Monday Overdose

Break out your high blood pressure medicine people, no matter what brand.

Thanks to the our blood pressure monitoring blog friend Jiggs, we now have a clearer murkier picture of the FFL's stand on the matters we've brought up.

It's vague and it's evasive, but hey, it's something to chew on this Monday.

From: Easter Group <eastergroup@gmail.com>
To: "jiggs842002@yahoo.com" <jiggs842002@yahoo.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 7:08:08 PM
Subject: questions on Truth Series 4.16 and 4.17

Hello Jiggs,

Peace be with you.

The responses to your queries of the 8th of October are embedded within your own e-mail as seen below.

God bless.

Moderator
CFC-FFL

At 12:57 AM 10/8/2007, you wrote:
Good day to you bro. frank and to FFL brethren,

i am compelled to write you regarding your most recent Truth Series 4.16 and 4.17. allow me to ask questions regaring these matters - on pro-life and partnerships wtih Pfizer and Wyeth, etc.


on Truth Series 4.16, Oct.05 2007
1. The sole culpability of Bro. Frank seems to be the only focus of the latest IC statement regarding contraceptives and the pharma companies. It completely misses the point that the IC is a fraternal and collegial body that decides on the basis of consensus and unanimity. The fact is there are at least 3 other members of the present Council who were also part of the old Council. They were Joe Tale, Joe Yamamoto, and Rouquel Ponte. The selective blame seemed to point to Frank. Was it not Joe Yamamoto who spearheaded the drive to involve the pharma companies as Head of Gawad Kalusugan?

my question and comment:
1. bro.frank, during the conception of the partnership, did you pose an opposition to the partnership with these pharmas? since this will contradict to the posture of CFC as being pro-life, did you not try your very best to dissuade the other members of the council not to push through with the partnership? did anyone in CFC try to check if these pharmas are selling contraceptives? even if you are outvoted, then in 2005 you must have raised hell and high waters in opposing the partnership. why only now?

CFC-FFL response: As the Executive Director of CFC and Chairman of the GK Board, Frank was never in on the details about the partnerships with the pharmas conceived and executed by Joe Yamamoto and Tony Meloto. His role in the signing was to witness the proceedings. While he does not disclaim responsibility for being part of this apparent mistake, he has in fact lamented for this act of silent assent and submitted his resignation in acceptance of his failure to stem the tide of infidelities to the vision and mission of CFC. The point is does sole culpability always rest on him when there are point persons in the Council primarily accountable for the project? Will the burden of accountability always rest on Frank when the council is undoubtedly a collegial and fraternal body where the members of the body operate as equals? The concept of command responsibility may inhere in groups which are led. However, in a collegial and fraternal body, the fault of one is the fault of all.

2. We have it from Bro. Frank himself that he did not actively support the program to the extent that the IC has dramatized it. As Chair of GK then, he was not directly involved in the actual operations of Gawad Kalusugan which is still headed by Dr. Joe Yamamoto.

i wish FFL never said this. to me this is a clear case of washing of hands.

CFC-FFL response: As we said in the above reply, what may be misplaced is placing the sole culpability on Frank when the Council is a collegial and fraternal body. Even pastorally, it operates as a household which is not led and each member is the pastor of another

AS WE SPEAK, CONGRESS IS POISED TO DELIBERATE AND POSSIBLY APPROVE AN APPROPRIATION OF 2 BILLION PESOS FOR THE DISTRIBUTION OF FREE CONTRACEPTIVES. AS IN THE PAST, WE HAVE TO FIGHT THIS MOVE AS PART OF OUR COVENANT AND ADVOCACY. WE HOPE YOU UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE THAT THE FIGHT GOES BEYOND CFC AND GK AND THE PHARMAS BECAUSE IT IS A FIGHT TO PROTECT THE SACREDNESS AND DIGNITY OF LIFE ITSELF.

Congress is mentioned here. may i ask if w can count on ms.cynthia villar to oppose the appropriation for this. or will it be the opposite?

are you aware that ms.cynthia villar is a sponsor/author of HB4110/3773 which CFC/Teodora/FEED vehemently oppose? let me answer it for you - YES, YOU ARE AWARE! then why partner with ms.cynthia villar?

CFC-FFL response: Your reaction seems to be a misapplication of the issue and using the argument tangentially to involve another party. Ms. Villar's involvement in being part of the so-called bill may have escaped notice and we shall be reaching out to make the stand of CFC-FFL known to her. In the particular case at hand, it also behooves the IC to rescind the GK partnerships with the pharma companies concerned since they know now that these firms are involved in the manufacture and sale of contraceptives.

By the way, the partner of Ms. Villar is GK. Shall we also ask GK to stop its partnership with her?

Her support for this bill is because she is concerned about women issues. She, however, is pro-life. If there are things she needs to appreciate from the Catholic perspective we shall try to impart that to her. For your information, Ms. Villar is a Protestant.


on Truth Series 4.1, Oct 05 2007
3. In view of the public announcement of Tony Meloto about not discriminating about the products and services and any potential donor manufactures and/or sells, the bishops also said that if GK wants to continue said practices which go against Christian beliefs and teachings, it can do so provided it exists like any other socio-civic organization and/or NGO, but not as one linked to a faith community organization like CFC.

on the discrimination issue - i think i saw or heard one church official that the Catholic church accepts donation from PAGCOR. i am just unsure, please correct me if am wrong. i think we all know that PAGCOR runs the casinos which is against Christian teachings. again, please correct me if i am wrong.

CFC-FFL response: There are 2 points to stress here: 1. Regarding the Church official; you may have missed the last part of his statement that even though he accepts donations from PAGCOR, "the devil remains to be his enemy." 2. PAGCOR is involved in gaming activities. Gambling, per se, is an indifferent act. It becomes a wrongdoing if done in excess. It could become sinful if it ends up in families and livelihoods being destroyed and the deleterious spread effects it may have in terms of social costs.

on Truth on Contraceptives
Depo- Provera Injectable Hormonal Contraceptive..., - bought at Mercury Drug Corporation, Pasig Fun Ranch, Frontera Verde, Pasig City, September 25 , 2007, at 5:14 PM under OR # 043376
Femenal Oral Contraceptive..., - bought at Watson's, SM Supercenter Pasig (Frontera Verde), Sept 25, 2007, at 5:10PM, Inv No. 181398


FAP/FFL, i really salute you for stooping this low like buying such products just to prove your point.

CFC-FFL response: We are for truth and are factual in raising issues, unlike others who simply malign and spread disinformation. This is a reaction we take strong exception to. There is nothing wrong whatsoever in finding out if the products are still sold over the counter because the Church authorities have ruled on Aug. 28, 2007 that it expects the IC to investigate said cases. Has the IC done its supposed work and assignment from Aug. 28 to Sept. 25, the date of the purchases? Has the IC, in compliance with its promise, done due diligence during that period? Or did it take our purchase and expose' to move the IC to action? THE TRUTH HURTS, DOESN'T IT? You may have your values misplaced when you speak about being factual, maligning and spreading disinformation. The shoe seems to be on the other foot. After being caught with a bare-faced untruth, please do not reverse our roles.

but why now? why did we not check this out Sept 2005 before we even signed the MOA? is it because back then it is not an issue? CFC-

I have not seen the MOA and i am not even aware of such partnerships until now. earlier on i asked what the scope of the partnership is. i assume the partnership is to provide free or cheap medicines to our GK beneficiaries coming from these pharma companies, right?

who defines what medicines are required - i assume that it will be CFC what medicines are needed by GK or by the beneficiaries. i think these are medicines for cough, flu, colds, headaches, diarrhea, TB and for most common diseases... but i supposed CFC will not ask Depo-provera, oral contraceptives, pills from these pharmas. did we ask for depo-provera? oral contraceptives? pills? from these pharmas during the course of two years?

CFC-FFl response: Now that we both know that these pharmas do manufacture and sell artificial contraceptives, the question is what does the IC do given the stand of the Church? It seems the burden of taking action is in your hands

my last question. talk about pro-life, can you boldly state that ALL of members of FFL do not use contraceptives?

in 2004 or 2005, statistics showed that majority of CFC still use contraceptives. we could not turn the tide and ask the members to be NATURAL. we are all guilty of this. so dont put the blame and point a finger at others. you are part to blame.

CFC-FFL response: Your question can be likened to lawmakers who think that they can legislate behavior and compliance just because there is a law. The more relevant question to ask is if CFC has actively promoted the use of the pro-life practices in its activities and programs? Does it still do so up to now? The answer is yes to both questions, except that we don't know if the IC still wants to pursue this activity because as we speak, the partnerships with the pharmas still persist and exist.

in Sept 2005, when the MOA was signed you did not lift a finger. then why do it now?

CFC-FFL response: Believe this has been sufficiently replied to earlier.

i hope you will be able to shed light on my questions.

thanks and God bless.

jiggs

God bless you too.

Couple for Christ Foundation for Family and Life

Well there you have it folks.

Now for my own set of questions...

"...he has in fact lamented for this act of silent assent and submitted his resignation in acceptance of his failure to stem the tide of infidelities to the vision and mission of CFC."

From what we've already gathered in this blog, the initial decision to resign did not stem from Frank, but from Tony Meloto. Does that mean Frank was not considering his lamentations until Tony resigned? Why then and not before, if he felt the guilt of silent assent already?

"...what may be misplaced is placing the sole culpability on Frank when the Council is a collegial and fraternal body."

It seems this is a new tack the FFL is taking, the whole collegial body argument. Even taking into consideration that by all past accounts, Frank LED the council and made many decisions without consulting the council (the Teodora/Villar tie up is an example, although that can arguably be attributable to Gerry Padilla), FP himself, in his long-winded 13 page resignation letter, exhorts us to support the council wholeheartedly:

Brothers and sisters, please support the four brothers in the council. Please give them your whole-hearted support because the council also helps us to move forward in unity of heart and mind.

All major decisions are made by the assent of all, or in this case, of Frank, but his last words to all CfC members was to stand behind the remaining 4 council members, giving the impression that they have his full support, blessings, and trust in their actions in their eventual leadership role.

"Your reaction seems to be a misapplication of the issue and using the argument tangentially to involve another party."

No, I actually think it is quite clear. A partnership by any definition is a PARTNERSHIP.

"Ms. Villar's involvement in being part of the so-called bill may have escaped notice..."

I doubt this very much, but lets take their word for it for now. I'm glad we were able to help in bringing this to their attention. The question now is, will Mrs. Villar change her stand, or will FFL move its offices?

"Her support for this bill is because she is concerned about women issues. She, however, is pro-life. If there are things she needs to appreciate from the Catholic perspective we shall try to impart that to her. For your information, Ms. Villar is a Protestant."

Wow. The simple argument that the FFL is making is that explicit AND/OR implicit support for anti-life activities is (such as accepting donations of life-saving TB medicines from a pharma who supposedly distributes or makes contraceptives) is UNchristian. So her being a Protestant makes it ok? Is being pro-life an exclusive Catholic perspective? Surely the explicit support for a bill that will have a vast effect on the public distribution of contraceptives would fall under such a label as well?

And also, does the FFL now include Protestants in its ranks? Then surely, mormons should be allowed in GK sites? That is a GREAT business decision, it will certainly help swell the FFL membership roll. Dont' take my word for it though, It's best to check, you may have to be a good friend of Gerry Padilla's first. =)

1. Regarding the Church official; you may have missed the last part of his statement that even though he accepts donations from PAGCOR, "the devil remains to be his enemy."

I take this to mean that what's good for the Church isn't good for CfC, because we could say the same thing and still be vilified by the FFL.

"...Church authorities have ruled on Aug. 28, 2007 that it expects the IC to investigate said cases. Has the IC done its supposed work and assignment from Aug. 28 to Sept. 25, the date of the purchases?"

Who's to say an investigation had NOT been done? Obviously when you query the company in question about its business activities, it will take some time to research, compose, and properly document an official response and stance. Did the IC not release a statement showing their progress in looking into the matter? My point is, these are not decisions done in haste, especially after the company had responded to the matter already.