Sunday, August 28, 2011

Quote of the day

Just love this quote from Ricky Gervais
“Just because you are offended doesn’t mean you are right,” Gervais said of his critics. “People fall into this myth that I’m a shock comedian. I’ve never been that. People say I crossed the line but I didn’t draw the fucking line, you did.”
if only the censorious catholics understand this.

Wednesday, August 24, 2011

Tito Sotto is a twit 2

May binabasa ako kanina tungkol sa mga kano na pro-life pero pabor sa death penalty, hindi nila nakikita yung contradiction sa pagtawag nila sa sarili nilang pro-life pero sa pagsuporta nila sa pagpatay sa tao. Naisip ko tuloy kung merong mga ganitong tao sa Pilipinas, at ang una ko na naisip ay si Senador Sotto. At ng i-google ko, makikita na pabor si Sen. Sotto sa bitay.
Senate Majority Floor Leader Vicente “Tito” Sotto III is contemplating of filing a bill seeking the re-imposition of the death penalty for drug trafficking alone.

”In the absence of death penalty, the drug traffickers seem getting their way with their illegal activities. I’m contemplating it (file bill for re-imposition of death penalty) right now,” Sotto said during the weekly Kapihan sa Senado media forum on Thursday.
Kahapon, dun sa interpellation niya kay Sen. Santiago, ipinipilit niya na amg buhay ay simula sa fertilization, at pag na fertilize na hindi na puede patayin.  Para kay Sen. Sotto, kapag di ka pa buhay, di puede pigilin ang pagiging tao mo, pag tao ka na at ayaw niya sa yo, ok lang na patayin ka.

Sotto clarified that he had not made a definite stand on the reimposition of death penalty, but admitted that if there would be a debate on this, he would agree to reimpose it on drug traffickers.
Di ba?  Hindi pa daw siya nakapagdesisyon kung para siya sa death penalty o hindi, pero pag nagkaroon ng botohan sa senado, papayag daw siya na ibalik ito.  Iniisip ba niya yung mga sinasabi niya?

Tuesday, August 23, 2011

Thursday, August 18, 2011

Ramon Tulfo on free speech

It should not have surprised me that Ramon Tulfo, somebody who deliberately makes people mad for a living is a defender of free expression

We pride ourselves as being an ideal democratic country, and yet we want to bludgeon to death an artist who offends our religious sensibilities.

We are a society of hypocrites!

We got our hypocrisy from the Spanish friars who taught us fornicating was a mortal sin, and yet impregnated many women.

*  *  *

If Mideo Cruz depicted Jesus of Nazareth with a penis protruding from his face on a painting, leave him alone.

If we crucify Cruz because we are offended by his work of “art,” we are just like the Jews who nailed Jesus on the cross because His teachings were radical.

Cruz’s work may be “immature and juvenile”—as National Artist Francisco Sionil Jose describes it—but must we punish him for being different?

Let us not forget, my dear friends and readers, that we live in a democracy.

Some wags say democracy—defined as government of, by and for the people—is “demo-crazy.”

Anyone can make a fool of himself just as long as they don’t do physical harm to others.
 I think the entire column is worth reading

Tuesday, August 16, 2011


Senator Jinggoy Estrada wants the officials of the Cultural Center of the Philippines to resign because
"As a Catholic I feel offended. I still stand by my call for those people responsible for showing the exhibit at the CCP (to resign),"
He wants the CCP personnel to resign for approving an exhibit that he finds blasphemous.  Yet he supported his father, on all his election campaigns,  his father who is an adulterer and a convicted thief.  Why was he not offended with his father who openly disobeyed the 10 commandments?

Catholic Bishop talks to god

Archbishop Gaudencio Rosales has asked Filipino catholics to do penance for the artwork of Mr. Cruz.  He does this because god is deeply offended by the work and presumably like his old testament self would punish all Filipinos up to the seventh generation for the work of one man unless catholics prostrate themselves seeking his forgiveness.

Archbishop Rosales knows that god is deeply offended by the work presumably because god told him so.

Thursday, August 11, 2011

I see the future (sort of)

In a previous post on criticism of social media, I opined that "Concerned trolling only gives ammunition to people who would want to stifle the free wheeling nature of the internet and impose their own order." Now prime minister of the UK wants to control social media because of the riots
"Mr Speaker, everyone watching these horrific actions will be stuck by how they were organised via social media. Free flow of information can be used for good. But it can also be used for ill. [And when people are using social media for violence we need to stop them.]
"So we are working with the Police, the intelligence services and industry to look at whether it would be right to stop people communicating via these websites and services when we know they are plotting violence, disorder and criminality. I have also asked the police if they need any other new powers."
via reddit

Wednesday, August 10, 2011

Mas importanteng balita nung bagyo

For the latest Philippine news stories and videos, visit GMANews.TV

Mas importante kesa kay Christopher Lao

Isa pang hirit

Pasensiya na ngayon ko lang nabasa itong article na ito kung saan nagwawala si Cardinal Rosales
Speaking on Church-run Radio Veritas, Rosales said the exhibit of Mideo Cruz “abused” freedom of expression and urged the faithful to “rise up” in protest against it.

“It’s an abuse of freedom because the use of freedom must respect responsibilities. There’s a responsibility not to destroy culture, civilization or the good conduct of persons,” Rosales said.
Kasi babagsak ang sibilisasyon dahil sa ginawang bagay ni Cruz.  Haha, over acting ka naman masyado Cardinal.
“Let me just ask, can he (Cruz) do that to his own father (or) to (national hero Jose) Rizal? …you will never do that to somebody you respect (like) your parents or to a hero like Jose Rizal. Why did you do that to the Son of God?” Rosales said.
Baka po hindi niya kinikilala si Jesus bilang anak ng diyos?  baka po hindi niya nirerespeto yung diyos na nirerespeto niyo?  Bakit kailangan niyo pilitin irespeto ng isang tao ang hindi niya nirerespeto?

Eto namand si Bishop Pabillo
Manila Auxiliary Bishop Broderick Pabillo said it was wrong for a person to “play” with objects considered holy by a religion.

“Art should enhance life…Freedom of expression has a limit because that freedom involves our duty to respect the stand, the opinion and the culture of others,” Pabillo said.
Aasahan ko na ipagbabawal na ng simbahang katoliko ang pagkain ng baboy, kasi bawal yan sa kultura at relihiyon ng mga Muslim.  Siguro ipagbawal na rin nila ang pagkain ng baka, bawal kasi yun sa kultura at relihiyon ng mga Hindu.  Yung shellfish pala kailangan din ipagbawal, bawal yun sa mga Hudyo.  Araw araw may ginagawa ang mga katoliko na taliwas sa kultura at relihiyon ng madaming tao,  bakit kailangan bigyang priority ang simbahang katoliko?

Why appeasement does not work

Because zealots do not understand appeasement,  they see it as a sign of weakness not compromise.  They will try to eliminate everybody they deem to have opposed them.

Sana Matuloy

Gusto ko matuloy itong kaso na isasampa nina Atty. Jo Imbong sa CCP para magkaroon na once and for all ng ruling.  Either ma deem unconstitutional ang blasphemy laws ng Pilipinas o makita ng buong mundo na medieval pa rin ang bansa natin.


The United Nations Human Right Committee in an opinion pronounced that blasphemy laws violate the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which the Philippines ratified in 1966.

via Dispatches from the Culture Wars

Sacred Cows

In his column defending while criticizing the CCP exhibit Conrado de Quiros revealed that his defense of freedom of expression is limited only to those he finds acceptable.  Expressions he finds unacceptable should be censored
"I grant there should be limits to free expression. You may not flash the dirty finger in public, as Rodrigo Duterte is wont to do, or the very thing the dirty finger is meant to represent, to say “f–k you” at the world. You may not piss on the flag in public to say you are pissed off with this country or its leaders. I myself do not think Cruz’s “RH series” belongs to this box, it is an attempt to say something serious, however what it has to say discombobulates the faithful."
The Philippine Daily Inquirer itself in an editorial states
"Violence should not be condoned, but the vandalism inflicted on Mideo M. Cruz’s “Polytheism” art work at the Cultural Center of the Philippines last Aug. 4—an unidentified couple smashed a penis-motif wooden ashtray glued onto the poster, and tried but failed to set fire to the collage that formed part of the installation—is understandable. The work is deeply offensive to Catholics, and even non-Catholic Christians are shocked and disgusted at the installation’s wooden cross with a movable penis and condom. If all of this does not constitute sacrilege, blasphemy or attack on religion, we don’t know what is."
These two institutions that can only do their work under the constitutional protection on freedom of expression blatantly supports limits to the freedom of other people.  Apparently, it's ok to have freedom of expression as long as you don't express things they find objectionable.

De Quiros' column is entitled "It's Complicated" only underlines his fear of religion
"First off, I’d say that as a general principle, one should be respectful of other people’s religious beliefs. One should be appreciative of, or sensitive to, the passions they generate. At the very least that is so because of the catastrophic consequences of not doing so. The capacity of slights to religion, real or imagined, to cause mayhem, or even war, is plentifully in evidence."
The fact that some religious people do violence because of perceived slight to their religion should not be a reason to tiptoe around religious feelings.  It should be a reason to ruthlessly prosecute any religious person that causes mayhem.  It should give us more reason to mock their religion so that they become inured (kumapal ang balat) to mockery.

The PDI's editorial is titled "Art as Terrorism", because putting a penis in a picture is equivalent to killing people.  The editorial is full of apologia for angry catholics and ad hominem attacks on the artist.
"Predictably enough, Cruz also misrepresents Catholic iconography in order to suit his self-serving and ultimately erroneous thesis. Whatever the excesses of Filipino folk religiosity, it must be said Catholics do not worship images; they venerate them as sensual channels to the divine. Catholics worship God; they accord the Blessed Trinity “latria,” Greek for adoration. They don’t worship the Blessed Mother and the saints. To the latter, they accord “dulia,” Greek for veneration; to the former they accord “hyperdulia,” a higher form of veneration. Therefore, Catholics don’t practice polytheism. Cruz not only misrepresents Catholics’ monotheistic practice; he insults it by using Catholic iconography to poke fun at it."
What is the difference between venerating saints and worshiping them? The end result is the same,  people pray to the saints, the the various incarnations of the Virgin Mary.  Disagreeing with one's interpretation of catholic dogma does not necessarily mean that the other person's interpretation is self serving. 

The funny thing is about the editorial is that it shoots itself.
In the end, Cruz is an “iconoclast.” His art smashes perceived false idols. The danger here is that his art could become arrogant and terror-prone. The Church has experienced a tumultuous history of iconoclastic revolutions across the centuries (the Byzantine iconoclastic outbursts in the first millennium and the Protestant revolts in the second) that have destroyed priceless items in man’s cultural heritage. And the Church is not alone among religions victimized by iconoclasm. Closer to our day, we witnessed how the Muslim Taliban dynamited in 2001 the ancient giant mountain carvings of Buddhas of Afghanistan, a terrorist blow to the cultural patrimony of humanity. 
 It styles itself as trying to protect the cultural heritage of the Philippines (presumably) because the exhibit will rile up Filipinos who will destroy catholic artifacts because they are Taliban (I think).  When in fact, the Taliban destroyed the cultural artifacts of Afghanistan because they perceived them as an affront to their one true religion, which is Islam.

I will give them this though, 
"It is unfortunate that the furor over “Polytheism” has obscured the fact that it’s just one of the works in a larger exhibit, “Kulo,” mounted by curators, artists and writers who have studied at the University of Santo Tomas in connection with its 400th anniversary this year."
it is unfortunate that a single artists work was zeroed in the catholic zealots which  led the closure of the exhibit including the works of other artists.  

CCP closes blasphemous exhibit

The CCP closed the exhibit opposed by the catholic church.  This is a sad day for artistic expression although I would not call CCP's action censorship inasmuch as it was done voluntarily.  Yes, there were threats of violence, yes, the President himself called them to state his displeasure with the exhibit.  But state coercion was not used. 

Of course informal channels have been used in the Philippines since time immemorial to silence expression they do not like but I find this positive in the sense that the establishment does understand that any overt coercion in closing the exhibit will harm the image of the Philippines as a country that values freedom.

Monday, August 08, 2011

On the CCP Exhibit

Kung nababastusan kayo sa exhibit, wag niyong tingnan.  Wala namang nakatutok na baril sa ulo niyo na pumipilit sa inyo na tingnan niyo yung exhibit.  Kailangan niyo bumiyahe papuntang CCP para makita yung exhibit, wala siya sa gitna ng sala niyo.  Kunwari pa kayo nababastusan kayo tingin naman kayo ng tingin.  Hayaan niyong yung hindi nababastusan ang tumingin.  Kung gusto niyo gumawa din kayo ng exhibit na mababastusan yung ibang tao, walang pumipigil sa inyo.

Pati si Imelda Marcos pumapapel na, tae.

Sunday, August 07, 2011

Concerned Trolls

The urban dictionary defines concerned troll as
"A person who posts on a blog thread, in the guise of "concern," to disrupt dialogue or undermine morale by pointing out that posters and/or the site may be getting themselves in trouble, usually with an authority or power. They point out problems that don't really exist. The intent is to derail, stifle, control, the dialogue. It is viewed as insincere and condescending."
The  adventures of Christopher Lao and the various reactions on the internet engendered a lot of concerned trolling.  There is Ed Biao who writes in the Manila Standard
...everyone who tweeted and blogged negative things about Christopher and the more than 35,000 people (as of this writing) who liked the “Christopher Lao (ang bobong sinugod ang kotse sa baha)” should reassess their values. Like you haven’t done anything stupid in your life? You should be thankful that your foolish deeds were not televised.
 or J. Miguel Tanchico for the Inquirer
However, whether or not to like the social media pages created to diss a flood victim online requires a lot of thinking before you click, because this clearly shows how prone social media is to abuse by some netizens who think they have the freedom to bash a person they hardly know, effectively making a group of cyber bullies out of them.
 The Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility, who should know better also got into the act
GMA News had to take down the video from their website because apart from sharing the news, people had started to call Lao names—used rude and/or insulting words to describe him and the incident—in other words, a clear abuse of social media.
It is one thing to point out that the reactions of people are unfair, another to blame social media for being at fault.  It should be noted that Mr. Biao, supports of social media tyranny if he disapproves of the subjects, in the same column wrote
Some individuals, like the couple who took distasteful and disrespectful pre-nup photos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani and the guy who hung his puppy on a clothesline, deserved the multimedia attention and the public outrage. They made premeditated bad choices and had to suffer the consequences. In Christopher’s case, it was a spur of the moment thing. He’s a person who happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time.
Both his examples are instances of poor judgement, the same as that of Mr. Christopher Lao.

And Mr. Tanchico (through the PDI) and the CMFR both uses social media to promote their ideas.  Freedom of expression means we protect expression we like as well as those we abhor.  Concerned trolling only gives ammunition to people who would want to stifle the free wheeling nature of the internet and impose their own order.

Thursday, August 04, 2011

Did GMA win?

Rigoberto Tiglao reminds us that by all metrics, GMA won the 2004 elections. Quoting Winnie Monsod's article
“Item: ‘Gloria Arroyo is an illegitimate president’ [because she cheated to win].

“1. Voter preferences as recorded by the Social Weather Stations, which conducted polls every two weeks since the start of the campaign period, showed that while at the beginning (Jan. 16-28) the lead of FPJ over Arroyo was almost 10 percentage points, this was whittled down so that a month later, they were running neck-and-neck, and this continued into March. By the second week of April, the polls showed Ms Arroyo ahead by almost five percentage points although this was not statistically significant. But by the week before the elections, Ms Arroyo’s lead over Poe was significant (37 percent vs. 30 percent).

“The other major polling organization, Pulse Asia, also noted the same trend, although its polls were taken at slightly different time periods…

“Its last poll from April 26-29 showed Ms Arroyo leading, 37 percent vs. 31 percent. Note that a six-point lead in voter preferences… would imply a difference of 2.0-2.5 million votes between the two candidates.

“2. Exit polls on Election Day itself by at least three media organizations validated the run-up polls. All of them showed Ms Arroyo as the winner.

“3. The final official congressional canvass showed Ms Arroyo getting 40 percent of the votes cast, while Poe got 36.5 percent (a difference of 1.1 million votes), while the Namfrel Quick Count, based on 83 percent of total precincts showed Ms Arroyo with 39.4 percent and Poe with 36.8 percent (a difference of 700,000 votes).

“All figures from different sources are within the same ballpark, and all indicate that Ms Arroyo won. For those who think that the poll results should not be accepted, it should be pointed out that the head of the Social Weather Stations is the first cousin of Poe.

“What’s more, other circumstances obtaining during the campaign period support the conclusion that it is the claim of ‘illegitimacy’ that is a lie: after all, her coalition party, K4, won 58 percent of senatorial seats, 87 percent of congressional seats, 85 percent of gubernatorial slots, 87 percent of city mayor seats, and 85 percent of all mayor seats. Either they carried her or she carried them, or there was some combination of both.

“Could this have been the result of a grand conspiracy to commit massive cheating at all levels? But that is not what either the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines or the Namfrel thought. Said the prelates: ‘There were some instances of cheating and violations of election law by political parties in their areas but these did not affect the voting in general. It is the view of the bishops that the results of the elections reflected the will of the Filipino people.’

“Said Namfrel secretary general Bill Luz: ‘The results of the elections are credible and reflect the vote of the people. We didn’t see enough electoral anomalies at the national level to have a material effect on the national results.’

“… And finally, it was generally acknowledged that Poe was shooting himself in the foot during the campaign, and that the opposition was split four ways. In other words, they did it to themselves.’’

And “Garci”? If he cheated for Arroyo, he did a lousy job. Votes for Arroyo in Mindanao, based on Congress’ official count, were 527,144 less than the votes based on the SWS exit poll. That is too big to be a poll’s margin of error: Was it she who was cheated?

How will the Catholic church react?

`Blasphemous’ art vandalized
An unidentified couple smashed a penis-motif wooden ashtray glued onto the poster and tried but failed to set fire to the entire collage, said Karen Flores, visual arts department chief of the Cultural Center of the Philippines.

One of the vandals then gave a lecture on morality to the lone guard assigned to the exhibit and other visitors before the couple casually walked out of the government building, Flores told Agence France-Presse."

Kami Man

Magic wishes he hadn't retired early
"Nearing the 20th anniversary of the announcement that he had contracted HIV, Magic Johnson sat down for a one-on-one conversation recently at Loyola Marymount University. [It] pains Johnson to this day that he cut his NBA career short, frankly because he didn't believe it was necessary. "If I knew what I know now, I wouldn't have retired," Johnson said. "But I didn't know that then. And you've just got to go with what happened." At the time, many wrongly perceived that Johnson had contracted AIDs and that he could spread the disease through simple contact. ... "I decided to retire because I didn't want to hurt the game."
Paborito ko dati si Magic Johnson.

Rizal and the Consequences of Leadership

Wednesday, August 03, 2011

Amoy baby

Pag wala ka anak at nakikita mo lang ay yung anak ng ibang tao, iisipin mo lahat ng baby amoy mabango, pero pag may anak ka na, ma realize mo na ang kuarto mo, kung saan kasama mo yung mga baby mo, ay amoy pupu ng baby.

Magbasa ka naman

Ilan pang mga katoliko na nagpo protesta sa exhibit ng CCP ang nagtanong 
"It was created by law and funded by our taxes for the purpose of awakening the consciousness of our people to our cultural heritage," Imbong said.

"Is it our cultural heritage to mock and insult religious personages and icons? Is it aesthetic to vandalize a venerated representation of objects of worship and reverence? Is vulgarity and blasphemy a Filipino value? What Filipino pride can emerge for such works? Is this our national identity? And CCP promotes it?" she asked.
Manang, basahin niyo po itong mga gawaing ito:  Noli Me Tangere, El Filibusterismo, Dasalan at Tuksuhan, Fray Botod, tapos saka mo itanong ulit yang mga tanong mo.

Muddled Thinking

Nasa topic na rin lang ako ng RH bill, to ang isang istorya tungkol kay dating Senador Tatad kung saan pinapakita niya ang malabong pag-iisip ng mga tumututol sa RH Bill.  Ayon sa kanya, labag sa saligang batasa ang RH bill dahil
"Section 12 of Article II of the Philippine Constitution which says that the State "shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception."

Based on this, he said that it is the duty of the State to protect the life of the unborn child from conception and that this shall be contradicted by a state-run program of contraception."
pero ano ba ibig sabihin ng contraception?   Ang contraception ay
"The deliberate use of artificial methods or other techniques to prevent pregnancy as a consequence of sexual intercourse
it ay paggamit ng iba't ibang uri ng teknik para hindi mabuntis ang babae sa pagtatalik.  Ibig sabihin, hinaharang ng contraception ang conception.  Kung walang conception, walang kailangan i-protect.

Tapos, labag daw sa saligang batas ang RH bill dahil
Tatad likewise said the RH bill violates the constitutional right of couples to conduct family planning in accordance with their religious convictions.

"The bill does not only attack that belief, it also seeks to further penalize those who hold such belief by making them pay with their tax money for the program that assaults their belief. This is tantamount to religious persecution, possible only in a totalitarian state," he said in his letter.
nilalabag daw nito ang karapatan ng isang mag-asawa na mag family planning ayon sa kanilang konsensiya.  Ano ba sinasabi ng Senate Bill 2865.
Section 3:  Guiding Principles
(a) The right to make free and informed decisions, which is central to the exercise of any right, shall not be subjected to any form of coercion and must be fully guaranteed by the State, like the right itself .
(b) Respect for, protection and fulfillment of, reproductive health and rights seek to promote the rights and welfare of every person.
(j)Each family shall have the right to determine its ideal family size; Provided however, That the State shall equip each parent with the necessary information on all aspects of family life, including reproductive health, in order to make that determination.
Pinopretektahan pa nga ng bill na ito ang karapatan ng lahat ng Pilipino na magdesisyon ayon sa kanilang konsensiya dahil sa karapatan nila ito at di puedeng pakilaman ng estado ang karapatan ng bawat Pilipino.

Sa pangalawa naman niyang punot na, na nakakawawa ang mga tutol sa batas na ito dahil kasama sa  pondong agagamitin sa pagpapatupad ng batas ang mga buwis ng mga tutol sa batas.  Pero hindi lamang ito ang batas na may mga tumutol.  Madaming tutol sa pagtaas ng VAT mula 10% patungong 12%.  At ang buwis nila ay kasama sa pagpondo sa BIR na kumukubra sa pinataas na buwis.  Kung susundan natin ang lohika ni Sen. Tatad,  wala ng magbabayad ng buwis sa bansa dahil lahat naman tayo ay may tinututulang batas na ayaw nating mapatupad.

Nagkukunwari pa ang mga tutol sa RH bill na may lohika ang kanilang pagtutuol sa panukalang batas na ito samantalang alam naman ng lahat ng relihiyon ang totoong dahilan ng kanilang pagtutol.  At ang pangrelihiyong patutol aywalang lohika, walang rason at makikita mo ito sa pagbali-baliktad nila ng lohika para lang mabigyang kunwari ng hindi pangrelihiyong dahilan ang pagtutol nila.

Disinformation by RH bill opponents

May editorial ang Cebu Daily News laban sa pagkampanya ng National Youth Commission para sa RH bill.  Ok lang naman, karapatan nila magmukhang gago na walang pakialam kung mamatay na ang kababaihan sa panganganak, kung gusto nila.  Kaya lang, maliban sa pagiging mukhang gago, nalaman tuloy natin na bobo pa sila.  Kabilang sa kanilang argument laban sa RH bill ay isang pag-aaral daw na angsasabi na nakakalusot ang HIV virus sa condom
"In  1993, a United States Naval Research study established that the HIV virus, about 0.1 microns in size (a micron is a millionth of a meter), can pass through condoms which have holes or “inherent defects… between five and 70 microns.”"
1993 pa yung pag-aaral,  kung totoo itong pag-aaral na ito, sana binago na ng World Healt Organization o ng Centers for Disease Control ang kanilang rekomendasyon sa paggamit ng condom.  Tingnan natin,  ayon sa WHO

""An extensive review was conducted by a panel convened by National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in June 2000 in the United States of America, with the participation of WHO. The review concluded that condoms, when used correctly and consistently, are effective for preventing HIV infection in women and men and gonorrhoea in men".
 Ayon sa CDC
"Latex condoms, when used consistently and correctly, are highly effective in preventing the sexual transmission of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. In addition, consistent and correct use of latex condoms reduces the risk of other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including diseases transmitted by genital secretions, and to a lesser degree, genital ulcer diseases. Condom use may reduce the risk for genital human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and HPV-associated diseases, e.g., genital warts and cervical cancer."
At yung pag-aaral na sinasabi nila?  Hindi siya pag-aaral sa condom, kundi sa gloves.
Your clip is a 1992 letter to the editor from Mike Roland, editor of Rubber Chemistry and Technology, a publication of the American Chemical Society. Roland argued that "the rubber comprising latex condoms has intrinsic voids [pores] about 5 microns (0.00002 inches) in size. Since this is roughly 10 times smaller than sperm, the latter are effectively blocked.... Contrarily, the AIDS virus is only 0.1 micron (4 millionths of an inch) in size. Since this is a factor of 50 smaller than the voids inherent in rubber, the virus can readily pass through."

This sounds scary, but there are a couple problems with it. First, Roland bases his statement about a 5 micron latex pore size on a study of rubber gloves, not condoms. The U.S. Public Health Service says that condoms are manufactured to higher standards than gloves. Condoms are dipped in the latex twice, gloves only once. If just 4 out of 1,000 condoms fail the leak test, the whole batch is rejected; the standard for gloves is 40 out of 1,000. A study of latex condoms by the National Institutes of Health using an electron microscope found no holes at a magnification of 2000.
 So ayon sa WHO at CDC ng Amerika, mabisa ang condom para pigilin ang paglaganap ng HIV ngayong 2011.  Bakit ngayong nagpapalaganap ng maling kaalaman?  Kasi alam nila na walang kuwenta ang mga argumento nila laban sa RH bill kung katotohanan lang ang sasabihin nila.