TABBOGA, Serenity Anne T.

4-I
Ate David and Kuya Benz
May 14, 2013
Clash of Beliefs
All of us have the right to stand for something. We can argue something based on what
we have observed. But sometimes, were arguing about a fact and we tend to commit fallacious
information just because our feelings overpowered those thoughts in our mind that needed to be
said. In arguing something, we should consider all aspects of the idea because we can be bias in
explaining and proving our side. There is this article RH Bill, Ateneo, and La Salle: Of lemons
and cowards. The author of this article can be clearly seen biased because of what school the
author came from. And the author didnt see all aspects of the issue.
As I continue reading this article, I can say that the introduction or the first paragraph of
the author doesnt connect with the body. The author defines RH Bill and in contrary, the author
stated that it is the Philippine state that is to blame and not the overpopulation of the poor. This
doesnt connect because the body talks about the professors of Ateneo de Manila University and
De La Salle University and not Who are the ones to be blame.
If UST professors dont agree with the stand of the CBCP, then they have a problem.
This is a fallacious statement. Its not because you dont oppose the RH Bill, you already have
the problem with yourself. CBCP is not a god. They cannot be equal to God. Opposing or
believing the advocacies of RH Bill doesnt measure your religion and doesnt measure your
faith as children of God.
Nobody should question whether the University supports the Churchs stand as the
Gospel of Christ is USTsand any Catholic institutionspillar and foundation. I can say that
this is a Hasty Generalization because how come the author is sure that 100% of the population

of their school believe that fact? We can question anybody in that school and we can find
someone opposing the authors argues.
How could Ateneo and La Salle professors dismiss the medically established dangerous
side effects of contraceptives when they are not even physicians? This can be considered as a
Guilt By Association. Ateneo and La Salle are Catholic schools too but believing RH Bill
doesnt change it. They are educated people and they need not to be physicians to understand the
bill and to understand the advantages and disadvantages of the bill. Even the author who is
clearly a student of UST understands the bill. So how come that the professors of Ateneo and La
Salle dont?
UST and her physicians surely know whereof they speak. Theyre scientists and experts,
unlike the Ateneo and La Salle professors who are intellectual pretenders and interlopers! The
author is saying that they are right about the effects of the bill because UST is the Medical school
of the Philippines. The author said that they are great. This is a fallacious statement that can be
considered as Guilt By Association. The author even criticize and insult the professors of La
Salle and Ateneo which is a wrong move because he is writing an article and he must not be
biased in standing his beliefs.
Were pretty sure Saint Ignatius would have no confusion on where to put that jesuitic
Jesuitin Heaven or Hell?in his famous Spiritual Exercises. This statement is a fallacious
statement because the author himself broke his beliefs of being a Catholic pride because he
places the names of saints in a wrong way. All throughout the article, the author is saying that as
a Thomasian, you must uphold the beliefs of the Catholic Church. But how come he could say
that statement? Disrespect to the saints the author tends to value.

Cabading emphasized that such reaffirmation is to safeguard the right of the students to
a solid Catholic education. This can be a hasty generalization because we can say that UST is
a Catholic School. But not all of them are Catholics. Some of their students are Christians and
Christians dont believe in saints. The author generalizes too much that he tends to forget that
they came from different religions because UST is not a school exclusive for Catholics only.
Some of us want to prove our own ideas but sometimes we tend to overthink and we
dont consider every factor of the issue. And we should not always consider our feelings in
proving something. It can be based on facts so that our ideas are not mislead. This article shows
numerous of fallacious statements. This is guilt by association considering that the author attacks
different schools and differentiating those schools from them by putting crown in their heads.