There are a hundred and one serious socio-political realities now obtaining in the country that beg for attention and resolution. These ranges from the search for truth on the legitimacy of the present Malacañang occupant to the acceptability of governance that comes therefrom. There are valid issues about the abuse of public funds together with the raising of taxes to fill up their losses. There is also the question of more and more people having less and less to eat, some engaging in criminality or simply leaving the country.
Then comes the exasperation of many with the way the present administration treats people who want to tell the truth they know, who have grievances they want heard, who go to the streets in protest only to be met with violent dispersals. Meanwhile, the same administration thinks and invents a good number of offensive moves that toy with human dignity and human rights.
These socio-political realities and others too many to mention have not only their ethical implications in the sphere of philosophy but also their moral relevance in the realm of theology. This means that there are two ways of looking at them and evaluating the same. They can be examined by strength of reason or in the light of faith.
Faith in the supernatural order and reason in the natural sphere are two guiding principles that can show what is right or wrong in such socio-political realities. Considering what is social as well as what is political directly or eventually affect human persons, it is the height of errancy to even think that socio-political realities are beyond the reach of ethical principles and/or moral norms.
To be more concrete, when a politician lies, cheats and/or steals, this goes against the mandate of ethics as well as against the imperative of morals about telling the truth. Being honest, respecting what belongs to others, just because one is a politician, this is definitely not exempted from what ethics and/or what morals say to all sane, thinking and accountable people.
One can and may respond to such serious disturbing socio-political realities with a call to patience, sacrifice, humility and other pious supernatural appeals. Another can and may speak on the same adverse factors by forwarding the relentless quest for truth and justice, the realistic correction of flagrant misdeeds, the due punishment of proven culprits. Both approaches are right.
In its desire to justify the issuance of
Presidential Decree 1017, the Administration appears to have been looking for the proverbial Tom, Dick and Harry to brand them as destabilizers, coup plotters and other fall guys. And among those said it want to confer such a distinction upon is my little self. That is why I was informed that in the order of battle of the government, my poor name is clearly listed.
Honest, I do not know what I have done to merit the distinction.
Among other things, this would mean that I am one of those who want the present administration driven out of Malacañang by any conceivable means—with the use of guns, gold, plus guts. I must be then counted as someone having secret meetings, drawing secret plans and making secret moves to oust the Malacañang occupant and entourage.
This is something for the movies.
Such is one of the reported findings of the members of the intelligence community assigned by the President. The wonder of wonders is the claim that the basis of this supposedly intelligent finding is my leadership in the “Silent Majority Prayer Movement”—which is an informal gathering of people open to all groups and individuals desirous of praying for the nation in turmoil and disarray.
If this is the kind of intelligence the country has, heaven help us!
Present during the first and so far the only gathering of the movement were no less than fourteen bishops, archbishops and a cardinal. If the intelligence community would only be fair, it should include all of them in the roll of honor. Why discriminate them and treat me with preferential attention?
The most serious agenda as thrice already enjoined by the CBCP is the search for truth in the 2004 National Elections. The more relevant issue to resolve is where have big public funds gone. The very intriguing question begging for an answer is why the gag order made on public officials who know the truth about suspect dealings of the government.
Everything else appears to be but a diversionary tactic.