Wednesday, March 24. 2010Why the big fuss about condoms?
(Following is the transcript of the segment "Analysis by Winnie Monsod" which aired on News on Q on March 22 , 2010. Prof. Winnie Monsod is the resident analyst of News on Q which airs weeknights at 9:30 p.m. on Q Channel 11.)
HIV/AIDS data gathered by the DOH National Epidemiology Center and published monthly in the Philippine HIV and AIDS Registry show that between 2001 and 2009, the number of new cases of HIV/AIDS reported almost quintupled: 174 in 2001 and 835 in 2009. But it was not a steady growth rate. Between 2001 and 2005 the reported number of infections grew by only 21 percent over the four year period. But in the next four years — between 2005 and 2009 — it almost quadrupled (from 210 to 835). Not only that, the number of cases reported in January 2010, just 2 months ago 143, was more than double (2.2 times) the preceding January's 65. Are these data reflective of what is going on globally? The answer is NO. Because globally, the number of reported new HIV/AIDS did not rise, but fell by 17 percent. In other words, where the rest of the world shows declining new cases, the Philippines is increasing figuratively by leaps and bounds which is probably the basis of Health Secretary Cabral's worry. And which should be cause for worry for the rest of us too. Let's go to the condom effectiveness issue. Are they effective in preventing HIV/AIDS? The answer is Yes, if we listen to the WHO study circa 2000 and the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health study circa 1999. Why are there no studies which are more recent? Apparently because the issue of condom effectiveness has been resolved all that long ago. Maybe there are other countries than the Philippines where questions are being asked, but I couldn't find any. The WHO Fact Sheet No. 243 states: "Laboratory studies have found that viruses (including HIV) do not pass through intact latex condoms even when the devices are stretched or stressed…. " In Thailand, the promotion by the government of 100 percent condom use by commercial sex workers led to a dramatic increase in the use of condoms (from 14 percent in 1990 to 94 percent in 1994); an equally dramatic decline in STD cases (from 410,406 cases in 1987 to 27,362 cases in 1994. ) Studies undertaken on serodiscordant couples, when one partner is infected with HIV and the other is not….well they show that, with consistent condom use, the HIV infection rate among uninfected partners was less than one percent per year, of course, inconsistent condom use can be as risky as not using condoms at all. The Johns Hopkins is more of the same (and probably one source of the WHO fact sheet): "Condoms provide highly effective protection against HIV infection when used correctly with every act of intercourse. All 10 cohort studies conducted through 1995 that evaluated condom use among heterosexual couples showed that consistent condom use protected against HIV." The caveat in all this is that the condoms should be used consistently and correctly, and that the condoms must be of good quality. But, as Johns Hopkins says, "Still, some use is better than none,” and "Narrowing the gap between condom need and use is a major public health challenge….Efforts to increase condom use are a good social, economic, and health investment." But, according to our Catholic prelates, definitely a bad moral/religious move. The question therefore is: will the beneficial social, economic and health aspects outweigh the disadvantageous moral/religious aspects, or will it be vice versa? Or maybe we should rephrase that question so that it really gets down to the nitty-gritty. Will the healthy wives or husbands of those who have AIDS practice abstinence for the rest of their lives, or will they use condoms and jeopardize their immortal soul? What would you do? Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
All statements Mrs. Monsod stated on this blog are true and based on facts.
The Catholic Church, most especially the priests and bishops from the Philippines need to shut the fuck up because in the first place, the never used condoms and majority of them never had sex. But they paid millions of dollars to silence those children abused by their own priests. Pope Benedict, when he was a still a bishop took a priest under his wing upon learning that a certain priest again sexually abused a child. This is the same reason why the Pope issued an apology less than a week ago. The State has all right to ensure that public safety must be prioritized in all aspects of the living community. The Catholic church as always, intervene with what we all know is a must needed action to combat against the spread of STDs and HIV/AIDS. The thing is, and what I want the church to understand, is that WE ARE HUMAN. We are going to have sex, intercourse or should I say bluntly, fuck because we were made to do so. This has been the case the beginning of human existence and will continue millions of years from now. People will do it anyway, with or without the church's consent. Just look back at the generation of our parents (I'm 31), how many people you know were product of pre-marital sex? How are of them were made and born outside their Dad's first marriage? (mga kabit at anak sa labas) This is reality. If people then were more holy and religious than today's peers, how much more of this mistake will be made? Back then, having a kid before marriage was a problem. Today, for the last 2 decades, it's more of the same PLUS the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. If it were up to, sampal ang aabutin sa akin ng mga putanginang paring ito na walang ginawa kungdi makialam sa mga ginagawa ng gobyerno na alam naman nating lahat na tama at para sa ikabubuti ng tao at ng mga darating pang tao. It's simple, if you don't have a moral high ground, you have no right to teach morality. After all the sexual abuses committed by members of the clergy, and the cover up that came afterwards, this moral high ground is lost, perhaps forever.
Clean your own backyard first, let the state take care of its people and keep off of its affairs. Tama kabrod tangina nilang lahat
supot lang sa burat ang makakalutas ng problema sa aids binabawalan pa nila. Mga hinayupak na yan sila nga ang no. 1 nagumagamit ng condom.... pabanal effect ... echosss. tangina. What do these Catholic prelates know? They don't have children to feed. They are provided for by the church already. It's immoral to have lots of kids and not be able to provide for them and to subject them to a life of prostitution or destitution. Condom use also prevents illegal abortions, which is murder in the eyes of the church. Moreover, we'll have an AIDS epidemic soon if nothing is done as well. Perhaps the church would love that. Their priests will become more in demand. They'll have more funerals to perform. I'm a practicing Catholic and support the church. But, with regard to this issue of condom, the church is wrong to call its use immoral. The Philippines is not a frailocracy!
GALIT kasi mga PARI dahil di raw sila NABIBIGYAN ng CONDOM kaya nakakabuntis sila ng mga MADRE!!!!
DOH bigyan nyo po sila para di MAKABUNTIS~~~ Generally speaking, condom in its effectiveness was never been the center of arguments, but the person who will use it and the way it was advertised or promoted. I say, moral issues was also a concern for the government to consider while promoting healthy sexual life.
JHUN sa mga pari mo sabihin yang moral issue baka sakaling ma solve nila yung laganap na gay sex scandal,child abuse sa kanilang bakuran.in fact matagal na ang ang catholic church pero wala silang nagawa sa sinasabi nilang moral value.lalo pang lumaganap,kaya dahil sa kakulangan na gawin ang trabaho nila,pansamantalang humanap muna ng solusyon para maiwasan ang paglaganap ng std,aids church lang naman ang nagbibigay ng moral issue para may katwiran silang batikusan dahil labag sa kanilang tinuturo,ang tunay na purpose kaya ginagawa ng doh para lang ma prevent ang paglaganap ng aids.alam kung susundin ng who at doh ang gusto ng pari baka within 10 years halos karamihan na ng tao ay may aids,pano nga naman susundin ang church gayong sila mismo may cover up sa mga kasong gay sex,phedopile at child abuse.
i agree with dddddd. paano ituturo ng catholic church and sinasabi nilang morality kung sila mismo ay may itinatagong imoralidad sa hanay nila. they are spending alots of money just to cover their scandals. saan nga ba galing yung mga perang 'yun? hindi ba sa mga catholic people. wala din silang pinagkaiba sa mga politiko.
Correction po, hindi po itanatago ng Katoliko ang ganitong imoralidad. Media nga naman. Bottom line is, the Catholic Church stands firm to its teachings regarding Condoms no matter what. Think deeper kapatid, masama ang mag-judge.
The government allow the church to stands on what they believe. Di pinagbawal na hindi gumamit ng condom ang ayaw. But the government have obligation to its contituents, that is to educate and offer protection to those who whises to have one.
Ibalik natin ang tanong sa church. Does the church allow the government stands on what the government believe? Wala naman sanang blackmailan na di iboboto.... Walang kinalaman ang leadership capability ng isang tao sa perference nya sexual discipline nya. Di kailangan ng boto ninyo kung ang hinihingi ninyong kapalit eh mapag bigyan kayo.... Nasaan ang morality ninyo???? Eh hindi ba ang magagaling na kaparian ang mahilig mag-judge ng mga tao ukol sa kung ano at sino ang moral at hindi?
So kung masama ang mag-judge... masama silang lahat! I guess the whole point really is... you don't hire a theoretical physicist to repair a software problem in your computer... so why would we trust priests on matters that they really have no expertise on? Matters like sex, reproductive health, marriage, parenting, etc. All their arguments are based on texts in the bible, which could be interpreted 1000 different ways anyways depending on your culture, traditions and set of beliefs. There really is very little logic behind it. sana mamigay na rin ng condom ang DOH sa church para sa mga baklang pari at pedophile baka makahawa pa ng sakit eh
Dear Madam Winnie,
With regards to your last two questions statement, I don't oppose the use of condoms for those married couples who has that case. The issue here is about AIDS,HIV and all related to sexual dieases, which are all the consequences of sexual immorality. Condom is only a tool in order to lessen/stop the spread of the diseases from those who were infected already but never a cure to stop the diseases. Distributing condoms publicly even to the youths and singles, is only promoting to have sex outside marriage. In my humble opinion, if we promote condoms we should also promote the morality of sex which is only within the marriage life. If we fight the use of condoms, then we should also be boldly fight sexual immorality, pornoghraphy and prostitution. We cannot stop the effect without dealing with the root cause. God bless you all, God bless the Philippines... sana magbalik loob na tunay sa Diyos ang lahat ng mga Pilipino at nang maka-bangon na ating bansang Pilipinas... EDDIE AKO! You hit the bottom line brother! And it seems people are not responding to your comments. Wonder why?
Maybe it will be better if the Catholic Church will do as you say, boldy fight sexual immorality, pornography and prostitution with much gusto as they do fight against the distribution of condoms. May tama ka dyan brother!
Condom will not completely cure or stop the dreaded AIDS... pero sino at alin ba? Statistics showed the effectiveness of the program around the world in curving down AIDS/HIV infections, except in our own country. And this, i guess, is the main objective before things go out of control. I'm sure no one wants to be a "walking-dead" someday. Stop associating condom with the promotion of sexual immorality because internet and media alone are very much effective in doing those kind of things. “Hypocrisy and distortion are passing currents under the name of religion” ~ Mahatma Gandhi These religious hypocrites should leave the decision to their flocks. While they are entrenched in their beautiful churches and convents and eating delicious foods, there are so many people leaving in the streets, children begging for a single peso, while this religious freaks are soundly sleeping in there air conditioned room funded by the blind obedience of the Religious Fanatics.
I agree with you Julian. Definitely comdoms are not for the youths. However, I think singles have the right to have it if the need comes along the way. It's the right of the person to be protected from these diseases.
Ang nakakainis sa Catholic Church hindi nila hinihiwalay yun issue ng AIDS/HIV/STD sa morality issue. Basta masama ang condom tapos. Mali yun ganon. If they are concerned about promiscuity that condom use may cause it's another story. If they only do their job good in preaching morality, our youths would never engage in permarital sex. Sinisisi nila sa pag gamit ng condom yun kakulangan nila sa pangangaral. Saka hindi naman lahat ng pinoy e Katoliko, bakit gusto ng simbahan ipagkait ng gobyerno sa lahat ng pilipino? Sa ibang relihiyon pinapayagan naman yun. Napaka inconsiderate naman. ano ba ang problema niyo!!!????di gumamit kayo ng condom kung gusto niyo....kainin niyo pa nga para mas masaya kayo,,,tsaka gamitin niyo rin to fuchhk whoever you want to!!!ano ba ang pinagmamaktol niyo,,,wag niyong pakinggan kahit sino,,wag kayong sumunod kahit anong batas,,,gawin niyo gusto niyo,,,fuchhk and use condom, kainin niyo rin agahan, tanghalian,,,,
This shows how much influence the church still has in our government and politics.
As my old history teacher used to say, there is a reason why old big churches or basilica are situated near the seat of every municipality. They virtually run the government during the Spanish period, and now they still want to get hold onto that same belief that they still have the significant power to influence the decision-makers in the gov't. The key here is education of the masses. Masakit mang tanggapin, marami pa ring bobo sa ating mga kababayan pagdating sa pagpili ng kung alin ang tama at mali, isama na natin ang pagboto ng tamang politicos. They are easily influenced by big entities around them. Kung edukado ang masa, kahit anong impluwensya ng malalakas na grupo, alam nila na desisyon pa rin nila ang masusunod sa huli. Dapat ganito tayo sa darating na eleksyon there is a possibility that condoms can atleast prevent women from getting pregnant and from getting sexually transmitted diseases but the way how people now adays practice sex,condoms won´t be of big help if its break during the intercourse.
the churches being the moral provider wasn´t effective enough on their mission,for they too failed to stop what are immoral things going on with in their churches. the priest and the nuns prohibited from marrying but they too are human beings that felt hungry for sex once in a while or more often depends how horny they are,at mas malaking kasalanan ang ginagawa ng mga pari at madre na ayaw magsipag-asawa dahil iyon ang patakaran ng katoliko romano kaya hindi na tayo magtaka kung bakit pilit nilang pinagtatakpan ang mga nangyayaring kababuyan sa loob ng monasteryo o kumbento dahil mga tao rin sila nakakaramdam ng kalibugan...hindi na sila makakaramdam ng kalibugan kung mga dead na sila. onething for sure why CBCP against condom,dahil hindi na lulubo ng husto ang populasyon kaya kukunti na ang magpapabinyag,kukunti na rin ang magpapakasal kay kukunti na ang kita ng simbahan dahil kukunti na ang magbibigay ng donasyon dahil wala na silang mga grasang lagalag na yagits na aalagaan kaya wala ng dahilan para magbigay pa ng kawanggawa ang mga mayayaman-tao sa mundo sa mga simbahan pinapatakbo ng mga pari at madre. paano makokontrol ng mga pari´t madre ang kalibugan ng mga tao kung ang nakapalibot sa kapaligiran ang mismo nag-uudyok sa tao na magtalik. bago i-ban ng CBCP ang condom dapat i-ban ng simbahan ang pornograpiya,mga hayop na nag-iiyutan mismo sa public places para hindi gayahin ng mga nalilibugan tao. CBCP should realized we all living in a sinful planet,not in heaven where there´s no one would desires for sexual satisfaction because there will be no more earthly desires in Heaven for that place is as holy as the Creator. the priest and the nuns are hypocrites,they pretend they are people with high moral but deep inside their soul is where evil live....phedophiles priest,nuns and clergy they too felt horny dapat nagsipag-asawa na lang sila para hindi nadadamay ang simbahan sa kahihiyan. mabuti pa ang mga puta hindi ipokrito o ipokrita at least sila nagbebenta ng aliw na hindi nagkukubli sa kabanalan. ang dapat palang ituro ng mga pari sa kalalakihan para hindi makabuntis at para hindi mahawaan ng sakit ay magsalsal na lang at ang mga madre ang dapat nilang ituro sa kababaihan sa halip na makipagtalik sa lalaki gumamit na lang ng saging,pipino o talong kung silaý nakakaramdam ng libog,ligtas na sila sa wala sa oras na pagbubuntis at nakakahawang sakit makakatulong pa sila sa mga farmer. people were born horny just like animals and most of the people think just like stupid animals...DOH should shower CBCP churches,movie houses,parks with condoms outlet that way it will protect the women from getting pregnant and from getting transferrable diseases. CBCP are hypocrites moral provider,they should know that anyone has a penis and vagina has a desires for sex unless they were inutile or ignorant of sex. yes, that's right! CBCP are a bunch of hypocrites.
Kasi pag may condom, kunkunti ang populasyon, pag kunti populasyon kunti na lang magsisimba hindi pwede magtayo ng bagong branch ng church, pag kunti magsisimba at simbahan kunti donasyon, kunti papakasal, papabinyag, papamesa, kunti lang din ang magpapalibing, sa madaling salita kunti ang kita...
simple lang naman ang issue dito sa condom e. kung hindi ka MANYAK at GAGAMIT LANG NG KUNG SINU SINONG BABAE DI KA MAGKAKAROON NG AIDS! The Condom was most and foremost DESIGNED TO PREVENT CONCEPTION OR MOTHERHOOD pero dahil nga sumiklab ang kakilakilabot na AIDS ay naging PROTEKSYON na rin ang CONDOM dahil na rin sa KALIBUGAN NG MGA LALAKI/BAKLA!
Some INFO on HIV/AIDS: What is AIDS? AIDS stands for: Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome AIDS is a medical condition. A person is diagnosed with AIDS when their immune system is too weak to fight off infections. Since AIDS was first identified in the early 1980s, an unprecedented number of people have been affected by the global AIDS epidemic. Today, there are an estimated 33.4 million people living with HIV and AIDS and each year around two million people die from AIDS related illnesses. What causes AIDS? AIDS is caused by HIV. HIV is a virus that gradually attacks immune system cells. As HIV progressively damages these cells, the body becomes more vulnerable to infections, which it will have difficulty in fighting off. It is at the point of very advanced HIV infection that a person is said to have AIDS. It can be years before HIV has damaged the immune system enough for AIDS to develop. What are the symptoms of AIDS? A person is diagnosed with AIDS when they have developed an AIDS related condition or symptom, called an opportunistic infection, or an AIDS related cancer. The infections are called ‘opportunistic’ because they take advantage of the opportunity offered by a weakened immune system. It is possible for someone to be diagnosed with AIDS even if they have not developed an opportunistic infection. AIDS can be diagnosed when the number of immune system cells (CD4 cells) in the blood of an HIV positive person drops below a certain level. Is there a cure for AIDS? Worryingly, many people think there is a 'cure' for AIDS - which makes them feel safer, and perhaps take risks that they otherwise wouldn’t. However, there is still no cure for AIDS. The only way to stay safe is to be aware of how HIV is transmitted and how to prevent HIV infection. How many people have died from AIDS? Since the first cases of AIDS were identified in 1981, more than 25 million people have died from AIDS. An estimated two million people died as a result of AIDS in 2008 alone. Although there is no cure for AIDS, HIV infection can be prevented, and those living with HIV can take antiretroviral drugs to delay the onset of AIDS. However, in many countries across the world access to prevention and treatment services is limited. Global leaders have pledged to work towards universal access to HIV treatment, prevention and care, so that millions of deaths can be averted. How is AIDS treated? A community health worker gives an HIV positive patient antiretroviral drugs, Kenya A community health worker gives an HIV positive patient antiretroviral drugs, Kenya Antiretroviral treatment can prolong the time between HIV infection and the onset of AIDS. Modern combination therapy is highly effective and someone with HIV who is taking treatment could live for the rest of their life without developing AIDS. An AIDS diagnosis does not necessarily equate to a death sentence. Many people can still benefit from starting antiretroviral therapy even once they have developed an AIDS defining illness. Better treatment and prevention for opportunistic infections have also helped to improve the quality and length of life for those diagnosed with AIDS. Treating some opportunistic infections is easier than others. Infections such as herpes zoster and candidiasis of the mouth, throat or vagina, can be managed effectively in most environments. On the other hand, more complex infections such as toxoplasmosis, need advanced medical equipment and infrastructure, which are lacking in many resource-poor areas. It is also important that treatment is provided for AIDS related pain, which is experienced by almost all people in the very advanced stages of HIV infection. How HIV is passed on? Vaginal sex HIV is found in the sexual fluids of an infected person. For a man, this means the pre-come and semen fluids that come out of the penis before and during sex. For a woman, it means HIV is in the vaginal fluids which are produced by the vagina to keep it clean and to help make intercourse easier. If a man with HIV has vaginal intercourse without a condom then HIV can pass into the woman's body through the lining of the vagina, cervix and womb. The risk of HIV transmission is increased if the woman has a cut or sore inside or around her vagina; this will make it easier for the virus to enter her bloodstream. Such a cut or sore might not always be visible, and could be so small that the woman wouldn't know about it. If a woman with HIV has sexual intercourse without a condom, HIV could get into the man's body through a sore patch on his penis or by getting into his urethra (the tube that runs down the penis) or the inside of his foreskin (if he has one). Any contact with blood during sex increases the chance of infection. For example, there may be blood in the vagina if intercourse occurs during a woman's period. Some sexually transmitted diseases – such as herpes and gonorrhoea – can also raise the risk of HIV transmission. Anal sex Receptive anal intercourse (i.e. being the “bottom”) carries a higher risk of HIV transmission than receptive vaginal intercourse. The lining of the anus is more delicate than the lining of the vagina, so is more likely to be damaged during sex. Any contact with blood during sex increases the risk of infection. If a man takes the insertive (“top”) position in anal sex with a man or woman who has HIV, then he too risks becoming infected. Oral sex Oral sex with an infected partner carries a small risk of HIV infection. If a person gives oral sex (licking or sucking the penis) to a man with HIV, then infected fluid could get into their mouth. If the person has bleeding gums or tiny sores or ulcers somewhere in their mouth, there is a risk of HIV entering their bloodstream. The same is true if infected sexual fluids from a woman get into the mouth of her partner. There is also a small risk if a person with HIV gives oral sex when they have bleeding gums or a bleeding wound in their mouth. Saliva does not pose a risk. HIV infection through oral sex alone seems to be very rare, and there are things you can do to protect yourself. For more information visit our Oral sex page. Injecting drugs Injecting drug users are a high-risk group for exposure to HIV. Sharing injecting equipment is a very efficient way to transmit blood-borne viruses such as HIV and Hepatitis C. Sharing needles and “works” (syringes, spoons, filters and blood-contaminated water) is thought to be three times more likely to transmit HIV than sexual intercourse. Disinfecting equipment between each use can reduce the chance of transmission, but does not eliminate it entirely. For more information, visit our injecting drugs, drug users and HIV page. Mother to child transmission An infected pregnant woman can pass HIV on to her unborn baby during pregnancy, labour and delivery. HIV can also be transmitted through breastfeeding. If a woman knows she is infected with HIV, there are drugs she can take to greatly reduce the chances of her child becoming infected. For more information, go to our pages about HIV and pregnancy and mother-to-child transmission of HIV. Blood transfusions and blood products Some people have been infected through a transfusion of infected blood. These days, in developed countries all the blood used for transfusions is tested for HIV. In those countries where the blood is tested, HIV infection through blood transfusions is now extremely rare. In some developing countries, testing systems are not so efficient and transmission through blood transfusions continues to occur. Blood products, such as those used by people with haemophilia, are now heat-treated to make them safe. Infection in health-care settings Hospitals and clinics should take precautions to prevent the spread of blood-borne infections. These measures include using sterile surgical instruments, wearing gloves, and safely disposing of medical waste. In developed countries, HIV transmission in health-care settings is extremely rare. However, cases continue to occur in less-resourced areas where safety procedures are not so well implemented. Health-care workers have on rare occasions become infected with HIV by being stuck with needles containing HIV-infected blood. A few have also become infected by HIV-infected blood getting into the bloodstream through an open cut, or splashing onto a mucous membrane (e.g. the eyes or the inside of the nose). There have been only a very few documented instances of patients acquiring HIV from an infected health-care worker. We have more information about healthcare workers and HIV infection. Tattoos / piercing Anything that potentially allows another person's blood to get into your bloodstream carries a risk. If the equipment has not been sterilised before having a tattoo or piercing, there could be a significant risk of exposure if the person before was HIV positive. In most developed countries there are hygiene regulations governing tattoo and piercing parlours to ensure all instruments used are sterile. If you are thinking of having a tattoo or piercing, ask staff at the shop what procedures they take to avoid infection. You cannot get AIDS from. . . Kissing To become infected with HIV you must get a sufficient quantity of the virus into your body. Saliva does contain HIV, but the virus is only present in very small quantities and as such cannot cause HIV infection. Unless both partners have large open sores in their mouths, or severely bleeding gums, there is no transmission risk from mouth-to-mouth kissing. Sneezing, coughing, sharing glasses/cups, etc Poster tackling myths about HIV transmission Poster tackling myths about HIV transmission HIV is unable to reproduce outside its living host, except under strictly controlled laboratory conditions. HIV does not survive well in the open air, and this makes the possibility of this type of environmental transmission remote. In practice no environmental transmission has been recorded. This means that HIV cannot be transmitted through spitting, sneezing, sharing glasses, cutlery, or musical instruments. You also can't be infected in swimming pools, showers or by sharing washing facilities or toilet seats. Insects Studies conducted by many researchers have shown no evidence of HIV transmission through insect bites, even in areas where there are many cases of HIV and AIDS and large populations of insects such as mosquitoes. Lack of such outbreaks, despite considerable efforts to detect them, supports the conclusion that insects do not transmit HIV. HIV only lives for a short time and cannot reproduce inside an insect. So, even if the virus enters a mosquito or another sucking or biting insect, the insect does not become infected and cannot transmit HIV to the next human it feeds on or bites. Injecting drugs with sterile needles Injecting with a sterile needle and works will not transmit HIV as long as clean equipment is used each time and none of it is shared. However, there are still many other risks associated with injecting drug use. If a person is on drugs (including alcohol) then their judgement may be clouded, making them more likely to become involved in risky sexual behaviour, which increases the chance of exposure to HIV. AVERT has more information on the risks involved with injecting drugs, drug users and HIV. Protected sex If used correctly and consistently, condoms are highly effective at preventing HIV transmission. A small minority believe condoms are not adequate protection and that 'some very small viruses can pass through latex'. Scientific tests have disproved this theory.1 Condoms are effective at preventing HIV during both vaginal and anal sex and can help to reduce the risks during oral sex too. Further information can be found on our condom. dont you know that may mga pare they pay for call boys in vatecan.holly land yun pero wla selang pke aslong malabas nela ang enit ng katawan.well its better than rape a young boys.in germany more vectim r coming out.kase takot then ang pules sa chatholic church before.mga pinoy na catholic gesing po.ang akala nyong santong mga pare mga demonyo pala.
Peace be with you! It seems like everybody here is against the Catholic Church. I am a Catholic and I am proud to be one and I am writing to defend my faith. Catholic did not claim that she is a perfect Religion. Everybody must now that all of its members are sinners and saints striving to be like our Savior Jesus Christ. It is true that there “some” priest that have problems on molestation. I think is people are quick to judge the church by saying it is covering it up and they are not doing anything about it. I tell you, it is not true. Media did a very good job on this false news and usually without a basis. I guess, centuries ago, the Church is being wrongly judge by people because they know nothing about its central and main teachings. And not knowing its history and rich teachings will only lead to misinterpretation.
Priests are also human and vulnerable to sins. There is no exception. Satan will do all kinds of things just to divert us from the love of God. The Church role is to guide its people to good moral values. And I think the issue on condom is one area that the Church stands that it is morally wrong because it does not solve the root problem and there are natural alternative to solve it. A good analogy on this is a broken/cracked window glass. Putting a tape/adhesive or what have you will not solve the problem permanently because overtime it will just get worst or will be shattered or may cause someone to get hurt. But changing the window glass itself will definitely solve the problem. Just like condom. Condom is a temporary fix to the problem. The real problem is our perception about "sex". How the world taught us what and how "sex" is for... which I can say is for pure “pleasure” only. Sex is holy and a marital act that creates life…. And that's the main purpose of it. Now, Aids came from our distorted understanding about sex. In the first place, Aids will not be around if we understand what “sex” is all about and why God created it in the first place. Aids will not even exist if human did not have sex with animals. It will not spread if we are “faithful” to our husband and wife. It will not spread if we did not tolerate pre-marital sex. These are the some reasons why Aids came. It is because of our weak understanding about sex. It is because of our values. We must change the broken glass or should I say our understanding about sex to fix it permanently. This is why Catholic Church. I hope it gives you a little light of the issue. May the Lord Bless us all. to u boka
sana alam mo kung ano ang mga ginagawa nang mga kaparian..dahil sa maliit na bayan sa bicol ay maraming bata na ang tatay ay isang pari..kaya lang hindi sila na babalita dahil bago pa mn lumabas ang katotohan ay inililipat na sila sa ibang lugar..iyan ang totoo sa loob ng simbahan sa maniwaaaaaala kayo sa hindi...yung lang Sang-ayon ako kay BOKA.
Wag mo lahatin na lahat ng pari ay ganon. Oo nililipat nila ang pari, pero hindi natin alam kung anong processo ang ginagawa ng simbahan sa ganitong sitwasyon... Pero ang totoo, hindi tino-tolerate ng Simbahang Katoliko ang ganitong immoralidad. HIndi rin ito dahilan para magalit sa simbahang Katoliko sa kabuuan. Dahil isang pare lang yan. at tao din yan nagkakasala at puedeng magbago.... Bottom line, wag tayong mag-judge. Instead of resisting and being angry about the Church as a whole, why don't you pray for that priest? right? That's the right thing to do.... @BOKA
"The Church role is to guide its people to good moral values. And I think the issue on condom is one area that the Church stands that it is morally wrong because it does not solve the root problem and there are natural alternative to solve it." Pano naging imorral ang condom? immoral ba sa mgasawa na gumamit ng condom??? bka ayaw ng mga pari ang condom kac mas masarap kung balat lng hahaha! Oh, your God is so powerful that it didn't interfere at the time man started fucking animals.
Now, you may say this is man's fault and he brought it to himself. NOW, IT IS MAN's IDEA OF USING CONDOM, TO PREVENT IT FROM SPREADING. And now, your God prevents man from protecting himself? aba, bigla nagbago ang hangin at contom ang napagtripan ni mareng win eh
nawala respeto ko dito kay wini dahil sa maling pamamaraan nya sa pagkontra sa supreme court
kelan ba narinig ang sigaw ng mga tumatalak sa daan? sori to say na "partisan" narin ang nakikita ko kay wini. sayagn ang paghanga ko but anyway. mahirap lang naman ako so walang nawala sa kanya sobra na ang pakikialam ng simbahan sa personal at pribadong buhay ng mga parishioners
nakahihiya na pati isyu sa loob ng bedroom sa gitna ng pagtatalik ng mag -asawa ay inuungkat pa ito sa altar ang pagtatalik ay kaloob ng Dios para masiyahan rin ang mag-asawa at hindi para magkaroon lamang ng anak kung gusto ng simbahan na may anak palagi sa bawat pagtatalik ibig sabihin niyan kung 4 ang anak ay 4 na beses lang ba dapat ang pagtatalik? maselan po ang isyu ng sex at banal ito para sa mag asawa kayo po bilang mga bachelor na pari ay huag ng mag dikta pa kung papanong paraan kami magsisiping PUNYETA talaga yang CATHOLIC CHURCH na yan for 2000 years pinag lololoko tao DAMI namang NAGPAPALOKONG mga PUNTEYA, nag aral naman di ginagamit pinag aralan
PUNYETA LAHAT N RELIGION!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Peace be with you! It seems like everybody here is against the Catholic Church. I am a Catholic and I am proud to be one and I am writing to defend my faith. Catholic did not claim that she is a perfect Religion. Everybody must now that all of its members are sinners and saints striving to be like our Savior Jesus Christ. It is true that there “some” priest that have problems on molestation. I think is people are quick to judge the church by saying it is covering it up and they are not doing anything about it. I tell you, it is not true. Media did a very good job on this false news and usually without a basis. I guess, centuries ago, the Church is being wrongly judge by people because they know nothing about its central and main teachings. And not knowing its history and rich teachings will only lead to misinterpretation.
Priests are also human and vulnerable to sins. There is no exception. Satan will do all kinds of things just to divert us from the love of God. The Church role is to guide its people to good moral values. And I think the issue on condom is one area that the Church stands that it is morally wrong because it does not solve the root problem and there are natural alternative to solve it. A good analogy on this is a broken/cracked window glass. Putting a tape/adhesive or what have you will not solve the problem permanently because overtime it will just get worst or will be shattered or may cause someone to get hurt. But changing the window glass itself will definitely solve the problem. Just like condom. Condom is a temporary fix to the problem. The real problem is our perception about "sex". How the world taught us what and how "sex" is for... which I can say is for pure “pleasure” only. Sex is holy and a marital act that creates life…. And that's the main purpose of it. Now, Aids came from our distorted understanding about sex. In the first place, Aids will not be around if we understand what “sex” is all about and why God created it in the first place. Aids will not even exist if human did not have sex with animals. It will not spread if we are “faithful” to our husband and wife. It will not spread if we did not tolerate pre-marital sex. These are the some reasons why Aids came. It is because of our weak understanding about sex. It is because of our values. We must change the broken glass or should I say our understanding about sex to fix it permanently. This is why Catholic Church consistently stands to its teachings. I hope it gives you a little light of the issue. May the Lord Bless us all. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/03/24/2010-03-24_irish_bishop_john_magee_resigns_apologizes_to_sex_abuse_victims.html
Then if he admits his guilty, so be it. Bottom line is the Catholic Church does not tolerate this kind of immoral things even if it is the priest.
#15.1.1.1.1
579kaliwete
on
2010-03-29 07:12
(Reply)
Ang oraganization ng Catholiko, parang organization ng PNP....
Work ka lang.... Pag may nagagawang mabuti, sasakyan ng nasa itaas ang papogi points..... Pag may nagawang mali, bahala ka na sa buhay mo....Ididiin pa para maging convinsing ang pag huhugas ng kamay. Ganun ang ginagawa ng Catholic. Di ko sinasabing dapat nilang pag takpan ang kahayupan na ginawa ng Demonyong Pari. Ang sinasabi ko, organization ng Catholico, di sing ganda ng kanilang pinakikita.....marumi din sila..gaya ng ibang organization... Magaling lang silang mag tago dahil ginagamit nila ang pangalan ng Dyos.... Kaya nagiging bulag ang mga religious panathic sa weekness ng Catholic Oraganization. Looking deeply, it appears that the culprit is the church's interpretation as to "when does life begin.."
The church have always held the idea that the sperm and the egg, even prior to union, is already a "life", hence any attempt to prevent the fertilization is immoral. Of course, science proved otherwise; life begins after fertilization. The church however stands pat on its beliefs; ergo, the issue of morality or the lack of it in using condoms is nothing more than a veiled attempt to impose the church's beliefs on others... We are living in a democracy - let's give each person the chance to act according to his conscience.  to much scientific and religious explanation regarding this raincoat issue!!!the bottomline here is...do you eat candy with a wrapper on it!!!!say mo??
you reap what you sow
di ba parang punishment ang pagkakaroon ng HIV because of immoral deeds? hayaan magkaAIDS ang mga fornicators Aids cannot be acquired by merely having sex.it can be transmitted sa laway o sa injection.
As an example,children from Africa as young as 1 year old ay nagka AIDS dahil nakalubilo sya sa Kumunidad na maraming kaso ng aids. kung ang isang tao bang nahawaan sa pamamagitan nito ay isa bang fornicator? Is this their punishment for what? Do we need to have this kind of situation before we start thinking of the solution? Why not just let the people decide on what they want to do with their sexual life. And let the government give the people material help (like condom) and education. And let the church do its part by their moral thing! There should be a separation of church and government.one should not en roach each other. But I can say now to the church,BACK OFF! ang topic po kasi ay HIV-AIDS, and condom
the use of condom to prevent the disease if im not mistaken if we narrow down the topic to getting HIV from sexual intercourse: paano magkakaroon ng transfer ng disease if married couples only did sex with each other nangyayari lang yun if either one nakipagtalik sa di niya asawa na may aids. Let's face it pabata ng pabata ang mga nakikipagtalik na di pa kasal. Sus, wag na tayong mapagkunwari at sisigaw ng moralidad e sa totoo lang, andaming diyan may asawang nangangaliwa.
Ibalik na kasi ang condom at iba pang contraceptives sa mga public health centers! Ito lang ang paraan para masugpo ang paglobo ng populasyon at dahil sa hirap na dulot ng populasyon, bumababa din ang moralidad ng mga pinoy! Thanks for that insight Mareng Winnie! condom or morality?
First point, it is the duty of the church to teach, principally, in terms of morality. you can't take that away from the ministry of the church. That is her task. Catholics or non-catholic church should strongly teach morality. If your church doesn't teach such morality then, it is not the true church... then go with your chosen church to hell. Second point, distributing condoms will not solve the problems. it will just make the problem perennial and complicated..it will never end because it never addresses the real issue. A problem will never solve another problem. I suggest go beyond the problem and put an end to its ultimate source...the poverty which the goverment could not address. without poverty everybody is capable of attaining proper education. good education gives good life, good health, good job and most especially good standard of moral living (where everybody thinks according to the norms of good conscience)...in the end everybody works and therefore no time for any unnecessary leisure. Third point. Never say "sapagkat tayo ay tao lamang".(Just a frail human being). I say you are a person...an intellectual being. As human you are accountable of your every acts. you are not a dog who is not responsible of its act. If you are not a responsible person.. you may not be better that a dog. Think of your self you are probably a dog. If you do sex with any body at anytime and anywhere because you have condom with you. ano ang pinagkaiba mo sa aso? that is what the government teaching you... to be a dog and just remain to be a dog. the government doesn't really care of your morality which is your preferential choice. if you wana be a dog then let it be. then, go with your government run by the dogs. Sus, dahil ba sinabi mong di masosolb ang problem sa paggamit ng condom maniwala ako sa iyo?
As a matter of fact napatunayan na sa maraming bansa na bumaba ang HIV AIDS cases dahil sa relentless campaign ng kani-kanilang gobyerno sa paggamit ng condom. Habang nag decline ang AIDS cases sa ibang bansa, kabaligtaran naman nangyayari sa ating bansa. Paano kasi primitive pa rin mag-isip ang karamihan sa atin. may katwiran ang opinyon mo,pero paano ang safety ng mga taong walang asawa pero gustong tumikim ng sex?Kaimmoralan ba ang tumikim ng sex outside of marriages?
condoms can´t 100% guarantee will not makes a person pregnant or avoid infection of diseases but it does help somehow a person to enjoy sex thinking they are protected thru the use of condoms. 99% of our population married or not married going to try sex and the only way they can protect themselves from diseases and avoid getting pregnant is thru the use of condoms. people were born horny and they are no different from animals,they will tried to have sex even it could makes them pregnant or get infected....and the only way the gov´t can do to help the people not worried about getting infected or get pregnant is thru the use of condoms. lets admit the fact that all people enjoy sex unless they are not capable for it....even priest and nuns they too are human being that felt horny just like everyone else and even they makes a vow to God not to have sex as its immoral for them,we can´t blame them if they were tempted to broke their vows for they are just like the rest of the people they too are weak to combat temptations....but condoms could somehow protect them from infection if they use it right and inspect it before using it. like we need a raincoat when it rains and if our raincoat has damages we get wet anyway or we don´t wear it right or we worn it out of course it will not protect us from getting wet. but for those doesn´t want to tried sex,it is good for them,but for those want to tried sex,must be very careful as it may gives sexual satisfaction but it could also lead to pregnancy or infection. CBCP should educates people when and where the people should becomes sexually active and why,only then condoms or whatever birth control materials will be no longer needed at all...if all the people know what the right thing to do,but with the kind of generations we had,it will be impossible to educate them when most of them are busy looking for foods to eat and after that they will engages into sexual acts as the only happiness they could have other than having a full stomach...kasi yon ang ginagawang libangan ng karamihan,dahil nakakaadik rin ang sex. kung marami ang adik sa bawal na droga marami rin ang adik sa sex...sa dami na ng bakla sa bansa kaya biglang lumobo ang maysakit. how do you understand morality or immorality? how do you define it? it seems that you have twisted concept of these terms! try to search and research it again and again and i hope you find it.
comdom and rain coat? what an anlogy? it is neither analogous nor congruent! where does morality lies? on condom or raincoat! a rain coat has nothing to do with morality my friend....wake up! little knowledge is dangerous bro! I understand his idiomatic comparison of Mr. August sa raincoat and condom. I don't see why you don't...or maybe just refuse to understand.
But the thing is, Wala akong nakikitang relevant sa mga tanong ng mga definition na morality or immorality. I think you are diverting the topic kasi nag run-out ka ng reasoning. Bottom line: The issue on condom is not a matter of morality....it's a matter of giving a safety net sa mga physical needs ng tao, which is SEX. Ang pari na nainvolved sa sex scandal, don't tell me na wala silang morality guidance kaya nila nagawa iyon....Tad-tad sila nun. Pero nangyari pa rin. quidproquo... does it solve the problem with the condom? really? who told you? you mean... does it end with the condom? widen your mind bro! if the catholic church doesn't teach then who will? you? come on! you, me, we don't deserve condom... we deserve good moral education and good life from the goverment who only mind their own interests while others are neglected and given minimum goverment services which they derserve...not to mention the money they recieve from condoms. perhaps you deserve condom alone.
it will be more exciting if gov´t will provides condominiums instead of condoms!
Why can't the government wrap a condom on a condo and shove it on your ass. just kidding
Hoy July magbasa ka ng maigi....gumagawa ka ng comment dito pero di mo binabasa blog ni Mareng Winnie.
Ang issue dito paano malutas ang AIDS problem at napatunayan na nga sa buong mundo kung gaano ka epektibo paggamit ng condom. Di ko na po kailangan ang teachings ng simbahan kasi napapatakbo ko pamilya ko ng maayos. Ang katuruan ng simbahan gawa2x lang ng tao at kadalasan baluktot at siya pa mismo nagpapahirap sa atin. Wag kayong hipokrit at sabihing nalulutas ng simbahan ang imoralidad. Gumising ka at mismong sa simbahan ginagawa ang imoralidad. At gobyerno na naman ang SCAPEGOAT mo. binibigyan mo ba ng condoms ang mga anak mo? at gusto mo ba yun? if you are concern with the wellfare of your family, much more the church is concern to the wellfare of the whole humanity by teaching morailty.
balak ko ngang tumawag sa mail for hanap di ako ng 2 cuban stud at very specific ang likes kew dapt 10 to 16 years of age lang at macho, at matambok ang kwan higit sa lahat tigasin at balbon. kaya lang wala akong pambayad di gaya ng clergy may pera na donation panglalake,magpari na rin kaya ako noh.
You are seriously angry about the priest huh? Seems like you should join them for counseling and healing. There still time to repent and change. God bless you!
CATHOLIC CHURCH is a Church that requires only one qualification from its members...that.. one must be a
sinner and and yet longs for perfection. If you are perfect as other churces claim and other people do claim too ..then you are not qualified to be a member of the catholic church. BUT even with her imperfection, as a whole she remained an authority to teach morality. a priest, a bishop is just a member of the church ...but not the whole church and theese people are even under the pain of punishment by the church according to their sins. NEVER will the CHURCH keep her silence as the needs to speak is called for. because woe to to the catholic church if she doesn't preach what to do as what other churches do. let her be anathema. but the Catholic church is the church that stands with her mission. sorry if you don't listen. kung si MOISES NA TUNAY NA LINGKOD NG DIYOS ANG TATANUNGIN DI MAKAKAPASA ANG KATOLIKO BAKA SUNUGIN PA NIYA ANG MGA REBULTONG NAKA PALIBOT SA CHURCH.JULY INGAT KA RIN PALA KASI MARAMING SELF PROCLAIM NA TRUE ANNOINTED GOD DAW SILA.
KAYA BASAHIN MO ANG BIBLE PARA MALAMAN MO ANG TUNAY NA RELIHIYON.AKO BASEHAN KO BIBLE IKAW ANO BASEHAN MO PARA SABIHING CATHOLIC CHURCH TUNAY!NASA BIBLE, ANG PAGSAMBA SA MGA DIYUS DYUSAN AY SA DIABLO Katawa ka naman.... hindi mo ba alam na ang BIBLE na binabasa mo e galing KATOLIKO? Katoliko ang nag-collect ng Bible.. hayyyy... mga ignorante nga naman.
UU nga pero di nyo naman binabasa at sinusunod. Wala rin.
anong mission?Yung turuan mo yung tao sumamba sa larawan at diyos diyosan! ang alam lang kasi ninyo ang pangangalunya ay ang mangaliwa sa asawa pangangalunya din matatawag ang pagsamba sa mga diyusdiyusan maliban sa isang diyos na lumikha yan ba ang turo dapat nating sundin?. nakasulat sa bibliya na karumaldumal sa paningin ng diyos! madali mandaya ang demonyo nagpapanggap na banal pero ililigaw ka,tingnan mo kung papaano pinaparada ang santo tuwing holy week pareho senaryo noong panahon moises na kanyang winasak ang imaheng ginawa ng tao.
lawakan mo naman ang isip mo di lahat ng nagtuturo tungkol sa sa diyos ay sugo,sa panahon ng wakas maraming magsusulputan na bulaang propeta ililigaw ang tao.sa tingin mo ba maililigaw ni satanas ang tao kung magiging lassengo siya at adik? siyempre magpapanggap siyang mabait at banal para makapanloko/makaplinlang.magigising ka na lang na napakalaki na ng kasalanan mo dahil imbes na sumamba ka sa diyos naghanap ka pa ng ibang diyos.kung kanino nila pinasamba ang tao,hinahalikan,niluluhuran,pinaparada sa kalye dinadasalan yan ang ang mga gawain ng pagsamba,kaya di kapanipaniwal na ang katwiran ng mga pari nag display sila ng imahe para sa inspiration kuno,na baligtad sa kanila mga kilos at gawa.mag ingat ka kapatid baka malinlang ka ni satanas makalimutan mo ng sumamba sa tunay at iisang diyos,na dapat ay siya lang sambahin at hingian ng tulong,hindi kung sino mang patron.
Pure ignorant. Will pray for you. Sa sinasabi mo, si Taning lang ang masaya. gawain ba yan ng mabuting tao? hayyy...
payo ko sayo MAGBASA KA NG BIBLIYA para makita mo ang mga karumaldumal sa paningin ng diyos na ITINUTURO NG SIMABAHNG KATOLIKO
ikaw ang mag basa. you don't even know what you are saying. what is your point? who is the true church? your church? come on.. hindi kalang mag basa. mag dasal kapa ng maraming marami dahil bingi at pikit pa ang mata mo.
you got it bro. little knowledge is dangerous. nly the Catholic Church stands on her mission because she is the only true church my friend. ang iba gayagaya lang. that is the painful reality sa iba... take it or leave it. other churches are blind guides that leads others to the wrong path. bulag nga eh. that is why little knowldge is really dangerous my friend.
yup kaya magbasa ka ng Bibliya para mag ka knowledge ka di yung nililigaw ka na paniwala ka parin,sino2 ba ang gumaya sa katoliko? may mga imahe rin ba silang sinasamaba? sabihin mu nga sa akin kung ano anong relihiyon ang gumaya sa katoliko? na may diyos diyusan din
#28.1.1.1.1
july
on
2010-03-25 07:34
(Reply)
ows... sinong diyos diyos? meron ba? for sure you have not understand what you've read my friend. for sure you have not read everything in the bible sino nag turo niyan sayo? simbahan nyo? serach and research kulang pa ang binasa at naintindihan mo bata! hindi sinasa ulo ang bibliya iniintindi yan ng mabuti hindi pa tsamba tsamba! where did you get the word church? saan ba kinuha ng ibang relihiyon ang word na church? mag isip kanga... kulang pa pre!
#28.1.1.1.1.1
mission from hell
on
2010-03-25 07:47
(Reply)
haha ganyan na lang masasabi mo.bakit nabas mo na ba sa bible! nilalayo mo ang usapan kung matibay kang mababasa sa bible sa bihin mo pati goggle sinabit mo na!bulag,ligaw ka.kakawaa ka naman lahat ng sinasabi mo fiction wlang pinagbasehang salita ng diyos kungdi mga pari na di nga nila napatunayan na alagad sila ng diyos.alam mo ba kung sino nagpapako kay kristo? mga high priest.eh takot kang mabasa ng bible manood ka na lang ng passion of the christ.
#28.1.1.1.1.1.1
july
on
2010-03-25 08:12
(Reply)
oh my lord.... where did you get that? sino ang nag turo sa iyo nyan...ay nmagaling na bata... wala kang natutunan. binili mo lang ata ang bible mo sa recto eh.
#28.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
Hypocrites Rule Philippines
on
2010-03-25 10:01
(Reply)
july is gaytard loving pedophile priest. enough said.
#28.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
JULY
on
2010-03-25 10:49
(Reply)
who told you that i am catholic? i am not... but I recognized the autenthicity of the Catholic church because this is the church that explain well and no doubt they have the reason to claim to be the true Church based on what they say and teach? aside from catholic church who else? CAtholic church leads, speaks, acts. kayo? ano kayo? simbahan mo? ganun ba? come on!
#28.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
Hypocrites Rule Philippines
on
2010-03-25 13:14
(Reply)
WHAT A FUCKIN LIAR! You say, your not even Catholic, then what the heck is your religion. You are officially insane in my BIBLE
. I am writing a book for those FANATICAL RELIGIOUS RETARDS LIKE YOU.
#28.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
july
on
2010-03-27 00:47
(Reply)
wag kanang mag sulat... bobo ka naman. dadami pa ang magiging bobo dahil sayo. you are blind!
Salamat july sa tinig mo. nakakalungkot na marami talaga ang di makaunawa sa kung ano ang simbahan at ano ang tungkuling iniatas sa kanya ng Panginoon.
Nakakalungkot din na parang wala ng takot sa Diyos at sabihin na lang natin na matuwid ng pag iisip ang iba nating kababayan. Sana walang murahan kundi maliwanag na paliwanagan lang. dahil sa mga katoklikong pare [na karamihan ay bakla at pedophies] na ang mga turo ay mali naman hindi na umunlad ang pilipinas....kung sana'y matuwid at tama ang turo ng katokliko ay maayos na sana ang pilipinas...e karamihan ng mga nakaupo sa gobyerno ay katokliko...puro manloloko...pareho lang sila lahat...
300 daan taon na kayo niloloko ng mga pare at katokliko..magising na sana kayo mga pilipino... oh here we go again... another narrow minded....again little knowledge is dangerous! YOU SOUND ILLOGICAL my friend. priests and specially you are sinners (pershaps you have more sins than them.)the church speaks but other would rather like not like to listen specially you my friend because if you do.... you will not sound illogical because you listen. are you better than the catholic church?
July para ka nakatira sa glass House lahat ng sinasabi mo bumabalik sayo.BASAHIN MO ANG BIBLE KASI i dare you haha.
#30.1.2.1.1
july
on
2010-03-25 12:54
(Reply)
thank you bro!
#30.1.2.1.1.1
SANTINO "RETARD KID"
on
2010-03-25 13:23
(Reply)
ATE JULY, linya ko po yan. Magagalit c BRO sau. Hypocrite ka daw.
simple lang sagot ko, submit your Body and Life to Jesus Christ our beloved saviour and be a true Christian and servant of God. lahat ng gusto na iyong laman (flesh) maiiwasan mo dahil kay Hesus dahil ang katawan mo ay kanyang Templo. simple lang no pero toto.
Get a life slave! fuckin hypocrite loser.
nakaklungkot nga kasi sa mga tulad ninyo nagmamagaling wala namang matibay na basehan kungdi offend words,takot kayong magbuklat ng bibliya dahil ayaw ninyong magising sa katotohanan,nagsaalita ng walang pinagbabasehan kakaawa naman kayo.
excuse me... anong bibliya? do you understand the word bible? saan mo nakuha ang word na bible? sa simbahan nyo? kulang pa ang nakuha mo bata... pag butihin mo pa. you're just using mere words and not getting its substance. saan ba galing ang biblya nyo at inaangkin ninyong inyo? come on! don't tell me that your church is the real church! kelang lang nga ba nag simbahan nyo? pag may problema ang gobyerno ang simbahan nyo ba nag nag iinitiate na mag turo? you are blind! at makitid ang utak tulad ng mga pastor nyo. yun lang ang npiga nyo dahil yun lang ang kayang ibigay ng mga pastor nyo. woe to you... you just get the mere words... but not the substance.
hinde ko magets ang mga statements ni july. ang gulo ng logic
parang kahit konting substance wala akong mafeel sa mga comments mo july..
kahit konting substance wala ko mafeel sa mga comments ni july..
The Catholic cChurch will speak in terms of morality and faith because that is her mission and you cannot take that away from her. The Catholic church is the only church that stands with her magisterial role and her mission because she is *the only true church that protects and gives concern to anyones moraily and salvation of soul*. she does it even under the pain of persecurion and martyrdom because she is the only true chuch, the mother church. if the catholic will not teach... then who will?nobody... but she and only she can do that even untill the end of time. she was a teacher before... today... and even forever. *she is the Catholic church... your Mother church. the one you persecute*.
the only church who cover's up all the child molistation cases of the catholic priest. Are you blind or just plain dumb?
You are living in a bubble, get out and be informed. I Agree with you July! God bless you. They are just so scared of the truth. Will just pray for them.
Bible or koran or kung ano pa, gawa sa papel ya....hindi latex! mabubutas lang yan kung gagamiting pang condom..
Support condom! These religious hypocrites should leave the decision to their flocks. While they are entrenched in their beautiful churches and convents and eating delicious foods, there are so many people leaving in the streets, children begging for a single peso, while this religious freaks are soundly sleeping in there air conditioned room funded by the blind obedience of the Religious Fanatics.
f you are entiltiled by your own opinion... if you say they are hyprocrites in general... remeber you are more hyprocrites than them. does it hurt? that's the truth?
Are you kidding me? The truth is, your a fucking hypocrite. Keep sucking Bishops cock, you retarded religious freak. Am I hurt, hehehe, are you kidding me faggot.
see.... what else can say? are you not? EXCUSE DO I SOUND JOKING?
#33.1.1.1.1
Hypocrites Rule Philippines
on
2010-03-25 10:06
(Reply)
You can say, you are stupid and a hypocrite. TRUE CHURCH my ass hehehe. Are you smoking that weed again? Your TRUE CHURCH is made up of a bunch of hypocrites just like yourself. PRETENDING to be the TRUE CHURCH, ouch. You can shove your CHURCH down your ass because that where it belongs. GOT IT BRO
#33.1.1.1.1.1
sure why not!
on
2010-03-25 10:14
(Reply)
Para kayong mga senador at congressman ng Pilipinas! Walang ginawa kungdi magpersonalan kaya ayun wla nangyayari sa bansa! Losers!
#33.1.1.1.1.1.1
Hypocrites Rule Philippines
on
2010-03-25 10:17
(Reply)
oo nga. mga putang ina talaga cla, lalo na cy JULY
#33.1.1.1.1.2
JULY
on
2010-03-25 10:20
(Reply)
WHICH ONE IS THE TRUE CHURCH? YOUR CHURCH? COME ON! KELAN LANG NATAYO ANG SIMBAHAN NYO? AT BAKIT KAYO ANG NAGING TOO? DON'T TELL ME YOU NOT HYPOCRITE! the word sthat you utter this blog is enough to say that you are a hypocrite.
#33.1.1.1.1.2.1
Hypocrites Rule Philippines
on
2010-03-25 10:26
(Reply)
Religion is for hypocrites like you JULY. I don't pretend to be HOLY or anything.
#33.1.1.1.1.2.1.1
july
on
2010-03-25 10:30
(Reply)
YOU ARE... AMININ.
#33.1.1.1.1.2.1.1.1
Hypocrites Rule Philippines
on
2010-03-25 10:34
(Reply)
Para kang c kris aquino. AMININ! hehehe. . . That's what GAYTARD would say to there victims before YOU KNOW, like what catholic pedophile priest do to their victims and bishops cleaning up the mess.
#33.1.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1
JULY
on
2010-03-25 10:38
(Reply)
CATHOLIC CHURCH is a Church that requires only one qualification from its members...that.. one must be a
sinner and and yet longs for perfection. If you are perfect as other churces claim and other people do claim too ..then you are not qualified to be a member of the catholic church. BUT even with her imperfection, as a whole she remained an authority to teach morality. a priest, a bishop is just a member of the church ...but not the whole church and theese people are even under the pain of punishment by the church according to their sins. NEVER will the CHURCH keep her silence as the needs to speak is called for. because woe to to the catholic church if she doesn't preach what to do as what other churches do. let her be anathema. but the Catholic church is the church that stands with her mission. sorry if you don't listen.
#33.1.1.1.1.2.1.2
JULY
on
2010-03-25 10:35
(Reply)
don't accuse the catholic church na hypocrites IN GENERAL dahil mas hepcrito ka kesa kanila. kung ayaw mong tawagin na ganun ayusin mo ang buhay mo. pag butihin mo pa pre!
#33.1.1.1.1.2.1.2.1
Hypocrites Rule Philippines
on
2010-03-25 10:43
(Reply)
Im doing fine PRE. Maglinis ka muna ng kumbento, magagalit na c FATHER mo.
#33.1.1.1.1.2.1.2.1.1
july
on
2010-03-25 10:55
(Reply)
you don't even have a point pre! you don't even have a substance on your allegation. little knowledge is dangerous and you are one of them.search and research wag kang aasa sa utak mong bunot.
#33.1.1.1.1.2.1.2.1.1.1
Hypocrites Rule Philippines
on
2010-03-25 13:03
(Reply)
Good for you JULY! Are you done cleaning the altars and PLEASE don't drink those MOMPO's too much. Look what it DID to that rat brain of yours. geezzz. . .
#33.1.1.1.1.2.1.2.1.1.1.1
579kaliwete
on
2010-03-28 21:27
(Reply)
Sali ako sa away nyo ha. Agree ako na hypocrites ang mga pari na catholico. Actually, agree ako na lahat ng religion are hypocrite in some way at any degree.
But ang point ng usapan eh, nag stand nga catholico against sa pag gamit ng condom. Wala namang ino-offer na solusyon sa spread ng aids, STD at over population. Ginagawa lang naman ng gobyerno ang programa dahil iyon lang ang paraan na alam ng gobyerno. Di mag aaksaya ng oras ang tao para mag basa ng bibliya kung sya ay libog-na-libog na. PEro ang condom, pag meron kahit saan, madaling gamitin bago mag yarian. Kung ang mga turo ng simbahan ang solusyon sa problema, sana noon pa nangyayari na na maganda dahil higit na mas matal na ang existence ng simbahan kaysa sa condom. Kung walang mai-ooffer na concrete solusyon ang simbahan, tumahimik na lang sila at mangoleksyon ng mangoleksyon sa mga tanangang nag bibigay ng abuloy! Catholic church lang kasi ang malakas ang loob na makisawsaw sa issue na ito.
Sa mga non-Catholic leaders, voice out din kayo! Make a stand! Sa separation ng CHURCH and GOVERNMENT: GOVERNMENT = FILIPINO PEOPLE, but CHURCH CATHOLISM. Catholic church lang kasi ang malakas ang loob na makisawsaw sa issue na ito.
Sa mga non-Catholic leaders, voice out din kayo! Make a stand! Sa separation ng CHURCH and GOVERNMENT: GOVERNMENT = FILIPINO PEOPLE, but CHURCH NE CATHOLISM. The church is right about the condom as a quick fix for the rising HIV/AIDS epidemic in the country, but we need to curb the rising number of HIV/AIDS victims NOW.. they cannot stop the spread of HIV by just teaching morallity, in every corner of metro manila. Condoms is never a cure for HIV/AIDS, but its effective in preventing the spread of the virus, we to slow down the rising number of HIV/AID infections among today youth. i remind the church, victims are getting younger and younger. And if they continue preventing the distribution of condom to the public.. maybe one day.. all there devoted followers would be infected by HIV/AIDS or worst a priest who have been infected by this dreaded virus.
By the way im a Catholic, Raised by a very strict Lola, who teaches me what is right and what is wrong,and she believes that what ever decision i make, is the right choice for me. The catholic church teaches the people what is moral and what is immoral, but is the church has the right to force their ideologies, their way of life on all of us? Not everyone follows the rules of the catholic church by the letter, especially the younger generations. Tama naman yun ah, ano ba meron sa title ng blog ni Mareng Winnie, di ba condom?
tama ka. sa lalim ng utak nyo kuya, nalunod tuloy kayo. kaya di na nag function ang utak nyo. sabi yan ni bro, katawa ka daw.
MORAL Lesson of the Story: Vote a Non-Catholic to be the President of the Country so that the Catholic Church won't have any influence on his decision.
condom or morality?
First point, it is the duty of the church to teach, principally, in terms of morality. you can't take that away from the ministry of the church. That is her task. Catholics or non-catholic church should strongly teach morality. If your church doesn't teach such morality then, it is not the true church... then go with your chosen church to hell. Second point, distributing condoms will not solve the problems. it will just make the problem perennial and complicated..it will never end because it never addresses the real issue. A problem will never solve another problem. I suggest go beyond the problem and put an end to its ultimate source...the poverty which the goverment could not address. without poverty everybody is capable of attaining proper education. good education gives good life, good health, good job and most especially good standard of moral living (where everybody thinks according to the norms of good conscience)...in the end everybody works and therefore no time for any unnecessary leisure. Third point. Never say "sapagkat tayo ay tao lamang".(Just a frail human being). I say you are a person...an intellectual being. As human you are accountable of your every acts. you are not a dog who is not responsible of its act. If you are not a responsible person.. you may not be better that a dog. Think of your self you are probably a dog. If you do sex with any body at anytime and anywhere because you have condom with you. ano ang pinagkaiba mo sa aso? that is what the government teaching you... to be a dog and just remain to be a dog. the government doesn't really care of your morality which is your preferential choice. if you wana be a dog then let it be. then, go with your government run by the dogs. well.. kung about sa morality ang ginagawang issue dito.. isuggest:
1. wag tumanggap ng mga donasyon ang simbahan sa mga corrupt na pulitiko, sa mga sex workers, sa mga may-ari ng FHM/Playboy etc etc. 2. ilipat nila ang mga nagtatayugan at naggagandahang simbahan nila sa quezon ave, malate at sa iba pang lugar na puno ng prostitusyon kasi wala namang silang nagagawang paraan para mawala ang prostitusyon. 3. magbayad sila ng buwis para may karapatan silang magsabi kung anong gagawin sa buwis ng taong bayan. .. tayo lang ang catholic country sa asia na pinaka corrupt, madaming sex workers etc etc... sa tingin nyo nagagawa ba ng simbahan ang katungkulan nila? condom lang ba ang issue ng simbahan with regards sa morality? Wala namang nagawa ang simbahan sa talamak na imoralidad sa ating bansa. Turo sila ng turo ng imoralidad mga bakla naman at pedophile. Sa kabilang dako naman yumayaman si Quiboloy at Velarde, kasi mga tao nagpapauto sa mga turong baluktot.
Kung tutuusin simple lang ang problema, gumamit ng condom. Ginawa lang kumplikado ng mga pinoy na nagpanggap na matalino. At tuturuan pa tayo ng tungkol sa moralidad. To hell with those people who makes morality an excuse to stop the use of condoms and other contraceptives. Kahit anong turo niyo, dumadami ang bakla sa Pinas, mga sanggol na tinatapon sa basurahan, AIDS, broken families among others. Ibig sahihin, hindi effective ang turo ng simbahan. Don't blame the church about HIV and immoralities in the Philippines not even corruption. The church teaches but the government teaches the other way contrary. sino ba ang simula ng curruption simbahan o government? tingnan mo ang ginagawa ng gobierno at dun mo malalaman. the church is owned not by the priests it is owned by the people. sinong currup? bakaw ikaw currupt ang utak mo rin.
CATHOLIC CHURCH is a Church that requires only one qualification from its members...that.. one must be a sinner and and yet longs for perfection. If you are perfect as other churces claim and other people do claim too ..then you are not qualified to be a member of the catholic church. BUT even with her imperfection, as a whole she remained an authority to teach morality. a priest, a bishop is just a member of the church ...but not the whole church and theese people are even under the pain of punishment by the church according to their sins. NEVER will the CHURCH keep her silence as the needs to speak is called for. because woe to to the catholic church if she doesn't preach what to do as what other churches do. let her be anathema. but the Catholic church is the church that stands with her mission. sorry if you don't listen. Chill JULY! your not even a CATHOLIC but based on your own words you can be the POPE. Why depend the CHURCH when you say, you are not even a part of. Are you fuckin crazy or shit?
#41.1.1.1.1
Hypocrites Rule Philippines
on
2010-03-25 14:05
(Reply)
See, you are fuckin crazy. How can I type this if I'm blind faggot? What a brain =-)
Wag kang lumayo sa isyu July....walang silbi ang simbahan mo sa pag-sugpo na imoralidad sa bansa. Kayo itong nag-sesermon ng moralidad pero may nagawa ba kayo? Bagkos dumami ang bading...ilang beses ko bang ulitin to para ma-gets ng saradong utak mo?
Pwede ba mga nagmamalinis, wag kayong mag-sermon dito ng kung ano-anong ek-ek, sa pera din naman nagtatapos ang sermon ninyo. Wag niyong idaan sa relihiyon ang problemang pambansa dahil your arguments are not based on facts. Tanong po sa mga experts sa MORALITY:
1. Ano po morality ang pinaguusapan dito? Fornication or ang paggamit ng condom mismo? 2. Kapag ang legally married couple po ba gumamit ng condom okay lang or immoral po ba din ito sa Catholic church? Just asking para clear ang topic. I LOVE BEING CATHOLIC! No matter what they say. Even if it is imperfect... with the issues on Priest sexual scandal, I still am proud to be Catholic. Why? because it consistent and it stands for the truth. Specially on CONDOM issue.
So for those people doesn't agree with the Church stand on condom... We will just pray for you that someday you will understand. To Winnie Monzod, just stick with Economics issue... your good at it... but NOT on Moral issues. Mga scientist na pala ang mga pari ngayon. Pati effectiveness ng condom against AIDS\HIV kinokontra na.
Sa mga panatikong katoliko, wag nyo naman kaming i deny sa karapatan naming mag condom! Di lang naman kayo ang relihiyon sa Pilipinas eh. Nagbabayad din kami ng tax, kung ang claim nyo nauubos ang tax nyo sa condom. I say, kung gusto nyong magpakabanal, sa inyo na lang yan. Wag na ninyong idamay ang gobyerno sa pamamagitan ng pakikialam. Kung kayo nga hindi pinakikialaman sa TAX ng real estates ninyong pagkalalake eh gaya ng Simbahan, eh dapat kayo di rin maki alam sa gusto ng gobyerno na maprotektahan ang mga tao sa sakit, and at the same time, kontrolin ang lumulobong population, na hindi naman kayang sustinihan ng mga paring katoliko sa pangangaral at pagaaruga. Solusyon ng gobyerno ang condom + family planning para sa ikauunlad ng bayan. Kayong mga panatikong katoliko at mga paring pakialamero ang isa sa mga sanhi kaya ang Pilipinas ay isang backward country. Pilit na kinukuha ng mga prayle/pari ang kapangyarihan na nalasap nila noong unang panahon. Mareng Winnie, mag-focus ka na lang sa Economics issue, duon ka magaling. Sa issue like condom, be careful because it doesn't help.
Mark, Mareng Winnie is the best when it comes to the topics like this. And you have no credibility to have Mareng Winnie heed your call. Too bad.
reaction ko sa lahat ng mga nagsasabing nakikialam ang simbahan sa mga usaping pampulitiko..ang simbahan ay isang institusyong gumagabay sa kanyang nasasakupan, kapag ang taong nasasakop nito ay sumusunod sa mga pinag uutos ang outcome is walang PROBLEMA, pero kapag ang mga nasasakupaan ay nalilihis sa tamang landas kailangan mag paalaala ng simbahan...huwag niyong punpunteryahin ang mga kasalanan ng pari to excuse your wrongdoing,,ang bawat isa sa ating ay may kanya-kanyang pananagutan sa bawat desisyong ginagawa.,kapag ang pari ang nagkasala maging ano man yon, ano ang pakialam mo,,katulad mo pananagutan niya yan sooner or later. at kapag ikaw pakiramdam mo wala kang kasalanan well and good,,wag ka nalang tumulad sa mga paring makasalanan.ano ang problema doon. ako pag di ko type ang pari di ibig sabihin di ko na rin type si God, kapag mangyari yon walang silbi si God sa buhay ko kasi my faith in God wwill just accord to the performance of His sinner priests so hindi yon faith and love of God. Kawawa naman ako kapag mangyari yon.
This is a blog madafacker, not a church. If you want to preach go see a faggot FATHER of yours at your TRUE CHURCH!?! Amen Amen my ass.
Please take note that hindi lang Roman Catholic ang relihiyon sa mundo. Mayroon pa ngang pagano diyan. Ang main reason para pag hiwalayin ang Pamahalaan at Simbahan ay para walang katigang relihiyon ang batas. Mapa katoliko ka man o muslim, Buddhism, taoism etc etc. Hindi moral issue kung bakit hiniwalay ang simbahan at pamahalaan.
is it really separate? think... think.... think... more logical thinking.... who are the members of the church? the people... who are the members of the the state? the people... the truth even the state exits religion exists way ahead. states will banish but religion will not. in the end it is the religious morality will save you. think think
#45.2.1.1.1
GAGO SI ELLEN
on
2010-03-25 13:15
(Reply)
What i am talking about is the law that the government will create, sign and take into effect. The governmet should not create a law that will side on just one religion as there are numerous religion that exist in our country. You should read my post carefully first before talking about what will save my soul. As for some religion, you just have to accept Christ as your saviour and you will be saved which is i think do not conform on your beliefs.
#45.2.1.1.2
mgascientistna
on
2010-03-25 13:32
(Reply)
Yes, pero dapat di nyo diktahan ang gobyerno sa mga kapritso ninyo. Condom is a viable solution to AIDS/birth control. Take note: SOLUTION.
What fanatics like you is doing is preventing the Government to provide the solution. That is the picture, my friend. The issue is not morality as thought by your "defective religion". The issue is how the Government tries to protect itself from the disease. A country has both populations: The sexually active and the hypocritically sexually inactive.
#45.2.1.1.3
Hypocrites Rule Philippines
on
2010-03-25 14:18
(Reply)
RELIGIOUS MORALITY WILL SAVE US? Ohh man, you are a sorry ass religious freakshow! If you want to leave in a theocratic country go to ROME. People there are so fuckin RELIGIOUS that they have ESCORT services for FAGGOT PRIEST and BISHOPS who want to satisfy they're RELIGIOUS URGE to fuck there same sexes. Is it TRUE? We'll just the news and you'll see.
Wag mo po isipin na sakop ng Catholico ang bansang Pilipinas dahil hindi po ninyo sakop ang mga Muslim, Protestante, pagano, buddhist etc na nakatira dito..
kawawa ka nman RENE. July stop sucking RENE's cock.
Paki basa na lang ang long ang dark history ng roman catholic church para lang maipilit ang gusto nila.
Kahit sa philippine history mayroon mga abusadong prayle na ginagamit ang impluwensiya nila para sa kanilang sariling kapakanan. Sa totoo lang, walang issue sakin mapakatoliko ka man o muslim or kung anu pa man. Ang issue dito ay, condom! Kung ayaw ng tao ng condom, wag nilang gamitin. Kung ayaw ng simbahan ng condom, huwang nilang ipilit sa pamahalaan at sa tao. Sa moral issue.. nagbabasa din naman ako ng bible eh. kaya siguro ayaw ng simbahan sa condom ay dahil sa sperm na naitatapon. base sa bibliya, ituturing na marumi sa loob ng tatlong araw ang anumang madapuan ng sperm. tatlong araw kasi, alam nyo naman ang wet dreams db?! so hindi talaga maiwasan minsan. Sa turo ng ibang relihiyon, basta iaccept mo si Jesus as your saviour ay maliligtas ka. Sa ibang relihiyon ba ay against sa condom din? Kung hindi, then nararapat lang na isantabi ng Simbahang katoliko ang kagustuhan nilang ipilit na alisin ang condom dahil hindi para sa lahat ang kagustuhan nila. Yun ay para lang sa mga katolikong katulad nila. July, naisip mo na ba ang iba na hindi katoliko maliban sa sarili mo? esep esep is it really separate? think.... think.... think... logically. or you don't know what you're saying. who is the member of the church? the people... who is the member of the state? the people.... the truth is before the state exist religion existed already way ahead. and in the end it is the religious morality will save you not the state. THINK BROADER MY FRIEND... makitid ang utak nyo. little knowledge is dangerous.
Yeah i agree my friend, little knowledge is really dangerous.
You really should like at the bigger picture. There are more religions in the world aside from the one you're with. and so the church must stop teaching? you completely missedt my point, coz you don't read between lines. at the very start i said. Catholics and non-catholic church should strongly teach morality because that is their tasks..... broaden your mind. not your mouth.
Tatagalugin ko na para maintindihan mo ang punto ko.
Maraming relihiyon sa mundo na mayroon iba't ibang moral na paniniwala. For Example, in tagalog Halimbawa: Maari kang mag asawa ng marami kung kaya mo sa Muslim. Sa katoliko naman ay hindi maaari. Ngayon, anong punto? malamang hindi mo pa rin maintindihan. ganito yan, ieexplain ko na maayos. in tagalog, ipapaliwanag ko ng maayos. Kung ang lahat ng relihiyon ay magsasabi sa gobyerno ng kung anong nararapat at hindi nararapat, malamang, lahat na tayo nakakulong. now, ang pagkakaalam ko, mayroon akong sariling utak para alam ko ang basic ng tama at mali. kuha mo?
#47.1.1.1.1
july
on
2010-03-25 14:02
(Reply)
very shallow....how do you understand morality in it fullest sense? other religion may have "morality" in a sense.. but not in its fullest sense. we are talking here of morality in its fullest sense and not a partial one... to attain the truth and not a partial one. that is our aim...not only by Catholics but to all who believe that God is perfect and the truth. morality does not rely thru the moral standard of human thinking.
#47.1.1.1.1.1
GAGO SI ELLEN
on
2010-03-25 14:16
(Reply)
How do you understand the laws that govern the land you are standing into.
In real life, you should follow the law of the land you are standing into. How about you go to a muslim country and tell them that their Morality is just partial.
#47.1.1.1.1.1.1
JULY
on
2010-03-25 14:30
(Reply)
how dare you talk about the law? what do you know about the law? how do you define law? and where does your law come from? do you even understand the ter "LAW"?
#47.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
GAGO SI ELLEN
on
2010-03-25 14:37
(Reply)
Yep, an answer expected from someone who do not know anything!
Why do you keep answering questions with questions?
#47.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
july
on
2010-03-25 14:45
(Reply)
tell me more about the law i am more interested on that. what do you know about the law? para matesting ko kung saan ang alam mo sa law
#47.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
GAGO SI ELLEN
on
2010-03-25 14:50
(Reply)
If you cannot answer simple questions being thrown at you then i believe you do not have the capability of understanding the simple law of separation of church and state.
#47.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
july
on
2010-03-25 14:55
(Reply)
you are the first one to use the term "law" tell me something about it so that i may know. baka magaling ka diyan. tapos kaba ng law? hangang saan sige nag?... pag butihin mo pa bata. di pa ako pinapawisan... lahat sumuko sakin eh.
#47.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
GAGO SI ELLEN
on
2010-03-25 15:02
(Reply)
Nagtapos ka ba ng Degree, Major in Morality in it's fullest sense? If not, then wala ka ding karapatang magsalita anything about morality.
I think, hindi sila sumuko sayo. Nalaman lang nila na it's just a waste of time makipag argue sa sira ulong natutong mag internet. hehehe
#47.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
gagosijuly
on
2010-03-25 16:31
(Reply)
Humanda ka at sasagutin ka na naman ng questions ni july! Hehehe
#47.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.2
Hypocrites Rule Philippines
on
2010-03-25 16:42
(Reply)
ang yabang ni mother JULY. kaloka ka mother ha, ilang lalaki ba tsutsupain mo mader mamya, para ma reserve ko na. hehehe
#47.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.1
july
on
2010-03-27 01:49
(Reply)
pasundot-sundot kalang pre... you don't even have any substance with all your comments. why not give substantial comments? it only say you can't fathom my wisdon and understanding. you are no better than a first grader. what a shame.
#47.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.2
GAGO SI ELLEN
on
2010-03-25 14:53
(Reply)
Ang how dare you talk about morality when OBVIOUSLY your comments on this blog does not conform on the Morality in it's fullest sense!
#47.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.3
Anonymous
on
2010-03-25 16:21
(Reply)
So sad, July is just resorting to tactics that might prevent him/her to answer questions. If this is the kind of apologist that we are engaging, it would not be very beneficial. I doubt the "morality" he/she is practicing.
#47.1.1.1.1.1.1.2
july
on
2010-03-27 05:22
(Reply)
one religious groups says:.... ok kill those christians, by doing so god will reward you... be a suicide bomber... god will reward you. is this the morality are you talking about? well, i am sorry.. i am talking about morality that surpass that twisted understanding of morality... this is not even considered a morality but a barbaric act. now tell me which one is a partial and which one is morality that give maening to its fullest sense or you are just foolish because you ca not reach the deepest sense of my understanding!!!!
#47.1.1.1.1.1.2
gagosijuly
on
2010-03-25 14:57
(Reply)
Tama. One dimension lang kasi ang alam ng mga katoliko. Ang dimension nila. Di nila iniisip may iba pang tao sa pilipinas na di naniniwala sa mga obispong katoliko. The government should serve ALL. It was not created to serve only people with the same thinking like July and the catholic church.
#47.1.1.1.1.1.3
july
on
2010-03-27 05:26
(Reply)
please read...
one religious groups says:.... ok kill those christians, by doing so god will reward you... be a suicide bomber... god will reward you. is this the morality are you talking about? well, i am sorry.. i am talking about morality that surpass that twisted understanding of morality... this is not even considered a morality but a barbaric act. now tell me which one is a partial and which one is morality that give maening to its fullest sense or you are just foolish because you ca not reach the deepest sense of my understanding!!!!
#47.1.1.1.1.1.4
Anonymous
on
2010-03-27 05:40
(Reply)
one religious groups says:.... ok kill those christians, by doing so god will reward you... be a suicide bomber... god will reward you. is this the morality are you talking about? well, i am sorry.. i am talking about morality that surpass that twisted understanding of morality... this is not even considered a morality but a barbaric act. now tell me which one is a partial and which one is morality that give maening to its fullest sense or you are just foolish because you ca not reach the deepest sense of my understanding!!!!
#47.1.1.1.1.2
GAGO SI ELLEN
on
2010-03-25 14:30
(Reply)
Is it also morally right ("in it's fullest sense") to tell politicians that the church will not vote for them if they support the RH bill?
I think that is what they call blackmailing... just a thought
#47.1.1.1.1.2.1
gagosijuly
on
2010-03-25 16:23
(Reply)
In short, just displaying their influence. A plain show of arrogance.
#47.1.1.1.1.2.1.1
july
on
2010-03-27 01:53
(Reply)
church may arrogant for you... but your thoughts display ignorance. if you're ignorant of a little things much more with greater things!!!!!!!!. ingnorant
To those who believe religion will save your soul.. be careful.. you are in real danger..
how do you define religion... and what do you know about religion?
Malaswa kase ang isip ng mga pareng against sa pamimigay ng CONDOM ng DOH. Nasa isip nila agad ang ibig sabihin daw nun, eh, "HERE'S THE CONDOM, MAKIPAG-SEX KAYO SA KAHIT KANINONG GUSTO NYO!"... oh, di ba malaswa! Eh di naman yun ang ibig sabihin nun... Helerw?! Buti nga libre ung protection, kesa bibili pa! Eh, pano nga kung walang pambili ung gustong makipagsex or nagmamadaling pumunta sa Motel, ala ng time bumili ng CONDOM?!! tapos, HIV pala ung partner nya?!! eh, di another victim na naman?!! Tsaka pwede ba, wag na silang maki-alam pa sa usaping CONDOM... Di naman talaga CONDOM ang issue dito, eh!!! PANGKALUSUGAN... KAYA LEAVE TO DOH,noh!!!
Yan ang mga pari ngayon, malibog pero hindi.
Banal pero malisyoso, pero di daw. I Timothy 5:8 But if someone does not provide for his own, especially his own family, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.
(Nakasaad po sa Biblia kung hindi kayang tustusan ang pangangailangan ng pamilya at iresponsable walang awat sa bilang ng mga anak ito ay kasalanang mas masahol pa sa gawi ng mga pagano) PAALALA LANG PO SA MGA PARI WALA PO KAYONG ALAM PAGDATING SA SEX AT SA TURO NG BIBLIA SA PAGPAPAMILYA HUAG NAMAN PO KAYO MASYADONG MAKIALAM SA BUHAY PERSONAL NG PAROKYA There is a saying "don't shoot the messenger".The Church is merely doing its job.While it may be true that there are sex offenders among their ranks, it is also true that rotten apples exists with other professions, while good apples still exists among priests,politicians,lawyers,doctors,women,men,gays or lesbians. Bottomline: To err is human. The battle between the secular and the proprietary is never ending. Hence, considering that the Church is doing its mandate, I am pleased that the government, through the DOH is finally implementing its constitutional mandate of "separation of the church and the state". Other issues emanating from the use of condom should be dealt with separately and more objectively. Which to believe: Science or God? Condom or No condom?HIV or not?I think it all boils down to God's ultimate gift: The freedom to choose, the will to decide and the existence of options both from the state and church; to use that God given free will to decide which is which and to decide with moral certainty,without guilt of conscience and full understanding on how we will run our lives is just beautiful. In the end, we will be judged by the choices we made and what we did and will do after that.
The CATHOLIC church is not the only messenger of "MORALITY" in this town, fan. And therefore, the "MORALITY" they are preaching is not universally accepted. In turn, the government that presides a nation with different views on faith and morality must not HEED to the dictate and blackmail attempts of one group THAT HAS BEEN IN EXISTENCE AND A HISTORY THAT HAD BEEN THE CAUSE OF PEOPLE'S SUFFERING IN THE PAST.
i don't know why you can't accept the fact that the church will speak whether you like it or not, follow it or not....but it is her role to teach morality. even in martyrdom she will stand on her ground for that is her mission. man does not deserve condoms. man desrve good life away from poverty that the goverment doesn't seem want to address. sabi ng govierno.... condom ka nalang... mahal mag paaral sayo eh... condom ka nalang para masaya ka....kahit wala kang trabaho... condom ka nalang kasi....kelangan namin ng pera sa kampanya nanim... condom ka nalang kasi...samin nalang ang pera makikihati kapa. kasi masaya naman kayo kapag may condom diba?
the church can voice what ever opinion they want.. but they are blackmailing politicians who are supporting RH Bill, people who advocates the use of Condoms. Telling the People its wrong and its againgst the will of God.. who in his right mind will go against God.
They are preventing the Government to do their job, just because it goes against thier teachings. besides.. the money being use by the government came from the from the people that paid their taxes. so if those people want their government to buy them CONDOMS and BIRTH CONTROL PILLS.. the government must follow.. the church doesn't PAY TAXES.. because there excempted.. if the church wants to have a voice concerning government funds.. may they sould start paying their Taxes... hindi naman parang SARS ang HIV. walang magkakaHIV kung hindi nyo WILLINGLY at PROACTIVELY ilalagay ang sarili nyo sa sitwasyon para makacontract kayo ng HIV.
band-aid solution lng yang condom na yan. nakakabobo. gagastos pa ng milyon-milyon para jan eh hindi naman yan RARE vaccine para gastusan gobyerno. kahit saang kanto pwede kang makahanap ng condom. dapat hindi matinag ang Catholic Church sa posisyon nila. Gawin n ng estado ang dapat nilang gawin, pero dapat hindi din mangengeme ang Simbahan sa pagtuturo ng doktrina nila. let's face it, ang papalag lang naman sa teaching ng Church ay yug hindi kayang panindigan ang BASIC (hindi necessarily dahil turo ng simbahan) Good Manner and Right Conduct nila pagdating sa relations sa opposite or same sex. Aw Good manners and right conduct! So kapag wla sila GMRC hayaan nlng natin sila magkaron ng AIDS. D po maganda pagsamahin yan mga acronyms na yan!!!
 ano ba ang naitutulong ng simbahan sa mamamayan?
wala naman ginawa ang simbahan kundi mangolekta ng pera sa mga uto-utong tao para mga pari,madre,pastor,emans,guru,monks etc. magbuhay hari sa kanilang mga malapalasyong simbahan,kumbento,moske atbp. religion is a monkey business using teaching of God as baits for the stupid fish. does condom reaaly solve the problem? really? widen your mind, if the catholic church doesn't teach then who will? come on! we don't deserve condom... we deserve good moral education and good life from the goverment who only mind their own interests while others are neglected and given minimum goverment services which they don't derserve...not to mention the money they got from condoms. perhaps you deserve condom alone.
i saw the marco polo life story. that time pag red ang hair ng girl seguradong susunogen ka ng buhay.pag red hair daw is pokpok or malande.yan ang utos ng sembahan catholoko.sabe nga sa ngalang ng pangenoon pwede selang mag nakaw at pumatay.the oldest culture in the worl like enka and maya shenuge sela ng mga pare kase ayaw nelang maging catholic.
mas may importante pa dapat asikasuhin ang simbahan kaysa sa condom na yan....unahin ninyo muna ang pagpapalakas sa relihiyon catoliko, maraming ng umalis, nagbabalak umalis.
Ang daming satsat natin mga pinoy! Kung ayaw mong gumamit ng condom eh di ok lang. Kung gusto mo naman eh di ok lang. So anong problema?
Kapag mamatay ka na, sinong haharap sa Diyos mo? Di ba ikaw? Walang ibang mananagot sa buhay mo kundi ikaw! Responsabilidad mo yan sa sarili mo! Meron na bang bumalik sa mga namatay na nagsabi na BAWAL and CONDOM????? mas kurakor ang sembahan kaysa goberno kailngan bang my own bank ang catholic church kc ayaw nelang controlen ng goberno ang nakolekta nlang pero.here in europe ang daming simbahan benebenta genagawang desco house or club.kc mga people deto nag sawa na sa kababayad ng tax.or hinde na sela mga tanga.about 1 million austrian just give up being romam catholic.nakaka heya daw ang lumalabas na scandal ngyon.
Mabuhay ka Sec. CABRAL! Sana marami pang katulad mong kawani ng gobyerno na di takot sa impluwensiya ng simbahan.
Di tulad ni Gloria, Atienza, at ibang presidentiables na takot ma-offend ang simbahan dahil ayaw ng huli ang condoms at contraceptives....mga walang bayag! libre condom sa center
sa mga malilibog dyan gumamit kayo ng kondom,sa mga ayaw magkondom bahala na kayo sa buhay nyo,kung mabuntis at magkasakit kayo wala kayong dapat sisihin kundi ang mga sarili nyo!
sa simbahan katoliko please lang hayaan nyo na ang gobyerno sa kanilang kagustuhan mapangalagaan ang mamamayan na wag lumaganap ang nakakahawang sakit at lumulubong populasyon dahil wala naman kayong naitutulong sa mga maysakit at hindi naman nyo naalagaan ang mga batang malnourish dahil mga palamunin rin kayo ng mga uto-utong mamamayan patuloy na sumusuporta sa baluktot nyong patakaran. kaya nga mayroon batas na "separation of church and states"pero bakit bawat galaw na lang ng gobyerno kailangan ang simbahan ang masunod,simbahan ba ang gobyerno? ang gobyerno hindi pinakikialaman ang kababoyan pinaggagawa ng simbahan pero ang simbahan wala ng ginawa kundi pakialaman ang gobyerno. hindi na ako magtataka kung bakit marami tuloy ang ayaw na magsimba dahil sa pakikialam ng simbahan sa gobyerno. hanggang ngayon ang tingin ng simbahan sa kanilang korporasyon mas mataas ang kanilang kapangyarihan keysa sa mga nasa gobyerno kaya naman ang mga politikong takot na hindi suportahan ng simbahan panay na lang sang-ayon sa bawat sabihin ng simbahan kahit pa hindi naman nakakatulong sa mamamayan at gobyerno ang kanilang idolohiya. dapat pakialaman lang ng simbahan kung ano ang nasa loob ng bakuran ng simbahan,dahil lahat ng tao may karapatan sundin kung ano sa palagay nila ay tama kaya hindi sila ang dapat magdesisyon kundi ang taumbayan at gobyerno. ang dapat na gawain ng simbahan ipagdasal ang mamamayan,gobyerno at ang bansa at ang buong mundo na sanaý bigyan ng maraming biyaya ang planetang ito ng sa gayon wala ng magugutom na tao,hayop o anuman nilalang ng Diyos and let people decides for themselves. CBCP please stop intervering in gov´t agenda its not your line of works or mission! tungkol naman sa moralidad,mas immoral pa nga gawain ng mga nasa simbahan kumpara sa mga taong lantaran gumagawa ng kaimmoralan dahil gusto nilang mabuhay na hindi nagtatago sa kabanalan. let´s say condom can help minimized the spread of transferrable sexual disease but what if the condoms that given for free are already contaminated with toxic chemicals that can cause ovarian cancer or infection for both users and sexual partners...no one can guarantee that a certain condom is free of chemicals that can cause irritations or infection.
still we people has no absolute solution when it comes to stoping the spread of AIDS,we may stop the spread of AIDS thru using condoms but condoms users sexual partners might sufferred on a toxicious chemical that will makes them sick anyway. the best way to prevent such diseases is for people to practice a safe sexual intercourse with partners they know are clean,if not sure better they don´t engages in any sexual acts at all. so i would say that churches has also good reasons to stop the gov´t from encouraging people to use condoms when infact,condoms has no guarantee it will not give them side effect from chemicals used in manufacturing those said condoms. being a woman myself it´s not really comfortable using condom because it feels like there is an extra skin on penis that makes intercourse no longer as natural as it should be. condoms are really good for fuckers only,not for people that value natural normal intercourse. however for some people it is more safe to use a condom as it gives them a little bit of chances that they won´t get infection from their sexual partners. sex is a very risky act to engages with,smart people would rather ejaculates or masturbates than having sex with people no one knows if they are clean or not. tama naman ang sabi ng mga pari´t madre na magsalsal este...magdasal na lang! kaya lang sa mga taong hindi kuntento sa mataimtim na pagdarasal hahanap at hahanap ng kaparehang mapagpaparausan at dyan na mag-umpisa ang kabaliwan. sex drives many people crazy! Huwag sana PARANOID sa paggamit ng condom, maging paranoid if di mo masyado kilala ang makaka-sex na baka nga may AIDS. I believe condom will not make it in the market if meron medical evidence na makakasama ito sa health ng everyone na gagamit nito. It is pure business kaya against ang Catholic Church sa paggamit ng condom o contraceptives. Ayaw ng church na ma-control ang population especially sa Pinas na mostly catholic, kase once na na-control ang population hihina ang income o donation sa Church. Did you know na ang religion sa Pinas eh business? Look at Mike velarde & Bro. Eddie, do you know how rich they are? Kaya ang catholic church eh marami ng competition sa donation. Ang ugali ng Pinoy, kahit naghihirap nagaabuloy at nagsisimba para guminhawa. Kaya I am not in favor sa pakikialam ng Simbahang katoliko sa pamamalakad ng gobyerno. What the Catholic Church should do is to clean up their backyards of Pedophiles and child molester. Amen!
*
i don't know why you can't accept the fact that the church will speak whether you like it or not, follow it or not....but it is her role to teach morality. even in martyrdom she will stand on her ground for that is her mission. man does not deserve condoms. man desrves good life away from poverty that the goverment doesn't seem want to address. sabi ng govierno.... condom ka nalang... mahal mag paaral sayo eh... condom ka nalang para masaya ka....kahit wala kang trabaho... condom ka nalang kasi....kelangan namin ng pera sa kampanya nanim... condom ka nalang kasi...samin nalang ang pera makikihati kapa. kasi masaya naman kayo kapag may condom diba? i am not sure condoms are all safe to be use as we all knew its made out from chemicals,not from edible foods or something our body will not get side effect or infections if we´re using it for a long period of time...as we all know,people don´t have sex only once in a lifetime,some people would have sex three or five times in a day depends how hungry they are for sex.
is DOH can guarantee condoms are free of bacteria that can cause infections to the users of it? what if condoms are contaminated with toxic chemical would the DOH provides free medical services for those infected of it? condoms are foreign objects that not all human body could accept as we know some people are allergic of chemicals used in condoms,like some people are allergic to perfumes,food colors or artificial flavors. DOH and CBCP should provides the advantages and disadvantages of condoms and let the public knew about it. what public needs is proper information about the good things the condoms could gives but also the damages it could bring to users of it. thank you Ms.Monsod for bringing this topic for public debates and let the people decides for themselves kung dapat nga ba silang gumamit ng kondom o hindi. Good suggestion!dapat lang na pagaralan ng DOH at CBCP ang garatya ng condom pero I dont think they can do that anymore.
Nag aaway pa kasi ang dalawa e!hahahaha! This is the reason why the Church and Government should be seperated.nagkakaproblema talaga pag may nag enoach na isa but they will be more effective kung magkakasundo sila sa solution. At sa mga comment naman sa itaas,hwag na kayong magtalo sa religion. In my own opinion,that God made man,man made religion then why the heck man have to look for God in their religion? The only barometer for a person to see if he's doing immoral thing ay sa pamamagitan ng kanyang sariling konsensya.I believe sane person has one of this.unless,of course,if you are an animal or a crack. To start with, I am a Catholic, and I am practicing my faith.
Here’s my stand on this issue: Without mudslinging, let both the Government and the Catholic Church do their respective jobs, all at the same time, and most specially let the people decide. Whatever the proposed solution is, the most important thing is to address the problem- to contain/control the spread of AIDS. The 2 entities (Church and State) should work hand-in-hand to provide options/solutions, and let the people decide. Solutions proposed by both parties are acceptable for me. The government proposes an immediate intervention, while the church proposes a long-term, values modification. Now, what i frown about the church’s stand is that, it only promotes the “value modification” or insist on teaching the moral based on the Holy Bible, which will take a life-time to realize, or even beyond. This is the only solution acceptable to the church. All other means to control the spread of AIDS is a taboo. My question is this; why don’t the church do its job- to instill to people the morals, while allow the state to offer alternatives, while they try to instill the values to the faithful? The church will probably say, if it will allow the use of condom, the people will use the condom rather than stick to the church’s teachings, because to use the condom is the easier way. And that will counter its efforts to lead the people in modifying their values. Yes, this might be true but then again, it is the challenge to the church, and it’s up to them how to do it without trying to control the state. I think the church needs to intensify its efforts to teach the values in accordance to Jesus’ teachings, and try to reach the most people. Now, if the church can’t do it (solve the spread of AIDS) all by itself at this very critical time- that the number of AIDS-infected Filipinos is dramatically increasing, it should not stop any other “effective” means the state is providing. Live and let live! Gawin natin ang lahat sa pagsugpo o pag-control sa pagkalat ng AIDS, taong-simbahan man o taong-gubyerno! 1
condom or morality? First point, it is the duty of the church to teach, principally, in terms of morality. you can't take that away from the ministry of the church. That is her task. Catholics or non-catholic church should strongly teach morality. If your church doesn't teach such morality then, it is not the true church... then go with your chosen church to hell. Second point, distributing condoms will not solve the problems. it will just make the problem perennial and complicated..it will never end because it never addresses the real issue. A problem will never solve another problem. I suggest go beyond the problem and put an end to its ultimate source...the poverty which the goverment could not address. without poverty everybody is capable of attaining proper education. good education gives good life, good health, good job and most especially good standard of moral living (where everybody thinks according to the norms of good conscience)...in the end everybody works and therefore no time for any unnecessary leisure. Third point. Never say "sapagkat tayo ay tao lamang".(Just a frail human being). I say you are a person...an intellectual being. As human you are accountable of your every acts. you are not a dog who is not responsible of its act. If you are not a responsible person.. you may not be better that a dog. Think of your self you are probably a dog. If you do sex with any body at anytime and anywhere because you have condom with you. ano ang pinagkaiba mo sa aso? that is what the government teaching you... to be a dog and just remain to be a dog. the government doesn't really care of your morality which is your preferential choice. if you wana be a dog then let it be. then, go with your government run by the dogs. dapat gawin ng gobyerno lahat ng tao ay suriin ang kanilang mga dugo,yong mga taong may AIDS tatakan ng "pulang tuldok" sa noo na kasing laki ng piso bilang tanda na sila ay may nakakahawang sakit na AIDS para mga taong wala namang AIDS makapag-ingat sa pakikihalubilo sa may AIDS.
mas effective yan keysa gagamit pa ng kondom sa tuwing magtatalik.kung ang magtatalik pareho naman may AIDS hindi na nila kailangan pang gumamit ng kondom unless they want to use condom to prevent the woman from getting pregnant but there is other ways to avoid it,gaya ng "withdrawal method"rhytmus or birt control pills,ligate or vasectomy. tama naman ang CBCP gastos lang yan kondom-kondom na yan ang magbenepisyo lang dyan ang mga condoms manufacturers dahil sila ang kikita ng limpak-limpak na pera,kahit walang kasiguraduhan na ligtas nga gamitin ang kondom,at syimpre may kommisyon din dyan ang DOH dahil sila ang nagprankisa ng mga kondom. kaya sa halip ibili ng kondom ang budget ng DOH sa pagsuri na lang at pagtatak sa may sakit gastusin ang naturang pondo para maproteksyonan ang walang sakit at ang mga maysakit mabigyan ng gamot. i hope this idea would help solve that epidemic. who needs condoms anyway?
people who are sick or afraid to acquired diseases or don´t want to make anyone pregnant needs condoms! but does anyone knows if those condoms given for free are safe to use? condoms could either safeguard the user or brought dangerous threat to its user and sexual partners. to prevent AIDS,an AIDS free person must only have sex with an AIDS free person that´s the only way to prevent from infecting with AIDS. ang mga kabataan ngayon marami ng alam kesa sa mga matatnda..sa dami nilang nakikitang pornography sa internet etc..sa cellphone lang noila ang daming makikitang hubad at malaswang ginagawa ng mga babae at lalaki..kaya wag isisi sa condom campaign ad..sa panahon ngayon mas marami ng alam mga kabattan mga bata nga lang alam ng lips to lips dahil sa marimar at anu anu pa palabas na teleserye
this time i would like also to get the attention of MASS MEDIA...all multimedie company.... you have like the church and goverment the responsiblity to teach thing on moral grounds. you have the means you have the capcity you have the talents... use it to propagate... morality... to address issues that will benefit everybody and aim for achieving hig morality in our sciety. hindi ung basta mag kapera.. not to lead people astray from good....*THIS IS SIMPLY BECAUSE GOD HAS GIVEN YOU BLESSINGS AND YOU SHOULS USE IT ACCORDINGLY TOTHE INVITATION OF GOD FOR MAN'S PERFECTION AND HOLINESS*. act proactively and not just react.
Guys, I suggest we just ignore comments made by july.
It will just be a waste of time replying on his/her post. Namimili lang siya ng sasagutin sa mga comment natin kasi alam nyan wala siyang maisasagot sa mga ibang comments natin kundi question ulit. In short, papansin lang. hehehe oooo... pakingagn nyo ito taong ito kasi nagmamakaawa na saiyo. baka umiyak!this people people says i deisplay arogance... but he displays arrogance... i will write whatever things i need to write just to point out the truth. and that is my moral obligation. wether you like it or not.
THE ROAD TO MORAILY IS HARD..many will not go this way.... BUT THE WAY OF THE CROCKED IS EASY.... AND MANY WILL FOLLoW IT... but in the end it is you who will choose the way to take. ETERNAL LIFE OR ETERNAL PUNISHMENT. ooooyyyyyyy... pakingan nyo itong tao na ito kasi nagmamakaawa na sainyo. baka umiyak! this guy says i display arogance... but I SAY this guy displays IGNORANCE... i will write whatever things i need to write just to point out the truth. and that is my moral obligation. wether you like it or not.
THE ROAD TO MORAILY IS HARD..many will not go this way.... BUT THE WAY OF THE CROCKED IS EASY.... AND MANY WILL FOLLoW IT... but in the end it is you who will choose the way to take. ETERNAL LIFE OR ETERNAL PUNISHMENT. maging responsable sa bilang ng mga anak dahil hindi naman mga pari ang magpapakain sa kanila kung umabot na sa gutom kundi mga magulang ren
THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE DOH SHOULDNT QUARREL ABOUT THE USE CONDOM.
Condom as for Prevention of STI/AIDS: I do agree that abstinence and being monogamous to your partner and in the same way your partner being monogamous is the surest way of preventing STI/HIV/AIDS transmission. The catholic church is advocating a no premarital sexual contact, of course a male to male sexual contact or a homosexual sexual contact is considered a sin so hindi rin dapat. The BIG problem is the BEHAVIOR of the PEOPLE towards sex...Why? Because most of these patients with STI/AIDS a very sexually active, promiscuous, parang kung sino sino na lang.. pag kinate sila - go go sex! They don’t even know the names of their sexual partner and some of them had different sexual partners in a day!!!!!!!!!!! Breakfast, lunch and dinner! Iba iba putahe... If you can change the behaviour of the people regarding sex then definitely transmission of any/all sexually transmitted illnesses including HIV/AIDS will decrease. I think DOH also advocate abstinence and being monogamous. What they are doing is damage control. They can’t change the behaviour of the people regarding sex so might as well give them protection. And that is by promoting the use of condom. Condom as for Pregnancy Prevention Being a graduate of a catholic school in medicine. We were not thought that much about contraceptive use also in clinical practice. I learned most of these during my internship. Personally, as a practicing physician, I do not recommend contraceptive methods for prevention of pregnancy. Responsible parenthood is what I advise to my patients and if really in need for contraceptive methods (those with medical problem and yung mga 10 na ang anak) I only advocate the use of condom. It may not be that sexually satisfying according to them (for male and female partners) but with proper use it will prevent mating of sperm cells and egg cells. Personally I haven’t use condom. But I do have it in my bag always just incase. Well, if you are going to read some of the post of bloggers here, you may find that some commented that changing the behaviour of the people against their own will is next to impossible.
Well, siguro kung ipapa impose ang martial which is karamihan sa mga tao ay ayaw mangyari. Get real people, hindi nyo madidiktahan ang tao sa panahon ngayon, lalong lalo na pagdating sa sex. Iba na ang panahon ngayon, hindi na ito panahon na kung saan lahat ng bagay ay dinidiktahan ng simbahan. End of story!its always the choice of an individual to use condom or not.
Gustuhin man ng simbahan o ng gobyerno na gumamit ng condom ang isang tao o hindi,it's always the individual that will decide.may AIDS man sya o wala.thats the reason nobody can guarantee that condom would do the tricks or not. Education,Education,Education.thats the best solution.church need to educate their flocks about the morals of sex and government should educate it's people about AIDS/STI transmission.they should not fight.this might help to change the mindset of a person. Then,condom idea might work. Dahil sa pag dami ng tao at isama pa ang pag-hihirap ay kibit balikat nalang ang iba nating mga kababayan na bumili ng condom..totoo malaki ang naitutulong ng condom sa taong malilibog sa laman..isipin nalang kung gusto nating huwag mahawa sa mga putatsing at kung sino-sinong tao na hindi natin alam kung may sakit ng HIV pag walang condom..
Tigok ka.. Ang importante sa topic na i2 ay protection para kahit papa-ano ay humaba ang buhay2 natin..
Sa totoo lang mas ok makipag sex pag walang condom..! Kaya hindi na talaga maiiwasan ng iba ang sakit na kalibugan at HIV.! Why the big fuss about condoms?Why nga ba???Wala naman ah!!Sa mga gustong gumamit nang condom GO,GO, gumamit kayo kahit ilan, then fuck whoever you meet, bata, matanda, lalaki, babae, kahit sino,,go,go,go,,wag na kayong makonsensiya as to sight the shortcomings, sins and failures of the priest,to excuse your own sins,,maging bingi, bulag kayo, kahit kanino,,,GO,GO, use condom, and eat them too baka mas lalong pa kayong masiyahan, makontento, kapag you serve yourself with it..
Christians can be grouped into three divisions. There are those who have repented and received forgiveness, but live their lives according to the dictates of their own hearts. They are usually faithful to attend church services, but away from their church they have their own goals and pursuits. Leading morally good lives is their idea of being good Christians.
The second group is dedicated to working for God. They carry their religion outside of the church doors and become very involved in doing what they consider the will of God. They are working for the Lord. The problem is that they are making the decision of what is the will of God and carrying it out using their own wisdom and energy. They are doing “good works,” but they are only good works in their own sight. Jesus calls them “workers of lawlessness,” because they are only doing what is right in their own sight. The third group consists of those who have learned to give their lives to the Lord, so that He might work through them. Instead of working “for” the Lord, they are working “with” the Lord. Their lives and His life are meshed together, and the Lord works through them. While the mechanics of both groups may seem very similar, or even the same at times, their ministry is entirely different. For example, they will also prophesy, cast out devils, and do many wonderful works. But it will be Christ working through them. 15 “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 “You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? 17 “So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 “A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. 19 “Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 “So then, you will know them by their fruits.
21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. 22 “Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ 23 “And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.’ * it seems you've been quoting bible huh? the question here is were you able to understand it? many times i would always say... broaden your mind because your mind is not better than a first grader. i am not catholic but now... i opened my eyes...that this church speaks and makes a stand as she is expected to do so...because she is the true church. you sighted these verse from a bible... pertaining to *false prophets*. Actually this bible verses pertain to those churches who separated from the Catholic church and even those people like you who will persecute the catholic church because of her mission. most of these separated churches and people have ears but don't listen (the truth), they have lips but don't speak (the truth) and eyes but don't see (the truth). you are one of them. because of your ignorance, you could lead other to be like you... a blind one and so false prophets refers primarily to persons like you
Ang tema kasi ng topic na ito ay CONDOM and how it is used to prevent AIDS and the moral issues surrounding it. Let us be reminded that the CONDOM was originally designed as a BIRTH CONTROL device and its only at this point in time that the Condom was being used as a preventive tool against sexually transmitted disease like AIDS.
On Moral Issue: The church, if my memory serves me right has always been against the use of any Birth Control device may it be the pills or Condom! That was the time that AIDS was not even in existence! The stand of the church on this issue is about people committing sexual promiscuity! Nohting more nothing less. With the use of these devices (Birth Control Tools) people are now encouraged to engage in pre-marital sex or sex with different partners. With the promise of safe sex people are encouraged to have sex knowing their partner will not get pregnant or they are protected from acquiring any Sexually Transmitted disease such as AIDS. The church being the guardian of morality now steps in to raise their concerns. Nothing more nothing less. NOW ITS UP TO THE PEOPLE WHETHER THEY'LL LISTEN TO WHAT THE CHURCH SAYS. IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT! HEALTH CARE: As mentioned earlier the use of the Condom was designed most and foremost as a BIRTH CONTROL device but now it's being used as an Effective way of preventing AIDS. Wear Condom and you're assured of a safe sex. No pregnancy and no sexually transmitted disease! Bottomline is; It's Your LIFE that's at STAKE! It's your CHOICE! Be responsible, Morally! First, hindi daw effective and condom. Mas lumala daw and aids. Ms Monsod, said that only here in the philippines mas lumala ang AIDS compared sa buong mundo. Sabi hindi daw effective, so nag sisinungaling ang church.
Second, sinasabi ng church na hindi nila iboboto ang sinumang pulitiko na susuporta sa RH bill. Blackmailing ika nga. Third, lumalala ang aids, meaning hindi sila gumagamit ng condom. meaning, sa ngayon anong ginagawa ng church para masolusyunan ang aids. if they are already doing their task as a MORAL GUARDIAN since the time na walang pang AIDS.. i think they failed MISERABLY in that part (what do you think?). the catholic church has been consistent in teaching morality.. it is so very unfortunate that the government teaches the other way around.
THE GOVERMENT SHOULD give us and our kids good AND DESCENT LIFE good education and good job. who are the rich ones today? AND WHO ARE THE POOR ONES? why so many are craving to politics? BECAUSE OF MONEY! GOVERNMENT must GIVE US GOOD AND DESCENT LIFE NOT A CONDOM! man does not deserve condoms. man deserves good life away from poverty that the government doesn't seem want to address. sabi ng govierno.... condom ka nalang... mahal mag paaral sayo eh... condom ka nalang para masaya ka....kahit wala kang trabaho... condom ka nalang kasi....kelangan namin ng pera sa kampanya nanim... condom ka nalang kasi...samin nalang ang pera makikihati kapa. kasi masaya naman kayo kapag may condom diba? THE church will speak whether you like it or not, follow it or not....but it is her role to teach morality. even in martyrdom she will stand on her ground for that is her mission. THE ROAD TO MORALITY IS HARD..many will not go this way.... BUT THE WAY OF THE CROCKED IS EASY.... AND MANY WILL FOLLoW IT... but in the end it is you who will choose the way to take. ETERNAL LIFE OR ETERNAL PUNISHMENT. condom will not save you soul MORALITY does. curious lang ako. binabasa kaya ni ms. winnie monsod mga comments sa blog nya? dami kasing nagbigay ng mga comments pati relious faith napag-aawayan dito.
The arguement is simple, if it does not apply to you, you don't have to worry about it.
Ang mga pari, madre at mga grupo na ayaw sa condom, kung ayaw nyo, di wag kayong gumamit. Wala kayong magagawa kung ang isang tao ay gugustuhin gumamit ng protection maliban sa dasal. Tama bahala sila sa buhay nila kung gusto nilang gumamit ok..mas mabuti narin yung nakaka-siguro kasi sa totoo lang mahirap talagang maka iwas sa tawag ng laman..tsaka wala naman talagang masama kung gumamit ng condom..wala namang side effect sa kalusugan ng tao..kaya tama yung go-go-go..be happy..
Yap....Kapag libog na libog ka na, tapos nasa lamesita ang bible at ang condom, Ano ang dadamputin mo?
Kung bible ang sagot mo, maaring bakla ka o impotent ka ka na.... Pero sa mga toro na kagaya natin, maaring wala tayong dadamputin sa dalawa, dahil sa chicks tayo naka focus.... he he he..... **heheh.... sabihn mo pala kay mama mo may condom ako marami... one on one kami one to sawa...ok ba!
thanks july.thank you because there are still people like you. we need people like you. i myself was amazed because like many people i am a nominal catholic (just by the name). now i found out that i still have a lot of things to do, not only on the physical aspect but more so on my faith. this is so, because earthly things (that i always crave for) will just pass away but what is more important is the salvation of my soul.
John,
Let me guess...You are probably Gay... If not, you probably passed the prime of your sexlife. Either way, sex is not as exciting to you compare to some other people. Sex is sex....it got nothing to do with angels singing in the skies. Get protection and sleep thight... Condom for life! heheh.... sabihn mo pala kay mama mo may condom ako marami... one on one kami one to sawa...ok ba!
15 “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 “You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? 17 “So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 “A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. 19 “Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 “So then, you will know them by their fruits.
21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. 22 “Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ 23 “And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.’ ** mayroon nang natatamaan... hehehehe at least john has seen it... ikaw wala ka naman alam sa lahat ng bagay... condom lang ang alam mo!
correct!!!!!!!!
i say to this guy G..si Ellen don't use bible to display your own ignorance...you and these misleading churches use the bible and quoting bible but not giving its substantial meaning.. that's dangerous...wag kang gagamit niyan (bible) lalo na kung wala kang alam diyan. they just learned to read it (bible) and now claiming to be experts of it! what a shame! 15 “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 “You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? 17 “So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 “A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. 19 “Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 “So then, you will know them by their fruits.
21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. 22 “Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ 23 “And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.’ ** Bible verse lang to bakit kaya may mga natatamaan? hehehe.. meaning. GUILTY! The second group is dedicated to working for God. They carry their religion outside of the church doors and become very involved in doing what they consider the will of God. They are working for the Lord. The problem is that they are making the decision of what is the will of God and carrying it out using their own wisdom and energy. They are doing “good works,” but they are only good works in their own sight. Jesus calls them “workers of lawlessness,” because they are only doing what is right in their own sight.
The problem is that they are making the decision of what is the will of God and carrying it out using their own wisdom and energy. They are doing “good works,” but they are only good works in their own sight.
** bato bato sa langit, ang tamaan.. sorry na lang.. hehehe ows..... ang galing mo... ikaw ata ang pinka magaganda ang comments sa blog na ito... hanga talaga ako sayo peks man.
i will gonna teach my children use condoms. ung dalaga ko an daming dalang condom lagi... i will tell them not to listen to catholic church. Thank you.
Well, kung marunong kang umintindi sa lahat ng comment ko sa blog na to, hindi yan ang ipinupunto ko. Isa lang ang pinatutungkulan nito. Mayroong mga taong magaling mag turo ng Moralidad, kahit na they are doing otherwise. Mayroong mga taong sinasabing ang kanilang Church ang nag iisang may kaalaman sa Moralidad in its Fullest Sense. Hindi mo naman kailangan ng church para ituro sa anak mo ang tama at mali. My posts are all about a Church/person who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. Wikipedia..
In a statement, read out by Archbishop Silvano Maria Tomasi in September 2009, the Holy See stated "We know now that in the last 50 years somewhere between 1.5% and 5% of the Catholic clergy has been involved in sexual abuse cases," adding that this figure was comparable with that of other groups and denominations.[9] In 2002, the John Jay report tabulated a total of 4392 priests and deacons in the U.S. against whom allegations of sexual abuse were considered by their diocese to have been "substantiated". In 2001, major lawsuits emerged in the United States and Ireland, alleging that some priests had sexually abused minors and that their superiors had conspired to conceal and otherwise abet their criminal misconduct.[10] Although the scandals in the U.S. and Ireland unfolded over approximately the same time period, there are some significant differences between them. In the United States, most of the abusers were parish priests under diocesan control. While there were also a significant number of abuse cases involving parish priests in Ireland, another major scandal involved abuse that was crime to have been committed by members of religious orders working in Catholic-run institutions such as orphanages and reform schools. In the United States, the abuse was primarily sexual in nature and involved mostly boys between the ages of 11 and 17. In Ireland, the allegations involved both physical abuse and sexual abuse; children of both genders were involved, although a large majority were male. Allegations of clergy sexual abuse have surfaced in numerous other countries (see Roman Catholic sex abuse cases by country). After the United States, the country with the next highest number of cases is Ireland with a significant number of cases being reported in Australia and New Zealand, and Canada. A significant number of cases have been reported in Europe, Latin America and Asia.[11] As a representative example, the organisation Broken Rites has detailed 71 cases where Catholic priests have been convicted and jailed for child sex offences in Australia, as well as others involving non custodial sentences and inconclusive proceedings.[12] 15 “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 “You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? 17 “So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 “A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. 19 “Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 “So then, you will know them by their fruits.
21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. 22 “Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ 23 “And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.’ ** BEWARE DAW ** Hindi nga mapigil ng mga pari ang kanilang sexual desire eh. pano pa ang mga simpleng tao.
G>> si ELLEN it seems you've been quoting bible huh? the question here is were you able to understand it? many times i would always say... broaden your mind because your mind is not better than a first grader. i am not catholic but now... i opened my eyes...that this church speaks and makes a stand as she is expected to do so...because she is the true church. you sighted these verse from a bible... pertaining to *false prophets*. Actually this bible verses pertain to those churches who separated from the Catholic church and even those people like you who will persecute the catholic church because of her mission. most of these separated churches and people have ears but don't listen (the truth), they have lips but don't speak (the truth) and eyes but don't see (the truth). you are one of them. because of your ignorance, you could lead other to be like you... a blind one and so false prophets refers primarily to persons like you
“Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 “You will know them by their fruits.
eto ang fruits: in the last 50 years somewhere between 1.5% and 5% of the Catholic clergy has been involved in sexual abuse cases G don't just give a half information
Scandal is nothing new for the Church. There have been many times through the ages when things were much worse off than they are now. The history of the Church is like a cosine curve with many ups and downs. At the times when the Church hits its low points God raises up tremendous saints to bring the Church back to its real mission. It's almost as if in those times of darkness the light of Christ shines ever more brightly. I would like to focus on a couple of saints whom God raised up in such difficult times, because their wisdom can guide us during our own difficult time. Martin Luther, an Augustinian priest, lived during the reign of perhaps the most notorious pope in history, Alexander VI. This pope never taught anything against the faith-the Holy Spirit prevented that-but he was a wicked man. He had nine children from six different concubines. He put out contracts on the lives of those he considered his enemies. Luther, like everyone, must have wondered how God could allow a wicked man to be the visible head of his Church. All types of moral problems confronted Luther even in his own country of Germany. Priests were living in open relationships with women. Some made exaggerated claims about indulgences. There was terrible immorality among lay Catholics. Luther was scandalized, as anyone who loved God should have been. He allowed the scandal to drive him from the Church. Christ can work still and does work still even through the most sinful priest. And thank God! If we were dependent on the priest's personal holiness, we would be in trouble. Though they are chosen by God from among men, priests are tempted and fall into sin just like anyone else. But of course God knew that from the beginning. Eleven of the first twelve apostles scattered when Christ was arrested, but they came back. Martin Luther King:
Luther maintained that justification (salvation) was granted by faith alone, saying that good works and the sacraments were not necessary in order to be saved. Protestantism is one of the three major divisions within Christianity (or four, if Anglicanism is considered separately) together with the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church. T Protestants are not part of the Roman Catholic Church. FYI. you said... good works will not help you to be saved?... that is why you are doing a barbaric act. anyway, why should i do good things if this will not help me to be saved.. better to kill anyone as long as I accept Christ to be the true GOD. WHAT A THEOLOGY...this one reflects your empty shell mind.
faith alone will not save you... because faith without action is dead... kaya pala wala kang ginagawa... what a the0logy you have? kung bibigay ka ng clips of information kumpletohin mo... protestante ka talaga.. you just get those lines you wanna get. Abnoy nga talaga to. Siya ang nagsabi ng Martin Luther eh. Abnoy nga, confirmed!
FYI, i am a catholic (by birth) but now... i opened my eyes. Pero wag kang mag alala, wala ako balak mag palit ng religion, dahil hindi naman ako masasave ng kahit anong religion, it will be my faith alone that will save me. terrible history ... were did you get that? protestantism is not from CAtholic?
for your information MATIN LUTHER is the founder of protestantism and he was a catholic priest... now tell me that protestantism is not from catholics? ignoramos!!!!!! kaya nga protestante you just protest from where you came from... tanga! Protestantism is one of the three major divisions within Christianity (or four, if Anglicanism is considered separately) together with the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church.
Mas tanga ka abnoy! Kung ganyang klase ng tao ang magtuturo ng Moralidad in its fullest sense walang pag asa ang mga tao...  kaya pala puro bukang bibig mo ay katoliko, kasi ang pagkakaalam mo, Christianism = Roman Catholic. Magbasa ka nga muna. Ang tanga tanga mo..
What a shame.. ***IGNORANT
you are citing orthodox church who separated from the catholic church because they want primacy over the pope... you cited Anglicans who separated from roman church because the POpe did not grant the king of Egland of divorce... protestantism as you said from MArtin Luther who separated from the catholic... by these facts sino ang tanga satin? read more ... research research... little knowledge is dangerous and you have one.
#89.3.2.1.1
GAGO SI ELLEN
on
2010-03-29 10:16
(Reply)
SEPARATED nga db? so, hindi na Roman Catholic Church! Tanga, mo grabe.
Protest nga db, so nag protesta sila sa mga maling gawain ng Roman Catholic Church. The Disputation of Doctor Martin Luther on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences (now known as the 95 theses)[3][4] debated and criticized the Church and the Pope, concentrating upon the sale of indulgences, the doctrines of purgatory, and the authority of the Pope. Luther maintained that justification (salvation) was granted by faith alone, saying that good works and the sacraments were not necessary in order to be saved. May pope pa rin db? so completely different sa paniniwala ng Roman Catholic. tanga, bobo! ang tanga.. grabe.
#89.3.2.1.1.1
myrna
on
2010-03-29 10:30
(Reply)
so si MARTIN LUTHER NA PALA ang church founded by christ? hindi na ang catholic church?
#89.3.2.1.1.1.1
GAGO SI ELLEN
on
2010-03-29 10:36
(Reply)
Ha? ano daw?
At dahil sa katangahan mo, iisipin mo rin na 3 lang ang division ng Christianism.
Wrong!! Sa pinas pa lang ang dami nang iba't ibang division ng Christianism na separate sa Roman Catholic church. Hindi ko na ilalatag ang list para mag research ka naman ng konti. Grabe, may mga taong tanga pa pala katulad nito! tama si JULY all these separated churches are from catholics.. nag separate lang nga. protestants,, anglicans etc etc. are all from catholics... because there was only one church founded by christ that is the Catholic church and other churches just founded by man including iglesia ni Kristo in the philippines which is founded by man manalo. o nakita mo na kung saan galing ang simbahan mo? kaya wag kang mag magaling kasi wala kang alam sa religion.
#89.3.3.1.1
GAGO SI ELLEN
on
2010-03-29 10:30
(Reply)
That is exactly the point. Lahat ng iba't ibang religion ay ganyan ang bukambibig.
Na sila ang nag iisang relihiyon na mag sasave sa kanila. na sila ang one church founded by christ . Madaling sabihin, mahirap patunayan. The Pope/priest is just a man just like everyone else. Some religion even says that Jesus is also a man. Ang point ng discussion ay, huwag niyong imanipulate ang mga batas ng gagawin ng Estado dahil hindi lang kayo ang relihiyon ng Pilipinas.
#89.3.3.1.1.1
myrna
on
2010-03-29 10:38
(Reply)
if the catholic church is not the one founded by christ... then which church? all these christian churches are coming from catholic! kasi nga siya ang pinka unang simbahan na itinalaga ni kristo! hidi protestante.. hindi orthodox aglicans during (1500 BC)... iglesia ni cristo nung 1914. sino nga ba? kasi ikaw dakdak ka ng dakdak wala ka naman alam.
#89.3.3.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-03-29 10:45
(Reply)
erratum din sakin... heheh protestantsnd and other denominations are founded 1500AD. catholic chruch is way ahead. 33 AD
#89.3.3.1.1.1.2
GAGO SI ELLEN
on
2010-03-29 10:50
(Reply)
Another question is.. bakit sila nag separate? Is there a problem on the Roman Catholic church?
And siyempre, mag seseparate sila kasi katoliko sila by birth. baby pa lang sila, ginawa na silang katoliko kahit in the future aayawan nila. Kaya huwag nyong ipagmalaki na galing sila sa Catholic Church, mahiya kayo kasi umalis sila.. ikaw ang dakdak ng dakdak.
#89.3.3.1.2
GAGO SI ELLEN
on
2010-03-29 10:45
(Reply)
Another question is.. bakit sila nag separate? Is there a problem on the Roman Catholic church?
And siyempre, mag seseparate sila kasi katoliko sila by birth. baby pa lang sila, ginawa na silang katoliko kahit in the future aayawan nila. Kaya huwag nyong ipagmalaki na galing sila sa Catholic Church, mahiya kayo kasi umalis sila..
#89.3.3.1.2.1
myna
on
2010-03-29 10:52
(Reply)
probably nabasa mo yung ibang dahil kung bakit umalis sila.. kasi yung isa gusto siya mamuno hindo pope... ung isa nagalit sa pope kasi ayaw pag bigyan ng divorce ung isa nag protesta dahil nahilo siya sa simbahan at akala niya siya na ang tama..at binago pati ang bibliya. kautlad din ng ibang simbahan.. pag ayaw ang turo ng ng simbahan umalalis..kasi mahirap ang daan sa kabutihan.
kaya ikaw mag isip ka... baka gusto mong mag tatag ng simbahan mo... go ahead.
#89.3.3.1.2.1.1
GAGO SI ELLEN
on
2010-03-29 10:56
(Reply)
And i supposed hindi mo pa nababasa. hehehe.
Is that all the history you know about the Long and Dark History of the Roman Catholic Church? You should read more.
#89.3.3.1.2.1.1.1
myrna
on
2010-03-29 11:02
(Reply)
ikaw anong alam mo? at least ako. i know more than you.
#89.3.3.1.2.1.1.1.1
GAGO SI ELLEN
on
2010-03-29 11:07
(Reply)
Maybe and maybe not.
That is our difference, nagmamagaling ka to the point na sarado na ang utak mo sa pag accept ng truth based on COLD HARD FACTS. To July, Myrna, Myra, Myna etc etc:
The Catholic religion is filled with all sorts of symbols, images, and relics. The Catechism of the Council of Trent states these words: "It is lawful to have images in the Church, and to give honor and worship unto them..." It's lawful to honor and worship images? Not according to God's word. Exodus 20:4-5 says, "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me." Image worship is unscriptural and will end with the eternal damnation of those who practice it (Rev. 14:11). The first verse of the Gospel of luke John 3: 14-21 gives us a parallel, “Just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert so must the Son of Man be lifted up, so that everyone who believes in Him may have eternal life.” What happened during the time of Moses? When the Israelites were on the way to the Promised Land, they complained against God and Moses. They regretted their having to leave Egypt. As a punishment, Yahweh sent serpents so that many of them died. In their distress, they asked for mercy and healing. And Yahweh instructed Moses to “make a fiery serpent, set it on a pole” so that “everyone who is bitten, when he sees it, shall live.” Moses then made a bronze serpent, and those who looked at it lived (Numbers 21, 5-9).
even before God wuld use symbols... fire cloud dove... to communicate with people... tanga! So you are saying that that bronze serpent ay si GOD? or just a image HE used but not whatsoever in his image or likeness?
Ang mga rebultong ng simbahan ay sinasamba ng mga Katoliko, pinupusan ng panyo, niluluhuran. etc etc.. ano bang instruction sa bronze na ahas? Tignan lang db? Ang tanga mo naman, para ihanlitulad sa bronze na ahas ang Diyos? the catholic church.. uses symbols like for example the cross.. cross for other is is a symbol of suffering. for the catholic church cross is the symbol of christ susffering and his triumph over death.. ang alam ko ad demonyo ayaw maka kita ng symbol na cross kasi ayaw niyang maalala na natalo siya ni kristo.. jung ikaw ayaw mong maka kita ng mga symbols yulad ng cross mag isip ka baka demonyo ka.
hehehe demonyo ka pala eh. hehehe.. parang bata.
What a waste of my precious time. akala ko si july lang ang walang wenta.. ikaw rin pala. or si july at ikaw ay iisa. nway, sana nga mapunta ka sa langit. it is the bible who says it not me..John 3: 14-21 and (Numbers 21, 5-9).
ooooh tatanga tanga ka nanaman Bronze na ahas ang diyos nito.. hehehe.
(gumaya na ko sa mga comment mong mababaw para magkalevel na tayo hehehe) You said and you quote” "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above”
In the beginning it is the Lord who created thing in his own image…HE CREATED…CARVED MEN IN HIS OWN IMAGE AND LIKENESS. NOW, are you telling us that GOD is contradicting himself? It is he the first one violating himself by creating in his OWN IMAGE! Bottom line: you interpreted it (the scripture) according to your design and fail to undress the underlying essence of its meaning. What are those images represents… in the bible before? YOU ARE SHORT MINDED you just wanna see those things you wanna see! DON’T EVER- EVER INTERPRET THE BIBLE IN YOUR OWN CAPACITY BECAUSE YOU ARE BLIND! congratulations july and myna.i am proud of you. i am proud to be a catholic again.
***the catholic church has been consistent in teaching morality.. it is so very unfortunate that the government teaches the other way around.
THE GOVERMENT SHOULD give us and our kids good AND DESCENT LIFE good education and good job. who are the rich ones today? AND WHO ARE THE POOR ONES? why so many are craving to politics? BECAUSE OF MONEY! GOVERNMENT must GIVE US GOOD AND DESCENT LIFE NOT A CONDOM! man does not deserve condoms. man deserves good life away from poverty that the government doesn't seem want to address. sabi ng govierno.... condom ka nalang... mahal mag paaral sayo eh... condom ka nalang para masaya ka....kahit wala kang trabaho... condom ka nalang kasi....kelangan namin ng pera sa kampanya nanim... condom ka nalang kasi...samin nalang ang pera makikihati kapa. kasi masaya naman kayo kapag may condom diba? THE church will speak whether you like it or not, follow it or not....but it is her role to teach morality. even in martyrdom she will stand on her ground for that is her mission. THE ROAD TO MORALITY IS HARD..many will not go this way.... BUT THE WAY OF THE CROCKED IS EASY.... AND MANY WILL FOLLoW IT... but in the end it is you who will choose the way to take. ETERNAL LIFE OR ETERNAL PUNISHMENT. condom will not save your soul. MORALITY does. “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.
Parang may bago ka ah. hehehe
“Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. tinatamaan ka ba? ay naku "GAGO SI ELLEN" para kang sirang plaka wala kanang points sa simula palang hangang ngaun ba naman? ay sus!
“Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.
Bato bato sa langit. ang tamaan, magrereact.. sorry na lang po. tabi tabi po. Ginagaya ko kasi ang taktika ni july.
Paulit ulit ulit ulit ulit ulit lang. And, wag ka papalit palit ng name july. halata ka eh. hehehe it seems that religion again is getting too involved in this issue. for gago si ellen, july and myna i commend all of you for your views that obviously were done thru research. i myself is a born catholic just like everyone else mentioned in this blog. but came into realization about the church flaws that eventually made people to change their faith. to gago si ellen, his comments about idolatry is well written in the holy book;
1 Peter 4:3 (King James Version) 3For the time past of our life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revellings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries: DEU 4:16 so that you do not become corrupt and make for yourselves an idol, an image of any shape, whether formed like a man or a woman, GEN 35:2 So Jacob said to his household and to all who were with him, "Get rid of the foreign gods you have with you, and purify yourselves and change your clothes. EXO 20:3 "You shall have no other gods before me. 4 "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 23 Do not make any gods to be alongside me; do not make for yourselves gods of silver or gods of gold. LEV 19:4 "'Do not turn to idols or make gods of cast metal for yourselves. I am the LORD your God. 26:1 "'Do not make idols or set up an image or a sacred stone for yourselves, and do not place a carved stone in your land to bow down before it. I am the LORD your God. DEU 4:16 so that you do not become corrupt and make for yourselves an idol, an image of any shape, whether formed like a man or a woman, 19 And when you look up to the sky and see the sun, the moon and the stars--all the heavenly array--do not be enticed into bowing down to them and worshiping things the LORD your God has apportioned to all the nations under heaven. 28 There you will worship man-made gods of wood and stone, which cannot see or hear or eat or smell. 27:15 "Cursed is the man who carves an image or casts an idol--a thing detestable to the LORD, the work of the craftsman's hands--and sets it up in secret." Then all the people shall say, "Amen!" PSA 115:4 But their idols are silver and gold, made by the hands of men. 5 They have mouths, but cannot speak, eyes, but they cannot see; These are just one of the many flaws of the catholic church. And there are more like calling FATHER, REV. FATHER or MOST HOLY FATHER. Remember our Lord Jesus Christ never calls Himslef with kind of Titles for it is written in Matthew 23:9 And call no man your father on the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Call no man your father upon earth. Another honorary title. The scribes delighted to be called Abba, father. So the priests of the Roman Catholic Church. So do all who welcome such honorary titles as Rev. Right Rev. Lord Bishop, etc. These are all forbidden. No apostle was ever so called. On repititive prayers (Praying the rosary): Matthew 6:7-8 “And when you pray, do not heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do, for they think that they will be heard for their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him. Helpful Not Helpful Matthew 6:9-13 Pray then like this: “Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name. Your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread, and forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. But i will not be a judge to that nor to all who practice all of these things for it is also written in Matthew 7:1-3 Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? ang problema sa inyo.. qoute kayo ng qoute sa bible di nyo naman naintindihan. you are using bible writen by catholics and now sasabhihin nyong magaling kayo kesa catholics at tama ang inyong interpretasyon! that is dangerous kaya duma dami ng dumadami ang nag sisisulpotang mga bulaang simbahan dahil may kanya kanyang interpretasyon. the church is the only authority to interprete it kasi sila ang nagsulat niyan....hindi kayo... kahit sino pweding mag sabi na tama sila... but the truth is catholic is the authentic interpreter ng bible kasi sila ang itinilaga ni kristo hindi kayo. pwede ba!
sino ba ang hindi nakakaintindi? nagbabasa ka ba ng bibliya? kahit sa hawak mong bibliya mababasa mo lahat yang nakasulat sa taas! di kita kasi magets e alin ba ang hindin namin naiintidihan? e ayan malinaw na nakasulat sa bibliya tapos hindi maintindihan? pakiexplain nga
correction di ang church ang nagsulat nyan kungdi mga EARLY CHRISTIANS! Wala pang mga CATHOLICS nung panahong sinusulat ang bibliya! Ginawa lang ng Roma ang pangalang Catholic dahil sa paniniwala nila itong Universal Church PERO ANG TUNAY NA SUMULAT NG BIBLIYA E MGA ALAGAD O DISIPULO NI KRISTO AT ANG TAWAG SA KANILA E MGA CHRISTIANS AT DI MGA KATOLIKO!
ows... what an ignorance..... what a hsitory you have. kailangan mo pang magbasa ng mag basa utak talakitok ka talaga.
sino ba nag first christian church aside from catholic church? protestants? orthodox? anglicans? iglesia ni kristo? come on? tanga ka talaga. research ka nalang nga. nga ngungupya na lang ng bibliya .. tapos sasabihin sila ang tama... what a shame. myna kung sino ka man AYOKONG BUMABA SA LEVEL MO DAHIL WALA KA NAMANG PINANGHAHAWAKAN NA KASULATAN PARA MAIPALIWANAG MO ANG SIDE MO AT PURO KA BATIKOS! AYAN NA SA HARAP MO ANG KASAYSAYAN NG CATHOLIC CHURCH AT NG EARLY CHRISTIANS! IKAW ME MAIPAPAKITA KA BANG GANYANG EBIDENSYA? WAG KANG MAGSABI NG TANGA SA KAPWA MO DAHIL LUMALABAS LANG ANG TUNAY NA ANYO MO DAHIL NATURINGAN PA NAMAN NA LENTEN SEASON NGAYON TAPOS GANYAN KA UMASTA! MAGBASA KA NGAYON NG BIBLIYA AT LAHAT NG MGA NAKASULAT SA TAAS MABABASA MO! DI YAN NIRECYCLE TULAD NG BINTANG MO! AKO MAN AY KATOLIKO PERO OPEN MINDED AKO SA MGA GANITONG SITWASYON! DAPAT SAGRADONG KATOLIKO AT DI SARADONG KATOLIKO! DAPAT MALAMAN MO KUNG ANO ANG TAMA AT MALI SA MGA TINUTURO NG MGA MANGAGARAL!
#101.1.1.1
myna
on
2010-03-30 22:59
(Reply)
are you hurt?????
the truth hurts.... don't disguise ... it so obvious!!!
#101.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-03-31 15:24
(Reply)
mahirap kasing makipag-usap sa taong nagtutulugtulugan at taong nagbubulagbulagan! napakanorrowminded mong tao ka kaya ganyan! sinabi ng mga early christians ang unang naging tagasunod ni kristo at ginawa lang ng roma ang pangalang katoliko dahil sa kanilang paniniwala na itoy isang universal religion. ngayon tinatanong mo kung sino original na church at sinong nanggaya e ayan na nga ang paliwanag! at sino ba nanggaya? yung bibliya mo at bibliya ng ibang christian churhes e PAREHO LANG NAMAN! ang PINAGKAIBA LANG E YUNG TURO NG BAWAT MANGANGARAL! sa INYO ok ang IDOLATRY pero MALIWANAG NAMAN SA BIBLIYA NA HINDI pero PINAGPIPILITAN MO NA NASA MALING INTERPRETASYON NG IBA YANG GANYANG ISYU E BAKET? MAGBASA KA NG BIBLIYANG GAMIT MO AT BIBLIYA NG IBANG SEKTA AT DOON MO MAKIKITA NA PAREHO LANG ANG NAKASULAT! ANONG MALING INTERPRETASYON DUN? KUNG IKAW AY NAPAKAGALING NA TAO AT PANAY TANGA TAWAG MO SA MGA KONTRA SA IYO AY PEDE BANG MASAGOT MO YUNG TANONG KO TUNGKOL SA KAPANGANAKAN NI KRISTO NA DECEMBER 25. BAKIT DECEMBER 25? AT BAKIT YUNG BIRTHDAY NYA E NAKA-FIXED SA DECEMBER 25 PERO BAKIT YUNG ARAW NG KAMATAYAN NYA E PAIBA-IBA NG BUWAN AT ARAW? MINSAN MARCH PERO MINSAN NAMAN APRIL. BAKIT GANUN? PAKIPALIWANAG NGA DAHIL MATALINO KA NAMAN.
CHURCH HISTORY & PROPHECY
Acts 11:26 and when he found him, he brought him to Antioch. So for a whole year Barnabas and Saul met with the church and taught a significant number of people. Now it was in Antioch that the disciples were first called Christians. (The early church were first called CHRISTIANS in Antioch Turkey they were not called CATHOLIC which came after Emperor Constantinople 500 years later) (Hindi man lang po nagkita si St Peter at si Pope Gregory I unang Papa, kahit ang kanilang mga membro ay hindi naman po tinatawag na Katoliko) Act 20:28-29 Watch out for yourselves and for all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God that he obtained with the blood of his own Son. I know that after I am gone fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. Even from among your own group men will arise, teaching perversions of the truth to draw the disciples away after them. (Ganito ang hula sa 'Iglesia Romana Katolika' pagkatapos mamatay si apostle Pablo sinabi niya na may papasok sa early christian church na kunwari ay kristyano pero ililihis nila ang turo at papatayin pati mga christian leaders Pagdating ni Constantinople bilang emperador ng Roma hindi na niya inusig pa ang mga kristyano sa halip ay ginawa niya itong State religion sa pangunguna ng Papa Gregorio I pero binago naman nila ang katuruan at pangalan ng Simbahan naging 'Roman Catholic Church' at ang sumalungat sa kanilang turo kahit man ito ay suportado ng Biblia ay itinuturing na heretic at pwedeng patayin Ganyan nagyari gaya ng hula sa Act 20:28) hindi ka born again ... born against... or recycled!
born again ba ang first christian church? born again foundaed in america in John Wesley, on early 17oo (separated from the catholic church)... what a shame? see... these churches are coming up as prophesized... to persecute the catholic church. it has been prophesized about false prophets.... born to be born against. (the separetd souls)
#102.1.1.1
Be Born Again John3:3
on
2010-03-30 02:13
(Reply)
IPeter 1:3
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! By his great mercy we are born-again into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead (Bible palagi ang basehan ng isang tunay na Kristyano, pagpalain ka ng Lord Ms Myna)
#102.1.1.1.1
myna
on
2010-03-30 02:43
(Reply)
BIBLE NA KINOPYA NYO GALING SA CATHOLICS AT NGAYON INAAANGKIN NYO (and used it against the catholic church). AT KAYO NA ANG MAGALING... WHAT A SHAME!
you make your self as instrument by satan to destroy the true church... wake up!!!!! the catholic church has been persecuted before and even now!!!! before you exixts catholics existed already... you will banish... but the catholic will not because GOD is WITH HER and she will remain with untill the end of time. STAY AWAY STAN!
#102.1.1.1.2
myna
on
2010-03-30 03:05
(Reply)
**to be born again is not to make a new church and call it "born again.. to be born again is to remain to the TRUE CHURCH and live all its teachings
(yan ang hirap sa pansariling interpretation ng bible!) to form a church and call it born again? WHAT A SHAME!
#102.1.1.1.2.1
GAGO SI ELLEN
on
2010-03-30 07:56
(Reply)
Parehas na parehas ng comment ni July (aka myna, myrna, beth, anonymous, katawa etc etc) ah..
KULANG ANG HISTORY MO.... kasi yan lang ang alam mo!
Peter traveled to Rome, where he was martyred. In this tract we will show that the Fathers also recognized that the bishop of Rome—the pope—continued to serve in Peter’s role in subsequent generations of the Church. Irenaeus (the historian 189 AD) "The blessed apostles [Peter and Paul], having founded and built up the church [of Rome] . . . handed over the office of the episcopate to Linus" (Against Heresies 3:3:3 [A.D. 189]). Tertullian (his writings 200 AD) "[T]his is the way in which the apostolic churches transmit their lists: like the church of the Smyrneans, which records that Polycarp was placed there by John, like the church of the Romans, where Clement was ordained by Peter" (Demurrer Against the Heretics 32:2 [A.D. 200]). The Little Labyrinth "Victor . . . was the thirteenth bishop of Rome from Peter" (The Little Labyrinth [A.D. 211], in Eusebius, Church History 5:28:3). “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.
sabi na eh, parehas lang si myna ay si july. hehehe.. parehas ng timbre ng boses, pang siraulong timbre. Huwag na tayong mag aksaya ng panahon kay Myna, Myrna, Betty, July minsan Anonymous.. iisang tao lang yan. Si july, ang analysis ko, hindi siya katoliko ay pinag iinit nya lang ang ulo natin para magalit tayo ng todo sa mga katoliko. Galing ng taktika mo july, pang sira ulo talaga. July believes that Catholic Church was established in the 1st century, with Peter. This is a belief, not a fact. The establishment of the Catholic Church was a later event, and the Roman state church did not exist in the first century. It is not a neutral presentation to retroactively claim first century Christians as Roman Catholics - this should only be stated as a belief, regardless of how strongly entrenched it may be among believers.--Jeffro77
Peter traveled to Rome, where he was martyred. In this tract we will show that the Fathers also recognized that the bishop of Rome—the pope—continued to serve in Peter’s role in subsequent generations of the Church.
Irenaeus (the historian 189 AD) "The blessed apostles [Peter and Paul], having founded and built up the church [of Rome] . . . handed over the office of the episcopate to Linus" (Against Heresies 3:3:3 [A.D. 189]). Tertullian (his writings 200 AD) "[T]his is the way in which the apostolic churches transmit their lists: like the church of the Smyrneans, which records that Polycarp was placed there by John, like the church of the Romans, where Clement was ordained by Peter" (Demurrer Against the Heretics 32:2 [A.D. 200]). The Little Labyrinth "Victor . . . was the thirteenth bishop of Rome from Peter" (The Little Labyrinth [A.D. 211], in Eusebius, Church History 5:28:3). La Iglesia Católica es la única iglesia que Cristo ha fundado. Todas otras iglesias cristianas se separaron de la iglesia para destruir a la iglesia católica como mencionado en la Biblia. Quedado estas iglesias que son del trabajo del diablo.
I will translate this to everybody using Google Translate:
La Catolica: The Catholic Church is the only church that Christ founded. All other Christian churches split from the church to destroy the Catholic Church as mentioned in the Bible. Left these churches are the work of the devil. definitely marunong english ang nag post nito kasi naintindihan nya ang mga comments. July july, another dirty tactic on your part. a typical July I studied Theology in a Roman Catholic seminary, including early Church History.
Christianity was about around 300 years old before it even became public, with the Roman Emperor Constantine. It took another 100 years for the religion to be accepted, and then adopted. So, it was almost 400AD before Christianity even became a Roman thing. It flourished long before Rome became involved. And, it flourished in places Rome had nothing to do with. The power of the Bishop of Rome (one of the leaders known as Pope - there are others) did not solidify until much later - after the decline of the Roman Empire. The Church certainly existed, but it was not Roman Catholic until later. The first main split was in the 1400's (the Orthodox/Latin split). However, the differences between the denominations are not nearly as large as people think. Although I was at a Roman Catholic university, I am Anglican, and there was a small Anglican studies department there. Anglicans and Roman Catholics took almost exactly the same courses. Anglicans added some specific Anglican history courses. Otherwise, we were about 98% the same. Apostolic Succession
The first Christians had no doubts about how to determine which was the true Church and which doctrines the true teachings of Christ. The test was simple: Just trace the apostolic succession of the claimants. Apostolic succession is the line of bishops stretching back to the apostles. All over the world, all Catholic bishops are part of a lineage that goes back to the time of the apostles, something that is impossible in Protestant denominations (most of which do not even claim to have bishops). The role of apostolic succession in preserving true doctrine is illustrated in the Bible. To make sure that the apostles’ teachings would be passed down after the deaths of the apostles, Paul told Timothy, "[W]hat you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also" (2 Tim. 2:2). In this passage he refers to the first three generations of apostolic succession—his own generation, Timothy’s generation, and the generation Timothy will teach. The Church Fathers, who were links in that chain of succession, regularly appealed to apostolic succession as a test for whether Catholics or heretics had correct doctrine. This was necessary because heretics simply put their own interpretations, even bizarre ones, on Scripture. Clearly, something other than Scripture had to be used as an ultimate test of doctrine in these cases. Thus the early Church historian J. N. D. Kelly, a Protestant, writes, "[W]here in practice was [the] apostolic testimony or tradition to be found? . . . The most obvious answer was that the apostles had committed it orally to the Church, where it had been handed down from generation to generation. . . . Unlike the alleged secret tradition of the Gnostics, it was entirely public and open, having been entrusted by the apostles to their successors, and by these in turn to those who followed them, and was visible in the Church for all who cared to look for it" (Early Christian Doctrines, 37). For the early Fathers, "the identity of the oral tradition with the original revelation is guaranteed by the unbroken succession of bishops in the great sees going back lineally to the apostles. . . . [A]n additional safeguard is supplied by the Holy Spirit, for the message committed was to the Church, and the Church is the home of the Spirit. Indeed, the Church’s bishops are . . . Spirit-endowed men who have been vouchsafed ‘an infallible charism of truth’" (ibid.). Thus on the basis of experience the Fathers could be "profoundly convinced of the futility of arguing with heretics merely on the basis of Scripture. The skill and success with which they twisted its plain meaning made it impossible to reach any decisive conclusion in that field" (ibid., 41). ***dahil ang basihan mo utak mong walang laman.
kung ang simbahang katoliko ay hindi ang tunay na simbahan.... HINDI rin KAYO KASI galing kayo samin.. KUng kami ang tunay na simbahan so hindi kayo ang tunay kasi nag separate kayo samin.... tanga!
#107.1.1.1
GAGO SI ELLEN
on
2010-03-30 08:20
(Reply)
Ang stand ko, may faith alone will save me. Hindi religion gaya ng pinuputak mo.
Ang tanga, grabe! Sana naman po, walang pinoy na ganito katanga.. para umunlad na ang pinas..
#107.1.1.1.1
myna
on
2010-03-30 09:05
(Reply)
your faith alone??????? oh my lord... hehehe... not even your faith will save you... tanga!
GOD created community,, for you to live with the community where HE is God (meaning the CHurch.. tanga) that is why he created covenant... tanga! and so he sent Christ to save his people tanga! and so Christ created the church... tanga! faith without action is dead... tanga! you have a heretical faith... tanga! wala kang alam tanga! lahat na ata ng katangahan nasa yo na..tanga!
#107.1.1.1.1.1
GAGO SI ELLEN
on
2010-03-30 09:36
(Reply)
Typical July...
Anu naman kaya ang gagawin mong name sa susunod para purihin ang sarili mong comment. What a pity. Napaka bobo Hinayhinay lang mga kaibigan.wait for more archeological finds.
Ang mga pinagtatalunan ninyong teksto aykulang yan.ilang libro lang ba ang nasa bibliya?ilan pa ang nakatago?(Apocripals/Gnostics).wala pa dyan ang gospel of Philip,Judas,Thomas,etc..etc.. To be sure kung talagang tutoo ang nakasulat sa pinagtatalunang 2k years of text and some text before that,try searching the stone tablets of the Summerians.nasa British museum ang mga ito. Ikumpara ninyo ang nilalaman ng old testament sa Stone tablets na ito and then you can start arguing with the new testament.kung masisikmura pa ninyong pagtalunan ang bibliya pagkatapos ninyong malaman ang mga nilalaman nito. Cheers! uy.. nag sambit ng archeological term.
teka teka... wag kanang ma excite kasi yan mga pinupulot ng mga archeologist na yan... iyan yung mga naitapon ng early church kasi... heretics and uninspired. it seems that you're so excited about those already disposed by the church. nGEK! Parehas na parehas ng comment ni July (aka myna, myrna, beth, anonymous, katawa etc etc) ah.
Parang pinagbiyak na arinola. hehehe Well,kung hanggang dyan na lang ang kayang mong paniwalaan ay wala na akong magagawa.
Facts can give you wisdom but ignorance is the enemy of wisdom. Its up to you which one you will choose. As I mentioned before,research for the Stone tablets from the Summerian civilization.those are authentic older than what you are reading now.most of it were derived from there.so before you argue,I will appriciate veracity from what you are defending with. You cannot say na itinapon lang ng simbahan yun dahil your church is not even in existence yet during that time. In short,wala pa ang kaparian at ang Pope nung time na yun kaya no way na sila ang nagtapon. Besides,kung ang binabasa mong bible ay sa English na o tagalog ibig sabihin nyan ay translated na yan.Sure ka ba na yun talaga ang translation nun? mas bibilib ako sayo kung Hebrew o Aramaic ang binabasa mong bible. you are more ignorant!
you don't even have a good grasp of the early history. you are using those stone which is preserve and collected as of its value as antiques but has nothing to do with the church because even then it was already pronounced as immaterial. englis or tagalog? then use greek hebrew Aramaic even Latin! kaya mo ba? ako? kaya ko! houtOs gar EgapEsen theos ton kosmon hOste
ton huion autou ton monogenE edOken hina pas ho pisteuOn eis auton mE apolEtai all echE zOEn aiOnion. ok basahin mo nga at ngaun mo sabihin na alam mo to! Wala ka lolo ko.. ung lolo ko mas matalino pa sayo eh. eh ikaw, halatang nakatakas sa mental.
Arabic: ما يؤسف له
Spanish: Qué lástima Greek: Κρίμα Hebrew: כמה חבל English: What a pity, sobrang katangahan. Natuto lang mag internet akala mo alam na ang history ng lahat. Puro non-sense naman ang pinag sasabi, galing lang sa maliit na utak nya.. kaawa awa. hahaha... yan lang ang alam? oh my lord... talo kalang ng driver ko.
Ha? Kaya pala pulos kayabangan mo kasi akala mo ikaw lang ang may alam.. first time mo sa internet? andami nang nangtratranslate ngayon teng.
John 3:16 Houto gar egapesen ho Theos ton kosmon hoste ton huion ton monogene edoken hina pas ho pisteuon eis auton me apoletai all’ echei zoen aionion “For God loved the world this way, that He gave His monogene Son so that everyone who believes in Him may not perish but may have eternal life. . . . ... hay,, naku.. tanga talaga.. hahaha... mag ta -translate lang mali mali pa... just using googles to translate? use ur mind! asa ka lang sa computer. tanga!
napahiya ka lang. nyahahahaha..
wawa ka naman.. hindi sa google translate yan. sa isang catholic website ko nakuha yan.. napakatanga, grabe. AdvC onj vi Aor Act 3 Sg t_ Acc Sg m t_ Nom Sg m vp Pres ActNom Sg mPre Ac Sg mvs PresAct 3 Sg a AccSg f.
tanga! nyahahahaha.. para ka talagang bata.
bahala ka umintindi nyan. hehehe. pahiya ang bata, kawawa.. iyak ka na.. hehehe wala ka pal eh... yabang mo inu-utu uto kalang eh..hehehe you're like a dog. you entertain me very much. ganun nga think like a dog!
Ako nga naeentertain sau eh.. tawa nga ako ng tawa lagi sa reply mo eh.
hehehehe grabe, meron pa palang esep bata dito.. at ganun katangang nilalang.. Theology 101
HISTORICAL CHRONOLOGICAL COMPRESSION (Pilit dinudugtong ang kasaysayan bagamat napakalawak ng kanyang agwat) Hindi pwedeng succession ng Pope si St Peter bilang apostol ng true church dahil 500 years ang kanilang pagitan Ang Roman Empire Catholic Church ay hindi tunay na Kristyano kundi sila yung humawak sa Tunay na Iglesia at pinalitan nila ito ng pangalan Tumago ang mga tunay na Kristyano partikular sa Alps mountain at dala nila ang sipi ng Bibliang aramaic (ACTS 20:28-29 Ito ay naganap bilang katuparan ng hula) sino yung mga sinsabi mong mga kristyano... mga BORN AGAIN?... ah ganun bayon? bago yun ah! ganun ba yung history? eh bakit sila (born again) galing sa catholics?
A response to Myna's views:
see... these churches are coming up as prophesized... to persecute the catholic church. it has been prophesized about false prophets.... born to be born against. (the separetd souls) POPE SAYS SORRY FOR SINS OF CHURCH Sweeping apology for attacks on Jews, women and minorities defies theologians' warnings Saving one of his most audacious initiatives for the twilight of his papacy, John Paul II yesterday attempted to purify the soul of the Roman Catholic church by making a sweeping apology for 2,000 years of violence, persecution and blunders. From the altar of St Peter's Basilica in Rome he led Catholicism into unchartered territory by seeking forgiveness for sins committed against Jews, heretics, women, Gypsies and native peoples. Fighting through trembles and slurrings caused by Parkinson's disease, the Pope electrified ranks of cardinals and bishops by pleading for a future that would not repeat the mistakes. "Never again," he said. Centuries of hate and rivalry could not recur in the third millennium. "We forgive and we ask forgiveness. We are asking pardon for the divisions among Christians, for the use of violence that some have committed in the service of truth, and for attitudes of mistrust and hostility assumed towards followers of other religions." Plea for brotherhood Defying warnings from some theologians that the unprecedented apology would undermine the church's authority, the 79-year-old pontiff asked God to forgive the persecution of the Jews. "We are deeply saddened by the behaviour of those who in the course of history have caused these children of yours to suffer, and asking your forgiveness we wish to commit ourselves to genuine brotherhood." Wearing the purple vestments of lenten mourning, the Pope sought pardon for seven categories of sin: general sins; sins in the service of truth; sins against Christian unity; against the Jews; against respect for love, peace and cultures; against the dignity of women and minorities; and against human rights. Ethnic groups had endured "contempt for their cultures and religious traditions". Women were "all too often humiliated and marginalised". Trust in wealth and power had obscured the church's responsibility to the poor and oppressed. There was no reference to homosexuals, who had asked to be included for suffering theocratic violence. The Pope did not identify guilty individuals or name the crusades, the Inquisition or the Holocaust, but the references were clear. Five Vatican cardinals and two bishops confessed sins on behalf of the church during the ceremony. Cardinal Edward Cassidy recalled the "sufferings of the people of Israel" asked divine pardon for the "sins committed by not a few [Catholics] against the people of the covenant". 'Warped' view Several Jewish leaders praised the sermon as historic and significant but Israel's chief rabbi said he was deeply frustrated by the Pope's failure to mention the Holocaust, and described the service as "a severely warped view of history". Rabbi Israel Meir Lau joined other Israelis in expressing hope that the pope had omitted acknowledging the church's passivity during the Holocaust only because he was planning a specific apology during next week's pilgrimage to the holy land. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, head of the congregation of the doctrine of the faith, confessed to the sins of the congregation's predecessor, the Inquisition. "Even men of the church, in the name of faith and morals, have sometimes used methods not in keeping with the Gospel," he said. Applause from the congregation greeted the Pope's arrival in the basilica. He kneeled before the Pieta, Michelangelo's statue of the dead Christ in the arms of his mother, before being wheeled to the altar. He leaned on his silver staff and it took several attempts for him to get out of his chair to kiss a crucifix. The Vatican no longer denies the Pope has Parkinson's disease. An operation to remove a tumour, several falls and an assassination attempt have left him hunched and stiff. Seeking forgiveness has been a leitmotif of his papacy since his election in 1978. He has apologised for the crusades, the massacre of French Protestants, the trial of Galileo and anti-semitism. Yesterday's apology was by far the most sweeping and an unprecedented act for the leader of a major religion. One of the highlights of this year's jubilee, or holy year, it was the result of four years' research by a panel of 28 theologians and scholars. Disquiet that the apology was a beautiful gesture but a theological mistake bubbled to the surface last week. Echoing widespread concern from liberal as well as conservative theologians, the Bishop of Como, Alessandro Maggiolini, said: "In whose name, exactly, is the holy father asking pardon? He is relying on a group of experts, but tomorrow another group of experts might come up with different examples." Other churchmen said the gesture would be seen by Muslims as a sign of weakness and by secular enemies as a cue to launch further attacks. The Pope's persistence in ramming through the initiative, despite resistance inside the Vatican, has doused claims that he has effectively retired and abandoned policy-making. The document that provides the theological framework emphasises a distinction between the sins committed by the church's sons and daughters and the church itself, which remains holy and immaculate. Speaking after the ceremony to the crowd in St Peter's Square, the Pope stressed he was seeking forgiveness not from those who had been wronged, but from God. "Only he can do that." 2,000 years of violence and persecution The Crusades Pope Urban II, anxious to assert Rome's authority in the east, sent a military expedition in 1095 to reconquer the holy land. The crusaders ravaged the countries they passed through and massacred the Muslim, Jewish and even Christian population of Jerusalem after capturing it in 1099. After 200 years of conflict Muslim armies drove them out for good, but the crusaders' symbol of the red cross remains provocative. The Inquisition The attempt to combat suspected apostates, Jews and Muslims at the time of the Reformation spawned tribunals in Europe and the new world that tortured and executed thousands. Ecclesiastical queasiness about flowing blood led to the use of racks, thumbscrews and red-hot metal instead of blades; 2,000 people were burned at the stake during the tenure of Spain's first grand inquisitor, Tomas de Torquemada. The Holocaust Pope Pius XII never publicly condemned the Nazis' persecution of Jews, even when they were being rounded up and deported from Rome. His silence is partly blamed for the failure of Germany's Catholics to resist Hitler. Anti-Jewish Catholic doctrines such as the claim that the Jews murdered Christ were said to have ideologically underpinned nazism. Vatican officials allegedly helped Nazis escape Europe after the war. A RESPONSE TO YOU
THE CATHOLIC CHURCH HAS REACH HER MATURITY BY LOOKING BACK HER WEAKNESSESS...THIS IS A SIGN OF A TRUE CHURCH THAT ADMITS HER WEAKNESSESS (FOR EVERYONE IS INVAITED FOR PERFECTION) Scandal is nothing new for the Church. There have been many times through the ages when things were much worse off than they are now. The history of the Church is like a cosine curve with many ups and downs. At the times when the Church hits its low points God raises up tremendous saints to bring the Church back to its real mission. It's almost as if in those times of darkness the light of Christ shines ever more brightly. I would like to focus on a couple of saints whom God raised up in such difficult times, because their wisdom can guide us during our own difficult time. Martin Luther, an Augustinian priest, lived during the reign of perhaps the most notorious pope in history, Alexander VI. This pope never taught anything against the faith-the Holy Spirit prevented that-but he was a wicked man. He had nine children from six different concubines. He put out contracts on the lives of those he considered his enemies. Luther, like everyone, must have wondered how God could allow a wicked man to be the visible head of his Church. All types of moral problems confronted Luther even in his own country of Germany. Priests were living in open relationships with women. Some made exaggerated claims about indulgences. There was terrible immorality among lay Catholics. Luther was scandalized, as anyone who loved God should have been. He allowed the scandal to drive him from the Church. Christ can work still and does work still even through the most sinful priest. And thank God! If we were dependent on the priest's personal holiness, we would be in trouble. Though they are chosen by God from among men, priests are tempted and fall into sin just like anyone else. But of course God knew that from the beginning. Eleven of the first twelve apostles scattered when Christ was arrested, but they came back. error:>>>>martin is not a saint (he is the father of protestantism) when he sepated himself from the catholic church.... from him almost all denominations came and were devided to smaller denominations because of self-interpretations of the bible... and so untill now many smaller demoninations came because of un-unified interpretation of the scripture... this all go back from MARTIN luthers self- interpretaion of the scripture.
#118.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-03-30 23:51
(Reply)
DID THE jewish LEADERS/people ASKS FORGIVES of their sins.. even during the time JESUS?
DID the MOSLIMS ask forgiveness from persecuting / killing CHristians? did other denominations and other churches asked forginess from their lapses? (or are they just bling and self righteous?) DID THEY? the answer is no BUT... THE CATHOLIC does! think!
#118.1.1.1.1
Back to the Bible
on
2010-03-31 01:43
(Reply)
Ang pagiging Born- Again ay isang personal experience at hindi bilang pangalan ng bagong kristyano o sekta
Mga naliwanagan sa Biblia at nakita namin na ito ang nais ni Jesus kaya't sinabi niya: 'You must be born-again' Juan 3:3 kailangan ma-experience nyo ipanganak muli Si Apostle Peter mismo ay nakaranas nito ng sabihin niya sa 1Pedro 1 :3 'Tayo'y na- born again ipinanganak muli sa kanyang mayamang habag dahil kay Hesukristo Balikan nyo po ang Biblia at taimtim basahen ang nakasulat duon
#118.1.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-03-31 03:49
(Reply)
READING THE BIBLE IS GOOD BUT IF YOU INTERPRET IT ACCORDING YOUR ABILITY.... THAT IS THE BEGINNING OF YOUR DOWNFALL.DEVIL COMES AND ROARING LIKE A LION LOOKING FOR SOMEONE TO DEVOUR.
#118.1.1.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-03-31 06:00
(Reply)
you can be born again without leaving the catholic church... not by forming another church
#118.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
GAGO SI ELLEN
on
2010-03-31 08:26
(Reply)
oh, myna (aka) july, myrna, betty.. bakit ayaw mo na maglagay ng name ngayon? hehehe
The only reason why we still have this population problem and growing HIV/AIDS menace is that we are still living with hypocrite and self-righteous people. We know who they are. They are the people who are still in denial that contraception is the best way to control this problem.
condoms is just a short term answer to the perolem but not the real solution to the problem. using condom actuality stimulates a more the mind of person to crave more for sex, and so it follows, people becomes more aggressive on sex and irresponsible sex, and, in the end worst scenario comes in. now did it answer the problem? no!
go to is roots to address the problem. good understanding of sex. responsibility, good parenthood, good education. but it will be realized if we don't have poverty. with poverty no one can offord to go school. no one can afford good education and so no will be educated of how is to be a resposible parents. and so, poverty ruins everything. i think that is what can i say about it Ang mga pari ay may magandang edukasyon, responsible parents at karamihan sa kanila ay may mga kaya sa buhay.. the question is, bakit hindi pa rin nila mapigilan?
get real.. kailangan natin ng utak para mag survive sa mundong ito. what???ano sabi mo, babaw naman ng logic mo. BAKIT MAY AIDS? Kasi mga walwal dila nila sa sex.Kahit sino gustong patusin, prosti man o hindi..B-U-B-U ka ba?
ATTENTION: To all critics of ELLEN tordesillas!
Hindi ba binatikos ninyo si ellen dahil sa prediction nya na ang pag sampa ng "rebellion charges" laban sa mga AMPATUAN ay pakana ng gobyerno para mapawalang sala ang mga AMPATUAN at sila ay makalaya at hindi makulong ng habang buhay. If my memory serves me right, marami sa mga bloggers dito na mga critics ni ellen ay nag pyesta sa pag batikos kay ellen na paranoid lang kasi ayaw nya kay gloria arroyo. Hindi din ako fan ni ellen, pero ngayon tanong ko lang sa inyo... hindi ba nagkatotoo ang mga sinulat ni ellen? Basahin nyu ang news... Binasura na ng QC court ang rebellion charges laban sa mga ampatuan. Mahiya naman kayo mga critics o bloggers kasi kayo ang nagkamali ngayon. Mukhang may ponto nga si ellen noon. Malapit nang makalaya ang mga AMPATUAN. Nanalo na sila sa first step ng laban. Pilipinas talaga... Naliligaw ka....Lipas gutom lang yan...
Condom ang topic dito pre..... mali ka yata ng pinasukang blog kasi blog ni mareng winnie monsod to. dun ka sa blog ni ellen tordisillas pumunta para maparating mo yung sinasabi mo.
Condoms: A point-by-point reply to Solita Monsod
By Abraham V. Llera In her “Analysis by Winnie Monsod” on” News on Q” on March 22, 2010, Solita Monsod made a number of points in favor of condoms as the solution to the rise in HIV new infections in the country. Monsod: New HIV infections in the Philippines have increased, whereas globally , new HIV infections have , in fact, decreased by 17 percent, a fact, which is probably the basis for Sec Cabral’s worry, and which should be the worry for the rest of us too. Llera: In the above , Monsod SUGGESTS that, since new HIV/AIDS infections elsewhere have gone down while ours in the Philippines have gone up, there must be something we are not doing right. Inasmuch as condom use is not as widespread in the Philippines as it is elsewhere in the world, our not using condoms is what’s causing the rise in our HIV/AIDS new infections. This is sloppy work for a journalist especially one who has a national audience. All it’ll take is a little imagination to see that Monsod’s conclusion not only misses the point entirely, but offers as the cure something which is the cause of the problem. Of the 2.7 M new infections in 2008 as recorded by UNAIDS, 1.9 M or 70 percent is accounted for by Sub-Saharan Africa, meaning that, if there has been a decrease in new HIV infections, half of the decrease is accounted for by Sub-Saharan Africa ALONE. Now let me ask. Of all the countries in the Sub-Saharan Africa, which has shown the most decrease in new HIV infections? Isn’t it Uganda? And how did Uganda did it? Isn’t it by abstinence? Monsod: There are no studies more recent than the WHO study in 2000 or the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health in 1999. Llera: In 2008 The Swiss Federal Commission for HIV/AIDS published the findings of four studies showing that couples may have “unprotected sex” so long as the HIV infected partner take ARV therapy as that will block the passing on of the virus. This was met by an immediate howl of protest from HIV/AIDS groups who questioned the fact that the study limited itself to heterosexual couples. Anal sex, these groups claim, pose special problems which vaginal sex don’t have. Condom failure is that much higher in anuses than in vaginas, forcing UNAIDS and WHO to issue statements to the effect that condoms were still the safest protection against HIV. Monsod: There are no studies more recent than 2000 because the issue of condom effectiveness has been resolved a long time ago. Llera: From the above, and from the experience of Thailand which is reeling from a resurgence of AIDS, condom effectiveness is far from a resolved issue. In fact, and I’d like to ask Solita Monsod: isn't it precisely condoms which is causing the increase in new HUV infections? Condoms, by promising “safe sex” has transformed Thailand’s youth into sexually-crazed creatures, ready to do sex at the drop of a hat and at an early age. Monsod: The WHO Fact Sheet No 243 states: “ Laboratory studies have found that viruses (including HIV) do not pass through intact latex condoms even when the devices are stretched or stressed. “ Llera: In a 1998 article, C.M. Roland of the Naval Research Laboratory Chemistry Division and M.J. Schroeder of the U.S. Naval Academy Department of Chemistry said: “The defining feature of viruses is their diminutive size. For example the AIDS virus is only 0.15 microns, and the Hepatitis B virus is even smaller. Given the presence in rubber of intrinsic defects two magnitudes of order larger in size , the ability of a condom or a surgical glove to percent transmissi0n of viral particles is problematic.” Moreover, we should remember that stretching applies only one type of stress: uniform lateral stress, the other four types of stress applied to a condom in use are not included. These are “the pressure stress (perpendicular to the axis of the later stress) ; shear stress (high twisting or angular stresses at critical points); friction stress (abrasion stress during lateral movement between two surfaces in contact); and corrosion stress caused by a mixture of body fluids and lubricants , whose effect is greatly enhanced by the repeated and simultaneous application of mechanical stresses.” (Credit: Brian Clowes) And look at what the U.S. National Institutes of Health says: scientific evidence does not support condom use as a means to prevent infections of genital herpes (HSV) [page 20]; human papillomavirus (HPV) [page 26]; Chlamydia [page 17]; syphilis [page 23]; canchroid [page 21]; trichomonas [page 18]. Monsod: In Thailand, the promotion by the government of 100 percent condom use by commercial sex workers led to a dramatic decline in STD cases from 410,406 in 1987 to 27,362 in 1994. Llera: Monsod is not being very honest here: she’s using old figures. The truth is, Thailand is now reeling under a resurgence of HIV infections. Go check it out on the Internet. Monsod: Johns Hopkins: “Consistent condom use protected against HIV.” Llera: In the above, Monsod is suggesting that condoms guarantee safety against STDs. But here’s what the National Institutes Of Health says in its Workshop Summary: Scientific Evidence for Condom Effectiveness for Sexually Transmitted Disease Prevention page 14: ”consistent condom use decreased the risk of HIV/AIDS transmission by approximately 85%.“ Monsod’s in effect saying: “Let the 15 percent die, 85 percent will live anyway.” Llera in effect saying: "Let more people become infected with AIDS now, it will probably lessen in the future (or not at all)"
Llera: "Condoms, by promising “safe sex” has transformed Thailand’s youth into sexually-crazed creatures, ready to do sex at the drop of a hat and at an early age." The church in effect should also withdraw their support on the calendar method as it also promise "safe sex" and will probably transform our country's youth into sexually-crazed creatures. -- next time na ung iba. hehehe, haba eh. "The only reason why we still have this population problem and growing HIV/AIDS menace is that we are still living with hypocrite and self-righteous people. We know who they are. They are the people who are still in denial that contraception is the best way to control this problem."
Apparently you're young. You were not around then when men respected women and didn't use them as sexual objects. You were not around when people actually believed sex is something sacred which may not be indulged in by a man and a woman who are not married to each other in Church. You were not around when husbands stayed faithful to their marriage vows and had no one else except his wife. You were not around when at dusk, children would hurry home, kiss the hands of their parents, and be around so that the whole family can have dinner together. You were not around when people valued life, when abortions were unheard of, and children did not consign their old parents homes for the aged. Apparently you've known only the ugly side of mankind: abortion, de facto unions, same-sex unions, euthanasia, ungodliness, pronography, alcoholism, drug addiction, loose living-- the Pandora's box of inquities contraception opened. Yes you are definitely right.. but past is past, we have to move on and adjust to what is happening to the world right now.
This is something called "Face of the new Generation"( Parang pepsi, ah)...
You can't do nothing about it but to adapt to it. Church has to know that by now.... na di na uto-uto ang mga bagong kabataan ngayon.... di na basta-basta naniniwala na si Eva ay hinugot mula sa tadyang ni adan.... Ang Mga Kwento ni Lola Basyang, napalitan na ng You Tube at Video games. Ang condom ay isang paraan na pag adapt. Kung di ka gagamit ng condom, you will suffer the consequence. Why adjust to it if we can go back to the good old days?
The key here is contraception. For 2,000 years the world believed that contraception is evil, and things, although not perfect, were not as bad as now. It's the introduction of contraception-- first by the discovery by Charles Goodyear of the condom, and, later, by the developmen of the Pill in 50s -- that opened the world wide to the present inquities the world is reeling under. Moling Benitez:
"If it were up to, sampal ang aabutin sa akin ng mga putanginang paring ito na walang ginawa kungdi makialam sa mga ginagawa ng gobyerno na alam naman nating lahat na tama at para sa ikabubuti ng tao at ng mga darating pang tao." Llera: Why are pro-condom people unformly uncouth? Go see WE SUPPORT SEC CABRAL and see her supporters there spewing vitriol like this Benitez guy here does. ON the other hand, go to I OPPOSE THE REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH BILL and see how civil their language is. I suggest you also quote some comments made by the anti-condom bloggers. e.g. July, Myna, Myrna.. etc.
That is what you call fair journalism in media. Gago si ellen:
"Llera in effect saying: "Let more people become infected with AIDS now, it will probably lessen in the future (or not at all)" Guderian: You're making one big assumption here, that condoms is the ONLY way to check HIV new infections. Truth to tell, it's not, or have you not heard about how abstinence has turned the tide of the AIDS epidemic in Uganda (hear Pres Yoweri Museveni tell it you). In fact, condoms is not a cure, it IS the cause of the AIDS epidemic in Thailand. Notice how Thailand went to the dogs after it listened to the false gospel of the Condom King Mechai. Officially it's 650,000 people living with AIDS in 2008, but it's more around 1,100,000. Condoms are not HIV virus-proof. Look up "U.S. National Institutes of Health,"
and you will see its report that condoms are effective only 85% of the time, meaning that, for every 100 persons who use it with an HIV-infected partner, 85 will be spared, but 15 will dies a SLOW death. And how about the slippages and breakages that the condom is prone to? Can anyone stop a condom from slipping because the penis has gone limp? Can anyone guarantee that a condom will not tear because of hard, intense sex? And how about condom slippage/breakage because of anal sex (anal sex subjects the condom to altogether different levels of stress)? And how about condom slippage because of incorrect donning (as when subject is drunk)? I likewise do not see how any amount of care can cover the part of the user which remains uncovered by the condom: the base, the pubic hair, the scrotums. These parts remain vulnerable to genital herpes (HSV), syphilis, chanchroid, trichomonas (U.S. National Institutes of Health: “ Workshop Summary: Scientific Evidence on Condom Effectiveness for Sexually Transmitted Diseases” pages 20, 23, 21, and 18, respectively). And how, pray tell me, could any amount of sex education skirt the laws of probability? “Simple high school statistics probability theory- imagine an increase of sexual activity by a thousand because of reliance on condoms. If each young HIV carrier, in his lifetime, has only 100 sexual intercourse with a risk probability of 10%, and imagine 1,000 HIV infected sex workers, expected value of transmission= 0.10x100x1,000= 10,000 transmissions. Condom users: think about it. The U.S. National Institutes of Health said it.. Why is that the U.S. is still using condom? There should be a reason for doing that otherwise, the U.S. National Institute of Health should recommend to the Government of the U.S. the ban of using of condom, just like what is the church is doing now.
What we are looking for right now is the IMMEDIATE solution to the problem. Baka naman its already too late pag nagkaroon ng result yang education process na proposal nyo.
The most effective process is, condom + education. Anybody knows Mrs. Monsod's e-mail address?
I'd like her to address the points I've raised in response to hers. Moralidad ang dapat ituro ng Simbahan at hindi ang pagbabawal sa contraceptives, pills, condom etc
Hindi kalaswaan sa mag asawa kung mag sex sila at gumamit ng paraan para malimitahan ang panganganak Huag nyo ng guluhen ang isyu dahil hindi totoong 'infallible' ang Papacy at 'inerrant' ang mga pusisyon ng simbahan nagkakamali ren sila particular sa pagpupumilit pakialaman ang mag-asawa sa loob ng bedroom “The main reason that condoms sometimes fail is incorrect or inconsistent use, not the failure of the condom itself”
http://www.avert.org/condoms.htm It is likely that the number of new HIV infections in Uganda peaked in the late 1980s, and then fell sharply until the mid 1990s. This is generally thought to have been the result of behaviour changes such as increased abstinence and monogamy, a rise in the average age of first sex, a reduction in the average number of sexual partners and more frequent use of CONDOMS. http://www.avert.org/aids-uganda.htm Whilst UN Special Envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa, Stephen Lewis said that PEPFAR's emphasis on abstinence above condom distribution is a "distortion of the preventive apparatus and is resulting in great damage and undoubtedly will cause significant numbers of infections which should never have occurred".28
Pro-abstinence-only organisations are increasingly using Uganda as an example to indicate the success of their methods. But this is inappropriate, since the multiplicity of prevention methods used in Uganda mean that the decline in HIV prevalence was certainly not due to abstinence-only messages. Abstinence is an important part of an HIV prevention programme, but it should not be promoted at the expense of encouraging condom use. http://www.avert.org/aids-uganda.htm mahirap kasing makipagusap sa taong nagtutulugtulugan at taong nagbubulagbulagan! napakanorrowminded mong tao ka kaya ganyan! sinabi ng mga early christians ang unang naging tagasunod ni kristo at ginawa lang ng roma ang pangalang katoliko dahil sa kanilang paniniwala na itoy isang universal religion. ngayon tinatanong mo kung sino original na church at sinong nanggaya e ayan na nga ang paliwanag! at sino ba nanggaya? yung bibliya mo at bibliya ng ibang christian churhes e PAREHO LANG NAMAN! ang PINAGKAIBA LANG E YUNG TURO NG BAWAT MANGANGARAL! sa INYO ok ang IDOLATRY pero MALIWANAG NAMAN SA BIBLIYA NA HINDI pero PINAGPIPILITAN MO NA NASA MALING INTERPRETASYON NG IBA YANG GANYANG ISYU E BAKET? MAGBASA KA NG BIBLIYANG GAMIT MO AT BIBLIYA NG IBANG SEKTA AT DOON MO MAKIKITA NA PAREHO LANG ANG NAKASULAT! ANONG MALING INTERPRETASYON DUN? KUNG IKAW AY NAPAKAGALING NA TAO AT PANAY TANGA TAWAG MO SA MGA KONTRA SA IYO AY PEDE BANG MASAGOT MO YUNG TANONG KO TUNGKOL SA KAPANGANAKAN NI KRISTO NA DECEMBER 25. BAKIT DECEMBER 25? AT BAKIT YUNG BIRTHDAY NYA E NAKAFIXED SA DECEMBER 25 PERO BAKIT YUNG ARAW NG KAMATAYAN NYA E PAIBAIBA NG BUWAN AT ARAW? MINSAN MARCH PERO MINSAN NAMAN APRIL. BAKIT GANUN? PAKIPALIWANAG NGA DAHIL MATALINO KA NAMAN.
****AS YOU REQUESTED
God Said To Make Them People who oppose religious statuary forget about the many passages where the Lord commands the making of statues. For example: "And you shall make two cherubim of gold [i.e., two gold statues of angels]; of hammered work shall you make them, on the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end; of one piece of the mercy seat shall you make the cherubim on its two ends. The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, their faces one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be" (Ex. 25:18–20). David gave Solomon the plan "for the altar of incense made of refined gold, and its weight; also his plan for the golden chariot of the cherubim that spread their wings and covered the ark of the covenant of the Lord. All this he made clear by the writing of the hand of the Lord concerning it all, all the work to be done according to the plan" (1 Chr. 28:18–19). David’s plan for the temple, which the biblical author tells us was "by the writing of the hand of the Lord concerning it all," included statues of angels. Similarly Ezekiel 41:17–18 describes graven (carved) images in the idealized temple he was shown in a vision, for he writes, "On the walls round about in the inner room and [on] the nave were carved likenesses of cherubim." The Religious Uses of Images During a plague of serpents sent to punish the Israelites during the exodus, God told Moses to "make [a statue of] a fiery serpent, and set it on a pole; and every one who is bitten, when he sees it shall live. So Moses made a bronze serpent, and set it on a pole; and if a serpent bit any man, he would look at the bronze serpent and live" (Num. 21:8–9). One had to look at the bronze statue of the serpent to be healed, which shows that statues could be used ritually, not merely as religious decorations. Catholics use statues, paintings, and other artistic devices to recall the person or thing depicted. Just as it helps to remember one’s mother by looking at her photograph, so it helps to recall the example of the saints by looking at pictures of them. Catholics also use statues as teaching tools. In the early Church they were especially useful for the instruction of the illiterate. Many Protestants have pictures of Jesus and other Bible pictures in Sunday school for teaching children. Catholics also use statues to commemorate certain people and events, much as Protestant churches have three-dimensional nativity scenes at Christmas. If we measure Protestants by the same rule, then by using these "graven" images, they would be practicing the "idolatry" of which they accuse Catholics. But there’s no idolatry going on in these situations. God forbids the worship of images as gods, but he doesn’t ban the making of images. If he had, religious movies, videos, photographs, paintings, and all similar things would be banned. But, as the case of the bronze serpent shows, God does not even forbid the ritual use of religious images. What About Bowing? Sometimes anti-Catholics cite Deuteronomy 5:9, where God said concerning idols, "You shall not bow down to them." Since many Catholics sometimes bow or kneel in front of statues of Jesus and the saints, anti-Catholics confuse the legitimate veneration of a sacred image with the sin of idolatry. Though bowing can be used as a posture in worship, not all bowing is worship. In Japan, people show respect by bowing in greeting (the equivalent of the Western handshake). Similarly, a person can kneel before a king without worshipping him as a god. In the same way, a Catholic who may kneel in front of a statue while praying isn’t worshipping the statue or even praying to it, any more than the Protestant who kneels with a Bible in his hands when praying is worshipping the Bible or praying to it. Aditionals Early in its history, Israel was forbidden to make any depictions of God because he had not revealed himself in a visible form. Given the pagan culture surrounding them, the Israelites might have been tempted to worship God in the form of an animal or some natural object (e.g., a bull or the sun). But later God did reveal himself under visible forms, such as in Daniel 7:9: "As I looked, thrones were placed and one that was Ancient of Days took his seat; his raiment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like pure wool; his throne was fiery flames, its wheels were burning fire." Protestants make depictions of the Father under this form when they do illustrations of Old Testament prophecies. The Holy Spirit revealed himself under at least two visible forms—that of a dove, at the baptism of Jesus (Matt. 3:16; Mark 1:10; Luke 3:22; John 1:32), and as tongues of fire, on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1–4). Protestants use these images when drawing or painting these biblical episodes and when they wear Holy Spirit lapel pins or place dove emblems on their cars. But, more important, in the Incarnation of Christ his Son, God showed mankind an icon of himself. Paul said, "He is the image (Greek: ikon) of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation." Christ is the tangible, divine "icon" of the unseen, infinite God. We read that when the magi were "going into the house they saw the child with Mary his mother, and they fell down and worshipped him. Then, opening their treasures, they offered him gifts, gold, frankincense, and myrrh" (Matt. 2:11). Though God did not reveal a form for himself on Mount Horeb, he did reveal one in the house in Bethlehem. The bottom line is, when God made the New Covenant with us, he did reveal himself under a visible form in Jesus Christ. For that reason, we can make representations of God in Christ. Even Protestants use all sorts of religious images: Pictures of Jesus and other biblical persons appear on a myriad of Bibles, picture books, T-shirts, jewelry, bumper stickers, greeting cards, compact discs, and manger scenes. Christ is even symbolically represented through the Icthus or "fish emblem." Common sense tells us that, since God has revealed himself in various images, most especially in the incarnate Jesus Christ, it’s not wrong for us to use images of these forms to deepen our knowledge and love of God. That’s why God revealed himself in these visible forms, and that’s why statues and pictures are made of them. You said and you quote” "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above” In the beginning it is the Lord who created thing in his own image…HE CREATED…CARVED MEN IN HIS OWN IMAGE AND LIKENESS. NOW, are you telling us that GOD is contradicting himself? It is he the first one violating himself by creating in his OWN IMAGE! Bottom line: you interpreted it (the scripture) according to your design and fail to undress the underlying essence of its meaning. YOU ARE SHORT MINDED you just wanna see those things that you wanna see! if you carved the statue of rizal... to remeber him... much more the catholics remembers the goodness of TRUE GOD... DON’T EVER- EVER INTERPRET THE BIBLE IN YOUR OWN CAPACITY BECAUSE YOU ARE BLIND! later sasagutin pa kita... ngayun may ginagawa pa ako... pasinsya na ah! Claim:
It is likely that the number of new HIV infections in Uganda peaked in the late 1980s, and then fell sharply until the mid 1990s. This is generally thought to have been the result of behaviour changes such as increased abstinence and monogamy, a rise in the average age of first sex, a reduction in the average number of sexual partners and more frequent use of CONDOMS. Rebuttal: Avert is the other (pro-condom) side and, naturally, you'd expect it to attribute Uganda's success to condoms. What we can do, perhaps, is to compare Uganda with other African states. South Africa, for instance, uses condoms but NOT abstinence. If it were true that condoms are what checked Uganda's AIDS epidemic, South Africa's AIDS epidemic must have been checked too. SO WHY WAS IT NOT? The answer to me is simple: Uganda did something which South Africa did not. What is it? ABSTINENCE. I think the logical way to compare abstinence to using only condom is to compare it to a country that have used abstinence-only method and has been successful in fighting AIDS.
is there any? Here are additional points to consider:
Burundi has a 6% HIV infection rate. Angola's is 3.9% Ghana's is 3.1% But look at Botswana's-- it's a whopping 37%. South Africa's is 22%. Question: Why are Burundi's, Angola's, and Botswana's rates so low, and Botswana's and South Africa's so high? Answer: Because the first group of countries are predominantly Catholic/Christian, while the second group of countries are not. Compare the Philippines and Thailand. Thailand has 1,100,000 people living with AIDS (official UNAIDS records place the number at 650,000). And the Philppines? WHY? “The main reason that condoms sometimes fail is incorrect or inconsistent use, not the failure of the condom itself”
The above is very funny. It's like saying a gun doesn't kill. Humans do. Ergo, it's all right to give a loaded gun to a two-year old. What that mean is Abstinence is an important part of an HIV prevention programme, but it should not be promoted at the expense of encouraging condom use.
Because, It's like saying a gun doesn't kill. Humans do. Parang mga pari lang yan na nagkakamali eh, dahil tao sila, nagkakamali sila. May mga nagkakamali din sa paggamit ng condom. Parokya at Moralidad:
Huag nyo ng guluhen ang isyu dahil hindi totoong 'infallible' ang Papacy at 'inerrant' ang mga pusisyon ng simbahan nagkakamali ren sila particular sa pagpupumilit pakialaman ang mag-asawa sa loob ng bedroom. Llera: Would you like to discuss your claims further with me please? I asssume you know what "papal infallibility" is, but just the same, could you state it here please. Montoya, wow! I like that. Would you like to discuss Bible passages with me too? I guess this forum is also for discussions Bible passages?
My name's Guderian. Minuteman:
It's simple, if you don't have a moral high ground, you have no right to teach morality. After all the sexual abuses committed by members of the clergy, and the cover up that came afterwards, this moral high ground is lost, perhaps forever. Llera: Jesus Christ had Judas Iscariot in his inner circle of friends, right? What does that tell you? Doesn't this tell you that holiness-- the "moral high ground you are speaking of -- ultimately remains a choice one makes, and is not something imposed upon him by God? Minuteman: Clean your own backyard first, let the state take care of its people and (keep*) (off*) of its affairs. Llera: Apparently, you're not very familiar with the constitution. The Philippine Constitution, in its Preamble, clearly speaks of a “common good,” and the last time I’ve checked, the framers of the present constitution used “common good” in its specifically theist connotation, giving precedence to God and his laws. In this definition, and to give just one example, not only is the physical, social, emotional, artistic part of the Filipino are given emphasis, but the spiritual aspect as well. The common good, in other words, is not simply what people normally consider desirable features, but what would be authentically good for them, the social conditions that enable human flourishing. The operative word is “human,” which takes into consideration the dignity of, as well as the ethical and moral dimension of, the human person. Yet here you are speaking like you've never heard of this reason for being of the Philippine government. In fact, previous constitutions did not use “common good,” but “general welfare.” Perhaps worthwile to note also is the fact that neither does the U.S, which is strange, considering our propensity to copy anything American—from their cuss words to their hemlines. There must be something special about “common good” for it to be specificed by the framers of our present constitution. For everybody’s easy reference, here’s the Preamble: “We, the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of Almighty God, in order to build a just and humane society, and establish a Government that shall embody our ideals and aspirations, promote the common good, conserve and develop our patrimony, and secure to ourselves and our posterity, the blessings of independence and democracy under the rule of law and a regime of truth, justice, freedom,love, equality, and peace, do ordain and promulgate this Constitution.” Maam Winnie, pakisagot naman po nitong kumag na to.
Condoms: A point-by-point reply to Solita Monsod By Abraham V. Llera In her “Analysis by Winnie Monsod” on” News on Q” on March 22, 2010, Solita Monsod made a number of points in favor of condoms as the solution to the rise in HIV new infections in the country. Monsod: New HIV infections in the Philippines have increased, whereas globally , new HIV infections have , in fact, decreased by 17 percent, a fact, which is probably the basis for Sec Cabral’s worry, and which should be the worry for the rest of us too. Llera: In the above , Monsod SUGGESTS that, since new HIV/AIDS infections elsewhere have gone down while ours in the Philippines have gone up, there must be something we are not doing right. Inasmuch as condom use is not as widespread in the Philippines as it is elsewhere in the world, our not using condoms is what’s causing the rise in our HIV/AIDS new infections. This is sloppy work for a journalist especially one who has a national audience. All it’ll take is a little imagination to see that Monsod’s conclusion not only misses the point entirely, but offers as the cure something which is the cause of the problem. Of the 2.7 M new infections in 2008 as recorded by UNAIDS, 1.9 M or 70 percent is accounted for by Sub-Saharan Africa, meaning that, if there has been a decrease in new HIV infections, half of the decrease is accounted for by Sub-Saharan Africa ALONE. Now let me ask. Of all the countries in the Sub-Saharan Africa, which has shown the most decrease in new HIV infections? Isn’t it Uganda? And how did Uganda did it? Isn’t it by abstinence? Monsod: There are no studies more recent than the WHO study in 2000 or the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health in 1999. Llera: In 2008 The Swiss Federal Commission for HIV/AIDS published the findings of four studies showing that couples may have “unprotected sex” so long as the HIV infected partner take ARV therapy as that will block the passing on of the virus. This was met by an immediate howl of protest from HIV/AIDS groups who questioned the fact that the study limited itself to heterosexual couples. Anal sex, these groups claim, pose special problems which vaginal sex don’t have. Condom failure is that much higher in anuses than in vaginas, forcing UNAIDS and WHO to issue statements to the effect that condoms were still the safest protection against HIV. Monsod: There are no studies more recent than 2000 because the issue of condom effectiveness has been resolved a long time ago. Llera: From the above, and from the experience of Thailand which is reeling from a resurgence of AIDS, condom effectiveness is far from a resolved issue. In fact, and I’d like to ask Solita Monsod: isn't it precisely condoms which is causing the increase in new HUV infections? Condoms, by promising “safe sex” has transformed Thailand’s youth into sexually-crazed creatures, ready to do sex at the drop of a hat and at an early age. Monsod: The WHO Fact Sheet No 243 states: “ Laboratory studies have found that viruses (including HIV) do not pass through intact latex condoms even when the devices are stretched or stressed. “ Llera: In a 1998 article, C.M. Roland of the Naval Research Laboratory Chemistry Division and M.J. Schroeder of the U.S. Naval Academy Department of Chemistry said: “The defining feature of viruses is their diminutive size. For example the AIDS virus is only 0.15 microns, and the Hepatitis B virus is even smaller. Given the presence in rubber of intrinsic defects two magnitudes of order larger in size , the ability of a condom or a surgical glove to percent transmissi0n of viral particles is problematic.” Moreover, we should remember that stretching applies only one type of stress: uniform lateral stress, the other four types of stress applied to a condom in use are not included. These are “the pressure stress (perpendicular to the axis of the later stress) ; shear stress (high twisting or angular stresses at critical points); friction stress (abrasion stress during lateral movement between two surfaces in contact); and corrosion stress caused by a mixture of body fluids and lubricants , whose effect is greatly enhanced by the repeated and simultaneous application of mechanical stresses.” (Credit: Brian Clowes) And look at what the U.S. National Institutes of Health says: scientific evidence does not support condom use as a means to prevent infections of genital herpes (HSV) [page 20]; human papillomavirus (HPV) [page 26]; Chlamydia [page 17]; syphilis [page 23]; canchroid [page 21]; trichomonas [page 18]. Monsod: In Thailand, the promotion by the government of 100 percent condom use by commercial sex workers led to a dramatic decline in STD cases from 410,406 in 1987 to 27,362 in 1994. Llera: Monsod is not being very honest here: she’s using old figures. The truth is, Thailand is now reeling under a resurgence of HIV infections. Go check it out on the Internet. Monsod: Johns Hopkins: “Consistent condom use protected against HIV.” Llera: In the above, Monsod is suggesting that condoms guarantee safety against STDs. But here’s what the National Institutes Of Health says in its Workshop Summary: Scientific Evidence for Condom Effectiveness for Sexually Transmitted Disease Prevention page 14: ”consistent condom use decreased the risk of HIV/AIDS transmission by approximately 85%.“ Monsod’s in effect saying: “Let the 15 percent die, 85 percent will live anyway.” Too much information.
Para sa pangkariwang tao na katulad ko, Using condom is like having and wearing a seatbelt sa sasakyan. It does not guarantee na di ka mamamatay or masasaktan pag nabangga ka, but at least, it give you a bit of chance than not wearing at all... Saka, Anong pakialam ng simbahan or mga taong ayaw sa condom sa taong gustong gumamit ng condom.... laliman mo pa ang analogy mo kasi simpleng bagay ang naka salalay dito.
... hindi yung...magkasakit na kung magkasakit.... mamatay na kung mamatay. it is depeer than that because it involves the sacred life that GOD has given you. hindi mo yan pag- aari...hiram laang yan! i tell you... kung concern ka sa pamilya mo... ayaw mo silang mapariwara and you guide and guard them right?.. ganun yun... kaya much more ang simbahan ay concern sa kataohan... simbahan na inaalipusta ng marami... kasama ka na diyan!
#139.1.1.1
579kaliwete
on
2010-04-01 23:23
(Reply)
You see, guys like you are making things complicated...When the actuallity is, it is really simple, "Use it if you feel like using it. Don't use it if you dont want to.
As long na wala kang na violate na law or ordinance, there is nothing to be concern about. Church are just making up law by itself, making it look like "The bible says this, the bible says that.." That is all bullshits....!!!! Just like all the religious hyphocrites. Pretend to be good person, when they are really not. You are maybe one of them...But hey, good luck on your sex life....If you have one...
#139.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-01 23:58
(Reply)
you hate law? then abolish the law! every one is guided by the law? but by whic law? LAW of MAN or LAW of GOD?
good luck sayo... sa family mo... sa mga anak mo (if you have one)... sane di sila mapariwara na katulad mo!
#139.1.1.1.1.1
kaliwete579
on
2010-04-02 02:51
(Reply)
As always....if you are running out of reasons....infuse another topic that is could somehow divert the discussion.
I can't see any thing in my previous comment that says "I hate law"..you are like the church...Loves to make things up. Anyway, speaking about law, as far as I can remeber, God have only 10 commandments. Walang syang sinasabing "Bawal gumamit ng condom"... Maybe in your bible...may ganun... But of course, your bile, their bible...the other religions bible...that's all bunch of crap. You all using God's name for your own personal interest.... Period. Bunch of Hypocrites!!!!
#139.1.1.1.1.2
kaliwete579
on
2010-04-02 03:01
(Reply)
It is simple as it is. Ware condom before having sex.... It got nothing to do with family or God or church...
You guys need to stay in your lane. It is our sex organ, Wag ninyong pakialaman! I don't care kung di ka na tinigasan. Pero never akong makikialam sa burat ng may Burat... Bakla ka siguro kaya burat ng may burat, gusto mong pakialaman. Gago si ellen said:
"What that mean is Abstinence is an important part of an HIV prevention programme, but it should not be promoted at the expense of encouraging condom use. " My reply is this. You might not have known it as you're probably non-Catholic, but abstinence and condoms simply do not mix, cannot mix. Either you have one, but not the other. It's like good and evil, God and the devil-- they don't mix. Is there a country that have used abstinence-only method and has been successful in fighting AIDS.
I would like to know more about it. Please share it if you have some knowledge. nakakatuwa ang gobierno ngaun... kase mainit na mainit ang isyu sa moralidad isa diyan ang kundom. well, i say diyan sila magaling.
tamang tama yan ngaung elekson nato kasi... dapat magulo..at kapag magulo... may maitatagong isyu. marami yun di pwedi nating isa isahin. pero halimbawa ngaung eleksyon many people and the goverment wants to discredit the credibilty of the church at alam nila with these morality... the church will be in a hot water. anso, para maging mainit ang mata ng tao sa simbahan... ok..bigyan natin ng flavor morality...upang tumahimik at malihis ang isyu. ano man ang sabihin ng simbahan at dahil mainit ang mata ng taho in terms of morality it follows church will have no more credibility. goverments knows when and what are the matters to silence the church and cover ups goverment's hiddin agenda. in terms naman sa kundom nayan... some may think... government has doing something for the good of it's intituents..... teka-teka something is fishy there... hindi yan ganyan kadali. alam mo noong mga nakaraang taon, isang mayor kumita ng milyon sa pagbili lang walis sa kanyang nasasakupan na syudad... uhmmmmm.... ano kaya ang kick back nila sa kundom na boong pilipinas kuno ang project nayan (as admitted by Sec. CAbral).... hummmmm something fishy ah... alam mo di naman sa pag maliit sa producto ng china... halos ang nakukuha ng pilipinas na galing sa china low kundi man reject na, low quality pa.... kung tay0'y mag iisip yan kayang mga condom nayan low quality....uhmmmm. well otherwise if they good amount of money for that! did they? uhmmmm something fishy huh? kaya ikaw john mag sumikap ka (as dely atay atay would say) Question: "I think the logical way to compare abstinence to using only condom is to compare it to a country that have used abstinence-only method and has been successful in fighting AIDS.
is there any?" Answer: To the extent that condom use -- before Cabral and her DOH minions started to promote condom use-- hs not been very popular among Filipinos, we can be said to have been practicing "abstinence." Oh really? Can you at least provide some figures for us to know how many Filipino are doing abstinence.
If condom is unpopular and the number of Filipino that have AIDS have increased in recent years. I therefore conclude that abstinence failed, miserably. simple logic. Likewise, Burundi (68% Catholic) and Angola (38% Catholic) have an AIDS rate of 6% and 3.9%, respectively.
See? Countries where it's taught that condoms are evil have low AIDS rates. Which makes Cabral suspect: why would she be doing the devil's work? Likewise, here in the Philippines wherein the Main Religion (Catholic) teaches filipinos that condoms are evil have high rate of AIDS.
Well well, aside from being catholic they have one more thing in common..
Angola - 70% of the population is below the poverty line Burundi - 68% of the population is below the poverty line philippines - kayo na bahala magsabi kung anu... hehehe What is religion supposed to save us from?
And which of the myriads of religion will do that. To the misguided Roman Catholics of this world,try to think. If Jesus died for your sins, then your sins have already been washed away or his dying was all in vain. "Go forth and multiply". This is from a book of stories but some people try to live by it. Ridiculous, you say - No, just ignorant (not stupid). Population control is not just desirable but necessary in a country whose main export seems to be people. Having grossly overpopulated the country, the country now seems intent on overpopulating the rest of the world. However, there is a problem to consider because someday some countries may find it difficult to accommodate all the excess Filipinos. The population growth in the developed countries to which Filipinos set their sights is about .02%, whereas here it is 10 times or more that amount. How long is this possible? Never mind, one may say, God will provide. Not quite! You see, God only provides for those who provide for themselves. But the Catholic Church is against the use of condoms or the RH Bill as it is commonly known. Why? the answer is simple, really. The more Catholic offsprings and faithfuls, there are , the more money the Church can garner from the poor starving innocents, the more affluent the priests can become and the bigger and nicer the churches and more expensive the vehicles the priests can own. Isn't it amazing for a group that has supposedly taken a vow of poverty? No wonder, the business of religion is alive and well in the Archipelago. Mga PARI at MADRE lang ang may bokasyon kung tawagen ay 'Celibacy'
hindi titikim ng sex at mananatiling bachelor habang buhay o abstinence sa pakikipagtalik habang panahon Ang mga desciples nuong una ay may kanya-kanyang isang asawa Mateo 8:14 hindi dapat ipilit ng simbahan ang 'abstinence' sa MAG-ASAWA dahil ang sex sa kanila ay matrimonyo may basbas ng Dios Huag ren ipagbawal ang responsable at paglilimita ng mga panganganak who wants to know the TRUTH?
THE TRUTH IS ....mas maraming DEMONYO sa loob ng SIMBAHAN..in PARTICULAR sa CATHOLIC CHURCH!!!!! THE TRUTH is... HINDI NA KALINGAN NG MGA DEMONYO SA LABAS NG simbahan KASI NASAKUP NA NG KADILIMAN ang mundo. GAYUN PAMAN....in the end tingnan natin kung sino ang talunan...THE EVIL ONES OR THE GOOD ONES! LEt us learn from the EXAMPLE OF NAPOLEN BONAPARTE...he dreamed to conquer THE VATICAN and distroy the VATICAN.... poor NAPOLEON... even the Cardinals are doing their best to distroy the church...but failed! bonaparte is dreaming. SA LAhat ng AGAINST SA CATHOLIC CHURCH...wake up!!!! you are just dreaming...ubusin nyo man ang space dito laban sa CATHOLIC CHURCH... i say you are just dreaming!!!!!IN THE END LET SEE WHO WILL SURVIVE!!! (WHO WILL SEPARATE THE CHURCH FROM THE LOVE OF GOD? neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.? WHO WILL SEPARATE THE CHURCH FROM THE LOVE OF GOD?PERSECUTION? scandals? Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.
tama naman ang DOH na bigyan ng kondom ang mga malilibog na tao.
tama naman ang CBCP na wag pagamitin ng kondom ang mga lalaki para dumami ang populasyon dahil sa populasyon galing ang kita ng simbahan,kung kaunti ang populasyon,kaunti lang magsisimba kaunti lang kita ng simbahan,ang payo ng simbahan na abstinence ay magagawa lang yan ng mga taong ayaw ng makipagtalik pero mga aktibo sa sex hindi nila mapipigilan ang kanilang kalibugan hahanap at hahanap yan ng mapaparausan. tungkol naman sa mga kritiko ng kalidad ng kondom tama rin kayo sa inyong suspetsa na maaring hindi magandang klase ng kondom ang pinamudmod ng DOH lalo na itoý galing sa bansang bantog na tagagawa ng mga mahinang klase ng produkto at malamang ibenenta sa DOH ng pinas para kahit paano mabawi ang pinuhunan nila sa paggawa ng naturang bagay. tama rin ang mga environmentalist na dagdag basura lang sa kalikasan ang paggamit ng kondom lalo na´t non biodegrabble ang mga yan,ang masama pa mga isda pa minsan ang nakakalulon ng mga kondom na itinapon ng mga nagtatalik sa tabing dagat o ilog. kung hayaan na lang ang mga gusto magtalik magkasakit ng AIDS o anuman STD at hayaan na rin lumubo ang populasyon dahil iyon naman ang gusto ng simbahan at karamihan dahil talaga naman darating ang panahon na wawakasan na ng Diyos ang planetang ito kaya hayaan na lang natin na mapuno ng makasalanan tao ang planetang ito para kung sunugin ng Diyos ang planetang ito walang dapat ipaghinanakit ang sinuman dahil lahat naman sila makasalanan at alam natin lahat ang bayad sa kasalanan ay kamatayan. alam ng lahat na ilan libo lang maliligtas at makakapasok sa kaharian ng Diyos,kaya yong mga hindi makatiis hayaan na natin sila gusto nilang magpakaligaya at least bago lamunin ng apoy ang mga kaluluwa nila natupad ang pangarap nilang makatalik ang taong gusto nila makapareha. those who are not destines to live long will die early and that´s the fact about life. who wants to know the TRUTH?
THE TRUTH IS ....mas maraming DEMONYO sa loob ng SIMBAHAN..in PARTICULAR sa CATHOLIC CHURCH!!!!! THE TRUTH is... HINDI NA KALINGAN NG MGA DEMONYO SA LABAS NG simbahan KASI NASAKUP NA NG KADILIMAN ang mundo. GAYUN PAMAN....in the end tingnan natin kung sino ang talunan...THE EVIL ONES OR THE GOOD ONES! LEt us learn from the EXAMPLE OF NAPOLEN BONAPARTE...he dreamed to conquer THE VATICAN and distroy the VATICAN.... poor NAPOLEON... even the Cardinals are doing their best to distroy the church...but failed! bonaparte is dreaming. SA LAhat ng AGAINST SA CATHOLIC CHURCH...wake up!!!! you are just dreaming...ubusin nyo man ang space dito laban sa CATHOLIC CHURCH... i say you are just dreaming!!!!!IN THE END LET SEE WHO WILL SURVIVE!!! (WHO WILL SEPARATE THE CHURCH FROM THE LOVE OF GOD? neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.? WHO WILL SEPARATE THE CHURCH FROM THE LOVE OF GOD?PERSECUTION? scandals? Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.
Kontra ang turo ng Simbahan sa turo naman ng Biblia
Alin ang authority na mas mataas, ang Simbahan o ang Biblia? Marami ng naliwanagan sa turo ng Bible kaya marami ren ang exodus papalabas ng Catholic Church Next ko i-post ang mga tradisyon at turo ng Simbahan na salungat naman sa turo ng Biblia papano nagkaroon ng bibliya kung wala ang church? naiwan ata ang utak mo sa iludoro at nai-flush mo! hehehe.
From Anonymous:
Likewise, Burundi (68% Catholic) and Angola (38% Catholic) have an AIDS rate of 6% and 3.9%, respectively. See? Countries where it's taught that condoms are evil have low AIDS rates. Which makes Cabral suspect: why would she be doing the devil's work? My Response: Well well, aside from being catholic they have one more thing in common.. Angola - 70% of the population is below the poverty line Burundi - 68% of the population is below the poverty line philippines - kayo na bahala magsabi kung anu... hehehe Gago si ellen:
Well well, aside from being catholic they have one more thing in common.. Angola - 70% of the population is below the poverty line Burundi - 68% of the population is below the poverty line philippines - kayo na bahala magsabi kung anu... hehehe Llera: Address the point raised. You're out of order. Bert:
But the Catholic Church is against the use of condoms or the RH Bill as it is commonly known. Why? the answer is simple, really. The more Catholic offsprings and faithfuls, there are , the more money the Church can garner from the poor starving innocents, the more affluent the priests can become and the bigger and nicer the churches and more expensive the vehicles the priests can own. Isn't it amazing for a group that has supposedly taken a vow of poverty? No wonder, the business of religion is alive and well in the Archipelago. Me: He is so damn right. researcher of truth:
Kontra ang turo ng Simbahan sa turo naman ng Biblia Alin ang authority na mas mataas, ang Simbahan o ang Biblia? Marami ng naliwanagan sa turo ng Bible kaya marami ren ang exodus papalabas ng Catholic Church Next ko i-post ang mga tradisyon at turo ng Simbahan na salungat naman sa turo ng Biblia Llera: Can't wait. Bring it on! I’ve been defending the catholic church ever since… and I will do so… when the need is called for…. but this doesn’t mean I don’t see the lapses inside the catholic church.
TO THE READERS OF THIS BLOG… I WRITE NOT JUST TO DEFEND THE CHURCH BUT ALSO TO RECOGNIZE HER WEAKNESSES TOO. Nothing from heaven happens by accident, as the adage goes. That the Catholic Church has been experiencing painful revelations involving worldwide clergy sexual abuse during this season of Lent is no coincidence. The intense purification continues. And there is no easy solution to this very serious problem. What's the main cause of the scandal? It… misguided to blame it ..on priestly celibacy. It misguided to blame it entirely on Vatican II, gays in the priesthood, bad psychologists, clericalism and church governance. As one clergy said, we have to recognize that evil exists, and some people choose to do evil -- for whatever reason. In addition, it is important to remember that many good, holy priests are suffering considerably. Some have been falsely accused and are ruined spiritually and emotionally. They, too, need our prayers and support. Still, despite all the scandals the church has experienced over the last 2000 years, it has not been destroyed. And it won't be, much to the dismay of its enemies. magkano ba ang porsyento na tinatanggap mo mula sa abuloy ng simbahan? Nagtatanong lang...
***i recieve everything.. the whole percent...*the grace*....which i counld not buy. the eucharist to nourish my soul. the holy spirit that enlightens my mind to see truth. the gift knowledge and understanding. the matuiry of faith. good judgement and wisdom..that nobody can give execpt the catholic church.
all these are not given by other blind churches and blind people like you! Blind people like me? Who are you talking to? Ikaw ang bulag...Bulag na sumusunod at nag papauto sa mga pare. Bulag sunudsunuran sa mga taong ginagamit ang pangalan ng dyos para sa pansariling kapakanan.... Tell me, saan na pupuinta ang mga koleksyon ng simabahan? I know, some goes to charity, some goes to finance the operation ng simbahan....Dun lang ba? Wala bang napupunta sa Vatican...Vatican ang franchaze holder ng Catholic Church. So inshort, business pa rin....pera pera pa rin ang usapan. Ikaw ang bulag, ikaw ang gising na nagtutulog-tulugan....Sampalin mo ang sarili mo para magising ka sa katotohanan na walang anumang say-say ang mga pinag sasabe mo dito in defence sa mga mapag samantalang pare na inaaruga mo!
the increase in REPORTED HIV cases may be due to more effective diagnostic and screening procedures and not due to an "epidemic".
we may actually be just getting the actual representation of the number of cases but not an increasing incidence. the segment also does not report the failure rates/probability of failure of condoms. this segment does not represent a thoroughly accurate picture of the situation. To Ate Myna
Traditional Teachings of Catholic Church that Contradicts the Bible: 1. There is no Purgatory recorded in the Bible but man would either go to heaven or hell after death (Mathhew 25:21-24 / Hebrews 9:27) 2. Folly of Idolatry & venerating Images (Acts 17:24-25 / Acts 19:26 / Exodus 20:3-5) 3. No Atoning Sacraments & Rituals other than forgiveness by the sacrifice of Jesus ( Hebrews 2:17 / I John 1:7-9 / Galatians 2 :15-16) Please read it for yourself sister ***Before I answer your question.. let me tell YOU HAVE THE RIGHT to know the truth about the Catholic church. And I hope you search the answer out of passion to know the truth and to obscure it. If you find it hard… just pray…and review you faith!
ON PURGATORY: Let me put it in this way first: you cannot enter heaven with SIN. Heaven is free from sin. By sin you deprive your self of everlasting happiness with GOD. MAN is inclined to sin because of his imperfection. Man will die because of his imperfection (with sin)… now tell me… who can go to heaven if everyone is sinful…because every one has a sin… (are you exempted?) We need purification: we pray for those under purgation: For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should have risen again, it had been superfluous and vain to pray for the dead. And also in that he perceived that there was great favor laid up for those that died godly, it was an holy and good thought. Whereupon he made a reconciliation for the dead, that they might be delivered from sin. (2 Macc. 12:41–45) When all the son’s of Job died: "Let us help and commemorate them. If Job’s sons were purified by their father’s sacrifice [Job 1:5], The doctrine of purgatory, or the final purification, has been part of the true faith since before the time of Christ. The Jews already believed it before the coming of the Messiah Orthodox Jews to this day believe in the final purification, and for eleven months after the death of a loved one, they pray a prayer called the Mourner’s Kaddish for their loved one’s purification. (Malachi 3:1-3) 1: "Behold, I send my messenger to prepare the way before me, and the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple; the messenger of the covenant in whom you delight, behold, he is coming, says the LORD of hosts. 2: But who can endure the day of his coming, and who can stand when he appears? "For he is like a refiner's fire and like fullers' soap; 3: he will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he will purify the sons of Levi and refine them like gold and silver, till they present right offerings to the LORD. Maccabees 12:42 & 45 42 and they turned to prayer, beseeching that the sin which had been committed might be wholly blotted out. And the noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened because of the sin of those who had fallen. 45: But if he was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Therefore he made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin. CHRIST HIMSELF WENT TO THE PLACE OF THE DEAD (ABODE OF DEAD) to those who died before him and open the gates of heaven for them! ON IMAGES (veneration of images) God Said To Make Them People who oppose religious statuary forget about the many passages where the Lord commands the making of statues. For example: "And you shall make two cherubim of gold [i.e., two gold statues of angels]; of hammered work shall you make them, on the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end; of one piece of the mercy seat shall you make the cherubim on its two ends. The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, their faces one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be" (Ex. 25:18–20). David gave Solomon the plan "for the altar of incense made of refined gold, and its weight; also his plan for the golden chariot of the cherubim that spread their wings and covered the ark of the covenant of the Lord. All this he made clear by the writing of the hand of the Lord concerning it all, all the work to be done according to the plan" (1 Chr. 28:18–19). David’s plan for the temple, which the biblical author tells us was "by the writing of the hand of the Lord concerning it all," included statues of angels. Similarly Ezekiel 41:17–18 describes graven (carved) images in the idealized temple he was shown in a vision, for he writes, "On the walls round about in the inner room and [on] the nave were carved likenesses of cherubim." The Religious Uses of Images During a plague of serpents sent to punish the Israelites during the exodus, God told Moses to "make [a statue of] a fiery serpent, and set it on a pole; and every one who is bitten, when he sees it shall live. So Moses made a bronze serpent, and set it on a pole; and if a serpent bit any man, he would look at the bronze serpent and live" (Num. 21:8–9). One had to look at the bronze statue of the serpent to be healed, which shows that statues could be used ritually, not merely as religious decorations. Catholics use statues, paintings, and other artistic devices to recall the person or thing depicted. Just as it helps to remember one’s mother by looking at her photograph, so it helps to recall the example of the saints by looking at pictures of them. Catholics also use statues as teaching tools. In the early Church they were especially useful for the instruction of the illiterate. Many Protestants have pictures of Jesus and other Bible pictures in Sunday school for teaching children. Catholics also use statues to commemorate certain people and events, much as Protestant churches have three-dimensional nativity scenes at Christmas. If we measure Protestants by the same rule, then by using these "graven" images, they would be practicing the "idolatry" of which they accuse Catholics. But there’s no idolatry going on in these situations. God forbids the worship of images as gods, but he doesn’t ban the making of images. If he had, religious movies, videos, photographs, paintings, and all similar things would be banned. But, as the case of the bronze serpent shows, God does not even forbid the ritual use of religious images. ON SACRAMENTS: FIRST… I WOULD SAY SACRAMENTS ARE REVELATION OF GOD (SIGNS OF GOD) actions of GOD. CHURCH HAS SACRAMENT…. FIRST ..we have CHRIST as a SACRAMENT of the FATHER….Christ is the representation of the INVISIBLE GOD (the Father) We THE CHURCH….as a SACRAMENT OF JESUS/GOD) WHERE THE CHURCH is… there where Christ is. We have other sacrament… established by Christ works done by Christ…which are continued by the church and the missions of the catholic church, The life of the catholic church. If these are hard for you to understand … pray… and reflect.! Someday you will need it. Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.
myna,you had explained very well some of the things that cc(catholic churches)does,however there are things that i still doesn´t know why a priest or a nun must not married to anyone other than God that result them to seek sexual pleasures by having sex secretly with children or with fellow priest or clergy...does it makes them holy or becomes hypocrites or becomes evil advocates hiding in holiness?
celebacy although it is strickly implemented by the Catholic church...still not a DOGMA OF FAITH.... it is a discipline of the chuch to the clergy and to those who wanna lay their whole life to the church as holy men and women.
The way to holiness is hard... some, if not most of these chosen people fail to respond to that. but celebacy is a gift.... it is not acquired... but although it is a gift these clergy still choose to embrace such life..and strugles....(so honesty to the formation is required) the more you dedicate yourself to God the more you strugle for holiness... they need intimate life with God... but when they ceases to pray..and ceases to open their hearts to graces...temptations comes in. but the very point of this didsciple is to give your life entirely to the ministry of the church and to GOD. they left their family although have family yet their lives belongs to none except for the Lord and the church. Ang dami mo naman paikot-ikot... Ang tanong, hypocrets ba sila o hinde???
Wag kang mag paligoy-ligoy...luma na ang technique na iyan...answer the directly what is being ask. Di na oobra yang pa epek mo na pasakalye.
#158.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-02 07:07
(Reply)
Are they hypocrites?
My answer is NO and YES! No, because there there a lot of them who lived and constantly responding accordingly to the call of GOD to holiness. some of them has forgotten what the world can offer. they are "holy men and women amidst their limitations" and sometimes they seclude themselves away from world just to find GOD. on the other hand I say YES, because many of them are not open to the reality of priestly life and ministry. they may have tried to be holy yet in a long run...they open up to the pleasure that the world offers. they have many doubts... until to the point of removing Christ into the center of their lives. they go astray.. they failed...and become helpless... you know who they are! but that is the church... these chosen people are not supernatural beings... they are frail beings. they are not the best ones, not even the holiest ones. DID CHRIST CHOSE THE BEST DISCIPLES? NO! THEY BETRAY CHRIST... THEY ABANDON CHRIST... THEY ARE SINNERS AND WEAK. BUT CHRIST HAS CHOSEN THEM... THEY WERE GIVEN a SPECIAL TASKS.. CHRIST TRUSTED THEm EVEN HE KNEW THEY GONNA FAIL HIM AND FALL! THEY BECAME A PART OF GOD'S PLAN. for sure GOD has also a plan for YOU and for me! DID WE FAIL CHRIST?
#158.1.1.1.1
kaliwete579
on
2010-04-02 11:05
(Reply)
Summary ng sagot mo: Hypocrites are those who gave in to sex. Hindi hypocrites ang never nakipag sex.
Look, we are talking about priest na naki pag sex. Not those priest that's on the right track. Or maybe di pa lang nahuhuli.... So in short term, kahit tadtad na ng moral guidance, wa epek pa rin... So moral guidance is not really as effective as you claim it is. Talking about desciples. You said it your self, weak and sinners din sila. So why we even beleive them and put them in pedestal, praise them as holy? Talking about the bible: Why Mary Magdalene's writing not included? The bible potrayed judas as a bad guy. But his text(recently discovered) says otherwise. Could it be that the writers(or the one who formulated it), have some influence on whatever the bible's contents? Or maybe they are trying to hide something....Just a thought..
#158.1.1.2
myna
on
2010-04-02 07:12
(Reply)
***Are they hypocrites?
My answer is NO and YES! No, because there there a lot of them who lived and constantly responding accordingly to the call of GOD to holiness. some of them has forgotten what the world can offer. they are "holy men and women amidst their limitations" and sometimes they seclude themselves away from world just to find GOD. on the other hand I say YES, because many of them are not open to the reality of priestly life and ministry. they may have tried to be holy yet in a long run...they open up to the pleasure that the world offers. they have many doubts... until to the point of removing Christ into the center of their lives. they go astray.. they failed...and become helpless... you know who they are! but that is the church... these chosen people are not supernatural beings... they are frail beings. they are not the best ones, not even the holiest ones. DID CHRIST CHOSE THE BEST DISCIPLES? NO! THEY BETRAY CHRIST... THEY ABANDON CHRIST... THEY ARE SINNERS AND WEAK. BUT CHRIST HAS CHOSEN THEM... THEY WERE GIVEN a SPECIAL TASKS.. CHRIST TRUSTED THEm EVEN HE KNEW THEY GONNA FAIL HIM AND FALL! THEY BECAME A PART OF GOD'S PLAN. for sure GOD has also a plan for YOU and for me! DID WE FAIL CHRIST?
#158.1.1.2.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-02 07:58
(Reply)
Myna please answer the ff:
1.Do you believe pope was prophecied as the anti-christ? 2.Why catholic babies has to be baptized at the early age when these babies are still sinless? 3.How many times a person should take body of christ everytime they attend mass and why some catholic people choice not to take it why? 4.Why the catholic people has to sign a cross everytime they pray or going in and out of the church? 5.Why some priest laughing at person confession of their wrong doing,is it okey for them to laugh on it? i still have so many question to ask but would appreciates if you could accurately answer my present (5) question first,thank you.
#158.1.1.2.1.1
MYNA
on
2010-04-02 09:46
(Reply)
The claim that the pope is the Antichrist has been part of anti-Catholic rhetoric since the Reformation, when it was needed to justify the Protestant Reformers’ desire to leave the Catholic Church.
THE CLAIMS OF THE PROTESTANTS: Thus the Lutheran Book of Concord states, "[T]he pope is the real Antichrist who has raised himself over and set himself against Christ . . . Accordingly, just as we cannot adore the devil himself as our lord or God, so we cannot suffer his apostle, the pope or Antichrist, to govern us as our head or lord" (Smalcald Articles 2:4:10, 14). The Presbyterian and Anglican Westminster Confession states, "There is no other head of the church but the Lord Jesus Christ; nor can the pope of Rome in any sense be the head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin, and that son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church against Christ, and all that is called God" (25:6). To make the prophecies of the Antichrist fit the pope, some even claimed that "the temple of God" in which the Antichrist pretends to be God (2 Thess. 2:4) is the Vatican. THE TRUTH IS: ANTICHRIST STANDS FOR… "Everyone who does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is an antichrist [1 John 4:2-3, 2 John 7]; whoever does not confess the testimony of the cross is of the devil; and whoever perverts the sayings of the Lord for his own desires, and says that there is neither resurrection nor judgment, such a one is the firstborn of Satan" (Letter to the Philadelphians 7:1 [A.D. 135]). Polycarp of Smyrna There is no specific one person or thing indicated by the term. Rather the title of Antichrist may be given to any person, idea, or group of persons who opposed, are opposing, or intend to oppose Christ and His Church. In particular this title is applicable only to the one enemy who will appear before the Last Judgment and draw many faithful away before being defeated by Christ. St. Paul calls this enemy "the man of lawlessness" (2 Thes. 2:3); this is not to be considered literally but as apocalyptic language in keeping with Rv. (12:12). In brief, it is the one who will attempt to substitute himself for God. A mystical number, especially 666 as stated in Revelation 13:18, is the "number of the beast." It was an ancient practice to have the letters of the Greek or Hebrew alphabets stand for a number. Antichrist is not the incarnation of antichristian hostility but rather an eschatological personage who will appear at the end of the world. The Church that Christ founded is of course guaranteed against any form of Antichrist until the end of time. 2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 2 Tim 4:4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, FOR THERE IS ONLY ONE CHURCH,,,BECAUSE THERE IS ONLY GOD.. ONE FAITH AND ONE BAPTISM! and many would like to destroy it! ON INFANT BAPTISM Fundamentalists often criticize the Catholic Church ON INFANT BAPTISM. For them, baptism is for adults and older children, because it is to be administered only after one has undergone a "born again" experience—that is, after one has "accepted Jesus Christ as his personal Lord and Savior." Remember, for Fundamentalists, baptism is not a sacrament but an ordinance. It does not in any way convey the grace it symbolizes; rather, it is merely a public manifestation of the person’s conversion. Catholics baptizes infants to take away the original sin on the case of the children for they are incapable of actual sin SALVATION IS FOR ALL- infants and adults: (Scriptural bases) "Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name" (Acts 22:16) "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38) "Now they were bringing even infants to him that he might touch them; and when the disciples saw it, they rebuked them. But Jesus called them to him, saying, ‘Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of God’" (Luke 18:15–16). In the New Testament we read that Lydia was converted by Paul’s preaching and that "She was baptized, with her household" (Acts 16:15). The Philippian jailer whom Paul and Silas had converted to the faith was baptized that night along with his household. We are told that "the same hour of the night . . . he was baptized, with all his family" (Acts 16:33). And in his greetings to the Corinthians, Paul recalled that, "I did baptize also the household of Stephanas" (1 Cor. 1:16). ON EUCHARIST: Unless you are predisposed to receive it ( proper contrition, confession, free from mortal sin. You are not required to receive communion all the time of the a day! "For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself" (1 Cor. 11:29). PRIEST LAUGHING ON CONFESSIONS: Not should be. Confession in not a laughing matter. It’s about conversion and sincere reconciliation to GOD. ON THE SIGNING OF THE CROSS: YOU ARE MARKED WITH THE SIGN OF THE CROSS! One reason is because it was the center of our confession and marking us as one redeemed by Christ thus pointing us back to our Baptism. It is at the cross where God revealed Himself to us through His Son so we make the sign of the cross while naming God as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. These gestures suggest Do everything for the glory of God…When you eat thank God.. when you go to the church ask GOD for blessings and on leaving…thank GOD. DO EVERYTHING FOR THE GREATER GLORY OF GOD.. IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER AND OF THE SON AND OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.
#158.1.1.2.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-02 12:52
(Reply)
I think this is way beyond the topic.
All right already! We got it! you are a bible freak. But it is time to connect back to humanity. And in the real world, AIDS and STD exist. No amount of your bible expertice could ever cure a person that's already been infected. Sure, your spiritual lectures did do its job in preventing it. For what ever the heck you are said,they'd been said a long time ago. Did it help to prevent AIDS and STD? I don't think so. So let the goverment do his job and try some other alternative. Get the hell out of the way.
#158.1.1.2.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-02 13:31
(Reply)
Do you think HIV/STD will be solve by man's power alone?
Remember... you may have horses ready for WAR but it is the LORD who will give Victory... you may have the best doctors and scientists but IT IS THE LORD WHO HEALS! if he is the the source of healing? oh man, what should you do? WHY DO MEN ACT AND THINK AS IF HE WERE A GOD? AND ACT AS IF EVERYTHING DEPENDS ON OWN CAPACITY? read all the blogs here before you react!
#158.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-02 17:48
(Reply)
Just to give you info, health workers was able to formulate vaccine for AIDS. I know AIDS and HIV are different but related in someway. But my point is, man of sceince is making some improvements. Health authorities are getting results. Do you understand what saying? They are doing something to solve the problem. It may not be that much for you, but hey, at least they are getting something done.
The way you answer my comment tells me that you not really that intellegent. You remind me of some folks that I met long time ago. They beleive so much in their faith that they descided to do "Lay hands" and prayer rally to their sickly kins insted of taking them to the hospital. They beleive so much in their faith that prayer alone will do the job and get bed ridden patients back on track. What happened? I can't really tell that they did not pray hard enough cause I saw how they did it..... It was very emotional prayers...but one by one, the sickly died. I know the illness was so easy to cure for signs and sypmtoms were obious on the latter. But they let them die anyway. Moral of the story? God said, "....Kumilos ka at tutulungan kita..." I think that is exactly what the scientist are doing. They are working to find solutions to the problem and God got their backs. In your case, God probably tired of your request and prayers when you are not actually trying to help yourself. Nakakasawa din yung all complains, all request ng walang sariling palo. That is exactly what you are doing. Living on a prayer...Bon Jovi.
#158.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-03 01:06
(Reply)
yes kumilos ka with the help of GOD and with the light of GOD's will...because if not? who are you?
are GOD THAT EVERYTHING RELIES IN IN YOUR POWER ALONE AND AS IF EVERYTHING DEPEND IN YOU? IBA YUNG GUMAGAWA KA DAHIL IYONG KAKAYAHAN AT IBA NAMAN YUNG GUMAGAWA KASAMA ANG GUIDANCE ANG PANGINOO! WIDEN YOUR MIND!
#158.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.2
Anonymous
on
2010-04-03 01:23
(Reply)
***CORRECTION: REVISED
yes kumilos ka with the help of GOD and with the light of GOD's will...because if not? who are you? are you a GOD THAT EVERYTHING RELIES ON IN YOUR POWER ALONE AND AS IF VERYTHING DEPENDs oN YOU? IBA YUNG GUMAGAWA KA DAHIL LAMANG SA SARILI MONG KAKAYAHAN AT IBA NAMAN YUNG GUMAGAWA KASAMA ANG GUIDANCE ANG PANGINOON! WIDEN YOUR MIND! DON'T PLAY LIKE A GOD!
#158.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.2.1
kaliwete579
on
2010-04-03 23:47
(Reply)
Ang daming revision ng sagot mo, wala naman sa hulog. Mahirap talagang makipag usap sa taong mababa ang kapasidad....
You are not at my level.....mag hanap ka na lang ng ibang kausap na kalevel mo. Wala kang sinagot sa mga sinabi ko. Much has been said about the Catholic church, priests, religious beliefs, morality, personal values, government programme on HIV & AIDS. Some make, some break the commentators. The issue is on condom use for the protection of HIV & AIDS, right? I would like to stress out that I am a Filipino working with the Health Bureau in China. The Chinese government did not start easy with the campaign and advocacy against the pandemic, it took a long time to implement fully the programme and mind you, many people still close their minds on condom use. The thrust of educating the people on the basics of HIV&AIDS and on the disease's mode of transmission should be given priority.Although China still has a growing number of cases each year, the prevalence is not as high as before.Thanks to the continuing and persistent government programmes. But its a reality that we (the population) cannot escape the consequences of the disease. Understanding our own biases and deleting stigma and discrimination towards the people living with HIV&AIDS will make us better persons in dealing with the pandemic. Condom use will never be a problem only of one understands why he/she should do it. (Female condoms are now available, too.) Also, always remember that it is not only through sexual contact that the virus is passed on. Injecting Drug Use (IDU's-marami din yan dito), Blood Transfusion, Mother-to-Child Transmission and other modes are also identified. Many innocent chidren have the virus and they did not get it through sexual contact. Many are orphaned by HIV & AIDS. Many have the disease but they are not promiscuous. Many have the disease now but have already repented. Sadly, there are some who have the disease now and are vindictive. This is a pandemic - worst than SARS or AH1N1. What can you do to help? (Kababayan, e-mail me if you need to.)
Kabayan, I don't need help kasi wala akong AIDs or STD. I just what to clear out the discussion for you...para kasing di mo lubusang natapos basahin eh. It is not "only" about "condom use for the protection of HIV & AIDS". The church thinks condom use is immoral... Kaya mahaba ang talakayan dahil sa mag kaibang pananaw. Gets mo?
Hi there,
Hmmm...may galit ka yata sa mundo that's why you cannot even see the bigger picture presented by some like the Pinoy in China. He/she is trying to separate the state and the church, which garner better results in govt project implementations. Hope that you know the basic fact that arguments or discussions on religion or beliefs are endless. Kaya lahat dito ay dying to speak out their own beliefs. Getz mo?Seek what is bothering you, you seem so unhappy. P.S. You also have to deal with your own stigma & discrimination problem as you said that "Kabayan, I don't need help kasi wala akong AIDs or STD"- you definitely did not get what was said: "What can you do to help? (Kababayan, e-mail me if you need to.)" Hehe. Your inputs are very factual, giving us insights on how China battles with AIDS. This should be adopted by the Philippines. But I’m afraid that this will not be understood by many intellectually-challenged, yet with big and filthy mouth individuals commenting in this blog of Monsod.
I think, people should focus on facts and not on the morality issues twisted on the matter. Most especially let’s not debate about religion, and personality, please. This will take us no where… Actually, the low-lifers turned this debate into a riot, all with bad use of language and bad words. Thanks.
That's why the words spoken here by our friends "make or break" them. Away-away na sila. That's sad. Myna, you're doing a good job. I have also been doing apologetics, you might want we work together. I have so much materials I will burst if I don't share them.
Anytime you want to link up, I'm over at I OPPOSE THE REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH BILL. Or the other one GOD HATES CONTRACEPTION. I'm inviting kibitzers to go check out I OPPOSE THE REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH BILL for some very stimulating mental exercises. Topic of the day: CONDOMS. sure Mr. Llera it is a pleasure to work with people like you. thnx
I have one point to add to this already very controversial topic;
Let us remember that humans, like any other organism in this planet is designed to reproduce. That is the Natural Law. When the reproductive system of a human being matures, he/she will certainly look for a partner to fulfill this obligation. So sex, just like breathing and eating is a biological need. In his lifetime, a man/woman can live without education but not without sex. That explains for the priests and nuns. When the church introduced restrictions in the name of morality, all hell went loose. It becomes worst when man developed a way to protect himself from the adverse effects, still the church is against it. CORRECTION: REVISED
yes kumilos ka with the help of GOD and with the light of GOD's will...because if not? who are you? are you a GOD THAT EVERYTHING RELIES ON IN YOUR POWER ALONE AND AS IF VERYTHING DEPENDs oN YOU? IBA YUNG GUMAGAWA KA DAHIL LAMANG SA SARILI MONG KAKAYAHAN AT IBA NAMAN YUNG GUMAGAWA KASAMA ANG GUIDANCE ANG PANGINOON! WIDEN YOUR MIND! DON'T PLAY LIKE A GOD! What do these Catholic prelates know? They don't have children to feed. They are provided for by the church already. It's immoral to have lots of kids and not be able to provide for them and to subject them to a life of prostitution or destitution. Condom use also prevents illegal abortions, which is murder in the eyes of the church. Moreover, we'll have an AIDS epidemic soon if nothing is done as well. Perhaps the church would love that. Their priests will become more in demand. They'll have more funerals to perform. I'm a practicing Catholic and support the church. But, with regard to this issue of condom, the church is wrong to call its use immoral. The Philippines is not a frailocracy!
Dinzki:
Let us remember that humans, like any other organism in this planet is designed to reproduce. That is the Natural Law. When the reproductive system of a human being matures, he/she will certainly look for a partner to fulfill this obligation. So sex, just like breathing and eating is a biological need. In his lifetime, a man/woman can live without education but not without sex. That explains for the priests and nuns. When the church introduced restrictions in the name of morality, all hell went loose. It becomes worst when man developed a way to protect himself from the adverse effects, still the church is against it. Llera: Have you noticed that one can have a Belgian shpeherd dog in mind, and, reading your post, will not have trouble thining you're speaking about dogs rather than human beings? I say this because unlike dogs whose preoccupation do not go much beyond the search for food and sex, man is more, much, much more than that. This is because man was given intelligence to make him soar beyond the strictly biological and share with his Creator his Creator's supernatural nature. Man is not a sexual automaton whose sexual organ you can tweak, and he is transformed into a runaway train of unstoppabe sexual urges he's unable to control. No Dinzki, man is m=way, way more than that. Haven't you noticed, at least from your own experience? " What do these Catholic prelates know? They don't have children to feed. They are provided for by the church already."
Does one have to be a chicken to know about eggs? Does one have to be in Serengeti to know about elephants, gazelles, and lions? Someone like you asked a real-life priest what makes him qualified to speak about the problems in a family when he doesnt himself have a family. His answer: "Son, you have only one family. I have 85 (referring to the number of families the priest has helped in his years as a priest)." To you I say,"Son, before you speak, choose your words well. Give it a little brain." Preist only recognize as "father" sa simbahan. But does he provide food, shelter and protection against external physical threat? The way I see it, PAri pa ang na-ngongoleksyon ng kontribution sa mga uto-utong panatiko sa religion. Sila pa ang palamunin....
All he can provide is a promise..... " I'm a practicing Catholic and support the church."
You are not a practicing Catholic; practicing Catholics do not behave like you do. You're not even Catholic, you don't know even the basics of the Catholic faith. Stop fooling yourself. "Their priests will become more in demand. They'll have more funerals to perform. I'm a practicing Catholic and support the church."
Joseph, do you know what you're talking about? Did you know how much a Raphael or a Michaelangelo will fetch in a Sotheby's auction? Hint: Van Gogh's "The Irises" fetched USD52 million "Just to give you info, health workers was able to formulate vaccine for AIDS. I know AIDS and HIV are different but related in someway. But my point is, man of sceince is making some improvements. Health authorities are getting results. Do you understand what saying? They are doing something to solve the problem. It may not be that much for you, but hey, at least they are getting something done.
The way you answer my comment tells me that you not really that intellegent. You remind me of some folks that I met long time ago. They beleive so much in their faith that they descided to do "Lay hands" and prayer rally to their sickly kins insted of taking them to the hospital. They beleive so much in their faith that prayer alone will do the job and get bed ridden patients back on track. What happened? I can't really tell that they did not pray hard enough cause I saw how they did it..... It was very emotional prayers...but one by one, the sickly died. I know the illness was so easy to cure for signs and sypmtoms were obious on the latter. But they let them die anyway." Mag aral jka munang mag spell Totoy. At and English mo, bali baliktad. Aral ka muna, saka ka na bumalik. Di importante ang spelling. Maliwanag ang point ng comment ko. Kung wala kang maisagot na maayos. Shut the hell up. Ang taong wala ng maisagot, ang di importanteng mga bagay pinupuna para lang may mai-type o maipakita kung gaano kakitid ang kanyang pang unawa.
Ate MYNA
Nawa ay liwanagan ka ng Lord sa mga verses na ito Ang mga basehan mo ng paniniwala patungkol sa Sacramento, Purgatoryo at Serbisyo Pagsamba sa imahen ay puro sa Old Testament at ito ay nirebisa na ng Panginoong Hesus dahil Siya ang may pinakamataas na awtoridad na naghahayag sa huling panahon Hebrews 1:1-3 After God spoke long ago in various portions and in various ways to our ancestors through the prophets, in these last days he has spoken to us in a son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he created the world. The Son is the radiance of his glory and the representation of his essence, and he sustains all things by his powerful word, and so when he had accomplished cleansing for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high. Hebrews10:1-10 For the law possesses a shadow of the good things to come but not the reality itself, and is therefore completely unable, by the same sacrifices offered continually, year after year, to perfect those who come to worship. For otherwise would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers would have been purified once for all and so have no further consciousness of sin? But in those sacrifices3 there is a reminder of sins year after year. For the blood of bulls and goats cannot take away sins. So when he came into the world, he said, “Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me. “Whole burnt offerings and sin-offerings you took no delight in. “Then I said, ‘Here I am: I have come—it is written of me in the scroll of the book—to do your will, O God.’” When he says above, “Sacrifices and offerings and whole burnt offerings and sin-offerings you did not desire nor did you take delight in them” (which are offered according to the law), then he says, “Here I am: I have come to do your will.” He does away with9 the first to establish the second. By his will we have been made holy through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all Acts 19:26 And you see and hear that this Paul has persuaded and turned away a large crowd, not only in Ephesus but in practically all of the province of Asia, by saying that gods made by hands are not gods at all. May bagong pahayag na po si Hesus at ang mga Apostol na siyang dapat nating sundan Taimtim nyo pong basahen ang Biblia gaya ng verses sa taas naniniwala akong liliwanagan ka ng Holy Spirit at manunumbalik sayo ang katotohanan na nakapaloob sa Salita ng Dios yan po ang dahilan kaya umalis kami sa Catholic Church mas gusto naming sundan ang sinasabi ng Biblia kesa sa Simbahang Katolika simple at malinaw na paliwanag salamat sa yo hanapin ko yan sa tagalog biblia
****Response to born again!
YOU CONVICTED ALREADY YOURSELF (AND COMPLETELY TWISTED THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE BIBLE) WHEN YOU SAY: ….Salita ng Dios yan po ang dahilan kaya umalis kami sa Catholic Church mas gusto naming sundan ang sinasabi ng Biblia kesa sa Simbahang Katolika. YOU SIMPLY LEAVE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH BY INTERPRETING THE BIBLE ON YOUR OWN ABILTY and by thinking you got the right answer from it and use it against the catholic church. I would like to start with the foundation of the church. WE HAVE ONLY ONE CHURCH…(not two or three) ONE AND ONLY ONE FOUNDED BY CHRIST. Why? First We have one GOD…so we have one faith and baptism. And the church will not be defeated as the scripture says: (Matt 16:18)And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And it will remain forever. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. NOW WHO ARE THOSE WHO SEPARATED FROM THE ONE CHURCH FOUNDED BY CHRIST? As what you have said:”… umalis kami sa Catholic Church…” don’t tell me that you and your pastor and you who just give a little amount of time browsing the bible has already understood it….. no!....unlike the catholic church who has devoted herself to the word of GOD under the light of the HOLY spirit since it beginning and until the end because GOD is with her until the end of time! You spoke of burnt offering. But you interpreted out of context… BURNT OFFERING DONE BY THE PAGANS DURING THE OLD TIME. The Catholic church offers a Sacrifice… CHRIST HIMSELF we offer during the celebration of the Eucharist because HE is the only one worthy to be offered because he is and only blameless and a perfect offering Mark 14:24 and he said to them this is my blood of the new and everlasting covenant and it will be shed for you and for all so that sins maybe forgiven” luke 22 :19 He said “ DO THIS IN MEMORY OF ME”. Jesus first repeated what he said, then summarized: "‘I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.’ IT SEEMS YOU HAVE A PROBLEM LIKE THE JEWS “The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, ‘How can this man give us his flesh to eat?’" (John 6:51–52). "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him" (John 6:53–56). But he knew some did not believe. "After this, many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him" (John 6:66)…PROBABLY YOU AND YOUR COMPANY ARE PART OF THEM! WE HAVE THIS SACRAMENT BECAUSE HE COMMANDED IT… YOU AND CHURCH DON’T HAVE SACRAMENT BECAUSE CHRIST IS NOT WITH YOU! Me:
Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves Myna: even before God wuld use symbols... fire cloud dove... to communicate with people... tanga! kung ikaw ayaw mong maka kita ng mga symbols yulad ng cross mag isip ka baka demonyo ka it is the bible who says it not me..John 3: 14-21 and (Numbers 21, 5-9). ooooh tatanga tanga ka nanaman ****dahil ang basihan mo utak mong walang laman.* your faith alone??????? oh my lord... hehehe... not even your faith will save you... *tanga*! GOD created community,, for you to live with the community where HE is God (meaning the CHurch.. *tanga*) that is why he created covenant... tanga! and so he sent Christ to save his people tanga! and so Christ created the church... tanga! faith without action is dead... tanga! you have a heretical faith... *tanga*! wala kang alam *tanga*! lahat na ata ng katangahan nasa yo na..*tanga*! wala ka pal eh... yabang mo *inu-utu uto kalang eh*..hehehe you're like a dog. you entertain me very much. ganun nga think like a dog! malabo paliwanag ni Myna puro copy-paste tagalog nalang kase gamitin mo
hindi nga Katoliko ang Iglesia nung una at hindi ang Pope ang lider nila panu mo sinabi kayo ang tunay at orihinal na Iglesia? mga Lider ng orihinal na Simbahang Kristyano: TIMOTHY 352 AD sunod kay Apostol Pablo ULPIAN ZACCHAIUS THEODOSIA SERAPION QUINTA SANCTUS SIMEON PROCOPIUS PHOTINUS POLYCARP ORIGEN METRA JULIAN ENNATHAS CRONION BLANDINA APPHIANUS APPOLONIUS APPOLONIA APHAEUS AGAPIUS EUSEBIUS pati babae ay lider sa orihinal na Simbahan wala pa ang Katolisismo pero naging Pope na ang lider kristyano sa panahon ni Emperor Constantinople at bawal na ang lady bishop nagtago naman ang orihinal na Iglesia mabuti nalang tumawag ng panibago at naliwanagan ang mga katoliko sa Bible nitong huli at sila ay dahan-dahan ng bumukod at ginawang mas mataas na awtoridad ang Bible kesa sa simbahan bat dimo sabihin kung sino ang simbahan na toto (na tinutukoy mo)?....kayo bayun?
kung mag popost ka ng lista ng pope siguron mong kumpleto ha! magresearch kapa! you are just giving a half truth! para kay "researcher of truth" i am also a researcher for truth. pwede po bang pakisabi kung saan galing ang history na kinuha mo -o naresearch mo para ma-review ko, at kung sino ang author.
Basahen nyo ang Fox book of Martyrs (By George Fox)
kung gusto nyo malaman papanu nagtuloy-tuloy ang original na Simbahang Kristyano at si Eusebius na lider kristyano ay pinapatay naman ng Pope dahilan sa heresy ang mga ayaw sumunod sa Katolisismo nuong araw at yaong mga bumukod ay sinusunog sa tulos, pinupugutan, pinapakain sa leon at pinahirapan sa 'inquisition' google search nyo INQUISITION hindi pumapatay ang tunay na Iglesya ng Dios pumapatay ang Katolisismo hindi talaga iyan ang Iglesiang itinatag ni Jesus Me:
Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves Myna: even before God wuld use symbols... fire cloud dove... to communicate with people... tanga ! kung ikaw ayaw mong maka kita ng mga symbols yulad ng cross mag isip ka baka demonyo ka it is the bible who says it not me..John 3: 14-21 and (Numbers 21, 5-9). ooooh tatanga tanga ka nanaman ****dahil ang basihan mo utak mong walang laman.* your faith alone??????? oh my lord... hehehe... not even your faith will save you... tanga ! GOD created community,, for you to live with the community where HE is God (meaning the CHurch.. *tanga*) that is why he created covenant... tanga ! and so he sent Christ to save his people tanga ! and so Christ created the church... tanga ! faith without action is dead... tanga ! you have a heretical faith... tanga ! wala kang alam tanga ! lahat na ata ng katangahan nasa yo na..*tanga* ! wala ka pal eh... yabang mo inu-utu uto kalang eh ..hehehe you're like a dog. you entertain me very much. ganun nga think like a dog! God made man,
Man made religion, Now,man is looking for God thru Religion. Ano ba yan? Gawin nyong makabuluhan ang Holyweek
Hanapin ang Katotohanan Basahen ang Biblia at mag-research Pauna nyo basahen ang Gospel of John Hingin nyo ang patnubay ng Holy Spirit Maging handa sa pagsunod sa Biblia kahit pa usigin ng Katolisismo Research nyo INQUISITION at sagutin nyo ang tanong 'kung ang Iglesia Katolica Apostolica Romana ay tunay na itinatag ni Jesus bakit niya pinapatay ang ibang kristyanong hindi Katoliko at lumabas sa Katoliko? medyu tama yung post nun born againts binasa ko acts 20;28 me prophecy dun na babaguhen ang christian teachings at papatayin ang mga christian leaders ang masaket lang mga pope ang salarin
GEORGE FOX?....hmmmm sya na ba yung basihan ng history ngayun uhhhhh.. smells fishy huh!
#175.2.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-05 01:02
(Reply)
"..Though Fox used the Bible to support his views, Fox reasoned that, because God was within the faithful, believers could follow their own inner guide rather than rely on a strict reading of Scripture or the word of clerics'...^(See e.g. Fox in Nickalls, pp.145, 159)Fox was imprisoned several times, the first at Nottingham (Fox in Nickalls, pp.40–43)
hmmmm ganun pala yun! Hwag na kayong mag research pa kung saan saan,bakit di nyo na lang alalhanin ang sarili nating history.
Ano ba ang naging kalagayan natin nung panahon ng mga "Prayle"? Pag nagbasa ka ng biblia ay siguradong latigo sa plasa ang aabutin mo.nung panahon ng prayle,dapat ay prayle lang ang paniniwalaan mo.ano man ang sabihin nila tungkol sa spiritual mong buhay. Gaya ba nung iginigiit ni Myna. What happened to our collective memory? Kaya hwag tayong magtaka kung may mga pilipino pang ganun ang utak hanggang ngayon. Hwag rin tayong magtaka kung bakit talamak ang kurapsyon sa pinoy hanggang ngayon at kung bakit ang kaparian sa pinas ay nanghihimasok pa rin sa patakbo ng gobyerno.na inherit natin yan sa mga kastila.dumating dito ang dala krus at nang umalis ay ginto ang dala. Me :
Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves Myna : even before God wuld use symbols... fire cloud dove... to communicate with people... tanga ! kung ikaw ayaw mong maka kita ng mga symbols yulad ng cross mag isip ka baka demonyo ka it is the bible who says it not me..John 3: 14-21 and (Numbers 21, 5-9). ooooh tatanga tanga ka nanaman ***dahil ang basihan mo utak mong walang laman . your faith alone??????? oh my lord... hehehe... not even your faith will save you... tanga ! GOD created community,, for you to live with the community where HE is God (meaning the CHurch.. tanga ) that is why he created covenant... tanga ! and so he sent Christ to save his people tanga ! and so Christ created the church... tanga ! faith without action is dead... tanga ! you have a heretical faith... tanga ! wala kang alam tanga ! lahat na ata ng katangahan nasa yo na..*tanga* ! wala ka pal eh... yabang mo inu-utu uto kalang eh ..hehehe you're like a dog. you entertain me very much. ganun nga think like a dog! does your title GAGO SI... merely speaks of your self?
o wala kanang utak kaya ya nalang ang kaya mong ilagay? oh ayan pinansin na kita ah... an dami mong papansin...eh. kawawa ka naman! Ahh.. ikaw na pala si anonymous..
Yes, so what. I am not the one who speaks of the Morality in its fullest sense while doing a not so morally right things. Hypocryte - A person who professes beliefs and opinions that he or she does not hold in order to conceal his or her real feelings or motives Swak na swak. And.. thank you sa pagpansin, at napahiya ka na naman sakin. nyahahahahaha.
he he he TANGA blog lang ito pinatulan mo Tanga. Pumatol ka sa TANGA. ha ha ha
Mas tanga ka kasi nagcomment ka sa comment ng tanga. hehehe
Wala na po ang post ni MYNA, magnilaynilay ka po hindi pwede original christian church ang Katoliko dahil pinapatay nila ang mga tunay na Kristyanong di-Katoliko
(Acts 20:28-29) Hebrews 3:7 Therefore, as the Holy Spirit says, “Oh, that today you would listen as he speaks! “Do not harden your hearts..." Huag nyo na po tanggihan ang katotohanan huag balewalain ang boses ng Holy Spirit sa puso mo Hindi relihiyon at seremonyas ang magliligtas sa tao kundi ang personal experience na maipanganak muli I Peter 1:3-4 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! By his great mercy we have been born again into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, that is, into an inheritance imperishable, undefiled, and unfading. It is RESERVED IN HEAVEN for you, Pagpalain ka po ng Panginoon *born against*.. you are just dreaming...you could not even argue well. tingnan mo nalang ang mga blog mo and it will tell something of your empty shell, go with "searcher of un-truth" who admire GEORGE FOX very much. these people are realy non-sense being with disformed mind. i don't know if i can call you human... even dogs are better than you.
*born against*... luma nayan, sinagot kana ni myna niyan. may bago ka pa ba? wala nga kayong maisagot kung sino ang totong simbahan eh! hindi naman kayo kasi kelan lang natayo ang simbahan nyo ng isang tao na pansariling interpretasyon ng biblia.
born aginst ay itinatag ng isang TAO lang na.. this bible group...usually thinks that faith alone will save you and even good thing could not add to your holiness... kaya mga halng ang kaululuwa ng mga taong ito. why do good then kung wala itong epekto sayo.ang sabinila just accept CHRIST as your savior ligtas kana, kahit pumatay ka ng pumatay... yan ang theologia ng mga utak talakitok na to. In recent history, born again is a term that has been widely associated with the evangelical Christian renewal since the late 1960s
In 1976, Watergate conspirator Chuck Colson's book Born Again gained international notice. In his book Born Again (1976 and 2008), *Watergate conspirator *Chuck Colson describes his path to faith in conjunction with his criminal imprisonment and played a significant role in solidifying "born again" identity as a cultural construct in the U.S. [Colson, Charles W. Born Again. Chosen Books (Baker Publishing), 2008.] The core doctrine we preach is that if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, that you shall be saved: That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. (Romans 10:9) O nakita muna kung saan ka galing? BORN AGAINST I think, people should focus on scientific facts and/or statistics and not on the morality issues surrounding the matter. Most especially let’s not debate about religion, and personality, please. This will take us nowhere…
Actually, the low-lifers turned this debate into a riot, all with bad use of language and bad words. d best thing to do is street protest just like winnie did, dun dinig kayo ng tambay.
gusto ko na uling manood ng unang hirit, wala na ba si winnie don? so irritating
Readers who can comply with the minimum requirements of civility are invited to come visit the Facebook group PINOY CATHOLICS' ANSWERS TO PINOY PROTESTANTS' QUESTIONS, let's discuss things there. The least we can gain is refined charity.
Those who cannot hold their tongue stay here. This is how the protest play the game..
Protestant says… you are not the church founded by Christ.. they are Christians there is no word “catholic” in the bible. If you ask them: Who are those early Christians.?.. they answer.. they are Christians & that’s all. Where are those early Christians now?.....their answer…(*silence*) What is the name of your religion?.... their answer….(silence/born again/protestant) Who is the founder of your religion….their answer….(*silence*) When was the year your religion founded?....their answer…(*silence*) What differs you from the other denominations?.. their answer…(*silence*) What is your doctrine?........they answer…faith alone will save you & not even your good deeds will save you/ just accept the Lord as redeemer and Lord you will be saved!/ grace alone will save you. Why did you separated from the catholic church…. Because we rely only the bible alone. The next question is….they answer…. “that’s enough… we are the true church not you.” THE FACT HERE IS… THEY COULD NOT EVEN FIGURE OUT WHAT IS THEIR CHURCH, WHEN WAS IT FOUNDED AND BY WHO, AND HOW DO THEY DIFFER FROM THE DENOMINATIONS! BLIND CHURCHES! para sa akin hindi tayo dapat magtalo sa kung sino ang nasa tamang landas na relihiyon dahil gaya ng mga punong prutas ang bawat relihiyon ay nabubuhay ayon sa biyayang kaloob ng Dakilang Diyos na lumikha sa atin lahat.
sa paningin ng Diyos lahat tayo ay taong makasalanan kaya kung gusto ng Diyos na wakasan ang planetang ito at wag ng magtira ni isang nilalang kung gawin iyon ng Diyos sino ba tayo para pigilan ang plano ng Diyos,after all we are only some pieces of His creations. kung ako ang Diyos,susunugin ko na lang ang planetang ito at wala na akong ililigtas ni isa at gagawa na lang uli ako ng panibagong nilalang na wala ng sexual organ,hindi na magugutom at hindi na mauuhaw gaya ng mga manekin na pwede naman bigyan buhay pakilusin ayon sakagustuhan ng maylikha. problema kasi ng tao ang kalibugan,pagkagutom at pagkauhaw kung wala ang tatlong yan,wala sanang problema ang mga tao dahil hindi sila magtatalik kung wala naman silang sexual organ at hindi magugutom kung walang bituka na kakalam-kalam at hindi mauuhaw dahil walang pantog na magpaparamdam ng uhaw. living on earthly body makes mankind prone to sinful acts. hindi lang makakagawa ng kasalanan ang sinuman kung sila ay nasa katawan langit na pero mangyayari lang yan kung patay na ang katawan-lupa ng bawat isa at tanging kaluluwa lang ang may kakayahan makapasok sa Kaharian ng Diyos dahil immortal na sya. gayon pa man ang masasamang kaluluwa ay hindi rin papapasukin sa Kaharian ng Diyos kaya sa kaharian ng demonyo ang bagsak nila at sa impyerno sila magsasama-sama kung saan ang apoy ang tutupok sa kanila. ang tanong tuluyan kayang matupok ng apoy ang kaluluwa ng mga demonyo at masasamang tao? if there is heaven,there is hell at ang hell ay dito magaganap sa planetang ito at ang langit ay nasa Kaharian ng Diyos. hanggang ngayon wala pa ni isa ang nakarating sa Langit na bumalik dito sa lupa at nagsabi kung ano ang hitsura nito,maliban sa vision na nakasaad sa aklat ng Apokalipsis walang sinuman ang nakakaalam kung ano ang hitsura ng Kaharian ng Diyos. yong si Quiboloy ng Kingdom of Jesus Christ gumawa ng sariling bersyon ng kaharian ni Hesus Kristo sa Davao pero hindi naman nya magaya ang Kaharian ng Diyos sa Langit kung saan ang Kaharian ay gawa sa ginto at iba´t-ibang klaseng makikinang na mga bato at mayroon 12 gates na bantay ng 12 anghel at doon ang mga nilalang ay hindi na makakaramdam ng gutom,wala ng magtatalik at wala pa ngang kalahating milyon ang maliligtas kundi 144,000 libo lang. God Kingdom can not be found in this planet earth but it is somewhere invisible in the eyes of man...it could be with-in the planet "Sun" as no one can even come closer to Him or else they will be burn unless they are immortal being where heats could no longer bring harm to themselves,for even clouds could be dried up and turn into dry airs. the universe is full of mystery,we don´t know what God plans for us,"when" He will finished-off the life of this planet earth,only Him knows! those who want to use condom let them,those do not want don´t force them,the churches should let everyone decided for themselves for everyone was born with a freewill. immorality start from each person doing immoral things but even so they had rights to do so,that´s their life,that´s their decision,that´s their fates and everyone will die,no one will be exempted from death...that´s the painful truth for even God has died to probe to mankind that there is life after death. if AIDS and diseases killing mankind,hell fires will kill everything this planet earth has maybe even the moon will suffered the same,if those astronaut failed to bring fire extinguisher...no jokes fires kill! Response to you ”Christian”
The church is very much involve on this discussion because when there is morality issues (like the use of condom)…church has something to say. The catholic church is much very firm on her teaching on morality. It is obvious that many who are here are against the Catholic church and it becomes the a festive blog for those protestant Christians to attack (not on the issue of morality but) the Catholic church itself. But it seems “Christian” that you your self touches the matter about the church. You are falling to a religious indifferentism… that every one/ every church are the same…for sure you are a Christian and could determine what kind of Christian are you. As what I posted above. THE FACT HERE IS… THEY COULD NOT EVEN FIGURE OUT WHAT IS THEIR CHURCH, WHEN WAS IT FOUNDED AND BY WHO, AND HOW DO THEY DIFFER FROM THE DENOMINATIONS! As you ‘ve said: “… ang Kaharian ng Diyos sa Langit kung saan ang Kaharian ay gawa sa ginto at iba´t-ibang klaseng makikinang na mga bato at mayroon 12 gates na bantay ng 12 anghel at doon ang mga nilalang ay hindi na makakaramdam ng gutom,wala ng magtatalik at wala pa ngang kalahating milyon ang maliligtas kundi 144,000 libo lang.” THIS PURE MISGUIDED AND ILOGICAL CONCEPT. As you said: “….God Kingdom can not be found in this planet earth but it is somewhere invisible in the eyes of man...” GOD’S KINGDOM IN HERE…where the church is there where GOD is..he founded church and he is the head of the church! On the last part of your blog it seems that you are telling us…gawin mo ang gusto mong gawin… ‘ they had rights to do so”. Wrong concept of freedom.. we have divine law to follow. Father Raymond J. de Souza
A Response to the New York Times The New York Times on March 25 accused Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, of intervening to prevent a priest, Father Lawrence Murphy, from facing penalties for cases of sexual abuse of minors. The story is false. It is unsupported by its own documentation. Indeed, it gives every indication of being part of a coordinated campaign against Pope Benedict, rather than responsible journalism. Before addressing the false substance of the story, the following circumstances are worthy of note: • The New York Times story had two sources. First, lawyers who currently have a civil suit pending against the Archdiocese of Milwaukee. One of the lawyers, Jeffrey Anderson, also has cases in the United States Supreme Court pending against the Holy See. He has a direct financial interest in the matter being reported. • The second source was Archbishop Rembert Weakland, retired archbishop of Milwaukee. He is the most discredited and disgraced bishop in the United States, widely known for mishandling sexual-abuse cases during his tenure, and guilty of using $450,000 of archdiocesan funds to pay hush money to a former homosexual lover who was blackmailing him. Archbishop Weakland had responsibility for the Father Murphy case between 1977 and 1998, when Father Murphy died. He has long been embittered that his maladministration of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee earned him the disfavor of Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, long before it was revealed that he had used parishioners’ money to pay off his clandestine lover. He is prima facie not a reliable source. • Laurie Goodstein, the author of the New York Times story, has a recent history with Archbishop Weakland. Last year, upon the release of the disgraced archbishop’s autobiography, she wrote an unusually sympathetic story that buried all the most serious allegations against him (New York Times, May 14, 2009). • A demonstration took place in Rome on Friday, coinciding with the publication of the New York Times story. One might ask how American activists would happen to be in Rome distributing the very documents referred to that day in the New York Times. The appearance here is one of a coordinated campaign, rather than disinterested reporting. It’s possible that bad sources could still provide the truth. But compromised sources scream out for greater scrutiny. Instead of greater scrutiny of the original story, however, news editors the world over simply parroted the New York Times piece. Which leads us the more fundamental problem: The story is not true, according to its own documentation. The New York Times made available on its own website the supporting documentation for the story. In those documents, Cardinal Ratzinger himself does not take any of the decisions that allegedly frustrated the trial. Letters are addressed to him; responses come from his deputy. Even leaving that aside, though, the gravamen of the charge — that Cardinal Ratzinger’s office impeded some investigation — is proven utterly false. The documents show that the canonical trial or penal process against Father Murphy was never stopped by anyone. In fact, it was only abandoned days before Father Murphy died. Cardinal Ratzinger never took a decision in the case, according to the documents. His deputy, Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, suggested, given that Father Murphy was in failing health and a canonical trial is a complicated matter, that more expeditious means be used to remove him from all ministry. To repeat: The charge that Cardinal Ratzinger did anything wrong is unsupported by the documentation on which the story was based. He does not appear in the record as taking any decision. His office, in the person of his deputy, Archbishop Bertone, agreed that there should be full canonical trial. When it became apparent that Father Murphy was in failing health, Archbishop Bertone suggested more expeditious means of removing him from any ministry. Furthermore, under canon law at the time, the principal responsibility for sexual-abuse cases lay with the local bishop. Archbishop Weakland had from 1977 onwards the responsibility of administering penalties to Father Murphy. He did nothing until 1996. It was at that point that Cardinal Ratzinger’s office became involved, and it subsequently did nothing to impede the local process. The New York Times flatly got the story wrong, according to its own evidence. Readers may want to speculate on why. Here is the relevant timeline, drawn from the documents the New York Times posted on its own website. 15 May 1974 Abuse by Father Lawrence Murphy is alleged by a former student at St. John’s School for the Deaf in Milwaukee. In fact, accusations against Father Murphy go back more than a decade. 12 September 1974 Father Murphy is granted an official “temporary sick leave” from St. John’s School for the Deaf. He leaves Milwaukee and moves to northern Wisconsin, in the Diocese of Superior, where he lives in a family home with his mother. He has no official assignment from this point until his death in 1998. He does not return to live in Milwaukee. No canonical penalties are pursued against him. 9 July 1980 Officials in the Diocese of Superior write to officials in the Archdiocese of Milwaukee about what ministry Father Murphy might undertake in Superior. Archbishop Rembert Weakland, archbishop of Milwaukee since 1977, has been consulted and says it would be unwise to have Father Murphy return to ministry with the deaf community. There is no indication that Archbishop Weakland foresees any other measures to be taken in the case. 17 July 1996 More than 20 years after the original abuse allegations, Archbishop Weakland writes to Cardinal Ratzinger, claiming that he has only just discovered that Father Murphy’s sexual abuse involved the sacrament of confession — a still more serious canonical crime. The allegations about the abuse of the sacrament of confession were in the original 1974 allegations. Weakland has been archbishop of Milwaukee by this point for 19 years. It should be noted that for sexual-abuse charges, Archbishop Weakland could have proceeded against Father Murphy at any time. The matter of solicitation in the sacrament of confession required notifying Rome, but that too could have been done as early as the 1970s. 10 September 1996 Father Murphy is notified that a canonical trial will proceed against him. Until 2001, the local bishop had authority to proceed in such trials. The Archdiocese of Milwaukee is now beginning the trial. It is noteworthy that at this point, no reply has been received from Rome indicating that Archbishop Weakland knew he had that authority to proceed. 24 March 1997 Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, Cardinal Ratzinger’s deputy at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, advises a canonical trial against Father Murphy. 14 May 1997 Archbishop Weakland writes to Archbishop Bertone to say that the penal process against Father Murphy has been launched, and notes that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has advised him to proceed even though the statute of limitations has expired. In fact, there is no statute of limitations for solicitation in the sacrament of confession. Throughout the rest of 1997 the preparatory phases of penal process or canonical trial is underway. On 5 January 1998 the Tribunal of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee says that an expedited trial should be concluded within a few months. 12 January 1998 Father Murphy, now less than eight months away from his death, appeals to Cardinal Ratzinger that, given his frail health, he be allowed to live out his days in peace. 6 April 1998 Archbishop Bertone, noting the frail health of Father Murphy and that there have been no new charges in almost 25 years, recommends using pastoral measures to ensure Father Murphy has no ministry, but without the full burden of a penal process. It is only a suggestion, as the local bishop retains control. 13 May 1998 The Bishop of Superior, where the process has been transferred to and where Father Murphy has lived since 1974, rejects the suggestion for pastoral measures. Formal pre-trial proceedings begin on 15 May 1998, continuing the process already begun with the notification that had been issued in September 1996. 30 May 1998 Archbishop Weakland, who is in Rome, meets with officials at the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, including Archbishop Bertone but not including Cardinal Ratzinger, to discuss the case. The penal process is ongoing. No decision taken to stop it, but given the difficulties of a trial after 25 years, other options are explored that would more quickly remove Father Murphy from ministry. 19 August 1998 Archbishop Weakland writes that he has halted the canonical trial and penal process against Father Murphy and has immediately begun the process to remove him from ministry — a quicker option. 21 August 1998 Father Murphy dies. His family defies the orders of Archbishop Weakland for a discreet funeral. Tags: National Review -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Entries (RSS) Thank you very much Filius for defending Mother Church, andfor doing with refinement.
It warms my heart to see the faithful giving an account for the hope that's in them, with gentleness and reverence. Except for a few, I think many of those villifying the Church the Church here do so because they simply do not know what the Church teaches and what it does not. We would definitely question the teachings of the church and its capability to understand what they teach and be able to apply it on their everyday life if their fruit will be someone like Myna.
if the number of people infected with HIV/AIDS continue to rise rapidly as depicted by the DOH.. then the country will have an HIV/AIDS epidemic in his hands. i what to ask the church, what will they do.. what will they do to the young people infected by this diesease. will they help this young people, knowing well that they got it from SEX.. or they will just PRAY for their soul.. they question the methods being used by the government, but i dont see them doing anything,
So i ask the Roman Catholic Chuch, I ask the CBCP, WHAT ARE THERE PLAN FOR THE GROWING NUMBER OF YOUNG PEOPLE INFECTED BY HIV/AIDS.. Some would say…prayer without action is useless…yes indeed, because it is like a faith without action is dead. And so we can’t say by faith alone, we can be saved nor we can solve the problem.
On the other hand …action without prayer is….calamity! This would tell us that we can do everything in our own ability without the help of GOD. So everything seems to depend on our own ability no matter what. With this concept, people try to justify their means just to reach their ends and play like a GOD. The end does not justify the means! All problems have a proper solution by using a right means and not by using evil to attain good. We use good things to confront evil things, but not vice versa. We act and we pray! And let us never forget to do things under the light of the will of God who designs everything. GOD is also the source of all our strength so we use it not contrary to his will! MAN’s sexuality vis a vis GOD’s design.
(most people are unaware of these teaching of the church) There is no denying that the accelerated rate of population growth brings many added difficulties to the problems of development where the size of the population grows more rapidly than the quantity of available resources to such a degree that things seem to have reached an impasse. In such circumstances people are inclined to apply drastic remedies to reduce the birth rate. (Humanae vitae) There is no doubt that public authorities can intervene in this matter, within the bounds of their competence. They can instruct citizens on this subject and adopt appropriate measures, so long as these are in conformity with the dictates of the moral law and the rightful freedom of married couples is preserved completely intact. When the inalienable right of marriage and of procreation is taken away, so is human dignity. (Populorum progressio) This new state of things gives rise to new questions. Granted the conditions of life today and taking into account the relevance of married love to the harmony and mutual fidelity of husband and wife, would it not be right to review the moral norms in force till now, especially when it is felt that these can be observed only with the gravest difficulty, sometimes only by heroic effort? (Humanae vitae) Self-development, however, is not left up to man's option. Just as the whole of creation is ordered toward its Creator, so too the rational creature should of his own accord direct his life to God, the first truth and the highest good. Thus human self-fulfillment may be said to sum up our obligations. (Humanae vitae) Though it is true that sometimes it is lawful to tolerate a lesser moral evil in order to avoid a greater evil or in order to promote a greater good," it is never lawful, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil that good may come of it (18)—in other words, to intend directly something which of its very nature contradicts the moral order, and which must therefore be judged unworthy of man, even though the intention is to protect or promote the welfare of an individual, of a family or of society in general. Consequently, it is a serious error to think that a whole married life of otherwise normal relations can justify sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive and so intrinsically wrong. (Humanae vitae) Just as man does not have unlimited dominion over his body in general, so also, and with more particular reason, he has no such dominion over his specifically sexual faculties, for these are concerned by their very nature with the generation of life, of which God is the source. "Human life is sacred—all men must recognize that fact," (Humanae vitae) Men rightly observe that a conjugal act imposed on one's partner without regard to his or her condition or personal and reasonable wishes in the matter [even Sexual acts outside marriage] is no true act of love, and therefore offends the moral order in its particular application to the intimate relationship of husband and wife. If they further reflect, they must also recognize that an act of mutual love which impairs the capacity to transmit life which God the Creator, through specific laws, has built into it, frustrates His design which constitutes the norm of marriage, and contradicts the will of the Author of life. Hence to use this divine gift while depriving it, even if only partially, of its meaning and purpose, is equally repugnant to the nature of man and of woman, and is consequently in opposition to the plan of God and His holy will. (Humanae vitae) Moreover, this harmonious integration of our human nature, carried through by personal effort and responsible activity, is destined for a higher state of perfection. United with the life-giving Christ, man's life is newly enhanced; it acquires a transcendent humanism which surpasses its nature and bestows new fullness of life. This is the highest goal of human self-fulfillment. (Populorum progressio) Blackmailing politicians so that they will not support RH bill is some kind of using an EVIL way to confront the use of condom. This should be unacceptable to the church who teaches MORALITY.
Aside from that, i've noticed that some blogger here like LLERA, always criticize the civility/foul language of PRO-CONDOM people(anti catholic church/protestant as the catholics say) but ignores the same flaws of the ANTI-CONDOM people(Catholics even though i myself is a catholic by birth). Is there a double standard in MORALITY? Hey guys.. check this out!!!! it is a good reading material done and researched by college christian students of CHURCH OF GOD. "the painful truth" Ambassador College Research.
link: http://www.hwarmstrong.com/ar/Catholic.html filius
karamihan sa mga clergy wala ng ginawa kundi magpasarap sa buhay,kaunting sermon lang babaha na ng pera at donasyon sa simbahan,tapos sasabihin mo ang simbahan ang kaharian ng Diyos? sabagay marami pang uto-utong mga tao ang hanggang ngayon nagpapauto sa mga demonyo. ang simbahan dito sa mundo ay simbahan ng mga demonyo kung saan ang sinasamba nilang diyos ay mga estatwa at rebulto na gawa ng tao at pinanloloko sa mga tao. hindi kaharian ng Diyos ang simbahan dahil kung kaharian ng Diyos ang simbahan bakit kailangan manghingi ng donasyon ang simbahan? ang kaharian ng Diyos ay sagana sa prutas at tubig ng buhay at di na kailangan ng Diyos manghingi ng donasyon para sya ay mabuhay,itong mga santo papa,pari,madre,pastor atbp mabuhay kaya ang mga yan na hindi hihingi ng donasyon sa mga tao? gaya ng ginawa ni quiboloy,he made his own kingdom but still people there got sick and die,if that´s God Kingdom wala na sanang makakaramdam ng gutom,magkakasakit at mamamatay. wala po dito sa planetang ito ang kaharian ng Diyos,at hindi po kaharian ng Diyos ang simbahan dahil ang simbahan po ay gawa ng tao hindi gawa ng Diyos,ang Kaharian ng Diyos ay Diyos mismo ang may gawa,nagdesinyo at lumikha ng bagay na tanging Diyos lang ang makakalikha. devil kingdom in this planet earth are everywhere,they mislead people´s faith by encouraging them to worship pagan gods,asked to give donations in order for the churches to remain abundant in riches a sign that only a devil gods would instruct people to do so. will you please stop fooling people,how many clergy do nothing but make a fool to these ignorant people? salvation can´t be obtain nor guarantee by anyone only God Himself can provides that to people that deserves it,because even the pope,the priest,the nuns,the pastor has no assurance they too are save from hell of fires. are you sure you are going to heaven,when here on earth you are fooling many people to believe that churches are kingdom of god. maari pang maging tahanan ng Diyos pero ang maging Kaharian ay magkaiba po ang tinutukoy nito. ang Banal na Ispiritu ng Diyos ay maaring manirahan sa puso ng sinuman banal na nilalang,tao,hayop o bagay pero ang Kaharian ng Diyos ay nasa langit kung saan tanging ang Diyos at mga anghel nya ang nandoon. wala pang sinuman ang nakapagpatunay na silaý galing na sa Kaharian ng Diyos maliban kay Hesus Kristo dahil Siya lang ang nagmula sa langit at nagbalik sa langit. even lucifer has not seen God´s Kingdom yet dahil kung alam ni lucifer tiyak pinagsisira na naman nya yon gaya ng ginagawa nya sa planetang ito,pinaghuhukay ang mga nakatagong yaman ng mundo sa pag-aakalang nakatago sa planetang ito ang kapangyarihan ng Diyos. kung hindi ako nagkakamali sa aking tantiya ang "Araw" ang Kaharian ng Diyos dahil walang sinuman ang pwedeng lumapit sa Araw kundi silaý magiging uling at abo. naniniwala rin ako na 144,000 libo lang maliligtas dahil halos lahat ng tao dito sa mundong ito ay makasalanan at ilan lang ang mga taong nabubuhay na nakakasunod sa Sampung Utos ng Diyos all the rest failed to follow the only Ten Commandments of God. kung ang Sampung Utos ng Diyos ang pagbabasihan ng maliligtas marami talaga ang babagsak sa pagsubok ng Diyos dahil maraming tao ang hindi kayang sundin lahat ng Sampung Utos ng Diyos not even the pope nor the kings or queens of the earth. are you talking about God who is so far away!... well i belive HE is EMMANUEL..meaning a GOD WHO IS WITH US!
christian---makikitanong lang po. sa bilamg mo pong "144,000 libo lang maliligtas". kasama ka po sa bilang nayan?
ang Diyos at ang mga inatasan Nyang mga anghel lang ang nakakaalam kung sino ang maliligtas dahil nasa Diyos ang desisyon hindi nasa tao,kaya hindi ko alam kung kasama ako sa 144,000 libong maliligtas,gayunpaman umaasa ako na makakasama ako at ganon rin ang mga mahal ko sa buhay at kung hindi man ako maligtas wala akong magagawa kundi tanggapin ang inilaan sa akin ng kapalaran.
i believed it is God who decides for our destiny not us. Hindi po ba pweding 150,000? you know why i am asking this? if you are in your right mind, millions and millions of infants & children die in a year for one reason to another. I set these children as an example, for these are innocent. As christ would say, let these children come to me "theirs is the kingdom of GOD".
Are you telling us that GOD is a god of injustice? or you are indeed out of your mind and you wanna limit the love of GOD?
#192.1.1.1
christian
on
2010-04-08 22:22
(Reply)
God Kingdom is like a big spaceship with 12 gates and each gates has angel on guard and anyone that is not fit to live in God Kingdom will be thrown to hell(earth in hellfires)therefore it was for God purpose to save a limited number of people only that way He can provides all their needs.
hindi po lahat ng mga batang nandito sa planetang ito ay mga anak ng Diyos dahil mas marami po ang anak ng mga kampon ng demonyo dahil mahigit 1/4 ng anghel ng Diyos ang sumama kay lucifer ng magpasya ang Diyos na palayasin ang rebeldeng anghel Nya,kaya wag na kayong magtaka kung bakit kaunti lang ang maliligtas iyon ay dahil kaunti lang ang tunay na mga anak ng Diyos at sumusunod sa utos ng Diyos,all the rest are remnants of evil.
#192.1.1.1.1
masayahin
on
2010-04-09 02:45
(Reply)
i don't know from what planet where you came from! but i am pretty sure you are out of this world.
are you talikng about a heaven as a place? my goodness where did you get that? heaven is not a place bounded by space and time. heaven is, aside from a state of being, it is spiritual and not physical and so it has no limit.. it has no gold or silver. INFACT the salvation is for all and not only for 144,000. you are talking about the children of lucifer. it is again a fallacy... since all of us are GOD's children because we are all came from GOD the creator. sino ba yung sinansabi mong anak ng mga fallen angels? can you cite one?and can you prove it? saan at ano ba ang basihan mo ang nag datus mo? are you telling us that GOD is poor that he runs out of the means to meet the needs of his people? you are a bizar creature. i think your mind if out of order.
#192.1.1.1.1.1
christian
on
2010-04-09 05:01
(Reply)
it is only by love of God that keep this planet alive,kung wala ng pagmamahal ang Diyos noon pa sinunog ng Diyos ang planetang ito.
kaya pasalamat pa ang mga demonyo at hindi pa winawakasan ng Diyos ang planetang ito dahil kung mangyari yan wala ng kawala ang mga demonyo unless makasanib sa mga maliligtas na tao ang spirito ng diablo. gayunpaman madali na para sa Diyos itapon palabas ng Kanyang Kaharian ang mga demonyo dahil sa Kaharian ng Diyos wala ng puwang ang kapangyarihan ng demonyo dahil madali na syang mahuli at maparusahan ng Diyos. dito kasi sa planetang ito hindi sila mahuli-huli ng Diyos dahil kayang-kaya lumipad ng mga diablo kaya tanging apoy ng impyerno na lang ang tanging solusyon upang tuluyan ng matupok ang diablo at mga kampon nya dahil kung nasusunog na ang planetang ito wala naman silang ibang mapupuntahan na makakasurvives sila dahil hanggang sa planetang ito lang naman ang kakayahan ng kanilang power at kung lumipat man sila sa buwan tiyak susunugin rin ng Diyos ang buwan para makasigurong tuluyan ng magiging abo ang mga suwail nyang anghel. halimbawa masunog na ang buong planetang ito sa palagay mo ba,may mapupuntahan pang ibang planeta ang mga tao,demonyo at hayop na gustong mabuhay? pilit tinutuklas ng mga syantipiko ang ibang planeta sa pagbabakasakali na maaring mabuhay ang mga tao doon,pero hanggang ngayon tanging sa buwan pa lang pwede tumira ang tao pero wala pang garantiya na mabubuhay nga sa buwan ang tao for a thousand years sakaling sunugin ng Diyos ang planetang ito wala naman ibang planetang pwedeng pagkunan ng ikabubuhay ang mga taong gustong manirahan sa moon habang nasusunog ang planetang ito...so to makes the scenario short,nasa Diyos pa rin nakasalalay ang kapalaran ng buong uniberso dahil Sya ang maylikha,kaya Sya rin may karapatan magwakas. "evil children" you will know them by their attitudes and deeds.
#192.1.1.1.1.1.1
masayahin
on
2010-04-09 05:40
(Reply)
I don't oppose your idea that GOD has the power over everything..he is indeed, because he is the creator of everything. but you don't answer my question why salvation is limited to 144,000 only. is GOD after that number of figures?. Why?... give me more substantial reason.
If you are talking about sin.... evryone is sinfull and once you commited a sin, God's kingdom is not with you, for it belong to those with purity, blameless and undefile. if every one is a sinner then who will be those 144,000 that you are talking about? evryone is a sinner so all are not welcome to the kingdom of GOD! so how will you reconcile that. you seems so illogical. Jehovah's Witnesses
Jehovah's Witnesses distinctly believe that exactly 144,000 people will be raised to heaven to spend eternity with God as spirit beings. They believe that this number is made up of early Christians and those of Jehovah's Witnesses who profess to be "anointed" (or "spiritual Israel"), rather than being composed of literal descendent of Jacob.[6] [from jehovas book: "What does the Bible Really Teach?, ch. 8, p. 79] Jehovas Witnesses believe that the 144,000 have been selected by God from the time of Jesus' apostles through to the modern era. They believe that 144,000 (those having a "heavenly hope") will reign with Christ in heaven, while all other people accepted by God will live forever on a paradise earth (an "earthly hope"). According to the Witnesses, the first of the 144,000 were raised to heaven from their graves in 1918 and others who die after 1918 go to heaven immediately when they die.[7] 7.[From Paradise Lost to Paradise Regained Watchtower Society 1st Ed. 1958, page 231-232; "Those of this spiritual nation who died before the spiritual resurrection began in 1918 slept in death until that year. But the others who were still alive on earth have continued to live out their regular lives. ... when the earthly life of one of such persons ends he is resurrected at once to spirit life. He is changed in a moment from being a human creature to being a spirit creature in heaven with Jesus Christ. ... But only 144,000 persons will be a part of the new heavens with Jesus Christ"] That is one big BULLSHIT!!! May kapit bahay kami noon, Saksi ni Eskoba, ehe, Saksi ni jehova, puro mag nanakaw. Mga Lasinggero at laging napapa away. Qualify sila sa 144,000?
Ang mga binebenta nilang pamplets, di naman nabibili....Sila-sila lang din ang bumabasa...Mga tanga talaga! Ang kukulit pa namang kung mag benta! KAhit na halata na di ka interesado, lagi pa ring nag pupumilit... Parang mga iglesia..... Panay ang imbita sa simbahan nila para lang mag pa impress sa jakuno nila na may na recruit sila.... Hay nako...Mga tanga talaga ang mga panatiko ng religion! mukang nagbawas na ng bilang ngayun siguro mga 10,000 nalang kasi yung iba dun inabot na yung condom. nag baka sakali...hehehe yari ka!
Hoy, kaming mga Iglesia ni Kristo kami ang totoo at yan ay nasusulat sa bibliya. Di kasi kayo marunong mag basa ng Bibliya. Nasa amin ang Sugo ng Diyos an itinalaga sa bibliya sa kataohan ni Ka. Felix Manalo.
You see how these christian bible groups and denominations interpret the BIBLE? its terrible. it is their their interpretabtions that will hinder them to gain the true salvation from GOD.
If they have this distorted faith and understanding of religion... what will you expect from their concept of morality. NOTHING. if you base your judgement on Erroneous faith then it follws you will get erroneous conclusion of MORALITY. poor people! when are you going to learn? when are you coming back to GOD and embrace his will? because if you don't... why do you expect healing for our problems, and problems of our country? what do you expect? On the MORALITY OF SEX
Speaking of sex, there are certain physical patterns that are wrong regardless of any intention that might inform them. For example, to have sexual intercourse with a person that is not one's spouse is always wrong, even if, hypothetically, one might be motivated by some non-adulterous intention. Although on the case of an HIV infected husband who has no contraceptive purpose, which is to say, no intention to prevent new life in using the condom, primarily his intention is for prevention of HIV infection to his wife… could still be a moral question for such sexual act could not be an act of love on the part of a husband, but more like reckless endangerment. Condoms being notoriously unreliable, one would expose one's wife in such a situation to risk of infection without any necessity to do so. "Notoriously unreliable", you are giving false information here.
Giving false information is not in anyway considered as morally right. We have been a Catholic nation ever since but look at what we have become? Wala namang RH bill noon, pero san pa rin tayo napunta? Huwag nyonh sabihin sa akin na walang prostitute, or sex is being used for pleasure alone, wherein individuals are dehumanized and immorally objectified, to be used as a means to physical ends alone? Sabihin nyo sa aking walang mga ganyan NGAYON? Ang cause ng mga ganyang problema ay ang kahirapan! Kahirapan na sanhi ng paglobo ng ating populasyon? Biruin mo, magkano ang Budget ng gobyerno para sa bawat isang tao? eh kung mas konti edi mas malaki ang allotment ng budget per person! Naniniwala ba kayo na ang mga prostitute ay nagtratrabaho dahil lang sa PLEASURE? OMG! need nilang mabuhay, need nilang kumita. Dumami pa ang anak nila kasi walang nagtuturo sa kanila ng Family Planning o wala silang pambili ng condom! Kahirapan ang problema, na ang solusyon ng Catholic Church ay isang bowl ng lugaw pantawid gutom sa isang araw. Thank you for your response.
I just like to address some points you've raised: you quoted "Notoriously unreliable" which i pertain to the use of of condom by a certain husband who is infected with HIV. if I could elaborate it more.. i would say this so (Notoriously unreliable)because. if you are on the case of the husband who is infected with HIV, first would you admit that by having sex with your wife it is more probable that your wife might be infected with that same virus? by using condom... do you think it will give 100% assurance that your wife will be free from HIV contamination? NO it will not give you 100% assurance. if then, this will not give you 100% assurance, it is tantamount to say that you are exposing your wife to such virus. from here we examine your act...perhaps you you are just concern of your personal pleasure and fail to consider the safety of your wife. As regards to prostitutes, as you have said they work not for pleasure but for their family and for a living. Their END is to alleviate them from poverty as to have good life but their MEANS is to give their body for commercial sex? this will not be morally acceptable since their ends doe not justify their means. remember you are always culpable with all your actions... i am convinced that they do prostitution because they are lazy to find a descent job and would only rely on easy money job. speaking of poverty...don't blame it to the church. why don't blame it to the government? why do we have a lot of population?... ask the government why these people has no work to spend their time productively! ask why the government doesn't give them good education. ask the government why there are a lot of corruption in our country and neglect our countrymen to poverty!
#197.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-13 14:51
(Reply)
Thank you also for your response.
So that is what you call easy money. Ang easy money ay yung pangongolekta ng pera sa pagsisimba, sa per Ninong at Ninang na bayad sa baptism, sa kabayaran sa pagbasbas ng patay at misa para dito. Condom is reliable based on the THOROUGH study conducted by the EXPERTS, not by just mere observation.
#197.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-13 23:53
(Reply)
you are so hateful to the church and getting so personal huh? that's bad.
who are those EXPERTS that you are talking about by the way? can you name them?
#197.1.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-14 08:45
(Reply)
And what is matter with describing what a EASY MONEY is to me? Too personal for you huh?!
You can read a research about condoms here http://www.avert.org/condoms.htm So the very reason why you do not trust condom and say that it is evil, is because you do not know a thing, nagtatanong ka pa ng mga experts eh obviously kaya nananatili pa rin ang condom sa market ay dahil sa sabi ng mga expert na reliability nito otherwise matagal na sanang tinapos ang pagbebenta nito.
#197.1.1.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-14 10:32
(Reply)
Even this link that you presented doesn't say anything that condoms can give 100% percent surety that one can be free from being infected by HIV. and so in one way or another there is still probability that HIV will be transmitted to somebody. AND so, still it is not reliable for HIV prevention. if not this time, sooner or later you will be infected by such virus! now did it solve the problem? NO! it goes on and on as long as you don't realize that it doesn't work because of irresponsible notion of sexuality which others like you would prefer.. aside from that, you are leading others to sin.
Perhaps, you are happy when somebody would fall to that same fate which you perhaps already had. so as a reflection think again... and ask...why do you exist, what is your job, what is your goal? You are from GOD and not from the clay you are a person with body and soul... Many times you are so concern with your bodily (flesh) needs ... and neglect your souls starving to death due to sinfulness. Before you were born GOD knew you. he calls you. You are HIS you are precious to HIM. HE chooses you, but you chose worldly things in PLACE of HIM. you love condom so much huh?
#197.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-14 10:48
(Reply)
yeah, it is not 100% but the main reason that condoms sometimes fail is incorrect or inconsistent use, not the failure of the condom itself.
Tapos na ang panahon ng panggamit ng Simbahan sa Diyos at paggamit ng Simbahan sa Pananakot na mapupunta sa Impyerno and mga tao pag hindi sinunod ang gusto ng Church. The issue here is to prevent the further increase of people with AIDS. This is what is happening to our world right now whether you like it or not. Sobrang tagal na nakatayo ang Simbahang katoliko at and Pilipinas ay sobrang tagal na naging bansang katoliko? Pero pumasok pa rin ang AIDS. Hindi nyo nga napigilan pumasok ang AIDS sa bansa tapos nagmamarunong kayo..
#197.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-14 12:06
(Reply)
My friend...i don't know what is in your mind not even the dictates of you conscience.
But always remember if your are infected by HIV that's it! even you use condom it will go on and on as long as there is sexual intercourse. because the probability always there. therefore for you not to be able to infect others (in a sure and right way) you know what to do.....the answer is there at the very core of your conscience. For sure you don't want to happen that to your sisters and brothers or even to your children(if you have one). My friend the door to right conscience is always open for you...it will not give you harm. instead, it will give you happiness away from treats of uncertainty. MY friend, if we ask GOD to take away these seemingly dangerous viruses in our world, or ask GOD to heal us in all our sickness, first let us ask GOD to heal our soul. as long us we, people are sick in our spirituality, it follows we will be sick physically. Ask GOD to heal your soul first and everything will be OK. My friend.. the door for right conscience is widely open for you. don't close that door because that is the only way for you to attain correct formation of knowledge. If not now sooner you will gonna look for it.
#197.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-14 12:56
(Reply)
You do not know the dictates of my conscience but it seems that you are already convinced that i am not good.
And is it because of my stand of the use of condom? That is the very problem with the anti-condom people. The only know the one side of the picture, as they don't even bother to search for the other side themselves. The EXPERTS have already said that condom will prevent the further of AIDS. So may i ask? EXPERT ka ba, i mean, pinag aralan mo ba ang condom as in binigyan mo ng time for research, test etc etc. If not, then saan mo nakukuha ang mga conclusion mo?
#197.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-14 14:08
(Reply)
Those experts that you admire most did not say will solve everything through the use of condom. by logic, the PROBABILITY is always there that is the fact that you always deny. When are you going to admit when it is already late? first countries down to the third country suffer from that situation. did it stop the VIRUS? NO! and it will never end because it is perennial.. until there are people like you who deny the this fact there will be no end. Using condom is just a part of a bigger problem underneath. you are not aware of some issues interrelated to that mentality. Emotional, psychological, mental and especially spiritual. all of these areas affected. not to mention the bad effect of this inside family relationship.. broken families, social relationships, the broken dreams and guilt that torture one's mind. you still have a lot to learn.
#197.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-14 15:01
(Reply)
Yes the probability is always there, same goes with any other method. But the problem is already here, we need an IMMEDIATE solution to the problem. Your suggestion will take years to bear fruit. Years that can be considered as Too Late.
How about education plus condom working hand in hand to solve the problem. That is the most effective way.
#197.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-14 22:56
(Reply)
Yap, and by giving those condom is tantamount of saying ...oh yeah,its just OK to have HIV to infect you sooner and just wait and see how HIV will ruin your life and your love ones and your community. It is decieving to tell anyone that it is safe and yet in the end it is not!right? so why do you expect to eleminate this problem by continuing use of condom where in you know sooner and later you will get infected by it. why risk when there is sure way not to refrain from it? if you want change it will beggin in you! ika nga "ika ang simula ng pagbabago!" and it takes extra effort and heroic act tho fulfill it.
#197.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-15 06:10
(Reply)
You cannot really just say to a person with or without AIDS to give up sex. They will not listen to you quickly or even never. That is the very nature of human, and you anti-condom people is always denying that FACT.
Kahit nga ang mga pari na sobra ang edukasyon, may kaya sa buhay at punong puno ng aral ng bibliya ay hindi napigilan ang sexual urge nila. Tayo pa kaya na karaniwang tao. In case you didn't know, may sexual scandal na kinakaharap ang catholic church ngayon, AGAIN.
#197.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-15 09:47
(Reply)
It seems that you are happy to hear that news huh? it is as if you are trying to justify that.. that is the reality and so we cannot do something for it anymore huh!
To tell you, every day many falls to that such sin not only priests (which many would magnify) because they are so weak and not faithful to the truth. i will not be surprised if even you, yourself, fell to that same sin. why? because what do you expect from those people like you who would love hiding in the dark and doesn't want to show Everyday purification happens especially within the church and i tell you, the church is not afraid to show the truth even it means rejection from its members within or the majority of men. So don't be so excited with that because that is a part of church purification to expose those who live in darkness, they may be priests or non- priest or people like you who would choose the worldly thing, who would cover the light of truth and more so, cooperators of darkness. I tell you, when you expose to the things that the world offers that is the beginning of your downfall and so people like you who are contaminated with worldly things are the main source of temptations for others who try to live an honest and pious kind of living.
#197.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-15 10:10
(Reply)
To tell you the truth.. The church have tried to HIDE the truth, that is the FACT.
Nalaman lang nila kasi may nagsumbong. But the church will not really admit it themselves. But, truth shall always prevail. Just like the condom, condom will always be there to give protection. Kung napatunayan na hindi ito effective then mawawala na lang ito.
#197.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.2
Anonymous
on
2010-04-15 10:16
(Reply)
So you are saying that it is okay for the WEAK to have AIDS, they should die because of their sin. They do not have the right to live in this world because they are WEAK.
So are really missing the point. I hope you open your mind to the WICKED reality of life.
#197.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-15 10:56
(Reply)
Truth will always prevail (as you have said)no matter what. no matter if you are a bishop or even a Cardinal of the church they could hinder the truth. God has a way of purifying the Church.
many people nowadays like you would always cover the truth, they fill the world with lies and deception. but to tell you, In the end all these lies will fade away because it is never consistent in itself. on the other hand, truth will always be a truth because it never lies and simply because it is consistent in itself. So to apply that to our situation, wickedness will come to an end because it is full of lies... but the truth will prevail (as you have said), no matter what. those who live in lies and deceptions will be lost because they are walking in darkness and those who live in the light of truth awaits GOD the who is source of all truth. you can never deceive GOD who is the author of life. If people nowadays are living a wicked life then what must you do?
#197.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-15 12:54
(Reply)
God is God, but do not associate God with the Catholic church, it is completely different. Catholic church has full of scandals but God has none.
My argument is simple, condom is the IMMEDIATE solution to the problem. As per your previous comments, it seems that you do not know that the Catholic Church have hidden the Truth (regarding sexual scandal), and your excuse for such is just a simple way of God to purify the Catholic Church. And what will you do to the victims? Are you just going to ignore them just like what you are proposing to do to with people with AIDS? How about the people infected with AIDS due to erroneous blood transfusion or woman who have been raped and become infected with AIDS? Do you consider them as WEAK?
#197.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-15 21:41
(Reply)
My point is that by using condom will not protect you 100 percent of HIV transmission simply because it is not perfect and the probability is there. Therefore, PROBABILITY is equal to HIV infection. Do you get that? why then risk if you know that sooner or later you will be infected and... then you will blame the Church because somebody is infected by HIV and the church is inefective of reminding you of that huh? It is so simple but you you don't understand it.
You are asking for prevention at the same time risking youserlf by using those condoms that sooner will be the reson why you are infected by that virus which you don't want have. THAT IS SIMPLY CRAZY! you always deviate the topic by attacking the catholic church huh? that's simply a work of a devil like you. you are just speaking of some bishops and priests but not the entire church...if you take it in general... you are simply ignorant of the church. church is never afraid of anything even to those devil like you because you are simply nothing. you are just giving here misleading information which is the very work of a devil huh? you are asking about "those being raped and taransmitted blood of a sick person"... by these you are just showing the disorderliness of your mind...we are taliknghere about the free will that leads you to acquire HIV. do they have free will? tsk tsk tsk. you are simply out of order... and would do everything to descredit the church just to free you of doing evil things (a simply work of a devil)... you are just dreaming. what a waste of time.
#197.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-16 05:51
(Reply)
You are the one whose dreaming as you cannot simply answer questions thrown at you?
Reverse psychology lang isinasagot mo sa mga question na di mo kayang sagutin. And the Takot Method na matagal nang method ng Catholic Church para mapasunod nila ang mga tao. BASIS FOR CHURCH SEXUAL MORALITY
For the Catholic Church, the general standard for sexual morality is that, just as Jesus’ love for us is always total, selfless, receptive, live-giving and of His own free-will, a moral sexual act is a freely chosen and uninhibited offering of all parts of oneself to another in a relationship which is bound by wedded love, which is completely open to the other, and through which conception is always possible. By this logic, the Church concludes that contraception is immoral since it allows couples to deliberately withhold fertility from one another, and in so doing, compromise the moral requisites of a total self-offering, complete openness to the other and the possibility of conception. In addition, the Church recognizes that contraception can lead to the misuse of sex for pleasure alone, wherein individuals are dehumanized and immorally objectified, to be used as a means to physical ends alone Who are the real victims of condoms?
Some research efforts have found that kids nowadays have knowledge and exposure to the subject of sex at younger ages of about 12 to 14 years old. This is the age of puberty, wherein both girls and boys start to get really curious about the changes in their physical structures. Because of availability of condoms given by the government and other health providers, many teenagers fall into practicing pre-marital and teenage sex. On the use of condom
Winnie Monsod's lecture on AIDS is really very comprehensive and I can say, convincingly true. But it should have been more convincing for the majority if it was written and broadcast in Filipino too. In the first place, these information are for the uninformed and most un-informed people do not, shall we say, understand complicated play of words like this exposition. There is no problem for us who could really understand such pretty difficult words as elucidated and expounded but for the "ordinary" listener it will be very difficult for them to understand. Mareng Winnie, I really admire your point-by-point exposition of facts and I support your stand. Its obvious that she favors the use of condom but had made a play of words at the end of the lecture by trying to pose two options, either do we follow what the church recommends as abstinence and reap the fruits of eternal life or use condom, indulge in sex and we shall be thrown to hell. Human beings as we are, for sure we cannot escape the reality of sex, because sex is delicious. But what if this delicious experience will shorten our life rather than empower our being? And what if we are going to use a device where we can still enjoy sex and avoid being infected, faithful to our partners even if one has an HIV, and still prolong the life of the uninfected? Will these lead us to hell? At least the hell as how the Church had defined it to us. The Church offers abstinence but for God's sake, not all people can live their life without sex even just once in their lifetime, even the most chaste mother superior. For sure, it is the safest way to avoid being infected. But hey let’s face the reality that we are sexual beings, we are not beings created to abstain pleasure for the rest of our life. At this point, let’s assume that everybody is infected with HIV and we are the only one without it so in order to live holistically instead, indulge in sex but use condom to be safe. The main question is, "Is abstinence" attainable in every instance of our life? Or is the use of condom very difficult to implement such that you risk every aspect of your life before you can even insert it to your penis? At this point, using condom is no longer an issue of procreation. It is already an issue of AIDS prevention. Will our policy makers follow the Church and they risk being destroyed by the Church of their credibility or will they go on, stand firm in their principles founded on scientific principles and be heroes in the eyes of the people and be evil in the eyes of the priest? you said "...not all people can live their life without sex even just once in their lifetime, even the most chaste mother superior"
you are out of your mind and jugemental. you are completely misleading. Let's face reality... do you, in your right mind, like to have sexual intercourse with somebody who is infected with HIV? come on! wake up. To tell you, even using condoms will not exempt you from having that virus sooner or later! by this fact therefore can you tell me if the problem with HIV is solved by using condom? no way. sooner or later you are going to regret it. don't forget you are A RATIONAL BEING and not solely a sentient being. feeling is good .."as you've said sex (sexual feeling) is good"... but you have mind capable of controling your self especially if you are exposing yourself to danger(like HIV).we are rational being that capable of controling ourselves.. or perhaps you are not better than a dog. ***you said "...not all people can live their life without sex even just once in their lifetime, even the most chaste mother superior"
you are out of your mind and jugemental. you are completely misleading. Let's face reality... do you, in your right mind, like to have sexual intercourse with somebody who is infected with HIV? come on! wake up. To tell you, even using condoms will not exempt you from having that virus sooner or later! by this fact therefore can you tell me if the problem with HIV is solved by using condom? no way. sooner or later you are going to regret it. don't forget you are A RATIONAL BEING and not solely a sentient being. feeling is good .."as you've said sex (sexual feeling) is good"... but you have mind capable of controling your self especially if you are exposing yourself to danger(like HIV).we are rational being that capable of controling ourselves.. or perhaps you are not better than a dog. If, as Monsod and Cabral are saying, condoms are "safe," why are these actual condom users scared?
Jan 25, 2010 Dear Doc I am a bisexual male who has always tried to be safe when it comes to sexual partners. However during recent insertive anal sex with a casual male partner (of unknown HIV status), the condom split. I withdrew less than a minute later without ejaculation. There did not appear to be any blood or mucus, nor were there any cuts, lesions or anything else on me. I am circumcised (in case this makes a difference) - and my most recent HIV test (on the day of the condom failure) was negative. I started the PEP course within 30 hours. However, almost at the same time as starting the PEP, my tongue became coated with a yellow mucus and I developed night sweats and a very sore throat which only started to subside on day 5 of the course. I have suffered the usual side effects from the PEP drugs (loss of appetite, nausea, etc). Could this be a sign of seroconversion? Or is it coincidence/side effects from the PEP drugs? Thanks Concerned If condoms are "safe," why are these actual condom users worried?
http://www.thebody.com/Forums/AIDS/SafeSex/Current/Q206372.html Dr. Bob condom broke during the act Jan 20, 2007 First, Thank you so much for this forum. about 4 days ago i had vaginal sex with a woman who i later discovered to be very high risk. the condom broke during our act and it was less than 3 or four minutes later that i finished. i don't know if she was hiv positive and have no way of finding out. the following day I went to the emergency room and was perscribed ATRIPLA. and of course i am not feeling very well at all on it. I go to the bathroom often and have the symptoms of a low fever at times during the day. cottonmouth, sore throat ... I live in san francisco, and am wondering if I should have a follow up visit with a specialist in the area. And How I would find such a doctor. Also was my risk and exposure high enough to warrant such a drastic step as ATRIPLA? And of course I am completely freaking out that one stupid drunk moment has damaged my body to such a degree, has anyone built a time machine yet? Yes they should really be worried. But did they state why the condom broke?
In case this one comment slips your understanding: "The main reason that condoms sometimes fail is incorrect or inconsistent use, not the failure of the condom itself." Mr Llera, i would like to point out that conclusion should follow some rules especially if you are going to question the reliability of certain object, otherwise it will be considered as if you are giving us false information.
As per wikipedia: "To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.[1] A scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.[2]" And by their torough analysis and sicientific experimentations they came out to the truth that these condoms will not give you a 100 percent assurance of protection and so still dangerous to use because of its imperfectness and NOT giving a 100 PERCENT RELIABILITY of protecting one from HIV virus.that is the complete analysis.
and you qoute "The main reason that condoms sometimes fail is incorrect or inconsistent use, not the failure of the condom itself." ..so simple reason huh? you are presenting it as simple as that..and ommiting the most significant reason of why it fails... you are misleading huh? you are hiding the truth. LIAR! Yes, their thorough analysis resulted to admitting that condom will not give you 100% assurance of protection. And also, the one i quoted came from same thorough analysis that the experts conducted.
"The main reason that condoms sometimes fail is incorrect or inconsistent use, not the failure of the condom itself" Simple lang naman sa mga open minded, pero sa mga katulad mo mahirap mo talagang maintindihan. You are the one giving us false hope and information.
#206.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-16 07:39
(Reply)
which is false hope,,, to say that condom is safe and could not transmit HIV which you always insist (where in fact it is not because of its limitation and imperfections not only on its use but the the very condom itself) or refrain having unnecessary sexual intercourse especially to those with HIV and surely you will not be contaminated?
it is clear that you are the one giving false hope by pushing unreliable use of condom.
#206.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-16 08:34
(Reply)
Hindi mo ba maintindihan ang reason why condom admits that it does not give 100% assurance? Hindi mo ba maintindihan ang linyang ito? "The main reason that condoms sometimes fail is incorrect or inconsistent use, not the failure of the condom itself"
Walang namang perfect sa mundong ito eh, kahit ang abstinence ay hindi rin perfect (you have to admit it), kasi nga pati mga pari na sumumpa ng celibacy ay hindi mapigilan ang sexual urge.
#206.1.1.1.2
Anonymous
on
2010-04-16 08:39
(Reply)
Expert na nga ang nagsabi eh.
eh ikaw, ni hindi ka naman nagspent ng araw to study condom thoroughly but you are already arriving at conclusions na ang basehan mo ay morality? Magkaiba po sila, FYI lang. Pagsisinungaling ata ang tawag dyan.
#206.1.1.1.2.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-16 09:22
(Reply)
hahaha do you say so that the condom has no defect at all and so perfect and it doesn't brake during sexual intercourse and aside from other bad effects of it? poor mind!
Well, those experts that you admire most say the other way around! it breaks at times and so tantamount to say it is not completely reliable! it has still defect. so transmission of HIV is still possible. And to give you a very simple question. when is abstinence become imperfect? wherein by abstinence there is no contact at all and so, no there will be no contamination at all. if one is contaminated by HIV buy sexual intercourse then one did not really abstain from it. oh my!... what a brain is that. you don't have to be expert to understand such simple things.
#206.1.1.1.2.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-16 09:39
(Reply)
Simpleng logic lang kailangan mo para malaman mo kung kelan hindi naging effective ang abstinence. Simple, it is when you promise yourself abstinence but instead hindi mo napigilan ang sexual urge mo. Simple lang pero di nakayanan ng utak mong isipin.
Naexplain ko na kanina di ka ba nagbabasa or nagbubulag bulagan ka talaga? Yes, condom sometimes break due to several reasons and dahil hindi mo kayang isipin ay ililista ko para sayo: 1: storing your condoms in a hot place, like a glove compartment 2: using one that is past its expiration date 3: accidentally ripping it with your teeth or fingernails while opening the wrapper 4: using the same condom more than once. 5: Lack of lubrication is another common culprit 6: It's also possible that your condoms are not the right match for your man's member. and siyempre hindi na naman maiintindihan ng utak mo ang mga to kahit na simple lang.
#206.1.1.1.2.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-16 09:55
(Reply)
Now you admit its limitation that it will not protect you 100 percent. that's good! before you are telling us that condom will suppress HIV transmission. SO DEFINITELY NOT because it has limitation!
and so the problem of HIV will continue as long as there is the use of that defective and unreliable use of CONDOM and as long as as there are people like you who would endorse such method. and later on you will again CRY that many are infected by HIV. why? so we go back to the problem of condom again! WHY then cry for having HIV when you know that, such method will not protect you. If you have HIV because you trust that unreliable method.. then DON'T CRY! simpleng simple na po yan para maintindihan mo!
#206.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-16 09:59
(Reply)
From the very start hindi ko sinabi ng 100% na effective ang condom.. and sinasabi ko ay kaya hindi 100% ay "The main reason that condoms sometimes fail is incorrect or inconsistent use, not the failure of the condom itself"
sana po marunong kang magbasa ng tagalog.. mukang hindi eh.
#206.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-16 10:17
(Reply)
you said so with clarity :"...From the very start hindi ko sinabi ng 100% na effective ang condom".
What can I say more? if you don't want HIV to infect you and anybody...and to stop the problem of HIV then don't use it because that will be a cause to spread virus to anybody and don't engage in any unnecessary sexual intercourse. Don't cry if you are infected by HIV because you don't listen and never blame anybody else but yourself alone.
#206.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-16 10:27
(Reply)
Haha. dirty tactic of somebody your caliber. Quoting only a part of my statement.
Ok i will repeat that statement for your satisfaction, CONDOM is not 100% effective as it sometimes break (by Mr. Llera and thank you) due to several reasons: 1: storing your condoms in a hot place, like a glove compartment 2: using one that is past its expiration date 3: accidentally ripping it with your teeth or fingernails while opening the wrapper 4: using the same condom more than once. 5: Lack of lubrication is another common culprit 6: It's also possible that your condoms are not the right match for your man's member. thus, the main reason that condoms sometimes fail is incorrect or inconsistent use, not the failure of the condom itself. If a condom is used correctly, it shouldn't snap, no matter how active your sack session is.
#206.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-16 10:42
(Reply)
hahaha you are citing the unimportant thing and fail to cite the most necessary one.. based on your site that you quote
"How often do condoms break or slip off? A large body of research in the United States has shown that rates of breakage, caused by fault in the condom itself,..studies also indicate that condoms slip off the penis " hahaha you are LIAR
#206.1.1.1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-16 10:45
(Reply)
Numero sais.. Number 6.
6: It's also possible that your condoms are not the right match for your man's member. When you promise yourself abstinence (or even celibacy) and failed to do so due to to your sexual urge then this is the time that abstinence fails. And when it fails, wala ka nang kawala, pero pag may condom ka at ginamit mo ng tama then may pagasa ka pa.
"failed to do [abstain] so due to to your sexual urge"
hehehe... an irony on your part. if you fail to abstain... then you don't really abstain... and it will never be an abstinence at all because you engage! This is like speaking to a first grader. What i said is when you PROMISE to abstain to any sexual activity then that is the time that your abstinence start. But the question is when will it end?
Hindi pwepwedeng sinabi mong mag aabstain ka tapos mga ilang araw lang kapag naisip mong hindi mo kaya eh itatapon mo na lang ang pangako mo. Ang ibig sabihin nun ay nasira mo ang pangako mo at nag fail ka sa goal mo to abstain. "Relying on condoms is like betting on your own death," said Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, the Vatican's spokesperson on family affairs, last week. He reiterated his opinion that condoms are too permeable to prevent the spread of HIV and AIDS, an opinion that Bishops and Cardinals are repeating across four continents.
The World Health Organization immediately denounced this view, saying it was particularly dangerous while the world faces a pandemic that has already killed 20 million people. Scientific research by groups such as the U.S. National Institutes of Health has found "intact condoms... are essentially impermeable" to HIV, and that "condoms provide a highly effective barrier to transmission" of HIV. The Vatican's Trujillo responded: "They are wrong about that... this is an easily recognizable fact." Ironically--and disastrously--the Catholic Church is growing fastest in Africa, where AIDS is not just killing individuals, but also depopulating entire towns and destroying the demographic balance of a half-dozen countries. In Kenya, for example, where an estimated 20% of people have HIV, the Church condemns condoms for promoting promiscuity and repeats the absurd claim about permeability. Nairobi Archbishop Raphael Ndingi Nzeki says "AIDS... has grown so fast because of the availability of condoms." Mistrusting condoms, many infected Africans are still trying to cure AIDS by having sex with virgins, further fueling the epidemic.
Once again, the Catholic Church has set itself in opposition to science. It is a too-straight line from the torture of Galileo, forced to retract his discoveries before the Inquisition, to this latest rejection of scientific truth. you are going back again.... and the result is the same...condom will not give you 100 percent assurance..and if it will not give you assurance why do expect for healing of HIV wherein you continue using condom that leads you to acquire HIV! and it goes on and on ... therefore it becomes perennial problem... and therefore no solution is solved by the condom.
You wanna go back again and again or you are again posting another concern to deviate the conclusion and attack again to the catholic church? hehehe Condom is not 100% so is abstinence. So what is your alternative again?
hehehe as expected...
try to attack the Church again. a simple way of a demonic person like you... who cannot argue well. hahaha you are going back again.... and the result is the same...condom will not give you 100 percent assurance..and if it will not give you assurance why do expect for healing of HIV wherein you continue using condom that leads you to acquire HIV! and it goes on and on ... therefore it becomes perennial problem... and therefore no solution is solved by the condom. You wanna go back again and again or you are again posting another concern to deviate the conclusion and attack again to the catholic church? hehehe Yes Condom is not 100% effective.
But your alternative is WORSE. Sa abstinence only the STRONG will survive. hehehe
pero ang mga weak, bahala kayo sa buhay nyo. hehehe. hahaha that is why... why cry of HIV infection if you don't want to control yourself? DON'T CRY because you deserved it. there is no cure for those hard headed like you. hehehe
Last fall, a congressional report said abstinence-only education fed students false information about pregnancy and birth control, and in the last six months of Horn's tenure, six states announced they would no longer accept federal abstinence funds.
Then a study released in April found no evidence that abstinence-only programs deter sexual activity. Perhaps as a result of these events -- and most certainly due in part to a Democrat-controlled House -- funding for abstinence-only education will run out this summer without assurance of renewal. http://www.alternet.org/rights/52648/ There is not EVIDENCE that abstinence is successful.. Siyempre, sasabihin ni anonymous ang Uganda.. pero sasabihin ko naman na Mult-Method so wag mong sasabihin Abstinence ang method na ginamit sa Uganda kasi pagsisinungaling un. hehehehe. Mahilig ka pa naman magsinungaling. simply because they don't want to abstain. so there is no really abstinence that happened. so it is not abstinence at all. simple logic... to abstain is not to engage.. and to engage is not to abstain.
while blame it to abstinence if you don't want to abstain. why blame anyone because you did not abstain from doing unnecessary sex and get HIV? hehehe What kind of analogy is that? So you are saying that abstinence will just be successful by chance. Meaning 50:50, pwedeng oo pwedeng hindi. So mas worse xia sa 87% na condom.
Simple logic my friend which i think so don't have. for what i understand, to abstain is to refrain to have sexual activity.
Paano mo sisimulan ang pag abstain? Magigising ka na lang ba na gusto mo mag abstain sa sex? Paano ako maniniwalang nag abstain ka o hindi. You have declare to yourself and be binded to do or not do a certain thing. Sasabihin mo lang na mag aabstain ka and that's it, un lang ba ang pagkakaintindi mo prosesong un? Mukang walang magtitiwala sa mga sinasabi mo at the very reason na hindi ko kayang magtiwala sa sinasabi mo. Mukang pati ang pag abstain ay hindi mo alam ang meaning. Bago ka mag sabi na mag aabstain ay siguraduhin mo na gagawin mo un sa kahit anong sitwasyon. Now, kung nasira ka sa BIND mo na mag aabstain. Then nag fail ka sa goal mo to abstain. Yan ang simpleng logic. you said it clearly...."for what i understand, to abstain is to refrain to have sexual activity."
hehehe, from that difinition of yours, how will somebody can have STVD/HIV? when actually you reatrain your self to engage in sex? bobo hahahaha! you are like a confused dog just barking and barking even without reason. The expensive failure of Abstinence Education in the U.S.
http://www.alternet.org/rights/52648/ you don't understand the very basic meaning of abstinence. poor mind! argue with me if you know already the meaning of abstinence. so poor brain!
my advice to you... just look for the meaning of abstinence in all the dictionary... there is the meaning.
you so desperate... huh? kumain ka nalang kaya ng condom baka magka laman pa ang utak mo!
#215.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-16 13:48
(Reply)
Nyahahahaha.. kitang kita na kasi ang Failure ang Abstinence kaya wala ka na maisagot.
Explain mo na lang na kung bakit sa pinamayamang bansa sa buong mundo nag fail ang Abstinence, nag aksaya lang sila ng milyon milyong dolyar sa isang systemang NOT PROVEN EFFECTIVE!
#215.1.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-17 00:28
(Reply)
hehehe. when was the time that by restraining from sex one GOT Sexual Tramsmited Disease/HIV?
ngahahah.if you GOT HIV through sex then you did not restrain fron sex at all! ngahahah! 'lol! nasaan na ba ang utak mo? nasa puwet? ngahahaha. Explain first why the abstinence-only method in U.S. failed miserably.
Otherwise you are hiding the real truth behind what you called abstinence, you LIAR! hehehe. hehehhe. are you afraid to define the word "absinence"? or the word "to abstain" or you are really brainless. in tagalog we can call it "lumiban" or it can be "umiwas" or or "huwag" or some words alike. but the simpliest definition you can find is in the dcitionary... just choose the simpliest definition that will just fit your small mind. kasi pag di simply dikakayanin ng utak mo. hehehehe
hehehehe. How will you acquire HIV through sex… if you have restrained from indulging in bodily sex and therefore no contact at all?
Heheheh. And now you are twisting that fact by saying you can still have HIV even if you retrain from it! Ngek!!!!!!!!! You are trying to twist it meaning huh? Hay naku di kana nga umubra sa condom mo eh dito pa kaya! Oh my… what a brain of a desperate man like you (full of VIRUS) hehehe. Hindi mo maexplain? Expert in the U.S. na ang nagsabi sa failure ng Abstinence.
Compared naman sa kabobohan mo, mas paniniwalaan ko sila. hehehe. who quote that? is it me? it is you who quoted that one so you have obligation to explain it by yourself and let us see kung uubra ka sa akin after you explain it...heheheh. sige nga umoisahan mo! heheheh!
hehehe. you've been quoting other people so much and you know it it says something something clearly about yourself that you have no brain and so you just depend on others thinking and you cannot even defend your self in an argument.
use your mind don't rely too much on others... because many times you misquoted them and often,you don't understand what you are qouting! eh ano panga ba.. wala naman utak. so, what do I expect from you? so nex't time when you quote somebody's work be sure that you understood it well. oh ano pang hinihintay mo quote kapa kasi wala na naman laman ang utak mo. hehehe! hiram ka nalang sa iba! No you are the one who has no brain, because everything you says does not undergo a thorough analysis unlike everything i quote.
Sino ba namang maniniwala sa isang walang wentang katulad mo? Ano ba ang napatunayan mo? Kahit nga dito sa blog, anonymous ka eh. hehehe Isa ka lang engot na nagmamarunong pero walang basehan ang sinasabi aside sa morality. balik ka muna grade 1 para maalala mo na ang basehan ng mga tao para maniwala sila sa isang tao ay ang iyong mga ACCOMPLISHMENTS... what a shame ang kabobohan mo. hehehe
#218.2.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-18 12:51
(Reply)
At sino nama maniniwala isang aso na katulad mo? a desperate man who cannot defend himself and so would cling to other's mind kahit di naman na intindihan.nyahahaha. nagpapapakita ng malubhang kabobohan.
ang advice ko lang sayo. kahit bobo ka, stand and fight like a man! if you are so sure of what you are talking explain it by yourself at wag kang aasa sa iba. and i am willing to measure up your mind kung saan ka! like me, i don't rely too much from other's mind. I fight when i need to and stand my cause. hindi ako aasa sa iba. but since wala ka naman talagang utak eh ano pa ang magagawa ko. it is out of my generosity to encourage you to fight and try correct your mind... wag kang mag isip na parang aso kasi lalo kang nagiging bobo.
#218.2.1.1.1
Anonymous
on
2010-04-18 20:14
(Reply)
Siguro isa ka sa mga garapata ko. nyahahahaha..
Try to explain it if you are so intelligent... or aminin mo na lang na bobo ka. hehehe. Paano namang mapapabuti kahit anong project yata eh pinag kakakitaan.
worgame... request lang po. paki claro po ung statement mo.. ano pong project angtinotukoy nyo... para po malinaw . salamat po!
The expensive failure of Abstinence Education in the U.S.
http://www.alternet.org/rights/52648/ eto ang hindi maexplain ng mga anti-condom people.. what a shame.. explain it yourself and let us see kung uubraka. why do you ask me to explain the i,ve not qouted tanga ka talaga. subukan mong e explain para makita mo kung ano ang katangahan mo. hehehe
and be sure to defend yourself well. hehehe. what a shame on your part. qouting others works and not understanding it.i,ve been wainting for your presentation of it. or takot kang e xplain yan kasi dimo kaya dahil tanga ka. by telling they are experts malika na agad eh hehehehe. tinganan ko kung saa ang galin mo bata. hehehe what a shame of qouting others and using others mind yet cannot defend himself.... hay naku..katakot takot na katangahan yan bata. hehehehe. a desperate man would always qoute anybody else mind and work, and try to fit ion his concept as if evrybody conforms on his mind. hhahaha.
on your cas e you always quote other people as it they agree with you... hahhaha. mas mahirap dyan you qoute somebody and and tell telling us they are EXPERTS? and naniwala ka naman... uto uto katalaga.. that simply an act of aDOG..i am mor convinced that you are a DOG hehehe. if you claim they are EXPERTS then explain to me theirs works kasi quoted mo sila and you think they agree with then let us start the debate. ano pan ang hinihintay mo? hehehe. eh kung sa condom nga ay di ka lumosot sakin. dito pa kaya na linya ko to. what more can I ask? para ka nanaman aso hukay ng hukay sa inihanda ng iba and you cant defend yourself! nyahahahaha. what a brain! hukay ng hukay kasai walng laman ang utak. kadiri mo chong!! Mr Garapata, alam mo bang gumawa ng isang research? If mag reresearch ka, you need to quote somebody's work otherwise walang basehan ang research mo.
Bumalik ka nga ulit sa high school at magkapag research ka ulit. hehehe. Hindi ako lumusot sayo? asa ka pa. Lagi ka ngang napapahiya sa akin eh. To the point na nanggagalaiti ka na sa galit. hehehehe..
To the point na walang nang maganda lumalabas sa bibig mo kundi panlalait at mga kasinungaling, Which is a work of a DEVIL. baka naman.... no way... marunong nang maginternet ang demonyo?! Nyahahahahaha.. Mr Garapata, hindi porke nasa balat kita eh mas matalino ka na sa akin. hehehe.
The point is, you are nobody in short walang kwenta. In other words, puro satsat pero walang basehan ang sinasabi kasi nga, bobo ka. Kung hindi mo kayang iexplain then at least umamin ka sa kabobohan mo. Mas uto uto ako, kung sa katulad mong walang kwenta ako maniniwala. hehehe. Sa isang garapatang katulad mo na natutong mag internet. |
Latest Posts
Wednesday, March 24. 2010» Why the big fuss about condoms?Calendar
CategoriesSyndicate This Blog |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
