Author: Andy Uyboco

Which is more important — the mass or thirty million dollars?

When Manila Archbishop Luis Antonio Tagle asked this question to a young audience, he was reportedly bothered when a good number of them chose 30 million dollars. He then proceeded to chastise them, saying how easy it was for them to exchange God for money, and so on.

When he related the story in his homily during Palm Sunday, he asked the audience the same question, to which they answered, “the mass,” though I highly doubt the sincerity of that response.

If the good cardinal was bothered about the initial reply, I am bothered that he asked such an inane question in the first place, and all the more bothered at the hypocrisy of his response.

Why so? Well, Tagle speaks from a position of privilege. He is head, after all, of an organization that owns vast tracts of land and has billions of pesos invested in publicly-listed corporations like BPI, Ayala Corporation, San Miguel Corporation, and so on. He probably does not have to worry where his next meal will come from, or what clothes to wear. He sleeps at night with a comfortable bed under him and a good roof over his head.

The question is a setup. It is designed for guilt-tripping.

While I talked about this with a friend, he said, “Why don’t we turn the tables around and ask him, ‘What is more important? Your stock holdings, your properties, and your public stature or saying the mass?’”

And if he responds that the mass is more important, then ask him why he and his church still clings tightly to its riches and grandeur while telling its flock to give up the same.

30 million dollars is not a paltry sum. It is around 1.3 billion pesos. It is more money than over 95% of our population will ever see. Invested wisely, this sum can literally turn people’s lives around and ensure their future for years to come.

Yet here is this very influential person, admonishing his flock for choosing a very real answer to their very real problems in exchange for a ceremony invented by men to appease and adore their deity. If I were that deity, I’d give that priest a smack on his head because if there is anything that people should learn, it is not to deify their rituals, but to see reality as it is and to live in the here and now, not in some future reality that they’re not even sure of. Would I be offended if some poor sap choose money over some ritual for me? Of course not. I do not lose any of my godhood whether or not people attend mass, yet that person stands to lose a lot if he doesn’t take the money.

I think one of the reasons why such a large percentage of our population is poor is this perverse brainwashing by our religion and by our culture that to desire money is somehow evil, and that to suffer is somehow good (the martyr syndrome). This is why we meekly bow and suck up to abusive leaders and officials. This kind of thinking has to stop.

I have a number of friends who came from poverty and worked their way into comfortable wealth. They tell me that they had problems when they were poor, and they still had problems when they were rich. The problems do not disappear. But every one of them said they would rather have problems while they are rich rather than have problems while they are poor.

Yes, I understand that money is not everything and cannot solve everything, but it certainly is something and it can solve a few things (of course, the more you have, the more you can solve). Now, the thirty million dollar question for the bishop is — in very real and practical terms, what problem does your mass solve?

And please don’t answer “eternal life.” Your most brilliant theologians would probably roll their eyes at that answer.

Originally published in Sunstar Davao.

Andy Uyboco enjoys mass only in physics equations. Contact him at andy@freethinking.me. View previous articles at www.freethinking.me.

 

The road to truth is a lonely one.

The road is full of twists and turns, numerous forks, and curious bends that invite you to put your foot to them. You meet fellow travellers along the way. You get along with some and enjoy their company but you also meet those whom you can’t wait to get rid of. But sooner or later, you have to part ways. Either they decide to take a different path, or you do.

Of course, there is always the option to stay where you are and make yourself believe that you have found what you were looking for. You make camp (or discover one) and decide that you like it there, and you begin to get others to join you. You create all sorts of rationalizations and reasons why your camp is the best and why all the others have got it wrong. Of course, that’s what those in the other camps are doing as well.

Pretty soon, a good number of you are embroiled in squabbles and arguments and debates. There is a lot of anger and insults thrown about left and right,  and you forget that this all began as a journey, not a war, which it has become. And the way to progress in this journey is not to be content in staying where you are and protecting your camp but to actually move on and keep walking the path, and to keep seeking. The camper digs his heels in and defends his territory. The true seeker is ready to pack up and follow wherever truth leads.

If you are still wondering what in the world I am talking about, let me make it plain — I am talking about the “war” between theists and atheists — those who believe in God and those who don’t.

As I walked the path from theism to atheism, I discovered a lot of material to digest. I read articles and books. I watched debates and listened to different podcasts. I also got to meet and talk to a lot of people and get different ideas.

One thing I found out was that both sides had their share of cheerers and jeerers. These were the noisy ones, the ones who get noticed the most, who post provocative and challenging statements on social media to grab attention. It is easy to get drawn by them (whichever side you’re on) and I’ll admit that I enjoyed being one of them for a time. It was fun cheering your side and jeering the other side.

But then I woke up and remembered how I got to this side in the first place. I was seeking the truth, not auditioning for a cheering squad. I don’t regret having done those things or having gone through them as they were important parts of the process, but I believe I’m on to something deeper now.

A friend of mine has made me realize that in my writings and discussions, I may not have been addressing the best arguments for theism. He managed to convince me of this and now I am halfway through a book that he recommended, even if I have to struggle with some of the concepts since philosophy is not really my forte and I still have painful memories of having to repeat a class because of a failing grade I got.

Theists tend to read books written by fellow theists and atheists tend to read books written by fellow atheists. While this has some value, I think it is of utmost importance that each side should read the other sides books as well, and with an open and humble attitude — not merely with the intent of punching holes in them. It is also important to read what are considered the best works of both sides, in order to really get the strongest arguments and thus be able to evaluate them better.

Now, of course, campers are afraid of this because there is always the chance that their numbers will be reduced because of those who will be swayed to the other side. Yet, truth often demands that you make the journey from one camp to the other, and still to another. A theist pursues his doubts which leads him to be an atheist. But it is very possible for the atheist now to have doubts and thus return to being a theist, or something else altogether.

The camper is content to select one side and entrench himself there, but the true seeker does not allow himself to be trapped, and is willing to reconsider and doubt whatever is his current position. A true seeker is not attached to labels but is relentless in his pursuit of truth. In the end, I do not aim to be a staunch defender of theism, atheism, agnosticism or whatever. I only aim for the truth, whatever it is, and wherever it may bring me.

Originally published in Sunstar Davao.

Andy Uyboco likes hide and seek. Contact him at andy@freethinking.me. View previous articles at www.freethinking.me.

Free writing is an exercise designed to stimulate writing. It is not related to freethinking although they sound the same. I use this exercise from time to time when I have a hard time coming up with something to write about. The idea is to write whatever comes to your head, without stopping, filtering or editing.

Well, that’s the idea, but I find it very hard to turn off my inner editor. Some of these sentences went through 2 or 3 revisions before I even completed them (including this one). Many people do not realize this but writing — or at least, good writing — is often a two-step process. Sometimes, it is even a three, four or five-step process. The first step consists of writing the first draft. The second step (and onwards) consists of revising and editing.

The point of free-writing is for you to come up with enough material for your first draft so that you have something to revise. After all, it is quite difficult to edit a blank page. The great artist, Michelangelo once said, “Every block of stone has a statue inside and it is the task of the sculptor to discover it.” However, it is quite difficult to create a statue if all you have is a pebble, or worse, thin air.

In the same manner, I believe that every block of text contains a bestseller or a Pulitzer-prize winner, or at least something memorable and meaningful. The task of the writer is to shape it as such. As with the pebble, It is quite difficult to shape only a few words — unless of course you are meaning to write short poetry, haiku, or the like — and even then those skilled in that art will tell you it is not an easy task to write them. Since one does not have the luxury of hundreds of words to make a point, then every word must count. Each word must be the right word. Some poets even labor over whether to put a comma or not.

I digress, but then that happens a lot in free writing. You just have to keep going and going. Yet, you need not be stuck with any material you don’t like. You can delete entire paragraphs if you want. You can delete the whole piece if you want and start over with an idea you got while typing the last paragraph of the first draft that you free-wrote.

The beauty of free writing is that it is very possible to generate a large amount of material in a short amount of time. That is, if you do it right. If you’re like me, however, who tends to mix editing and revising along with writing, then it will possibly take longer, but you spend less time on final revisions since you have already done most of the work anyway.

The danger of doing what I do, however, is getting stuck. You now have an idea of where you want the article or story to go but you become obsessed with perfecting it, with using the right words. Sometimes, that will cause you to just stare at the screen and think, until you realize that an hour has passed and you still haven’t progressed. That actually defeats the purpose of free writing in the first place.

So when I catch myself pausing for a long time, I just force myself to type on. I mutter things like, “Press on. The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. The battle is won by winning each war and each sentence you write is a war won.” And so on and so forth.

And then comes the magic. You type a word at the end of the line and your word processor automatically bumps you to the next page. You can hear angels (or Hell’s Angels, whichever you prefer) singing.

You have now reached the second page.

Of course you do a quick check to make sure that you haven’t cheated (like typing in double-space, or things like that). Sometimes, this experience is enough encouragement for some to just keep going and going, like runners getting a second wind.

However, don’t get too carried away. It’s not the length of your article that’s important but also its substance and value. Remember to revise and rewrite as necessary, and cut away anything irrelevant. Be a cruel and merciless editor of your own work. Your readers will thank you for it.

Samuel Johnson said, “What is written without effort is in general read without pleasure.”

So, do use free writing as a technique but remember to review and revise your work to make it meaningful and a pleasurable read.

Originally published in Sunstar Davao.

Andy Uyboco reads and writes for pleasure. Contact him at andy@freethinking.me. View previous articles at www.freethinking.me.

Every once in a while, the anti-vaccination scare-mongers rear their heads and make the rounds on the internet. They have been around for a long time, making their first appearances in chain emails and the gaudy, twinkly websites of the late 90’s and early 2000’s.

Currently circulating on social media is a CBCP News article entitled “The Truth About Vaccines” (http://www.cbcpnews.com/cbcpnews/?p=32904), which is quite ironic given that it is mostly a lie. The article relates the recent talk of a Dr. Eleanor de Borja-Palabyab, president of the Doctors for Life, Philippines, who claimed that vaccines contained mercury and formalin that are harmful to the body and brain, as well as causing autism.

That claim is inaccurate and misleading. While it is true that vaccines contain mercury and formalin (or formaldehyde), they are only trace amounts and pose no danger to the human body. Anyone with a basic understanding of chemistry or pharmacology will tell you that it is not the substance itself which is deadly, but the dosage at which it is administered. Thus, a known poison may be safely ingested at a very tiny dose but something beneficial (such as Vitamin A) may be poisonous at high doses.

The link between vaccines and autism comes from a 1998 issue of the British medical journal, The Lancet, which published a study by a certain Andrew Wakefield connecting autism and the MMR (Measles-Mumps-Rubella) vaccine. That study was later discredited and retracted as an “elaborate fraud,” but not after it had done its damage, which we feel more than a decade later, as evidenced by the misinformation perpetuated by this medical practitioner and many other celebrities and personalities as well.

If mercury is your main concern, then you will be relieved to know that since 1999, the US FDA, along with other health organizations, have asked vaccine manufacturers to remove thimerosal (the compound containing mercury) and the manufacturers have complied. Thus, if you or your child was vaccinated after 2002, there is a very large possibility that there was zero or only minute traces of thimerosal in those vaccines.

Even then, there have been numerous studies showing that there is no link between autism and thimerosal. For example, the August 2003 issue of the American Journal of Preventative Medicine contains a study which documented autism rates in Denmark and Sweden, where manufacturers stopped using thimerosal in vaccines in 1992. If there had been a positive link between thimerosal and autism, its occurrence should have also dropped but the opposite happened as the rate continued on an upward trend from 1987 through 1999. This strongly points to other factors contributing to autism and not thimerosal.

Now, regarding formaldehyde, the usual tactic to scare people is to mention that this is the same compound used for embalming corpses. Yet, what most people don’t know is that we are regularly exposed to formaldehyde every single day. It is in car exhaust fumes, latex paint, nail polish, plywood and particle boards, fiberglass, carpets, laminates, grocery bags and some paper products. It may even be present in some of the food that we eat, but note that these are all in very small amounts and are not harmful at all. In the same manner, the formaldehyde found in vaccines are not harmful either.

That an influential doctor should resort to such unscientific, sensationalist and irresponsible statements is a cause for concern. How many mothers and fathers would take this advice to heart (coming as it were, from a “reputable” source) and refuse to vaccinate their children, risking not only their own lives but others whom their unvaccinated children might also infect should they contract a deadly virus?

One local doctor put it quite plainly, “ I would really like to see [the anti-vaccine advocates] look at the parents of kids who died of measles straight in the eye and tell them that not vaccinating their kids was the right decision.” I am thankful that most of the doctors I know, like this one,  are better informed and more scientifically grounded.

But please, don’t take my word for it. I have listed my sources below. It would be best for you to go through them thoroughly for a better understanding of the issue. In the meantime, be wary of headlines which purport to tell you “the truth” about anything. Do your research. Use your head.

Sources:

Toxic Myths About Vaccines: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/toxic-myths-about-vaccines/

Thimerosal in Vaccines: http://www.fda.gov/biologicsbloodvaccines/safetyavailability/vaccinesafety/ucm096228

MMR Vaccine Controversy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine_controversy

Autism-Vaccine Link: http://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/searching-for-answers/vaccines-autism

Vaccines and Autism – Separating Fact From Fiction:
http://www.babycenter.com/0_vaccines-and-autism-separating-fact-from-fiction_1470554.bc

Retracted Autism Study an “Elaborate Fraud”: http://edition.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/01/05/autism.vaccines/

Originally published in Sunstar Davao.

Andy Uyboco is happily vaccinated. Contact him at andy@freethinking.me. View previous articles at www.freethinking.me.

My 7-year old asked me, “Daddy, are all the stories in the Bible true?”

I said, “What do you think?”

She said, “I don’t think so.”

I said, “Why?”

She furrowed her brow and was silent for a few seconds. Then she said, “I don’t know. But I think some of them aren’t real. I’ll think about it some more.”

I said, “Okay.” Then she ran off to play with her brother.

And that, in a nutshell, is what I think about raising freethinking kids. For those who want more than a nutshell, read on.

If “freethinking” or “freethought” is an unfamiliar word for you, let me give a brief explanation. Freethinking does not imply that you are free to think whatever you want. It is a “philosophical viewpoint which holds that positions regarding truth should be formed on the basis of logic, reason, and empiricism, rather than authority, tradition, or other dogmas.”

“Freethought holds that individuals should not accept ideas proposed as truth without recourse to knowledge and reason. Thus, freethinkers strive to build their opinions on the basis of facts, scientific inquiry, and logical principles, independent of any logical fallacies or the intellectually limiting effects of authority, confirmation bias, cognitive bias, conventional wisdom, popular culture, prejudice, sectarianism, tradition, urban legend, and all other dogmas.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freethought)

My desire to have freethinking kids is really a desire for them to be able to think for themselves, to be able to express their thoughts in a logical, reasonable fashion. As much as possible, my wife and I avoid being dogmatic to them. If full, detailed explanation is yet inappropriate or too complex, we just tell them we’ll explain when they’re older and they’ll understand better then.

In matters of religion, I rarely tell them what to think or do. I just ask questions and let them think through the answers.

My kids go to a Christian school. Sometimes, they want to go to Sunday School as well and I take them there. If they would rather stay at home, then I allow them to do so anyway. Sometimes I ask, “Why don’t you want to go?” and listen to their reasons. Most of the time, they’ll just say, “It’s boring,” and I’ll leave it at that. Sometimes, I’ll try to probe deeper and ask, “Well, why is it boring?” and other such questions until they get tired of me asking. And when they do, I am content to let them do something else and play. I will not push the issue right there and then. They have plenty of time to come back to me when they have thought about it or when they have another question.

Sometimes, I’ll offer my own opinion, but I won’t force it on them. I remember when the aforementioned 7-year old was still 6, I told her, “I don’t believe in heaven or hell. I don’t think they’re real.” She said, “Why don’t you believe in heaven? You should believe in heaven. You’re sinning. You will go to hell.”

I smiled and said, “Well, how do you know they’re real? Have you seen heaven or hell?”

“No, but you should believe in them,” and she said that with all the conviction she could muster.

“Well, just think about it,” I said.

“Okay,” she said.

Just a while ago, I asked her what she now thought of heaven and hell and she said, “I don’t know but it seems like a fairy tale.”

I don’t know what they’ll grow up believing and I don’t think I’d really mind as long as I know they’ve thought hard about it, they’re not afraid to question it, and they have good reasons for believing whatever they do. What’s important for me is the process they go through to reach those beliefs, but otherwise, their journey is their own to discover, explore and enjoy.

As I am enjoying mine.

Originally published in Sunstar Davao.

Andy Uyboco welcomes comments, gifts and tithes. Contact him at andy@freethinking.me. View previous articles at www.freethinking.me.