Blogging with a Pad of RH-Pills

It’s distressing to quit blogging knowing that this had been one of my favorite pastimes for so many years. I have given up my word on this: “should stop this nonsense and concentrate on my God-forsaken-life through my diary (Rosa) and think like Anais Nin, bereft of sensuality.” Hahaha. But then I realize there is nothing wrong in taking back my word to resume my passion for it. I just have to be a little mature, though, in dealing with the topic I write. I know I have been careless in the past, and I really didn’t ruminate well about the topic I wrote (which have offended readers, human and alien alike). I  failed to distinguish blogging from a diary writing which you can input some of your most personal and honest opinions.

I was wrong. Blogging is entirely different for its serves as a public pad for online readers and a catch basin of opinions or reactions. Carefulness is the word here; otherwise you really have to deal with people of multiple crass opinions. While diary is totally free, blogging is framed with jails and bombs that you need to be very careful in handling it. We do not know what the readers would tell you, and not all readers are typically good people like those in my bloglist. Some are absolutely weird, or at least behaving like weird; others are addict who have sniffed a hundred pounds of ipil-ipil leaves; and others are precisely fallen angels or just fallen (minus the angels). Hehehe.

Anyway, I’ll update this site as often as possible, till my wedding day. =)

***

Meanwhile, I have been attending church forums on RH-Bill. Obviously, I was the only one among the pact of devout Catholics, who was very firm in being a pro RH-Bill. I never bothered to throw any question and just listened to the speaker who kept on saying, “Diba brothers and sisters, Amen? Amen!” It was really irritating to hear that repeated over a hundred folds compared to the whole content of the lecture that I almost wailed, “Hey, brod, just go on with your lecture.”

But anyway, I am amenable not all about RH-Bill are acceptable. There are things that need to be clarified and should be subjected to consultation with the church. No question with that. But what really took the cake away was the repeated statement of lecturers that you cannot discuss RH-Bill without God. I totally agree brother. But you cannot also talk about RH-Bill without Science and Statistics. You may be right in saying that there is no direct correlation between poverty and the total number of population, backed by different researches. But absolutely, population growth will have an environmental impact and the last thing that you should be aware of is what lies beneath our feet. Growth changes geography, and so the kind of mind we should employ towards it.

And lastly, the church looks at the government as adversary on this issue. The way I look at it, the situation presents a new perspective. Why do you think the government is pursuing the RH-Bill? Is this one way of saying that the church had been ineffective in their service to curb pre-marital sex? Does this situation call for re-defining the church and its mission? Why do people neglect morality? Has this something to do with clergies as violators of moral codes themselves? 

I think clergies have to think of this too: we all have a shared guilt on this. RH-Bill, aside from addressing the burgeoning population, also poses a challenge to the church to look deeper into the very nature of it and question its reliability amidst the secular world.

***

P.S. I hope this won’t make me less Catholic.