Dear Varsitarian, you don’t argue quite well.

Dear Varsitarian,

No. I’m not writing this letter because I was offended by the word “lemon”. I am writing this letter because you still have not learned your lesson on how you lay your arguments correctly. It’s fine that you oppose the RH Bill, but you should be able to know how to argue, if not quite well, at least correctly.

First of all, I am gonna be straight forward to you. I hate to burst your bubble, but NO: Traditional and online media did not “piggyback” (and yes, you should hyphenate it for the past tense since it is a slang) on your self-claimed infamy of your pathetically notorious editorial. Stop being delusional; your writing is not that good (oh no I did not!). And  to tell you the truth, we do not have “psychotic tendecies” and we did not cyberbully you– we were just merely reacting to what you have written.

Another aside. You know what? The first time I read the title of your latest editorial, it immediately registered as “bullcrap” in my mind. Is it worth reading, I asked myself; but still decided to continue reading until I could not take it anymore beyond the second sentence of your second paragraph. But nevertheless, the only reason why I read your editorial thoroughly was because I decided to write back due to the fact that I have to kill time at 2:20 in the morning. Yes, I am just bored, that is why I am writing to you. I hope you get what I mean.

Now, tackling the actual content of your editorial, I have to reiterate that you don’t argue quite well. In the past years that you have been writing against the RH Bill and criticizing our dear lemon-colored professors at the Ateneo (We put the in front of the name of the school simply because we can. No, you can’t do that with your pontifically impotent university), you have offered nothing but a whole bunch of verbal diarrhea masquerading as a journalistic entry. What your editorials (I’m referring to your grim-reaper entry few years ago, the lemon entry you posted just before we crushed you during the UAAP finals, and the latest post you have) imply is that you are a bunch of blabbering name-callers!

You know what, as an RH Bill advocate, I am personally tired of debating. But just to tackle some of your points, I’ll bother to answer them for quite a bit. Once again, you must remember that I am bored and that is the only reason why I am writing this.

First,  you say that Ateneo and La Salle profs were not candid about their funders; well, you don’t even have the guts to name those supposed funders. But of course, naming them would entail that those “funders” actually exist; but you very well know that they don’t. I give it to you for seeing that entailment, but nevertheless, your logic fails by trying to implicate an imaginary set of “funders”. Secondly, you said that all the RH Advocacy is just about a propaganda against the Catholic Church. Let me tell you who started the smear campaign: It’s the Church and the CBCP who continually lead a nationwide campaign to stay ignorant by barraging the public with outright lies and misinterpreted and false statistics.  Lastly, I commend you for using the word opprobrium because it such a daunting word; but, you are not “throwing pearls on the swines”– you act like swines kissing the blessed ass of the Catholic Church merely because you have to kiss their ass or else you lose the title of being the “pontifical and royal” university.

Now, if you have reached this point of my letter, I guess you would know how it feels like reading your editorials. If it isn’t that obvious to you, yes, I have been calling you names all through out this letter; and I did that to make a point. You don’t just go around flaunting an imaginary infamy and continue walking like you are holier than the blue and green heathens from Taft and Katipunan. In the first place, being “holy” is out of the debate here: public policy should be void of blind faith. You claim that the RH Bill is a form of “blind idealism” but it is far from being blind. The bill itself seeks to enlighten people about their rights and alternatives that were kept away from them for the longest time.

I hope you finally get the point. We welcome debate, but you have to keep it clean. Parading yourselves as holy bullies does not get you anywhere. Trust me, even your flock is being turned off by what you have been writing.


Edited 10AM, November 26: Some people have pointed out lapses in the text and I have edited them as such. All of the mistakes were mine and I apologize for that.


4 thoughts on “Dear Varsitarian, you don’t argue quite well.

  1. Dear Gelo, it was good na you changed the tense of “piggyback” in this post. Pero I was thinking if saan nanggaling ang “hyphenate” statement mo? Hehehe. Wow, nag-iimbento ng rules sa grammar? :p

    Regarding this post, ‘yan ang hirap sa mga ilang netizens na kagaya mo. Puro posts at bash ng kayabangan. Sana kung maganda naman ang sinasabi. Parang latang walang laman. Uy, bakit hindi mo inaccept ‘yung comments dito? Anyway, you have your choice naman.

    Pero it was nice na you acknowledged your mistakes. Good job. Buti nga at meron kang venue to write like this. Pero I hope maayos. I have a question, are you an undergraduate student? If oo, I think may chance ka pa to improve. If hindi, naku, ewan ko na lang. Siguro. Pwede din.

    Tungkol sa argument ang post mo pero between you and grammar, hindi kayo magkasundo. Your “about me” that says “For someone destined to pass every examination he is taken, will he succeed in life?” is calling my attention. Sa tingin mo tama ang grammar niyan? Sheez.

    Oh well, ang yayabang kasi ng ibang mga netizens dito ngayon. Akala mo ang gagaling, pero wala.

    Anyway, i think you are “fiercely fighting the absurd.” Well, ako din, kapag napupunta ako sa site mo, I am having a battle with absurdity.

    Ingat na lang. 😀

    • Thank you for your comment. The mistakes happened because I failed to proofread. I need to remind myself that I have to proofread my posts. I have always failed to do that whenever I blog and you may account it to carelessness. Nevertheless, I disagree with you and the fact is my grammar is not that bad. A little google of my name will lead you to the award I have received few years ago which will be an enough testament to my mastery of the language. Although such grammar mistakes had appeared, it was merely due to carelessness, which I admit and will commit to eliminating such henceforth, and not due to a poor mastery of English.

      And as for your second paragraph, I am actually waiting for you to rebut the arguments I have presented. Please, I welcome you to discuss this incident.

      • It is good to see that you frequently “reblog” here, I believe that that’s better than writing your own pieces so that you’ll not commit more mistakes.

        Carelessness and irresponsibility. What if a person saw a post of yours that was written “carelessly,” and then after further contemplation (or maybe after being corrected) you changed the mistakes, however, your reader didn’t have the time to look back and view the corrected version? Your carelessness just made a damage.

        Well, congratulations if (it is true that) you garnered an award for your “writing.” I did a “little googling” but I just saw some things and a link that says something about a transcript of Willie Revillame’s speech in Willing Willie. You had an award? Seriously? Seriously, congrats. Hihihi.

        You said something about “mastery of language.” Well, it’s kind of a contradiction that you have mastered a language when you frequently commit language mistakes. It leads me to a realization: your statement of having a “mastery of language” is a mistake and is not really convincing. And oh, you defended it. I remember, in writing, there is a saying “show don’t tell.” Claims. Claims. Claims.

        I don’t know how to put it but the “argument” that you are saying is not visible in this piece. And if ever that there is an “argument,” I consider it as a bad argument. Because many of the things you said may be out of your emotions and are baseless. I hope you review your paragraphs and reflect on it. I prefer not to have a discussion on your “arguments” because I might end up lecturing you on Arguments, Fallacies and Writing with Substance. I just happened to read your post and got irritated with your arrogance and most especially your grammar. I’m just commenting on posts during my spare time and I am really tired to discuss online. I’ve been doing discussions all day.

        Anyway, have a good day. And good luck on improving your writing. It’s nice to see that you have changed your “about Gelo Lopez.” Good bye. 😀

      • ” Because many of the things you said may be out of your emotions and are baseless.”

        I am glad that you see the point. Thank you very much for your time.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s