Singing for the Glory of God

For the video, click the link below.

UPC Balibago Praise Team at Cuneta Astrodome Global Homecoming Concert Crusade 

Community Indulgence

Live Life to the Fullest

            Who among us can even dare to say that life is not meaningful? Even the elderly, the disabled, the blind, the deaf, the mute, the lowly, can declare that it is.

            Kanlungan ni Maria, Home for the Aged Foundation Inc. relatively depicts what life is. All of us will come and get old – a life’s fragment which is inevitable. But, when our years will gradually wither, can we say or even whisper to ourselves that we have lived a meaningful life, and that we have fought a good fight?

            Presumably at some point in our life, we are wondering why have we been given this life. What is it for? Why are we given the breath we breathe? Why are we given years to live? These questions may seem to be foolish and childish, nevertheless, they are very important and profound questions in our life that we continue to search through the times for a perfect answer. I assume, this is the reason why life seems to be mysterious and relatively unique to each other.

            As it is denotatively defined, a meaningful life is a broad term encompassing a varied number of definitions having to do with the pursuit of life satisfaction. Some may find it in pursuit of things, in pursuit of pleasure or in leaving a legacy – three of the most common approaches in search for the meaning of life. One thing is common and clear here; we all define and create our own meaning. We all choose what pursuit we will take. We all choose what way we want to walk through, what we want to become. We all choose how we will live our life, and eventually find the meaning of it.

            Looking upon the situations of the elderlies in the Home for the Aged Foundation makes me to be reminded that life is short and that you will never know when it will end. Life is a cycle - you die and decompose, as Daniel Kolak have said. Amidst the atmosphere in Kanlungan ni Maria, I learned there that life can be as easy as you think but can be likewise as hard when you expect that it will be, as quoted by Nanay Baby. I was inspired by each of their life stories. With empathy, I can really feel the hardships they have been through, yet still thankfulness is in their hearts. Though they feel that society isolates them yet can they still appreciate life. “All is well”, as most of them say. Looking in their eyes, mercy propagates in my heart but nay, cheer hovers still because I can see that in their little ways, they know how to turn the world upside down. They are positive, looking forward for greater existence and are all grateful for the life they had, they are having, and the extended years they will have.

Truly, life is meaningful. It was designed by God from the very moment He created us to be lived fully and well. We choose, in ourselves, how to find its meaning, how to find our life’s satisfaction. And in the search for a meaningful life, yes, we sometimes pass through the abstracts, the life’s ups and downs. There can we further understand what we are searching for. It is good to remember that life is rendered short and it is only once, so we must live it to the fullest. Live the best out of it. Live a meaningful life!

Is Flirting a Question of Morality?

“Sex is a natural part of human life for which we have very strong drivers. In stories it both provides an echo of our experiences and plays directly to our desires and fantasies. In tales of morality, those who transgress social morals, such as rakes, seductresses and lechers may well be punished for their sins. In other tales, they may be objects of fantasy who play out our secret desires and allow for vicarious pleasures” (Flirting; Psychology Today)

Now, is flirting here a question of morality. To attend to the question, we must first clearly define the terms involve – flirting and morality.

What is morality? From the Latin moralitas “manner, character, proper behavior”, morality is the differentiation of intentions, decisions and actions between those that are good (or right) and those that are bad (or wrong). The term morality can be used descriptively or normatively: descriptively, to refer to some codes of conduct put forward by a society or some other group, such as religion or accepted by an individual for an own behavior; normatively, to refer to a code of conduct that, given specified conditions, would be put forward by all rational persons. Morality when used in descriptive sense has an essential feature that “morality” in the normative sense does not have, namely, that it refers to codes of conduct that are actually put forward and accepted by some society, group, or individual. If one is not a member of that society or group, and is not that individual, by then accepting a descriptive definition of morality has no implications for how one should behave. If one accepts a moral theory’s account of rational persons and the specifications of the conditions under which all rational persons would endorse a code of conduct as a moral code, then one accepts that moral theory’s normative definition of “morality”. Accepting a normative definition of “morality” commits a person to regarding some behavior as immoral, perhaps even behavior that one is tempted to perform. (Morality; Standford.edu)

            At this time, let us define what flirting is. Flirting can be in itself considered flirting when it suffices the following conditions. First, the flirter should act with the intention to do things which are disposed to raise flirter-flirtee romance and/or sex to salience for the flirtee, in a knowing yet playful manner. Second, he or she should believe that the flirtee can respond in some significant way. We note here the intention and manner of flirting and the significant response of the flirter as well (Jenkins, 2010; pp.18).

            Further, it is said that flirting is a basic instinct, part of human nature. This is not surprising: if we did not initiate contact and express interest in members of the opposite sec, we would not progress to reproduction, and the human species would become extinct. According to some evolutionary psychologists, flirting may even be the foundation of civilization as we know it. They argue that the large human brain – our superior intelligence, complex language, everything that distinguishes us from animals – is the equivalent of the peacock’s tail, a courtship device evolved to attract and retain sexual partners (Fox, 2011; pp. 1). Thus, we can now see here that flirting becomes instinctive.

            How can we now say that flirting is in itself a question of morality? The questions now forego the list. Do we properly behave when we flirt? Is it right to act flirtatiously? Do I become immoral when I flirt with someone else?

            Like every other human activity, flirting is governed by a complex set of unwritten laws of etiquette. These rules dictate where, when, with whom and in what manner we flirt. We generally obey these unofficial laws instinctively, without being conscious of doing so.

            We only become aware of the rules when someone commits a breach of this etiquette – by flirting with the wrong person, perhaps, or at an inappropriate time or place. Chatting up a widow at her husband’s funeral, for example, would at the very least incur disapproval, if not serious distress or anger. This is a very obvious example, but the more complex and subtle aspects of flirting etiquette can be confusing – and most of us have made a few embarrassing mistakes (Fox, 2011; pp.1).

            Now, to fully answer the question, we first take into consideration what was mentioned in the definition of flirting, that it considers the intention. At one level, you can flirt with more or less anyone – a flirting for fun. An exchange of admiring glances or a bit of light-hearted flirtatious banter can brighten the day, raise self-esteem and strengthen social bonds. Flirtation at this level is harmless fun, and only stuffiest killjoys could possibly have any objections.

Clearly, it makes sense to exercise a degree of caution with people who are married or attached. Most people in long-term relationships can cope with a bit of admiration, and may even benefit from knowing that others find them or their partners attractive, but couples differ in their tolerance of flirtatious behavior, and it is important to be alert to signs of discomfort or distress because this could lead to society’s disapproval; thus making your flirting act to be perceived as immoral.

Research has also shown that men have a tendency to mistake friendly behavior for sexual flirting. This is not because they are stupid or deluded, but because they tend to see the world in more sexual terms than women. There is also evidence to suggest that women are naturally more socially skilled than men, better at interpreting people’s behavior and responding appropriately. This means that women need to be particularly careful to avoid sending ambiguous signals in interactions with married men, and men need to be aware that married/attached males may misinterpret friendly behavior towards their wives/girlfriends. If they will not, this could possibly lead to immoral actions.

At another level, where it is not just flirting for fun but rather flirting with intent, flirting per se serves here as an essential element of the mate-selection process. We flirt with the intent of assessing potential lifetime partners. However, there is a need here to be more selective about your choice of target, your behavior (Fox, 2011; pp.4), the places your flirt with and other factors to be taken into consideration, lest you found yourself judged by society as immoral.

One can also say that his or her intention for flirting is ‘it can be a liberating form of play, a game with suspense and ambiguities that brings joy of its own’. There is a playful manner, as what have been said also in the definition. Some flirters appear to want to prolong the interaction because it is pleasurable and erotic in its own right, regardless of where it might lead. We sometimes fantasize of flirtation turning into something more. This is even worse. The intention of flirting here clearly becomes to have easy, no-strings-attached sex (The New Flirting Game; Psychology Today). Is this morally right – to engage in sex before marriage?

Take a look at the sample story from the Book Wagas entitled “Playmates” by Mitzie Ann Mercado. The characters only met that very same day and walked through the park yet here is what happened next:

When the sun had set without so much as a glance, maybe he remembered why we met. Or maybe, I had exhausted all of my life stories. It’s funny how I could summarize my life in just one day. His hand on my waist was no longer tickling me. It began caressing my back, my hips, and it’s climbing upward. He blew light kisses on my neck, behind my ears. I started to pant as his hand drew circles on my belly. His lips traced my jaw, searching for my lips as his hand reached my breasts underneath the cardigan. I could hear the music from the aerobics class nearby, the ice cream bells, the children playing in the playground behind the bushes.

But darkness made us bolder. His hand was already inside my skirt and his finger probed between my legs. My lips missed his as I arched my neck upward, gasping. His finger is within me and down there, I felt myself tightening around it. He’s looking at me directly, daring me more. His fingers became more insistent. He was biting his lower lip. I fought the urge not to crush it on mine. I could feel the world spinning. I held on to his nape and raked his hair. He tried to kiss me on the lips but I buried my face on his chest as I grew breathless. I closed my eyes and as his finger dug deeper, I recalled our whole time together (Caslib, Ruizo, 2012; pp. 76)

They have been engaged in sex. This is thus morally wrong and biblically established as wrong too. What is sinful here is they act lasciviously attending to the desires of their flesh, even if instinctively, they both know that the act is wrong.

Thus, flirting in its intention and playfulness manner should take into consideration the right places of flirting, right persons to flirt with, and right way to flirt, not involving SEX in the case. Sex is sacred and is a gift from God for us to multiply and replenish the earth, not to fulfill our fleshly desires.

            In the end, flirting is truly a question of morality, whether in descriptive or normative sense. Our behavior as we exist in society are always and must be based on a general moral law, may it be written or unwritten. Besides, we instinctively have the capability to reason out for ourselves what is wrong and right. We have our common sense to decide whether to do something or abstain from it. Flirting involves morality in the sense that it concerns man’s proper behavior in a group or society he or she belongs to.  However, we are not concluding that flirting is always judged as morally wrong. To flirt professionally as part of mate-selection process, just as how the civilization before worked with it, can be said to be morally right.

Impact of Technology on Social Circles

Email, Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, YouTube, Tumblr, blogs (of course), and scores of others—all part of the new and wonderful ways we can now connect with one another electronically, each with its own culture and unique set of rules. In one sense, the planet has never been more interconnected. And yet, this interconnectedness, while wonderful, hasn't come without cost (Lickerman, 2010)

The first trend we can’t help but notice is the fact that communication has become

more rapid than ever. Forget about writing letters, even about writing emails to your loved ones, now most people prefer texting. This is in fact one of the most effective and fastest communication methods. But how does texting shape our relationships? First of all, people expect to receive an answer much more quickly than before. An email writer expects to receive a reply in 24 hours to 48 hours at most. A texter expects to receive a reply right away. But is this good for our relationships? According to experts, it is not good at all, because it reduces the significance of social interaction and if love is concerned, it reduces longing, and therefore degrades romance.

Another trend is the fact that we meet more people online than in real life. Although dating sites aren’t new, they are becoming more and more popular. This is a much simpler, quicker method to meet someone, so much so you can even afford to be picky. Now you can even meet someone in online games or forums, not to mention all the social media sites which are growing more and more popular. People have also begun to Google each other before even meeting face to face. Now you can know a lot about a person by simply typing in their name into your browser. By simply browsing through a person’s Facebook or Twitter page, you can learn more personal things than ever about someone. Not to mention that the trend in social media is to overshare information (Moisan, 2012).

These are just quick samples of technology’s impact on society. In the formation of our social circles and relationships, it also has its great impact. Here is what I’ve got.

Isolation. Much has been written about the dangers of Internet addiction. From pornography to merely surfing the web, the Internet is clearly the television of the 21st century, an electronic drug that often yanks us away from the physical world. Like any addiction, the real cost, for those of us who are truly addicted, is to the number and quality of our relationships with others. We may enjoy online relationships using social media sites like Facebook or Twitter, for example, but the difference between these kinds of interactions and interactions with people in the physical world is clearly vast. As long as we expect no more from these online relationships than they can give, no good reason exists why we can't enjoy the power of social media sites to connect us efficiently to people we had otherwise not touch. The problem, however, comes when we find ourselves subtly substituting electronic relationships for physical ones or mistaking our electronic relationships for physical ones. We may feel we are connecting effectively with others via the Internet, but too much electronic-relating paradoxically engenders a sense of social isolation (Lickerman, 2010).

We know that human interaction is important. People should not be isolated. Humans are genetically designed to gain satisfaction from meaningful relationships with real people. And as a result, receive many benefits from doing so. For example, babies who are handled frequently when they are young grow bigger, have better muscle development and are generally healthier than babies who receive little or no physical contact.

            Another example can be found with people who have lots of friends in their life. These people are much more likely to be happier, healthier and live longer than lonely people. Whatever the reasons may be for these mental and physical benefits, the fact remains that there is something about real human interaction that completes us, as without it, our body and life slowly starts to break down.

Weakening family ties. Although technology has made global communication possible, but paradoxically, it has also resulted to weaker family ties. Whereas in the past a family would sit down, eat dinner together and talk, nowadays, it’s far more common to sit in front of the television and eat without talking. If you do talk, it is usually not about anything significant, since neither you nor the other person wants to be distracted from what you are watching. And that’s if you’re lucky, as most of the time you will be told to stay quiet (ssssssh!). In some families they don’t even sit together, as there are ready instant meals that they can eat whenever and wherever they want.

Individualism. Unfortunately, this weakening family tie is not confined solely to dinner time, because as after dinner, each family member will go their separate ways usually returning back to the TV, going on the Internet, playing a computer game, listening to their iPod or chatting on their cellular phone. They become individualistic.

The result of this technological bubble in general is that people are having less dace to face communication, and more indirect communication via intermediaries such as computer screens and telephones (Haracz, 2012).

Virtual identity. Another impact of technology is the virtuality of one’s identity in different social media and networking sites. One is not being true to yourself. In the same way, everything you can see in social media and other technologies may not be as true and cannot be trusted. One can hide his or her identity or can create a new identity in one’s account far apart from one’s true self. Hence, you are playing with your identity, expressing yourself so much as trying to purify a neutral self-suitable for broadcasting to the viewing mass. It is the art of self-censorship in an attempt to handle the collision of life contexts that normally remain separate (Haracz, 2012).

Dangers. Making our meaning clear electronically presents extra challenges. For example, we write things like "LOL" and "LMOA" to describe our laughter, but they're no real substitute for hearing people laugh, which has real power to lift our spirits when we're feeling low.

Confrontation are also made easier using electronic media and as a result, relationships falter. People are often uncomfortable with face-to-face confrontation, so it's easy to understand why they'd choose to use the Internet. Precisely because electronic media transmit emotion so poorly compared to in-person interaction, many view it as the perfect way to send difficult messages: it blocks us from registering the negative emotional responses such messages engender, which provides us the illusion we're not really doing harm. Unfortunately, this also usually means we don't transmit these messages with as much empathy, and often find ourselves sending a different message than we intended and breeding more confusion than we realize (Lickerman, 2010).

It is therefore recommendable that amidst technologies, we still have to communicate in person. In-person interactions, though more difficult, are more likely to result in positive outcomes and provide opportunities for personal growth. When we find ourselves tempted to communicate that way because it feels easier, we do not realize that the outcome is often worse - romantic break-ups, firings, or even arguments going on electronically, which are hard to solve.

Etiquette. For transferring information efficiently, the Internet is excellent. For transacting emotionally sensitive or satisfying connections, it's not. Even when we are all careful to use the Internet only to exchange information, problems can still arise. People tend to delay answering emails when they don't have what they consider to be good answers or when they want to avoid whatever responsibility the email demands of them. But this is like being asked a question in person and rather than responding, "I don't know" or "I'll have to think about it," turning on your heels and walking away in silence. It's far easier to ignore an email sender's request than a request from someone made in person because an email sender's hope to get a response or frustration in not receiving one remains mostly invisible. But it's every bit as rude.

Our "emotional invisibility" on the Internet perhaps also explains so much of the vitriol we see on so many websites. People clearly have a penchant for saying things in the electronic world they'd never say to people in person because the person to whom they're saying it is not physically present to display their emotional reaction. It is as if the part of our nervous system that registers the feelings of others has been paralyzed or removed when we are communicating electronically, as if we're drunk and don't realize or don't care that our words are hurting others (Lickerman, 2010).

Distraction. As I quote from Adam Briggle’s  article Dear Facebook, technologies became also become distraction to us.

"…What I see there are not thoughtful people forming a convivial cyber-community. Rather, I see people distracted from distraction by distractions. I see fragmentation and partial-attention disorder galore. I see a lot of scurrying along the surface, commenting on the fleeting moment and forgetting it as soon as the relentless newsfeed pushes it south of screenshot. There may be an orienting logic, an iron anchor in this post-modern crush of information … (but we still lose focus). Each friend collected gets less of our time. We are spread thinner than the screen itself. (Briggle, 2010).

Isolation, weakening family ties, individualism, virtual Identity, danger, etiquette, and distraction – these are some of the great impact of technology in how we form our social circles and relationships. For the negative impact, it is but unfair to blame technology alone. If truth be told, we users are the ones who dress social media and technology like a clown. For all the talk lately of how technology shapes our society (machine makes history!), it is still the case that our tools (the technologies) reflect our image more than re-make it.