Ang namumukod-tanging katangian ng pulitika sa Pilipinas ay pagiging marumi nito. Ang mga kandidato ay nagbabatuhan ng mga putik. Kaya may kasabihan sa Pilipinas na kung ayaw mong mabisto ang katauhan mo ay huwag kang pumasok sa pulitika. Ang dahilan noong-noon pa ng mga pulitiko, na “pagtulong sa kapwa” ang dahilan ng pagpasok nila sa pulitika ay pinagtatawanan na ngayon. Sinasabi pa ng iba na ang pulitika ay isa sa mga larangan kung saan ay yayaman ang isang tao – na unfair naman sa mga talagang walang intensiyong mangurakot….ng malaki. Tanggap naman ang 10% na komisyon na ang tawag noon pa man ay “for the boys”, na ayaw pa ngang tanggapin ng iba dahil nakakahiya sa sinumpaan nilang tungkulin. Ang masama lang kasi sa ibang nanalo at nakaupo na sa puwesto, hindi lang 70% ang gustong kurakutin, kundi 100% dahil ang project ay hanggang papel lang!
Hindi sana umabot sa hamunan ang dalawang kandidato sa pagka-pangulo ng bansa kung hindi sana pinakialaman ni Roxas ang nananahimik na Davao City. Alam naman niyang alagang-alaga ito ni Duterte pati na ng mga Davaweἧo, pati ng mga taong nakatira sa mga bayang nakapaligid dito. Kung papansinin, nagpakumbaba pa nga si Duterte nang punahin ang pagmumura niya at tinanggap pa ang “lecture” ng Obispo sa Davao City. Ito ay pakita lang na okey sa kanyang punahin ang mga personal niyang pagkakamali sa mata ng mga moralista, pero ang kantihin ang inaalagaan niyang katahimikan sa Davao na kung ilang taon din niyang nilinis at pinatahimik ay maituturing na “below the belt”.
Nang gantihan naman ni Duterte si Roxas tungkol sa nakakadudang pag-graduate niya sa hindi naman gaanong kilalang eskwelahan sa Amerika, pumalag din siya. Ngayon ay nagsisisi siya dahil pati ang kredibilidad niya sa larangan ng edukasyon na isa sa mga pinagmamalaki niya ay nalagay sa balag ng alanganin. Dahil sa panggagalaiti niya, marami tuloy ay nagsasabing baka nga totoong hanggang kodakan lang ang pag-graduate niya sa Amerika.
Ang daming maaaring ipaliwanag ni Roxas sa mga tao upang magkaroon ng linaw ang mga isyu na may kinalaman din sa sinasandalan niyang presidente ng Pilipinas…bakit hindi na lang niya dito ituon ang kanyang effort sa pangangampanya? Bakit kailangang siraan pa niya si Duterte na nananahimik na nga? Mag-concentrate na lang sana siya sa “tuwid na daan” na pinangako niyang ipagpapatuloy, para marami pang mahatak kung sakali. Huwag na niyang pakialaman si Duterte na ang kapalaran ay nasa kamay ng COMELEC. Sa ginagawa niya, halatang ninenerbiyos siya dahil malakas ang hatak pareho ni Duterte at Poe. Mukhang pumalpak na naman ang campaign machinery na tumutulak kay Roxas.
Sa interbyu kay Duterte sa isang radio station sa Manila tungkol sa kanyang pagkandidato, nakiusap siya sa mga sumusuporta sa kanya na maging mahinahon at itigil na ang pagbabanta ng “rebolusyon” kung siya ay ma-disqualify. Bukambibig niya ang pagtanggap ng disqualification kung ito ang desisyon ng COMELEC, kaya sinabi pa niya na kung maaari ay ituon din ng mga sumusuporta sa kanya ang atensiyon nila sa ibang mga kandidato, upang makapili sila ng karapat-dapat kung sakali ngang siya ay ma-disqualify. Pinapakita ni Duterte na hindi siya sakim, dahil ang gusto lamang niya ay maging realistic ang mga supporter niya batay sa mga umiiral na sitwasyon. Sa isang banda, malinaw pa rin ang pahayag niya na hindi siya umuurong sa pagtakbo bilang presidente ng Pilipinas.
It is seldom that an Ecumenical Patriarch is given exposure for his views. During the recent visit of Patriach Bartolomew in Manila, he delivered a speech in which he shared his seldom-heard views about the most important issue – ecology, correlating it to man’s obligation for the sake of self-preservation. Though simply stated, his message is full of inspiration:
Reflections by Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew at the Forum held at the National Museum in Manila
CREATION CARE, ECOLOGICAL JUSTICE AND ETHICS
“Toward COP 21: Civil Society Mobilized for the Climate”
(February 26, 2015)
Distinguished forum participants,
Many of you may be surprised that a religious leader concerned with “spiritual” values is accompanying a political leader involved with “secular” issues. After all, what does preserving the planet have to do with saving the soul? It is widely assumed that climate change and the exploitation of natural resources are matters concerning scientists, technocrats and politicians.
Yet, the preoccupation of the highest spiritual authority in the worldwide Orthodox Church, namely the Ecumenical Patriarchate, with the ecological crisis demonstrates that we cannot have two ways of looking at the world: religious on the one hand and worldly on the other. We cannot separate our concern for human dignity, human rights or social justice from concern for ecological preservation and sustainability. These concerns are forged together, an intertwining spiral that can descend or ascend. If we value each individual made in the image of God, and if we value every particle of God’s creation, then we will care for each other and our world. In religious terms, the way we relate to nature directly reflects the way we relate to God and to our fellow human beings, as well as the way we relate to the biodiversity of creation.
At stake is not just our respect for biodiversity, but our very survival. Scientists calculate that those most harmed by global warming in the future will be the most vulnerable and marginalized. It is those living in the typhoon-prone Philippines who are being forced not only to deal with the miseries of flooded homes and prolonged disruption, but to make fundamental changes in their way of life. And there is a particularly bitter injustice about the fact that those suffering its worst ravages have done least to contribute to it. The ecological crisis is directly related to the ethical challenge of eliminating poverty and advocating human rights. Food security was the foremost issue at the United Nations climate change discussions in Geneva this month.
We are convinced that Asia holds many of the answers to a more biocentric worldview; Western industrialized nations must be humble to listen and learn. Only a few days ago, in India, the world’s public health leaders concluded that fossil fuels are detrimental to human health and wellbeing. And the Philippines – already a leader in geothermal and hydropower – are committed to a path from low carbon to zero carbon in a partnership between the public and private sectors.
This means that global warming is a moral crisis and a moral challenge. The dignity and rights of human beings are intimately and integrally related to the poetry and – we would dare to say – the rights of the earth itself. Human rights in the West have long been criticized for individualism. So will we recognize the faces of the thousands – men and women, mothers and children, elderly and disabled – lost when Typhoon Yolanda hit Guian at 4.40am on November 8th, 2013? On that day, by providence or serendipity, our church celebrates the feast of the holy angels. Will we remember the haunting photographs of that nightmare? The number of deaths horrifies us – but what most painfully reaches our feelings is the individual faces of loss and terror.
And what about the rights of the earth – of which we are a part and apart from which we cannot exist? Who will speak for the voiceless resources of our planet? Who will protect the silent diversity of its species? Will we accept responsibility for pushing our environment over the tipping-point?
In the discussions about climate change, some take a fatalistic attitude, arguing that we should give up all efforts to prevent further changes and instead direct our efforts towards adapting to the inevitable. But the response from those experiencing the effect of climate change is clear: adaptation is not enough. Fundamental changes need to be made at the level of global policy making, and made as a matter of urgency.
Wealthy, industrialized countries have unquestionably contributed most to atmospheric pollution. In our effort, then, to contain and reverse global warming, we must honestly ask ourselves: Will we in the West, in more affluent countries, sacrifice our self-indulgence and consumerism? Will we direct our focus away from what we want to what the rest of the world needs? Among all the facts and statistics, the summits and debates, it is essential for us to remember the human faces of those who suffer because of climate instability. Will we recognize and assume our responsibility to leave a lighter footprint on this planet for them and for the sake of future generations? We must choose to care; otherwise, we do not really care at all about the creator or the creation.
The choice is ours! We stand at a critical moment in the history and future of our planet, a time when our human family must choose future of our earth community. The protection of our planet’s vitality and diversity is a sacred task and a common vocation. At a summit organized by our Church two years ago, former NASA climate scientist Professor James Hansen observed: “Our parents honestly did not know that their actions could harm future generations. But we, our current generation, can only pretend that we did not know.”
It is not too late to act, but we cannot afford to wait; we certainly cannot afford not to act at all. We all agree on the necessity to protect our planet’s natural resources, which are neither limitless nor negotiable. We are all in this together: people of faith must practice what they preach; citizens of the world must clearly voice their opinion; and political leaders must act urgently and decisively.
Dear friends, you will now appreciate why a religious leader is concerned with the ecological crisis. With the voices of those angels who died in Typhoon Yolanda echoing in our ears, we must make the strongest possible call for change and justice at the Climate Conference in Paris next December. This is our ethical and honorable obligation; this is our word of promise and hope to the entire world.