The grand inquisitor

In the news: three members of TV network ABC-5 die in the line of duty. Everyone is sorry for ABC’s loss.

Garcillano lieutenants promoted.

Newbreak on military rebels that changed sides, and the political dexterity of Manuel Villar.

Palau prepared for border talks with Philippines.

In the punditocracy, my column is The grand inquisitor. A reader responded with this criticism, which I answered here.

Amando Doronila says ethical questions hounding congressmen won’t go away.

The Inquirer editorial condemns the New People’s Army for attacking the Army on Mayon Volcano.

The Business Mirror editorial says Philippine authorities have (typically) overreacted in response to the London terrorist bombing threat. Read Slate’s commentary on how even American authorities are confused and unclear about their own regulations for airlines.

Billy Esposo optimistically hopes Bolante’s cutting a deal to spill the beans.

Bong Austero on the perils of multiculturalism: how to enforce dress codes at work?

The Nation of Thailand points to Thaksin’s divide-and-conquer strategy. Sounds familiar.

In the blogosphere, Ricky Carandang takes a poke at a bigot. Other bloggers who also did: maharhar and Leaflens and salamangkiero. Also, Out of my mind.

RG Cruz ponders talk of the President’s being a dipsomaniac.

Iloilo City Boy: political quarrels over tourism pork. Peryodistang Pinay: gerrymandering revival in Cebu. a nagueño in the blogosphere on what dismantling Imperial Manila really requires. Istambay sa Mindanao on freak waves.

Coffee With Amee and Uniffors are both impressed by Patricia Evangelista’s Sunday column.

Another Hundred Years Hence begins what should be a highly thought-provoking analysis of the defects of Philippine democracy from a design perspective.

Other stuff: E. San Juan, Jr. on re-mapping the National Democratic imagination.

The Golden Apple Tale: it remains unsolved; the rumored author died, possibly taking the solution to his grave.

Raskln Center for Humane Interfaces attempting to develop the next big leap forward in computer interface design.

Colbert has fun with Wikipedia.

The Rapture Index: creepy stuff!

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

97 comments

4 pings

Skip to comment form

    • jumper on August 15, 2006 at 12:53 pm

    rego,

    usually, people don’t bother to make the distinction, but i think it’s an important thing for us to do. it is only by separating the homosexuality from the homosexual can people who are against homosexuality avoid rejecting and condemning the person as well.

    • manuelbuencamino on August 15, 2006 at 1:52 pm

    Problema kay Cruzzand other bigots like him is they always argue along these lines – I am not against homosexuals per se but…..they should behave in a way acceptable to me. Or let’s say someone like Max Soliven – I am not against Muslims putting up a prayer room but not in my neighborhood. Etc. Etc. Etc.

    Or like that “guidance counselor” who appeared on ANC yesterday. He said, I am gay but I am celibate. I am not against gays I am against homosexual acts. Stupid stupid stupid. What distinguishes homosexuals from heterosexuals or bisexuals is that they have sex with their own sex. The man was obviously confused between binabae and bakla.

    • cvj on August 15, 2006 at 3:42 pm

    jumper, i agree with you that homosexuality is both biological and mental. however, unlike alzheimer’s and parkinson’s, i don’t think it requires a cure.

  1. Somebody should have defined what “homosexuality” is before going into arguments, and saying something said as stupid or not.

    In my dictionary the word means “A sexual attraction to (or sexual relations with) persons of the same sex”.

    So Manuel, that counselor might have been saying that he is sexually attracted to the same sex, but he’s not having sexual relations with them. But in context of the word, he’s still homosexual.

  2. we condemn I. Cruz for being a bigot but most of us don’t realize is that we are bigots ourselves when we use the pejorative term, idiot to people who have challenged our opinions on religion, political beliefs, ideologies and lifestyles.

    He expressed his opinion in the same manner that most of us give our views on issues that we steadfastly believed in regardless whether they reflect the truth or not. If he continues to write with passion against gays and lesbians with the purpose of encouraging other people to condemn them too, then he becomes a bigot.

    It is also the right of MLQ3 to react on his article but take note guys of his message,

    “he is as good a man as anyone from his generation, and i don’t advocate forcing him to change his but also, i won’t change mine. left reasonably alone, both of us could probably focus on other things and agree to disagree, and i’d not foist my views on him -but if we wants to call for a counter-cultural push, then pushing back has to be done, otherwise both he and i would be where he’s happy and i’m not.:”

    • rego on August 15, 2006 at 6:28 pm

    I believe the definition of homosexulaity is not really necessary. The simple question to be ask is that what is really the mnessage of Mr Cruz essay? Becuase to me he wanted gays to behave the way he wanted it to be. And that is a big no no to the gay community. Even gays cannot dictate to his fellow gay ( the same way that heterosexuals dont dictate to their fellow hetero) how he should act in public and in private… Homosexual are just as diverse as the univerese. Just like heterosexuals. You just cannot put homosexuals in a box…much more define a particular set of behaviour standards for them….

    However for those who wanted to be enlightened more about homosexuality, here is something from American Psychological Association:

    What Is Sexual Orientation?

    Sexual Orientation is an enduring emotional, romantic, sexual or affectional attraction to another person. It is easily distinguished
    from other components of sexuality including biological sex, gender
    identity (the psychological sense of being male or female) and the
    social gender role (adherence to cultural norms for feminine and
    masculine behavior).

    Sexual orientation exists along a continuum that ranges from
    exclusive homosexuality to exclusive heterosexuality and includes
    various forms of bisexuality. Bisexual persons can experience
    sexual, emotional and affectional attraction to both their own sex
    and the opposite sex. Persons with a homosexual orientation are
    sometimes referred to as gay (both men and women) or as lesbian
    (women only).

    Sexual orientation is different from sexual behavior because it
    refers to feelings and self-concept. Persons may or may not express
    their sexual orientation in their behaviors.

    What Causes a Person To Have a Particular Sexual Orientation?

    There are numerous theories about the origins of a person’s sexual
    orientation; most scientists today agree that sexual orientation is
    most likely the result of a complex interaction of environmental,
    cognitive and biological factors. In most people, sexual orientation
    is shaped at an early age. There is also considerable recent
    evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn
    hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person’s sexuality.

    In summary, it is important to recognize that there are probably many
    reasons for a person’s sexual orientation and the reasons may be
    different for different people.

    Is Sexual Orientation a Choice?

    No, human beings can not choose to be either gay or straight. Sexual
    orientation emerges for most people in early adolescence without any
    prior sexual experience. Although we can choose whether to act on our
    feelings, psychologists do not consider sexual orientation to be a
    conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed.

    Can Therapy Change Sexual Orientation?

    No. Even though most homosexuals live successful, happy lives, some
    homosexual or bisexual people may seek to change their sexual
    orientation through therapy, sometimes pressured by the influence of
    family members or religious groups to try and do so. The reality is
    that homosexuality is not an illness. It does not require treatment
    and is not changeable. However, not all gay, lesbian, and bisexual
    people who seek assistance from a mental health professional want to
    change their sexual orientation. Gay, lesbian, and bisexual people
    may seek psychological help with the coming out process or for
    strategies to deal with prejudice, but most go into therapy for the
    same reasons and life issues that bring straight people to mental
    health professionals.

    What About So-Called “Conversion Therapies”?

    Some therapists who undertake so-called conversion therapy report
    that they have been able to change their clients’ sexual orientation
    from homosexual to heterosexual. Close scrutiny of these reports
    however show several factors that cast doubt on their claims. For
    example, many of the claims come from organizations with an
    ideological perspective which condemns homosexuality. Furthermore,
    their claims are poorly documented. For example, treatment outcome is
    not followed and reported overtime as would be the standard to test
    the validity of any mental health intervention.

    The American Psychological Association is concerned about such
    therapies and their potential harm to patients. In 1997, the
    Association’s Council of Representatives passed a resolution
    reaffirming psychology’s opposition to homophobia in treatment and
    spelling out a client’s right to unbiased treatment and self-
    determination. Any person who enters into therapy to deal with
    issues of sexual orientation has a right to expect that such therapy
    would take place in a professionally neutral environment absent of
    any social bias.

    Is Homosexuality a Mental Illness or Emotional Problem?

    No. Psychologists, psychiatrists and other mental health
    professionals agree that homosexuality is not an illness, mental
    disorder or an emotional problem. Over 35 years of objective, well-
    designed scientific research has shown that homosexuality, in and
    itself, is not associated with mental disorders or emotional or
    social problems. Homosexuality was once thought to be a mental
    illness because mental health professionals and society had biased
    information.

    In the past the studies of gay, lesbian and bisexual people involved
    only those in therapy, thus biasing the resulting conclusions. When
    researchers examined data about these people who were not in therapy,
    the idea that homosexuality was a mental illness was quickly found to
    be untrue.

    In 1973 the American Psychiatric Association confirmed the importance
    of the new, better designed research and removed homosexuality from
    the official manual that lists mental and emotional disorders. Two
    years later, the American Psychological Association passed a
    resolution supporting the removal.

    For more than 25 years, both associations have urged all mental
    health professionals to help dispel the stigma of mental illness that
    some people still associate with homosexual orientation.

    Can Lesbians, Gay Men, and Bisexuals Be Good Parents?

    Yes. Studies comparing groups of children raised by homosexual and by
    heterosexual parents find no developmental differences between the
    two groups of children in four critical areas: their intelligence,
    psychological adjustment, social adjustment, and popularity with
    friends. It is also important to realize that a parent’s sexual
    orientation does not indicate their children’s.

    Another myth about homosexuality is the mistaken belief that gay men
    have more of a tendency than heterosexual men to sexually molest
    children. There is no evidence to suggest that homosexuals molest
    children more often than heterosexuals.

    Why Do Some Gay Men, Lesbians and Bisexuals Tell People About Their
    Sexual Orientation?

    Because sharing that aspect of themselves with others is important to
    their mental health. In fact, the process of identity development for
    lesbians, gay men and bisexuals called “coming out”, has been found
    to be strongly related to psychological adjustment—the more positive
    the gay, lesbian, or bisexual identity, the better one’s mental
    health and the higher one’s self-esteem.

    Why Is the “Coming Out” Process Difficult for Some Gay, Lesbian and
    Bisexual People?

    For some gay and bisexual people the coming out process is difficult,
    for others it is not. Often lesbian, gay and bisexual people feel
    afraid, different, and alone when they first realize that their
    sexual orientation is different from the community norm. This is
    particularly true for people becoming aware of their gay, lesbian, or
    bisexual orientation as a child or adolescent, which is not uncommon.
    And, depending on their families and where they live, they may have
    to struggle against prejudice and misinformation about
    homosexuality.

    Children and adolescents may be particularly vulnerable to the
    deleterious effects of bias and stereotypes. They may also fear being
    rejected by family, friends, co-workers, and religious institutions.
    Some gay people have to worry about losing their jobs or being
    harassed at school if their sexual orientation became well known.

    Unfortunately, gay, lesbian and bisexual people are at a higher risk
    for physical assault and violence than are heterosexuals. Studies
    done in California in the mid 1990s showed that nearly one-fifth of
    all lesbians who took part in the study and more than one-fourth of
    all gay men who participated had been the victim of a hate crime
    based on their sexual orientation. In another California study of
    approximately 500 young adults, half of all the young men
    participating in the study admitted to some form of anti-gay
    aggression from name-calling to physical violence.

    What Can Be Done to Overcome the Prejudice and Discrimination the Gay
    Men, Lesbians, and Bisexuals Experience?

    Research has found that the people who have the most positive
    attitudes toward gay men, lesbians and bisexuals are those who say
    they know one or more gay, lesbian or bisexual person well—often as a
    friend or co-worker. For this reason, psychologists believe negative
    attitudes toward gay people as a group are prejudices that are not
    grounded in actual experiences but are based on stereotypes and
    prejudice. Furthermore, protection against violence and
    discrimination are very important, just as they are for any other
    minority groups. Some states include violence against an individual
    on the basis of his or her sexual orientation as a “hate crime” and
    ten U.S. states have laws against discrimination on the basis of
    sexual orientation.

    Why is it Important for Society to be Better Educated About
    Homosexuality?

    Educating all people about sexual orientation and homosexuality is
    likely to diminish anti-gay prejudice. Accurate information about
    homosexuality is especially important to young people who are first
    discovering and seeking to understand their sexuality—whether
    homosexual, bisexual, or heterosexual. Fears that access to such
    information will make more people gay have no validity—information
    about homosexuality does not make someone gay or straight.

    Are All Gay and Bisexual Men HIV Infected?

    No. This is a commonly held myth. In reality, the risk of exposure to
    HIV is related to a person’s behavior, not their sexual orientation.
    What’s important to remember about HIV/AIDS is it is a preventable
    disease through the use of safe sex practices and by not using
    drugs.

  3. rego,
    homosexuals in the US from that of the Philippines’.

    Gays, lesbians here do not have relationships of any kind, romantic or sexual with straight guys.

    They live, “marry” or have relationships with people in the same sexual orientation. So they would not prey on young men. Priests who abused young boys are pedophiles and not gays.

    Our gays fall for straight or bisexual but never in their kabaros not unless the straight eventually becomes gay due to close association or osmosis. For them, it is incest. So we cannot apply the theories in the East to the Philippine scenario.

  4. correction West.

    • arikasikis on August 16, 2006 at 1:27 am

    If satire (a technique of writing to ridicule) is legitimate form of criticism, then we should expect that debate will deteriorate into mere name-calling. It is difficult for me to understand a minority in his sexual preference would defend ridiculing because this minority has in the past felt that they do not deserved being ridiculed. If the gay people do not deserved to be ridiculed, I dont see the logic why other people deserved to be ridiculed, unless mr. quezon thinks that the gay people or anyone could be ridiculed as long as they can ridicule back.

    That idea is too french and too petty (that is an example of ridiculing the french). Rizal was born 100 years ago. I dont think that I should believe in his words without question. A view is not automatically correct just because it is Rizal’s.

    • cvj on August 16, 2006 at 2:26 am

    Satire helps people think. In that way, it helps the discussion. Intelligent people can normally distinguish satire from crude name calling. In these weblogs, i’ve read good satire from both the pro and anti Arroyo camps.

    • jumper on August 16, 2006 at 2:53 am

    “jumper, i agree with you that homosexuality is both biological and mental. however, unlike alzheimer’s and parkinson’s, i don’t think it requires a cure.”

    i KNEW i should have put in the disclaimer that i was thinking of putting in! 🙂

    i was wondering if i should put in a note saying that my comparison of homosexuality to alzheimer’s (and also to personality types) is for illustrative purposes only (to illustrate the “mental”-ness of both) and in no way am i implying that homosexuality is a disease that needs to be cured. but then i thought the inclusion of “personality types” in the comparison, them not being diseases, would be clear enough. i guess not.

    so, for the sake of clarity: IN NO UNCERTAIN WAY am i implying that homosexuality is a disease when i mentioned alzheimer’s and parkinson’s in my illustration. i mentioned those, along with personality types, for illustrative purposes only, to illustrate the “mental”-ness of homosexuality.

    • rego on August 16, 2006 at 8:36 am

    “rego, homosexuals in the US from that of the Philippines’…”

    Ca t,

    I dont why you are ponting this out to me, I some how know this for a fact. I live in New York City for five years now….

    But wait a minute, did n’t the former New Jersey Governor. Mc Greevey had a relationship with a straight until it became a big scandal that lead to the former resignation????

    The homosexuals that you mentioned to be in relationship with another gay are just one type of homosexual. If you go by teh definition of APA that sexual oreintation is a continuum, ( Dr Albert Kinsey, got it from the golden globe nominated for best picture movie “Kinsey” also espouses the same continuum concept) they are the types that belongs on far end of the continuum. But then there are other types that lies on rest of the continuum…(until it reaches the other end where the exclusive heterosexual belongs….). If you go the the strip bars for gays in NYC, you will notice that the male dancers varies from very effiminate to a masculine looking gay, to bixeuals to straights. And even colors, too. They have to cater to varied choices of the customer. So for me it is not true that only Filipino gays go for straights. There are Americans and other races who would go for straights or at least straight acting men.

    As I ve its just very very difficult to generealized gays the same way that you cannot generalized heterosexuals…thats why there is no way that you can stereotype gays. There is really no way that you can exactly define homosexuals….They are just too diverse just like hetero even in there choice for sexual partners.

    • jumper on August 16, 2006 at 9:17 am

    cvj,

    i think one needs not only to be intelligent, but also able to take things impersonally, in order to appreciate satire. it’s one thing to understand the satire, and it’s another thing not to feel offended by the satire.

    unfortunately, i think Asians, including Filipinos, in general haven’t yet mastered the “art” of not always taking things personally. hence the tendency of “debates” and “discussions” to degenerate into name-calling and insult-hurling, because things always get personal.

    all the more i think that it is important for us to learn not to equate a person with his beliefs, ideas, or sexual orientation. ideas and beliefs can be agreed with or rejected, but the people holding those ideas should ALWAYS be respected.

    • cvj on August 16, 2006 at 9:34 am

    jumper, that’s a good point. i guess that explains why satire is mistakenly classified by some to be on the same level as name-calling.

    • mlq3 on August 16, 2006 at 10:50 am
      Author

    arikisakis, give me the french over red state americans any day, but that’s just me. and really, if you disown satirical writing then you and i obviously can’t see eye to eye, in large part because it involves a question of nuance. writers in part choose which writing traditions they will consider themselves heirs to: and to my mind one of the greatest of writing traditions is that of the satire, as well as the tradition of the pamphlet. on one hand you have gogol, and swift, and the filipino propagandists, you have so many writers who look at the foibles of the grand and rich, like p.g. wodehouse and even orwell and samuel johnson and tom wolf and so.

    satire -making fun, poking fun, even mocking- are the armaments of the weak versus the strong and as long as there are those who are stronger and use their strength versus the weak, you bet you strong have to grin and bear it because they’ve been shoving their weight around for centuries, with fatal consequences for the weak.

  5. Mc Greevey resigned because he was threatened of sexual harassment by the guy Cipel whom he had an adulterous affair.
    The man was his employee (and that what’s makes it a crime), appointed in a position where citizenship is a must and he isn’t.
    He is now divorced from his wife and has a domestic partner (another gay).

    What am saying is, people here are not yet open to come out from
    their closet because that much talked about toleration and or anti=-gay discrimination doesn’t really exist in the same way that racial discrimination is still real as the sun.
    Only a night ago, it was announced that more than 700 soldiers from Iraq were sent home because they were found to be gays.

    • Dita on August 16, 2006 at 4:15 pm

    Manolo,
    I cried when I read your article. Thanks for giving us a voice. Being a homosexual at early 20s, I know what’s it like to be character asassinated by obssesive republicans like Isagani Cruz. Sad but I’m really good friends with his daughter.

    • juan makabayan on August 16, 2006 at 4:17 pm

    mlq3,

    hey, ok lang, relaks. If gays can be gays, let bigots be bigots.

  6. btw,

    1)what’s black & white of the gay issue?
    2)does it now color your views in my view as not so black & white as when it was not factored in as before? yes, not less but differently, how? i don’t know, more humanely, better
    3)but you’re a man, manly in more ways than one, more honest than most, for one …
    4)”go and multiply?”, Isagani’s fear/view is understandable, in my view, can he tolerate one gay? but not a gay invasion/explosion? funny but reminded me of my pa who I heard muttered to himself “bakla” with a hint of a chuckle while watching, of all people, Mon Tulfo on TV! but pa definitely was not a bigot, commended a gay for sacrifing to feed a family.
    5)Go, gay or not gay, out and multiply the love in your hearts, for love conquers all.

    • Jeg on August 16, 2006 at 5:51 pm

    satire -making fun, poking fun, even mocking- are the armaments of the weak versus the strong and as long as there are those who are stronger and use their strength versus the weak, you bet you strong have to grin and bear it because they’ve been shoving their weight around for centuries, with fatal consequences for the weak.

    Hear, hear!

    In these weblogs, i’ve read good satire from both the pro and anti Arroyo camps.

    And some really bad ones as well.

  7. rego,

    Illusions, delusions, distortions, pressumptions, assumptions, theories, conclusions, beliefs,

    Is homosexuality a sickness? No? Who’s to say? Does it matter?
    ——-

    “The new pope has been widely quoted as saying that moral relativism is to blame for some of the more destructive “isms” of the last century — fascism, communism, Nazism, terrorism, even social liberalism…”

    Is ‘homosexualism’ a cultural wave what Isagani Cruz afraid of?

    • bless on August 17, 2006 at 12:28 am

    What’s the fuss about? The former SC justice just articulated the opinions of millions of people who shun the gay lifestyle. The overreaction to this one article has probably done more harm than what was used as reason for castigating Mr. Cruz.

    • bless on August 17, 2006 at 12:31 am

    The infamous Soozyhopper even picked it up!
    http://soozzyhopper.blogspot.com

    • cvj on August 17, 2006 at 12:47 am

    It is precisely because ‘millions of people’ agree with Mr. Cruz that his statements cannot go unchallenged. His prejudice (along with those who share his views) has no place in a civilized society.

  8. cvj,
    “His prejudice (along with those who share his views) has no place in a civilized society.”

    What differentiates being prejudiced from drawing the line in accordance with a moral standard?

    • cvj on August 17, 2006 at 1:18 am

    juan makabayan, i suppose it would depend on the ‘frame’ that a person holds. One person’s prejudice within a particular frame is another person’s ‘moral standard’ within another frame. Not all frames should be considered equally valid though. The Pope is right to warn against moral relativism, which is why i believe society has to work towards a morality that is in keeping with the times.

    • bless on August 17, 2006 at 1:54 am

    “Not all frames should be considered equally valid though.”
    HOW ARROGANT! AND YOUR OWN FRAME IS GREATER THAN / WORTHIER THAN OTHERS? WHO’S THE ARBITER? THIS IS WHY EVERYBODY IS FREE TO VOICE THEIR OPINIONS — NOBODY HAS MORE RIGHT THAN THE NEXT PERSON. AS LONG AS THE ARGUMENT DOES NOT GO PHYSICAL, GO GO GO!!!

    • cvj on August 17, 2006 at 2:11 am

    bless, you are right about the need to avoid violence. that’s a prerequisite to open discussion within and across frames. from the standpoint of society, greater inclusiveness is superior to one that is characterized by prejudice in that it is better able to harness the capabilities of its members.

    • Edwin on August 17, 2006 at 2:57 am

    Honestly the point is.

    Isagani Cruz Doesnt CONDEMNED Homosexuality. he just voiced his opinion about THE GAYS WHO MAKES HIM SICK.

    I have gay friends but I HATE SOME GAYS TOO. I hate homos that feels like THEY ARE ABOVE THAN THE OTHERS because THEY ARE GAYS. I also hate gays who are multong bakla, aswang, salot. You know who those are.

    who ever said that a gay can have a straight lover? A STRAIGHT ONLY GOES TO ANOTHER STRAIGHT except if he needs money or something. gays are for gays. if you fell inlove with a gay and then you are gay too. if you fell inlove with a same gender and then youre a bakla,syokla,bading,tomboy,dyke or what ever people or other homos label themselves to.

    anyway this is just my opinion.

    ps. I like gay comedians but I hate homos that harrases people. (based on my experience)

  9. cvj, thanks, I agree with your view that,
    “The Pope is right to warn against moral relativism,”

    Compassion seems to be a ‘superior’ frame, a kind of compassion that involves a dying to self, to one’s prejudices, fears, in order to ‘include’ (embrace) another — “there is no greater love than this, that one gives his life for a friend” — which is the absolute that is antidote to moral relativism.

    • bas on August 17, 2006 at 1:55 pm

    I can understand the ramifications of a greater inclusiveness that cvj was talking about. It’s just that that remains something to aspire for. In reality, there is far more exclusiveness especially in the details… It’s also fun to have diversity. Bless is absolutely right in implying that we can argue all we want as long as there is no violence.

    • jb on August 19, 2006 at 11:36 pm

    is this an issue we really have to bother ourselves with?

    • Marjorie on August 20, 2006 at 5:08 am

    I have to admit, after reading posts on this blog as well as Justice Cruz’s article on the PDI Web site, I’m more amused than enraged by all the flak he’s received. Justice Cruz’s essay comes across as the nostalgic, final salvo of a man longing for the good ol’ days when men wore their machismo on their bulging biceps and women were widely known as the ‘weaker sex.’ The man may be a brilliant jurist with a superb intellectual record on the bench, but otherwise, he writes like my grandfather whining about the length of today’s skirts, the speed with which kids drive, and the volume of today’s music.

    I mean, he may be a little more eloquent than my grandfather, but c’mon, lolo, it’s freakin’ 2006, for God’s sake.

    Yes, I realize that he unleashed his bigotry on PDI’s million+ readership, but I trust the intelligence and discernment of most of my fellow Pinoys and Pinays. There will be those who already agree with Justice Cruz’s argument and will not be persuaded by MLQ3’s counter-essay. With our without Cruz’s essay, they will retain their homophobia. But there will likely be many more who will see right through Cruz’s hatred and immature fears and will only laugh at the incoherent ramblings of an old, old man out of touch with both his faith and his society.

    Cheers,
    Marjorie

    • Marjorie on August 20, 2006 at 5:16 am

    By the way, I’m all for the gay acceptance in modern society. (As opposed to ‘gay tolerance,’ that is. What an odious term. As an old college friend once opined, “Who wants to be ‘tolerated??!!'”), but really, shouldn’t the GLBT community aspire for greater things? I mean, the so-called straight community has been a hotbed of world wars, genocide, racism, sexism, classism, poverty, hunger, murder, and rape. Oh, and let’s not forget that they’ve also bequeathed to us a bland, boring, commercialized culture that worships mainstream (i.e., conventional) opinion and thought and excoriates or completely excludes any kind of creative work that may actually make us think for ourselves.

    Rather than so-called gay acceptance into mainstream society, how ’bout a little gay influence instead? The mainstream’s been bought and sold by commercial, elite interests for too long. Perhaps now’s the time for a little cultural revolution.

    Cheers,
    Marjorie

    • benj on August 20, 2006 at 3:37 pm

    In the blogosphere, Ricky Carandang takes a poke at a bigot. Other bloggers who also did: maharhar and Leaflens and salamangkiero. Also, Out of my mind.

    nice mix of people you got there.
    you get one that’s clearly one of the people that isagani cruz hates
    and you have one of the nastiest bassists in the local hard rock scene.

    • benj on August 20, 2006 at 3:44 pm

    i hope the rapture will happen sooner. the world will be a smarter place without the people who keep on quoting the bible in arguments as if the christians own the world.

    • erg on August 20, 2006 at 9:38 pm

    an old man once asked me a question and he said…

    “what if the world someday will accept all that is gay (homosexuality), a man can marry a man (same sex marriage), and they become good parents, and adopt kids, and they will be a so called family. do you think by then in that modern day of world, they would also have to change the concept of the holy family (joseph, mary and jesus)? picture out a family of a loving father and another father and their children. now that would be a sight isn’t it?”

    i’ll answer this as soon as i get to that world.

    • miko on August 20, 2006 at 9:41 pm

    …thank God for an MLQIII… your article, “the grand inquisitor”, is instantly a classic. i see no ground in reason why someone who is capable of reason, NOT see at all, the bigotry in Cruz’s article. i recommend to all educators that your article be used as reference in the study of humanities. more power!

    • slomo on August 20, 2006 at 10:21 pm

    Neil Cruz thinks gays and lesbians are unacceptable. That is his opinion, his belief, and he should be respected for that. Of all people, gay men and women should know that because they too are of the opinion and belief that they have a choice as to who to go to bed with [read: male to male or female to female]. What they call bigotry in Cruz is called perversion in them. The exchange of opinions is a welcome thing but the calling of names isn’t. If anyone has a case, he should present and defend it against the toughest opposition. But no one has the right to call others names. It only shows their intolerance for the very thing they want to be or have.

    • handurog on August 20, 2006 at 11:47 pm

    slomo: not neil cruz but isagani cruz. you might be confusing two different columnists who share the same space in the opinion section of pdi. well, just making sure that we call people by their right names. cheers! 🙂

    • erg on August 21, 2006 at 1:45 am

    we all commit mistakes in our life with some related to how we view our opinions and of others as well. but in the long run amidst all the description that make’s man a man, whether you believe in an opinion or not, it’s all about you and your existence. so you’ve said some hateful, grudgeful and distasteful opinion–do you still deserve to bask under the sun tomorrow and breathe in fresh air–to live? the same question that queers will ask themselves after reading that inclusive opinion by i. cruz–being a compromise between the male and female qualities–is it worth another day in the closet?

    • Clark on August 22, 2006 at 12:16 am

    isagani cruz is noting but the epitome of bigotry. the old man probably still have delusions of living in the broze age era!

  10. A man who has ongoing sexual relations with other men is one or more of these three things:

    1. a gay man
    2. a bisexual man
    3. a whore (who can be straight, gay, or bisexual)

    A man who has ongoing sexual relations with another man, who is _not_ getting material benefits in return for sex, is gay or bisexual. If he claims to be straight, then he’s either in denial or lying through his teeth. But straight he ain’t.

    • Tuwid na Pinoy on August 24, 2006 at 12:31 pm

    Manolo, your “disease” is inherited so I don’t blame you.

    Do you think your father or grandfather had the same defective gene?

    • mlq3 on August 24, 2006 at 12:36 pm
      Author

    tuwid, i’m adopted so i doubt i share any genes with them.

    • bas on August 25, 2006 at 11:23 am

    wow. mlq3 is really something. first, you admitted you are gay. now, you were adopted? this is saucy stuff! i admire people like you who had so much to hurdle in life before finally becoming who you are today: a very intelligent blogger, a celebrity in your own right. GAY AND ADOPTED! Whew! That’s too much drama. How did you survive?

    • mlq3 on August 25, 2006 at 11:56 am
      Author

    ike every one else does. day by day.

  11. Hi! Very nice site! Thanks you very much! qN5uO04Ex2hD

Load more

  1. […] Following the raging discussion on MLQ3’s blog, which mainly focuses on Isagani Cruz’s column on homosexuality. (Read Manuel Quezon III’s opinion piece here.) […]

  2. […] No honey, I am not riding on the much talked about alleged gay bashing of Former SC Justice Isagani Cruz and his response to MLQ3’s emotional reaction to his first article, simply because I was among the few commenters in MLQ3’s blog who did not ask for I. Cruz’ head on a platter for an accusation of bigotry. This Ca t is going to paddle against the stream or drive against the traffic flow to the point of being stalked by people she successfully ruffled the feathers just so she can express her opinion. […]

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.