Adultery/Cheating is no joking matter

What can we expect of millennials when many of our politicians, celebrities, athletes, ministers, judges and police think adultery - cheating is just normal behavior.  You know ‘boys will be boys’; there are so many women and you (have) so short a time; if you are able to support all your illegitimate children that is all that matters; Who isn’t entitled to happiness; etc.  I bet there are 10,000 more reasons to attempt to justify adultery/cheating. 

The thing I really do not get is the double standard.  Men can cheat and women cannot.  A woman cheats and she is immoral.  A man cheats and he is a hailed a model of manhood.  Destroy the women for extra affairs and make jokes about the men doing the same thing.

I am one of those people who thinks adultery – cheating is not acceptable and should not be joked about.  One undersecretary even said, “President Duterte can make jokes about extramarital affairs of government officials, (a crime under Philippine law and grounds for suspension of government officials), since he himself is not married at the moment.”  He is not legally married, but he is supposed to be in a committed relationship, with a child by his partner. 

President Trump defends Bill O’Reilly and Roger Ailes of FOX news for his sexual remarks because he has done the very same thing.  The same thing is true of President Duterte you cannot condemn others when you are guilty of the same sin/crime.  I do not care what your position in society is cheating on relationships is wrong.  It is demeaning!   Yes, the priest that takes a vow of chastity and cheats on that vow is scum, so bishops stop acting so sanctimonious.  

How would you feel if your spouse cheated on you? Some of you may know this from experience, but I think we can all imagine it—it hurts! You've been betrayed and lied to and you feel angry, depressed, unworthy, second-rate, unwanted. You want to lash out at the same time you want to crawl inside yourself and hide. Your spouse chose to seek out intimacy of one sort or another with another person  - not you. I think that "sucks" and anyone that does it is an self-centered, pompous ass. 

Infidelity is very hurtful, and does real psychological, emotional, and spiritual damage to one's partner.  I may be a bit old fashion, but I think hurting people is wrong, period!  Be honest and admit the relationship is over and each go their own way, but do not lower yourself to become a sleaze ball.

Yes, we should forgive, but forgiveness should come with a stipulation that you at least TRY to stop doing the wrong you are doing.  Only a fool keeps forgiving the same wrong over and over without expectation of change. 

Justice Assistant Secretary Aimee Neri said, “Duterte, as mayor, would show his displeasure when he hears a policeman is cheating on their wife”.  I am sorry, but I am not smart enough to comprehend that remark.  The employer should abide by the rules he dictates to his or her employees.  A father should abide by the same rules he holds his children to.  A man should not ask more of his wife or partner than he is willing to give his wife or partner. 

“This is a world of hypocrisy. Who among you here does not have a mistress?” President Duterte said in a speech aired live on television one Tuesday night, adding it was “a non-issue”.  I have known many men and women that have been faithful to their partners.  Unfortunately, my father was not one of them and each time it destroyed a little of my mother.  I loved by father, I was respectful of my father, I appreciated the material things he provided us, but I did not RESPECT my father. 

Just as Presidents Trumps remarks do not speak well of American men, President Duterte's remarks do not speak well of Filipino men. 

Instead of the stand the Catholic Church is taking on President Duterte they should realize the necessity of divorce and stop standing in the way of the Philippines joining the 21^st century.  Stopping divorce is not going to stop adultery and for some weird reason I think adultery/cheating is worse than divorce.

I realize in most Western countries, adultery itself is no longer a criminal offense, but may still have legal consequences, particularly in divorce cases.  The fact that it may no longer be a crime does not mean it is not morally, spiritually and socially wrong.   Adultery almost always constitutes a ground for divorce and may be a factor in property settlement, the custody of children and the denial of alimony. 

 Adultery is illegal in approximately half the world including about half of the United States in which jail time and fines are imposed, at least in theory.  The laws are seldom enforced, but at least all of society has not lost their moral compass.  These sensible people may think adultery does not deserve jail time or fine, but that there is still something wrong and immoral about it.  It seems to me where adultery/cheating is acceptable other types of corruption are more acceptable.

 An elderly actor and lawmaker in the Philippines is remembered for siring at least 72 children by 16 different women, only one of whom was his wife. Thirty-eight of the children bear his surname.  His other achievements in life are not remembered or worth mentioning.  I see nothing honorable about his behavior.

It is almost comical the Philippines is now the only country in the world that denies divorce to the majority of its citizens; it is the last holdout among a group of staunchly Catholic countries where the church has fought hard to enforce its views on the sanctity of marriage. Pope Francis, who visited the Philippines, has urged his bishops to take a more forgiving stance toward divorced Catholics, but this is a moot point in the Philippines: There is no such thing as a divorced Catholic in the Philippines. 

The Catholic hierarchy takes particular pride in the country’s status as the last holdout on divorce.  Do they also take pride in the number of Filipinos who find themselves in an unhappy relationship and simply move on to the next one? The women, of course, are expected to deal with the children. “For these women, the survival mechanism is to find another guy to support her and her kid”.

In the Philippines only 30 to 40 percent of the urban poor now bother to get married in the first place.  Thanks to the Catholic Church.  Cultural traditions make wedding too expensive. You are expected to have a big celebration, and they simply can’t afford it and the realization that once you enter into a marriage there’s no getting out.

Thanks to the Catholic church’s opposition to divorce and its opposition to virtually every form of contraceptive it has created millions of “illegitimate” children. No one knows the number, but one study suggests that about 30 percent of births in the Philippines go unregistered, often because of the stigma of illegitimacy.

So please tell me how adultery/cheating has made the world a better place.  Please tell me how it is a joking matter.

Kennedy admired more after his death than during his life

On November 23, 2013 the USA was fixated on the 50th anniversary of John F Kennedy's assassination and a CNN poll registers JFK as our most admired ex-president from the past half century. I was not an admirer of any of the Kennedy’s except Jacqueline. President Kennedy was not as beloved in life as he has been in death.  

During the 1960 campaign, Kennedy confronted anti-Catholic bigotry.  In Texas, the Baptist convention passed a resolution "cautioning members against voting for a Roman Catholic candidate.”  Many Protestant ministers, especially Fundamentalist minister preached from the pulpit a Catholic president would put loyalty to the Pope ahead of loyalty to the United States. Just weeks after his election, an anti-Catholic retired postal worker tried to assassinate Kennedy in Florida. I am Catholic so I had nothing against Kennedy’s religious affiliation.  In fact I am proud of the fact that Kennedy proved all the Fundamentalist Christians wrong.

I do blame Kennedy for the botched Bay of Pigs invasion. He abandoned Cuban’s fighting to overthrow Castro  on the Cuban beaches. I believe he handled the segregation issue in the South in such a way that violence was inevitable. He was slow in taking action. I know for a fact that he sent F.B.I. agents from Alabama back to Alabama undercover to spy on whites because my cousin was one of them. I did not like the way he dealt with our allies in the United Nations. It seems to me he was determined to weaken the sovereignty of the United States in the United Nation. I disagreed with his Immigration policies. He established Immigration policies that haunt us even in 2016. I opposed his family ties to the Mafia and history proves he used those ties to get elected. Kennedy was more of a philander in the White House than Clinton ever was, but people over looked it.

 Kennedy took numerous actions that increased the risk of war with the USSR. NATO aircraft with Turkish pilots loaded active nuclear bombs and advanced to an alert status in which individual pilots could have chosen to take off, fly to Moscow, and drop a bomb and this was done at Kennedy’s request. Kennedy had deployed medium-range "Jupiter" missiles to Italy and Turkey (which bordered the USSR) earlier in his term. The missiles had no deterrent value and were basically only useful as a means of attacking the Soviet nuclear arsenal as part of a first strike. That meant they were extremely destabilizing, something that was known at the time and provoked concern from Sens. Albert Gore Sr. a Democrat from Tennessee. Kennedy put missiles along the USSR border before the USSR put missiles in Cuba. Did Kennedy’s action cause the USSR to put missiles in Cuba?

Kennedy's decision to overthrow South Vietnamese president Ngô Đình Diệm was a decisive move for greater hands-on American involvement in the conflict. After that, the North Vietnamese escalated their attempt to destabilize the South Vietnamese state, which in turn spurred Lyndon Johnson's 1964 escalation.

 Kennedy authorized a 1963 coup against the pro-Soviet military leader of Iraq. The coup put the Iraqi Baath party in power, setting in motion the chain of events that would result in Saddam Hussein's decades-long rule over the nation.

He is responsible for Federal workers forming a union.

Everyone gives Kennedy credit for the Apollo Space Program, he did support it, but the Apollo Program was first conceived under the Eisenhower administration and  the Johnson administration did the heavy lifting in actually completing a manned moon landing.

As you can see I was not impressed with JFK for many reasons and I could list more. Those Christian Democrat Fundamentalist that love him so much today never mention his swimming nude in the White House Pool and using it to have sex with women other than his wife and all the other immorality that existed in the White House during his administration. They have selected memories.

Contrary to what many Democrats would like us to believe about Kennedy he was never fully embraced by the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. He certainly was disliked by Texas Democrats whom at the time I was one of them. I was a an officer in the Young Democrats and a supporter of Ralph Yarborough.

I believe his Immigration policies and open border philosophy stemmed from the fact that his family immigrated in the 1840’s from Ireland. Few restrictions were placed on whites that wanted to immigrate to the U.S., but it is a fact the Irish immigrants were not treated fairly once they arrived in the U.S. The discrimination against the Irish was extreme. There being Catholic made the discrimination worse.

The Kennedy’s are responsible for the wholesale shift in the face of our nation today. In 1960 there were less than 1 million foreign born from Latin America, but by 2012 the number had increased to 21.2 million. In 1958 Kennedy was calling for open borders in his public speeches. In  1963 before his assassination he was working to get support for more of his immigration reforms. Kennedy ignored the economic needs, the cultural traditions and the public sentiment of the citizens of the United States when it came to immigration policies much like Obama has done.

Kennedy was warned that the sharp increase in immigration would shake the stability of the United States and he ignored the warnings. Ted Kennedy even argued that the Founding Fathers would support open borders if that were true why did they restrict immigration only to white folks with good morals.

Few people know that it was Ted Kennedy that led the fight in 1979 to allow more political refugees into the U.S.  In 1986 he helped President Reagan pass legislation that allowed 2.7 million illegals to become legal residence of the U.S. In 2007 he helped President Bush pass legislation that allowed another 12 million illegal immigrants a chance to become citizens of the U.S. Yes, I blame the Kennedy for the problems with immigration we face in 2016 and have good reasons to do so.  The Obama victories in 2008 and 2012 are directly tied to immigrant vote.

Senator Kennedy prior to his death admitted he had not anticipated that the rise of immigration would lead to such a dramatic shift in the composition of the American population.  SORRY – A LITTLE TOO LATE THE HORSE WAS ALREADY OUT OF THE BARN BEFORE THE BARN DOOR WAS SHUT!!

Manny Pacquiao you have demonstrated what bigots and hypocrites some Christians are.

Once again Manny Pacquiao has demonstrated how a lack of education can keep a man in ignorance. Manny you need to watch National Geographics and not cartoons on television. If you did you would know that other species besides man have same sex partners. Manny, Christians pay Caesar what belongs to Caesar,so pay your debt to the people of the Philippines - TAXES! I would never say anything negative about your ability to fight in the ring, but unfortunately that does not qualify you to represent the people in Congress, Senate or as President. The message I think you send to the young people of the Philippines is education does not matter or is not important.'I will be President with a third grade education'.

You may say you're sorry in an attempt not to lose endorsements and votes, but what comes from a man's mouths speaks for his heart. You my friend are a bigot and are misguided in your theology.

 Manny Pacquiao - compared same-sex couples to animals. “It’s common sense. Do you see animals mating with the same sex?" YES, Manny I have! "Animals are better because they can distinguish male from female,” Manny, read something besides a boxing magazine. "If men mate with men and women mate with women they are worse than animals.” Is that another one of your direct quotes from the bible - show me where it says that homosexuals are worse than animals. It also says women and men do not have sex outside of marriage - you know what I mean.

I think your time would be better spent not making disingenuous apologies and seek forgiveness from God.

Manny you said, "God only expects man and woman to be together and to be legally
married, only if they are in love with each other.(Manny in case you did not know marriage in biblical time had nothing to do with love, marriages were arranged.) It should not be of the same sex so as to adulterate the altar of matrimony, like in the days of Sodom and Gomorrah of Old." Manny, did God say it was okay to have sex with others after you went to the altar of matrimony. I have always thought Sodom and Gomorrah was about rape and incest, but I am sure you know more about the bible than I do.

I wrote a blog a few weeks back on should we make idols of celebrities - Manny has demonstrated why we should not!

Catholic Hierarchy - Double Talk.

 The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) on Tuesday urged voters not to support candidates in the 2016 elections who are pushing for divorce, death penalty and other measures that it said are against the Church's doctrines.

CBCP President Archbishop Socrates Villegas issued some guidelines for Catholic voters to follow in choosing their candidates in 2016. According to Villegas, a Catholic voter should not support a candidate "who’s legislative or executive programs include initiatives diametrically opposed to (Catholic) Church moral teachings on such vital issues as abortion, euthanasia, the return of the death penalty, divorce and the dilution of the character of Christian marriage," even if the candidate is honest, qualified and the best candidate. We all know there are NO Catholics in the Philippines that are violating their marriage vows taking Communion every Sunday in the Philippines. 

"While we expect every public officer to give life to the constitutional posture of 'benevolent neutrality' in respect to the attitude of the State towards religion, the Catholic voter cannot and should not lend his support to any candidate whose ideology binds him or her to make of the Philippines a secular state that has no tolerance for religion in its public life," Villegas said.

"It has never been the practice of the Catholic Church to hold out a candidate to the faithful as the 'chosen' candidate of the Church," he said. "Church doctrine has remained consistent: Partisanship is an arena into which the Church should not venture."

Villegas also urged the voters to consider political aspirants from other religions. "A Catholic is not closed to the candidacy of a non-Catholic," he said. "In fact, there are worthy candidates from other Christian communities and other religions." "Their qualifications and aspirations must be given serious heed by our Catholic voters, their truly helpful plans and visions must be supported,” Villegas said. As long as they uphold Catholic teachings!

There are an estimated 75,594,148 Catholics in the Philippines according to the latest statistics. The population of the Philippines was estimated at 100,096,496 as of July 1, 2014. The total registered voters in the Philippines as of January 22, 2013 were 52,014,648. Roughly 75% plus (85%) Filipinos are Catholic. That is enough to control any election if 75% (85%) of registered voters are Catholic. I know it is said that Catholics tend not to block vote. But, any time the hierarchy of the Catholic Church speaks out about an election it has to have some influence on the election and to pretend they do not try to choose candidates in my opinion is not entirely honest.

The Philippines is the only country in the world, aside from Vatican City, which lacks divorce laws. How could anyone deny that is not due to the influence of the Catholic Church hierarchy in the Philippines? The Catholic Church does get involved in the political arena in the Philippines the recent battle over artificial birth control is evidence of that. They have a strong influence over any and all laws passed in the Philippines. To my knowledge the only time they have lost a political battle was the one over artificial birth control.

UPDATE: THE BISHOPS LOST THE WAR, BUT WON THE BATTLE THEY MANAGE TO GET THE PHILIPPINE CONGRESS NOT TO FUND THE REPRODUCTIVE BILL IN THE 2016 BUDGET - FOR ALL PRACTICAL PURPOSE NO FUNDS MEANS NO REPRODUCTIVE BILL. 

Any non-Catholic candidate would need to adhere to Catholic doctrine, even if his or her denomination or religion did not support Catholic doctrine, if they wanted the support of the Catholic hierarchy. In other words a non-Catholic candidate might have to go against his or her religious beliefs to satisfy the Catholic hierarchy of the Philippines in order to be elected. Most mainstream Protestant denominations support divorce and artificial birth control.  Many Protestant denominations are not opposed to the death penalty.

I cannot reconcile in my mind how the Catholic hierarchy can maintain they do not demonstrate some partisanship when they dictate what a candidate must believe or support in order to get the Catholic vote.

For a country to have tolerance for  religion in its public life is one thing, but to dictate religious doctrine in public life is quite another. Is the Philippines a secular state where freedom of religion is allowed or is it a religious run state?

While the Philippine law does not permit divorce it does permit Legal separation which allows a couple to live apart and separate their assets, but they are not free to marry again. In fact, they face being charged with adultery if caught with another partner. I wonder how many Filipinos are forced to violate the law because of the Catholic hierarchy’s position on divorce.

Banning divorce in my opinion has not stopped couples from separating and starting new families. Banning divorce appears to me to have contributed to illegitimate births which may cause inheritance problems and certainly could cause emotional stigma for a child.  I have absolutely no problem with Catholic hierarchy requiring Catholics to follow their doctrine, but to attempt to impose their religious beliefs on non-Catholics is unjust to me. 

I have heard obtaining a civil and church annulment can take up to four years and $4000. That would likely be more than a years’ worth of income for the average mall worker. I wonder when forced to choose are they going to choose annulment or to ignore the law. In addition a married couple must have lived separately for five years or had a legal separation for two years before an annulment can be granted.

In 2012 there were only 10,528 people who applied for annulments in the Philippines. There were 476,408 marriages registered in 2011. I find it impossible to believe that only a little over 2% of the marriage ended. It is estimated 40 to 50% of marriages end in divorce/separation in First World countries and I do not believe that number would be much different in any country.

Could it be possible that divorce laws may make couples think twice before walking out on their marriages? Statistics show that the divorce rate in the U.S. in 1981 was 5.3 per 1000 people and in 2012 it had fallen to 3.6 per 1000 people.

The Catholic hierarchy in the Philippines does get involved in politics and governance in the Philippines. When the clergy called for civil unrest and even threatened to excommunicate President Aquino over contraception how can they say they do not. There is no proof that Catholic doctrine pertaining to separation and artificial birth control is even being followed by Catholics and to attempt to impose that on non-Catholics is unjust. 

I would not be surprised if sometime prior to the 2016 election there is a list floating around with the names of candidate that the Catholic hierarchy is supporting.  Of course the Catholic hierarchy will deny having anything to do with it like they did the banner flying from a Catholic church in one of the previous elections.

Is it just for religious leaders in a country that is supposed to have a democratic form of government to use threats of excommunication against any elected official, elected to represent ALL the people, in order to get what they want? 

The Church’s influence in the Philippines is diminishing. The power of social media is taking its toll. It might help the country if they put their devout Catholic past behind them and move toward a more secular state. Politics needs to go beyond religious groups and be more concerned with the needs of all the people regardless of religious affiliation. But, keep in mind no group gives up power without a fight and the Catholic hierarchy will not either.

Protestant denominations are growing in the Philippines and other predominantly Catholic nations like Mexico. How much of that growth could be contributed to the Catholic hierarchy’s desire for influence and control in the political arena.