The Dog Effect

Cess asked me to download a TV series she heard from her officemates. She told me that I would really enjoy it. And true enough, I am hooked.

National Geographic channel’s TV series, “Dog Whisperer” is now part of my lunch and dinner routine. It’s been four days and I still can’t get enough of it.

The series is about a guy named, Cesar Millan, a so-called dog behaviorist in theUS. He takes on the challenge of, what he calls, “rehabilitating” canines of their unwanted behavior to them into a state of calm and submissive behavior – which according to him, is how dogs should behave around humans.

Both Cess and I share this love for dogs – from the big and macho German Shepherds to the small goofy Pugs.

The presence of dogs serve as cue for ceasefire whenever we run into an argument. Whether it’s a dog taking a stroll in the mall, or whether it’s a dog in a pet store or whether it’s a K-9 guarding the mall entrance, dogs never fail to catch our attention.

We would literally stop and forget what we were arguing/talking about. That’s the dog effect to the both of us.

Back at the del Rosario residence in Olongapo, we have our goofy and spoiled Pug named Donald. We found him in ayosdito.ph in 2009.

We thought of buying a dog for my mom because it was the first time all three of us (me and my two sisters) will be leaving our home to study here inManila.

We got the idea when mama was telling us a story about how our Lolo’s dog, Jack (an AsPin) was being possessive of her in front of other people. We saw how animated she was while telling her story –facial expressions and all that.

Since then, a new bunso was introduced to our household.

Now, Donald enjoys the privilege of having Sinigang for lunch while the eldest child (a.k.a. ME) would have Mungo. Enough said.

But going back to my current addiction, this TV series talks about how humans should be the “Pack Leader” of their dogs. Dogs do not follow affectionate or emotional leader, but rather, they follow dominant and assertive leaders.

It’s oftentimes true that: Ang hayop pilit nagpapaka-tao, habang ang tao nagpapaka-hayop. This series reminded me that no matter how hard we try, dogs will stay as what they truly are – animals.

We love them like a true friend but following nature’s course as canines, they will love us more as pack leaders.

Tao ka! Magpakatao ka! Ha ha ha

Watching relaxing episodes of The Dog Whisperer is a good way to spend a well- deserved break from school today, special thanks to Typhoon Falcon.

 

Divorcing Pinoy I Do’s

Here’s what’s in store for us Filipinos amidst the debates on the Reproductive Health Bill (RH Bill) at the House of Representatives:

Introducing, House Bill 1799 a.k.a. Divorce Bill, as proposed by Gabriela Representatives Luzviminda Ilagan and Emerenciana de Jesus. These are the provisions the bill seeks to insert:

Art. 55(B), Family Code of the Philippines

“(B) A PETITION FOR DIVORCE MAY BE FILED ON ANY OF THE

FOLLOWING GROUNDS:

 

(1) THE PETITIONER HAS BEEN SEPARATED DE FACTO FROM HIS OR HER SPOUSE FOR AT LEAST FIVE YEARS AT THE TIME OF THE FILING OF THE PETITION AND RECONCILIATION IS HIGHLY IMPROBABLE;

(2) THE PETITIONER HAS BEEN LEGALLY SEPARATED FROM HIS OR HER SPOUSE FOR AT LEAST TWO YEARS AT THE TIME OF THE FILING OF THE PETITION AND RECONCILIATION IS HIGHLY IMPROBABLE;

(3) WHEN ANY OF THE GROUNDS FOR LEGAL SEPARATION UNDERPARAGRAPH (A) OF THIS ARTICLE HAS CAUSED THE IRREPARABLE BREAKDOWN OF THE MARRIAGE;

(4) WHEN ONE OR BOTH SPOUSES ARE PSYCHOLOGICALLY INCAPACITATED TO COMPLY WITH THE ESSENTIAL MARITAL OBLIGATIONS;

(5) WHEN THE SPOUSES SUFFER FROM IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES THAT HAVE CAUSED THE IRREPARABLE BREAKDOWN OF THE MARRIAGE.”

These are the grounds that will embed divorce in our society and I would like to give emphasis on numbers one and five.

First, five years de facto (in fact) separation? For whatever reason? (I know, reconciliation is highly improbable, but who decides on that?) Enough said.

And second, what will qualify as an irreconcilable difference between the spouses? And who will decide whether or not that “irreconcilable difference” has caused “irreparable breakdown” in the marriage?

This particular provision is all-encompassing that any problem between the spouses can qualify as an irreconcilable difference. Any disagreement can cause an “irreparable breakdown” in a marriage. Any problem, no matter how shallow it may be, can be irreconcilable. It will all depend on the subjective point of view of the couple!

Is this what we want to legalize in our country? Is this how we protect the Filipino family?

Many people say that we should not force two people to be together when both of them do not love each other anymore. I would like to raise two points:

One, love should not be the only reason why people should stay married;

Two, this is marriage we are talking about, not just any other relationship.

What separates Marriage from a boyfriend-girlfriend relationship is the VOW that people undertake during their wedding. Regardless of how people marry (whether on a church or a judge’s chamber), or what religion they follow, everyone couple who gets married assume the responsibility to stick to each other no matter what and to work and help each other out.

What will become of the family that the couple may have built out of wedlock? Should the couple only think about what is best for their selves instead of thinking about what is best for the whole family?

I may sound optimistic or maybe even naïve but this is one thing that makes me proud as a Filipino—that WE value the sanctity of marriage more than any people or race in the world.

What pisses me off is that SOME people use the argument that we are the only country in the world that does not recognize divorce and that there is an “increase” in the applications for annulment in the Office of the Solicitor General (which is what, only 8,000 per year?!).

I mean, ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?! Is that how shallow we are that because everybody else is doing it, we should too? And just because some couples are trying to annul their marriage we should give them the tools to dissolve their marriage?

I am willing to hear other people’s opinion regarding this issue but if this is the only thing you have, PLEASE you better just shut the hell up! OK?!

Legalizing divorce does not give people a choice, rather, this bill will give some people a GOAL that they should reach in order to satisfy their own agendas. An example would be the first ground regarding de facto separation for five years. Wait until five years, then you are good to go!

Instead of encouraging couples to work things out, it will only teach some people to focus on looking for problems in their marriages to get out of it.

Lastly, people keep on criticizing the courts on how long and how costly it takes for a petition for annulment to be approved. I believe the reason behind this is that the court takes time to give couples the opportunity to ponder on whether they want to separate or not and to test the applicants on how far they are willing to go just to get out of their marriages.

Well, annulment is another topic.

Nobody forces anybody into marriage (if that’s the case, what you have is a ground for Declaration of Nullity, not Divorce). Two individuals enter into this special “contract” with his/her own free will. Everybody is entitled to commit mistakes but two wrongs don’t make a right. Filipinos value marriage and I don’t see any reason why we should do away with it.

Note: I am NOT questioning other cultures about their views regarding marriage. I am speaking as a Filipino based on our culture and beliefs.

 

RH Bill: Reading, Understanding And Making A Stand

The ultimate question stands: Should Congress approve House Bill 4244 or  the The Responsible Parenthood, Reproductive Health and Population and Development Act of 2011 (RH bill)?

I read the said bill with the hope of finally making a stand to be for or against it. And here’s what I got:

There are some points in the bill that, in my opinion, could do good in our society like:

1. The emphasis on INFORMING and EDUCATING the people about proper reproductive health and family planning – whether by natural OR artificial means.
2. The creation of the Population Commission (POPCOM) which will be designated to specifically look after the reproductive health and population development of our country.
3. The provision on Maternal Health Review which will annually provide an in-depth study of the causes of maternal death for future prevention.
4. The provision in making all modern family planning methods available in all health care facilities in the country.
5. The provision on Mandatory Age-Appropriate Reproductive Health and Sexuality Education from Grade 5 to 4th year high school. (People should be educated with these before they are even capable of fertility)
6. And the provision adding, as a requirement in obtaining marriage licenses, a certification on proper family planning, responsible parenthood, breastfeeding and infant nutrition.

But, on the other hand, I do not agree the inclusion of these two provisions in the RH bill:

SEC. 10. Family Planning Supplies as Essential Medicines. Products and supplies for modern family planning methods shall be part of the National Drug Formulary and the same shall be included in the regular purchase of essential medicines and supplies of all national and local hospitals and other government health units.
SEC. 11. Procurement and Distribution of Family Planning Supplies. The DOH shall spearhead the efficient procurement, distribution to Local Government Units (LGUs) and usage-monitoring of family planning supplies for the whole country. The DOH shall coordinate with all appropriate LGUs to plan and implement this procurement and distribution program.

I really do not like the idea that people will DO it at the expense of the people’s money (taxes). We have more pressing issues that should be addressed first rather than shouldering the expense of buying condoms/pills just to enable people to have safe sex. They should at least be responsible enough to purchase those on their own.

In addition, this could also be another avenue for corruption for our beloved public officials. *clap, clap*

Summing Up

First, as much as I want to preserve the innocence of our youth and wait for “the right time” for them to be introduced to sex education, I really don’t want our generation to be blamed when our nation’s future generations get caught unprepared in handling this complicated issue.

I agree with those advocating for this bill that cases of unwanted pregnancies and unwanted deaths (both for mothers and their babies whether wanted or unwanted) are increasing because of poor reproductive health. I agree that these are the current realities and that we should deal with it.

But I think, we should put more emphasis on educating people about reproductive health and family planning – even if that means introducing artificial means to help prevent those so-called “evils”.

Let’s face it, we can not stop young people from being exposed to this “practice” because of the trimedia’s sexual content. What we can do is to give them a chance to protect themselves and to teach them to make better decisions for themselves.

The kind of guidance parents provide to their offsprings plays a big role in our youth’s outlook towards this subject. No matter how the government and the public make these contraceptives available to the youth, the morals and values that parents provide will guide our nation’s youth to make better decisions.

Second, regarding the Church’s opposition to the RH bill, everyone has the right to be informed about the truth which should be supported with reliable facts.

A person should not only tell another person what to do. This is why we are all given Free Will, which I consider as one of the best gifts that the Creator has given us.

In my opinion, what puts the Church under a bad light for some (most especially the RH bill advocates), is the fact that they are not stating the reasons why we should be against the bill. Instead, there are some priests who would plainly tell their parishoners not to attend mass if he/she supports the RH bill.

Using contraceptives is not abortion.

There is no provision in this bill that tells people that if it becomes a law, people are MANDATED to make use of contraceptives. What this law provides is that people be informed and be given the information needed to decide for themselves how they would take care of their reproductive health and how they would properly plan their families.

It doesn’t follow that just because condoms are available in our Health Centers that everyone should make use of it, right?! No matter what we say about how safe contraceptives are, engaging in sexual acts alone comes with responsibility and the possibility of diseases, complications and unwanted pregnancies.

What the state is duty-bound to do is to inform us about all of these things but it is up to us to decide for ourselves whether or not to DO it.

Finally, I believe that this bill should still be amended. I do not agree in the sense that the government should shoulder procurement and distribution of free contraceptives for the public. I think it is a way of advertising the practice of sex. Again, we should atleast be responsible whichever method suits us. Why should people’s taxes finance contraceptives? Now that’s absurd.

Respect for life and respect for other people’s belief.

Because of my stated objections, despite the good points given by this bill, I am against this RH bill, although certain amendments may sway me to support it. What our country needs is to educate and to make all the methods available to the public but not to the point that we compromise the sanctity and the respect we put into the sexual act. It comes with a BIG responsibility.

I am hoping that some amendments be introduced to this bill. As of the moment, reading, understanding and making a stand against RH bill is – because  I’m taking up summer classes, just another day in law school.

for those interested in reading the full text of HB 4244 here are some links:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/49328993/Consolidated-RH-Bill-HB-4244

http://filipinosforlife.com/2011/03/10/15th-congress-house-bill-4244-full-text-final-consolidated-rh-bill-hb-4244/