ed cartoon lemon

With all due respect

We from The LaSallian did not release an official stand on House Bill no. 4244, otherwise known as the Responsible Parenthood Bill, despite numerous requests and pressure from a majority of our own members, as well as various University stakeholders. This is because we respected, and we continue to respect, every person’s right to have his or her own informed opinion, including our individual editors and staffers. What we stand for in many issues is the process of discernment, and for one’s personal stand and conviction to surface from rigorous research, contemplation, and discourse, before pursuing determined action.

 

Precisely because we are members of a Catholic University, following Pope John Paul II’s apostolic constitution Ex Corde Ecclesiae and its challenge to university students, we encourage our individual staff to make personal judgments that may guide them to truth. Perhaps we may make recommendations, but we would never impose on the freedom of conscience (ECE II, Art. 2, sec. 4).

 

We did not feel the need to impose any stance to support or refuse a bill that would blatantly disregard the stances of some of our editors and staffers.

 

In this publication, we believe in independent thought, and we encourage our staffers to go against any norms in public opinion and rightfully deconstruct, and discern their own beliefs through issue-oriented critical thinking, if and only if it is what they believe in, and for as long as they too would respect the rights of others to voice an opinion contrary to their own.

 

In light of published content, we know for a fact that The Varsitarian is against HB 4244, and we respect the unified publication’s stance. Moreover, we applaud UST’s official student publication for declaring their stance with such great conviction. They do go against the grain, as they said, and what they did takes courage, and a lot of arguments. In our opinion, however, the method of expression used to express the matter veered away from the real issue, while creating new and unnecessary ones.

 

The RH Bill is an important issue that deserves constructive discourse. None of this constructive discourse, however, can come from ad hominem lambasting from any of the parties involved, whether Pro-RH or Anti-RH. We believe in sticking to the issues, and backing conclusions with substantial, objective arguments.

 

This is the nature of sincere rational dialectic. We advocate constructive discourse, and the search for truth that Catholic Universities so aspire for can, in our opinion, be only attained through issue-oriented critical thinking.

 

DISCLAIMER: The LaSallian is a publication and a separate entity from the institution that is De La Salle University; hence, its views do not necessarily reflect the views of DLSU or the Lasallian institution. Its opinion is also separate from and independent of its members, stakeholders, partners, alumni, staff, faculty, and students.

ADDENDUM: We wish to clarify that Ex Corde Ecclesiae (English: From the Heart of the Church) is an apostolic constitution, and not an encyclical letter, issued by Pope John Paul II.

  • An Atenean.

    heir heir. Cheers to you.

    • Another Atenista

      It’s “hear hear,” but nice try.

      • Batang Katipunan

        buti walang sumunod na “here, here”

        • Another Atenista

          I would have double-facepalmed in that case.

          • datu marikudo

            it’s “hare, hare” because he’s a rabbit.

        • Katipunero

          The perfect response to you comment is “har, har”.

  • CORNICLES

    corny.

    • Blue Saber

      Mukha mo corny.

    • A LaSallian

      A Growling Tiger I suppose?
      Haha!

      • I R Lemon

        More like Trolling Tiger

        • Not Adele

          Trolling it the deep!

      • An Offended Thomasian

        Come on, don’t drag us, Thomasians, into this. Rather, call him “A Varsitarian”.

        • AntiUST

          as if poser

          • anti antiust

            ikaw ba ung nananasak ng ust student na taga feu? malamang… haha

        • AntiUST

          Kapal ng mukha niyo ha, kayo na nga yung nang offend, kayo pa yung na-ooffend?

        • A LaSallian

          I stand corrected. My apologies An Offended Thomasian.

    • An Isko

      @CORNICLES

    • An Isko

      @CORNICLES Troll :p

  • Another Atenean :P

    Very well put. Applause for your excellent way of handling and addressing the issue at hand. Great job! :)

  • Atenean also :))

    Its funny how Ateneans are the ones posting here..:))
    Well said! TheLaSallian, Hail

  • Ramon Navarro Jr.

    Very well said.

  • suncoast

    But it’s the “official student publication of the De La Salle University-Manila”, right? So it’s the official voice of the students of the University? I didn’t get the disclaimer, the “students” are the publishers of the campus paper.

    Article wise, it’s well written and it is geared on addressing what the editorial board and staff wants to say.

    • PuDz

      What it’s trying to say Sir is that even though they voice out what is happening and give critical insights about it, they do not fully represent the institution’s stakeholders, which not only include the students.

      • suncoast

        Kind Sir, I understood that they don’t speak for the institution, the administration for that matter. Just saying!

        • Talia

          How I understood it is, though they are one of the official school publications, they-the editors-are taking responsibility for what is being said. They are not speaking for the student body, which is represented when the student government takes a stand, not when The LaSallian posts an article.

          • infels

            The student body is represented by the university student government (usg). The paper does not represent the student body in the same way that inquirer does not represent the Filipino nation.

    • puwang

      i think you missed the “we encourage our individual staff to make personal judgments that may guide them to truth.” part

  • A Bedan

    Respect. Much respect to you guys.

  • Some Random Thomasian

    Thank you for the eloquent response. I, for one, am disappointed that all this started due to someone’s pathetic attempt at petty mudslinging.

    The article(s) in question does not represent the general consensus (as far as I know). Chhers!

    • AntiUST

      Then you should go to your newspaper and tell them that they are wrong. Do something about it.

      • An Atheist

        They already know that what they did was wrong, so give them the chance to recuperate from their misgivings. It is being taken cared of as we speak, though the blow they struck will be retained in all our minds for a long time. And please, stop putting salt on the wound. You’re just making things worse, barbarian.

      • woot woot

        Anti-UST, really? Come on. Mistakes will continue to be made in the journey towards progress; all you’re managing to do right now is sound like a snobbish brat. It’s always easy to point fingers when someone makes a mistake, but we should learn: we shouldn’t only require growth and better judgment from those who have erred, we must also be more mature in our dealings with the world. So handle this with more grace, would you?

        All that this small-minded thinking does is stymie proper discourse. You’re effectively shunning people who may very well have the same goals as the rest of us,

  • Thomasian

    Well said!

    • AntiUST

      Whatever poser

      • A

        Look who’s talking?

  • A LaSallian

    Ito naman ang posisyon ng Ang Pahayagang Plaridel, opisyal na pahayagan sa Filipino ng Pamantasang De La Salle.
    http://plaridel.ph/?p=257

  • matteorenzi

    questo è il vero giornale studentesco. congratulazioni!

  • http://twitter.com/hanscruz Hans Cruz

    Good job! Definitely a reflection of La Sallian education – a Catholic education. No need to bash other universities to grab attention. This is why La Salle and Ateneo are the best universities in the country. Hail!

    • Isko

      Best Universities? What about UP?

      • Green

        I think he means Catholic Universities, don’t worry, you’re with us all the time :))

        • ~Green

          NO, you’re with us.:))

    • summer

      what’s with the ‘best universities’? Why do people have to say that this or that university is the best?

      • redkinoko

        For when there’s lack of individual merit, one has to find distinction by association. haha

  • Sheena

    If only the infamous unknown Varsitarian author encouraged intellectual discourse in his or her article because it fell short in that aspect. Indeed there is nothing wrong with stating a stand and it is even courageous to openly state your stand. However, whether you are Pro or Anti RH Bill that doesn’t make your stand the “RIGHT” one or the “BETTER” option by name-calling those who don’t share a common belief.

  • http://twitter.com/paulgarilao paulgarilao

    Good job

  • A Lasalllian

    I do agree with out Thomasian friend, we don’t need to stereotype all Thomasian because of some idiot Varsitarian mistake. Anyways good article, really shows how civilized and educated our writers truly are

  • A Thomasian

    Indeed very well said. I, myself, do not agree with the anonymous Varsitarian staff have said in his/her article. This is in lieu to my belief of respect of others’ opinion… for the opinion of the Ateneo and La Salle professors who stood up for what they believe is necessary.

  • king

    I like what you wrote …but I hope the La Sallian Community will just ignore UST. Showing them we are more educated and we have ethics. Giving more comments are like stepping lower to their mentality.. La Salle is LA SALLE :)

    • LaSallian

      Ang babaw naman if you’ll bash the whole university. Now who’s more educated now?

    • benavides

      So you’re saying UST doesn’t have its values and that they don’t receive the same amount of education that you guys are receiving? Well, look who just stooped down to that “lower mentality”

    • http://www.facebook.com/vincent.strife.146 Vincent Strife

      as a DLSU alumnus, I am appalled by your arrogance. Your comments are just putting DLSU in a bad light. The word is respect. We are condemning what the writer wrote in the varsitarian not the whole school. being proud doesnt mean you have to put others down. Hindi yan ang tinuturo sa atin sa la salle. Magaling ang La Salle. Magaling ang Ateneo. Magaling ang UST. period.

  • Thomasian

    UST disowns Varsitarian’s stance vs ‘lemons, cowards’http://www.rappler.com/nation/13905-ust-disowns-varsitarian-s-stance-vs-lemons,-cowards … via @rapplerdotcom

  • Isang Probinsyano

    Again the infamous “La Salle-and-Ateneo-are-the-best-universities!” line. Seriously coming from undergrads. In a corporate world, wala na yang mga school na yan. An employee from a provincial college/university can kick those rich a**. Enough of the “We are better” attittude. Maisingit lang sa issue.

    • LOL COMMENT

      the heck is wrong with you? where did your topic came from?

    • woot woot

      Yeesh, Chill out, would you? Realize that generalization is a tendency of the weak-minded. The only times people generalize is when they can’t muster up the brain-juice required to actually judge people individually.

    • Marlon Brando

      I’m an employee from a provincial college, and i’ll kick your a**. Huwag ka makisawsaw.

      • stay classy de lasalle

        wow. what a classy retort. hahahaha

    • Isko

      then you shouldn’t have paid attention top it. After all, you believe you can kick their
      “rich” asses right?

  • A Lasallian

    In the end, it’s just a case of knowing what side you are for, and having the maturity and grace to respect the other. Be grown-ups!

    • Student

      Correct!

  • Lasallian TechGeek

    Very well said, The LaSallian. This is the true spirit of a Catholic Education – an education that encourages inquiry and dialogue across various beliefs and opinions and an education that respects the various traits of intellectuals in pursuit of knowledge in a wide array of disciplines.

  • Voice of Reason

    Our beloved universities have taught us that critical thinking spells the difference whether we will succeed in life, or not.

    Things are not always what they seem.

    The original offensive article was made to look like it was written by a student. Read it again, and ask yourself, was it really?

    Things are not always what they seem.

    The studentry of the oldest university of our country are intelligent, sensitive, patriotic, and smart enough to doubt if this article was written by one of them. Their only fault is that they have been conditioned to follow. They sit in silence right now, distracted by their finals exams and the championship game with Ateneo. Their silence is based on anxious obedience. But they are quite liberal, unlike their handlers.

    Things are not always what they seem.

    Read your Filipino history books, any HEKASI textbook, go to the chapter on Magellan and how Legazpi started to conquer and convert the visayans. Outnumbered, though better trained and equipped, he was the consummate bluffer, using the fear of the impression of superiority to submit the rajas and datus to submission by default and bloodless surrender, then by converting them to Christianity, therefore allying with them to conquer the bolder, braver datus. This was how the Philippines was conquered and enslaved for more than 300 years.

    Do not forget this fact.

    He utilized the age-old strategy of tyrants and despots, CEOs and corporate leaders alike: divide and conquer.

    Things are not always what they seem.

    Isnt the timing too coincidental?

    TRO today by SC on the cyber libel law, RH bill still pending, the comedian lawman painting himself in corners, the Dominicans cracking down on its students, the faculty being asked to keep quiet, the students being given an extra five points to attend the bogus anti-RH rally.

    And now, seeds of discord has been sowed among 3 of the BIg 4. (Potentially, if there is a need, the BIg 4 can mobilize against all forms of tyranny, whether it’s the cyber libel law or the anti-RH movement. The rest of the country’s studentry will follow suite because all they need is the spark, which can only be done by the Big 4). But if there is discord, specially with sem break coming, many things could slip under the radar, like that cyber law being passed without so much as a mention in mainstream media.

    Things are not always what they seem.

    My suggestion:

    use critical thinking to find the most likely truth. let us not jump into conclusions and be a “mob,” for that will prove nothing, and only make matters worse.

    Listen and read as many opposing opinions as you can, then discuss among your peers, parents, relatives. Then decide for yourselves what seems to be the truth.

    And do not forget to practice restraint on this issue – online, on the streets, in the UAAP games, in the mall, in your neighborhood.

    Until we know the truth to this issue, practice restraint. Always.

    Remember that article was only claimed to be written by a student, and that other students from UST have corrected the wrong impressions the original article claimed.

    Practice restraint on this issue.

    Because things are not always what they seem.

    • A

      ANSAVEH

      • Voice of Reason

        A,

        sana nagpapatawa ka lang. ang mensahe ko ay simplre: walang rason ang isang undergrad ng USTE isulat ang ganitong klaseng artikulo.

        Walang rason. Basahin mo uli ang artikulo at tanungin mo sa sarili mo kung undergrad ba talaga ang nagsulat nito.

        Salamat.

        Atheist:

        Thank you. Please share if you think there was any merit to my plea for restraint. We all need that more than ever right now. Let us not be distracted by this, for this could have been potentially orchestrated. Think about it really well, and tell ask yourself if there is a reason in this world why a typical undergrad would hold such concerns as valuable. He is about to take his final exams. This article comes out at such a coincidental time.

        Why did he choose to come out with this article now, when the news about the ADMU and DLSU faculty support of the RH bill was months ago? Why just now? Why a week before sem break, when students are home and hard to organize?

        Let us all ask ourselves.

        To me, it does not make sense.

        That’s why til such time that we know more about this, let us practice restraint.

        Because it is

        • An Atheist

          I find your plea for restraint, in my opinion, a result of pragmatism. To strike when the time is ripe for gain. Though I ask you this, when is the right time to simply open the gate and flood them?
          Slowly, they are creeping towards the downfall of the Bill. Since their influence among the faithful and the fanatics is strong, the chance of our fight against them is considerably narrowing.
          We could restrain ourselves from lashing out and keep on finding the right answers and the right arguments, yet they are those who seem to be beyond logic.

          And it is easier to do battle with a thinking opponent than a mindless beast.

          • woot woot

            This will be the government’s job, I think. Let us hope that those in power can hear the rational cries. Even when the argument about the bill devolves into its basest form, sans all the numbers about growth and maternal deaths, the principle of it still remains- people deserve the right to choose what they want from themselves. Because really, what may we do but clamor? The debates don’t go anywhere, because the process of discourse has been sullied. Debating topics is no longer a try at finding common ground and growing from that discovery. Instead, it has turned into a contest to see who is undoubtedly right in their stance.

            If an institution truly, indubitably believes that its teachings and practices are right, then shouldn’t it allow its constituents to choose for themselves?

          • An Atheist

            I’m sorry, my friend. Alas, it’s been along time since I held the government in such light.
            We need to plan our own course of action. If we just hope for the government to hear us, they would just ignore us as usual. We need something to push the government and the religious sectors into taking better care for its followers and hearing -nay- listening to our wake up calls.

          • Voice of Reason

            An Atheist:

            To begin with, we have 119 more days til the TRO is lifted.

            This is critical. I’m betting if this seed of discord that has been planted among the 3 big universities does not work and the students, alumni, faculty and staff of all 3 schools, then there will be a plan B, then a C, then a D, and so on.

            In the meantime, we must find a way to inform others, the ones who are in the working class, the middle class, the rank-and-file, the micro-preneurs, the people in the streets, to share with them another point of view, for them to consider. We still are in a democracy and the only way to relieve us of these no-good people is thru elections. Lawmakers will never pass a bill that’ll work against them.

            I know there may not be enough time, but this law and the passing or rejection of it, to its detractors, is ALL ABOUT power. They know they are losing it, and they are desperate to hang on to it for dear life. They may not realize it, but it is their own fault that they have made themselves irrelevant.

            I have no solid plan of action yet, but this thinking opponent is also a wounded opponent, cornered and will fight back with all its might.

            Which is why i ask for restraint.

            We have 119 more days before this ridiculous bill can potentially be enforced again.

            Any ideas and suggestions, as long as they are within the law, are most welcome.

    • Atheist

      This country needs more people like you. This country needs more voices of reason over fanaticism and blind faith.

    • woot woot

      I sort of caught the whiff that the author of that article might not have been a student. I’m still not sure regarding the matter, though. :)

      • Another student

        It was a student.

        • Voice of Reason

          that may be so. but the rest of it still does not add up. Think, man!

          • http://www.facebook.com/vincent.strife.146 Vincent Strife

            I was thinking the same too. Ideas like that must have come from a religious zealot or a priest. But if it came from a student, he might be a seminarian.

          • proletariat

            For a person like me who hasn’t gone to college, I find that article too difficult to understand. It’s full of clutters, pretentious words that hide true meanings. But all the same, it wants to defame, to demean institutions. I think it wasn’t written by a mere student. I really doubt it.

    • Another student

      It was in fact a student who wrote that article. I know who he is and he seems to be quite happy with himself because of all the attention he is getting.

      Your message is a hopeful one, and I wish it were the case but you cannot ignore the fact that there are people in this world that just do not think before they do something absolutely stupid.

  • pedronimo

    The Varsitarian has the inalienable right to put its stand on the RH bill in its editorial. It can even heap all praises and hosanas to every one in UST who fight for the Church stand, What it can'[t and must not do however is to criticize other institutions who have contrary views on the controversial bill. In simple Tagalog, itayo ninyo ang bank ninyo diyan sa UST via an editorial, pero huwag naman ninyong sirain ang bank ng ibang tao.; This is downright unCatholic, and ridiculous journalism, To the editors of Varsitarians, please review the tenets of Journalism 101. Na-abala yata kayo sa pagkatalo ninyo nung sa Sabado sa Ateneo. BTW. hindi ako Atenista o La Salista, but a 72 year old senior Citizen who can still discern right from wrong,

    • Sarski

      They’re quite free to criticize and demean others should they wish; that right is enshrined in our Bill of Rights, is it not? They’re not free from all the criticism, though. :) Goes with the territory.

      • Migz

        Sarksi, you’re right that freedom of expression includes the freedom to criticize. However, it does not include the freedom to insult people or institutions. In fact, it can be a ground for damages under the NCC.

        That is what the Varsitarian has done. Insult those who are in opposition of its beliefs.

        Know that the Bill of Rights under our Constitution, though may be respected and protected, is not absolute and limitless.

        • Gabby

          Dear Migz, I think Sarski already understood your point. He was just stating it in a different style, in a figure of speech. Nevertheless, your clarification is very much appreciated. Thank you.

          • Migz

            Dear Gabby, if you may have noticed, my reply was earlier than “Just a thought”‘s. So back off.

        • Sarski

          In a time where government is trying to scare us in what we can and can’t say, I readily welcome ALL kinds of opinion, however written. I’m not saying that I agree with the Varsi polemic. I’m saying it’s their right to publish it, and that right should be defended. :)

          • blah

            you CAN be blunt and tell a person you think she’s f*cking ugly, but YOU JUST DON’T. common sense tells you that. or if you can’t be bothered to shut up, a thinking person would find a way to say it in a better way.

          • Guest

            And I’m beginning to think you’re just a troll, trying to justify an inutile argument, to gain the attention of the public.

          • Migz

            Sorry, blah, though this was the part where I can reply to “Sarksi”.

          • juandelacruz69

            Sarski you’re too young to be too mature LOL. the Concept of being able to take the harshest, rudest, and the most painful of criticism and insults has yet to take root in the Philippine Psyche. Ironic being attacked so much, and serving as a quite visible example has not enlightened anyone yet :LOL:.

          • Migz

            And I’m beginning to think you’re just a troll, trying to justify an inutile argument, to gain the attention of the public. So, people try to understand his need to satisfy himself.

          • Migz

            And I’m beginning to think you’re just a troll, trying to justify an inutile argument, to gain the attention of the public. So, people try to understand her need to satisfy himself.

          • Migz

            And I’m beginning to think you’re just a troll, trying to justify an inutile argument, to gain the attention of the public. So, people try to understand her need to satisfy herself.

      • Just a thought

        To criticize is one thing, to demean is another. In exercising our right to free speech, we must take into consideration that we what we say does not blur the line of what is and isn’t libelous statement. Our constitution, laws and jurisprudence are replete with recognition of not only our freedom to air our opinions, but also of potential civil–even criminal–liabilities should we forget our duties as responsible citizens.

        • Sarski

          Of course. Implicit in our actions and speech is the understanding that we are bound by the laws of the land. I have no argument with that (excepting certain provisions of RA 10175). ;)

          I am slightly perturbed by the reasoning that the Varsi can’t criticize and demean others who take contrary views. They can, and they did. Was it a good decision? Probably not. Was it the best path to take in a time where RH debates are crawling with ad hominem attacks and self-satisfied rhetoric? Again, probably not. I take no umbrage from the hyperbole simply because there are some claims you just laugh off, kind of like the Birther claims in the US. :)

          • ALDEA

            you might be too young to know what is unprofessional and unethical in different level of people age bracket, intelligence and life experience who brought them to where they are now… being critical is part of knowing what other people had learned, but to demean other people, you’re pulling those people down to your level of knowledge to beat them by your street smart intelligence… you know, too much democracy in your thought makes you a cry baby. Just right now…

          • Shaun67

            It’s good to be outspoken and blunt but there’s a very fine line between being rude and honest. never confuse the two.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1090674636 AJ Santos

        They could have done it in a more diplomatic and rational manner rather than just calling us ‘lemons’ and implicitly condemning people to hell.

        • Sarski

          That’s the point — they chose to do so in a manner replete with low-rent, laughable rhetoric and hyperbole. This is problematic for those who champion a civil discourse and debate (and society). To say that they CAN’T do so is problematic as well, personally; they were exercising their right to speech, however feebly this was done. :)

          • https://me.yahoo.com/craigdanielb#ed38b Daniel

            Freedom of speech and opinion is not absolute Sarski. Have you not been taught on regarding that? Freedom always comes with great responsibility. And every rights have its own boundaries. The editorial section of the Varsitarian is clearly a one sided argument steered away from the main topic by throwing defamatory remarks to the other two universities without stating objectives opinion. Rather than informative, it is an unintelligent opinion that tarnished the well-respected publication due to lack of sensitivity and objective.

            For a publication that represent a community of well-educated students and a well-dignified institution, a responsible writing should be in place. It is okay to affirm their stand on the issue but never its been good to defame others just to make you look great, that the Varsitarian did unfortunately. This is why libel/defamation has been introduced in your so-called laws of the land because freedom is not limitless and you cannot always put in defense that ‘Hey, I have the freedom to say anything and everything as I am only exercising my right”. We are not infants anymore to even put that into thinking.

          • Sarski

            Again, as I’ve tried to make clear in my responses, I will always err on the side of speech, however polemical, hysterical, unhinged, or deranged it may be. This is in no way an ENDORSEMENT of the Varsi’s editorial content. I and many others disagree with it. That’s our right. They published it. That’s theirs.

            We are agreed that responsible writing and critiquing is a must in today’s media, student or otherwise. There is a must for carefully considered opinions so as to elevate the public discourse. The Varsi editorial fails on that. Let me repeat: this is not the way to encourage an open, honest debate about the RH Bill.

            Even as I don’t agree with the way they presented this, I appreciate the right they hold, the right we all hold, to do so.

      • http://www.facebook.com/myrrod.datoon MyrRod Datoon

        off course they have the right to do so. they wont go to jail for what they did. we often forget that society has this thing called ethics. ethics in journalism, in using the library, ethics in using our phones in the movie house etc. we often forget that not all ethics are made into laws however, oftentimes ethics are more important than laws in the functioning of our society.

  • An Atenean Benildean

    A well-written, intelligent, respectful, charitable, and distinctly Lasallian response. More profound and impacting in its restraint than the abrasive and empty rhetoric of UST’s The Varsitarian.

    Kudos to The LaSallian for a job well done! Animo!

  • brandon void

    Respect…respect the xxxx –Tom Cruise in Magnolia

    apat lang ba ang eskwelahan dito sa pilipinas? (3 schools, regarding the skirmish caused by this article). itigil na ang kaguluhang ‘yan. hindi lang boses n’yo ang dapat pakinggan. karamihan sa mga squatters e di naman nakakapag-aral, lalo na ang makapasok sa big 4.

    • Marlon Brando

      Huwag ka na lang makisawsaw.

  • An Iska

    Applause. :)

  • An Atheist

    Your cartoon says it all. Kudos to The LaSallian for cutting off the strings of blind faith and giving way for the voice of reason.

  • http://twitter.com/dorkychou Gerard JA C Atienza

    Hail to #TheLasallian for being civil and responsible. Beat #TheVarsitarian! Animo!

  • http://www.facebook.com/elmer.baguioro Elmer Baguioro

    You may not force anyone to do or proclaim something against their conscience, but you LA SALLIAN are an INSTRUMENT OF A CATHOLIC INSTITUTION. You are at least OBLIGATED to echo what the AUTHENTIC TEACHING of the Catholic Church regarding the subject (CONTRACEPTION) is!

    • lol

      “May not force anyone to do or proclaim something against their conscience..”
      “You are at least OBLIGATED..”

      Did you just contradict yourself in a span of 2 sentences?

    • An Atheist

      Oh, I just love it when the Catholic Church imposes its almost-authoritarian stance on people with “free will”.. Reminds me of the “Holy” Crusade and Salem witch hunt.

      • stay classy de la salle!

        add in the the inquisition! such lovely times!

        stay classy de la salle!

    • stay classy de lasalle

      AN INSTRUMENT OF A CATHOLIC INSTITUTION. – i didnt read that part of anything I signed up and studied in DLSU. we’re not zombies. heck, a lot of students i know are not catholic. university. plurality. UNITY in diversity. now that is what de la salle espouses.

      Did you know that your type of argument actually caused Galileo being kicked out of the Catholic Church?

      stay classy de la salle!

  • JUN BARRAMEDA

    excellent mind, magnificent manuscript = DLSU

  • A Thomasian

    I’ll be the one who’ll make an apology from what was written in that editorial. Sorry.

    • Dominic

      Dear Thomasian, thank you. very much appreciated. It seems like the writer of the article had good intentions, …it’s just that he overdid it, and with all the carelessness of implusive overdoing.

      Don’t worry, I have always known UST students and alumni to be humble and kind. What happened was just an exception I’m sure.

      Here’s wishing you the best and to UST as well!

      Regards,
      Gabriel Dominic,
      La Salle grad and Ateneo student

    • Jerome Paul Esteban

      Students, faculty, staff, and/or graduates of UST shouldn’t have to be the ones apologizing for the article. Only the author carries that responsibility. The fact that he or she is allowing others to pipe in for that mess of an article is the true cowardice on display here.

      But thank you.

  • Alumni

    Since we are all intelligent and critically-thinking boys and girls, let me offer a contrary opinion. From what I understand, the only things this editorial piece managed to do is cry foul over The Varsitarian editorial’s approach to the RH Bill and the stand of the AdMU & DLSU professors. The rest of the article looks to me like is a long list of excuses for why The Lasallian did not take an official position (an editorial?) on the matter interspersed with pronouncements on how it supposedly approaches discourse/critical thinking. It only adressess The Varsitarian editorial but not the RH Bill.

    I found this part of the article disconcerting: “[We did not take an official stand on the RH Bill because] … we respected, and we continue to respect, every person’s right to have his or her own informed opinion, including our individual editors and staffers…”

    This I think is an excuse. Why? Respecting every person’s right to have his or her own informed opinion is not a hindrance to taking a stand or publishing an editorial expressing a position on an issue, even as sensitive/divisive as the RH Bill. To insist that it does can only mean one unbelievable thing: The LaSallian editorial staff requires absolute unanimity before it takes a ‘stand’ (and publish editorials assuming that it is part of what it refers to as ‘official stand’). If it requires unanimity before it publishes editorials or take official stands, then very few of those will see the light of day.

    This statement I think is also an excuse: “We did not feel the need to impose any stance to support or refuse a bill that would blatantly disregard the stances of some of our editors and staffers…” Why? Does taking an official stand (or publishing an editorial, assuming that editorials are part of what it refers to as ‘official stand’) require ‘imposing’ a stance on all the editors and staffers? It is possible, but only if The LaSallian believes that to take a stand (or publishing an editorial) requires imposing absolute unanimity on its editorial staff.

    Absolute unanimity is very difficult to attain and this is why editorials in the Inquirer, The Philippine Star, etc. while appearing to speak for the newspaper, may be understood to reflect the/a prevailing biased opinion within the senior editorial staff and not necessarily a unanimous opinion. Individual staffers are often free to express their own contrary opinions and they often do. Even the much criticized Varsitarian editorial is not a representation of the opinion of the UST’s entire student body, perhaps not even the entire editorial staff. Given the piece’s praise for cracking the whip and demand for the resignation of those ‘who do not toe the line,’ I can understand why those who disagree may be quiet.

    I respect The LaSallian’s lack of an official stand on the RH Bill. It is a divisive issue and it takes a lot of courage and conviction to take a stand, especially when one is caught between public sentiment and being in a Catholic institution. The LaSallian should be honest enough to admit that and not proffer excuses.

  • Another Thomasian

    Don’t look at it as if the whole [Thomasian] community contributed a word in that editorial. Most of us never expected something from Varsitarian hence when it was published, we were really disappointed. Sorry from whatever the publication has done.

  • Alumni

    Since we are all intelligent and critically-thinking boys and girls, let me offer a contrary opinion. From what I understand, the only things this editorial piece managed to do is cry foul over The Varsitarian editorial’s approach to the RH Bill and the stand of the AdMU & DLSU professors. The rest of the article looks to me like is a long list of excuses for why The Lasallian did not take an official position (an editorial?) on the matter interspersed with pronouncements on how it supposedly approaches discourse/critical thinking. It only addresses The Varsitarian editorial but not the RH Bill.

    I found this part of the article disconcerting: “[We did not take an official stand on the RH Bill because] … we respected, and we continue to respect, every person’s right to have his or her own informed opinion, including our individual editors and staffers…”

    This I think is an excuse. Why? Respecting every person’s right to have his or her own informed opinion is not a hindrance to taking a stand or publishing an editorial expressing a position on an issue, even as sensitive/divisive as the RH Bill. To insist that it does can only mean one unbelievable thing: The LaSallian editorial staff requires absolute unanimity before it takes a ‘stand’ (and publish editorials assuming that it is part of what it refers to as ‘official stand’). If it requires unanimity before it publishes editorials or take official stands, then very few of those will see the light of day.

    This statement I think is also an excuse: “We did not feel the need to impose any stance to support or refuse a bill that would blatantly disregard the stances of some of our editors and staffers…” Why? Does taking an official stand (or publishing an editorial, assuming that editorials are part of what it refers to as ‘official stand’) require ‘imposing’ a stance on all the editors and staffers? It is possible, but only if The LaSallian believes that to take a stand (or publishing an editorial) requires imposing absolute unanimity on its editorial staff.

    Absolute unanimity is very difficult to attain and this is why editorials in the Inquirer, The Philippine Star, etc. while appearing to speak for the newspaper, may be understood to reflect the/a prevailing biased opinion within the senior editorial staff and not necessarily a unanimous opinion. Individual staffers are often free to express their own contrary opinions and they often do. Even the much criticized Varsitarian editorial is not a representation of the opinion of the UST’s entire student body, perhaps not even the entire editorial staff. Given the piece’s praise for cracking the whip and demand for the resignation of those ‘who do not toe the line,’ I can understand why those who disagree may be quiet.

    I respect The LaSallian’s lack of an official stand on the RH Bill. It is a divisive issue and it takes a lot of courage and conviction to take a stand, especially when one is caught between public sentiment and being in a Catholic institution. The LaSallian should be honest enough to admit that and not proffer excuses.

    • http://www.facebook.com/jasonago Jason Go

      DLSU admits their lack of official stand on the RH-bill and chose to let the Lasallian community search for the truths in the light of research and critical thinking. They also understood that they can perhaps have a stand without imposing it to the community BUT they chose to be silent so as not to make further confusion on the matter. DLSU recognized that the issue on RH-bill is always tackled in the light of who’s pro and who’s anti-rh bill. It is this tendency that DLSU wishes not to mess with. DLSU is always encouraging all of us to look things in a critical stance so as not to fall on the bandwagon appeal.

      If you are looking for the “DLSU official position”, the position of the majority of Lasallians is to be critical in every social issues we may face. An official stand doesn’t need to be taking an extreme pole. Inasmuch as you have said that unanimity is hard to achieve, it is also true that there could be many choices and opinions a university can adopt. It can stand as an “Anti”, “Pro”, “Critical”, “Pragmatic”, or “Wapakels”. In short, positions can be assumed in a continuum of choices and not just the two poles of pro and anti.

      • A friend

        @facebook-1030694075:disqus, your attempt at making further excuses for the LaSallian may be betraying a misguided logic equating the LaSallian position with the DLSU position as if you are equating the Varsitarian position with the UST position. This is very disturbing. Please revisit this logic if you are truly a discerning individual. Perhaps after that, you can reply anew to the post, as you were not able to address @Alumni’s attempt at constructive discourse at all, given your unfortunate inability to distinguish the LaSallian publication as separate from the LaSallian community or from De La Salle University. (If you need further direction, you need not look further than the DISCLAIMER in this opinion article.) For your benefit, I hope the failure to distinguish terminologies was merely an oversight and not indicative of poor logic.

      • A friend

        your attempt at making further excuses for the LaSallian may be betraying a misguided logic equating the LaSallian position with the DLSU position as if you are equating the Varsitarian position with the UST position. This is very disturbing. Please revisit this logic if you are truly a discerning individual. Perhaps after that, you can reply anew to the post, as you were not able to address Alumni’s attempt at constructive discourse at all, given your unfortunate inability to distinguish the LaSallian publication as separate from the LaSallian community or from De La Salle University. (If you need further direction, you need not look further than the DISCLAIMER in this opinion article.) For your benefit, I hope the failure to distinguish terminologies was merely an oversight and not indicative of poor logic.

    • Undergrad

      With all due respect, sire, an editorial does represent a newspaper’s stance on an issue. With the advent of blogging, it is very easy to state personal opinions without having to go through the means employed by the writer of the offending piece. Hence, the article released by the Varsitarian does somewhat reflect the views of their whole office. Also, the professors of ADMU and DLSU were not only nitpicked on one article, but two. With similar structures and tone. The writer of both articles is probably one and the same, if I may surmise.

      I do respect your opinions, but I beg to disagree. Respect simply begets respect, as per the golden rule. To push for one person to impose their beliefs by releasing a statement without the agreement of the majority is simply tyrannical. I’d like to believe that we have long moved on from that era of bigotry.

      It is such a privilege to study in an institution that fosters the belief of each and every individual, and I humbly think that the school should carry on–nurturing each and every mind that resides within its walls–as it always has.

    • http://www.facebook.com/jasonago Jason Go

      Just a follow up, I wrote a more elaborate take on this matter at my own blog (
      http://jasongo.net/2012/10/09/pro-anti-or-critical/). It argues that positions need not to be only “pro” or “anti” but rather a University can assume a different position – so different that others may perceived it as positionless just because they do not fall on the expected poles of thought. In addition, I encourage others to be critical in all of the social issues we face.

      • Alumni

        I’m happy to encounter fellow La Sallians like you who actually invest time and thought to articulate his thoughts. I read your blog. You have a very interesting and well-thought out piece there I agree, in the issue of the RH Bill, categories like pro or anti might be too simple to capture the complexities of possible personal stands on the matter. What I disagree with is your claim that being a “critical thinker,” especially with regards to matters like the RH bill is a position. It is not. To say that one is being critical or is a critical thinker, is simply making a claim about one’s purported qualities.

        In your blog article, you used a plethora of adjectives to describe what you imagine being critical to be. I won’t contest your definition. Instead, I would argue that critical thinking is a process by which one (e.g., a critical thinker) arrives at a conclusion or position. Any critical thinker worth their salt must be able to demonstrate that they are indeed critical thinkers. They should at the very least be able to explain their position on the matter and why they are taking that position instead of just saying I am pro/anti or simply saying they are critical. (The position papers of the AdMU and DLSU professors on the RH bill are good examples). The position taken might be very general (e.g, position with regards to some or all the basic policy premises of the RH Bill), very specific (e.g., version per version, provision per provision position), or anywhere in between. One might even come up with alternative proposals.

        Your positioning theory is interesting. But at the end of the day, we know that as far as policy questions like the RH Bill is concerned, our people and our legislators still have to make a decision: Do we pass/reject the RH bill? Do we amend it or portions of it? Or should we pursue other alternatives? Given this reality, being critical here means taking a position with respect to the issue at hand and explaining that position. To take a position that one is a critical thinker with regards to the RH bill will simply not do.

    • Mico

      I think it goes down to the merits of the arguments. The Editorial is supposedly the collective voice of the publication. If the publication is not collective enough in its stance, how would it be possible? I think some editors posted their own individual statements on the matter.

  • gdac

    I am a pure blooded Thomasian. I have already aired my disgust on the article that the Varsitarian has published. I am now speaking here as a Thomasian. I do apologized for the harsh insensitive words that was thrown against the two schools, La Salle and Ateneo. I do hope that such single article be not taken against our university nor against the whole Thomasian community. The great majority of Thomasians have already spoken of their disagreement against the controversial editorial.
    I commend this article for having handled the situation graciously.
    Again, our sincerest apology.
    To God be the Glory!

    • An education

      You’re from Slytherin. I can smell it.

      • leeSallian

        HAHA!

    • Bisaya

      tama. huwag idamay ang lahat sa pagkakamali ng iisa. Sa sobra nyong pagyakap sa demokrasya puro galit na lang ang namumutawi sa inyong mga bibig.

  • just_anotherperson

    I wonder whose strings he should cut?

    Right reason, that is, reason rightly exercised, leads the mind to the Catholic faith, and plants it there, and teaches it in all its religious speculations to act under its guidance. — St. John Henry Cardinal Newman

  • Another Iska

    Very well said. I agree. Everyone has the right to express their opinions, but the use of harsh words is uncalled for. Criticize the bill as you have the right to do so but not the people who support it. Everyone is entitled to choose which side they’re on and we must respect that. The issue at hand is the bill, not the people who support it.

  • Just Saying

    This was quite a weaker response to the Varsitarian compared to what The Guidon has just published.

    • Mark

      I think it’s more humble. The Guidon’s is more blunt. Both showed refinement though.

    • bamboo

      I think this is the response of an institution that does not entertain unethical opinion.

  • GO USTEHH

    E.V.I.L
    EVERY VILLAIN IS LEMONS

  • Pingback: http://thelasallian.com/2012/10/09/with-all-due-respect/ « filipinescas

  • Gabby Lim

    To all my fellow La Sallites, I am almost sure that you were hurt like me by the Varsitarian article. There is a statement issued by the UST, though, which I found very clarificatory and reconciliatory. PLEASE GET IN TOUCH with it online (UST QUADRI in FB). By now, it seems clear to all that a wrong has been done, but a reconciliatory hand has been extended as well. Guys, I beg you all to forgive with me… St. JB de La Salle would be proud of us for that!

  • Pingback: Is being “Pro” or “Anti” the only position? Or can we be “Critical”? | Open Your Mind – JasonGo.net

  • timawa13

    To those who want to read Ex Corde Ecclesiae further: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_jp-ii_apc_15081990_ex-corde-ecclesiae_en.html

    Note to the Editor: Ex Corde Ecclesiae is not an Encyclical; it’s an Apostolic Constitution.

  • http://twitter.com/Jayveesac Jayvee S. Sacramento

    I love how the editorial cartoon is so subtle and yet so powerful.

  • http://twitter.com/yogon Camillo

    Nice. Sober and reasonable. Very lemony, I mean, La Salle.

  • http://twitter.com/heartonastring Miguel
  • http://twitter.com/notorhbill notoRHbill

    I have read that Ex Corde Ecclesiae is not an exhortation “to make personal judgments that may guide (them) one to truth”, BUT “teaches fidelity to the Church.”

  • ADLSU

    Ateneo and La Salle united!!! Hahaha

  • leeSallian

    this is the right way to deal with the issue. and i think it only reflects the way the school culture influence their students.

  • really disappointed with UST
  • Batman

    I’m Batman >:)))

  • Jewnigger

    I haz approved this.

    JEW JEW JEW JEW JEW JEW JEW JEW JEW JEW JEW JEW JEW JEW JEW JEW JEW JEW JEW JEW

    WE ARE LE 9GAG ARMEH

    WE ARE LE 9GAG ARMEH LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE LE

    • Adolf Hitler

      I disapprove of this user and comment.

  • alexangeles

    Well it is to be expected from a school founded by the Dominican Order… The same order that censors Catholic Literature, Spear headed the burning time… the reason why Pope John Paul II have to apologize to the world their excesses .

  • http://twitter.com/kingdelrosario king del rosario

    DISCLAIMER: The LaSallian is a publication and a separate entity from the institution that is De La Salle University; hence, its views do not necessarily reflect the views of DLSU or the Lasallian institution. Its opinion is also separate from and independent of its members, stakeholders, partners, alumni, staff, faculty, and students.
    ADDENDUM: We wish to clarify that Ex Corde Ecclesiae (English: From the Heart of the Church) is an apostolic constitution, and not an encyclical letter, issued by Pope John Paul II.

  • Pingback: School paper wars - Manila Standard Today

  • hehe

    RESPETO? I THINK KADUWAGAN? – “We from The LaSallian did not release an official stand on House Bill no. 4244, otherwise known as the Responsible Parenthood Bill, despite numerous requests and pressure from a majority of our own members, as well as various University stakeholders. This is because we respected, and we continue to respect, every person’s right to have his or her own informed opinion, including our individual editors and staffers.”

  • Manfred

    Let’s just focus on what unites! :) https://www.facebook.com/WePROgressph?ref=ts&fref=ts

  • Pingback: pop goes the world: house rules — gogirl cafe

  • GreenAtHeart

    Bad move, UST. tsk tsk. We all have our thoughts about things. But let’s not go over the line. Well said La Salle! :)

  • youngwebsigner

    I am glad I am part of the Lasallian system since my tertiary until post graduate studies. Thank you for this article. ANIMO! :)

  • Pingback: ACADEMIC FREEDOM IS NOT ABSOLUTE – CBCP « The Splendor of the Church

  • just_anotherperson
  • Pingback: On Editorial Courage and Cowardice « THE VINCENTON POST

  • alle faye

    This opinion was written in a very simple language, no clutters, no intention to hide other meanings. Unlike the other two universities, esp. The Varsi, that used too much unnecessary words. A high school freshman, like me, could understand this without rummaging through shelves for a dictionary. Nice one.

  • tamana

    we may have different names but we’re still brothers.

  • XBeliever

    This post is an art of being fair, thus gives great sense of reason rather than pushing or pulling everything, and I think religion and government should be separated constitutionally.

  • Lesley Udtohan

    UST is bitter. Besides, they are the dumping facility for the dumb and those who did not make it to DLSU and UP.

  • Pingback: SECULARISM | derailog