The Cebu debate held at University of the Philippines last Sunday, March 20 is the second in a series, which features the presidential wannabes.[1] The debate is co-organized by the Commission on Elections, TV5, Philippine Star, Kapisanan ng mga Brodkaster ng Pilipinas, and University of the Philippines Cebu.
Before the camera rolls finally, the spectators grumble
about the delay leading up to the debate, which is originally scheduled at 5pm
but starts at around 6:30 pm triggered by an apparent last-minute argument of
camps over debate rules specifically on mistaken permission for Vice President
Binay to bring documents to podium which is prohibited in the debate, which prompted
administration party standard-bearer Manuel Roxas II to question, thus delaying
the start of the event.
TV5
executive Luchi Cruz Valdes allows Binay to bring documents, unaware of the
established agreement against any form of cheat sheets at the debate among the
Commission on Elections, media organizers, and the political camps. Binay and
his trusted ally, Cavite Governor Jonvic Remulla, then got into a heated
argument with the other candidates onstage brought by this.
Senator
Miriam Defensor Santiago skipped this debate for health reasons, as she was set
to participate in a clinical trial for a "new, unnamed anti-cancer
pill."
The
intense debate started right away and quickly became a nerve-racking exchange
of arguments particularly on Binay's alleged corruption and Poe's citizenship.
Grace
Poe is selected as the winner on the first set of the first part according to
Rappler editors. She is considered the most consistent and composed in
answering tough questions although she lost a bit of her calmness at some
point.
The second part of the first round has not
discerned a clear winner, which concentrates on taxes and Yolanda
rehabilitation, in which the candidates swerves from the original question.
The
third part of the first set undertakes crime and the coco levy issue. Mar Roxas
is selected as the winner in this set, for his more nuanced approach to
answering the questions and cited specific numbers with regard to his defense
on crime management.
Criteria
taken in choosing the winner is based on
honesty (values, consistency), overall impact (vision, leadership,
eloquence in thoughts), knowledge/facts on file
In
the second part of the debate,[2]
presidential contenders ask each other questions with sequence that’s
pre-determined. In the first part of the debate, candidates are asked from a
panel of journalists.
The
choice of a winner is based on how the candidate answered the question
specifically directed at each one of them.
Grace
Poe is the most specific and consistent in replying her question from Rodrigo
Duterte.
Vice
President Binay who’s armed with documents that were supposed to disprove corruption
allegations against him (a secret weapon he was not allowed to use)[3]
missed a key opportunity to discredit his rivals, specifically Senator Grace
Poe and former interior secretary Mar Roxas.
Political
analysts (like Aries Arugay of the University of the Philippines, Diliman) took
it as the wrong scheme for the United Nationalist Alliance (UNA)
standard-bearer especially because it delayed the debate for an hour and a
half, which bounces back on Binay which did not benefit him at all.
Insisting
to use the documents doesn't really show that he is politically confident and
flexible to a situation like this, not to mention that this is not the proper
venue to present such because it's not his space alone. It’s not surprising if
the pre-debate argument affected his performance during the debate proper, he
says.
Binay
attacks Roxas and Poe’s as disciples of Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Germany chief
propagandist who is commonly credited for the quote:
“If you tell a lie big enough and
keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be
maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the
political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes
vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent,
for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the
truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
|
Just
a backgrounder, during the ancient times Goebbels was tasked with presenting
Adolf Hitler to the masses in the most favorable light. He regulated all German
media, from newspapers, radio, film, theatre, literature, music and arts. He
also burned books that were considered “un-German.”
Thus,
taking Goebbels’ words is simply a misattribution because I could not sense any
Poe’s line of attacks that she lied, except on occasion that she raised her
hands together with Duterte when asked on who among them are in favor of death
penalty (as countermeasure against drugs for Duterte, while against drugs and
heinous crimes for Poe), which appears to me a lie on her part because this is
not suppose to be an advocacy of a Catholic. Citizenry is bound to abide the
law as God Himself charges the people to heed leadership, and leaders are given
the authority to promulgate laws but not laws that surpass God’s laws as no one
is above God’s authority; no man is above human law but no man’s law is beyond
God’s law. Thus, the Catechism of the Catholic Church edifies:
Catechism
of the Catholic Church
|
||
Assuming
that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully
determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse
to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively
defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
If,
however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's
safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as
these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and
are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
Today,
in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for
effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense
incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the
possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the
offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically
non-existent."
|
Catechism
of the Catholic Church
|
||
“Certain
particularly grave sins incur excommunication, the most severe ecclesiastical
penalty, which impedes the reception of the sacraments and the exercise of
certain ecclesiastical acts, and for which absolution consequently cannot be
granted, according to canon law, except by the Pope, the bishop of the place
or priests authorized by them. In danger of death any priest, even if
deprived of faculties for hearing confessions, can absolve from every sin and
excommunication.
|
To
those who were not able to watch the debate, you may take a glimpse on it as
summarized below. Compared with last
debate which chronology is according to seniority, this time I organized them
according to depth of presentation of their thoughts, sincerity, expressiveness,
preparedness and composure: [4][5]
HIGHLIGHT
OF THE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES
University of the Philippines, Cebu
|
|||
Grace Poe
Senator
|
Rodrigo Duterte
Davao Mayor
|
Mar Roxas
DILG Secretary
|
Jejomar Binay
Vice President
|
Addressing Duterte’s question on PH-China maritime dispute, she is
consistent in her stand that by coordinating with other ASEAN countries like
Singapore and Indonesia can help the country in proving that China is wrong
about its claims on the West Philippine Sea and that the country should
continue with its arbitration case.
She also promises to fortify the Coast Guard and the Armed Forces.
Although she said before that the Philippines should not depend on the
US to defend itself against China, in this debate she mentions the Visiting
Forces Agreement which allows US troops to train in the country.
|
Asks Poe whose question focuses on maritime conflict.
When asked about addressing crime in the
Philippines, he reiterates older statements that he will get rid of it in 3
to 6 months turning the country like Davao as one of the most conducive city.
|
He fails to respond directly regarding the 2013 Zamboanga siege issue
thrown by Poe’s but cites instead of few casualties on the part of the
hostages.
He does not able to sufficiently reply on Poe’s concerning alleged
error in Zamboanga and in the repercussion of Super Typhoon Yolanda as the
possible reasons of excluding him from the decision to allow special police
forces to raid a village in Mamasapano town in January 2015 to arrest a
terrorist.
|
When asked by Roxas about the overpriced equipment at the Ospital ng
Makati mentioned in a Commission on Audit
(COA) report, he initially evade the question but later says, that
they are at liberty to buy expensive items.
Explaining the discrepancy, he says, that it’s the right quality that
should be looked at here and not the price.
|
Likewise she strikes Roxas regarding the 2013 Zamboanga siege, citing
that the crisis did end, but only after 3 weeks. She discloses that President
Aquino had to go to Zamboanga to help oversee the counter-attack against the
Moro National Liberation Front rebels who attacked the city.
She also points out Roxas' error in Zamboanga and in the repercussion
of Super Typhoon Yolanda as the possible reasons why Pres. Aquino excluded him
from the decision to allow special police forces to raid a village in
Mamasapano town in January 2015 to arrest a terrorist.
|
Back
to the Wharton issue, he hits Roxas a
fraud[6] for
including Wharton education in his profile when in fact he’s not,
He asserts that Roxas is not a Wharton
graduate backing up with statement that his camp asked the school and found
out the truth, highlighting that Roxas is
only a graduate of University of Pennsylvania, ''not Wharton," adding
that for one to be considered a Wharton alumnus, one has to earn an MBA
degree from the said school.
|
Agitated by Duterte’s assertiveness
concerning Wharton, he remains firm that he is a graduate from the
prestigious school, stressing that is it's not his problem if the Mayor does
not understand what it means to be a graduate from Wharton. It's very clear,
Wharton says I graduated from their school. He then strikes Duterte for
his brand of justice pointing out that whatever comes to his head even if
it's not true, that's what he believes in, he retorts.
|
When asked what he would do with the pending cases of his son,
dismissed Makati mayor Junjun Binay, he says that he will obey the law – even
if he believes that his son is innocent.
He strikes Poe on her citizenship issue, citing that the latter turned
away from her Filipino citizenship when she took an oath to become an
American citizen.
|
She presents the need to create more permanent jobs and fair
compensation, in addition to tax laws modification. Making use of her
previous comments concerning Filipinos working outside of the country as a
jumping off point, she emphasizes that other countries enjoy lower tax rates,
which is likewise appealing to Filipinos.
|
He reiterates his earlier challenge to Binay, that both of them should
vacate once found guilty of stealing.
Duterte retells his previous comments that projects and endeavors like
tax reforms and rehabilitation would only be effective if corruptions are
wiped out.
|
Rebutting
Duterte’s claim that Davao is the most conducive city in the country, he says
that Duterte did not really lay out a plan, adding that 30 to 40 villages in
Davao City are still drug-infested, according to government statistics, which
the Mayor did not refute saying cities all over the country have
"porous" borders.
|
When asked how he would reconcile his massive infrastructure program
with the resulting shrink of funds to be collected should his plan to exempt
those earning P30,000 or less a month of taxes pursue, He says that there
would be compensatory measures, and savings from other areas and projects.
|
Turning key questions against her, she relates her citizenship, to a
discussion about her plan to help Filipinos abroad.
Striking back to Binay’s questioning of her citizenship, she compares
her situation to Filipinos who work abroad but do not necessarily love their
country any less, and stresses that one of her goals is to provide more
opportunities for them.
|
He strikes Roxas, saying that under his watch,
crime continued even behind bars.
He
says that this administration allows shabu to be cooked inside the national
penitentiary, accusing Roxas who did nothing when he was the chief of police,
yet claims credit that is not his, and asserts that Roxas is always a pretentious
leader.
|
He
claims that the Philippine National Police, (PNP), under his direction as
former interior secretary, was able to confiscate P7.5 billion worth of drugs
nationwide.
To refute Duterte’s of tagging him as pretentious,
he
says that the DILG and PNP have addressed the drugs issue as proven by the
value of their confiscations, and the arrests made. He also adds that offenders were arrested
and fight against drugs continues as accounted in the newspapers, he says.
|
|
She brings up about the need for communication and good planning in
emergency situations, mentioning the lack of satellite phones, which would
work over mobile phones. She says that the elected leader, will need to
exercise a more effective management style.
|
When given the floor to ask Binay, he likewise chooses not to ask the
VP, but instead affirms back by saying that Binay was more qualified" to
be president then they shake hands.
|
He questions Binay about corruption allegations asking the latter to
explain how original P280 million budget for the Makati parking building got
bloated to about P2 billion, the sterilizers which cost P16,000 per unit but
were procured by the Makati government for P1.5 million a piece, and
ultrasound equipment priced at P1.3 million but acquired for P8 million.
|
When given the opportunity to ask Duterte, he prefers not to ask the
latter, saying that they are both qualified to be president.
|
When
asked why she feels the FOI bill she championed gets weaker and who among the
candidates in her opinion can help or hindrance afterwards. She tells that it
will be difficult for Binay to champion on this brought by corruption charges
that he’s been facing and not showing at the Senate probe investigating these
accusations.
|
He says that he will support FOI in his administration.
|
He says that he will support FOI in his presidency.
Calling Binay’s analysis “convoluted,” he stresses his own project for
tax reforms, which would be addressed after the election period.
He also reproaches Poe for her failure to push for a bill to
facilitate the release of coco levy funds to coconut farmers.
|
He says that he will support FOI in his government.
|
When Roxas criticizes her on Coco Levy Fund, she denies that she
protects the interests of businessman and Marcos crony Eduardo
"Danding" Cojuangco, who was accused of misusing the funds to build
his own fortune. But she avoids Roxas' question on whether she voted for a
bill that would have assisted the farmers. She simply says the Senate
leadership should be blamed for the non-passage of the bill.
|
He says that he will do what he did in Davao. He stress that it's a
very simplistic approach to crime, which has other elements like inefficient
and corrupt police, a sometimes indifferent public, loose firearms, etc. The
drug problem is a tough one. The fact that drugs are peddled right inside
Muntinlupa puts on view the extent of this issue. Muntinlupa issue came about
under Aquino administration, but this problem has been prevalent for decades,
he adds.
|
He presents the spending that was aimed at rehabilitation following
super typhoon Yolanda. He points out that of a P200 billion budget, only 90
billion has been released. He adds that of the 90 billion, 4 billion was
coursed through DILG and that this was accounted for.
When called an apologist for the current administration, he defends
the achievements of the current government, citing families with improved
lives under the administration’s projects.
Fighting
over Binay on calling him a disciple of Goebbels several times, he says it is
Binay who is a follower of Goebbels.
|
|
COMMENTARIES
ON PERCEIVED DEBATE LOOPHOLES:
Instead of mudslinging, candidates must raise
the level of discussion by talking about platforms for people because they way
how they handle the talking without being derailed by emotions but be geared up
with thoughts of substance and adequacy can also be a gauge and mirrors their
personality how organized, diligent, and creative they are in planning and researches
for every issue that the country has been facing in terms of governance, economy,
developments, labor concerns, health benefits, technological advancement, etc.
While
scrutinizing the outcome of this debate, there are particular dubious issues
that need attention:
1). Binay’s
attempt on presenting 9 documents[9]
Binay could have shown his 9 documents but the organizer disallowed him to bring them on the presidential debate, the
documents that he says would prove wrong allegations on money laundering and
corruption against him.
“What difference does it make if I bring
these documents to support my position? As long as we follow the same time
restrictions as everyone else,' the Vice President says a day after the
debate,” VP Binay says. Of course, there’s a difference – following
rules on not arming with any form of cheat sheets. The mere fact that the concerned individuals
are aware that bringing of documents to the podium is strictly prohibited as agreed
upon among the Commission on Elections, media organizers, and the political
camps, means that they’re not following certain rules, what more when it comes
to bigger rules? Binay and his trusted ally, Cavite Governor Jonvic Remulla got
into a heated argument with the other candidates onstage brought by this which
caused a delay of about an hour and a half, without realizing that they’re
wasting not only the precious time of the organizers of this event but most of
all the valuable time of the Filipinos especially those who are present in the
event. Being on time is serving on time.
For the benefit of the doubt to give
awareness about these documents that were not given the opportunity to be
presented, the
9 documents that Binay was supposed to show during the Cebu presidential debate
were:
A). Statement
of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN) - This is in reply to the
number if questions chasing him as to where he gets wealth, presenting copies
of his SALNs since 1988, when he was first elected Makati mayor. His wealth had
a highest jump when he became 2010 VP
from P2.5M to P60M
B). Statement
of Election Contributions and Expenditures (SOCE) - This contains a list of
the contributions that a candidate got in an election and the mode of spending.
In the 2010 elections, he declares that he spent P217.9 million – sourcing all
of it from contributions. He also received P231,480,000 from 641 contributors,
consisting of private corporations and individuals.
C). Blue
Ribbon Committee Affidavit - This is about his official response to the
year-long Senate inquiry into the allegedly overpriced P3.8-billion parking
building at the Makati City Hall compound. When asked about his evasion not to
attend Senate hearings to present this affidavit himself, he said that the
court is the proper venue for him to be judged.
D). Income
Tax Returns (ITR) - He says that he may have some wealth, but at least he
files and pay taxes on time. From 1986 to 2013, Binay and his wife Elenita
recorded a consolidated net income of P83,115,268.23 ($1.9 million), with taxes
amounting to P23,054,751.93 ($518,635).
E). Bank Secrecy Waiver - This is the
document which challenges other candidates to sign during the first round of
the debate on Sunday, which didn't materialize because of prohibition on
bringing notes to the podium. The copy he presented to the press conference was
without signature, but affixed his when sent to local media.
F). Anti-Money
Laundering Council (AMLC) - This affidavit shows AMLC's ex parte motion to
drop from a Manila court case the companies linked to him: the JCB Foundation,
Agrifortuna, and 6 other respondents. He denies ownership of more than 200 bank
accounts, allegedly under names of relatives and associates. The AMLC already
filed a civil forfeiture case with the Manila Regional Trial Court against him,
his family, and alleged dummies. It is seeking for a freeze order that covers
139 bank accounts and 19 real properties under him name and his co-accused.
G). Medical
Certificate - This document signed by doctors Regina Macalintal-Canlas,
Juaneha Alfredo Las, and Irma Macalinao of the Makati Medical Center on January
27, 2016, affirm that as 73-year old, he is "physically and mentally fit
to run the country for 6 years.
H). United
States Oath of Allegiance - This is the only document not related to him, a
U.S. oath of allegiance, the statement that a person reads when taking their
oath as a citizen of the US. He used this as a point of attack against Poe’s
citizenship telling that the latter took an oath to become an American citizen
than be proud of her roots. At the time
when he was New York, United States, and had just passed the bar, he says that
he almost applied to be a naturalized American citizen, but couldn't take it
when he heard the oath of allegiance.
I). Good
Governance Awards - These are awards and citations to prove his track
record for good governance: [1.] A plaque for the 2011 Seal of Good House
Keeping from the Department of the Interior and Local Government, signed by
late DILG Secretary Jesse Robredo [2.] A plaque for the 2014 Blue Certification
for Business Permits from the Office of the Ombudsman signed by Ombudsman
Conchita Carpio-Morales, and [3.] A plaque from the National Competitive
Council acknowledging Makati as the most competitive city in the country.
These documents are equally significant that
could supposedly clear all accusations against him but he preferred not to talk
about it when invited in a Senate hearings and it’s ironic now that he is
voluntarily presenting such proofs when it’s not demanded although he could
articulate everything by bullets/one liner since time is limited for a rebuttal,
if he wished to, but instead wasted his time by not maximizing his time on
every opportunity that he’s given the floor to rebut.
2).
Roxas’ Misrepresentation Educational
Background
Although
Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania itself through its media
relations director Peter Winicov confirms that Roxas finished his undergraduate
degree of Bachelor of Science in Economics, major in Finance from the
university in 1979.[10] , it could be better if he clarified that
issue during the rebuttals during occasions that Duterte asserts not to playing
up the public. Because at a certain angle, Duterte could be right when he says,
“That would have been more in keeping with honesty. Do not pretend to be what
you are not,”[11]
because of his failure to expound what is it really like to be a graduate of
Wharton because the ordinary people know nothing about it.
Reconciling
Duterte’s line with that of Former Akbayan Rep. Walden Bello[12] who
says “There is an element of intellectual dishonesty here because everybody
knows that when you say that you are from Wharton, the understanding is that
you have an MBA, Masters in Business Administration, not a bachelor’s degree
from the University of Pennsylvania in which he took some courses at Wharton,” simply
suggests that there’s a misrepresentation on his part.
Bello
adds that, “When you claim you’re from Wharton, the understanding of most
people is that you have an MBA degree from Wharton and although technically
speaking, you might say that he is an undergraduate from the University of
Pennsylvania, to which Wharton is connected,” which implies that there’s really
misrepresentation of the fact that the projection is that of an MBA degree.
Roxas’
profile posted on the Senate website says he graduated from the Ateneo De
Manila University in 1974, then the Wharton School of Economics at the
University of Pennsylvania five years later. In the University of
Pennsylvania's website, Roxas is also described as having earned the degree of
''B.S. in Econ., 1979 (Bachelor of Science in Economics, Wharton School)[13]
Let
people make an assessment on the play of words, who can weigh the distinction
between misrepresentation and sincerity.
3).
Support on Death Penalty Law by Poe and
Duterte
Poe
and Duterte are in-favor of the death penalty[14],
which was abolished in 1986 when President Corazon Aquino took over the reins
of power from Ferdinand Marcos. It was reintroduced by President Fidel Ramos in
1993, then suspended again in 2006. After Jesus’ resurrection, Constantine the Great, the first
Christian emperor, abolish capital punishment in 337 in veneration of Jesus who
is the most renowned victim of death penalty.
Presidential
candidates should be reminded that this country dwindles in terms of economy
and justice system not because of lack of expertise in governance and ingenuity
that could regulate any forms of crimes but because of these leaders who set
aside morals because of dishonesty, corruption and inequality in opportunities
and tarnished justice system that lead people to end up in different crimes.
Fifth Commandment: You shall not Kill .
(Matthew 19:18 ; Ephesians 4:31; Matthew 22:39-40) . This precept commands
respect for life, material and spiritual health of self and others, permits
legitimate self-defense of individuals and nations (just war), as well as capital punishment, respect for the bodies of the
dead. God did not break His own commandment when people had been killed (the
most prominent example being the flood). According to the Bible, God killed
every human except Noah, his wife, his sons, and their wives in the flood. None
of these people were killed unjustly. At the time not only had all people
(except Noah and his family) become corrupted, but they were continually
plotting evil, comparable to Nazis who took over Germany before WWII. Jesus had underwent the extreme ruthless of
death penalty not to suggest toleration of such cruel punishment but to give
life and second chance to the humanity; death penalty does not give life but
kills life, and does not give second chance but last breath.
Death penalty law should not be
restored on the following grounds:
According
to Amnesty International,[15]
seventy-six countries have eliminated the death penalty completely, and many
countries that retain it have not utilized it for years. It’s completely ironic that while other
countries removed this, Poe and Duterte desire to bring back this law which
Cory Aquino and Gloria Arroyo had already abolished.
Just yesterday, I had the opportunity to talk to an engineer who happened to
work in the Middle East for long years.
At one point, out of curiosity he tried to witness an execution of
capital punishment in this country. My
heartbeat dwindled as he narrated his encounter especially when he mentioned
how the blood of the man had squirted upwardly when the executioner cut the
man’s head with a samurai-looked piece of tool. According to him, he was
traumatized by that violent scene which caused him sleepless nights for 4 days. Meaning, feeling bad about something that's violent is not acceptable in the human's conscience, heart and mind.
◄See here for the Reality and Injurious Effects of Death Penalty►
◄See here for the Reality and Injurious Effects of Death Penalty►
4. Sen.
Santiago’s Support on Divorce Law
At
least, when asked about divorce, all of the contenders (Vice President Jejomar
Binay, Senator Grace Poe, Davao City Mayor Rodrigo Duterte, and Mar Roxas) express
uniformly as not in favor of the proposition. Only Senator Miriam Defensor
Santiago[16]
who was absent during the debate actively supports the divorce law on grounds
either of adultery or concubinage: when one spouse is already living with
another person. Reasons other than these
might trivialize the institution of marriage stressing that young people might
rush into marriage, particularly when they are young, and then change their
minds and get a divorce.
According
to a 2015 Social Weather Stations survey Filipinos are in favor of legalizing
divorce. The survey discovers that 60% of adult Filipinos support divorce for
"married couples who have already separated and cannot reconcile anymore,
so that they can get legally married again." Only country in the world
without a divorce law, the Philippine divorce bill was filed in 2010 and has
been pending in Congress since.
So
far, family ties in the Philippines is evidently interestingly beautiful (without
divorce law) because its’ connected to God’s precept so it’s good to be this
way. What the country and every
relationships need is not a law that gives a hint towards infidelity but continued
education, counseling, talks on how to groom and hone relationships. Marriage management just like governance is
not something that can be junked when comfort zones are threatened but a
commitment that is anointed to constantly grow than be backward and to be ever
ready in repairing any aspect that’s compromised because of negligence and when
confronted/defeated by temptation.
If we’ll check the reality about
those who take divorce as a law, we could therefore conclude that God must be
true in teaching the preservation of marriage. Each
year, over 1 million American children suffer the divorce of their parents; Increasing
proof in social science journals shows that the devastating physical,
emotional, and financial effects that divorce is having on these children last
well into adulthood and affect future generations, and this include:[17]
·
Children with divorced parents are increasingly the
victims of abuse. They show more health, behavioral, and emotional problems,
are involved more frequently in and drug abuse, and with higher rates of
suicide.
·
Children with divorced parents perform more poorly
in reading, spelling, and math, and are more likely to repeat a grade and
higher drop-out rates and lower rates of college graduation.
·
Families with children that were not poor before
the divorce witness their income drop as much as 50 percent. About 50 percent
of the parents with children that are experiencing a divorce move into poverty
after the divorce.
·
Religious worship, which has been associated to
better health, longer marriages, and better family life, drops after the
parents’ divorce.
References:
[1] PiliPinas 2016
Cebu Presidential Debate: Winners of Part 1, Published 7:13 PM, March 20, 2016,
Updated 12:32 AM, March 21, 2016, http://www.rappler.com/nation/politics/elections/2016/126316-pilipinas-2016-presidential-debate-up-cebu-round-1-winner-first-part
[2]PiliPinas 2016 Cebu Presidential Debate: Part 2 goes to Grace Poe,
Published 9:50 PM, March 20, 2016, Updated 10:08 PM, March 20, 2016, http://www.rappler.com/nation/politics/elections/2016/126319-pilipinas-2016-presidential-debate-cebu-round-2-winner
[3] Mara
Cepeda, In Cebu debate, Binay’s game plan 'boomeranged' – analysts, Published
2:08 PM, March 22, 2016, Updated 3:23 PM, March 22, 2016, http://www.rappler.com/nation/politics/elections/2016/126726-jejomar-binay-performance-cebu-presidential-debate
[4] PiliPinas 2016 Cebu Presidential Debate: Part 2 goes to Grace Poe,
Published 9:50 PM, March 20, 2016
Updated
10:08 PM, March 20, 2016, http://www.rappler.com/nation/politics/elections/2016/126319-pilipinas-2016-presidential-debate-cebu-round-2-winner
Updated
12:32 AM, March 21, 2016, http://www.rappler.com/nation/politics/elections/2016/126316-pilipinas-2016-presidential-debate-up-cebu-round-1-winner-first-part
[6] Pia Ranada,
Duterte to Roxas: You are pretentious, a fraud
As
rebuttal, Liberal Party standard-bearer Mar Roxas questions the 'Duterte brand
of justice', Published 9:37 PM, March 20, 2016, Updated 9:37 PM, March 20,
2016, http://www.rappler.com/nation/politics/elections/2016/126530-duterte-roxas-pretentious-fraudulent
[7] Kierrsner
Gerwin , Who is Joseph Goebbels and why did VP Binay keep mentioning him in the
debate?, Published March 20, 2016 10:27pm, http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/559819/news/nation/who-is-joseph-goebbels-and-why-did-vp-binay-keep-mentioning-him-in-the-debate
[8] Who
is Joseph Goebbels and why did VP Binay keep mentioning him in the debate?,
Published March 20, 2016 10:27pm, http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/559819/news/nation/who-is-joseph-goebbels-and-why-did-vp-binay-keep-mentioning-him-in-the-debate
[9] Ryan Macasero,
Published 10:41 PM, March 21, 2016, Updated 1:55 AM, March 22, 2016, http://www.rappler.com/nation/politics/elections/2016/126657-list-documents-binay-up-cebu-presidential-debate
[10] Wharton
confirms Roxas is its alumnus, ABS-CBN News, Posted at 17 Dec 2015 04:55 PM |
Updated as of 17 Dec 2015 05:46 PM, http://news.abs-cbn.com/halalan2016/focus/12/17/15/wharton-confirms-roxas-is-its-alumnus
[11] Wharton
confirms Roxas is its alumnus, ABS-CBN News, Posted at 17 Dec 2015 04:55 PM |
Updated as of 17 Dec 2015 05:46 PM, http://news.abs-cbn.com/halalan2016/focus/12/17/15/wharton-confirms-roxas-is-its-alumnus)
[12] Christian V.
Esguerra Bello: Mar 'misrepresented' Wharton degree, ABS-CBN News, Posted at 18
Dec 2015 01:53 AM | Updated as of 18 Dec 2015 12:17 PM, http://news.abs-cbn.com/halalan2016/nation/12/18/15/bello-mar-misrepresented-wharton-degree
[13] Wharton
confirms Roxas is its alumnus, ABS-CBN News, Posted at 17 Dec 2015 04:55 PM |
Updated as of 17 Dec 2015 05:46 PM, http://news.abs-cbn.com/halalan2016/focus/12/17/15/wharton-confirms-roxas-is-its-alumnus
[14] Jee Y. Geronimo, Cebu
debate: Duterte, Poe favor return of death penalty, Published 8:48 PM, March
20, 2016, Updated 1:43 AM, March 21, 2016, http://www.rappler.com/nation/politics/elections/2016/126523-presidential-debate-duterte-poe-death-penalty
[15] Alisha Ott,
The Death Penalty: Society's Injustice System, https://www.deltacollege.edu/org/deltawinds/DWOnline04/thedeathpenalty.html
[16] Fritzie
Rodriguez, Cebu presidential debate: All candidates against divorce,
Published
8:33 PM, March 20, 2016, Updated 8:40 PM, March 20, 2016, http://www.rappler.com/nation/politics/elections/2016/126515-philippines-up-cebu-debate-divorce
[17] Patrick F. Fagan, Ph.D. and Robert Rector, The Effects
of Divorce on America, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2000/06/the-effects-of-divorce-on-america
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment