Akbayan Youth Statement on the Admission made by UST Prof Jalin that He Gave Students Incentives for Anti-RH Stand

We, from the youth wing of Akbayan party welcome the decision of University of Santo Tomas Theology Professor Aguedo Florence Jalin to surface and own up to the issue of “troll anti-reproductive health messages” made at our party’s fan page by certain UST students allegedly in exchange for extra grades. While we believe the decision to come out was the result of the students’ strong demand for the “architect” of the questioned action to surface, we nonetheless welcome Jalin’s decision to go public and face the music. His formal admission as attested by a letter he sent to Akbayan youth through our blog (akbayanyouth.wordpress.com) confirmed many things.

First, he admitted that all the students from the identified classes were his confirming that there was indeed a concerted effort to post/flood Akbayan’s fan page with troll messages. He also admitted that the action’s objective is to “bring across the message of opposition” to the RH bill disproving previous contentions that the students were merely exercising their right to register their opinion on the issue.

Second, he admitted that the messages were specifically “designed” “to show consistency of thoughts” saying they were based on Circular No. 2010-31 issued on 26 July 2010 by His Emminence Bishop nereo P. Odchimar, DD, the president of CBCP. Nowhere in Jalin’s letter did it say that he provided or urged his students to read the proposed reproductive health bill filed before Congress before formulating their own opinions on the issue.

Again, this proves another important point. It proves that the “anti-RH messages” made at Akbayan’s fan page were not random, spontaneous and/or unrestrained from undue influence. It proves our long held postulation that many of the posts made by alleged anti-RH UST students used the same template and arguments, which we asserted resulted to an influx of anti-RH statements devoid of new dimensions and perspectives.

Third, Jalin virtually admitted to the charge that he gave incentives to students in exchange for the posting of anti-RH messages. He defended this as an “age-old system that he claimed to have originated “with the birthing of universities and other educational institutions.”

Fourth, his decision to decline our invitation to a debate over the merits of the reproductive health bill exposed his intellectual dishonesty. He would rather hide behind the backs of his students and treat them as transmission belts of his own opinions than articulate it on his own. The platform of discourse would have been a good venue for him to redeem his reputation as a member of the academic community. Yet, his utter disdain for debates on a very important issue such reproductive rights squandered this opportunity.

Nonetheless, we thank Jalin for saving us the time in clearing many of the things surrounding this issue. It confirmed that he abused his position as a teacher. He privileged a certain position over another, and hindered the development and expression of a counter-opinion on the issue at hand.

We also fear that he obstructed free opinion in the school, which he is supposed to foster and develop as a teacher. More so, he deployed and misused his position and power as an educator by taking advantage of his asymmetrical power relations over the students to extract fake consensus and/or opinions using extra grades as an enticement.

Again, we reiterate, the students are not at fault. This is also not an assault against the UST institution. The core issue here is Professor Aguedo Florence Jalin and his unwarranted action to orchestrate a cheap and desperate plan to oppose the reproductive health bill. At the very least, Jalin must issue an apology to the UST community and all the students belonging to the said classes who were undeservedly dragged into this controversy.

To his fate and stature as a member of the broad academic community, we leave the decision to the hands of the UST administration, which we hope will act in an impartial and judicious manner. Jalin’s unethical and irresponsible conduct as a teacher reflects badly on the university. We would like to believe that Jalin is but a minority in a university that professes faith to the teachings of St. Tomas Aquinas. We also would like to believe that the university’s faculty population does not share his perspectives.

Lastly, we encourage dialogue and free exchange of perspectives on the issue of the reproductive health bill based on well-grounded arguments, postulations and dispassionate discourse. The goal of discourse is to deepen our understanding of an issue’s different facets and hopefully, arrive at sound decisions and conclusions to better our lives. ###


Letter of UST Theology Professor Aguedo Florence Jalin to Akbayan youth.


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.



3 thoughts on “Akbayan Youth Statement on the Admission made by UST Prof Jalin that He Gave Students Incentives for Anti-RH Stand

    ni Aguedo Florence Jalin noong Biyernes, Pebrero 25, 2011 nang 7:46 PM


    This light is best absorbed and understood via the negativa-approach. It is not the kind of light: that looks at population as a headache (much less a misery); that embraces the RHBill particularly Section 10 and expresses the line “I am a Catholic”; that interprets incentives as a total stranger in the integral life of the academe; that distributes condoms for free and still claims protection/safety instead of exploitation; that says pray to your God if you have one but do not force me to have one; that says I am a UST professor (Sir Atanacio) and I will not mention the other professors who gave incentives to their students when there are not many (except me)- a kind of lie and deliberate media-fishing; that claims I am a Thomasian alumnus and very much pro the Bill (in toto); that states I have read the entire Bill when what is presented by their towering gurus were simply statements for pros; that degrades the clergy for safeguarding the society’s moral heritage; that makes the approved essential medicines and supplies and/or medical contracepts as their baal; that 3 Billion pesos will be sourced out from peoples’ taxes to fund the Bill’s programs but not to increase the budget for State Universities and Colleges; that declares fear for debate is tantamount to no education; and that says they are fighting for my (UST) students but the same fighters are more out than inside the classroom reducing education to slogans, placards, polyetos, megaphone and blackbands…Turning black into white goes on and on…The dark and blurring scenario continues. But the fact remains, there is no moral light in the above situations.

    What now is moral light? It is not man-made. It is infused by a higher Being. It is the light utilized by our ancestors and fore-bearers in establishing and maintaining the civilizations of our time. It is the light deeply seated not in the letters of the law but in its spirit. It is the light continuously put off by students who claim responsibility for the nation’s families. It is the light of a believer who fears God. It is the light that gives the natural dictate to protect life in all its forms. It is the light that makes us become for reasons of who we are. It is the light that one continues to deny.


    The moral light is visible only with moral eyes. These eyes fixed their gazed upon God. And they are honed not by rejecting God as if you have caused your existence. By the way nemo dat quod non habet. But I say dum spero spiro. My hope remains that everyone receives this light so that as we walk the alley of humanity we will safely say we have done our best to come close to the Source. One cannot give or produce this light just as one cannot have these eyes with laws encumbering the natural course of life. Play as man but not as God. We have to accept that without God one cannot have moral eyes. No amount of street activism, baal(ic) servitude (from Gustavo Gutierrez Essential Writings) and Marxian insights (from Marxism and Religion: A Fusion of Horizon) will form the moral eyes.

    There is only one and only fount of these eyes- God.


    Our (my students and I) stand is the stand of the Bishops- led by His Excellency Most Rev. Nereo Odchimar. They have spoken and so we have listened. Those who rebuff are not expected to have listened for how can they listen when propitious benefits are enthroned in the Bill that candy-coats an act of annihilating.
    It is imperative to follow the stand of the Bishops not detached from reality but the reality itself. And incentives do not limit the efficacy of this choice. As vanguards of “student-democracy” you know what I mean. When all else fail and seem not working we return to our anchor(s) – moral light, eyes and stand. Again, I am Sir Agui.

    I will instruct you and guide you along the best pathway for your life- Psalms 32:8

  2. Sir Agui,

    Just get over the fact that you lost the recent celestial elections for the position of “the right hand of the Father”. =)

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s