Saturday, August 4, 2012

Anti-RH Rally proves risks of overpopulation

Ok, so the RH Bill issue is back since congress needs to pass vote in this bill before election time comes or else all of them will be seen as having wasted yet another 1.5 years of debates where the same questions are asked by different people.

Senate obviously has more problems as Tito Sotto is threatening to delay any sort of progress for their version of the bill. From my point of view, he's afraid the bill will be passed. After all, why delay if you're sure the majority will vote against it?

Today, the Catholic Church (CC) held an event to show that they have the numbers to go against passage of the bill. However, I think this is a stupid idea as it has shown the risks of one reason the RH Bill is supported by people: Overpopulation.

Many Anti-RH advocates have stated that we are not overpopulated, and that this is simply a way for the western countries to prevent us from taking over their societies with our numbers (A pretty stupid idea IMO, after all, why are they still implementing it in their own societies?)

Anyway, as I said earlier, they've shown some proof of the risks of overpopulation (i.e. a lot of people in a small place)


A) Heavy traffic - a bad thing for progress. The last thing you'd want is to have your goods or workers being regularly late just because there are too many people on the road.

B) Lack of comfortable space - hey, I want to live comfortably, with enough space to put in my stuff, do some stretching, and maybe some cartwheels. With too many people living in a small space, expect things to get more than a little bit crowded.

C) A ton of garbage - Where will those 10K people take their trash? It would be great if there are trashcans big enough to handle all of it, but that's very unlikely. Even worst if they're a bunch of litterbugs. I pity the people who have to clean up after them.

D) An active force to keep things from getting out of hand - Qualified people to keep peace and order will not always grow proportionally with a growing population. In the Anti-RH rally, a small amount of peace-keeping forces are trying to handle 10K people when they were only expecting 3K. If a riot had started, those police will have been overwhelmed, an usurpation of authority, complete anarchy.

E) Lack of resources - those people have to eat, right? What if the nearby stores ran out of food? That would mean they have to go somewhere farther to buy food then go back to the venue? In a grander scale, that would be similar to importation of food.

F) Hunger - But what if most of the food from out of the venue are more expensive that not everyone can afford it? Some people will go hungry.

G) OFWs - Some groups/families will get one person to go somewhere and get them food because they can't buy anything nearby. Said person will then go out of his way to get some food and bring back the bacon (may be taken literally).

H) Emigration - There are also some who'll go straight home after eating and not comeback because they think the hassle is not worth the cause.

So those just some things I've found similar to risks of overpopulation. I hope some people get to read this and accept that while we are not overpopulated, there's still that risk if we don't carefully handle our resources and population.

Thursday, December 1, 2011

That lost feeling.

Ok, I'm feeling a little lost right now. I've lost any sense of attraction to women.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not into men, its just that I've lost any want or need for a romantic relationship with anyone.

I think I've become desensitized, had lost hope in finding "the one".  This is a truly scary experience for me.
The idea of not finding the one for me and dying old and alone is frightneing. But what's even worst is knowing that when I begin to lose hope, I'll also lose the drive to keep searching for that one girl, keeping everything inside until the day I day, living without a legacy as well as never having fulfillment.

It took me two years get over a girl I truly loved and had a relationship with; It took me a whole year to fall in love with a girl who I thought had also been attracted to me. Unfortunately, she clammed up once I told her of my feelings and never spoke to me again, its almost 2 years after that fiasco and I haven't found anyone yet to fill the void.

I'm getting tired.

Back to regular programming

I've been sidetracked by how much I hate propaganda's and the failure of my government.

So for now, I'm going to write a few stories/essays/any posts that have more to do with how I feel about my life that how I feel about my society.

Wednesday, October 19, 2011

I think, therefore I am not (Catholic)

I can never understand the zealots of the Catholic Church.

Ad  hominems, hasty generalization, association fallacies, red herrings, blaming, playing the victim, twist words and statements, and quoting scripture and playing the infallible faith card among others. Once they start losing a logical argument, they use one of those "strategies".

No need for explanations, just use a logical fallacy. It would be nice if it was only the ignorant masses do this. What's sad is, from the highest position in the land (Archbishop) to the lay leaders, this technique is well used.

What I hate most however, is the thought (or lack of) they put into their replies. You come up with a highly thought out, highly researched topic and all they come up with for a reply is "My god/pope/priest/bishop said so!!!" or "You're attacking my faith!!!" (take note the amount of exclamation points)

Before I learned that there are other ways to look at things, I was a Catholic. The moment I started to think differently and define my own self, I became less and less of a Catholic.

All I want is a sensible argument that leads to the creation of new knowledge and realizations, from those of the Catholic faith.

I will never rejoin your faith, and at the rate I'm going, I'll probably never understand it as well.

But is it really impossible to mix thinking and being Catholic? Are the smart sage-like priests already extinct in this country? Can their followers be more like Christ?

So many questions, and they still won't answer me properly.

Tuesday, September 6, 2011

Having a mind of a critic

As of now, most of my posts have been filled with criticisms. Most of them (if not all) negative.

I can't just help myself from ranting about these things. If I may seem angry, argumentative, or annoying to you, don't worry, I feel that way about myself as well.

I even think that I might need a psychiatrist in the near future.

You see, I an obsessive compulsive critic. Everything I do, everything I say, everything I write, it goes to some sort of filter before I'm able to do, say, or write it.

What's worst? I'm have an obsession with academic correctness. Whenever I use an uncommon word, a scientific term, or any word that I haven't used in a while, I have to check both urbandictionary.com as well as wordwebonline.com (Yes, I also checked links to websites before posting them)

The harder part? I have to read the news everyday and find something to think upon and criticize.
What could have person A done? What is wrong with Senator B's arguments? Why does Bishop C think that way? Why am I reading this when I'm supposed to be working?

Well, it's pretty damn hard to work when your supervisor is watching your every move. It's even damn harder when your supervisor is inside your own head.

Prying into the mind of a Senator

Okay, this blog was initially supposed to be a collection of stories. But recent events in the Philippines have made me realize that sometimes, real life is more interesting than anything I can imagine. And so, some of my posts have become rant-like. Unfortunately, here's some more.

Now, Senator Sotto has been very vocal about his opposition to any and all forms of the RH Bill.
Putting myself in his shoes, I was trying to think of a reason to oppose the Bill without delving into religion.

I've come up with the following conclusion:

Maybe the reason Sen. Sotto is going to new lows to stop the RH Bill is because he (or his heirs) will lose on potential voters.
Imagine, a hundred million potential voters in 2025 (or 2028), most of those would probably be living below the poverty line and most of them will just vote for the most popular candidates (Sen Sotto, if still alive, or maybe someone else in the family)

Remember, less population means we can concentrate more on education. Better education means future voters are able to make informed choices, better chances of electing better candidates. Better chance of better candidates winning elections means a lower chance of politicians winning just because they are popular comedians or actors.

If he saw that far into the future, then maybe I can give some respect to the guy. He is after all, investing in the future and based on surveys, investments are good.

Anyways, hope I get into writing again after a few days. I'm busy with other stuff (and trying to not get annoyed too much at what my countrymen are doing).

Saturday, September 3, 2011

On Kit Tatad and Federico D. Pascual Jr's stance on the RH Bill


http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?publicationSubCategoryId=64&articleId=723549

From what I've read, it's either a) He has not read the latest version of the bill b) blindy refuses the bill because it's labelled RH b) He does not approve because the church say so.

I agree with one point though, RH should not be dicated by foreign pressure, we should have this for ourselves.

Birthrate and overpopulation: Yes, we're not over populated, but some areas are already saturated. And the saturation will keep getting worst until a) we do something to prevent further growth or b) we relocate others from saturated areas. Good luck on trying to relocate people.

Availability of contraception/sterilization: Yes they are available, but only to those who have money, and those who know about them. Part of RH Bill is about information, availability to those who are a bit unfortunate should only come as second.

Birth Control: The government can't punish us for having unprotected sex and it cannot force us to practice birth control, it does not say that in the bill, that would be unconstitutional, inhumane, and incredibly awkward.

On Child bearing: Actually, it can, and it should protect or prevent child bearing. Some parents have too many kids and can't take care of more of them, to prevent another child from joining the family is to promote the existing children's right to a good life. Now, which is more important? The actual, living, breathing children, or an imaginary child that has not been concieved yet.

Dropping the bill: Yes, please, do that by all means. Just make sure you have an alternative to protecting women and children's rights to good lives.

To those against Population control: Please watch Soylent Green. I agree that we are far from overpopulation but that does not mean we should be complacent. Prevention is better that cure. I don't want my descendants suffering because their resources are dwindling to quickly.

You may also want to visit slums and try living with the families there. An RH bill is not only for the present, it is for the future.

The country's resources are like a piece of pie. The more the people who share the pie, the less your share becomes. I don't want my descendants becoming hungry because everyone's share of the pie is reduced to a small crumb.