As we relish the alleged overall “success” of the first automated election in the country let us not overlook and ignore its more significant but clearly alarming aspect—that candidates who openly and brazenly violate our election laws with impunity can be, as they are proclaimed winners by the very electoral body charged with the enforcement of said laws; that candidates who want to stick to the rules and engage in principled politics do not stand a chance of ever winning the election; and that the dirty politics of traditional politicians is here to stay especially in the election of provincial, city or municipal officials. Can any of the winners for example honestly claim that they did not overspend in their campaign? And will anybody believe them if they say so?
Of course, this kind of dirty politics and illegal practices is not only due to the lax or absence of proper implementation of the laws by the responsible government agencies. It is also due to the laws themselves which recognize individual rights and freedoms particularly the “due process” clause used by candidates to prolong and delay the resolution of the cases filed against them until these cases become moot and academic.
But blame should also be heaped on all of us comprising the electorate for still electing these candidates who brazenly commit these election related offenses. As they say, people deserve the government they get because they are the ones who installed such government in the first place.
We may have elected a leader who seems to be credible and capable enough to comply with his promise of reforming the government particularly in eradicating corruption plaguing almost all areas in public service. But in a society like ours, the promised reforms may remain simply a promise.
Indeed our society is in danger of becoming too liberal and aptly fits the description of a society depicted in an Article published in Synergeia a journal on interdisciplinary research in the humanities and social sciences of the UA&P, written by Reverend Fr. Henry P. Bocala. This is a society where “there are no moral absolutes, norms of conduct that applies to all at all times”; where “those who preach the Truth are bigots, intolerant creatures who have no place in a pluralistic world. Only the pragmatic makes sense”; and where “Ethics are relative and culture bound; like fads they change with the time. They are no more than social conventions . . . Nowadays spheres of public life make hardly any reference to God. He has been driven out and confined to the private realm.
Describing it further, Fr. Bocala says: “Key sectors of society are plagued by moral disorder. The media have become a potent tool of trivializing sex, drugs and violence. Schools teach students how to use condoms. Tinsel-town is idolized for its glitz and glamour. Parliaments enact laws that trample upon basic human rights. Families are breaking apart, while same sex unions are on the rise. Pregnancy is treated like a disease. Fetuses are flushed down the privy. Pets are mollycoddled, while babies are aborted. Blasphemous books and movies are raking it in as bestsellers and blockbusters. Gay coalitions are making waves. There’s an upsurge of cyber prostitution and the flesh trade”.
But “the scenario is not bleak”, according to Fr. Bocala. “The flight of the modern world from God is far from irreversible. On the contrary we can accurately say that side by side with secularism, there emerges an increasing interest in the religious phenomenon. The sacred is in vogue once again. It has dawned upon some rationalist intellectuals that faith cannot be replaced by ‘pure concept’ and that a society cut off from its religious roots and traditions cannot simply exist. The human person cannot entirely forget that ‘in Him (God) we live and move and have our being (Acts 17:28)”.
“So, re-Christianization should reach into the media, families, schools, businesses and parliaments. Agents of evangelization must leave no stone unturned in making the voice of Christ heard. Christians neither violate individual freedom nor erase the separation between Church and State when they speak of God. It is their right as citizens and their moral duty to do so. If people can parade their immorality pompously and with impunity, are we going to do less with our business?”
Thus in conclusion, the author even likened our Faith to a foot-wear. They have one thing in common: they are “something you always have to wear”.
This is the challenge we have to face as we hopefully look forward to the installation of a new government whose main promise is reflected in its enticing campaign slogan: “kung walang corrupt walang mahirap.”
* * *
E-mail at:jcson@pldtdsl.net