Why Christopher Hitchens matters to me

When a bishop threatened a sitting President of excommunication, that can really piss people off. It didn’t take long for me to express my anger, as shown here in my Facebook post last September 30, 2010. The original Inquirer news has long been deleted for reasons I do not know. So incensed I was at the news that I was ready to exit the Catholic  Church as well. What I didn’t realized back then that this was the beginning of my journey toward nonbelief. This moment that set off my curiosity towards freethinking and atheism and eventually my awakening towards a life of humanism and secularism.

And my constant companion was Christopher Hitchens. His numerous Youtube videos of him debating theists on why religions like Islam, Christianity and Judaism are contributing to the persecution of women and stifling of free speech; the many CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and CSPAN interviews of him enlightening us to the evils of fundamentalism and the need to oppose absolutism; his BBC documentary explaining why Mother Teresa is a complete fanatic, fundamentalist and a fraud; his best-selling books including god is not Great explaining why religion poisons everything in our lives.

His arguments convinced me right away. Unlike dogma, his ideas let you think for yourself. For a 38 year old Filipino Catholic and former seminarian of eight years, that was a breath of fresh air, especially if I was told and taught for many years that God can be known through reason, faith seeking understading, which is a false premise since faith is a process of non-thinking, accepting something by abandoning reason. So there I was, soaking my mind in atheistic literature that was completely new to me. And I loved it!

The Hitch stood for free speech, empowerment of women, against dictatorship celestial or otherwise, defended homosexuality, and pleaded for us to use criticial thinking and not surrender our minds against the onslaught of mind-numbing conformity and impositions of religions.
               

“Faith is the surrender of the mind, it's the surrender of reason, it's the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other animals. It's our need to believe and to surrender our skepticism and our reason, our yearning to discard that and put all our trust or faith in someone or something, that is the sinister thing to me. ... Out of all the virtues, all the supposed virtues, faith must be the most overrated” – Christopher Hitchens

So I learned to be brave, to question everything, and to stand for the same virtues that Hitchens stood for. Hitchens of course hated the idea of emulating him and putting him in the pedestal; but I owe him, his contribution to humanity for unshackling my mind from the prison of religion and faith. Christopher Hitchens ideas are universal and accepted by fair minded individuals around the world. When Hitchens wrote why Orwell matters, he got his analysis right. In many ways, he educated us to always pay attention to society's leanings towards absolute rule and constant surveillance. With Hitchens, a torch has been passed, now we need to be aware, not just of fascist and totalitarian tendencies, but of the uncritical surrender of the mind, against the evils of religion. That is why Christopher Hitchens matters to me.

Forget Halloween, real life is scary enough

During Halloween, for a few days, we pretend to scare ourselves by watching scary movies, donning scary costumes, or imagining scary creatures exist. This desire, like all things imaginary, is self-inflicted yet it appeals to us because we know that tomorrow morning, this ‘Friday the 13th’ scenario ends. But what if your life is one never-ending Halloween?

For example, because I now live in Australia, I am lucky I don’t have to endure long hours of traffic in EDSA just to get to and from work; or test my immune system with heavy and toxic pollution that is all around Metro Manila. For millions of Filipinos, real life is scary enough and they face these scary realities every day.

To many, they think the real horror are the politicians, their lies, and their never-ending and uncontrollable corruption; the bloody religious conflict in Mindanao; and the elusive march towards eliminating poverty and the injustices poor Filipinos face every day. They are probably right. Philippine society is fraught with so many problems that it is so impossible to improve it. The very institutions fail them at every juncture.

The irony here is that even if we deny there is a problem, which politicians are wont to do, or try to divert their attention thru shallow entertainment, which the media outlets in the Philippines almost always do, we are in effect helping to perpetuate it. The only way is to face the problem.

Sometimes, the solution comes from history. When Epy Quizon, son of the late great comedian, Dolphy, was asked why he remained seated throughout the entire movie, Heneral Luna, where he played the role of Apolinario Mabini, the Sublime Paralytic, he became sad because the younger generation do not know their history. The resulting furore brought a mini-renaissance and great interest in learning Philippine history.

Or, by being honest. Leah Salonga wrote what could be the tweet of the year: “Okay lang sa akin ang kababawan, pero hanggang doon na lamang ba tayo? #NagtatanongLangPo” (It’s ok to be shallow sometimes, but is that all we aspire to? Just asking). I was criticised in the past for saying Filipinos are bobotante (stupid voters). But that’s the reality, Filipinos are stupid. They criticise their politicians, yet still keep electing the same corrupt people into elected office. If only 25 million tweets for AlDub, a love tandem popularized by a noontime show Eat Bulaga, could be used to elect moral and competent candidates; to push their local mayor or governor to build more roads, hospitals and schools; or to generate strong opposition against unfair labour practices by some corporations.

Douglas Adams, in his book The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, wrote ‘I’d rather be happy than right any day’. This quote probably sums up AlDub fans simplistic attitude toward life. The problem is, life is anything but simple. Life requires that we think about our decisions constantly and not expect solutions to be handed from above. The work continues even AFTER the election. Democracy requires that we fight for our freedoms everyday. Perhaps this explains why we seek strong and assertive candidates like Duterte to do the dirty work for us.

I know Filipinos have suffered enough for so long. The real horror, and perhaps insult, is not acting on our problems. As Christopher Hitchens puts it: “Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. The grave will supply plenty of time for silence.”

Where art thou, secularism?

Photo by Rappler

In the Philippines, the concept of secularism is poorly understood. When followers of Iglesia Ni Cristo (INC) staged a protest in front of the Department of Justice against government interference in their church’s internal matters particularly by Secretary Leila de Lima, they shouted that separation of church and state, as enshrined in our 1987 Constitution, must be respected. Somehow to them secularism meant non-interference, or a hands-off approach when dealing with religious matters. Civil laws have no influence, weight or jurisdiction over religious communities. In short, INC wants to be exempted from any wrongdoings or crimes just by invoking separation of church and state; notwithstanding the fact that they, as a religious organization, have in multiple occasions, clearly interfered in national politics and state matters.

Senior INC leaders, who are facing complaint for illegally detaining some of their church members, try to agitate their supporters by accusing the government of persecution and unfair treatment. It is an old but effective tactic employed not just by religions, but by regimes like Cuba and North Korea. There is such a thing as “persecution mentality” where leaders rally their constituents to help justify their continuance in power. For a minority religion in a Catholic-majority country, this persuasion really comes in handy at a time when INC is facing major leadership crisis.

As a secular humanist, I had mixed reactions when I heard INC proclaimed separation of church and state. A part of me was glad that finally one religion was openly advocating for secularism; but then I got really worried when I read more deeply the news feeds on my Facebook wall. As a founder of a Facebook group, Secular Filipinos, I could not help but clarify to our INC brothers and sisters what ‘’separation” of church and state really is.

First, it must be noted that church and state separation or secularism means that religious people are free to practice their religion as long as they don’t interfere with the freedom of other religious and non-religious people; and as long as they don’t impose their beliefs in law-making, in government, in schools and in health. Secularism means freedom of religion and freedom from religion. Secularism promotes equality which is the reason why it is supported by both religious and non-religious people. Secularism is allied to democracy because it respects all religions and no religion.

Naturally, the nature of religions is to impose their beliefs on others. Secularism is the boundary that protects both the religious and non-religious from unwarranted imposition by one religious group. One case in particular was the RH Bill controversy wherein the Catholic Church, with all its might, tried to impose its particular theological interpretation and control women’s reproductive right. A religion like the Catholic Church, who had been used to getting privileged position in Philippine society, doesn’t want that privilege removed. So when the CPCP described the RH Bill as the “product of the spirit of this world, a secularist, materialistic spirit that considers morality as a set of teachings from which one can choose”, it was a shameless misrepresentation of what secularism really is. While secular moral principles recognize fairness, mutual consideration and promotion of well-being of all; secularism is not anti-religion. As Fr. Joaquin Bernas noted, secularism is about pluralism, “constitutionally protected pluralism includes nontheistic religions such as Buddhism, ethical culture, secular humanism, and a variety of ethical philosophies.”

Now when INC protesters marched at the DOJ premises, they were in fact doing exactly the reverse of secularism by interfering in a government investigation. Now it is legal to stage a rally as we have our right to free speech. However, if the purpose of the protest is to silence or stop investigations into possible criminal behaviour and irregularities in their church under the guise of protest to promote separation of state and church, that is a different matter altogether. We know the adage “no one is above the law” holds true even for the INC. For example, if you harass, threaten or prevent government authorities from investigating a possible crime, should it be considered obstruction of justice under PD 1829?

Of course INC leaders know that the 2016 Presidential election is just around the corner. Their marching protest is now gaining momentum and they have occupied EDSA! Presidential aspirant Jejomar Binay started demagoguing to INC members saying they are merely “fighting for their faith…from a clear act of harassment and interference from the administration.” Even Grace Poe, another contender for the seat in Malacanang, has this to say in support of the protest, "Those people are only defending their faith. We respect that, and we should also respect their rights." Words like these add fuel to the fire and can give INC’s so-called “secular” cause further legitimacy. I believe politicians should be neutral to religion and should take no sides. Which brings to mind Presidential candidate John F Kennedy, a Catholic, during his Sept 12, 1960 speech at the gathering of Protestant ministers, when asked about his allegiance to the Pope, he said:

“I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute, where no Catholic prelate would tell the president (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote; where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference; and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the president who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.

I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish; where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source; where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials; and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all.”

I know many Filipinos look up to America and her democratic and secular values, more so to JFK and for all the values he stood for. His message of secularism presents a challenge to us Filipinos who are so easily swayed by religious affinities and loyalties. 

It is time to talk about secularism.

Secularism: the real people power

The August Twenty One Movement (ATOM) was the first one to call for strike and civil disobedience against the Marcos government. Although surprisingly Cardinal Sin and the Catholic Church got all the credit for starting the People Power that eventually led to the toppling of the Marcos dictatorship back in February 1986. If the Catholic Church did not steal the idea from secular heroes like Ninoy Aquino, Butz Aquino, Jovita Salonga and Lorenzo Tanada, who all labored tirelessly in defiance of Ferdinand Marcos, and who were obviously great leaders, then we would have witnessed a stronger foundation by which to build a democratic society. The Catholic Church definitely had the power, time and opportunity to counter the dictatorship, but lacked the imagination to mobilize an effective movement to counter the massive machinery of Marcos. That credit certainly belonged to secular and civil leaders, not the religious ones, who kept the fire of defiance up in the air.

This is the reason why when the Catholic Church took on the big leading role in the People Power movement, although it had an aura of success for a few years, it did not have the sustaining and liberating power that superior secular ideas have. What was initially a secular movement, of Filipino unity and solidarity, to topple the Marcos dictatorship, it was replaced with a facetious claim that the February revolution was divinely inspired, suddenly taking the credit away the poor people who have carried the burden for so long. Instead of ordinary people, the heroes became the priests and nuns who, for the most part, stayed silent, even worse as some colluded with the regime, regarding the many crimes committed against farmers, laborers and ordinary families. In essence, the 1986 EDSA People Power and the events after that was an advertisement for one religion, the Catholic Church, its power, influence and religious leadership in transforming the current zeitgeist in Philippine society. The strength and convincing power of this promotion, we found out, failed miserably. After almost 30 years after the original People Power, our society remains so divided by one religion who is actively blocking any attempt at social progress like same-sex marriage, divorce and RH Law by citing bronze-age dogmas, instead of focusing on more important issues like our 21^st century economy. Religion cannot unite humanity. Wherever religion touches, it poisons. As long as religion controls the government, there will never be true progress. This is the reason why secularism is the key to true people power for the following reasons.

Secularism is about equality.

Secularism is not about getting rid of religion, it is about treating all religions, and no religion, as equal. Secularism is about protecting minorities and the weak in our society. Secularism is democracy. Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine advocated for secularism, better known as the separation of church and state, because they saw and experienced the real danger of clerical tyranny, intimidation and clerical abuse when men in long, white clothes were given temporal powers. Jefferson believed that human and civil rights do not depend on religious opinions. This set the path in recognizing religious freedom. Jefferson knew about the history of Europe and its religious wars because religion and religious leaders were given free rein to do whatever they want. He absolutely made sure this scenario will not happen in America and so he put this trend to an end when he proposed the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, the founding document which was adopted into the US Constitution in 1786, and of course we see echoes of it in our very own 1987 Constitution: the principle of the separation of church and state.

Only in secularism where the issues of same-sex marriage, divorce, and free speech are fully recognized and actively promoted because it addresses the human need for equality and fairness. Religion, like the Catholic Church, will always be opposed to free speech, divorce and gay marriage because of their static and unbending dogma. As long religion sticks to ancient texts for guidance, it cannot claim to reform humanity while it alienates the minorities in society.

Secularism promotes true morality

It is often assumed that religion gives us morality, or that we derive morality from religion. What we don’t see is that religion is only telling us what to do. Telling people what to do or commanding people is not morality. The real test for morality is to be able to reason and come up with your own conclusion based on the best outcome and well-being for all. Most theists claim that humans alone cannot organize this world without the help of a supernatural being. This is an insult to all humans. We have innate morality. We can distinguish right from wrong without being divinely supervised. Even some animals have shown empathy to their fellow animals.

Secularism promotes science and reason

Since the state takes no sides in religious matters, it actively promotes science and reason that generates progress to society. The state recognizes that science and reason are the tools that unites society and solve problems that plague society.

Intellectual courage

Many of us have probably encountered a loud mouth and very opinionated friend or relative who thinks his/her ideas are the best ideas there is. This person can rattle much information yet is inflexible when questioned or challenged or when in the face of opposing or contrary ideas. When we fail to appease or reason to this person, our normal reaction is either to shut up, move away or change the topic.

The problem gets infinitely harder if you’re a talking to an older Filipino person, who thinks that going against his/her ideas is considered bad manners and a breach of cultural mores called “paggalang sa matatanda” (respect for elders); or if you’re talking to someone in a position of moral authority, say a priest, it is often seen as “walang galang” (no respect) and unthinkable to even go against an institution that is thousands of years old. Failure to show restraint and respect in front of elders and in the face of authority is a ticket to social banishment.

This in-group hostility is bad for intellectual growth because it discourages new ideas. If history is our guide, much of human progress was done through challenging old ideas and trying on new ones. Imagine if scientists like Copernicus and Galileo didn’t challenge old beliefs about the world, then most of us would still hold the belief that the earth was flat and 6,000 years old.

Much of Filipino culture now is anchored on religion: from Black Nazarene and Sinulog processions to the largest 10 commandments monument in the world in Baguio; from local town fiestas to PPCRV’s involvement in the barangay and presidential elections; from TV networks to DepEd promoting God in their vision missions; from chapels and prayer rooms in almost all government buildings to CBCP and religious groups lobbying lawmakers against RH Law - religious based thinking is the accepted way of thinking. It is no wonder that we always include God in all our social and personal activities whether its opening with a prayer before a congressional and senate inquiry; thanking God for that product endorsement and movie award; or posting on Facebook about how God inspired you to live your life to the full, or how Jesus saved you from the typhoon, or how God stopped you from punching that arrogant friend of yours in the face.

The problem with this behaviour is that we have shunned every other way of thinking about the world. For example, science has opened our minds to the evidence that there is a bigger world out there. The Hubble telescope has just captured a view of a part of the sky, about the size of a one dollar coin, of roughly 8,000 galaxies each comprising billions of stars and many of those stars with planets that could possibly harbor life like ours. Now, if you ask me, that is more awe inspiring than the revelations and unverified claims written in the Bible.

When Pope Francis came to visit the Philippines last Jan 2015, Filipino Catholics went on fiesta-mode  again, so effectively shutting opportunities for conversations about the various questionable statements the Pope had; or any expression of dissent some groups may have against the Catholic Church. Imagine a US president visiting the country without the perfunctory KMU/BAYAN anti-US rally. Filipinos love to please visitors especially the Pope. They want this visit to come out pleasant and wonderful, as any host would. But there is no place for reasonable dissent. I believe that part of the visit that makes it meaningful is the engagement with disagreements, criticisms and dissent. When President Aquino criticised the Filipino clergy in front of the Pope in Malacanang, he effectively brought a good conversation. Yet many Catholics still saw this as disrespectful. What does that tell us as a people: that we are intellectually lazy.

That is why I am calling for an intellectual courage, not only from the President, but from the secular communities as well, to be brave enough to constantly challenge and bring forward avenues for fruitful conversations to the common Filipinos. The media also should not shun these conversations and stop protecting the Pope or any person from criticisms. You are not doing them or the Filipinos any favours at all in the long run.

ABS CBN needs to stop patronizing religious viewers

Catholics are a sensitive bunch. I know because I used to be one. Five years ago, I would have been offended, for example, over accusations that the Church was directly responsible for the murder of countless nonbelievers during the Inquisition, or the corruption in the Vatican. I had this attitude of denial only because I already convinced myself that the Catholic Church, the Church founded by Jesus Christ, God himself, was incapable of any wrongdoing.  So, naturally, criticisms of the Church must be exposed as lies and propaganda by the nonbelievers. Being a Catholic seminarian for eight years only further supported this attitude. And theology became that elaborate and self-reinforcing language to defend this point of view.

I remember discussing the concept of sin to a group of high school graduates in Caloocan during their class retreat at Grace Park parish. When someone asked why we need God, my prepared answer was because we were sinful in the first place. This idea sounds ridiculous of course. Why would a god allow humanity to become sinful creatures only to punish them for the sinfulness that he allowed in the first place? Any eight year old child can see through this silliness. This same attitude and behavior was in full display when ABS CBN began selling t-shirts with the words: “No race. No religion. I embrace diversity” and “Ganito ako. Ganyan ka. Who am I to judge?”

It sent Catholics into rage mode on social media. One even labelled ABS-CBN as an anti-Christ organization.

They accused the network of selling shirts with ‘distorted’ quotes of Pope Francis. However ABSCBN clarified itself in a statement saying that the shirt expressed “love, patience and humility”. ABSCBN has since pulled out the offending “No race. No religion” t-shirt from its online and retail stores. Honestly, the no race, no religion shirt made me think of John Lennon’s song Imagine:

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for

And no religion too

Contrary to what the CBCP President Socrates Villegas said, religion is allied to racism. Just look at the many dictatorships in history that used religion and race to discriminate and kill minorities including Jews, homosexuals and nonbelievers. Villegas would like you to believe that religion has no role in violence and social injustices. A close examination of their dogma and biblical texts reveal many injunctions against homosexuals, nonbelievers, women, and even children. Exodus 21 encourages slavery. 1 Timothy 2 admonishes women to be silent. The 19 hijackers who flew those airplanes into the Twin Towers were not “selfish, uncharitable and judgemental people”, they were educated men and they got inspiration from the text of the Quran and were “happy” to die for their faith.

"Ganito ako. Ganyan ka. Who am I to judge?” shirt was interpreted as an excuse to commit immorality. Yes you read it right; homosexuality and homosexual acts are viewed as immoral by many Catholics, and by extension, all liberal views that contradict the Catholic teachings. Sad to say but in order to preach morality Catholics have to denigrate the LGBTQ community.

It has now become impossible to offer better ideas in the face of an overwhelmingly bellicose Catholic social media. As soon as you have formed and shared your ideas, be prepared to be called names and worse maybe lose your jobs, business and even social life. Filipino Catholics rarely paid attention to criticisms of Catholic Church before. When I was a kid 30 years ago, I often heard people say that the Catholic Church was the one true apostolic Church that cannot be destroyed and that the Philippines was a Catholic country. But after the loss in RH Law, perhaps the defining issue of the Filipino culture war of our generation, Philippine Catholic Church leaders and apologists have increased their attacks and found their new purpose.

Rollie delos Reyes, that staunch defender of the Catholic faith, penned an open letter to ABS-CBN detailing his equal disgust over the twisting of the Pope’s words and at celebrities who promote promiscuous lifestyles. Now any decent journalist or writer knows not to conflate criticism of ideas over criticism of a group of people. It is intellectual dishonesty, yet this has become the norm of discourse among the religious set.

Compared with western media where there is robust conversation about many social, political, economic and religious issues, I deplore the state of Philippine media myself. ABS-CBN, being both a victim and perpetrator of shallow media content, has contented itself over the years to sucking up to religious crowd and viewers. ABS-CBN needs to get over its religious phase and decide for itself whether to let this lesser issue of religious rabble rousing over Pope t-shirts paralyse, influence and control them as a media organization. Eventually, ABS-CBN and other media organizations must learn to slowly detach themselves from the religious worldview and religious moralizing to gain viewership. They must also realise that religious morality are not real morality – they are commands. Religion offers only instructions what to do. Real morality emanate outside of religious traditions. Religious morality cannot offer real world solutions to issues like racism, homosexuality, empowerment of women, free speech and sex, among others. Here I offer secular humanism as a better philosophy and morality to engage its viewers. One of the positive aspects of secular humanism is that it is not engaged in indoctrinating its viewers with ready-made morality or a list of do’s and don’ts. Secular humanism engages its viewers to think for themselves about many issues while rejecting superstition, supernaturalism and dogma as the basis of decision making.  In the end, it’s a question whether you want to apply 1^st century morality to 21^st century problems.