, the "mind of a lawyer" and the "effort of a law student" are essential and one reason is the current law curriculum and teaching style. I'll give this example when one time I was called in the recitation and asked about the details of a case which I missed to read. Even though I'm confident that I know all the provisions of the laws needed of the topic, I failed the recitation for just missing to read that one case.

On the other hand, the mind of a lawyer is important because even though a law student memorizes all the provisions of law and the details of the cases assigned, without it, that student still can't apply those that s/he memorized to more complicated and challenging case. All s/he knows is just the one verbally written on the books and the cases.

The mind of a lawyer can be obtained in born or practice. But of course, to obtain it by practice is not an easy task while those who obtained it in born are just lucky. I don't know exact formula on how to obtain it by practice.

In the case of the effort of a law student, all people have the opportunity of doing it. The only indicator of this is the laziness and the industriousness of a person. Some people find it easy and most find it hard. It needs dedication and motivation.

My Law School Sched

2008-07-30T15:10:00.002+08:00

Monday
6:00 pm - 7:00 pm: Persons and Family Relations
7:00 pm - 8:00 pm: Law and Values
8:00 pm - 9:00 pm: Criminal Law 1

Tuesday
6:00 pm - 7:00 pm: Persons and Family Relations
7:00 pm - 9:00 pm: Political Law

Wednesday
6:00 pm - 7:00 pm: Persons and Family Relations
7:00 pm - 9:00 pm: Statutory Construction

Thursday
7:00 pm - 9:00 pm: Persons and Family Relations

Friday
6:00 pm - 7:00 pm: Legal Research
7:00 pm - 9:00 pm: Criminal Law 1

Saturday
10:00 am - 12:00 am: Political Law

At Last!!! A PSP and a DS lite!!

2008-07-30T13:51:00.001+08:00

REDEMPTION

2008-07-30T13:42:00.001+08:00

As told on one of my previous blogs, I failed a recitation because of missing to read one case. But fortunately, in my PERSONS class, I was called again by the professor and stood up for almost two hours. In my last recitation, I was told to seat down because of not reading a case and that means failure. And there is rumors that that professor only call a student once a semester in a recitation and I assume that I would fail that subject already because of that. As said earlier, I was standing for almost two hours in class while the professor asked me several consecutive questions. But luckily, I knew all the provisions of law he was talking about, that's why I managed to answer all the questions correctly but with some minor mistakes on the use of words but generally, that was excellent. By the way, the questions asked are some various provisions of marriage which are quite easy for me to understand. Situations like these may boost the morale of the student and redeem his pride from the grave failure that he experienced.

Taking up law school is not a joke. Talking it up just to try law school is a very stupid decision. It's either you take it because you REALLY WANT TO BE A LAWYER or don't take Law School. Taking up law without the STRONG ASPIRATION to be a lawyer is a sure failure not necessarily in subjects and in bar exam but in LIFE. In law school, failure is always in front of you. There is no way to evade it and the only solution to get rid of it is to destroy it!!!

Last and the most crucial point, now that I am in law school, I realized na wala akong karapatang IPAGMALAKI kung ano mang ang mga nakamit sa sa aking undergraudate. Walang-wala talaga ang experience ko sa undergraduate if I have to compare it with law school. Yes, I get in in to the dean's list in most of the terms and I have a relatively high CGPA but still those achievements are just a big junk of joke comparing it to my situation today. Other law students can also affirm that. I don't say that undergraduate is senseless because there are people who have good and fulfilled undergraduate experience. In my situation, Law school is the real start of College academic life. Undergraduate is a state of NO CHALLENGE for me because of the following reasons:

1. I can get a grade of 3.5-4.0 on other subjects without merely studying at all. Meaning, not taking down notes and not buying or reading the books required.
2. Even I cut almost all the meeting in a particular class, I can still get a high grade.
3. The tasks are very easy compared to law school.
4. Pressure in law school is 10x or even 20x of the pressure I felt in my undergraduate experience.
5. With my achievements right now, I have no ability to get a descent job that I want.
6. Most (but NOT ALL) of the professors in my undergraduate experience are:
a. Karamihan ay NANGHUHULA lang ng grades
b. Favoritism factor
c. Masyadong silang mabait at madali yung pinapagawa
d. Ang alam lang ay kunin ang sweldo kapag end of month
e. Baka humaba pa kapag tinuloy ko pa

Even if may grades are relatively high, eh kung ganyan naman, wala din.

Anong nang pwede kong maipagmalaki para sa sarili ko? wala pa, di ba?

Quotations From Ace Attorney Games

2008-02-29T04:13:00.001+08:00

Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney

The First Turnabout

Phoenix Wright

(referring to his friend Larry) Our school had a saying: "When something smells, it's usually the Butz."
The autopsy notes the time of death at sometime after 4PM. There was nobody to... er... no "body" to find at 1:00 PM!
Proof enough for you, Mr. Sahwit? Or should I say... Mr. Did It!

Mia Fey

Lies always beget more lies! See through one, and their whole story falls apart!
This is no laughing matter! You did pass the bar didn't you?
I think I feel a migraine coming on...
Try thinking out of the box! Don't waste time doubting the facts. Assume the clock was three hours slow and... Think through it! Ask yourself, "Why was the clock three hours slow"? Figure out the reason, and you'll have your proof!
Wright? I hope you see the importance of evidence now. Also, hopefully you realize, things change depending on how you look at them. People, too. We never really know if our clients are guilty or innocent. All we can do is believe in them. And in order to believe in them, you have to believe in yourself.

Other

Butz: I wasn't dumped! She just wasn't taking my phone calls. Or seeing me... Ever.

Judge: If you wish to hang yourself, Mr. Wright, you're welcome to, but not inside my courtroom.

Dialogue

Butz: We were great together! We were Romeo and Juliet, Cleopatra and Mark Anthony!

Phoenix: (Um... didn't they all die?)

Judge: Ahem. Mr Wright? This is your first trial, is it not?

Phoenix: Y-Yes, Your Honor. I'm, um, a little nervous.

Judge: Your conduct during this trial will determine the fate of your client. Murder is a serious charge. For your client's sake, I hope you can control your nerves.

Phoenix: Thank... thank you, Your Honor.

Judge: Mr Wright, given the circumstances... I think we should have a test to ascertain your readiness.

Phoenix: Yes, Your Honor. (Gulp... Hands shaking... Eyesight... fading...)

Turnabout Sisters

Phoenix Wright

Why did I become a lawyer in the first place...? Because someone has to look out for the people who have no one on their side.
(My heart goes out to you, Edgeworth. Not.)

Miles Edgeworth

I object! That was... objectionable!
The guilty will always lie, to avoid being found out. There's no way to tell who is guilty and who is innocent! All that I can hope to do is get every defendant declared "guilty"! So I make that my policy.

Redd White

Welcome! Please furnish me with the title of your personage! …Your name! What's your name? I was just inquirably asking the title that you go by.
What's wrong? Is something stuck to my face? Why yes! There's my eyes, and my nose, and my mouth…

ther

Dick Gumshoe: [when asked about blood tests] Huh? What kind? Umm... well... I hear they take the, um, little bits in the blood, the... er... hemo... hemogl... Hermo... goblins... hobgob... Er...? Herma-goblin bobbin... I-I refuse to testify on this matter, sir! I'm no expert on blood tests!

Judge: [to April May] The witness will refrain from wonton winking!

April: What's it to you, porcupine-head!?

April: I like a man with a big... vocabulary.

April: You... you LAWYER!

Dialogue

April: ... So? What is it you wish to ask of me, then? Hmm?

Phoenix: (For starters, how did you get to be so totally whacked!?)

Bellboy: He struck me as a real "Lady Killer," if you'll pardon the expression. I knew it from the moment I saw him, sir. He and I are of the same ilk. We both carry the scent of... danger.

Phoenix: (There we are in total agreement, Mr. Psycho Bellboy.)

April: You don't just have spiky hair, you also have a spiky heart.

Phoenix: (That does it. When this case is done I'm shaving my head.)

April: (When presenting incorrect evidence) Hey guess what? Actually, I really hate your guts. So get lost because, well I'm not co-operating.

Phoenix: (Thanks, I noticed...)

Edgeworth: Please state your full name.

White: You wish to know the title of my personage?

Edgeworth: Er... your name?

White: Yes! That is what I said! Oh dear, do my locutions confuse?

Edgeworth: Name!

Phoenix: (These two are great together...)

Turnabout Samurai

Phoenix Wright

It must be nice to live so free of guilt.
Ohhh yeah, right here! Sherlock Holmes II, baby!

Maya

Old windbag sure has balls! Or... well, you know what I mean.
Um, maybe I shouldn't be saying this... But he definitely did it. Murder. At least once. Maybe twice.

Dialogue

Manella: Yeah... sux0rz! I hate missing out on food...

Maya: Nick... what does "Sucksores" mean?

Phoenix: No idea...

Maya: Hey, Nick... It's Ms. Vasquez! Hello?

Vasquez: ...

Maya: H-E-L-L-O!

Vasquez: ...

Maya: H! E! L! L! O!

Maya: The old windbag sure is quiet today.

Oldbag: ...

Maya:Hey I bet we could even eat the donuts in the guard station!

Oldbag: ... You eat, you die.

Maya: Whew! She's alive.

Edgeworth: Will the witness declare her name?

Oldbag: ...Hmm? My, aren't you a handsome fellow! I'm afraid I'm a bit flustered!

Edgeworth: Y-your name, please!

Oldbag: Oh, dearie! No need for you to be embarrassed! Just call me "grandma."

Edgeworth: YOUR NAME, PLEASE!

Phoenix: (Seems Edgeworth has a bit of trouble getting his witnesses to say their names...)

Oldbag: You let 'em have it, Edgey-boy!

Phoenix: (E-Edgey-boy...?)

Edgeworth: ...

Other

Manella: (After presenting any evidence other than Powers's(?) Photo) I try not to pay much attention to things that don't interest me. LOL.

Maya: W-why are you staring at me like that...?

Oldbag: Umm... E-Edgey-boy! Help!

Turnabout Goodbyes

Miles Edgeworth

[After Phoenix asks to defend him] ... I hoped you wouldn't come. I didn't want you to see me. Not like this.

Dialogue

Maya: The water pressure's kind of low in that shower.

Phoenix: You want more pressure, huh? Why don't you go down to the fire department and have them spray you with the hose?

Maya: Good idea, Nick!

Phoenix: (Apparently, E.S.P. is no aid in detecting sarcasm...)

Maya: Nick..

Phoenix: What!?

Maya: The fireman yelled at me when I called him..

Santa Larry: Long time no see, Nick

Maya: Nick... you know Santa? Wow... Nick and St. Nick... Hey! I see the connection!

Edgeworth: So, you've come to laugh at the fallen attorney? Then laugh, laugh! Well? Why aren't you laughing?

Maya: Nick... Should we be laughing?

Phoenix: Nah. It's a trick. Laugh and he'll get mad... or burst into tears.

Maya: Oh, it's Christmas today! I forgot! What are you getting for me for Christmas, Nick?

Phoenix: Ask Santa.

Maya: (Looking at the noise-activated camera) Let's try it out! Hi! I'm Nick!

Camera: (Silence)

Maya: Maybe I'm not saying it loud enough? HEY! I'M NICK!

Camera: (Silence)

Maya: Huh... NIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIICK!

Phoenix: Will you stop that?

Maya: Maybe it's broken?

Phoenix: D-Don't kick it! Maybe it doesn't respond to voices!

Maya: Oh. Let's try..

Phoenix: The party popper..?

BANG

Camera: Klik klik klik klik klik klik klik klik klik klik..

Maya: ...Yep. It works.

Other

Manfred von Karma: Witness, you've had a long day. Shut your pie hole.

Rise From the Ashes

Ema Skye

Maybe Edgeworth took his unholy revenge on the detectives and slapped somebody!
You know, I got a 97 on my Science test the other day!

Judge

So that's why everyone craves about caviar! It's so tasty it hurts!
The prosecution will wait... I'm not finished eating.
I spent a whole day looking for my dentures. They turned out to be in my mouth all along.

Miles Edgeworth

Our job is to find truth, no matter how painful it may be.

Dialogue

Edgeworth: What the hell is that wriggling piece of plywood?

Meekins: Sir! That is the pride and joy of the entire Criminal Affairs Department, sir! It's the Blue Badger, sir!

Ema: There you are! Where've you been? My sister's trial is tomorrow!

Phoenix: Um... and you are?

Ema: It doesn't matter who I am, it matters who YOU are! You're the famous defence attorney Mia Fey!

Phoenix: ...

Ema: ...Oh! You're not Mia Fey are you?

Phoenix: I'm sorry. Mia Fey no longer... works here.

Ema: So you are... the coffee boy?

Phoenix: I'm Phoenix Wright, defence attorney.

Ema: (writing notes) Wright... Wright... Wait! You mean THE Phoenix Wright. The Phoenix Wright from the Edgeworth murder case?

Phoenix: Um, yeah sure. *It wasn't Edgeworth getting murdered though*

Ema: Phew... that's a relief. You're better than nobody.

Ema: I promised my sister I'd bring her Mia Fey but...

Phoenix: Incidentally, Mia was a woman.

Ema: Yeah, I thought you looked a bit strange when I first saw you.

Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney: Justice For All

The Lost Turnabout

Phoenix Wright

Mr. Wellington likes BIG bananas!
(When presenting the yellow baseball glove a witness has mistaken for a bunch of bananas) Doesn't it look delicious? Care for a bite?
(Nowhere to run... I'm sooo dead!)
(Recalling his friends and picturing Winston Payne) ...This person... I haven't got a clue. He seems to know me but maybe he's mistaking me for someone else?

Maya Fey

Earth to Nick! What's the matter?
You know you're awfully forgetful these days Nick. I hope I never get to be a forgetful old prune like you.
Come on Nick. We can talk about you being old later.

Dialogue

Maggey: What's wrong? You've been staring at me for a while. You're kind of scaring me sir.
Phoenix: (Thinking) Hmm, I'm afraid to ask but here goes. So this might sound bad but... who are you?

Wellington: Fashion! Cars! Women! Glasses! And of course... University! First-rates need only apply!
Phoenix: (Glasses? But you aren't wearing glasses.)

Phoenix: Could you tell the court what is special about this glove?
Gumshoe: What's special? Never really thought about it but... it's REALLY yellow... and that's about it.

Phoenix: Mr. Wellington loves large bananas!

Judge: ...

Payne: ...

Wellington: ...

............

Maya: Uh, Nick...

Maya: I hope you've noticed the icy glares we're getting from everyone in here!

Judge: Wh-What in the world do you mean?

Wellington: I'll have you know I like strawberries much better than bananas.

Reunion, and Turnabout

Phoenix: (After being asked if he wants to hear the Ini Miney's story again) (Well excuuuse me, Princess. ...Anyway, should I ask to hear the story again...?)

Dialogue

Franziska: Cry and my whip will acommodate .
Phoenix: (What's with her? All she's said for the last few minutes is utter nonsense!)

Franziska: I look forward to tonight's news with great joy Mr Phoenix Wright. The image of your face being projected all over the world.
Mia: All over the world? Looks like you've made a name for yourself.
Franziska: Don't be foolish you foolish fool wearing the foolishly foolish clothes.

Turnabout Big Top

Phoenix Wright

Wonderful. Today's special must be Fillet O' Phoenix!

Maya Fey

Nick? NICK! You're too young to die!

Dialogue

Maya: I wish I was an animal tamer! Nick! Roll over!

Phoenix: When this case is over, I'll roll over for you all you want.

Phoenix: Well, what do you think of this?

Moe:Looks tasty!

Phoenix:Huh?

Moe:The burgers dummy!

Maximillion: I'm counting on you my sweeties!

Phoenix: (He didn't just call me his sweety did he?)

Maya: I just found it odd... Maximillion Galatica is just a country bumpkin.

Phoenix: So? What's wrong with that? He's still a world-class magician.

Maya: Yeah, but his name is Billy Bob Johns...

Phoenix: (Yikes, the guy has 3 first names! That is kind of odd.)

Farewell, My Turnabout

Phoenix Wright

Difficult-looking legal books stand in a formidable row. They mock me. I tried reading one, and it made my head hurt. When I closed it, it slipped out of my hand. Then my foot hurt too.
(False Ending sppech) And just like that... the case came to an end. I ran from the courtroom and wandered the streets alone. I never saw Maya again. De Killer is a man of his word, so I'm sure he let Maya go. The trial of Adrian Andrews went ahead and the newspapers read the following headline... Guilty of course. The miracle never happen. Maybe it was never meant to? Because a miracle is something that doesn't exist.

Dialogue

Edgeworth: That's not something I can answer for you... Wright... Only you can decide where to go from here. One year ago... At that time, I didn't truly understand what a "prosecutor" was. And that is why... I had to leave the Prosecutor's Office. I felt that I couldn't stand in a court of law until I knew what a prosecutor really was. And now, Wright... It's your turn.

Phoenix: My... Turn?

Edgeworth: What is this thing called a "lawyer"? What can you do as one? You must find the answer... And you must find it on your own.

Phoenix: I'm a lawyer... But to fight for someone who is clearly a killer... Matt Engarde... That man is really... Argh!

Edgeworth: It doesn't matter who, every person deserves a proper defense and a fair trial. Isn't that the basis of our judicial system?

Phoenix: "Proper defense"? But what exactly is that? Is it where a lawyer forcibly and blindly gets an acquittal through shouting and trickery?

Edgeworth: ...*sigh* Ironic that you of all people should say such a thing. Isn't that exactly how you have fought for your clients up until now?

Phoenix: Uh... W-Well, that may be true, but... But that's... That's because I've believed my clients to be innocent from the bottom of my heart! But if I were to get Engarde an acquittal... That... That isn't a proper defense at all! I became a lawyer because I thought... I thought I could save people who were in suffering and in pain... But... When I look at this mess we're in... I can't even protect the person closest to me. Even if I win the case, I still lose in the end... I just don't know what to do!

Edgeworth: ... Wright. Would you get a hold of yourself? You have it all wrong.

Phoenix: Huh?

Edgeworth: We aren't some sort of heroes. We're only human, you and I. You want to "save someone"? That's something easier said than done, wouldn't you say? You are a defense lawyer. You can't run away from that. You can only fight. That's all you can do.

Phoenix: People like you and Franziska von Karma are always using all you have to pin me down. You fight to the very end, even when you know the truth is not with you. But I'm not like you. I can't fight for a false verdict -- for a man I clearly know to be guilty!

Edgeworth: ... Franziska... She fights for herself. The only thing she fights for is her perfect win record. That's all.

Phoenix: And!? Isn't that the same as you!? Isn't that why you ran away a year ago? Because your precious win record was destroyed!? You are so petty!

Edgeworth: ... I see... Now I understand why you despise me so. However, you are mistaken.

Phoenix: What do you... ?

Edgeworth: Thanks to you, when you sealed off my path to a perfect win record... I began to realize the error of my ways. I realized that such things as a perfect win record were meaningless.

Phoenix: I don't believe you. Are you saying that's why you left the Prosecutor's Office? But then, why? Why are you here now?

Edgeworth: The answer to that... is something you will find out on your own. I have faith you will see it before the verdict is read tomorrow. But if you can't, then you will be powerless to change the ending of this story.

Edgeworth: For my own personal victories...and for guilty verdicts... I used every dirty trick in the book. And so my win record remained spotless. But... A man appeared and stood fast against that selfish me. I fought him in my usual manner, and tasted my first defeat. I felt like I had lost everything because of that. And then... It was my turn to sit in the defendant's chair. And I was saved...by that person I called my "enemy"... I couldn't forgive myself for all that had happened. So I left the Prosecutor's Office. And I left that note... "Prosecutor Miles Edgeworth chooses death"...

Franziska von Karma: Hmph, as well you should have. A prosecutor who has shamed himself with defeat should crawl into a hole and die!

Edgeworth: ...But that was not what happened. After I left the Prosecutor's Office, I finally came to realize something. And it was in that moment of clarity that everything began to change.

Franziska: Wh-What foolish nonsense...

Edgeworth: We prosecutors use anything we can to attack the defendant. But every time we did so... No matter how desperate the situation, instead of giving up like most people, that man would hold strong with his undying faith. And then, before I knew it... I began to trust in that man as well.

Franziska: Wh-What!? You trusted your enemy!?

Edgeworth: It doesn't matter how many underhanded tricks a person uses... The truth will always find a way to make itself known. The only thing we can do is to fight with the knowledge we hold and everything we have. Erasing the paradoxes one by one... It's never easy... We claw and scratch for every inch. But we will always eventually reach that one single truth. This I promise you.

Pearl Fey: The "truth"...

Edgeworth: Yes. That's the reason why prosecutors and defense lawyers exist. But I'm sure you knew that already, didn't you, Wright?

Phoenix: ...

Edgeworth: That's why you couldn't forgive me; this man who went into hiding. Isn't that right? This man who only had his sights set on "victory", who ran away into the night...

Pearl: Ah! Is...Is Mr. Edgeworth right, Mr. Nick...!?

Phoenix: (You really let me down...) When you disappeared, I felt...betrayed. The reason I decided to become a lawyer to begin with...was because I believed in the things you said to me, all those years ago... And you...you betrayed your own words. That's why...one year ago, I made up my mind. I decided that the Miles Edgeworth I knew had died... At least, that's what I told myself.

Franziska: You pathetic fool! I don't want to hear the wretched whimpering of a disgraced loser! A Von Karma is someone who is destined to be perfect! Miles Edgeworth... You are no longer worthy! You are no longer worthy of being a Von Karma! And neither am I! It's over.. It's all over!

Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney: Trials & Tribulations

Turnabout Memories

Mia

Well, we know whose milkshake brings all the boys to the yard...

Dialogue

Mia: Mr Wright! Where's the bottle necklace?
Phoenix:...
Mia:Mr Wright?
Phoenix: I... I ate it.

Grossberg: When you find the evidence you need, present it and rub it into old greybeard's face!
Mia: Yes sir! Into old greybeard's face!
Judge: Mr Grossberg? Please try to set a better example for the young lady! .

The Stolen Turnabout

Godot

To err is human... to forgive... divine. Humans aren't machines... they have souls... They live, they die, they love, they hate... and yes, they even make mistakes...

Blacker then a moonless night, hotter and more bitter than hell itself.. That is coffee.

Luke Atmey

Zvarri! The truth has once again been elegantly revealed to me!
Take a good look, everyone! Unable to find a rival worthy of my genius, I was forced to create one by myself! Here I am! The tragic clown!

Ron Delite

Come on! I'm guilty! Throw the book at meeeeeee!

Dialogue

Maya: (examining part of a sign saying "bur") Aha, I've got it! Maybe it's supposed to say "Hamburger"
Phoenix: Why would anyone write "Hamburger" that big?
Maya: Like, maybe for the "World Hamburger Festival" or something?
Phoenix: I kinda doubt it.
Maya: Aha, I've got it! Maybe it said, 'Spaghetti?'
Phoenix: ...Why are you talking about food? Oh, wait. That's normal for you.
Anyway, it says, "bur". There's no way it could be "Spaghetti".
Maya: Well, maybe it was a typo! It might have said, "Spaghetti Festival". What do you think?
Phoenix: Ok to me... Besides, Spaghetti is the only thing more tangled than your reasoning.

Maya: When did you first get that porcupine cut?
Phoenix: ...Um, it's been like this ever since I was a little kid.
Maya: What!? You mean that's the way your hair is naturally!?
I thought you had some sort of special "Phoenix Cut" deal with the barber.
I mean... You usually only see hair like that in a video game.
Phoenix: (Is my hair really that weird-looking?)

Judge: Order Order! Mr Godot! Can you explain this?
Godot:...
Judge: And stop drinking that coffee!

Recipe for Turnabout

Phoenix Wright

After Phoenix sees Maya been 'hired' by Jean Armstrong ( I don't know whether to laugh or feel bad for Maya....Maybe I should do both...?)
Referring to Gumshoe when he tries to deny above his love on Maggey(Note to self: Gossip with Maya about this later)
Refering to Mia in maid's outfit with Mr.Kudo (Mia's really got this guy eating out of her hands..)
[When Godot toss a cup of coffee at his face](Should I be grateful this coffee's only hot to give me 1st degree burns...?)
(He's (Kudo) looking at me as if I was an evil Shogun...)
(He's(Kudo) got to be using some sort of infinite ammo code with that box of seeds...)
[Refering about Godot's drinking habits](Do you have the slightest idea how many cups you've had by now...?)
ACK! NOT THE HAIR!

Godot

You're saying that if something isn't normal, it simply isn't possible? Where does that leave the porcu-headed lawyer and the topknot chick over there... and the ungodly cool guy with the mask over here? Well, Trite?

Armstrong

Oui! Perfect! I will 'ire you!
Non, non, NON! You naughty man!

Judge

You will suck down the penalty Mr Wright... and you will like it!

Dialogue

Phoenix: Don't go licking the table cloth, OK, Maya?

Maya: Why would I lick it? I'm not a cat, Nick!

Phoenix:(Then why can I picture you doing just that?)

(After Phoenix Wright tastes one of the dishes in Tres Bien)

Phoenix: ...Urp!

Maya: Well?

Phoenix: Are you hungry, Maya?

Maya: I'm starving!

Phoenix: Here. It's yours

Maya: Really? (Tries it out)...Urp!

Phoenix: Remember, Maya! My wallet doesn't print money, so you'd better polish off the plate!

Maya: I...I've just remembered I've got to clean the toilet! (goes to the another location)

Phoenix: Hey! (You can't be in that much of a hurry to clean the toilet!)

Maya: Nick! That's the kind of talk that could hurt a girl!

Phoenix: Have you forgotten that Mr Armstrong is a MAN Maya?

Phoenix: (T-That coffee! It was laced with something I'm sure of it!)

Maya: Nick! My stomach! It hurts! ...Oh wait that's just the burger I had for breakfast.

Judge: Mr... Um... Mr.Wright

Phoenix: Yes, Your Honor?

Judge: Aaahhh!!

Phoenix: Wh-What's wrong?!

Judge: Nothing. It's just... whenever I addressed you in the previous trial, your response was... "Youse talkin' to me?" It was a little, well... intimidating.

Phoenix: No, no! That wasn't me! That was the phony Phoenix!

Judge: I see. So our trusty Phoenix Wright is back with us now, is he?

Phoenix: ("Our trusty"...)

Judge: Mr, Wright. I would ask you to begin your cross-examination, but...

Phoenix: Yes?

Judge: Please, no intimidation tricks this time around. Is that understood?

Phoenix: I already told you! That wasn't me!

Kudo: Oops!

Judge: Witness! You can't just "oops" you way out of this!

(Referring about the lottery ticket)

Maya: I want to try it, Nick!

Phoenix: Then buy a ticket, Maya. With your own money!

Gumshoe: They called him "the walking computer" at the place where he worked.

Maya: What happens when he crashes though!? Does he stop moving all of a sudden?

Phoenix: *groan* (He wasn't a computer, Maya.)

(After presenting incorrect evidence to Lisa Basil)

Maya: Umm, would you mind taking a look at this?

Basil: I'm sorry. That data is SuPer-Admin Restricted Desktop Access password-protected.

Maya: SuPer-Admin Restricted Desktop Access password-protected!? What? This is madness!

Phoenix: No, Maya, that is SPARDA.

Maya: Ah! It's Xin Eohp!

Tigre: Who you callin' "Zinne Oooph"!?

Maya: Aaaaahhh! (disappears)

Phoenix: (Come out from under the table already, Maya!)

Armstrong: Oui! With you here, Monsieur, everything feels right!

Godot: Ha!

Phoenix: Doesn't anything scare this guy!?

(Don Tigre roars in court)

Maya: Aaaaahhhhh! (disappears)

Phoenix: (Don't hide under the table Maya! ...Unless there's room for me down there too!)

Judge: I... err... I... Would you mind!?

Tigre: What 'youse say to me!?

Judge: N-N-N-Nothing! I didn't say nuddin'! Honest!

Phoenix: (Who could've guessed that fear would induce a bad Brooklyn accent in the judge?)

Tigre: I got a business to take care of, ya hear me? So who the hell called me into this hole?! Was it you', spikey?!

Phoenix: Ack, no. Of course not... It was... the judge... (Notices the judge is gone) Y-Your Honor!!!

Judge: (sarcasm) Oh, dear! I, um... I seem to have dropped my pen. Where on earth is it...? Don't mind me! Just carry on with the proceedings as normal!

Phoenix: (That's it. We're doomed.)

Judge: Ruh-roh!

Tigre: So I dare you' to say it again! Come on! You' got the guts!?

Judge: (Still scared) Y-Y-You can't threaten m-me, Mr. Tigre. I-It's the defense! Go ahead and tell the witness, Mr. Wright!

(Wright disappeared)

Judge: Mr. Wriight!

Tigre: Sounds to me like it must be you', old man. Youse got guts, I'll give you that.

Judge: M-M-Mr. Wright! Do not leave me to handle this alone!

Phoenix: V-Very impressive Mr. Godot, waiting for my absence to launch your attack!

Godot: Ha...! Found your pen at last, Trite?

Phoenix: It was in my pocket.

Tigre: I can see through you Phoenix Wright! That ain't the bottle with the cyanide in it.

Phoenix: No, no. This is the bottle we found traces of the poison in.

Tigre: Don't mess with The Tiger or you're going to get ripped to shreds! The cyanide bottle was brown. And it was made of glass. That cheap piece of trash don't look nothin' like that!

(Phoenix just stares at thim, Godot's visor is smoking, the judge is shocked and the whole court room is completely silent)

Phoenix: (Got him. At last...)

Tigre: Wh-What? Why's everyone gone quiet?

Judge: Wh-What's going on?

Bailiff: It looks like a blackout.

Godot: Well done...Trite. (lights back) I've saved my 17th cup of coffee just for you. (Camera shows the coffee landed onto Phoenix's head) Savor it... While you watch your caged prey.

Turnabout Beginnings

Judge

Why, Mr. Edgeworth... I'm not sure I like you wagging your finger at me as though I were some hoser!
Or-Order! Order in the court! What is the meaning of all this ballyhoo...!?
"To err is human, to forgive, divine."
Did you hear that Ms. Fey? I believe Mr. Edgeworth just called you a canucklehead.

Diego Armando

I came to see how our little kitten was doing all alone in the big, scary lion's den. ...I thought maybe you'd like someone to play with.
The courtroom can be a cold battlefield alright. Especially... for a beginner.
But maybe you should keep your claws out, and show them what you've got... Kitten.
A lawyer is someone who smiles no matter how bad it gets.
Mia...don't cry. The only time a lawyer can cry is when it's all over.

Dialogue

Mia: ...Err, umm... So why did you escape anyway?

Fawles: Ah. Ah. UGGA!

Mia: Eeeeek! I'm sorry! I'm sorry!

Fawles: I never... I never lie! I din't escape from nowhere!

Mia: Err... But, Mr. Fawles... The police just recaptured you two days ago.

Fawles: ... Ugh. Sorry. I told a little lie.

Mia: (Oh boy...)

Judge: Yes, yes...

Judge: It's quite obvious that the defendant is guilty.

Mia: *OBJECTION!*

Mia: W-Wait a minute! That's not right!

Mia: At least hear the case before you decide on the outcome, Your Honor!

Judge: Grrrngh...

Edgeworth: Young people these days simply don't know how to respect their elders.

Mia: (Why you...! You're even younger than me, you hypocrite!)

Gumshoe: Hey, ma'am! You got any idea how much work it takes... ......

Mia: Wh-What is it?

Gumshoe: You... Y-You're really gorgeous...

Mia: Excuse me?

Gumshoe: No, seriously... My heart... It's aching for you...

Edgeworth: Now then, if the defence is quite done embarassing itself...

Mia: (Boy would I like wrap this scarf around his smarmy little neck!)

Armando: Hey, Kitten... Have you ever put salt in your coffee?

Mia: No... Why would I!?

Armando: Why not?

Mia: Huh...?

Armando: It may actually go better with coffee than sugar, right?

Mia: ...

Armando: Listen. My point is if you're not sure, you might as well add a ton of salt to it. It might... bring out the rust in something. Like a piece of evidence.

Mia: (He's right, Mia... Go present something. You've got nothing to lose!)

Armando: By the way, I wouldn't put salt in my coffee. The two don't go well, after all.

Edgeworth: All you have to do is tell us only what you saw.

Edgeworth: Otherwise the mean lady might yell at you again.

Mia: (Who is he talking about!?)

Fawles: Dahlia. My girlfriend. My love. My Teen Angel.

Mia: (Ugh. Did he actually say, "My Teen Angel"? He's seen one too many soap operas.)

Armando: Your "Teen Angel"...? How old was she anyway?

Fawles: Just 14...

Mia: F-F-Fourteen!? (I guess you were robbing cradles before diamonds...)

Bridge to the Turnabout

Phoenix Wright

Hmm... I see it now... Zvarri! A fortune-teller...?
(Now I'm definitely up the creek without a paddle... or a life jacket)
(To Godot) Objection! Could you please knock it off with the cheesy proverbs and illogical metaphors already!?
Um...The rest of this court dosen't speak Coffeenese. Can you elaborate a bit more?
Nnghn!(Did the judge take smart pills during the last recess?)

Godot

You look like I did after I mistakenly took a swig of Worcestershire sauce.
You think maybe my beans are under-roasted, but you have no idea gramps.
Cute girls never lie. Ever.
People are like books. We've all got a front and a back. You get my drift?
I can also say that darkness loves to play with the human mind.
There are 253 distinct types of bitterness in coffee... But to pick out each one requires total concentration and the use of all the senses.
We can't see the demons that lurk in the night... That's why humans are weak.
I'm only going to say this once, Lady von Whippingberg. Go home!

Dick Gumshoe

...You sure have one mean punch, Mr. Edgeworth! It's down-right fierce!

Miles Edgeworth

(Gumshoe indeed! Like gum on your shoe, he's impossible to get rid of!)

(... D-Do I really inspire this sort of frothing desire from the female masses?)

Dialogue

Edgeworth: Are...!

von Karma: You...!

Judge: High! The girl... She's very high up in this picture!

Godot: As they say.. "A cornered fox is more dangerous than a jackal".

Phoenix: *slams desk* I believe the correct definition of a cornered fox is "scared and petrified".

Godot: ... Your animal analogies have grown tiresome!

Phoenix: (You were the one who started it!)

Edgeworth: How long were you in the bath for?

Bikini: My, my, my! What a filthy little rogue you are! I know what's on your mind!

Edgeworth: ...?

Bikini: Your next question is going to be "Where exactly did you wash," isn't it? Ah, THIS is why you have to watch the young ones.

Edgeworth: W-What are you going on about? I was just... *whip* ACK!

von Karma: Pathetic Miles Edgeworth...

Judge: The lowest of the low.

Edgeworth: Is there some sort of "Kick Me" sign stuck to the defense's bench!?

Edgeworth:[referring to some flags on a line] What is this festive-looking ornament?

Larry Butz: It reminds me of art class in grade school. We used to have a lot of fun decorating the classroom with origami. Remember?

Edgeworth: W-Well, I...

Larry Butz: Oh, yeah... You never were any good at it.

Gumshoe: Really?

Larry Butz: Yeah, this guy was so bad, he couldn't even fold a dollar, let alone a crane. Everyone tried to comfort him, but he would just sit there sobbing.

Gumshoe: Really? I never would have expected that.

Edgeworth: Be quiet already! I'll never forget the shame of that day! You want a crane! I can now make a perfect quarter-inch crane without a single flaw!

Larry Butz: ... You know, Edgey... Nothing for nothing, but a quarter-inch crane without a single flaw is not easy.

Gumshoe: Yeah, that's quite a feat, Prosecutor Edgeworth!

Edgeworth: (Grr... This is exactly why I hate childhood friends...)

Dahlia: I already told you... Maya Fey is dead.

Phoenix: N-No! Noooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Pearl: ...And what does this word say?

Elise: That? It says "roast." That's kind of a tough word.

Phoenix: (Just what kind of book are they reading?)

Godot: I was the one that failed to protect Mia... ...Me and no one else. I tried to avert my eyes from the truth... to escape from the harshness of reality. I just couldn't face Mia's death head on, so I ran! I hid behind a mask. I threw away my true name. I couldn't even deal with being a defense attorney anymore, so I quit.

Phoenix: But, but! You saved Maya!

Godot: Yeah. That was my plan... Up until just now, anyway.

Maya: Wh-what do you mean?

Godot: (drinks) Are you listening, Maya? If I had really wanted to save you... ...then there's one person that I should have gone and talked to right away.

Maya: Wh-who do you mean? Are you talking about Nick?

Godot: But I didn't do it... I tried to get the help of Iris and your mother... I closed my eyes to the most important man involved. Do you know why? The real reason?

Maya: No... Why?

Godot: I suppose... I wasn't really interested in saving you at all.

Maya: Huh?

Godot: I think I was just trying to salvage what's left of my own broken soul... I was trying to make up for the fact that I couldn't save Mia. Nothing more. That's why I let you walk right into a situation that I knew was dangerous. Forgive me...

Phoenix: Y-You're wrong! You put your life on the line to save Maya!

Godot: *shakes his head* Was it really for Maya's sake...? Even I'm not really sure.

Judge: Wh-What do you mean by that...?

Godot: That night, in the darkness of the garden, when I saw her silhouette...a part of me must have known it... That it wasn't really Dahlia Hawthorne that was standing there in front of me.

Maya: ...!

Godot: It could have been Misty Fey... Or even that little girl. But still, I picked up that blade as though I were in a dream! I'm not sure exactly what was going on in my mind at that point... Was I really motivated by a pure desire to protect Maya Fey? Or was it something else...? Was it hatred for a woman who had stolen everything from me 6 years earlier...? Could it have been simply a desire for revenge? And now, I don't know anything anymore! I did learn something today, however. I finally realized that I was the arrogant one. I was just... chasing an illusion, a fantasy. The stupid fantasy of defeating you in the courtroom...

Phoenix: ...

Godot: You were the one who taught me that. You never ran away from Mia's death. Instead, you picked up where she left off, as a true defender of the people. In that one moment... I understood everything!

Phoenix: Mr. Godot...

Godot: *shakes his head* If you don't mind... I hope you'll remember... My name is... Diego Armando.

Maya: M-Mr. Armando! I believe in you! I know you were trying to save me!

Godot: (blood seeps out from under his visor) Hmm... Thanks.

Phoenix: Y-Your wound...! It's bleeding!

Godot: ...Ha! Did you forget already? In my world, the color red doesn't exist.

Phoenix: ...!

Godot: These must be... my tears.

Judge: Tears...?

Godot: Ever since I woke up from my coma... ...I think I've been waiting for this very moment.

Maya: M-Mr. Armando...

Godot: You'd do well to remember this, Maya. The only time a lawyer can cry is when it's all over.

Iris: I want to... I want to apologize to you.

Phoenix: Apologize? To me? For what?

Iris: For the case six years ago, of course.

Judge: I just remembered... Weren't you poisoned by your own lover?

Phoenix: ...Not exactly, but yeah, something like that. Even now... 6 years later, I can hardly believe it. She was going to do it... She was planning to kill me...

Iris: ......It's not all that surprising. The two of you... You hardly knew each other.

Phoenix: Huh...? What do you mean?

Iris: You and my sister... You only met twice.

Phoenix: ......Huh. W-We only met t-twice?

Iris: The first time you met was on that fateful day... The day she poisoned Mr. Armando in the cafeteria of this very courtroom. The next time you met her was... six months later. You met her again on the day that she stole your cold medicine... and Doug Swallows was killed.

Phoenix: N-N-No way! It just... It can't be true! I mean, during our whole relationship, we were...

Iris: ......For those six months... ...the girl that you thought was Dahlia Hawthorne... She wasn't actually my sister.

Phoenix: (Huh? It wasn't Dahlia...?)

Iris: I hope one day you can forgive me... Feenie.

Phoenix: You... Y-Y-You mean...?

Iris: That's right... I lied to you... for six months.

Judge: B-But why...!? Why would you do such a thing?

Iris: Ever since she gave you the bottle that day... my sister was trying to get it back as soon as she possibly could. Because of the police investigation and their surveillance... she couldn't move about freely.

Phoenix: So that's why you...?

Iris: My sister... From the beginning, she was prepared for the worst.

Phoenix: P-Prepared for the worst?

Iris: She thought that you might discover the truth. That's why she was always ready to deal with you at a moment's notice...

Phoenix: (You mean she was ready to kill me, don't you...?)

Iris: She already had so much to answer for, I didn't want any more sins on her soul. I begged her not to do it, and she agreed to give me a chance.

Phoenix: And that's why... you came to me? You came to get the bottle pendant back from me in her place?

Iris: But I couldn't get you to give it back... I failed at something even as simple as that. Six months passed and I still couldn't get it back from you. Finally, my sister couldn't wait any longer. She didn't consult me about her plans for you that day. ...It was the first time that had ever happened.

Phoenix: That was a bit strange, wasn't it? Up until that day, you two were partners in crime, and she would confer with you...

Iris: I think... she must have noticed.

Phoenix: ...? Noticed what?

Iris: My feelings for you. If I had found out that she planned to kill you... ...I would have done whatever was neccesary to stop her. Even if it meant her life... or mine.

Phoenix: I-Iris...!

Iris: After spending half a year by your side... My feelings for you... They changed.

Phoenix: ...... I have something to say to you, too.

Iris: Y-Yes?

Phoenix: You really are the person I always thought you were. Even after Dahlia Hawthorne was found guilty... I still believed in you.

Iris: ...... Thank you.

Ending

Phoenix: It's only natural for living creatures to fight to protect their own lives. But what makes us human is that we fight for others. But who do you fight for? How hard must you fight...? That's the true measure of what human life is worth. We defense attorneys are warriors who are constantly challenged by that question. Even when the battle is over, and the bonds that connect us are severed... We always return... Time and time again. Mia, Maya, Pearls, Mr. Armando... and Maya's mother, too... I learned that... from all of them.

Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney

Turnabout Trump

Apollo Justice

Isn't violence against hair a crime, Your Honor?
Don't worry. I was up at 5AM practicing my "Chords of Steel!"

Turnabout Corners

Dialogue

Trucy: Oh hey! An attorney badge? My Daddy has one of those too. Here, give that to me a second... Now watch as I make it disapear!

Apollo: Ack! My badge! Bring it back!

Trucy: Don't worry, just check your pocket.

Apollo: ...This is... the flyer you just gave me?!

Turnabout Serenade

Apollo Justice

...Valant Gramarye! (...Using the door like an average muggle, no less.)

Turnabout Succesion

Apollo Justice

"Attorney Utterly Confused", end quote.
Or "I Still Have No Idea What You're Talking About", end quote, I might say.
("Judge Has Active Imagination"... end quote.)
Believe me, any comic relief I may provide is entirely unintentional.

Source: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Ace_Attorney

Masama ba talaga akong tao???

2008-02-26T09:00:00.002+08:00

Minsan, hindi ko maintindihan ang mga bagay-bagay. Hindi ko maintindihan kung bakit kung minsan pakiramdam ko, napakasama ko ng tao kahit wala naman akong ginagawang masama. Kung meron man akong ginagawang masama siguro hindi ko alam na masama iyon o kaya naman hindi ko maintindihan ang rason kung bakit masama ang isang bagay. Inaamin ko na hindi ako isang mabuting tao ngunit sinisigurado ko naman na wala akong ginagawang makapagpapahamak sa mga tao lalo na sa mga kaibigan ko. Siguro hindi ko alam na minsan, nakakasakit na ako nang hindi ko nalalaman o hindi ako nasasabihan. Siguro nga malaki ang pinagkaiba ng mga konseptong makapagpapahamak at makakasakit. Ako ay ang isang taong mahirap magpatawad kaya minsan wala akong paki-alam kung hindi man ako patawarin ng isang tao. Ako ay isa ring tao na hindi marunong makisama at suplado kung hindi ko gusto ang taong kaharap ko. Ako rin ay isang taong hindi mabilis magtiwala sa mga tao. Sa mga taong malalapit sa akin, alam niyo na naman siguro iyon. Siguro ang mga ito ang mga dahilan kung bakit marami akong mga taong hindi kinakausap o kagalit. Siguro, ito ang dahilan kung bakit mabilis akong magalit o magtampo. Siguro, ito ang mga dahilan kung bakit hindi ako maiintindihan ng ibang tao at hindi ko maintindihan ng ibang tao. Siguro masama talaga akong tao, hindi ko lang alam. Wala nga akong itinuturing na Diyos di ba??? Di ba tama? masama naman talaga ako? Kahit anung gawin ko (mabuti man yun o masama) masama pa rin ako... Salamat na lang siguro sa mga taong nakakaintindi sa akin. Kasalanan ko ba kung bakit ako ganito???

My Wish List!!!

2008-02-19T21:29:00.012+08:00

MacBook Pro, 15-inch, 2.4GHz

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W100

iPhone 16GB

iPod Classic 160 GB

Nintendo DS Lite

Sony PSP

Nintendo Wii

PlayStation 3 System MotorStorm Pack (80GB HD)

Favorite Quotations from Philosophers

2008-02-12T06:55:00.001+08:00

If God exists, all depends on him and we can do nothing against his will. If he does not exist, everything depends on us.
-Albert Camus (1913 - 1960)

Since the order of the world is shaped by death, mightn't it be better for God if we refuse to believe in Him, and struggle with all our might against death without raising our eyes towards the heaven where He sits in silence?
-Albert Camus (1913 - 1960)

Politics and the fate of mankind are shaped by men without ideas and without greatness. Men who have greatness within them don't go in for politics.
-Albert Camus (1913 - 1960)

Religion is the soul of soulless conditions, the heart of a heartless world, the opium of the people.
-Karl Marx (1818 - 1883)

The first requisite for the happiness of the people is the abolition of religion.
-Karl Marx (1818 - 1883)

If a Jew is fascinated by Christians it is not because of their virtues, which he values little, but because they represent anonymity, humanity without race.
-Jean-Paul Sartre (1905 - 1980)

So that's what Hell is. I'd never have believed it...Do you remember, brimstone, the stake, the gridiron? What a joke! No need of a gridiron—Hell is other people.
-Jean-Paul Sartre (1905 - 1980)

I call Christianity the one great curse, the one enormous and innermost perversion, the one great instinct of revenge, for which no means are too venomous, too underhand, too underground and too petty—I call it the one immortal blemish of mankind.
-Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (1844 - 1900)

Believe me! The secret of reaping the greatest fruitfulness and the greatest enjoyment from life is to live dangerously!
-Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (1844 - 1900)

There is master morality and slave morality...Slave morality is essentially the morality of utility.
-Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (1844 - 1900)

The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it.
-Karl Marx (1818 - 1883)

The knowledge of the other world can be obtained here only by losing some of that intelligence which is necessary for this present world.
-Immanuel Kant (1724 - 1804)

Thoughts without content are empty, intuitions without concepts are blind...The understanding can intuit nothing, the senses can think nothing. Only through their union can knowledge arise.
-Immanuel Kant (1724 - 1804)

I have therefore found it necessary to deny knowledge in order to make room for faith.
-Immanuel Kant (1724 - 1804)

Religion is the dream of the human mind.
-Ludwig Andreas Feuerbach (1804 - 1872)

Let us say,''Either God is or he is not'...Let us weigh up the gain and loss involved in calling heads that God exists...Let us assess the two cases: if you win you win everything, if you lose you lose nothing. Do not hesitate then: wager that he does exist.
-Blaise Pascal (1623 - 1662)

LASARET...

2008-02-09T22:14:00.001+08:00

LASARET.... Retreat.... The so-called a time to spend time with "God." But how about those people who have different perspective in his/her idea of a higher being?
I know that many of you know my different kind of belief which is not aligned with the most of the conventions. Some labeled me an atheist and some labeled me as an agnostic but for me, I don't care about those labels and I don't give myself any label. There are times that I think atheistically, sometimes agnostic, but there are times I also do theist practices. There is an activity in the LASARET called "coming home" wherein part of it says that you'll feel the presence of God in that activity. There's nothing wrong in trying right? Wala namang mawawala sa akin eh. After doing the activity, honestly, I don't really feel what they call that presence of God. I don't know. There is just two possibilities: there is a problem in my way of thinking or "God" created me with this way of thinking. I believe in the possibility that God really exist. There are also times that I pray but my only difference with others is I don't expect that my prayers will be answered because when I have problems, I'm solving them using realistic and empirical solutions because I really hate uncertainties. I do not know if prayers are really being answered or not and I don't care if what is the real situation. The important is that I do have my own principles wherein not doing improper actions against other people because I believe that people can still be good persons whether God exists or don't.

The activities in LASARET are great especially the Solidarity meal, the drawing activity and the time capsule. I'm really excited about that concept of time capsule but I won't tell the procedures because I don't want to be spoiler. My group mates in this activity is Per, Nazca, Ina, Abby and Kim (Thank you!!! I will never forget you!!!) with the motto: "We are rockstars from heaven and for our fellow countrymen!!!"

*groupmates, please correct me if I'm wrong... hehehe

for the photo's just go to this link:

http://master386.multiply.com/photos/album/68/LASARET_A55

IM BACK!!!!

2008-02-08T06:34:00.001+08:00

After a long time of trying to make a G-mail account, at last!!!! I made it. That is one reason why this blog stoped working for almost 2 years??? check my last post: It was still last September 2006!!! Anyway, I'm preparing for my LASARET (Lasallian Retreat) today so I won't able to do a formal post... I'll post ASAP after my LASARET this weekend. I hope you liked my new layout ;P

*About the title: the title "Philosophical" is from my the previous title of my multiply "Political and Philosophical." What I did was I split the title in to two making "Philosophical" the title of my blogspot account while "Political" on my multiply account.