“Professional Squatter” isn’t so bad; at least it sounds like it has some kind of a work ethic attached to it.
A tweet I posted about a week ago – in an attempt to channel my inner George Carlin
Of course if you’re Filipino, you shouldn’t wonder what prompted this jape. If you’re not well, here are some links to explain why “squatters are hitting the headlines nowadays.
So basically, as I understood it, Mayor Herbert Bautista decided to [finally] crack down on what he called the “professional squatters” that plagued his City (QC)… and that snowballed into a whole debate questioning if they should be kicked out.
Take note, these are people who do not own the land which they live in – and there’s a debate whether or not it’s justified to kick them out. Take a minute to let that sink in for a bit. Read More
So, in continuation of the first part I’ll now attempt to narrow things down and focus more on marriage and relationships.
Here are excerpts from the first few paragraphs of an online article called the History of Marriage in Western Civilization
When we look at the marriage customs of our ancestors, we discover several striking facts. For example, for the most of Western history, marriage was not a mere personal matter concerning only husband and wife, but rather the business of their two families which brought them together. Most marriages, therefore, were arranged. Moreover, the wife usually had much fewer rights than her husband and was expected to be subservient to him. To a considerable extent, marriage was also an economic arrangement. There was little room for romantic love, and even simple affection was not considered essential. Procreation and cooperation were the main marital duties.
On the other hand, it may surprise many modern couples to learn that in earlier times divorce was often easily granted. Here again, men usually had the advantage when they could simply dismiss their wives, but in many instances women could also sue for divorce. In ancient Rome couples could even divorce each other by mutual agreement, a possibility that has not yet returned to all European countries. Another notable historical fact is the nearly universal stress on the necessity of marriage and the resulting pressure on single persons to get married. This pressure was partially lifted only under the influence of Christianity which, at least for some time, found a special virtue in celibacy. Christian doctrines have, of course, also had their effects on marriage itself, and some of these will be discussed below.
So take all the boldface sentences and in a nutshell you get two important points.
- Civil/legal unions pre-date religious sacraments
- Marriages, and their terminations – were mere [civil/legal] practicalities. Read More
It’s interesting to know that upon reading my stance on divorce – one may assume that I’m a person of faith – I’m not. I don’t even know if I should take that as a compliment or insult to be perfectly honest.
So in this first of what I imagine to be a multi-part series, I would want to make clear that my seeming steadfast defense of the sacrament of matrimony doesn’t necessarily mean that I actually believe in what it stands for. Well, I do; I just don’t think it’s necessary.
Of course, stating it that way makes me seem utterly against it. That’s why I’m going to try to get a bit thorough – all I ask is for your patience and open mind in reading every nuance that I will mention throughout the series – which I must warn you – could lack proper cohesion Read More
The article under scrutiny: Why Pinoy Pride will never save the Philippines
Summary of my opinion:
There’s no problem being proud of successful Filipinos – the problem starts when this “pride” causes us to immediately assume and attribute our heritage as the cause of [their] success.
What matters ultimately is motivation and action. But these are individual traits, not something that being Filipino, Japanese, American, etc. will cause one to be. Read More
So I finally got to jotting down what I felt/feel about the whole issue on a possible “divorce law” – given of course I had just watched another show which was discussing it. And that my opinion is based solely on a very limited understanding on the scope of the matter.
In any case, the intro that triggered the post went something like this.
“Now that we have the RH law, it’s high time that we discuss divorce.”
It’s interesting because I used to be apathetic towards this particular issue. And I guess I still am, emotionally speaking. My Mom is happily re-married (I’m not even sure if she had a divorce or annulment), and I don’t believe I’ve had any uneasy feelings about the whole thing. So I’m inclined to think that for me, as long as a person’s happy, then they can do whatever the hell they want.
But as a “logical exercise” I just can’t get on board with the the point of the “divorce bill” (and possibly the concept in and of itself) and I’ll tell you why. Read More