Irony

     Merriam-Webster’s defines “irony” as the “incongruity between the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected result”. With this understanding, it is astonishing how human thought can be so ironic! As I revive this column, I wish to call our attention to this reality, while I invite everyone to do what this column title intends to do: “Cogito” (I think).

     In the front page of The Philippine Star last Wednesday (February 6), I came across this photo of several supposedly naked women models (nine of them), each holding a placard that seemingly serves as the only cover to one’s private parts. All their placards read: “Naked truth is: Mali, the elephant suffering!”

 

     The caption says: “Models and entertainers hold placards during a photo shoot for a new ad for animal rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals in Makati City... PETA seeks the transfer of Mali, the elephant, from solitary confinement at the Manila Zoo to a sanctuary in Thailand”.

      Here’s the irony: to support for the “ethical treatment of animals”, this group (PETA) has to strip naked nine respectable women and cover them only with placards.

   

     Is that the way we “ethically treat” human beings? Does ethical treatment of animals need to “unethically treat” women? Maybe just to call our attention, eh! But calling one’s attention need not be unethical to the dignity of human persons. I wonder how many ironic thinking we, human beings, show!

 * * *

Here’s another one!

      At the height of the RH bill debate last year, a good number of Ateneo de Manila University professors expressed their support for the bill, despite the fact that, while they were giving classes in a Catholic school, they were defying the Catholic authority – the Magisterium of the Church. Responding to the people’s confusion on this issue (How could a Catholic university tolerate such an anti-Catholic stand?), one Jesuit priest made a very subtle distinction: “Ateneo is not a Catholic school, but a school where Catholics go”. Very clever!

      But where’s the irony? The irony is that some of these professors belong to a group that calls itself “Catholics for RH” (C4RH). Just recently, they held a symposium here in Davao wherein they argued that RH law can be compatible with the Catholic doctrine. How ironic!

      Are they really Catholics? If they are (as their group name suggests), then why would they embrace an anti-Catholic stand on RH law? Since they could not make the Catholic Church pro-RH law, they are now trying to make the RH law Catholic! What a shame!

      Truly, “si no vives como piensas, acabarás pensando como vives” (If you don’t live according to how you believe, you will end up believing according to how you live).