Akbayan youth on reports that certain UST teachers motivated students to “reject” the RH bill in exchange for “bonus points”

Last February 14, Valentine’s Day, Akbayan Party distributed free condoms to passersby in Mega-Q Mart along Cubao-EDSA. The action was part of the party’s broader awareness campaign for the Reproductive Health Bill. Shortly after, alleged students from the University of Santo Tomas flooded Akbayan Facebook site (http://www.facebook.com/pages/AKBAYAN-PARTYLIST/61953501555) with troll messages of “opposition” to the campaign.

Akbayan Youth welcomes the posts made in the spirit of open and respectful debate. However, beyond objecting to the manner of some of these posts, we lament the manner on how the students were motivated to register their “opposition” to the RH bill.

Certain professors/instructors who reportedly gave “voluntary and optional” assignments to students who introduced themselves from the classes of 2 LM1, 2 Pol 2, 2 JRN 1, and 2CA 2 were allegedly asked to refute the pro-RH position of Akbayan on its Facebook page in exchange for extra grades. Some of the students who made the said posts admitted this.

“Extra Grades”, “optional assignment”, “goaded” by teachers

While we respect the right of students to express their opinions, we do not believe this can happen under conditions where they are incentivized to mimic the positions of authority figures. The involved teachers unjustly influenced their students to voice their positions against the bill. Rather than consider opinions based on a careful reading of the bill, many of these posts were mere reproductions of ill-informed stances repetitively stating the same arguments framed in the same template without offering new dimensions and perspectives to deepen discourse. We believe this obscures true and meaningful debates especially among the students who are most in need of guidance – guidance made not through the unequal exercise of authority by certain teachers but through dialogue based on good faith and open-mindedness.

Furthermore, though the involved professors might say that it is an “optional grade”, the fact is, it privileges a certain position over another, and hinders the formulation and expression of a counter-opinion. That it takes place in an academic setting where the ferment of free opinion should be given premium, and that the clear asymmetrical power relations (teacher-student) were deployed, makes it even more reprehensible.

Students not at fault, Teachers challenged to a debate

The students are not at fault here. They were only acting based on the “incentives” offered to them by these irresponsible teachers who exercised unequal power relations to their students. It would have been permissible if the involved teachers provided their students all the necessary lens of analysis or at the very least, a simple reading of the reproductive health bill before agitating them to take a position on the issue. However, based on the posts made by the students using the same arguments and templates repetitively, it is safe to surmise that they were provided ready-made statements and/or assumptions.

Hence, we challenge the said teachers to a debate on the issue of reproductive health. We challenge them to stop using their students as “transmission belts” of their own opinions. Being members of the broad academic community, it is incumbent on them to exercise intellectual honesty, courage and integrity. They should stop hiding behind the backs of their students.

We, student and youth leaders from Akbayan Youth are more than willing to debate with these “teachers.”  ###

Advertisements

120 thoughts on “Akbayan youth on reports that certain UST teachers motivated students to “reject” the RH bill in exchange for “bonus points”

  1. i agree! those teachers were obviously egging on their students to post anti-RH statements. otherwise, they would not have offered “incentives.”

    on an unrelated note, is it possible for this site to have “share” buttons so that we can retweet or replurk your posts?

    🙂

    • i disagree sa pagsabi niyo na egging eh. nasa estudyante naman yan kung papatulan nila yung incentive eh? alam niyo din naman po na catholic institution ung UST di ba? marami naman pong paraan na matumbasan ung incentive na un aside from forced anti-RH statements from students.

  2. I am the professor of theology you are referring in your lengthy discourse about certain professors. And the classes you categorically named were my classes. First, I appreciate with much intense your effort in analyzing the efforts we have done. It only proved we, my students and I, have achieved what we are dearly hoping – to bring across the message of opposition to: 1) the “valentine’s day activity” your group decided to take up and 2) the RHBill. Indeed, it takes a lot of time to put into the foreground what you wanted- to have safe sex and the passing of the Bill, that you have to go out and meet everyone and give them pabaon (…condom).

    The messages you have received were not “ill-informed stances” as you have succinctly termed. Instead they were designed to show consistency of thoughts. My students and I are simply echoing the very contents of Circular No. 2010-31 issued on 26 July 2010 by His Emminence Bishop nereo P. Odchimar, DD, the president of CBCP. This document is the CBCP’s Pastoral Exhortation on Proposed Bills on Sex Education and Reproductive Health which highlights the need to SECURE OUR MORAL HERITAGE: TOWARDS A MORAL SOCIETY. The Letter mentioned two timeless and simple but profound truths:
    1. At the foundation of moral society is a central religious truth- our divine origin and our divinely-given identity as persons, and
    2. Real corruption is moral and spiritual corruption. The rejection or disregard of morality and religious belief is at the core of corruption. Moral and spiritual corruption breeds its kind in other spheres of life- political, social, and economic.

    In the academic world, we carefully mold and filter the knowledge we impart because that is part of our Code of Ethics as rabbi. We guide our students toward the narrow-road which is the road-less-traveled. Even the giving of incentive(s) is an age-old system that originated with the birthing of Universities and other Educational Institutions. Great thinkers like St. Thomas Aquinas came to be primarily due to their mentors who did everything to open their minds with the societal affairs.

    With regard to your invitation for a debate, allow me to make a comparison. In the olden times, duel or in our term ‘square tayo” was the best manifestation of manhood but now, being a provider and a true father to your family or respecting and not hurting women are manifestations manhood and of being a real man. Debate, as you and I fully know, showcases arrogance more than clarity of the issue. This is what is clear to me –we both know where we stand.

    And if the 2 bishops (Bishop Bastes and Bishop Odchimar) mentioned in the Philippine Star News, Friday, February 4, 2011,p.8, explicitly stated: “We bishops are willing to be imprisoned together with our priests and protest the immoral things “, then I will express the same mind- imprison me and my students.

    As Thomasians we commit ourselves to the cause of truth. Thank you for your time, I am Sir Agui.

    • AN OPEN LETTER TO A UST PROFESSOR

      Sir Aguedo Florence A. Jalin:

      Let me take the war to the front now!! First up, I have answered your letter posted in the Akbatan Youth website point-for-point. (https://akbayanyouth.wordpress.com/2011/02/21/youth-group-hits-alleged-extra-credits-for-students-vs-rh-bill/).

      Let me tell you my side. What you did may be permissible within school rules, but again, it seemed indecent to me. Offering bonus points for anti-RH postings without offering them for pro-RH postings? Did you consider what MERIT is for? MERIT, I think, in a university setting, is offered for BRILLIANT, ORIGNAL, STRIKING or WELL-RESEARCHED (probably you can add EXHAUSTIVE) reasoning, regardless of the SIDE TAKEN. Bonus points can also be given for exploring uncommon views regarding each side. To sum up, MERIT should be given to the REASONING used, irrespective of the SIDE taken.

      So, as I see, if you follow this train of thought, an anti-RH student who utilized bad logic will earn bonus points, while a pro-RH student whose reasoning was cogent won’t. This breaks the MERIT system.

      Next, what you did may be legal, but it seemed to me indecent. It seemed that, by offering bonus points, you have no reasons to back up your anti-RH advocacies. If you are a professor really worth your grain of salt, you would inspire your students with PERSUASION rather than by giving CANDIES to those who support your view. While for children giving candies may make them accept some views and reject others, surely it is improper to do that to adults, especially in a university setting.

      (And, oh, the usage of the word CANDIES is figurative. I hope you get it. Some of the students who posted here didn’t. They may need some remedial classes in English proficiency.)

      Please don’t overuse the method of giving candies. You’ll have to wean them off it. They are ADULTS now. Let me refresh. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohlberg%27s_stages_of_moral_development

      Some of your students should have been insulted, because you offered them candy. They are ADULTS already. Don’t put your “children of God” claptrap because you are not God. Be careful.

      Please act like a university professor, not like a clown who offers lollipops and cookies just to make his preschool audience believe that there is a ghost inside the box.

      ***

      Have you lost your powers of persuasion, by the way? Because you seem to dislike debate? “Debate, as you and I fully know, showcases arrogance more than clarity of the issue” You mean Socrates was arrogant when he invited Athenians to dialogues? Okay, let me tell you what debate does. In a debate, two sides take opposing views. The two sides offer substantive material while rebutting those from the other side. The better view is the one which stands criticism the most.

      It’s perfectly okay if you don’t want to debate. Maybe because, you’re busy, or because your schedule is prohibitive. But I have just shown your reason for avoiding debate patently wrong. Admit it. One of the commenters from another Facebook asked quizzically how you got your graduate degrees without learning how to debate. It is the tradition which nurtured the professorial likes of you. And you’re going to turn back from it? SHAME ON YOU. Unequivocally.

      Exposure to a debate strengthens your views. It exposes your weak views, so you can discard them or at least change them. Then those that will be left will be potent views a rational person deserves.

      ***

      So you seem to like rallies, but not debates. Why? Because in rallies, force is power? In debates, REASON is power, not force. (Although one can join a rally reasonably and willingly.) Although rallies can be settled with fistfights and water cannons, debates cannot be settled by such. They can be settled only by ratiocinating and rebutting. The side who wins is not necessarily the side who has the most thugs.

      (As an aside: You are giving students the wrong idea by making them join rallies that may not be of their choosing. You give them the idea that force is the way to self-actualization. You are promoting thuggery and not scholarship.)

      Your students seem to hate rebuttal, as evidenced by the comments on the other post here. Now I get it.

      ***

      Oh. In closing. Better defend your views in the open than rot in jail. Please don’t force your students to rot in jail with you because of your views. Heck, no one’s rotting in jail for his or her views here, theoretically, in this free country.

      And please, treat your students as individuals, not as extensions of your own will. If I had a student who turned away from what I preached because he has finally gathered his own beliefs, I will be very proud of him. (I will also be proud of a student who agrees with me intelligently.) By offering them candy, you precluded their natural willingness to agree/disagree smartly.

      Thank you for the time. Before you forget. I am Percival Bueser, just a student. I believe that REASON is GOD, and LOVE is unconditional. Not like your God, who likes Catholics exclusively and agrees or disagrees through bountiful harvests, croaking frogs, lightning bolts and earthquakes. That’s why I am offering a few words for you.

      Percy

  3. Pingback: Tweets that mention Akbayan youth on reports that certain UST teachers motivated students to “reject” the RH bill in exchange for “bonus points” « Akbayan Youth -- Topsy.com

  4. Sir Aguedo Florence A. Jalin Jr.:

    Now let me engage in a spirited discussion with you. It seems to me this troubles you, but it ought to. You have gained a bit of notoriety by prostituting your students’ minds, and such prostitution, even under the will of God, is impermissible and alien to a supposedly scholarly and inquiring person like I think you to be.

    Let me refute as many points as possible first.

    You said: “The messages you have received were not “ill-informed stances” as you have succinctly termed. Instead they were designed to show consistency of thoughts. My students and I are simply echoing the very contents of Circular No. 2010-31 issued on 26 July 2010 by His Emminence Bishop Nereo P. Odchimar, DD, the president of CBCP.”

    – Your conscience is paramount and the conscience of the CBCP is just secondary. I am a bit sure you didn’t use it, and you taught the students not to use it as well. You are a taskmaster first and being a scholar, for you, is just peripheral. You should have said: “Here is what the CBCP and the so-and-so letter says; now, since we’re all grown-ups, let us analyze these a little further, and form your own conclusions. You will be graded according to the cogency of your logic, irrespective of the positions you have taken up. As for me, this is my position… (state your position) and you may accept it or refute it, but it’s always better for you to defend a position of your own rather than borrow from others capriciously.” But you said, “Here is what CBCP says. Here is what I say. Now let’s wage a jihad upon all nonbelievers. Those who come with me, you get a plus two. Those who don’t, well, you don’t get it.”

    You ought to be a bit ashamed of yourself. You are molding students’ minds, which can be taken only INDIVIDUALLY, and any attempt to mold them COLLECTIVELY through force and bribery (if through persuasion, it’s very OK) will lead to a autocratic uniformity.

    You said again: “The Letter mentioned two timeless and simple but profound truths:

    “1. At the foundation of moral society is a central religious truth- our divine origin and our divinely-given identity as persons”

    I do not know. But there are many of us who don’t have to invoke God as the basis of morality. There is reason, there is happiness, there is game theory, and so on. And the truth you referred to is not a central truth. It is a truth only for those who believe it. Why bother those who don’t care a damn about it?

    “2. Real corruption is moral and spiritual corruption. The rejection or disregard of morality and religious belief is at the core of corruption. Moral and spiritual corruption breeds its kind in other spheres of life- political, social, and economic.

    You are the corrupt one. What if you were an employer? What you did is just a scale model of: “I’ll give another P5,000 raise to someone who believes such-and-such” or “I’ll deduct P2,000 from the monthly salary of someone who doesn’t agree”. And this corruption indeed breeds into other spheres of life. Especially the academic sphere.

    You said: “In the academic world, we carefully mold and filter the knowledge we impart because that is part of our Code of Ethics as rabbi. We guide our students toward the narrow-road which is the road-less-traveled. ”

    Suppose I replace some words here and there, and add some odd-looking phrase, and instead say:

    “In the academic world, we carefully reshape and censor the knowledge we impart because that is part of our Code of Ethics as rabbi, but more because we’re afraid of the consequences which we will incur if we didn’t follow the Code, from higher-ups and from God Almighty who sees what we do and who will stab us with a lightning bolt once we don’t follow. Therefore, we’re left with no choice but to guide our students toward the narrow-road, which is the road-less-traveled, instead of making them think for themselves which road they should travel.”

    If this is what your heart contains, say it. Damn the CBCP, damn excommunication, damn the Vatican, they feed you with pandesal only once a week and that one is smaller than a P5-peso coin.

    You said: “Even the giving of incentive(s) is an age-old system that originated with
    the birthing of Universities and other Educational Institutions.”

    For believing the professor, or for showing an extraordinarily agile state of mind? You offered incentives for the wrong reason. You ought to build up a student body whose minds are unfettered instead you opted for a tight-minded and dogmatic upbringing. Positive or negative reinforcement – it doesn’t matter.

    “Great thinkers like St. Thomas Aquinas came to be primarily due to their mentors who did everything to open their minds with the societal affairs.”

    We’re not talking about opening minds. We’re taking about your mental prostitution. And, oh, if your student opposes you, but has very great reasons for doing so – will you praise him or curse him? I would praise him – because he updated my thoughts as well as corrected my errors.

    And, oh, your method is so corny. It’s like offering candies to gullible children.

    You said: “With regard to your invitation for a debate, allow me to make a comparison. In the olden times, duel or in our term ‘square tayo” was the best manifestation of manhood but now, being a provider and a true father to your family or respecting and not hurting women are manifestations manhood and of being a real man.”

    – How is this relevant?

    You said: “Debate, as you and I fully know, showcases arrogance more than clarity of the issue. This is what is clear to me –we both know where we stand.”

    – I’d bet you’re just scared to hear things you aren’t used to hear. Open your mind, at least for a while. If you’re wrong, then thank your God you’re corrected. If they’re the ones who are wrong, then thank your God you’ve had the honor of correcting them. And, oh, debate offers you exposure – which allows you to promote your ideas more. =)

    You said: “And if the 2 bishops (Bishop Bastes and Bishop Odchimar) mentioned in the Philippine Star News, Friday, February 4, 2011,p.8, explicitly stated: “We bishops are willing to be imprisoned together with our priests and protest the immoral things “, then I will express the same mind- imprison me and my students.”

    – Fuck you. Let the students decide for themselves and their consciences. And, let the CBCP and all your elect prove, conclusively, that what you’re fighting is immoral. Just because you are Christians does not mean that what’s not Christian according to your doctrine is reprehensible. If you’ll follow your line, maybe airplanes are immoral, because God didn’t mean us to fly, as evidenced by our not having wings.

    And, oh, thank you for your time. I’ve also gotten to the Philippine Star: http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=654673 publicationSubCategoryId=86

    Come on. I’ve got a better prose style than you. Try harder!

    Cy

      • i bet you CAN’T write like that, hello. hahaha, sorry ha, pero basahin mo nga mga hirit mo sa baba, yun ang ayusin mo. at least si Cy, nag iisip kaya nakakapagsulat ng maayos na sagot. tsk.

      • Ang problema lang kasi kay Cy, ayos na sana ung sa kanya, kaso may hirit pa kasi sa huli.

        “Come on. I’ve got a better prose style than you. Try harder!” (Cy)

        Kung ilalagay ang opinion, opinion lang, wag nang mag lagay ng mga ganyan na nagiging arogante na tayo. (Walang intention umatake) kung pabarahan lang pala ang paraan at pa tutungan (sa iba) ng mura para manalo sa buhay kahit walang respeto eh nakakaawa naman ang mundo. Sana magkatotoo nalang ang end of the world.

        Comment ko lang to pero sa mga ibang mabilis kumulo ang dugo, huminahon lang kayo. Kasi ung mga ibang nag ccoment na wala namang intention mangbara o ano man eh iniisip na nangaganon. Anong mangyayari nyan? Eh di magagalit narin ung nagcomment tapos word war na. Mas makakaisip tayong lahat ng mabuti kung relaxed lang tayo pero nandoon parin ang determination para sa side natin.

        Hindi ung unang basa mo palang kahit walang intention ung nag comment galit na kaagad. Tapos mumurahin o ano man ang gagawin. Ung mga nagagalit kaagad dyan, sila ung nagmumukhang sira ulo kasi basa sila ng basa eh di naman iniintindi ang laman.

        Sabihin mo nang off topic to, pero ito lang ang comment ko sa mga tao rito. Anyway, RH bill lang ba ang option sa problemang ‘to? 🙂 mayroon din bang ibang way? Hmm.. Kasi sobrang opposite ung mga sides. Ewan ko lang kung mabibigyan yan kaagad ng final decision.

      • @Leah

        May pa-philippine star-pa-philippine star pa kasing nalalaman e. Akala niya siguro siya lang. At saka P.S. lang naman, pagbigyan mo na…. =D

        At yung sa comment niya na may kulong, uminit talaga dugo ko dun. And I don’t regret it. He rightfully deserves a “Fuck you”. He’s trying to imply that his students’ conscience is his as well, and they ought to follow him even if the students don’t want to.

  5. P. S. Hoy Agui, wag kang babakla-bakla, ang Kristo mo hinarap niya ang mga Pharisees at mga Scribes, hindi niya sinabi sa mga alagad niya na “Hoy, kayo na nga lang”; you better follow his example. Just a reminder. Peace.

  6. You, Aguedo Florence, is a quintessential obscurantist coward. These students pay you tons of money for a liberating and liberative education, and you can only offer them ‘consistency of thought’? Please disabuse your mind: you’re not a professor, you are a sheep herder. You don’t treat your students as people, you treat them like sheep. “We guide our students through the narrow road” — how true. What you do is intellectual corruption. It makes me cringe that you are giving even theology a bad name.

  7. why imprison the students when it you who is primarily at fault? and please, enough with the melodramatics… we’re no longer in the middle ages. priests no longer threaten to excommunicate dissenters to the teachings of the holy mother church…

    wait. hold that thought… they still do pala 🙂

  8. I am a former student of Sir Agui, & first off, I would just like to point out to Gus that insults are beneath you. This is an intellectual discussion, & it’s best to keep these discussions objective.

    I am pro-RH Bill, I would like to point that out.

    Main point — it is the church’s obligation to guide us regarding social issues, separation of church & state is not an option in this one. So whether we like it or not, the church WILL involve itself, & attacking a theology professor won’t change that.

    • well, some insults are well-deserved

      to quote Sigmund Freud:
      “The first human who hurled an insult instead of a stone was the founder of civilization.”

      actually, nagpapaka sibilisado na ako sa lagay na yan. How else would you describe this poor excuse of a professor who hides beneath the mantle of the academia he debases so much?

  9. Btw UST is not liberal in terms of education. It is a conservative & traditional school, don’t expect us to be as liberal as UP.

  10. Sir Agui refuses to debate the issue, because, as he said clearly, “Debate, as you and I fully know, showcases arrogance more than clarity of the issue. This is what is clear to me–we both know where we stand.” You (without particular reference to anyone) might want to read that again. He simply means that the debate would not lead anywhere. It will only push us away from the real issue. Moreover, the debate would be pointless.

    Clearly, the stand of the Church is misinterpreted. Sir Agui referred to the second truth the Letter mentioned, and I quote: “Real corruption is moral and spiritual corruption. The rejection or disregard of morality and religious belief is at the core of corruption. Moral and spiritual corruption breeds its kind in other spheres of life- political, social, and economic.” The truth is, we Filipinos do not have a clear sense of morality yet. We are poor (if ‘corrupted’ is too strong a word), aren’t we? By poor, I meant, politically, socially, economically poor (in fact, among all those aspects Sir Jalin mentioned, it is in the economic aspect–the material aspect–where we are richest). We are poor morally and spiritually. And that’s why we are in poverty. I quote again, “Real corruption is moral and spiritual corruption.”

    Poverty and corruption is not in the presence of HIV, situations of unwanted pregnancies and abortion, or number of unplanned and over-sized families. Poverty and corruption is in the disregard for moral values: man, the Other, life.

    I am saying these, because the gesture of Sir Jalin is misinterpreted. Perhaps it could be called irresponsible. I believe that. But at least it is not as irresponsible as distributing free condoms–take note–to passers-by. Come on, who are we kidding? Passers-by? I mean, passers-by? To raise awareness? Honestly, who are these people? Not everyone knows what a condom is for, at least in the context of RH Bill, which is responsibility and protection.

    Akbayan Youth, before giving out condoms, have you done enough responsibility to preach what RH Bill really is to these passers-by? Not everyone of these passers-by will ever get your message to “raise awareness.” Sir Agui might have shoved his stand down his students’ throats, but I’m certain that before he did so, he has explained his stand to his students, especially its moral implications. If his students don’t believe him, they wouldn’t bother for an incentive.

    By the way, I am 50-50 about RH Bill. I am pro-RH Bill for the same reasons you have. However, I am anti-RH Bill, because honestly, we Filipinos are not yet ready.

  11. Sir Agui refuses to debate the issue, because, as he said clearly, “Debate, as you and I fully know, showcases arrogance more than clarity of the issue. This is what is clear to me–we both know where we stand.” You (without particular reference to anyone) might want to read that again. He simply means that the debate would not lead anywhere. It will only push us away from the real issue. Moreover, the debate would be pointless.

    Clearly, the stand of the Church is misinterpreted. Sir Agui referred to the second truth the Letter mentioned, and I quote: “Real corruption is moral and spiritual corruption. The rejection or disregard of morality and religious belief is at the core of corruption. Moral and spiritual corruption breeds its kind in other spheres of life- political, social, and economic.” The truth is, we Filipinos do not have a clear sense of morality yet. We are poor (if ‘corrupted’ is too strong a word), aren’t we? By poor, I meant, politically, socially, economically poor (in fact, among all those aspects Sir Jalin mentioned, it is in the economic aspect–the material aspect–where we are richest). We are poor morally and spiritually. And that’s why we are in poverty. I quote again, “Real corruption is moral and spiritual corruption.”

    Poverty and corruption are not in the presence of HIV, situations of unwanted pregnancies and abortion, or number of unplanned and over-sized families. Poverty and corruption is in the disregard for moral values: man, the Other, life.

    I am saying these, because the gesture of Sir Jalin is misinterpreted. Perhaps it could be called irresponsible. I believe that. But at least it is not as irresponsible as distributing free condoms–take note–to passers-by. Come on, who are we kidding? Passers-by? I mean, passers-by? To raise awareness? Honestly, who are these people? Not everyone knows what a condom is for, at least in the context of RH Bill, which is responsibility and protection.

    Akbayan Youth, before giving out condoms, have you done enough responsibility to preach what RH Bill really is to these passers-by? Not everyone of these passers-by will ever get your message to “raise awareness.” Sir Agui might have shoved his stand down his students’ throats, but I’m certain that before he did so, he has explained his stand to his students, especially its moral implications. If his students don’t believe him, they wouldn’t bother for an incentive.

    By the way, I am 50-50 about RH Bill. I am pro-RH Bill for the same reasons you have. However, I am anti-RH Bill, because honestly, we Filipinos are not yet ready.

  12. Another point I’d like to make — Sir Agui’s not trying to hostage their grades! Bonus points nga eh, meaning kahit na hindi gawin eh walang mangyayari sa final grades. @-)

    Cy — Sir Agui respects his students’s opinions (student here, hello!!). He’s actually doing his job — teaching us what’s moral & what’s not. That’s what UST pays him to do. & why compare him with Christ? He was perfect, sir’s only human.

    & again, I don’t see how hurling insults are gonna make an impact on your lives, really. =))

    • Ang pagbigay ng extra-points ay katumbas ng pambili ng boto ng isang kandidato. Maari mong tanggihan maari mong tanggapin pero sa bandang huli, mas maraming pera yung tumanggap at mas mataas ang grade nung nag post. e paano kung yung ayaw mag post e numero uno sa klase tapos malalamangan siya ng kasunod niya dahil nag post. nasaan ang katarungan doon?

  13. as far as i remember.. We did not get incentive or bonus points from Sir Agui.
    I never had a record of incentive about the RH bill

  14. I’m a current student of Sir Agui and just would like to point out that not all of us posted comment about disapproving with the RH Bill. In fact, not all of us supports this bill and not all of his student submitted.

    Another thing, please keep in mind that he is human. He makes mistakes. Kayo din naman po di ba? And please do respect him, even for a little bit? He is a Theology professor and just following the decision of the Church.

    I don’t see the point of insulting him. Masakit po pag iniisulto ka, lalo na kung ginagawa mo ang trabaho mo. Just like what AA-JRN2 said. Tska, some of you quoted that “stoop to your level” thing, when in fact, binababa niyo na rin sarili niyo for saying these insults?

    I’m just stating my opinion. 🙂

    ps. He will NOT (I repeat NOT) going to be put in prison. Besides our professor in another class, already said He didn’t commit any mistakes that threatens the national security of the country. So why put him in prison? For opinions? 🙂

    • ““We bishops are willing to be imprisoned together with our priests and protest the immoral things “, then I will express the same mind- imprison me and my students.”

      Siya nagsabi. As for me. He deserves to be in an intellectual jail cell. Bahala na kayo kung ano yun.

  15. Professor, if I may ask a question:

    Supposing a student of yours stated on FB their all-out support for the Reproductive Health bill, and backed up their stance on the matter, defended it with a very thorough argument based on the theology you teach, and their understanding of Catholic doctrine, and supplementary research from the scientific community regarding the need for such a bill…

    ..or in short, if the student basically displayed exemplary academic ability in defending their stance, despite it being opposed to yours, would you give them a bonus as well?

  16. Professor Jalin,

    With all due respect, why should I take the word of an old men – celibates at that – on what sort of measures we should, as a nation, take in the matter of protecting the welfare of our women?

    Why should I take the word of an organization that’s willing to throw out tripe, such as claims that the RH bill is pro-death and immoral, when its contents are meant to minimize the number of deaths and suffering that we see each year due to birth-related complications and STDs.

    http://reproductiverights.org/en/forsakenlives

    Why should I take the word of an organization that would willingly put a woman’s life at risk, just so they can dispense their misguided sense of what is human life?

    http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/content/full/98/10/1774#SEC4

    You claim moral corruption, and yet the past few years have seen report after report of the church’s own sex scandals being exposed. And when the church had the chance to bring these monsters to justice, they instead hide them.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/08/28/us-belgium-church-abuse-idUSTRE67R1EN20100828

    The Catholic church does not have a monopoly on morality. It lost its legitimacy to demand morality in any form the minute it decided to protect its rapists, and not their victims.

    For a Thomasian in pursuit of a truth, I think you’re woefully outdated on reality. Your opposition to the RH bill serves nobody but your own deluded ego. Our women deserve far better than to die, just so you get a hard-on from dispensing your dogma.

  17. I just thought Sir Jalin has good intention but i detest the fact that he opted to give incentives to “force” “impel” the students to write things against or unclear to their personal stance. “The end does not justify the means”. Good intentions never become rewarding with not-so-good means. If i were the teacher, i would encourage free and open discussion on the matter in terns not only of religious convictions but a more comprehensive one, like, scientific, legal and moral implications among others.
    I pity Sir Jalin that he resorted to a kind of age-old “indoctrination” like what Medieval Ages had done in the past. Gone are those days and collaborative, constructive, productive and interactive discussions would help the students better. Manage them by accountability, not by control.

  18. Aminin na natin, maraming schools nagbibigay ng incentive sa pagnonood at pagchecheer sa mga UAAP/NCAA games. Ultimo pag suot ng university-colored shirt, di naman na natin kailangang magspecify, kalat ang mga tulad nyan. Pagbibigay ng extra points sa mga simpleng pag lilinis sa classroom, pagbubura ng mga nakasulat sa white/blackboard, pagsasayaw sa mga field demos pag foundation day.

    Yep, incentives sa mga ganung kababaw na bagay.

    Anong masama kung magbigay ng incentives sa pagbibigay ng informed opinion, take note, voluntary pa.

    It’s like giving a piece of bread to a fellow protester as a gesture of “thanks for sharing this idealism with me, let’s carry on with it” drama.
    No harm is done sa grades kung hindi sila nagpost, we have to note that.

    • hello, akala ko kaya mong pangatawanan ang pagiging moralista mo? now you’re saying na dahil ginagawa ng schools ang pagbibigay ng incentives, OK na yun?

      Incentives = suhol = bribe. Simple lang yan.

      Medyo bullshit din ang analogy mo na ‘sharing tinapay with a fellow protester’

      una, kasi authority figure si Aguedo sa klase nya. di siya ordinaryong fellow protester; siya ang principal protester. siya nga ang kayang magbigay ng incentive eh. in short, nilaro niya ang estudyante niya to amplify his real stand. gusto nya palabasin na may groundswell against RH. gusto nyang bumango ang dating nya sa mga frayleng amo niya. may incentive ba siyang ibibigay sa pro-RH? malamang wala.

      pangalawa, nagiging malaking bagay sa isang estudyanteng mababa o pabagsak ang grade ang usapin ng incentive. hindi siya puwedeng i-dismiss na ‘no harm done’ kasi if there were two students na parehong pabagsak, at yung isa anti-RH, yung isa pro-RH, mas malamang na si anti-RH lang ang papasa kasi siya ang may ‘consistency of thought’ (Aguedo’s words) on condoms/RH na siyang gusto ng taong nagbibigay ng incentive.

      ayun. take note of that.

      • bwahahaahah! im not saying OK yung mga binigay kong example. ALL IM SAYING IS THAT THEY (bonus point sa mga petty school activities) ARE PART OF REALITY SINCE TIME IMMEMORIAL. WE’VE BEEN LIVING WITH THEM (not to vindicate them). Gosh naman gus. 🙂

        Bilang prof, karapatan ni Jalin mag isip ng mga paraan ng pagtuturo. FYI, (Summa cum laude siya ng Theology. He did his thesis so damn well kung alam mo lang–award-winning teh!) IN THE SAME WAY, karapatan din ng mga estudyante nya kung papatulan nila ang mga extra bonus points. The fact na HINDI LAHAT SA KANILA E NAGPOST DITO AT SUMUNOD, gaaaaasssh gus!

        isa mo pang problema: pangalawa, nagiging malaking bagay sa isang estudyanteng mababa o pabagsak ang grade ang usapin ng incentive. hindi siya puwedeng i-dismiss na ‘no harm done’ kasi if there were two students na parehong pabagsak, at yung isa anti-RH, yung isa pro-RH, mas malamang na si anti-RH lang ang papasa kasi siya ang may ‘consistency of thought’ (Aguedo’s words) on condoms/RH na siyang gusto ng taong nagbibigay ng incentive. –> NAPAKA creative mo. ang advance mo mag isip. bakit mo hinayaang suportahan ng again, MERE ASSUMPTION mo ang side mo na dapat e may konkretong basehan.

      • haha, summa cum laude ba kaya OK lang tratuhin nya estudyante nya as mindless sheep by dangling incentives? LOL! award-winning ba? wow, magaling sa thesis, pero hindi disente ang pedagogy? haha, you’re very funny, hello. ang alam ko sa mga summa cum laude, nakikipag debate, hindi yung nagtatago, hindi nanggagamit ng proxy. HAHA. naghahamon pa naman ang akbayan. tsk, walang binatbat mga summa dyan.

      • @Gus

        Concur.

        Summa cum laude, ayaw ng debate? How’s that possible?

        We’re thinking similarly.

        Well. Buti nga hinamon siya e. It will be a time for him to establish prestige, not only for himself, but for his causes and for UST.

        Too bad he doesn’t recognize manna from heaven.

        Anyway. Let me continue duck-shooting.

        “He did his thesis so damn well kung alam mo lang–award-winning teh!)”

        Well, that was the grandeur of the past. Let us shift to the encumbrances of the probabilistic future.

        “NAPAKA creative mo. ang advance mo mag isip. bakit mo hinayaang suportahan ng again, MERE ASSUMPTION mo ang side mo na dapat e may konkretong basehan.”

        Well, Gus, you really are creative. After all. Who says we’re debating only? We’re also IMAGINING. We have an edge over the firecracker vendors. We also sell fountains and glow-in-the-dark animal figurines. =D

  19. Isa pa, kung ang trip nyo talaga eh pag raise ng awareness, bakit hindi na lang kayo mamigay ng easy-to-read leaflets explaining RH bill in layman’s term. Or hold more and more forums sa mga barangay–mas mura ata yun diba? Magkano lang pa-photocopy ng leaflets at walang bayad (i think) ang paghingi ng suporta ng mga barangay sa venue/programs.

    Kung gusto nyo mag raise ng awareness, ibig sabihin nun aminado kayong wala pang muwang ang mga Pilipino. Kailangan ng EDUKASYON, hindi instant access sa condoms. Siguro naman, hindi kayo mang-mang para maisip na maaring ang epekto ng pamimigay nyo ng condoms sa mga literal na passers-by e maging iba sa “intention nyo”. Siguro naman aware kayo na yung iba ay maaring mamisinterpret ang “intention” nyong “ieducate” sila.

    • actually, giving out leaflets on the merits of RH has been done by many groups, not just akbayan. the condoms distribution was just another form of awareness raising. hello, under which rock have you been hiding? again, kung ikaw ang binigyan ng condom, makikipag-sex ka ba agad? kung hindi, bakit hindi mo kayang isipin na ganun din ang maiisip ng mga ‘passer-by sa Q-Mart na nakatanggap ng condom? tumaas ba ang rate ng sex sa Cubao dahil dun, hindi di ba? unless minamaliit mo ang sense of judgment nila dahil sa QMart lang sila nagpupunta? konting Pinoy na lang actually ang habol ng kampanyang yun, kasi sa surveys, consistent halos 70% ng pinoy ay gustong ipasa ang RH. 70%! Get that? Sorry to say na isa ka dun sa minority na hindi bukas ang utak — and i’m sure di nakakaintindi. Sayang lang imprenta sa leaflets sa mga medyo intellectually-challenged. Mabuti pa ang masang Pilipino, nakakaintindi. At mas higit na sila ang makikinabang sa RH, hindi ang mga moralistang katulad mo. Yun lang.

      • oops, hindi ako ang nangmamaliit sa kanila. ikaw ang tumawag na “lang” sa Qmart. Hinay lang 😀

      • Sa tingin ko, hindi por que kabilang ang isang tao sa mga Anti-RH (sa 30% “minority na hindi bukas ang utak” tulad ng sinasabi mo) ay nangangahulugan na na hindi sila nakakaintindi. Isa pa, hindi naman lahat ng nabigyan ng condom sa QMart ay naintindihan fully ang nilalaman ng RH Bill at kung bakit sobrang controversial ito ngayon. Aminin natin yung iba sa kanila talagang tinanggap lang yung libreng condom.

        Isa pa, kung yung mga taong pro-RH (yung mga kabilang sa sinasabing 70%) ang tunay na “nakakaintindi”, at ipagpalagay natin na may mga estudyante si Mr. Jalin na pro-RH din, siguro naman ay kaya nilang patunayan na “nakakaintindi” sila by not doing what the professor told them. Kung talagang pinaninindigan nila ang stance nila sa RH Bill, hindi sila magpapadala sa kahit na anong incentives o bonus.

      • and i noticed na hindi mo sinagot kung maeengganyo ka makipag sex at the sight of condoms? wala lang, napansin ko lang, hehe. :p maganda kasing study yan eh, kung nalilibugan kayong mga moralista sa condom. landmark study kung sakali. hahaha

      • ah 70% ba ang nakakaintindi ng RH bill? sige nga, try picking one random passer-by at ipaexplain mo ang RH bill.
        ang problema sayo ang assumera/assumero mo.
        paano nyo ieexplain ang isang parte ng RH bill na ganito ang sinasabi eh in case walang parent ang “victim of abuse”, ipeperform ng mga health officials ang “necessary action” to save the “victim”

        point one: anong klaseng “abuse” ang tinutukoy dito? RAPE. ano ang “necessary action to save the victim”? ISIP-ISIP! Hmm, literal yung action ha, hindi siya tipong “will guide, console, lift up morale” and other chuchu-vague deeds. Ring a bell na ba? ABORTION.
        Yeah, sarap ba ng sugar-coating ng RH bill?

        Haha! Back in 2007 actually, may super-duper HEFTY FINES pa sa mga doctors na hindi issusuggest sa mga tao ang contraceptives. sinugar-coat ulit siya dito ngayon. SO it’s like meddling with how doctors (who have studied for more than 10 years, some even fellows of international and reputable institutions) do their job. o diba, diktadura? well, that was 2007–concrete nila yun sinabi dun. sa latest version ngayon, vaguey-vague na lang. HAHAHA.

      • @hello: nagkakalat ka na naman. classic na jumping to conclusions, landing on your face. actually, sa consolidated version ng RH bill, namumutakti ang pasubali for “legal, medically-safe and effective” methods. Tanong: Legal ba ang abortion sa Pinas? Sagot: Hindi. Conclusion: You are peddling lies. hahaha 🙂 eto link ulit sa consolidated bill ha, kasi nabubuhay ka yata sa 2007 eh:

        move on, vaguey-vague dim-wits! HAHAHAHA 🙂

      • and please, hello – pakisagot naman yung original question ko, kung nalilibugan ka sa condom. HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! 🙂

      • sige, bigyan mo muna ako ng sex rate sa cubao 🙂
        tas silipin ko kung sino-sino at ano-anong entities and nagdonate sa mga pangangampanya ng mga pulitikong dead na dead sa RH bill. yun ay kung dineclare nila sa comelec yun.

        wag ka masyadong pikon, nawawalan ka ng sense. 🙂

      • wow, napaka sensible ni hello. mga moralista ang nagsasabi na nag iinduce ng sex ang condom distribution di ba? o, pano nyo mapapatunayan yan kung di kayo nag aabang ng spike sa sex rate? dapat kayo ang may means to do that. abang ka sa Sogo. iha, mag isip ka ng konti. kahit konti lang. sus naman.

      • Gus, Masyado ka na sigurong napipikon dahil napapansin kong medyo tagilid na mga pinagsasabi mo. Di mo na masuportahan mga sinasabi at ang ginagawa mo nalang ay tuligsain ang mga sinasabi ni Hello. 😉

        Ang sinabi ni Hello na “i can’t help but think you guys are backed by manufacturing giants.” ay naisip nya siguro dahil sa mga pagbibigay ng condom. Don palang ay nagbibigay na ng senyales na bina-back upan sila ng manufacturing giants dahil saan naman kayo kukuha ng condoms, o funds para bumili ng condom.

      • thank you jake. bakit ikaw gets mo, siya hindi? oh well. ang naisip ko dyan e baka na-hack lang ang account ni gus, para kasing magkaibang tao ang kausap ko dito. contradicting na ng mga sinasabi.

        gus, bakit ka nag aassume na ako dapat ang may stats ng sex rate sa cubao? eh ikaw tong nag claim na HINDI TUMAAS ANG SEX RATE, diba? by claiming that siguro naman IKAW ANG MAY DATA to support your claim, at HINDI AKO. paano mo nasabi na hindi tumaas? unless, feeling mo lang yun. assumera?

        at bakit mo pinupuna ang “evidence-based hirit” ko, eh ikaw nga itong naunang humingi ng “proof” see comment: “care to offer some proof, or may sayad ka lang?” sinabayan ko lang ang way of thinking mo.

        gawd, hindi ko na dapat pinapatulan ang mga ganitong kababaw na feedback, pero nakakaawa ka naman, maiiwan ka sa cloud nine mo. naramdaman ko bigla ang compassion na pagtyagaan ang tulad mo. baka pag may nakausap kang iba at nabara ka ng todo, maiyak ka. mabuti na na dito pa lang, mabigyan ka na ng clarifications. at least dito, anonymous ka, di masyado nakakahiya.

      • @jake: dapat pinapatulan ang mga ganyang hirit ng mga katulad ni hello kasi planting the seed of malice yan, which is an old trick of the obscurantists. in fact, she made this accusation even clearer in her succeeding reply: “silipin mo kung sino-sino at ano-anong entities ang nagdonate sa mga pangangampanya ng mga pulitikong dead na dead sa RH bill.” her assumption now becomes a suggestion for a fishing expedition, for a witch-hunt. her real objective is to put malice in people’s heads. and she does so poorly. sabagay, dahil wala nang maihirit si hello, tamang hinala na lang siya HAHA 🙂 if you don’t get this as well, you are in her league. too bad. and sorry, I don’t get pikon with loose cannons like hello. pero minsan, dapat siya ilagay sa tama nyang lugar.

        @hello…tsk, mali na naman hirit eh. the assertion of ‘condoms = promoting sex’ ay galing sa inyo di ba? i never asserted that ‘condoms = decreasing sex activity.’ ikaw yun using twisted logic. hahaha. that was the root of your complaints, that the condoms-giving activity was wrong kasi ‘wrong message’ daw (wrong = promoting sex; which you in fact repeated in one of your ramblings somewhere in this thread when you wrote “to improve sex life kamo! ” gets?).. kaso di nyo ma-frame ang debate kung sino ang magsasabi kung alin ang wrong, at kung alin ang correct. which forces you to go back to your moralist arguments, which in turn are bankrupt kasi Catholic morals lang yan (note that other Christians do not have this hang up). tsk. kaya ‘hello’ lang ginagamit mong pangalan dito eh, mukhang ikaw ang ayaw mapahiya. read back through your comments para maintindihan mo ang ibig sabihin ng kababawan LOL. may hirit ka sa incentives, na sablay. may hirit ka kay Cy na hindi mo masabayan kaya one-liner na walang kuwenta sinabi mo. I assume na medyo matanda ka na kasi my condescending comment ka sa mga ‘masyado pang bata’ somewhere in this thread, pero mukhang ikaw kahit tumanda na, twisted pa rin. at yun ang kahiya-hiya. haha

    • @jake: and for the record, I think akbayan already issued a statement to the question about the source of the condoms. They said it was the group TLF SHARE who donated. apparently, not your BIG manufacturing giants. guni-guni nyo lang yun. HAHA 🙂 now you know.

  20. Friends, let us not forget that the real issue here is not Prof. Agui. Nagkataon lang na he is from UST kaya lumaki ng ganyan ang problem. Kung manggagaling yan sa ibang school or academic institution, papansinin niyo ba? And besides, the students admitted na it’s their stand about the issue and not because of tthe incentives. I know Agui, I know his style of teaching. He did not require his students to do this.

  21. Why don’t you just respect Prof. Jalin and his views?

    To the man who even wrote that his prose style is better than the professor, you better think twice.

    The issue here is not about Prof. Jalin, but the RH Bill. The millions of intellectuals in the country can argue for or against the bill. Whatever your stand may be, fight for it and let the representatives of the people (Congress) decide.

    (I hope the President would exercise his veto power in case Congress submits the bill for signing, and this I think is what he will do.)

    • Right. And Prof. Jalin is not claiming that he is a very good writer. He merely stated his points on giving incentives to his students and his stance on the RH Bill. Who would’ve thought this thread is a venue for a writing competition.

    • Issue din ang pagbibigay ng incentive sa pag sa pag post ng opinyon na ipinipilit ng isang guro. ang panginoon ay binigyan tayo ng napakahusay na utak para mag pasiya para sa ating sarili, para ipilit ng isang tao ang kanyang kagustuhan sa iba ay pag labag sa karapatang pang tao. hindi man direct ang pag pilit, ang pagbigay ng incentive ay nag bubukas ng unfair advantage against sa mga taliwas ang paniniwala

    • Bakit? Nagbabanta na ba siya? DEBATE NA! Pero with Akbayan. To tell you. I HAVE NO VIEWS ABOUT THE RH BILL!!! But I have views regarding his action.

  22. nakaka-amuse yung mga paniniwala ng iba. halatang masyado pang bata at nasa hype pa ng idealism, feeling-cool-kasi-i-don’t-have-a-god-unless-mahoholdap/babagsak-ako-sa-exam-dun-ako-mapapa”lord help”-at-sign-of-the-cross attitude.

    • cool bang maging moralista? naks. haha. ang cool mo eh, ano? alam mo mas cool yung nag iisip. yun bang kayang i-relate ang RH sa pag improve ng buhay ng kababaihang mahirap at sa value ng sex education in schools to improve the quality of life. yun ang cool eh, pero mukhang pa sign sign of the cross lang kaya mo eh. good luck, iha.

      • Hey Gus, Nagiisip din naman yung mga moralista. Kaya nga nagdecide sila na pumanig sa side na iyon. Ako ay sumusuporta din sa RH-bill. Pero ang iyong mga pinagsasabi ay tila ba walang kwenta at below the belt.

        At yung sinabi ni Hello naman ay tama. Maraming tao ay ganoon. Kung kelan lang nila kailangan si God, saka palang sila hihingi ng tulong o saka palang nila maaalala si God.

      • @jake: nasaktan ka ba sa label na moralista kaya mo nasabing ‘below the belt’?? hahaha. ooppss, sowi. hindi ko kasi iginagalang ang mga moralistang katulad nyo eh. sabi nga ni Dong Abay, “banal na aso, santong kabayo’ HAHAHA

        @hello: see? you equate RH/condom with improving sex life. gotcha. 🙂 kunyari joke, pero yun yun eh. wag kasi tatanga-tanga, hahaha. 🙂

    • Ako ay isang Katoliko, at may pamilya ngunit di ako sumasangayon sa sinasabi ng simbahan tunkol sa RH Bill. Unang una dahil hindi ito Pro-Abortion, sa katunayan, kung maisabatas ito, maari itong makatulong sa pagbaba ng kaso ng abortion dahil, matututunan ng mga tao ang wastong pag-iingat. pangalawa, ito ay makakatulong sa pagtaas ng dekalidad ng buhay ng mga tao lalo na ng maralita. Ang taong nagugutom ay uunahin muna ang mga pangangailangan ng temporal bago ang spiritwal. Ang RH bill sa aking palagay at pagunawa ay tumutulong din sa pag papatupad at pag galang sa karapatan pang tao, karapatan ng kababaihan para mag pasiya sa kanilang kalusugan at ng mga bata

      • @Kulas

        I’m sorry, but this ain’t the right venue for your views. What we are discussing is about Sir Jalin’s actions.

  23. AN OPEN LETTER TO A UST PROFESSOR

    Sir Aguedo Florence A. Jalin:

    Let me take the war to the front now!! First up, I have answered your letter posted in the Akbatan Youth website point-for-point. (https://akbayanyouth.wordpress.com/2011/02/21/yo……uth-group-hits-alleged-extra-credits-for-students-vs-rh-bill/).

    Let me tell you my side. What you did may be permissible within school rules, but again, it seemed indecent to me. Offering bonus points for anti-RH postings without offering them for pro-RH postings? Did you consider what MERIT is for? MERIT, I think, in a university setting, is offered for BRILLIANT, ORIGNAL, STRIKING or WELL-RESEARCHED (probably you can add EXHAUSTIVE) reasoning, regardless of the SIDE TAKEN. Bonus points can also be given for exploring uncommon views regarding each side. To sum up, MERIT should be given to the REASONING used, irrespective of the SIDE taken.

    So, as I see, if you follow this train of thought, an anti-RH student who utilized bad logic will earn bonus points, while a pro-RH student whose reasoning was cogent won’t. This breaks the MERIT system.

    Next, what you did may be legal, but it seemed to me indecent. It seemed that, by offering bonus points, you have no reasons to back up your anti-RH advocacies. If you are a professor really worth your grain of salt, you would inspire your students with PERSUASION rather than by giving CANDIES to those who support your view. While for children giving candies may make them accept some views and reject others, surely it is improper to do that to adults, especially in a university setting.

    (And, oh, the usage of the word CANDIES is figurative. I hope you get it. Some of the students who posted here didn’t. They may need some remedial classes in English proficiency.)

    Please don’t overuse the method of giving candies. You’ll have to wean them off it. They are ADULTS now. Let me refresh. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohlberg%27s_stages_of_moral_development

    Some of your students should have been insulted, because you offered them candy. They are ADULTS already. Don’t put your “children of God” claptrap because you are not God. Be careful.

    Please act like a university professor, not like a clown who offers lollipops and cookies just to make his preschool audience believe that there is a ghost inside the box.

    ***

    Have you lost your powers of persuasion, by the way? Because you seem to dislike debate? “Debate, as you and I fully know, showcases arrogance more than clarity of the issue” You mean Socrates was arrogant when he invited Athenians to dialogues? Okay, let me tell you what debate does. In a debate, two sides take opposing views. The two sides offer substantive material while rebutting those from the other side. The better view is the one which stands criticism the most.

    It’s perfectly okay if you don’t want to debate. Maybe because, you’re busy, or because your schedule is prohibitive. But I have just shown your reason for avoiding debate patently wrong. Admit it. One of the commenters from another Facebook asked quizzically how you got your graduate degrees without learning how to debate. It is the tradition which nurtured the professorial likes of you. And you’re going to turn back from it? SHAME ON YOU. Unequivocally.

    Exposure to a debate strengthens your views. It exposes your weak views, so you can discard them or at least change them. Then those that will be left will be potent views a rational person deserves.

    ***

    So you seem to like rallies, but not debates. Why? Because in rallies, force is power? In debates, REASON is power, not force. (Although one can join a rally reasonably and willingly.) Although rallies can be settled with fistfights and water cannons, debates cannot be settled by such. They can be settled only by ratiocinating and rebutting. The side who wins is not necessarily the side who has the most thugs.

    (As an aside: You are giving students the wrong idea by making them join rallies that may not be of their choosing. You give them the idea that force is the way to self-actualization. You are promoting thuggery and not scholarship.)

    Your students seem to hate rebuttal, as evidenced by the comments on the other post here. Now I get it.

    ***

    Oh. In closing. Better defend your views in the open than rot in jail. Please don’t force your students to rot in jail with you because of your views. Heck, no one’s rotting in jail for his or her views here, theoretically, in this free country.

    And please, treat your students as individuals, not as extensions of your own will. If I had a student who turned away from what I preached because he has finally gathered his own beliefs, I will be very proud of him. (I will also be proud of a student who agrees with me intelligently.) By offering them candy, you precluded their natural willingness to agree/disagree smartly.

    Thank you for the time. Before you forget. I am Percival Bueser, just a student. I believe that REASON is GOD, and LOVE is unconditional. Not like your God, who likes Catholics exclusively and agrees or disagrees through bountiful harvests, croaking frogs, lightning bolts and earthquakes. That’s why I am offering a few words for you.

    Percy

  24. @ABCDE

    “I know Agui, I know his style of teaching. He did not require his students to do this.”

    The style of teaching is not the issue. It’s what he has done – offer incentives for anti-RH postings without offering such for pro-RH.

    Clear your mind of idle thoughts; if you won’t, I’ll do.

  25. @aiz

    “To the man who even wrote that his prose style is better than the professor, you better think twice.”

    Okay, seems like he’s ready for a debate, huh? Although he should take AKBAYAN;s invitation. I’m rather busy, and I admit, I don’t have views about the RH bill. I have views about the actions of Prof. Jalin.

  26. @utteringmiyosname

    “Another thing, please keep in mind that he is human. He makes mistakes. Kayo din naman po di ba? And please do respect him, even for a little bit? He is a Theology professor and just following the decision of the Church.”

    I don’t know about him as a person. But I don’t respect what he did. For reasons I already outlined.

    You mean it’s the Church who told him to candy-peddle bonuses?

    • First thing, I’m not defending Sir Agui. 😀 Naawa lang ako sa kanya kasi pinagkakaisahan siya ng mga taong hindi naman niya kilala. And the fact that you are saying this behind his back is low. Did it even cross your mind that he takes time reading what you posted or not?

      Second, the respect. What I am saying is Respect him as a person, not what he did. True, what he did is embarrassing to his students and calling us sheep/tuta whatever. But I didn’t lose my respect. I’m shocked after finding out he identified himself. Cowardice is when he didn’t identify himself and allowed his students to clean his “dirt”. Shouldn’t that be an enough reason for him to gain, even a little, respect?

      Lastly, the Church. The Church is against it and he teaches Theology. So he gained the idea of going against it from the Church. And Theology is a subject that teaches about the Church and everything about it, even the decisions. And if, hypothetically speaking, he is a PRO-RHB and continues to discuss the Pro’s and why the church is wrong, because they are Anti, might cause a stir. For me, an example, if that happens, I will think differently of the church and might turn my back against them.

      Let me just say something else.

      Please be open-minded. See both sides. Everyone is at fault as well. Sir Agui for his incentive things and such. And AKBAYAN for failing to give us a details, in layman’s term, about the Pro’s of RHB. And besides they didn’t explain why they gave free condoms last valentines day. 🙂

      I rest my case.

      • @utteringmiyosname

        “First thing, I’m not defending Sir Agui. 😀 Naawa lang ako sa kanya kasi pinagkakaisahan siya ng mga taong hindi naman niya kilala. And the fact that you are saying this behind his back is low. Did it even cross your mind that he takes time reading what you posted or not?”

        – Good for him then. Perhaps he should start opening up to the world and start weaning himself off from his shelterbox.

        “Second, the respect. What I am saying is Respect him as a person, not what he did. True, what he did is embarrassing to his students and calling us sheep/tuta whatever. But I didn’t lose my respect. I’m shocked after finding out he identified himself. Cowardice is when he didn’t identify himself and allowed his students to clean his “dirt”. Shouldn’t that be an enough reason for him to gain, even a little, respect?”

        – All people deserve respect. But not all actions. As for me, I’ve gained not a little, but PLENTY of respect for him after his admission, but his action’s distinct from him, remember that.

        “Lastly, the Church. The Church is against it and he teaches Theology. So he gained the idea of going against it from the Church. And Theology is a subject that teaches about the Church and everything about it, even the decisions. And if, hypothetically speaking, he is a PRO-RHB and continues to discuss the Pro’s and why the church is wrong, because they are Anti, might cause a stir. For me, an example, if that happens, I will think differently of the church and might turn my back against them.”

        – Then what did you mena when you said: “He is a Theology professor and just following the decision of the Church.”

        “Please be open-minded. See both sides. Everyone is at fault as well. Sir Agui for his incentive things and such. And AKBAYAN for failing to give us a details, in layman’s term, about the Pro’s of RHB. And besides they didn’t explain why they gave free condoms last valentines day.”

        – But the topic of the day is about his actions. Discuss that – and NOTHING else – unless you want to compromise your logical knowledge by giving a red herring.

      • @utteringmiyosname

        “Naawa lang ako sa kanya kasi pinagkakaisahan siya ng mga taong hindi naman niya kilala.”

        Mag-isa lang po ako! =)

      • “True, what he did is embarrassing to his students and calling us sheep/tuta whatever.”

        -Remind him that. So that I won’t have to remind him that.

  27. @Prof. Jalin

    “In the olden times, duel or in our term ‘square tayo” was the best manifestation of manhood but now, being a provider and a true father to your family or respecting and not hurting women are manifestations manhood and of being a real man.”

    From a SOFTIE who implies, through here, that populating the world with babies is preferable to reasoning.

    Sir Agui, your conception of manhood is bestial. Even animals can do what you are saying is the best manifestation of manhood. You have forgotten what Plato said – that man has an additional feature which is rationality. A debate can showcase it (though it is not the only way). Is your philosophy training rusting already?

    Okay.

    “So far as I can remember, there is not one word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence.” – Bertrand Russell

  28. @thomas

    “I pity Sir Jalin that he resorted to a kind of age-old “indoctrination” like what Medieval Ages had done in the past.”

    Ang sakit pa ng dinagdag niya; accrdoing kay Gus, dinamay pa niya si Santo Thomas Aquinas…. =(

  29. @Twin-Skies

    “or in short, if the student basically displayed exemplary academic ability in defending their stance, despite it being opposed to yours, would you give them a bonus as well?”

    My point as well. MERIT. =D

    Now give me my answer, if I were the UST prof. YES, I WILL, because if I happen to hold bad reasons for my stand, then his reasoning will help me jettison the bad reasons out. Therefore only the good reasons remain. At least if I don’t shift points, I retain the strong ones.

  30. @calorimeter

    UST is a UNIVERSITY first and CATHOLIC only second. Reverse it and intellectual catastrophe will ensue.

    Theoretically, suppose a generic UNIVERSITY holds a value and CATHOLICISM holds the opposite. Which one will UST choose?

  31. @aiz

    “To the man who even wrote that his prose style is better than the professor, you better think twice.”

    Let me tell you. Aquinas, for me, is a BORE.

    • Are you sure? Have you read any of his works? Did you understand what they mean? Don’t attack the saint, he’s already physically gone. Guys, let’s stick to the issue.

    • Oh, that, I think, is the problem with the most of you here–whether for Agui or against him–most of what you say here are mere “RED HERRINGS”. That’s why the discussion gives birth to many unnecessary, childish and petty things. You are filling a what is supposed to be a diplomatic and civilized discussion to a cheap fight.

      • palusot? not really. trying to referee, it feels like it’s badly needed here. yes, move on and keep on discussing RESPONSIBLY. YOU and I should keep that lesson.

  32. @hello

    “Aminin na natin, maraming schools nagbibigay ng incentive sa pagnonood at pagchecheer sa mga UAAP/NCAA games. Ultimo pag suot ng university-colored shirt, di naman na natin kailangang magspecify, kalat ang mga tulad nyan. Pagbibigay ng extra points sa mga simpleng pag lilinis sa classroom, pagbubura ng mga nakasulat sa white/blackboard, pagsasayaw sa mga field demos pag foundation day.”

    Give incentives only for meritorious acts. As for the activities you mentioned:

    watching and cheering – it’s the promoter who gives, not the professor

    wearing university shirt – not meritorious – what foolishness is this? Maybe it’s enforceable – in which case give negative reinforcement for not complying.

    cleaning the classroom, erasing the blackboard – why give incentives when it’s an expectation?

    field demos – meritorious – give.

    siding on an issue – NOT MERITORIOUS – it’s easy to do, even drunks can take sides

    reasoning – meritorious – give not only incentives, but life eternal, for this is rare – although your prof Agui seems not to like it

    “Yep, incentives sa mga ganung kababaw na bagay.”

    Damn the CANDY and COOKIE culture.

  33. @aiz

    “To the man who even wrote that his prose style is better than the professor, you better think twice.”

    Prove it.

    And, pasensya, age does not always imply glitz.

  34. @Prof. Jalin

    “As Thomasians we commit ourselves to the cause of truth.”

    Wag mong idamay ang buong UST sa kabalbalan mo. Mag-isa ka.

    Cause of truth pala ha. Well. You seemed to have found the perfect way to further it. By giving CANDIES!!! =D Ewan ko sa iyo, parang ganito: 2 + 2 = 5, okay? Believe me and I’ll give you Flat Tops, a Coke in Can, and a toy gun. Ganoon ba pre?

  35. @sofia

    “Sir Agui refuses to debate the issue, because, as he said clearly, “Debate, as you and I fully know, showcases arrogance more than clarity of the issue. This is what is clear to me–we both know where we stand.” You (without particular reference to anyone) might want to read that again. He simply means that the debate would not lead anywhere. It will only push us away from the real issue. Moreover, the debate would be pointless.”

    – I have explained that although it is optional, a debate would be fruitful. (See my long comment up there.) I have already refuted (I think, satisfactorily), his reasons for not debating.

    “Clearly, the stand of the Church is misinterpreted. Sir Agui referred to the second truth the Letter mentioned, and I quote: “Real corruption is moral and spiritual corruption. The rejection or disregard of morality and religious belief is at the core of corruption. Moral and spiritual corruption breeds its kind in other spheres of life- political, social, and economic.” The truth is, we Filipinos do not have a clear sense of morality yet. We are poor (if ‘corrupted’ is too strong a word), aren’t we? By poor, I meant, politically, socially, economically poor (in fact, among all those aspects Sir Jalin mentioned, it is in the economic aspect–the material aspect–where we are richest). We are poor morally and spiritually. And that’s why we are in poverty. I quote again, “Real corruption is moral and spiritual corruption.””

    – Ewan ko. He should have talked about his actions alone, because THAT’s the issue. He should have not put plenty of red fishes across our path. He’s diverting the real issue, which is his giving of incentive. However, his diversion is UNSUCCESSFUL. =)

    “Poverty and corruption are not in the presence of HIV, situations of unwanted pregnancies and abortion, or number of unplanned and over-sized families. Poverty and corruption is in the disregard for moral values: man, the Other, life.”

    – Let me include: poverty and corruption also counts the unwillingness to use reason when one could and should have.

    “I am saying these, because the gesture of Sir Jalin is misinterpreted. Perhaps it could be called irresponsible. I believe that. But at least it is not as irresponsible as distributing free condoms–take note–to passers-by.”

    – Just stick to his action, okay? Don’t place plenty of red fishes along our path. Maybe your Logic professor ought to have done better with you.

    “Sir Agui might have shoved his stand down his students’ throats, but I’m certain that before he did so, he has explained his stand to his students, especially its moral implications. If his students don’t believe him, they wouldn’t bother for an incentive.”

    – I explained my point on incentives in my long comment above. Tapos, let me correct you. According to Akbayan Youth’s blog, it was Sir Agui who offered incentives. The students did not ask for it.

    “By the way, I am 50-50 about RH Bill. I am pro-RH Bill for the same reasons you have. However, I am anti-RH Bill, because honestly, we Filipinos are not yet ready.”

    – Stick to the point, okay??!! Peace!

  36. @Gus

    Ang dami mong sinabi!! Well, let us break down some of them so you can shove what you said into the throats of that erring prof and his sentinels:

    “i bet you CAN’T write like that, hello. hahaha, sorry ha, pero basahin mo nga mga hirit mo sa baba, yun ang ayusin mo. at least si Cy, nag iisip kaya nakakapagsulat ng maayos na sagot. tsk”

    – Maybe Sir Agui couldn’t write well because he’s already panicking. He’s now busted. =) And oh, my writing’s not yet up to par. I spent 20 minutes hacking it.

    “and please stick with your idol bishops Bastes and Odchimar. Nakakahiya kasi kung idadamay mo pa si Thomas Aquinas. Nakakahiya.”

    – FOR THE WIN!!! =)

    “You, Aguedo Florence, is a quintessential obscurantist coward. These students pay you tons of money for a liberating and liberative education, and you can only offer them ‘consistency of thought’? Please disabuse your mind: you’re not a professor, you are a sheep herder. You don’t treat your students as people, you treat them like sheep. “We guide our students through the narrow road” — how true. What you do is intellectual corruption. It makes me cringe that you are giving even theology a bad name.”

    – How the ^&%&^ did he get his graduate degrees, by the way? Baka kinalye na lang niya yun? Eh yun na ang nakagawian niya e. Ratiocination seems very alien to him. By the way. He should pay back the students who don’t like the way he taught.

    “hello, akala ko kaya mong pangatawanan ang pagiging moralista mo? now you’re saying na dahil ginagawa ng schools ang pagbibigay ng incentives, OK na yun?”

    – Huli siya. He probably forgot that incentives should be there for a reason.

    Incentives = suhol = bribe. Simple lang yan.

    – Hindi naman by definition. But I have, at least, tried (difficultly) to show that the incentive is tantamount to a mental bribe. It short-circuits the educational process.

    “Medyo bullshit din ang analogy mo na ‘sharing tinapay with a fellow protester’”

    – He can only see the students as his fellow protesters. As loudspeakers of his views. NOT as students.

    “in short, nilaro niya ang estudyante niya to amplify his real stand. gusto nya palabasin na may groundswell against RH. gusto nyang bumango ang dating nya sa mga frayleng amo niya. may incentive ba siyang ibibigay sa pro-RH? malamang wala.”

    – My point too.

    WELL SAID. 😉 although I recommend you cut down on the red herring the others bait you with. 😉

    • thanks, Cy. sorry pero sa ‘red herring’ na lang kasi ako nakakakuha ng konting excitement sa debateng ito, nakaka-bore na kasi mga argumento nila eh, HAHA 🙂

      • “sorry pero sa ‘red herring’ na lang kasi ako nakakakuha ng konting excitement sa debateng ito,”

        I don’t mean that you place too plenty of red herrings. I mean that you should ignore the red herrings of others and steer them back to the main topic (Sir Agui’s actions).

        Anyway. That was before.

        Now, shoot all the red fish you want, if you’re looking for action; the issue, maybe, is not only Sir Agui’s actions; the issue now is the deficiency of REASON in the FIlipino Society, especially in the…. =)

        “nakaka-bore na kasi mga argumento nila eh, HAHA”

        Wait for Sir Agui. Tire out his underlings first and the superintendent will emerge. Hayan, iba na ang topic (lack of REASON na). =)

  37. @aiz

    “Why don’t you just respect Prof. Jalin and his views?”

    Don’t tell me what to do! And as for his views, they should be analyzed independently of the mental state of the one who said them. DID YOUR LOGIC TEACHER TEACH YOU A THING??!!

  38. mas maganda kung sa fb fanpage at website ng UST magkaroon ng debate para nakikita ng mga pari maging ng mga propesor nito ang kaengengan na sinimulan ng isang bulok na kamatis mula sa kanilang hanay. ^^

  39. Pingback: Uphold Academic Freedom in USTe « The Allegiance

  40. after reading the heated debate (mostly on Cy’s end), i realized one thing: Sir Agui need not to defend himself from the “FUCK YOUs”, etc… a smart person who will read, has read, and is reading the thread above can pick out who is being moral, humane and educated from the one who is NOT.

    Sir Agui did what he had to do to instill morality to us thomasians. he did not force or threatened anyone to post anything on whatever website. he gave us the freedom to exercise our own will and expression to what we see fit re the RH BILL ISSUE.

    it just so happened that a number of us thomasians DON’T AGREE to 1) the giving out of condoms and/or 2) the provisions in the latest RH BILL. what he did cannot be considered as BUYING OF VOTES come election period because he gave us a CHOICE.

    this debate does not call for foul words but if some people choose to sound arrogant and poorly educated, wala na po tayo magagawa doon. SANA NAGING PROF MO RIN SI SIR AGUI PARA HINDI KA SANA NAGMUMURA NG GANYAN NGAYON. 🙂

    God Bless Philippines…

    • You just missed the point four times.

      1) Your first paragraph is about the difference between the moral and the immoral ones.

      2) Your second paragraph is about freedom of your will.

      3) Your third is about the statistical bent of Thomasians towards anti-RH thinking.

      4) Your fourth is about policies regarding foul language.

      None of these is related to the main topic – is what Prof. Jalin has done appropriate – meaning, is the action of OPENLY offering incentives for an anti-RH view (while none for pro-RH) appropriate in a university setting?

      My main argument: it is not; because it’s against the merit system; one of its logical consequences is that a shaky anti-RH argument will get points while a well-constructed pro-RH argument won’t. Also, he should have used PERSUASION rather than INCENTIVES if he is really a prof worth his title and the subject he teaches. After all, UST students are ADULTS at a more advanced stage of moral development, and not CHILDREN to be offered candies and cookies (figurative for incentives).

      How did I come to conclude that he doesn’t like PERSUASION? Because he dislikes debate. He said it himself.

      Ay, oo nga pala.

      Maybe I should want to be his student, at least for a while. After all, for the past few days I took him more seriously than any student he had ever did.

    • Pahabol:

      “Sir Agui did what he had to do to instill morality to us thomasians. he did not force or threatened anyone to post anything on whatever website.”

      – A bribe, ipso facto, is neither forceful nor threatening. But it is still a bribe. I believe his offering of incentives based on side taken (and not on cogency of reasoning) is a form of mental bribery.

      “a smart person who will read, has read, and is reading the thread above can pick out who is being moral, humane and educated from the one who is NOT.”

      – A smart person will ferret out the real issues from the smokeballs. Even if it is couched in harsh language, if it makes logical sense, a smart person should choose to accept that rather than a sweet-sounding but poorly argued one.

  41. I don’t really like what he did. Some of my colleagues fell into the bait of giving appetizer for bashing RH-Bill. It’s because he gave a main dish that doesn’t have enough satisfaction.

    Okay, appetizers = incentive, main dish = grades. I mean that he give low grades for his students. I can’t believe that my THEO grade is just as equal to my Math Grade. Okay I suck at Math I could understand that, but Theology?! He rarely go to class for crying out loud. I can’t learn something from “God” if he is always absent.

    (And I heard that during our class, he’s in Starbucks drinking coffee.)

    He hid behind his students, ordered them to “post” anti-RH bill comments, give incentives to those who agree on him and fail those who disagree.

    YES, you read it right people. HE WILL FAIL THOSE HE WILL KNOW DISAGREEING WITH HIM! Very stupid idea if you ask me. He imposed ideas to his students, and anyone who would counter or disagree will fail due to that reason.

    Is this a work of a professor, a professor who reached a certain degree?

    I pity you, Mr. Jalin, for doing such to the students.

    Oh and by the way, I’m an atheist. I was raised in a Catholic family, but I don’t give a damn on it on the teachings impose on me. Too archaic. Too backward. And this is one of the examples of why I turned my back against this religion… They’re too much attached on their beliefs that they couldn’t accept new ideas.

    Come on people. This is 2011 already. UST’s 400 years should have teach you something, Mr. Jalin.

    PS. I am one of his students. I am posting this hoping someone would understand me and my sentiments. Up until now, I am not learning something interesting in his class. Maybe it’s because I’m an atheist.

      • @Cy

        Let me quote him way back at our class, just as the same time he gave us the work for incentives.

        “Pag sinuportahan niyo ang RH-Bill, ibabagsak ko kayo.”

        I support RH Bill, and is it “moral” to just fail me if caught supporting the bill?

        As I heard from other classes, there are certain times that he wouldn’t also come to their class. It’s like Theology was a break time for them.

        And another thing, I have a friend of mine who is also under his class in Theology. I heard that they were given a quiz which he didn’t fully explain to them. “Final quiz na daw yun.” My friend said. “Just because of the issue, he told a lot of crap in our class. I don’t know the whole statement because I was half-awake that time. And after that, he walked out and got angry to us. Now after that quiz, I don’t know what will happen to my grade, and to everyone’s grade.”

        And Cy, I don’t think he would be agree to meet you personally, because, let me quote him again.

        “I would only agree to have a debate with the Akbayan people if I can convert them to my believe my beliefs but if not, it’s useless.”

        And if I am found out posting this here at your blog, I do not know what will happen to me in my class. Most of my classmates are angry at him for “hiding” behind our backs when they comment in the Akbayan page.

        I could fail his subject if he founds out that I am exposing him. But let me just say this, what I post here is true. Whatever happens to me, I do not care. I have exposed his wrongdoings, and I shall not fall back to my words.

    • AKBAYAN YOUTH!!!

      NEWSFLASH!!!

      “YES, you read it right people. HE WILL FAIL THOSE HE WILL KNOW DISAGREEING WITH HIM! Very stupid idea if you ask me. He imposed ideas to his students, and anyone who would counter or disagree will fail due to that reason.”

      AKBAYAN YOUTH!!!

      NEWSFLASH!!!

      NEWSFLASH!!!

      “YES, you read it right people. HE WILL FAIL THOSE HE WILL KNOW DISAGREEING WITH HIM! Very stupid idea if you ask me. He imposed ideas to his students, and anyone who would counter or disagree will fail due to that reason.”

  42. Yes, don’t worry. I’ll have fun listening to his blabbering inside my class about his Almighty God.

    I know that Catholics have a God, but I don’t think he has the same god as them.

    Thanks for reading. I hope my identity wouldn’t be revealed, or at least until I passed his subject. 😀

    Kudos to your notes, I’ll wait for it. 🙂

  43. Pingback: Theological Incentives – The Case of a Theology Professor, the RH Bill, and Some “Goodies”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s