RH bill, Ateneo, and La Salle: Of lemons and cowards

Going against the grain, going against the tide, going against popularity surveys, the University of Santo Tomas has upheld the stand of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) condemning the Reproductive Health (RH) bill as an anti-poor, social-engineering measure that not only denigrates the natural law but also runs roughshod over maternal health, kowtows to the contraceptive imperialism of the West, and generally blames the poor and their alleged overpopulation for the ills of society, when it’s the Philippine state and its depredations—its mismanagement and appalling corruption—that are to blame.

UST is a Catholic institution. It is a pontifical institution—the second to be so named in world history. Nobody should question whether the University supports the Church’s stand as the Gospel of Christ is UST’s—and any Catholic institution’s—pillar and foundation.

Professors who are affiliated with UST must respect the stand of the University against the RH bill as they are part of an institution which is fundamentally bound with Catholic faith and teachings. If UST professors don’t agree with the stand of the CBCP, then they have a problem. The bishops are the successors of the Christ’s apostles and possess the Magisterium, the teaching authority of the Church.

If faculty members of UST and other Catholic schools feel they need to invoke their academic freedom to make known their stand in conflict with the bishops regarding the RH bill, then they’re free to do so. But they must resign from UST. They must give up their Catholic academic affiliation. They must have the courage of their intellectual conviction. Upholding their conscience, they must respect the Church and her teachings.

Recently, a number of professors from Ateneo de Manila University and De La Salle University have voiced their support for the RH bill. A close reading of the measure should show it promotes abortifacients.

A total of 192 Ateneo professors supported the RH bill in their Aug. 13 statement, arguing that the “RH bill can have a decided impact on alleviating pressing social concerns such as high maternal mortality ratio, the rise in teenage pregnancies, and the increase in the number of HIV/AIDS cases, among others.”

Last Sept. 3, 45 La Salle professors joined the bandwagon, arguing that there is a need for artificial contraceptives as these can control the growth of the population and improve the quality of life.

It’s quite shocking that Ateneo and La Salle professors should harbor naive and misguided thinking about health and social problems. How could they argue that an RH measure would be needed to lower maternal mortality when the Philippine government not too long ago had told the United Nations that it was on track to meet the Unesco millennium development goals by 2015, one of which was the lowering of maternal deaths? How could they argue that alleged high mortality must be checked by an RH measure when pregnancy complications are not in the Top 10 causes of women's deaths? How could they argue that contraceptives allegedly worth billions of pesos must be given to women to avert pregnancy risks when contraceptives have been known to cause cardiac problems, which are the No. 1 cause of death of Filipino women?

How could Ateneo and La Salle professors dismiss the medically established dangerous side effects of contraceptives when they are not even physicians?

In contrast, UST, which has the oldest and the foremost school of medicine in the Philippines and Southeast Asia, has always warned about the dangerous side effects of contraceptives. UST and her physicians surely know whereof they speak. They’re scientists and experts, unlike the Ateneo and La Salle professors who are intellectual pretenders and interlopers!

But what’s more appalling is that the Jesuit and Christian Brother administrations of Ateneo and La Salle didn’t reprimand their faculty members for openly defying the bishops. Ateneo said it respects the academic freedom of its professors: it had nothing to say about the intellectual dishonesty of its faculty members who are teaching in and receiving high salaries from a Catholic institution who however chose to bite the hand that feeds them all in the name of academic freedom.

The Ateneo administration did not even clamp down on two theology professors who signed the pro-RH statement for violating the mandatum of the Catholic Church on theology professors to observe orthodoxy. Perhaps even worse, a Filipino Jesuit professor has been quoted by his student in the latter’s Facebook as scoffing at the alleged threat of the bishops to remove Ateneo’s Catholic title, saying that Ateneo in any case does not have the word “Catholic” appended to its name, so what’s there to lose? We’re pretty sure Saint Ignatius would have no confusion on where to put that jesuitic Jesuit—in Heaven or Hell?—in his famous Spiritual Exercises.

The Ateneo and La Salle professors therefore have been treated with kid gloves by the Jesuits and the Christian Brothers. Although they’re religious and members of Catholic orders, the Jesuits and Christian Brothers have failed to uphold orthodoxy and defend the Church. As far as the RH bill and support for it among their faculty are concerned, they’re lemons. And as far as the Pro-RH Ateneo and La Salle professors are concerned, they’re dishonest and don’t have the courage of their intellectual conviction. Contradicting the bishops and defending the RH bill, they have clung on to their faculty membership in Catholic institutions. They want to have their cake and eat it, too. They’re intellectual mercenaries, nothing more, nothing less.

It is quite gratifying that UST has cracked the whip and reminded its faculty members that they’re members of a Catholic institution and should toe the line.

UST Secretary General Fr. Winston Cabading, O.P. has sent a letter to Prof. Clarita Carillo, Ph.D., vice rector for academic affairs and research, to reaffirm the University’s support of the bishops on matters of faith and morals.

“In the light of recent events where some faculty members of Catholic Universities have publicly expressed dissenting positions from the Catholic bishops on matters of faith and morals, we in the University would like to reaffirm our fidelity to the magisterium of the Church as the Catholic University of the Philippines,” Cabading stated in the letter.

UST was given the title of “The Catholic University of the Philippines” in 1947 by Pope Pius XII. Even earlier, in 1902, UST had been declared a “Pontifical University,” the second to be so named in history even ahead of European universities. Therefore, the University has embodied the ideals that Catholic universities must possess, including the Catholic “education” which the students must learn from their professors.

Cabading also stated in his letter that “all faculty members of the University are to refrain from teaching or expressing their personal opinions within the bounds of the University, anything contrary to Catholic faith and morals.”

As these professors have chosen to teach in a Catholic university, they must abide by its teachings and beliefs. In the first place, the same is demanded of students.

Cabading emphasized that such reaffirmation is “to safeguard the right of the students to a solid Catholic education.”

Faculty members are “obliged to uphold and show deference to their teaching authority whenever the bishops of the Church have spoken on an issue and have taken a stand in behalf of the Church,” the Dominican Patristics scholar explained.

Father Cabading has also clarified that professors, “if they are to speak outside the University of anything contrary to the position of the Church, they are to do so only as private individuals and never identify themselves as faculty members of the University.”

Every person is given the “freedom” to choose but that freedom is not absolute.

Professors, who are opposed to the University’s—and the bishops’—stand, have always the choice of leaving the University’s portals if they adulterate the Catholic education that the student is entitled to with their personal preference or personal position. The student of a Catholic school must receive Catholic teachings without adulteration, without debasement.

But is Father Cabading’s declaration contrary to “academic freedom?”

In the first place, academic freedom is not absolute. The Church does not say that a professor must always take the stand of the Church. In the first place, teachers and scholars should know that they’re applying for teaching positions in a sectarian institution.

The professors, before they apply for a university position, must know the background of a university. In this case, a Catholic university, like Ateneo, La Salle and UST, has a purpose over and above academic freedoms: the nature and function of a Catholic school are inextricably tied up with the mandatum given by Christ to the Apostles before He ascended to Heaven: “Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Douay-Rheims Bible).

In short, over and above academic freedom, the Catholic university exists for evangelical purposes. By going against the stand of the bishops, the Ateneo and La Salle professors are saying they don’t agree with the Church’s mission. If so, they’re free to leave. In fact, they must leave. They must resign if they have the courage of their conviction.

But alas, it seems intellectual honesty and moral conviction are in such short supply in Katipunan, Quezon City and Taft Avenue, Manila.

Tags: RH bill

"You can't handle the

"You can't handle the truth."
Although harsh, this article is well-written. That's why its called an "editorial". Don't get your panties in a twist. Let's respect his/her opinion. This is a pretty brave thing to do. You deserve a high five. And btw, to that high school teacher who told her students to comment on this....wow... just wow. Awesome professionalism mate.

Greetings!We would like to


We would like to begin this by stating that we are students from the Ateneo de Manila High School. Our English teacher showed us this article and asked that we comment on it.

We found this article interesting because we cannot seem to determine whether this article is an example of the misuse of logic, the complete lack of logic, or a very, very, very convincing satire.

Let’s look at the text.

Nobody should question whether the University supports the Church’s stand as the Gospel of Christ is UST’s—and any Catholic institution’s—pillar and foundation.

I suppose we cannot question that kind of dedication. Whether or not an institution for education should be more loyal to the principles of academia or the principles of its founders is a debate for another day. What we do want to question is simple. What is the stand of the Church on the RH Bill?

It sounds like a stupid question, but forgive us. We are only Atenean high school seniors, worlds away from the intelligence of the UST faculty. But even so, isn’t it just a bit confusing? We all know that the CBCP is very vocal in their opposition towards the RH Bill, saying things like “Contraception is Corruption.” However, even as early as 2010, the Pope himself was willing to admit that contraceptives were acceptable in certain scenarios. So, if you put yourself against the RH Bill, are you standing with the Church, or with the CBCP?

Recently, a number of professors from Ateneo de Manila University and De La Salle University have voiced their support for the RH bill. A close reading of the measure should show it promotes abortifacients.

“While nothing in this Act changes the law on abortion, as abortion remains a crime and is punishable, the government shall ensure that women seeking care for post-abortion complications shall be treated and counseled in a humane, non-judgmental and compassionate manner.”

Abortifacients, or substances that induce abortion, are in no way promoted by the RH Bill, at least according to the text of the bill itself. In fact, it makes a point of reiterating that abortion is a crime, and that anyone who suffers harm due to it should be treated in a humane manner. Therefore, the RH bill does not in itself condone abortion but rather states that we should treat those suffering from “post-abortion complications” with respect and dignity.

If faculty members of UST and other Catholic schools feel they need to invoke their academic freedom to make known their stand in conflict with the bishops regarding the RH bill, then they’re free to do so. But they must resign from UST.

Do they? Academic freedom is defined as the ability for faculty to inquire about and express thoughts and ideas to students, colleagues and others, without fear of reprimand or censorship. So if you admit that UST faculty members should be able to establish their stance on the RH Bill, you must also admit that they can do so without getting fired. That’s what academic freedom means. Not doing so is actually in violation of human freedom.

However, let us take this article for what it has turned out to be: an argument against having RH bill supporters. The writer completely overlooks any proposed benefits the RH bill has and proceeds directly to speaking out against anyone who supports it. The fact stands. There is a need for reproductive health, and the only question is how the state will implement it. Concededly, the RH bill itself is not perfect. Hardly anything is. However, this is where we see the value of having two sides to a discussion. The fact that you have proponents and opponents for a bill means there will be countless intelligent discussions about it. People get involved socio-politically and speak out for or against the bill in question. With the help of informed discussions and opinions coming from multiple demographics, compromises and improvements are made in the construction of the bill. In this way, the bill can be pushed to its best form both in terms of the morals it challenges and the problem it hopes to address. Concededly, lawmakers cannot please everyone, but they can try. This form of discourse and feedback is the best way to do so. Hindering this kind of discussion can actually alter the intention of these discussions from intelligent debates to uninformed bashing.

In conclusion, one cannot be so close-minded as to shut anything new out, especially in a fairly progressive society. Rather, it is much better to educate oneself about the issues he or she is experiencing and join into intelligent discussions about these issues to be part of the process in solving societal problems such as reproductive health. Commenting on national issues without information can only do more harm.

Pretty lacking.

For one of our tasks, our English teacher told us to comment on this article.
To be able to explain the experience of reading this article, I will compare it to ordering a set of large fries and receiving some ketchup sachets along with it. With the proper proportion of ketchup to fries, the two make an amazing combination. The saltiness of the fries is complimented by the sweetness of the ketchup. Just like this, a proper argument must have the appropriate proofs and explanations to be able to present a good point. This article on the other hand felt like ordering large fries, but receiving a bucket of ketchup and a few potato peelings instead. The arguments presented by the author were focused mainly on attacking the opinions of people who supported the RH bill. Instead of presenting legitimate proofs, the article focused on using criticisms towards others and positive descriptions of those who were against the RH bill to try and persuade its readers. The author gave blatantly biased and opinionated points while discussing the issue. He mentioned only the negative extremes of the RH Bill to make those who agree with it sound like evil people. Furthermore, he claims that teaching at a Catholic institution forces one to believe in and support the school’s ideals without question. Although that being part of a Catholic school means that you are expected to abide by the ideals and the morals that the Church upholds, it does not allow any opinion or stand to be forced onto an individual who has the right to have and defend his/her own opinion. The author’s attack on the Atenean and Lasallian professors is extremely uncalled for. The author called them intellectually dishonest and cowardly for going against their school’s grain. These people didn’t go-pro RH just to go against their school’s stand or to flaunt their academic freedom. These people are thinkers who made their decision based on what they see in the RH Bill and what they believe to be best for the people. The article never gave ideas that actually back up UST's stand against the RH bill, just some insights from people in the church saying that all those part of catholic institutions must live by the church's stand and its belief. That's it. In the end, it left us feeling sick and drowned in a sea of ketchup and potato peelings. Maybe it’s time to dial 8-6236 for another (hopefully better) order and to file a complaint to the manager. THANK YOU

There Is Something Wrong

Greetings! We are students from the Ateneo De Manila High School. As part of an English requirement for the third term of SY 2014-2015, our teacher, Ms.Caroline C. Laforteza requested that all of us, in groups of three, comment on the article, “RH bill, Ateneo, and La Salle: Of lemons and cowards” posted last September 30,2012.

After reading this article, we agreed that there are relevant points in its argument which we feel need to be thought about more. First of all, please do not attack the Ateneo and La Salle professors. We can see that with the words and the emotion directed towards the professors that the Varsitarian is not keen on those who support the R.H Bill. Calling these people lemons, cowards, dishonest and bandwagon riders in order to pass the claim of UST as more viable and acceptable.

Along with that, praising UST and its accomplishments will not garner more followers in the rally against the R.H Bill. UST is a pontifical institute which does uphold Catholic values, but it is not the standard. UST is not the only Catholic institution in the Philippines, and highlighting its stands opposing the bill does not give more credit to their position because their stand is not necessarily deemed as right/the best by all.

The article is also guilty of appealing to the traditions of the masses by playing the Christ card. UST is passing itself off as the university which serves God’s mission, as the one with the sole duty of evangelizing. This is a poor attempt to catch the emotions of many, not only because it appeals to tradition, but because not all readers of the article are Catholic/Christian and are not sold on its teachings.

In what we read, we saw that the author bashes on the Ateneo and La Salle for not dealing with the supporters of the R.H. Bill in a more serious manner. He acknowledges that the professors have the freedom to speak but also the obligation to remove themselves from the Catholic university in which they work. The Ateneo and La Salle may be institutions that have a code of conduct based and centered on Catholicism, but that does not mean that they require all to follow this way of thinking. Ateneo and La Salle are open to the opinions and voices of all and are not in any way against their right to speak freely. In the end of it all, the universities, not the author, decides whether what the professors did was acceptable or not.

This article claims that UST’s basis and foundation is the Gospel of Christ. Therefore, it falsely claims that the very act of lambasting the professors of Ateneo and La Salle is in accordance with Christianity. How can the Varsitarian discount the intellect of the two universities on the basis of personal statements which are not at all reflective of the stand of the schools in their entirety? In the first place, even UST has students and faculty who oppose the RH Bill.

Most of the words in the article are spent in highlighting how as a whole, UST adheres to the Church while Ateneo and La Salle do not, without even dissecting the said bill and examining it part-by-part. What’s worse, when the bill was actually discussed, the arguments were invalid. For pregnancy complications not to belong in the Top 10 causes of women’s death is not enough reason for it not to be addressed. Likewise, the association of contraceptives to cardiac diseases cannot be universally accepted by all medical professionals, especially when the patients follow the advice of the doctors fully.

Lastly, for UST to expect their professors and students to abide by the Church’s teachings without giving them the opportunity to formulate their own thoughts regarding the issue denies these citizens of their right to education and free expression. Yes, UST is a Catholic university, but not even the Church itself can impose a religion on others.

Indoctrination and Additional Help

Putting all of the poisoning of wells and hasty generalizations aside, I would like to counter 2 points.
First, you assert that the professors who promote the passage of the RH bill should resign because they have taken a stand that is directly against that of the Catholic Church. I must disagree with the flow of your thinking. Though there might be some merit in saying that the professors shouldn't impose their academic freedom unto their universities by opposing the view of the Catholic Church and that the professors should express their personal opinions outside of their roles as professors of their respective universities, the professors shouldn't have to repress their own opinions. As with any other issue, they shouldn't solely teach what the Catholic Church has to say about the RH Bill because as much as these universities are Catholic institutions, UST, Ateneo, and La Salle are also educational institutions. As much as professors should be fully aware that they are employed at universities that undertake evangelical missions, professors should also be aware that their role is to expose students to all perspectives on a certain issue. In the case of the RH Bill, professors should present to their students both the Catholic and the scientific view on the bill; they should present both how the RH bill is beneficial and detrimental for the Philippine population. You say that professors should respect the Catholic position of their universities, but ultimately, their goal is to educate students, and holding from them a holistic view on a national issue is not the correct way to do so. Every thinking person has the right to their own stand. Universities -even catholic ones, are there to cultivate intelligent thought and discourse. NOT to be channels for indoctrination.

Second, on a more technical note, you say that contraceptives cause cardiac problems and that these are unnecessary since the Philippines will achieve its public health goals anyway. I must point out that cardiac problems are side effects. Treating side effects as main effects is flawed thinking. Surgery has negative side effects. Medicine has negative side effects. Sterilization has negative side effects. But until it is proven that the rewards as worth more than the risks involved, we should not shun these things. I must also point out that efficiency in achieving our goals doesn't imply that it has no room or no necessity for improvement. Yes, you may believe that we are on the right track, and if ever this holds any truth, any additional laws which are proven to be beneficial for our country should not be vetoed on the basis that existing laws are already effective.

(Dr. Abrea is a group of Ateneo High School students who is doing an English assignment on logical arguments, and this comment is a result of this assignment.)

Academic freedom should not betray Catholic identity

Benedict XVI to Educators: I wish to reaffirm the great value of academic freedom. In virtue of this freedom you are called to search for the truth wherever careful analysis of evidence leads you. Yet it is also the case that any appeal to the principle of academic freedom in order to justify positions that contradict the faith and the teaching of the Church would obstruct or even betray the university's identity and mission


I just wanna say that I don't agree with the part of this article saying that those pro- RH Bill professors of Ateneo and La Salle are dishonest and don't have the courage for their intellectual conviction. Well, for the fact that they go pro with the RH Bill, then doesn't it simply imply that they are very honest with what they want and therefore, upon declaring themselves as part of the RH supporters, they have this so-called intellectual "conviction"? Ok, alright, I understand that UST is quite known for applying what the Catholic Church wants and they've been with it for over many decades, and I won't even wonder if they want to continue the tradition, I respect them for that. I respect if they are against the RH Bill because that's what they want to follow. What I am only pointing out here is that the author, you seem to be intellectual( I guess), but not courageous enough for publishing yourself as anonymous. Well, you know you should be honest and courageous to stand on your so-called "Intellectual CONVICTION"! Wonder if you even know that...=))

you're wrong and i hate you.

You didn't have to bash both schools I came from. You don't see the Ateneo's Guidon publishing any articles about how RH Bill supporters are disillusioned by a false, narrow, compensative sense of morality. You must be as sinless as Jesus to entitle yourself such a high horse.

And as far as I'm concerned, you did a hell of a good job bringing attention to your school newspaper. What bothers me is if your conviction is as strong as your golden and perfect catholic education, you shouldn't have published this anonymously.

Even though I am an Atenean,

Even though I am an Atenean, I laud you for this fearless and bold act that you have committed. As a true Catholic, I appreciated your view to defend and let morality prevail. I loved what you did, because as a paper of a Catholic institution, you have refracted the principles of your institution, unlike Ateneo and La Salle who did not uphold true courage by just pouring out minds without hearts unto what they write, not minding that they are carrying the name of Ateneo and La Salle. I want to help you spread the word by sharing and reposting your editorials, as an editorial writer myself and as a faithful Catholic. Keep up!

Are you really an Atenean?

Yes, our school's (Ateneo) also a Catholic institution yet however, we're (I think I'd exclude you on that we're) trained to think critically and challenge what has been instilled on one's instilled knowledge as to how they've been perceived. If you review the history of the Jesuit fathers, they have been known to be critical and radical rather than just bluntly repeating everything that the Vatican says. Sure, the Vatican guides us to religious morality yet our human nature would devoid us of such capability to perfectly guide the Church. Jesuits teach us how to think. Ateneo teaches how to think. I'll loosely quote a vandal I saw in UP Diliman which says, "If one would want to know the absolute truth, one must wrestle with God." God's perfect. The Vatican's word is not God's. It's just a product of mere judgment after putting their shoes and pretending to be God. One can act and try to be God but one shall never possess the wisdom of God. I don't claim any stand on RH whatsoever but I am appalled at how you denied Jesuit pedagogy.

bato bato sa langit..... tamaan wag magalit!

its as simple as that. the editorial spoke of the naked truth, it felt like a dagger to the people concerned, hence the exagerated violent reactions! congrats to varsitarian of ust- always a chronicler of the truth.these people bashing the varsi editorial are just not used to campus papers who straight forwardly telll the truth. sanay sila sa sugar coating at media hype. be objective and truthful- it will set you free. kudos varsitarian. you are indeed a cut above other student publications. carry on

bato bato sa langit..... tamaan wag magalit!

its as simple as that. the editorial spoke of the naked truth, it felt like a dagger to the people concerned, hence the exagerated violent reactions! congrats to varsitarian of ust- always a chronicler of the truth.these people bashing the varsi editorial are just not used to campus papers who straight forwardly telll the truth. sanay sila sa sugar coating at media hype. be objective and truthful- it will set you free. kudos varsitarian. you are indeed a cut above other student publications. carry on


Dear unnamed Varsitarian editor,

I'm interested by your comments! Let's dissect it!

Let's base it on the theory of relativity!

If CBCP=Catholic Church

and Catholic Church=God

So... God=CBCP

Hmm. Weird argument.

ADMU and DLSU support for RH Bill = Naive! They're not physicians!

"Contraceptives are dangerous!" - unsourced claim from the 'UST community'

UST is the Medical University in the Philippines. We are right! They are wrong!

Hmm. Weird(er) argument.

ADMU and DLSU didn't reprimant their faculty for going against CBCP/Church/GOD!

At least UST told their faculty to support GOD!

Why? Because WE provide a TRUE Catholic Education!
Ateneo and La Salle don't because their professors are against GOD!

They should resign!

Hmm. Weirdest argument.


A student from DLSU.

Basically I'm a lemon. :)


"Hmm. Weird argument." It's definitely weird because your syllogisms are beyond wrong. CBCP = Catholic Church? What? That did not even made sense. Based from what is written here, anyone could infer that you did not understand what you have read. The only thing that I could agree on this comment is that you are a lemon.
(P.S. read this well, you might misunderstood it.)

On Humility - A Tomasino Virtue

Where is it? As a writer, I understand the need to argue on editorials such as these. But judging on one's mental capability in an abrupt manner is hitting below the belt. We can pick our own nose, but of others is another thing. As a Thomasian, you must know that what makes St. Thomas wise is his humility. So bragging UST's titles and status on the medical field is not a portrayal of the said virtue. As you point out, you entered this university. you are free to leave the confines of this institution if you refuse to practice its virtues.

Re: On Humility - A Tomasino Virtue

Humility in according to St. Thomas Aquinas, “humility properly regards the subjection of man to God.” So the foundation where this argument is standing collapsed on it's own when you point out the missing Thomasian virtue on the article that is humility.

and here's another reason why

and here's another reason why i'm not proud to be a thomasian, why i am so ashamed to admit that i've earned my medical degree from such a backward institution.

Oh well. . .

You never should have enroll in the first place

Pledge of Loyalty

To the Ateneo and DLSU Professors who dare bite the institution that feed them, here's a good advice for you (Elbert Green Hubbard):

If you work for a man, in heaven's name work for him,
speak well of him and stand by the institution he represents.

Remember, an ounce of loyalty is worth a pound of cleverness.

If you must growl, condemn and eternally find fault,
why, resign your position.

And then when you are outside, damn to your heart's content.

But as long as you are a part of that institution, do not condemn it.

For if you do, the first high wind that comes along
will blow you away, and probably you will never know why.


You should be careful of what you say. Not all Thomasians are Catholics, and not all Catholics are against the RH Bill. As of the anti-RH catholics, binababoy mo ang image nila. Sinisira mo ang pangalan ng UST. Sana man lang pinag-isipan mo lang muna kung ano dapat isulat mo. Mag-ingat ka sa mga pinagsasabi mo, marami kang makakaaway. Pati Simbahan, makakaaway mo.


Once again I am so proud to be a Thomasian. Good job to the writer of this article - Logical, straightforward, makes sense, courageous and most of all, truthful. God bless you for defending the Catholic Church... especially it's unpopular stand against the RH bill.

Wow. How stupid can you get.

Wow. How stupid can you get. ganyan ba ang mga students ng UST? I dont usually resort to calling names, but there are no other words to describe you people.


Lorenzo Luigi Gayya got owned by Patricia Evangelista! BOOM!

RH bill

I am proud to be a Thomasian, ready to defend its faith and conviction . It must only be the wisdom from above that allows us to clearly see the will of God in matters that deal with the culture of life.
If only we think simply about obedience to God's natural laws,
guided by the church's teachings, it is not difficult to comprehend why this RH bill is so full of deception and ignorance. It is not difficult to comprehend why and how the artificial contraceptives can cause abortion and other medical complications.
I am an obstetrician and I proudly stand side by side with UST's anti-RH view. Thank you for your firm

RH bill

I agree with you totally. To stand with Christ is to stand for LIFE. Let us all learn from other countries. There was a time in the US and other european countries where abortion was abhorable. Now, millions of babies aborted every year and it all started with the seemingly harmless planned parenthood program.

Own Decision

For me, I don't care if you are PRO or ANTI RH BILL as long as

1.) you read the bill

2.) you understood the bill

3.) you made your own decision regarding the bill -- hindi yung nakikiride lang sa majority

There's nothing wrong with being anti rh, it's just that the way this article was written is very close minded. I get it that it's your opinion and this is your editorial but you also have to acknowledge that there is always another side to the issue and that you should respect their stand as well.

Own decision?

"For me, I don't care if you are PRO or ANTI RH BILL as long as
1.) you read the bill
2.) you understood the bill
3.) you made your own decision regarding the bill -- hindi yung nakikiride lang sa majority" -Unless you are to ask the author directly, how else would you know that? Your argument is invalid.

Intellectual Merchants

Intellectual Merchants

Observing emergence of “intellectual pretenders and interlopers”, “jesuitic” and “intellectual honesty and moral conviction short supply ……….”, the UST Varsitarian came out with an editorial: “RH Bill, Ateneo and La Salle: Of lemons and cowards.”

Who is to be blamed? Answer: The INTELLECTUAL MERCHANTS OF CONTRACEPTIVES. Professors cannot use “academic freedom” to abuse their ascendancy especially over their helpless students who could not offer opposition to their RH bill advocacy without certainly getting fair grades. Now, for CONVERTING, wittingly or unwittingly, the blue and green universities into INSTITUTIONS OF CONDOMS and IUDs, the intellectual merchants’ liability cannot simply go unchecked. Objectively, mindful of the plight of their fellow students who are entitled to genuine Catholic education in a catholic-run schools, the UST Varsitarian (as it did to UST professors) must have in mind the social obligation to protect Ateneo and La Salle students from such unfair conversion or label emanating from professorial imprudence, inadequate medical knowledge and
or/ lack of expertise.

A person who dislikes having been born in this world is most likely an adherent of RH bill. Expectedly, because of cheerless childhood days, he passes on his hatred, becomes an agent of death of sperm/egg cells targeting those inadequate families whom he just conveniently categorizes as “poor,” exempts the few rich, then shouts academic freedom to justify his task for the well-oiled RH bill. While a professor in a catholic school may have the privilege to display an uncooperative muscle to the Catholic Church, he cannot imprudently use the very catholic institution where he gets his bread to advertise, directly or indirectly, the condoms and IUDs against which the teachings of the Catholic Church are directed. The recourse is for him to resign, make media mileage, freely display his self importance, then establish his own school of condoms and IUDs that can even accomote non-catholics.

Observable fact: Ang mga “anti-RH” ay galing sa mga masasayang pamilya (“functional families”). Sana ganoon din sa mga pro.

Prof. Arm Morayta
Sociologist , Bicol

Another Big Sigh...

Gasp! So I guess even people with respected titles like "professors" and "sociologists" can be VERY subjective. First of all, look at your last statement, (Ang mga “anti-RH” ay galing sa mga masasayang pamilya (“functional families”). Sana ganoon din sa mga pro.), does not befit your supposed title. Plus how you GENERALIZE that RH bill supporters are unhappy people? It's like saying that Catholicism is the only way for people to be happy? Mind you that, as I have said before, not EVERYONE in UST are Catholics. And not all Catholics disagree nor agree with the RH Bill. Yes, UST is a Catholic university, and it is highly influenced by Catholic doctrines. BUT the university is FIRST and FOREMOST an EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION. IT IS NOT JUST A SEMINARY!!! I graduated from UST, and I am NOT Catholic. I studied Asian Studies. We were TAUGHT about philosophies that were not always compliant with Catholic teaching (Indian Philosophy, Chinese Philosophy, etc). Though we weren't encouraged to turn from our beliefs to understand those philosophies, they still have points that were (and are) completely valid and CONTRADICT Catholic beliefs. If that is the case, then WHY does UST still allow and promote these studies? Again because IT IS AN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION! As a professor, you DON'T have to BE a Catholic to become a good one, nor should you practice the "supposed" perfect Catholic life. As an educator and a sociologist, you SHOULD know the number of Catholics around the world who are NOT living the supposed perfect lives you claim they have. Look at South America. Almost all the countries in that continent are Catholics, but do they show a majority that live the happy life that you are professing? I studied history, and liked the subject so much that I took up my course in UST. I learned of the woes and triumphs of different peoples, civilizations and faiths. History has proven more than once that the Roman Catholic "way" had proved to be more disastrous than beneficial. Don't deny that, that's in the books. Times may have changed, and so has the Catholic Church, but there are still some things that don't change. And those same mistakes are rearing it's ugly head again. I admit that the RH Bill is NOT perfect. But just like the infamous Cybercrime Law, it can be amended. Labeling something to be completely evil, even if it still has good intentions, is just not the reasonable thing to do. As I said before, "The greatest harm can result from the best intentions." Please think OBJECTIVELY. Aren't educators and civilized people supposed to think that way?

I Wasted My Time Reading Fallacies

All I can say is; 'what a completely fallacious article.' Don't get me wrong. I respect your right to express your opinion - yes, I respect it even if it means I have to fight for your right to exude fallacious thoughts. But, as a point of caution, for your own sake, next time you decide to be aggressive in writing, please, mind your logic. It would do your reputation good if you 'argue' and not 'rant.' Great opinions are always supported by good arguments and not by fallacies. Yours is supported by the latter. Thus, I am morally and rationally banned to admire your article.

I wasted my time reading your unsubstantiated allegation

You allege that the article is completely fallacious, but could not even point out what fallacies the article has committed. Good opinions are indeed supported by good arguments. I hope you practice what you preach and not make unsubstantiated allegations.

ust editorial re ateneo and la salle

"But alas, it seems intellectual honesty and moral conviction are in such short supply in Katipunan, Quezon City and Taft Avenue, Manila".... eh nasaan kaya??? nasa espanya na laging lubog??? I was looking for Christ humility.... walang wala... parang si padre damaso ang nakikita ko.... please, don't boast that you're a pontifical university... after this article??? parang it's not reflective of the thinking of the pontiff.... this is really holier than thou... parang gustong maki-compete sa la salle and ateneo... hwag na lang... focus on the issue huwag ng manira ng iba... di naman kayo pinakikialaman... sila nga nagsasalita para sa kanilang mga sarili... ganun na lang... huwag ng mandawit ng iba...

Not even about the RH bill-- I think

My OPINION about this is it's not even about the RH bill. It's about uplifting the school. If you truly want to show you're against the RH Bill, why hit on Ateneo or La Salle only? They are just considered bulk supporters of the bill. Why not hit on the people who are trying to pass the bill in congress? Like Miriam Defensor Santiago? I don't know if people get my drift here, and it's really just my opinion, which I think every Filipino is entitled of, just as long as you do it right. I'm not a student of one of the schools, I'm a graduate residing outside of Manila, specifically Baguio. To me, right from the start of this article it just screams "Hey choose UST! We know what's right and we know what to teach, we're an expert at that! Compared to those pea- brained Ateneo and La Salle profs!"
Makes sense right? RH wasn't even mentioned but still matches most of the articles statements.
Mr/Ms Editor, I respect your views, but please, either you're trying to uplift your school or if you really just want to show you're against something, at least be decent enough to leave the hurtful loathings out of your job.

Intellectual Merchants of Condoms and IUDS

Observing emergence of “intellectual pretenders and interlopers”, “Jesuitic” and “lack of supply of ……….” the UST Varsitarian came out with an editorial: “RH Bill, Ateneo and La Salle: Of lemons and cowards.”

Who is to be blamed? Answer: The INTELLECTUAL MERCHANTS/PROFESSORS OF CONTRACEPTIVES. The so-called academic freedom lovers/professors, who definitely have ascendancy over their students with no genuine opposition to their advocacy for RH bill, cannot escape liability for CONVERTING, wittingly or unwittingly, the blue and green universities into INSTITUTIONS OF CONDOMS and IUDs. This is UNFAIR. Objectively, mindful of the plight of their fellow students, the UST Varsitarian must have in mind the protection of Ateneo and La Salle students from such tirade emanating from professorial imprudence.

A person who dislikes having been born in this world is most likely an adherent of RH bill. Expectedly, because of cheerless and unhappy childhood days, he passes on his hatred, becomes an agent of death of sperm/egg cells only of those inadequate families whom he conveniently calls as “poor”, then shouts academic freedom on funded RH bill for undeserved attention to display uncooperative muscle to the Catholic Church, the true source of strength of the poor.

Ang mga anti-RH ay galing sa mga masasayang pamilya. Mabuhay red circle! Mabuhay University of the East!

Why Consider Yourselves Catholics?

Great piece! This editorial articulates the feelings of Catholics betrayed by fellow Catholics. It stands to reason that Catholics should not call themselves Catholics if they are unwilling to abide by the teachings of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church.

I'd like to ask everyone who

I'd like to ask everyone who will read this. Is there anyone among you who have never sinned? If so, then I will agree that you have every right to condemn sinners like me, not just for this particular issue but for every other mistake you can list down. If not, then it will be best that criticisms are done constructively and realities considered. Enough of the rhetorics. Real life is far from how most people would paint it. Unless you have immersed yourself among the poorest of the poor, then the least we can do is tackle issues with respect towards opposing views, regardless of whether it is Catholic or not. The RH Bill is not solely a Catholic issue. It is the concern even of atheists. So, if you want to bring Christ closer to people, especially the faithful, come not like a brazen judge ready to spit fire from your ass to consume the sinners that we all are. Do you know the difference between Christ, the saints, and hypocrites. Christ and the saints converted people out of true compassion and love. They gave them options, but all done in the humblest of manners. Everything would be the opposite for hypocrites. As Sir Lito puts it, "it is un-Christian."

RH bill and shallow thinking

I'm a traditional Catholic. That group of die hard out of touch with modern world Catholics. My two cents comment is that ignorance is the biggest enemy of our religion today. These so called educated professors and teachers of a Catholic institution are Novus Ordo Catholics
So called because they follow Vaticcan 11.
So it's not surpising that they would have the courage to challenge the Bishops. Many probably would not even understand what I am talking about.
In any case, this is not intellectual dishonesty, it's pure ignorance and no real belief in God and it shows. God has provided us with everything we need to survive not the laws made by the government. The more of our freedoms we surrender to the government, the higher the likelihood that we will become their slaves. This subject is not a matter for the government to decide but a matter for our conscience to decide.
Stop following the liberal world and start following your conscience that God gave us so we can have an orderly world.
How many of those teachers/professors actually still pray a daily rosary? If they cannot honestly say that they do, then they have no business commenting on our religious convictions.
PS I am a La Sallite and I have always admired Sto tomas and Ateneo. Just my 2 centavos.

At Least He Had An Opinion

Marami sa ating tumatahimik lang sa gitna ng mga kontrobersyal na usaping kinakaharap natin. Ako masasabi kong ganun ako. Apathetic kumbaga o kaya at least man lang, passive, na halos parang wala nang pakealam. Pa'no nga ba mareresolba ang mga isyu kung walang nageere ng kanilang sentimiento. Alam ko hindi ko gusto ang laman ng article na ito pero ganun pa man, masaya ako para sa kanya na meron syang opinyon at panig. Sabi nga nila, ang hindi pagpanig ay parang pagpanig na rin sa mas nakararami. Kung gusto mong marinig, sabihin mo. Kung nakakasakit man para sa iba ang article na 'to, sus, para namang wala na tayong pinagkaiba. Naiintindihan ko sya, at kung kontra man ako sa iniisip nya, di ako nasaktan. Dahil hindi nya rin ako naiintindihan. At ang sulusyong nakikita ko ay turuan ang taong ito at hindi lang punahin sa "pagkakasabi" ng opinyon nya.

At bakit kailangan magpayabangan ng comment? Haay nako. Pero at least, dito naguumpisa ang mga tao na makealam at hindi lang palampasin ang mga isyung kailangang resolbahin.

If I made a point or not, if i made a decent comment or not, sige judge me. Then again, think about what I said (try to understand kung magulo man sya). Ang mas nakakaintindi ang syang dapat magpasensya.

Pointing Fingers

Wow, I'm appalled at how Varsitarian is so adept at pointing fingers to those who don't share the same stand with their institution. (Like the people who tried to stone Magdalene?) Nonetheless, I believe you are so blessed to propagate this bill that I can already see you guys being welcomed by Jesus in heaven with open arms.

If every man in this country could only think like this (or these) Varsitarian writer/s, I am very sure that all Filipinos will go to heaven.

Again, cheers for your honesty, moral conviction and your fervor for evangelism.

Btw, I am NOT a Catholic and this article added to the assurance that I've made the right decision to be an atheist.

Exuberance or Brazenness of Youth

Before this gets blown out of proportion we have to remember it is a student writer who wrote this article. And young people are young people. What some would term the exuberance or better still the brazenness of youth would be an apt description for this misfortune. But if it were a professor who wrote this then, that will be alarming indeed. It is unimaginable that this would be penned by a priest or a bishop of the Catholic faith. Now if there is a professor behind this young student writer who is gloating over all the negative attention and humiliation UST and the Varsitarian are getting from this article that professor more than anyone else should in all honesty reflect and have remorse for all the damage and hurt he has caused. If he thinks the article is doing a great service to the Anti-RH Bill cause, eh kailangan mag-isip isip at gumising gising siya. You never win an opponent's vote by insulting and humiliating your opponent. And should we remind our editorial writer about the important lesson found throughout the Catholic Church's history in this part of the world? Votes here are won perhaps more than by the force of reason and evidence, by the goodwill and trust generated by one's honest effort.

Konting Preno

Packed with facts and wits pero nawalan ng preno at masyadong judgmental 'yung article. Tomasino ako at sigurado akong hindi lahat ng Thomasian ay Anti-RH Bill. Sayang lang at nadumihan ang 84-year brilliance ng The Varsitarian sa artikulong ito. Pero, saludo pa rin ako sa katapangang ginawa ng official UST publication. Mabuhay!

This article is funny.

This article is funny.


I just wonder where the framer of the Varsitarian editorial is coming from. I will not deal anymore with the fallacies, ignorance, and hypocrisies the anonymous writer has committed. All I want to say is that it went beyond the fabric of journalism ethics and good taste. Sad times for campus journalism.

Pathetic IQ.

Yung iba dito pinagmamalaki ang IQ nila at sabi pa ng isa,"you should have at least half of my IQ sabay diretso sa kanyang pang aalipusta ng article na ito. I wonder, does high IQ really help our countrymen to get out of this economic muck most of them are in right now? Kahit pa mataas ang IQ mo ko'ng para lang naman sa iyo ito wala ka pa ring silbi sa amin o sa iyong bayan. It is good that UST is even reminding us that the real solution to most if not all problems is the eradication of corruption. Of course this is going to be difficult. Kaya nga mas gusto nyo pa population control nalang kaysa eradication of poverty kasi nga ko'ng corrupt ka, mas convenient para ma-deflect ang attention ng mga tao away from corruption. Don't mislead us, many Pro RH in the government are supporting RH Bill kasi nga they are telling us that it is always population and not their corruption that is causing our countrymen to become poorer by all these corruption they have been doing all along. Pero ko'ng maloloko nila mga tao into thinking na ang population ang nakakapigil sa pag angat ng kabuhayan ng mga Pilipino, lusot pa tuloy sila. I guess kakutsaba nila ang makikinabang nga mga contraceptives na ito. Kikita na naman sila ng malaki sa panloloko. Marami naman din silang naloloko kasi nga ang gagaling din naman manlinlang.

No respect.

"They’re scientists and experts, unlike the Ateneo and La Salle professors who are intellectual pretenders and interlopers!" You're not experts. You're hypocrites. Close minded - people who don't think and view the issue in other perspectives. Are you even sure that your beloved university, the one who speak - highly of, and each one student truly is against the RH Bill?? Ateneo and Lasalle profs should be regarded because of their courage to speak out their opinions and beliefs regarding the issue. They did so without publishing stupid editorials, spreading wrong things about other schools. What a hypocrite. Is that what your so called "pontifical and royal catholic school" teaches you? Stupidity at its finest.

A true Catholic respects other peoples' stand and right

As people under such Sectarian Institution, we should show respect to the views and stand of certain people in our community towards morality. We should live a life of Christianity. Yes! We should abide by the Canon law which merely oblige us of living a Christian life. But a part of it, is the respect of other party's "free will." If we are to judge people as to how they approach and move things, then we are the ones who seem to have a short supply of such intellectual honesty and moral conviction. Think. Respect. But never judge. I'm a Thomasian. And I know my conviction.

Yes, it's a call for Catholics to be brave and honest

Although I may not agree with the harshness of this editorial's note in some of its parts, I do fully agree with its basic point that a Catholic university must be faithful to its mission and not be ambiguous, especially in controversial issues concerning faith and morals because those are precisely the issues wherein its students and the public in general will look to the university for a clear stand, a guiding light.

The editorial is right: teachers of Catholic universities who express opinions dissenting or contrary to Catholic faith cannot have their cake and eat it too. Spelling it out, they have no right to use their title and position as teachers of a Catholic institution when publicly expressing their opinions that are contrary to Catholic teaching.

It is just the ethical thing to do. Even in business, it is unethical for an employee working for company X to identify himself as such WHILE speaking against the products or services of company X AND staying on in the company. If he does not believe in his company's products/services, then he should be brave and honest enough to resign and go where his convictions lead him.

If he wants to stay on, then he should bring up his critical observations privately and directly to the persons who have the
competency to address these. It's either one or the other.

When teachers apply in a Catholic university to teach, they know the mission of the institution to teach the Catholic faith under the authority and guidance of the Catholic Church. So if these teachers, when already employed, do not agree with what
the Catholic faith officially teaches, they should do either one of the following:

- not say anything about the issue; or,

- state it as any private individual exercising his right to expression but without using their position and title as teachers of that catholic university; or,

- leave the university and then publicly state their convictions.

To act as the concerned teachers of Ateneo and Lasalle have done is to misuse their connection to the Catholic university - they did it, whether deliberately or unwittingly, in order to attract attention to their viewpoint. Let's face it, if they had not identified themselves as teachers of these catholic universities, who would have cared about what they said?

And as for the management of Catholic universities whose teachers publicly express opinions contrary to Catholic teaching, this is definitely not the time to play safe. By being lenient and ambiguous, they betray on an even more serious level their school's and their own Catholic identity. Again, a brave, honest choice has to be made: either be faithful to their Catholic mission or give up their claim to being Catholic.

UST may not be the most prestigious university. But courage and honesty are more noble than prestige. And so I thank UST, her management, her faculty, the Varsitarian and all UST students for their courage and honesty - for being true to their Catholic identity in these pressured times of political correctness. As a UST graduate, you make me proud!



KUDOS to UST. God Bless!


I am disappointed to say the least in reading this Article. So young, and yet so arrogant. What is worse, however, is that it ostensibly mirrors the sentiments of UST and its student population, which, I am glad, the UST Administration, as well as many UST students and Alumni have categorically denied. To be candid, the article sounded like a bishop talking straight from the Dark Ages. Thankfully, we have more enlightened clerics nowadays. And what of cowards? Perhaps the editorial writer can publish his name so that he can put his foot where his mouth is.


It is really unfortunate that UST, my beloved alma mater is again at the middle of another controversy. As a Thomasian I feel sorry for some irresponsible statements of the anonymous writer of the Varsitarian Editorial against Ateneo and La Salle, institutions that I truly respect.

There is no way that the UST Varsitarian Editorial, "RH bill, Ateneo, and La Salle: Of lemons and cowards" represents the general sentiment and position of the Thomasian Community. And there is no way that this article could be written by a genuine Thomasian no matter how hard he or she pretends to be.

A true Thomasian is honest, respectful and truthful, one who truly follows the example of St. Thomas Aquinas. Writing with firm conviction does not mean expressing correct views; hitting people and institutions below the belt and putting them in bad light is not respectful; relying on hearsay and not substantiating one's statements is not at all truthful.

St. Thomas, whom we admire, is honest, respectful and truthful.
He is honest at least in saying that he cannot know everything, that he cannot have full understanding of certain issues, that despite his numerous writings, he admits that all that he has written are nothing but "straw." Hence a Thomasian cannot pretend to be all knowing, that he possesses the entire truth, that he has the monopoly of the truth about certain issues (RH Bill included) St. Thomas may be right in writing his opinions but he had deep respect for the opinions of others, often engaging his critics in a rational discussion and being open to the objections of others. Hence a Thomasian cannot simply set aside the opinions of others, even if he thinks these opinions are baseless or worthless. There are always two sides of one and the same coin. He must engage in an open and free exchange of ideas. Needless to say that a Thomasian university while standing on its values and tradition must be like an agora for free thinking where ideas can circulate freely and responsibly. After all, that is what a university stands for. St. Thomas was truthful in his presentations. He substantiated his arguments, considered many sources of information including those that are deemed heretical during his time. A Thomasian therefore must be truthful in his propositions as he fights for what he believes is true.

Catholic does not mean uniformity and blind conformism. This term has been abused so much. For one, being "catholic" does not mean infallible; it does not mean that if one is catholic he or she is always right. While the term "catholic" refers to being whole or universal it does not mean uniformity of opinions and convictions. The Church admits and respects different convictions; and in the history of the Church we have seen changes in its positions including those considered to be "catholic." Didn't John Paul II apologize for the mistakes of the Church against science? Needless to say that a Catholic university must respect diversity of opinions and convictions, after all, that is what promotes intellectual growth and maturity.

Catholic is not blind conformism and adherence. The Catholic Church while it teaches its doctrines and dogmas, respects individual conscience. No less than John Paul II stressed that freedom of conscience is a basic right. Of course it must be an informed conscience. There is nothing wrong with genuine opposition, an opposition that is respectful and contributes for the common good. John Paul II writing as Karol Wojtyla listed this as one of the genuine attitudes of active participation in a community. Blind conformism is the opposite of genuine opposition. A Catholic university then, while being true to its calling of being a defender of the Catholic faith, must respect individual conscience and promote genuine opposition. These are values promoted by no less than John Paul II.

On a personal note I am happy with the different comments about this article. For me it shows that UST after all is a vibrant community of rational thinkers capable of self-criticism and self-evaluation. These comments show that we are a community who will not simply support any opinion just because it was aired or ventilated by a "Thomasian." This show of dissenting opinions means that we value honesty, respect and truthfulness.

Post new comment

  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <p> <br> <iframe>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

User login

Recent comments


Readers' comments posted in this site do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of the Varsitarian. The Varsitarian does not knowingly publish false information and may not be held liable for the views of readers exercising their right to free expression.