THE TRUTH ABOUT OURSELVES

From the viewpoint of self-knowledge, we can distinguish three zones in our personalities. The first zone is our "self-image". A person's self-image is the picture he has of himself.Each of us has a mental picture of himself. Some of us may picture ourselves as charming like our batch mates Portiabeth, Annie, and cute as Dalin and Luningning Catarin (pasensiya na lang sa mga hindi ko na mention), intelligent like Lowell and Jessie , friendly and cheerful like Lito, Raymundo, Henry, , Jojo etc.( yan mga tol, sana makahalata kayo,libre niyo ako ha? Mcdo pwede na) and good-looking (siyempre ako na ito, huwag ng umangal pa hating magkakapatid naman, puro na lang sa inyo e hehehehe). Some of us picture themselves in negative aspects.

We are not altogether responsible for our own self-images.To a great extent, our parents have painted our self-images for us, that sometimes as we grow-up we often think of what we are to them. The self-image our parents give us becomes part of our perceptual field, the colored lenses through which we see reality. We do not see things the way they really are. We see things the way we expect them to be.

We, in many times ought to compare our self-images with what others think of us. What others think is called our "public image". It is the second zone of our personality from the view point of self-knowledge. We are aware that we create a certain impression on other people. They have a picture of our personality that differs from our self-image. Sometimes the difference is slight, sometimes great. One good example is my friend Engr. Lito Lumabas. If for the first time you'll gonna meet this guy, you can easily judge him with his being serious personality as unreachable one, yet, if you'll be given the chance to be with him, I'm quite sure you'll gonna like him by his being down-to-earth person and the most thing you'll gonna miss on him is his being "Kwela" all the time.

We usually accept anything in our public image that agrees with our self-image and discard the rest. We tell ourselves that other people do not understand us or are envious or just do not know enough about us to know what we are like. We try to tell other people they are wrong about us. We want them to accept our self-image as our real self.

But our self-image is not necessary your real-self. As a matter of fact, our public image may be a much better picture of our real self. Perhaps most people fail to grow in self-knowledge,and thus in maturity, because they discredit what other people say about them. What seems to be a casual remark from another person may be a valuable clue to what we are really like. A person can learn about himself by giving thought to such little comments as " you take yourself too seriously," or "You worry to much" etc.. It does not make whether the remark comes from somebody who is pleased with us or from somebody who is mad at us. It may contain more truth than we realize about ourselves.

But our public image does not contain the whole truth about us, and may be distorted like our self-image.Much of our real self remains hidden from both ourselves and others.Our "hidden self" is the third zone of our personality from the view point of self- knowledge. There is much within us- feelings, motives, fears hopes and talents. Each of us remains a mystery. As we reflect on our daily experience of living we come to know more about ourselves all the time, but we never completely solve mystery.

Ikaw kaibigan. Ang tanong ko sa’yo, ANO NGA BA ANG TINGIN MO SA SARILI MO?

SOMEDAY I WILL . . .

"A nation is born into freedom on the day when such a people, molded into a nation by a process of cultural evolution and sense of oneness born of common struggle and suffering, announces to the world that it asserts its natural right to liberty and is ready to defend it with blood, life, and honor." A quotable version from the speech being delivered by the late President Diosdado Macapagal during the June 12, 1962 Independence Day Celebration.

On August 4, 1964, President Macapagal signed at Malacañang Republic Act No. 4166 statutorily prescribing June 12 as Philippine Independence Day. Special witnesses invited to the signing were children of Presidents, including Carmen Melencio-Aguinaldo, Manuel Quezon Jr., Maria Osmeña-Charnley, Gerardo Roxas, Tomas Quirino, and his sons Arturo and Diosdado Jr.
Even several decades after being declared free from the bondage of colonial cruelty and slavery, many of us feel that the Philippines is still a neo-colony. All the years of neo-colonialism had cemented the US presence in the Philippines. Aside from the American impact to our daily way of living and product colonial mentality, the Philippines is also reliant upon the United States for aid. Most Filipinos are keenly aware of the coupling of their nation with its colonizer; however many are split on whether or not this coupling is a positive thing or a negative thing. It seems as if there is only one answer. Years of economic struggling and government corruption has left the Philippines with two distinct classes – the very poor and the very rich, the former outnumbering the latter. The Philippine cityscape is inundated with temporary lean-tos, whose owners scour the busy city streets trying to sell whatever they can. Many barely make enough to get by, while all the money stays with the rich. Many of these gifted few were undoubtedly those who enjoyed the US presence, and are still reaping their benefits today. Now, does the acquisition and declaration of the said PHILIPPINE INDEPENDENCE really of great value and help for us Filipinos? Is there really a true freedom after the said independence proclamation?

Sometimes,I do not understand why we call it Independence Day if it purports to be as Freedom Day. Much, I am pretty sure that it tends to be a celebration of the day that we became free from the claws and control of another state. Sounds a mere linguistic issue. Yet, it doesn't even matter if it is indeed independence or freedom that we are referring to. The sure issue on this line is we are neither free nor independent.
Atty.Connie Veneracion wrote in one of her Manila Standard Today article entitled "Freedom and Independence" he quoted that independence practically means self-sufficiency. It is also the capacity to act based on one’s own competence. An independent person or entity does not need to rely on another in order to survive and function effectively. It is a status whereby association with others, and seeking the assistance of others, are not matters of necessity but matters of choice.

Choice is what makes independence a sibling of freedom. A teenager may be free to decide whether or not to watch a movie. But since he needs to ask his parents for money to buy the movie ticket—a state of dependence—then his freedom is compromised. Independence, therefore, is an important element of freedom.
One particular example of this is when a government allows foreign military troops into its soil under terms that constitute a derogation of its own sovereignty, in exchange for money, is not the government of a free state. if this sounds incomprehensible to you, you will need to read up on the circumstances that led to the signing of the Visiting Forces Agreement in 1998. You ought to know that money was a primary consideration.

In short, we are not free because we have not achieved the kind of independence that will allow us to be free.

However, everyone is entitled to his or her own belief and perception. Thus, No one should ever be deprived of his own personal way of thinking and views. My dear fellow Filipinos,If you believe we are independent, then we are independent, If not, then we're not.The strange question on this matter lies on what is really happening in our day to day living , with that of being mentally colonized, colloquial participation towards product manufacturings and importations, colonialization on our own government activities and decisions. Now, How can we say that we are totally independent if we are not tend to be free in so many ways? We need a stronger sense of self-reliance and self-sufficiency. . Let us not be reluctant to change, let us be united with one racial participation to push through one particular objective- to move and defend this country with unity and pride. Holding one great principle that Philippine country is our very own country and that should likewise be for the Filipino, by the Filipino and with the Filipino in. Defending one another from any aspect of colonial plans and ways of destabilization and interference.

In so many ways, we refuse to be defeated. Despite the dark picture painted by the pessimists among us, with the firm determination of the Leadership, we are able to improve economically and politically somehow, the prophets of doom notwithstanding. Democracy is on our side, an asset we can harness to our advantage.

So, with this kind of Independence we have had at present, I believe that there is no room nor even concrete evident of justification for the word "Philippine Freedom". Thus, proclaiming to my native land and to my fellow Filipino of whatever race and colors, of whatever dialect he or she used, of whatever status of life that he/she is enjoying thereat. "I will sing no songs of glory and joy every 12th day of June" Although I sincerely hope that someday I will.

IT IS THE ACTION ,NOT THE PERSON ; IT IS THE SIN, NOT THE SINNER

In classifying persons or things, there should be a clear and distinct difference between two categories. This is because in legal terms, classification is defined as the grouping of

persons or things similar to each other in certain
particulars and different from all others in the same particulars (Constitutional Law by Justice Isagani Cruz, supra). There has to be what is called substantial distinction, as contrary to superficial difference. This is the reason why we could distinctively classify men from women (difference in reproductive roles), minors from adults (difference in age of consent), citizens from aliens (difference in nationality) etc. This distinction can be described with relative permanency in the characteristics of the distinction being made.

However when a person uses colors for vehicles or emotions and/or lifestyles for persons, they convey superficial differences in as much as these differences can change relatively in time – there exists no permanency in the distinctions being established. That is why it is important to understand that sexual orientation is such a superficial difference since the attraction of a person to the same sex varies in degrees, and there are recorded cases of persons with diminished same-sex attractions, if not totally re-oriented into heterosexuals. In fact, there are a number of "ex-gay ministries" available for persons struggling with same-sex attractions, such as our group Courage, and Bagong Pag-Asa, who assist the individual in understanding the struggle and living a chaste life. So to classify individuals according to their sexual orientation (homosexuals and heterosexuals) is unreasonable.

It is also equally important to understand that gender identity is also a superficial difference. As defined, it refers to a personal sense of identity (making it a subjective concept) based on manners of clothing, inclinations and behavior in relation to masculine or feminine conventions. Notwithstanding the argument that sexual orientation can be changed, the indicators of gender identity – manners of clothing, inclinations and behavior – are also undeniably factors in social science that can change relatively in time. The subjectivity of the definition ("personal") makes it so general that it is difficult for it to be considered as a substantial distinction.

The Church has been accused of condemning homosexuals to hell. But the Catholic Church has always seen the homosexual condition as a sharing of a person with the sufferings of Jesus, as the Catechism states – "this inclination… constitutes for most of them a trial… These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition." "Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection." Persons with same-sex attractions are called to holiness!

For it is not the person that experience same-sex attraction that the Church condemns but the sexual activity between persons of the same-sex. It is the action, not the person; it is the sin, not the sinner. And people inside and outside the Church should be able to understand how to distinguish them. The practice of loving the sinner and hating the sin should always be emphasized to the clergy and even to the lay persons.