Is There a Future for Mining in the Philippines?

By: Ateneo School of Government

The Graduate School of Leadership and Public Service

This policy brief is based on years of research and stakeholder discussions on natural resource governance and conflict management conducted by the Ateneo School of Government (ASoG). The School has taken every effort to gather empirical data and to understand the concerns of all stakeholders, before synthesizing ideas and formulating recommendations for this policy brief. Most recently, the School invited representatives from relevant sectors to an academic conference on November 22, 2011, to discuss these ideas and recommendations. The School acknowledges the inputs of the experts and stakeholders who greatly contributed to the refinement of this document.

The Ateneo School of Government is neither for nor against mining, a priori, because that would be against its principle of fostering the development of new ideas and approaches that bridge the gap between classroom wisdom and real-world policy decision-making and governance. However, the School does not shy away from taking a principled stand on issues, after rigorous examination of facts and engaging stakeholders with different perspectives in honest and candid discussions. Ultimately, this policy brief is not a consensus document, and ASoG is solely responsible for the views and contents presented.

This policy brief answers ten key questions related to mining and governance:

1. What is the nature of mining in the Philippines?
2. Why does mining generate conflicts?
3. Is mining beneficial to the country and to indigenous and local communities?
4. What are the real costs of doing mining in the Philippines?
5. How do we understand risks and conduct a cost-benefit analysis?
6. What is responsible mining, as applied to the Philippines?
7. What operational conditions must be met to conduct responsible mining in the Philippines?
8. What actions must the government take towards the management of responsible mining?
9. What interim measures must the government take while appropriate mining governance is instituted?
10. What is the future of mining in the Philippines?

1. What is the nature of mining in the Philippines?

The Philippines is a country rich in mineral resources that would be worth trillions of pesos if sold today (PhP47 trillion, according to a leader in the mining industry). These mineral resources are located within our lands or under our seas, both of which locations are also rich in other living or non-living resources that sustain economic activities such as farming, eco-tourism, and fishing. Mining operations necessarily involve the alteration of the land or seabed, such that people who use the land or sea for settlement and/or livelihood are likely to be displaced by mining operations. The lands where mineral resources are located may also have cultural or ecological values not easily measured in monetary terms.

The benefits derived from mining must balance its costs on people and the environment. Compensation for losses must be provided on top of the rightful share of the country and local people of the income from mineral wealth.

Minerals are non-renewable resources. Therefore, mining operations have a limited lifespan. The scale of alteration or disturbance resulting from mining operations (spatial and temporal) depends on the type of minerals, size of deposit, type of technology used, economic feasibility, and similar factors. The impacts on the environment and people, at any scale, depend on unique local factors: customary traditions and practices, uniqueness of natural ecosystems, risk of accidents brought by natural disasters, availability of livelihood alternatives, or the general ability of people and ecosystems to adjust to the scale of alteration or disturbance. The extent of alteration or disturbance resulting from mining operations may be limited to the period of operations and controlled to minimize its adverse impacts. However, the impacts on the environment and on people generally last longer than the mining operations, and may or may not be reversible. The impacts of mining operations in the Philippines are magnified because their scale is large compared to the total area and population affected (often in small islands, with many communities living in the area intended for mining, with high risk of natural disasters). This is in contrast to the impact of mining operations in continental settings (e.g., Australia, Canada, the United States) where the size of mining operations is small compared to the vastness of the continent, with a sparse population and less diverse natural ecosystems. Mining operations are either large-scale or small-scale, depending on the perspective of regulating the mining operator relative to the size of its operations. The policy criteria for categorizing small- versus large-scale mining do not always match the criteria for determining the scale of environmental impacts or economic benefits.

2. Why does mining generate conflicts?

The conflicts in mining generally relate to the following questions:

• Should mining prevail over current land-uses?
• Are the benefits from mining sufficient and fairly distributed?
• Are the social and environmental costs fully considered and compensated?
• Are the risks of adverse impacts reduced to a minimum and socially acceptable to those who bear them?
• When local stakeholders decide that the risks are unacceptable, can the national government override that decision based on broader criteria?
• Does small-scale mining provide more equitable access to resources? At what cost?

For each of these issues, the fundamental questions are: Who has the right to decide? How are decisions made, and on what basis? According to the current legal framework, the State decides these matters, acting as owner of the mineral resources and as protector of the interests of those who may be adversely affected. However, the State recognizes that stakeholders have the right to participate in decision-making and even to decide on some issues for themselves (e.g., free and prior informed consent [FPIC] of indigenous peoples). Since the right to decide is a matter of State recognition, there are also conflicts about how the State decides on who participates in decision-making, and to what extent their participation affects the final decision. The dynamics of “who decides” keep changing as policies change. The net effect is the absence of stability and consistency in decision-making. Conflicts persist.

How are decisions made, and on what basis? Conflicts about mining can only be resolved after examining the facts by answering: How many occupants are affected? How much production is there? How much water is needed? How much pollution is generated? What is the probability of adverse impacts? How many workers are employed? These facts are not readily available to those who have the responsibility to decide. Gathering and analyzing the data require experts’ inputs and considerable time and money. Understanding these inputs and applying the knowledge to the decision-making process require a certain level of skill. The law places the burden of data generation and analysis on the mining applicant because the studies must relate to the applicant’s proposed activities, and because of the considerable costs. This raises questions about the independence and credibility of the information and analysis.

The people tasked to decide or participate in decision-making have problems securing and effectively using reliable information because:

• Sources of information (e.g., experts) are not acceptable to all;
• Methods and/or outputs are insufficient or not fully relevant to the decision needed;
• Information is in a form that is not easily understood by stakeholders;
• Access to information is limited; and
• Information is unobtainable or unknowable given available resources.

The law requires experts to evaluate the data gathered and recommend actions to decision-makers or stakeholders. The quality of expert advice may vary considerably, thus decisions might be made based on inaccurate, insufficient or unreliable information – or not based on any data at all. Such decisions are then subject to challenge and reconsideration. The net effect is unreliability of decision-making. Conflicts persist.

When decisions and decision-making are inconsistent or unstable because of the lack of empirical bases, stakeholders tend to appeal to the highest power that can enforce a decision in their favor. This opens up venues for arbitrary decision-making based on factors other than facts. The problem is that decision-makers, even at the highest levels, change with every election. The incumbent may have a different appreciation of particular situations depending on his agenda and what sectors have more political influence. The net effect is policy uncertainty and more conflicts.

Case 1. Here is an example of inconsistency in decision-making on land-use in Palawan:

MacroAsia Corporation, the flagship of one of the country’s most prominent business conglomerates, is applying for local permits to operate its 25-year lease awarded by the national government, on a property in the town of Brooke’s Point that partly overlaps with a protected area on Mt. Mantalingahan. Two other mining companies – Ipilan Nickel Mining Corp. and Lebach Mining Corp. – are in earlier stages of mining project development, trying to secure all the local endorsements in order to proceed.
 

One of the contentious issues being raised about Mt. Mantalingahan is whether mining should be allowed in “core zone” areas or places where there are old-growth forests, which are protected under a special law – the Strategic Environmental Plan (SEP) for Palawan (Republic Act No. 7611). An initial review by the Palawan Council for Sustainable Development (PCSD), the regulatory agency for environmental concerns in the province, showed that all except 91 hectares of the area leased to MacroAsia are “core and restricted zones” protected under the SEP zoning system. The mining company maintains that its legal right to utilize the lease area has precedence over local laws, including the proclamation of Mantalingahan as a protected area.
 

There are different institutions responsible for making decisions that determine whether land is to be maintained as a protected area or opened for mining. The inconsistency in decisions, based on differing information on the status of land as a core zone and when mining rights are vested, fuels conflicts.

Case 2. Uncertain future of the Tampakan Copper-Gold Project:

The Tampakan Project is expected to be the single biggest mining project in the country that could potentially double the current contribution of the sector to national gross domestic product (GDP). All eyes are on Tampakan and South Cotabato to see how decisions will be made on whether or not to allow the project to push through.
 

The Province of South Cotabato enacted a Provincial Environment Code that bans open-pit mining, which happens to be the method of choice for the Tampakan Project. The National Government, through Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) Secretary Jesse Robredo is pressuring the province to reconsider the ban, asserting that the ban is inconsistent with national law.
 

From various interviews and public pronouncements, it appears that one of the main reasons behind the open-pit mining ban is that officials are not convinced the project will not cause harm to the environment and to local farmers. Former South Cotabato Governor Daisy Fuentes has publicly announced that the decision to ban open-pit mining was made as a precaution to protect farmers from potential water scarcity that can result from mining operations. On the other hand, the mining company claims that water quality and supply issues have been fully considered in its studies and assures the stakeholders that there will be no disruption of water supply for other uses.
 

Studies conducted by groups opposed to the project evince water, earthquake, and pollution risks, among other issues. MGB also raised three questions to SMI that have not been answered: the 2km-long tailings dam that the government is expected to maintain forever, the cutting of old growth forests and effect of water degradation and supply on agriculture.
 

The national government is insisting on a legalistic approach, which the province has vowed to face. Underneath the legal posturing are serious issues that cannot be resolved because of the lack of reliable information.

  

In the Fraser Institute Policy Potential Index (PPI) in 2010/2011, the Philippines ranked 66th out of 72 countries in conduciveness of policies to mining investments. The country ranked low despite fiscal and other incentives provided by the government to mining companies. Could this be due to the lingering uncertainty and conflicts associated with mining activities in the country?

Are all these conflicts over mining policies, decisions, and operations worth it? A look at the benefits and costs of mining may provide an answer.

3. Is mining beneficial to the country and to indigenous and local communities?

Mining operations bring jobs and infuse money into the local economy, and the mining sector contributes to economic growth in general. Even so, is any positive number in terms of job generation and economic growth always a good thing? How much incentive does the government give to the mining sector, which should be deducted from the net benefits to the country and local people? How much more (or less) can the government get if it considers alternative uses of the land? In other words, are Filipinos (as a people) really better off with mining, and is the government getting the best deal for its people? These are tough questions to answer because the researchers do not have the complete picture, due to the lack of data and a framework to analyze benefits as a whole. But there are known facts that can help in this analysis:

a.) Contribution of mining sector to employment generation – According to the Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB), the mining (and quarrying) sector’s contribution to national total employment has always been below 1 percent (1%). Recent data has shown that it has been 0.5% since 2008 until 2010. So far, for the first half of 2011, contribution has been reported as 0.6% (in contrast to agriculture at 33% in 2011). All over the world, extractive mining is known as a low-employment generating activity. The Tampakan project, with expected investments of $5.9 billion, will provide only 2,000 permanent jobs.

b.) Contribution of mining industry to growth in other sectors – Habito (2010) observed that the mining sector has relatively low labor-output ratios in terms of employment generation. Labor compensation accounts for only 13.3% against an average of 20.7% in all sectors. The sector has a backward linkage index of only 0.46, meaning there is relatively little input from other domestic industries; even the forward linkage of 0.82 indicates that the sector is below average compared to all other sectors in generating further domestic economic activities. Minerals are being exported with little value-adding that could have generated further employment and industry linkage.

c.) Contribution of mining to economic growth – At the macro level, the contribution of mining to GDP has remained in the single digits. As of 2010, it only contributed 1.0%, with a Gross Value Added in Mining of PhP88.2 billion (MGB, 2011), compared to the agricultural sector’s contribution of 12% in 2010 (BAS, 2011). As for its contribution to total exports, export of minerals and mineral products has averaged 4.5% in the last four years and reporting 4.3% for the first half of 2011 (MGB, 2011). Total exports of non-metallic minerals’ share are even lower, hovering around 0.4% for the past 4 years (MGB, 2011) compared to agriculture at 8% for 2011. The manufacturing and service sector has always been the main driver of economic growth for the country comprising of over 50% of GDP (ADB, 2011).

However, the picture can be very different from the perspective of a project proponent. In the Tampakan Copper-Gold Project, Sagittarius Mines, Inc. (SMI) estimates that the project alone will contribute an additional 1% of national GDP, or an additional 10.4% of regional GDP for Regions XI and XII. It is difficult to access data for relative contribution of existing projects to local economic growth (at provincial and municipal levels), if data exists at all.

d.) Inflow of foreign investments and outflow of profits – The figures are not readily accessible to the public, but the government should be able to determine how much of the foreign funds that come in actually remains in the country to generate more jobs and economic activities. How quickly do the funds return to the foreign investors?

 

Figure 1. (Vertical Axis: Units in Millions of Dollars. Horizontal Axis: Years) Total Mining Investment including forecasts that include seven development projects such as Tampakan Copper, Far Southeast Copper-Gold Project, Runruno Gold-Molybdenum Project, Didipio Copper-Gold, Boyungan Gold Project, Sumitomo Nickel Project and Kingking Copper Gold Project (MGB, 2011)

e.) Revenues/taxes received by the government – The amounts of taxes, fees and royalties from mining change from year to year and do not appear to show a trend.

Table 1. Taxes, Fees and Royalties from Mining (MGB, 2011)

There are other factors to consider in how much the government actually gets. It would seem that a tax holiday for Financial and Technical Assistance Agreements (FTAAs) and the 2% limit of government (excise) tax on Mineral Production and Sharing Agreements (MPSAs) translate to almost zero revenue for government. Bautista (2009) estimated that 19.60% to 29.74% of mining revenue accrues to government tax collection. Action for Economic Reforms (2009) calculated only a 7.5% effective tax rate in the industry (1997-2000). AER also cited that the government loses an average of 32% of revenues annually (1999-2004) because of incentive laws. Compared to other countries, the Philippines’ effective tax rate is low. Deutsche Bank (2010) reported that effective tax rate for minerals in other countries are as follows: US (40%), Australia (38%), Brazil (38%), and Canada (23%).

In the Tampakan Project, SMI estimates that the project will produce a revenue stream of up to US$37B (PhP1.85 trillion) over the life of the mine – US$7 billion will go to government as taxes/duties/royalties and US$2 billion will go to local governments and host communities. According to the Chamber of Mines, government already gets 41% of the mining firm’s income before taxes, which is much higher compared to Africa (average 34.4%) or Latin America (average 39.5%).

f.) Poverty incidence in mining areas – There are a few studies that appear to associate poverty incidence with mining. It is difficult to make sweeping conclusions, but the data shows that provinces hosting mining operations do not necessarily demonstrate improvement in the lives of local people.

In a recent study by Balisacan (2011), the poverty incidence among individuals engaged in mining has continued to increase, compared to workers in other sectors. In 2006, income poverty in the sector was at 34.64 and by 2009 it increased to 48.71. The author also uses a multidimensional poverty index (MPI) that captures various dimensions of poverty (see Table 2). The mining sector also shows a high deprivation in health and education compared to other industries (see Table 3).

Table 2. MPI, H, A and Income Poverty by Sector, 2006 and 2009 (Balisacan, 2011)

 

Table 3. Contributions of Dimensions per group.

The 2003 small area poverty incidence of National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB) shows that Bataraza, Palawan, where Rio Tuba has been operating for 30, years has a poverty incidence that is twice the national rate, and is in the bottom 25% of municipalities on poverty incidence.

Some may argue that at the project level, mining operations can have a significant impact on the local community income from royalties and social benefits, which could lift families out of poverty. For the Tampakan Project, SMI expects royalty payments and social development contributions to reach US$800 million to host indigenous and local communities.

There are no systematic studies to track the impact of the mining sector (as a whole or at a project level) to improving the lives of local communities. It is important to measure this economic impact especially after mining activities end.

g.) Improvement of health and education services in mining areas – According to Bautista (2009), a paltry 0.11% to 0.26% (with gold mines at 1.23%) of mining revenues go to community development. How much of this goes to improving the health and education of local communities? Since these services are the responsibility of government, it is also important to know how much of the government’s share from mining revenues has been put into improving basic services.

There are many reports of adverse health impacts associated with mining, both large- and small-scale (Sakoan, 2003; Drasch et al., 2001; Appleton, et al., 1999; 2006). These have shown poor health in communities mostly due to exposure to high levels of mercury, specifically in areas of small-scale mining .Even granting that these incidents are accidental or isolated instances, the health impacts of mining require accurately accounting for the improvement of health services together with the dangers to life and health.

The benefits that the country and local people can derive from mining have a limit in amount and in time period. A visit to a mining operation typically shows new roads and access to transportation, increased trade of goods and services supplied to the mining operations, even improved access to health centers and schools. These added benefits might be provided by the mining operator or the government, or made possible because of the presence of mining operations. Mining companies claim that there are huge economic and social benefits during mining operations, although there are no independent studies that measure the net benefits after accounting for the costs.

On the contrary, there is no dispute that there is little or no economic benefits after operations end. The sustainability of the benefits from mining depends on how the benefits will be allocated among the beneficiaries in the present and for the future. But, is there any municipality that shows significantly better quality of life than neighboring municipalities after mining has left?

Based on available verifiable information, it can be argued that the contribution of mining to the overall economy is small. The Philippine government does not appear to be getting the best deal for the people, especially compared to other countries with mining industries, and most of the benefits go to a very narrow set of beneficiaries. The researchers encourage the mining industry to provide verifiable information on benefits that are not considered here.

4. What are the real costs of doing mining in the Philippines?

As part of assuming the risk of adverse impacts, mining operators are required to set aside funds to compensate for damages. Mining operators may compensate the displacement of communities and economic losses from disturbance based on negotiations with affected stakeholders. Given that the same affected or at-risk stakeholders are also entitled to a share in mining revenues, there should be a net economic benefit to them apart from the costs of displacement, disturbance, or risk of damages.

Conflicts regarding costs are not only about measurable economic losses, but also about environmental and social costs that are either unknown or not measurable in monetary terms. The basic issue is: if these costs are unknown or not measurable, how can decision-makers make accurate cost-benefit decisions? If the environmental and social costs have no equivalent in money, are these costs then ignored? Or should decisions be suspended, pending a better appreciation of these costs? Who decides?

Over the past decade, valuation methods have been introduced to estimate the value of biodiversity and other ecosystem services. As applied to mining, environmental and social valuation is useful for conducting cost-benefit analysis, damage assessment and compensation, regulatory analysis, land-use planning, and natural resource accounting, among others. There is no single valuation technique that can be applied to the Philippine mining sector, considering the diverse nature of the interactions between the economy, the environment, and human communities. Therefore, several techniques must be used in conjunction with one another in order to ensure that the worth of social and environmental health is not undervalued. These methods and results are at best complex and contested, and data-gathering has not been regular.

For instance, although information already exists that shows the financial value of negative environmental impacts due to mining, it is albeit incomplete and outdated. According to data from NSCB (2010), the cost of these negative environmental impacts steadily increased from 1992 to 1996. However, the data data does not distinguish small-scale from large-scale mining.

 

Figure 3. Cost of Negative Environmental Impacts of Mining (NSCB, 2010)

While determining the social value of a good or a service is complicated, there are several approaches that can be used to establish a reasonable figure. Examples of such methods include willingness to pay, measures of damages (lost wages, health care requirements due to injury or disease), and travel costs (Matthews and Lave, 2000).

One study done in the Philippines that weighed mining benefits against other land uses is the Samar Island Biodiversity (SAMBIO) Project in 2000. The Island is known for its extensive bauxite, copper, and nickel mines. One component of the study showed that total non-use value (i.e., to preserve resources) is around PhP54 million per year, revealing a significant willingness of Samar Island residents to pay to preserve its natural resources. The willingness to pay (WTP) value showed that resources can be equally or more valuable, and also likely to be as profitable as mining (through eco-tourism and non-timber products), with much less risk and uncertainties involved, making conservation a viable land-use option.

Valuation studies are few and limited. The Philippines does not have a system of measuring the value of ecosystems for services provide such as waste treatment and detoxification, nutrient dispersal and cycling, crop pollination, disease control, etc. – services that could be lost when natural ecosystems are destroyed by mining operations. Mining operations directly cause the loss of these services, which must be compensated.

On social costs, how do decision-makers account for the changes in a people’s way of life, their health and well-being, their personal and property rights, and the erosion of their cultural values brought about by the sudden wealth of individuals and communities? These are especially crucial questions as over half of the mining sites in the Philippines is found in socially vulnerable areas, including areas where conflict is ongoing, such as the island of Mindanao (Miranda, et al., 2003; AER, 2009). There is an undeniable and glaring conflict between mining activities and the culture and lifestyle of indigenous peoples (IPs). A UN report in 2007 concluded that in Benguet, Cordillera, the Kankanaey and Ibaloy who had been displaced from their ancestral lands and traditional livelihood have become illegal occupants in the area. Mining activities have occupied lands used to cultivate and raise livestock. This is a common trend in indigenous peoples’ communities across the country.

Recent news reports highlight the security risks of mining operations, as with the reported attack by the New People’s Army (NPA) on mining facilities in Surigao del Norte. The costs to the government of protecting mining companies from these risks represent the real costs of mining. The Philippine National Police and Armed Forces of the Philippines should have estimates of government expenditure to make mining operations secure.

In many coastal provinces, such as Negros Occidental and those along the Ilocos coastline, local governments and local communities are at risk of losing millions of pesos and are compelled to invest hundreds of work hours invested in protecting coastal ecosystem because the Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB) opened up the coastal areas for magnetite mining. Despite LGU opposition through resolutions and ordinances, MGB still entertains applications for sand mining that can destroy fisherfolks’ livelihoods and marine habitats. Losses to government and community investments are not accounted for in the decision to allow coastal mining.

We are struggling with measuring the cost of environmental and social impacts in the present. We have no idea what the costs will be in the future. There are many unknown impacts, and unknown risks. It seems that we are doing no better than guesswork in assessing the real costs of mining.

Is this a responsible thing to do – to base decisions on guesswork? Should we exercise caution instead? How much benefit will we forego if we decide to exercise precaution? Can we afford to gamble our future for so little benefit that extends to so few? Can we afford the cost of conflicts that leave so many with ill feeling, which could prevent cooperation in more inclusive productive activities? Unless we gain a better handle on the value of what we lose in exchange for mining, we have no rational basis for decision-making.

5. How do we understand risks and conduct a cost-benefit analysis?

Like any other development activity done by man, mining has environmental, social, economic, cultural, and political impacts, both positive and negative. There are impacts that are certain: taxes, roads, increase in local economic activities, land disturbance, pollution, etc. There are impacts that may or may not happen. The probability of some of these uncertain impacts can be estimated, especially those that are within human control, such as the likelihood of dam breaking, or of pollution causing health problems.

However, there are impacts whose occurrence is not only uncertain, but whose probability (along with the extent of probable harm) is also unknown: the likelihood that extreme weather conditions can cause a dam to break 100 years from now, or that pollution can cause species extinction. Calculations of probabilities and risks can be adjusted over time to consider new data and improved technology. Mitigating measures to prevent adverse impacts can also be improved based on more accurate calculations.

The complexity of analyzing risks, the lack of information relevant to risk assessment, or lack of access thereto, and the absence of accuracy and credibility of information, all add to the difficulty stakeholders face in making decisions now on what are the acceptable costs and risks of adverse impacts. Because of this difficulty, some stakeholders resort to emotional pleas and indirect attacks to win arguments: 

• How many people will die should the dam break? One life is one too many – therefore, the proposed activity is unacceptable.
• Trust our experts because they stake their careers and reputations on their opinions.
• We do not care what your experts say, they are paid to support your position.

Is this a helpful way to frame the issue on acceptability of costs and of risks?

An analogy to air travel might be helpful: Air travel safety has undoubtedly improved with stricter regulations and advanced technology, yet there are more reports of accidents and loss of lives today than in the past because of the scale and amount of air travel undertaken today. The probability of death from an air crash is measurable with reasonable accuracy. But the reality is that lives and properties are lost every year. One life is one too many. There are alternatives to air travel with their own risks. Do we stop flying? How do we assess what is acceptable risk? In going on a flight, does one accept the risks (regardless of insurance and compensation schemes)?

How is this different from mining? Do people feel that they get the same personal benefit from mining as with flying? Do people feel that they will be personally affected by a mining disaster that could impact water, habitats, agricultural productivity, and realignment of public services? Unlike flying, the environmental effects of mining – even without the occurrence of disasters – affect bigger areas than the mining sites as well as more people, including future generations. It is a common observation that most of those opposed to mining operations live farther away from the mining site than those who support it. Do people feel that it is fair for them to bear the risks in return for what they perceive as personal costs and benefits? Different stakeholder groups will have different answers depending on how closely or remotely they feel the benefits and costs – therefore each group may decide differently, and all interests must be taken into account. However, this situation assumes the stakeholders know and understand the level of risks and the magnitude of consequences.

What if the probabilities and magnitude of harm are unknown? In our analogy with air travel, what if the causes of airplane crashes were unknown and there was insufficient data on design, manufacturing, safety, and maintenance on which to base the calculation of risks? Would we fly? Would the government allow airline companies to operate? We would not gamble our lives on the unknown risks of air travel. Why would we gamble on the unknown environmental and social risks of mining? This goes back to the issue of how much value we place on environmental and social costs for the purpose of assessing cost-benefit and risks.

Until we have a better handle on risks, is it reasonable and responsible to continue making decisions on mining applications?

6. What is responsible mining, as applied to the Philippines?

A simple operational answer is: responsible mining is complying with the laws that already take into account its environmental, social, economic, cultural, and other impacts. However, this assumes that the existing regulations are enough to safeguard the health of the environment and human communities, and that these come with effective mechanisms of implementation.

Republic Act No. 7942 or the Philippine Mining Act or 1995 declares that all Philippine mineral resources are owned by the State, which is responsible for the “rational exploration, development, utilization and conservation [of mineral resources] through the combined efforts of government and the private sector in order to enhance national growth in a way that effectively safeguards the environment and protect the rights of affected communities. “The law mandates several environmental and social work programs (i.e., the Environmental Work Program, the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Program, the Final Mine Rehabilitation/Decommissioning Plan and the Social Development and Management Program), as well as financial assurances (i.e., the Contingent Liability and Rehabilitation Fund, Mine Rehabilitation Fund, and Mine Wastes and Tailings Reserve Fund).

However, because of the unreliability and insufficiency of available monitoring data, it is still uncertain whether these mechanisms are enough and whether they are enforced effectively. There is still no definitive document from the government that clearly and specifically details the national expectation for responsible mining. Does the legal framework take into account the uncertainties detailed above, the uniqueness of Philippines as biodiversity-rich, the sensitivity of small islands, the situation in populated mining areas, risks from extreme weather, and so on? Is compliance with the law enough?

Responsible mining can also be measured using basic principles developed and adopted by ethical mining companies worldwide. The Philippine Chamber of Mines’ Compliance and Beyond: A Guidebook on Corporate Social Responsibility for the Philippine Mining Industry is the most comprehensive guidance on responsible mining in the country so far, which includes specific suggestions on how to adhere to responsible mining at every stage of the mining cycle. The following principles are the bases for the Guidebook: 

• Protect the environment as a paramount consideration in all stages of mining and conduct activities in a manner that will contribute to the broader goals of sustainable development.
• Protect the rights of affected communities, including the rights of indigenous cultural communities.
• Engage in adequate and timely communication and consultation with them and work for the improvement of the quality of their lives during and even after the life of the mine.
• Safeguard the health and safety of mineworkers, local population, host and impact communities, and address foreseeable health- and safety-related impacts associated with mining over its full life cycle.
• Maintain a competent workforce that is committed to responsible mining and whose welfare is advanced. 
• Make sure that affected communities benefit from mining through employment, whenever possible.
• Respect, protect, and promote human rights of those affected by mining and promote human rights-sensitive security arrangements.
• Adopt responsible corporate governance and management principles that nurture trust and promote company integrity by developing effective self-regulatory practices and management systems and employing business practices that are ethical, transparent and accountable. (Chamber of Mines, 2010)

In the Philippines, a special concern for responsible mining is the identification of “no-go” areas. Despite provisions in the law that identify areas closed to mining, field implementation has been beset by conflicts. There is no clear-cut policy on mining in island ecosystems that are most vulnerable to environmental and social impacts. The National Integrated Protected Areas System (NIPAS) and SEP for Palawan laws should inform such a policy. In 2000, DENR issued Administrative Order No. 83 on “Guidelines for the Management And Development of Small Islands, Including Its Coastal Areas” but this regulation has not stopped the exploitation of mineral resources in small islands and coastal areas.

7. What operational conditions must be met to conduct responsible mining in the Philippines?

Responsible mining has to accurately assess and account for all relevant costs and benefits: 

• The appropriate valuation mechanisms should be employed to ensure that the environmental and social responsibilities are accounted for, and that the negative impacts are mitigated and affected communities compensated.
• There must be a more comprehensive articulation of risk assessment for disaster management, given that the Philippines is prone to geophysical disturbance and climate change-induced hazards.
• Regulations on environmental impact studies should be reviewed to account for the value of biodiversity and ethnodiversity significance.

Responsible mining has to respect no-go areas:

• There must be respect for the NIPAS and SEP for Palawan that declare areas closed to mining.
• There must be respect for the right of local governments to close areas within their territorial jurisdiction to mining operations as a precautionary measure, in the absence of credible information on impacts and acceptable risks.
• Small island ecosystems should be excluded from mining. Agenda 21 of the United Nations identifies small islands supporting small communities as special cases for environment and development, being ecologically fragile and vulnerable. The ocean and coastal environment of small islands of strategic importance and constitutes a valuable development resource. Their small size, limited resources, geographic dispersion and isolation from markets, place them at a disadvantage economically and prevent economies of scale.

Responsible mining has to respect the decision of local stakeholders, especially indigenous peoples: 

• Inconsistencies in the implementation of FPIC raise serious doubts as to the validity of community consent and benefit-sharing agreements.
• The right of IPs and local communities to say “no” should be respected and not taken as a provisional decision subject to negotiation until communities finally say “yes.”

Small-scale mining should be held to the same high standards: 

• Policies on small-scale mining should be revised to account for the same impacts as large-scale mining.

8. What actions must the government take towards management of responsible mining?

The operational conditions for responsible mining must be matched with governance actions, including: 

• Defining a policy to get the best deal for the people –The country and local communities apparently get little in terms of benefits from mining, compared to the returns that investors get. The Philippine Development Plan (PDP) noted from an assessment report of a mining project (Rapu-Rapu) that the fair share of the government from mining has not been achieved due to the existing incentive mechanism (PDP, p. 297). The current fiscal incentives and taxation regime in mining are inadequate and do not assume long-term national and local benefits in the extraction of exhaustible resources. The government recently proposed the imposition of a 5% royalty for the exploitation of select mineral reservations. This has been met with stiff opposition by the mining industry. Comparative data on government benefits from mining are conflicting; therefore the government must make further studies to firm up its negotiating position.
  
  In the landmark case of La Bugal-B’laan Tribal Association vs. Ramos (GR No. 127882, Jan 27, 2004), the Supreme Court ruled that the Mining Act of 1995 was constitutional provided it was implemented in a manner that truly benefited the country. The Court stated that the government retained control of mineral resources in the country through regulation. Thus, if the government and society at large do not benefit from the current mining revenue system, modifying that system is then justified.
   
• Defining clear indicators for reforms – Clear and measurable indicators are needed to track compliance and progress in reforms needed for responsible mining, including inclusiveness of economic benefits, as well as social, cultural, and environmental safeguards. The government needs to design and implement a systematic monitoring and evaluation (M & E) process based on these indicators.
  
  There should be an objective, third-party review of current operating mines to determine compliance with responsible mining. A more comprehensive compilation of best practices should also be prepared to equip the government, mining companies, and affected communities with information to make rational decisions.
   
• Continuous capacity building – In order to support stable, rational decision-making, the government must have the capacity to implement:
  
  
  • Natural resources valuation;
  • Options for benefit-sharing schemes at the national, local, and community level;
  • Measuring local economic impact;
  • Measuring impact on community values and culture;
  • Establishing systematic monitoring and evaluation of environmental, social, and economic impacts at all levels (project, local, and national); and
  • A genuine and inclusive process of obtaining free and prior informed consent.
  
  The Philippine Development Plan acknowledges that “government capacity for resource management is wanting” (p. 309) and that “Ensuring the equitable and just distribution of benefits from extracted mineral resources remains to be a challenge… Currently, there is no standard resource and environment valuation. There is a need to have a cost-benefit analysis and standard parameters that will consider all relevant values (including nonmarket values).” (p. 298)
  
  Risk assessment should also be prioritized. The Philippines is located in the Pacific Ring of Fire. The same tectonic activity that makes it a prime location for economically valuable metals also means that the country is prone to geophysical hazards such as earthquakes and volcanic eruptions.
   
• Setting a clear action plan with a reasonable timetable and sufficient budget and personnel support – The actions needed must be set in a clear, doable, time-bound, and adequately funded action plan, so that all stakeholders can reasonably expect accomplishment of the reform goals. The reforms are only as good as their implementation. Government has to provide the manpower needed to implement the reforms both at national and local government levels.

For decades, the shortcomings in governance have been side-stepped, and the government has assumed that approval of mining operations can continue because capacity-building is taking place. This is no longer acceptable. As shown above, with the inadequacies of regulation and capacity for governance, the government has no rational basis for making decisions on mining.

9. What interim measures must the government take while appropriate mining governance is instituted?

In reassessing its mining policy, the government should adhere to the precautionary principle – a generally accepted international law principle – expressed by the Supreme Court in the Rules of 

Procedure for Environmental Cases (Part V, Rule 20): 

Sec. 1. When there is a lack of full scientific certainty in establishing a causal link between human activity and environmental effect, the court shall apply the precautionary principle in resolving the case before it.
The constitutional right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology shall be given the benefit of the doubt. 

Sec. 2. In applying the precautionary principle, the following factors, among others, may be considered: (1) threats to human life or health; (2) inequity to present or future generations; (3) prejudice to the environment without legal consideration of the environmental rights of those affected.

Clearly, all the factors for the application of the precautionary principle to mining operations exist.

The government has suspended acceptance of all types of mining applications effective January this year. In Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) Memorandum Order No. 2011-01, Secretary Ramon Paje indicated that DENR is undertaking a “cleansing” of mining applications, apparently to weed out defective applications and unqualified applicants. Recent news reports of disapprovals of mining applications (e.g., in Caraga Region) show that DENR is serious about the clean-up. Civil society groups, including Legal Rights and Natural Resources Center, Inc.- Kasama sa Kalikasan (LRC-KsK), contend that the suspension is not enough because the problems lie with existing tenements or with applications already being processed. LRC-KsK further claims that the suspension will eventually open up more lands for mining applications to replace the defective ones.

The Ateneo School of Government supports the position that the government impose a blanket moratorium that includes the suspension of processing of submitted mining applications, and not be limited to the cleansing of dormant or defective applications. The fundamental uncertainties and gaps raised above call for the government to take pause and re-evaluate its mining policy. The current suspension is not effective in fixing fundamental problems, but will only serve to replace the actors. The same mining areas will be open for application once the unqualified or defective applications have been removed. If we do not know proper valuation, we cannot do rational cost-benefit analysis. If we cannot assess risks, we cannot make informed decisions acceptable to stakeholders.

The School is mindful that a moratorium can have adverse effects, especially on jobs and local economic activities in areas where mining activities are already starting– exploration, consultations, etc. – even though mining applications are still being processed. For this reason, a clear action plan and firm timeline is needed to accomplish the reforms for an improved governance framework for responsible mining.

Local governments that have expressed firm positions on mining have to be heard and their positions respected. Regardless of the legal technicalities that surround the enactment of ordinances deemed inconsistent with national law, local governments are simply expressing and applying the precautionary principle. The national government should continue to engage with local governments in evaluating compliance with the indicators of reforms for responsible mining and governance. Without doubt, local governments will appreciate such a joint problem-solving approach, and may reconsider their positions when compliance is assured. The national government may then lift the moratorium accordingly, on a per-area or -case basis, as soon as target actions have been completed and local governments and stakeholders give their support.

10. What is the future of mining in the Philippines?

We, the current generation, are potential beneficiaries of mining operations. But we must remain aware of our responsibility as caretakers of our nation’s wealth for the enjoyment of our children and their children. The country’s mineral resources are limited and exhaustible. Do we really have to pressure ourselves to cash in on the benefits now? The Ateneo School of Government’s position is that the country could wait for better conditions and negotiate better terms on the basis of better information. The consequences of erroneous decisions are so huge and irreversible that it is better to take a longer view today. The global economic outlook for the mining sector favors prudence and patience because demand for minerals will continue well into the future; thus there is no real opportunity cost in deferring decisions on utilization of our mineral resources.

This is not to say that we should not consider mining at all in the future. We can learn from existing mining operations to improve governance and work towards responsible mining. We recognize that the mining industry has improved a lot over the past decades in adopting new technologies, in considering the environmental, economic, social, and cultural impacts of mining operations. However, in our country, mining still has had to demonstrate what “responsible” mining is. And there is skepticism to overcome because, unfortunately for the industry, mining has a poor record of performance on the issue in the past 50 years. The action plan we propose is only the first step towards a responsible and sustainable governance environment for mining. We should put in place safeguards and governance framework to capture more of the values of our minerals for ourselves.

Steve Jobs, 1955-2011

By Albert Mohler

Crosswalk.com

The death of Steve Jobs, founder and iconic leader of Apple, is a signal moment in the lives of the “digital generation,” which Jobs, along with a very few other creative geniuses, made possible. Few individuals of any historical epoch can claim to have changed the way so many people live their lives, do their work and engage the products of the culture.

Jobs was one of the most influential cultural creatives of all time. If that seems like an exaggeration, it is only because the products that Jobs and Apple brought into being have become so familiar that they appear as the furnishings of contemporary lives. The personal computer was not invented by Steve Jobs, but he saw the possibility of integrated systems that would allow personal creativity to blossom. He saw products that customers did not even know they needed — and then released the products to the public, creating entire new markets and unleashing an explosion of worldwide technological creativity.

The Apple products that Jobs personally introduced, including the iPod, the iPhone and the iPad, defined a new era. There is now no going back. We are in the digital age to stay. But, that world will now have to reckon with the absence of Steve Jobs.

Born to unwed parents in 1955, Jobs was adopted by a couple in Northern California — the region later to be known as Silicon Valley. In one sense, Jobs was first defined by Silicon Valley. Later, he would return the favor by defining the region on his own terms.

He, along with Stephen Wozniak, developed Apple as an idea and as a company. After dropping out of Reed College, Jobs joined Stephen Wozniak in attending the meetings of the Homebrew Computer Club, which met at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center in Menlo Park, California. They began attending the meetings in 1975. In 1976, they began Apple with just over $1,000 of their own money. By 1981, the company was worth $600 million. In 1983, Apple joined the Fortune 500.

Jobs had his share of technological failures, or disappointments. Nevertheless, even in his years away from Apple (after losing control of the company), Jobs redefined entire industries. He developed Pixar into a digital movie powerhouse, among other things, returning to lead Apple in 1997 and later to become CEO again in 2000. The rest is history.

Christians considering the life and death of Steve Jobs will do well to remember once again the power of an individual life. God has invested massive creative abilities in his human creatures. These are often used for good, and sometimes deployed to evil ends. Steve Jobs devoted his life to a technological dream that he thought would empower humanity. He led creative teams that developed technological wonders, and then he made them seemingly necessary for life in the digital age.

Jobs’ massive creative genius was matched to an almost unerring intuition of taste. His design specifications and attention to aesthetic detail are legendary. He reportedly held product designs, such as the iPhone, in his hand, closing his eyes as he ran his fingers over each surface, mandating changes to make to the product that were, to his mind, aesthetically perfect. He once defined taste as “trying to expose yourself to the best things humans have done and then trying to bring those things into what you are doing.”

His sense of taste — almost an intuition to know in advance what would be considered tasteful — was remarkable. Nevertheless, taste is not a very substantial basis for a worldview, nor can technology save us.

Steve Jobs lived a life that, by secular standards, will be considered legendary. Generations to come will be directly influenced by forces and products that he and his company brought to reality. He died a legend and one of the world’s richest men.

His personal life was far more complicated than his cool and reserved public image suggested. And his worldview, seemingly and vaguely Eastern in orientation (there was speculation that Jobs was Buddhist), was very much a part of the hidden Steve Jobs. In his 2005 commencement address at Stanford University, Jobs said:

“Again, you can’t connect the dots looking forward; you can only connect them looking backwards. So you have to trust that the dots will somehow connect in your future. You have to trust in something — your gut, destiny, life, karma, whatever. This approach has never let me down, and it has made all the difference in my life.”

He told the graduating students to pursue their dreams and cited The Whole Earth Catalog, a work that symbolized the quirky culture of Jobs’ youth in northern California: “Stay hungry. Stay foolish.”

In diet, he was a pescetarian, eating fish as the only meat. In public, he was the essence of cool — redefining the role of the CEO as the narrator and public revealer of new technologies and products. In private, beginning in 2004, he was fighting against pancreatic cancer.

In his Stanford address, Jobs told of a saying he first heard as a 17-year-old: “If you live each day as if it was your last, someday you’ll most certainly be right.”

He stepped down as Apple's CEO in August, telling his company’s employee: “I have always said that if there ever came a day when I could no longer meet my duties and expectations as Apple’s CEO, I would be the first to let you know. Unfortunately, that day has come.”

He exited the scene with grace, ensuring that the company he founded would endure when he was off the scene. There is much to learn from his life and his legacy.

At the same time, Christians cannot leave the matter where the secular world will settle on Steve Jobs’ legacy. The secular conversation will evade questions of eternal significance, but Christians cannot. As is the case with so many kings, rulers, inventors, leaders and shapers of history, Christians can learn from Steve Jobs and even admire many of his gifts and contributions. Yet, we must also observe what is missing here.

I am writing this essay on an Apple laptop computer. I am listening to the strains of Bach playing from my iPad via an AirPort Express. My iPhone sits on my desk, downloading a new app from iTunes. Steve Jobs has invaded my life, my house, my office, my car and my desktop — and I am thankful for all of these technologies.

But unerring taste, aesthetic achievement, and technological genius will not save the world. Christians know what the world does not — that the mother tending her child, the farmer planting his crops, the father protecting his family, the couple faithfully living out their marital vows, the factory worker laboring to support his family and the preacher preparing to preach the Word of God are all doing far more important work.

We have to measure life by its eternal impact, even as we are thankful for every individual who makes this world a better place. But, don’t expect eternal impact to be the main concern of the business pages.

My son Christopher, age 19, is very much part of the digital generation — a “digital native” who never knew a time when the digital world was not. To him, and to his generation, Steve Jobs was the worker of wonders. Jobs, said Christoper, “made computing cool” and “brought in the iGeneration.” Texting me after the announcement of Steve Jobs’s death, Christopher wanted to make sure I knew “this is a big deal.” Got it, Christopher. Thanks.

Read also: "Steve Jobs: Trapped by his own dogma"


----------

"Your time is limited, so don't waste it living someone else's life. Don't be trapped by dogma — which is living with the results of other people's thinking." --Steve Jobs

"Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world are the ones who do." --Steve Jobs

But isn't many of today's people living with the results of Steve Job's thinking? Isn't today's generation being trapped by his dogma? Indeed life is limited, but isn't today's iGG (iGadget Generation) living the kind of life which people like Steve Jobs were crazy enough to conform the world according to their concepts?

Like the proverbial fruit of Eden, once one gets crazy enough to take a bite, the "serpentic" lure to change the world according to one's own concepts becomes irresistible. And so, as these so-called world-changers think, so goes this world.    

Contraception: Why Not? (Abortion as Contraception)

.

The reason why abortion is a demanded form of contraception among women who have unwanted pregnancies is this:

"We have a phenomena here: About 53% of women who go to abortion clinics say that they were using a contraceptive when they got pregnant." --Dr. Janet Smith

In Thailand, the U.N.-advocated Reproductive Health program has long been implemented but with dismal outcome (please see the video about Thailand's RH program failure on my previous post below). The major reason for many governments' contraception program failure is described by Dr. Janet Smith in the video shown above. And because of this reason, abortion as contraception becomes badly demanded to cope with the program's failure.

          

Thailand's Unborn: A Case of Reproductive Health Program Failure

.

Thailand has long been implementing the Reproductive Health program (like the proposed RH bill in our country), and after several years of implementation, its outcome is a dismal failure.

A problem which has more of a psychological/spiritual dimension can't be remedied appropriately with solutions that are merely material in nature and it can't be dealt with effectively if it is addressed in the physical realm alone.

 
With all of its symptoms and consequences, irresponsible sex is more of a mental attitude problem than it is a physical one. Therefore to address this problem with the use of solutions such as those provided in the proposed Reproductive Health bill -- which primarily includes maternal-and-child healthcare products and services as well as birth-prevention products and services -- is to merely deal with the physical consequences of the problem and does not address the psychological dimension of the problem itself at its very core.

In today's instant-gratification world, the correct and proper teaching of the ABC's of sexual responsibility which is a big part of the most critical phase of youth development has been greatly declining in most of the societies across the globe -- already almost to the point of total neglect. Majority of the young minds of today's information age, on their own, are left freely learning wrong norms from the various forms of media they constantly are exposed to everyday -- the internet, mobile phone, television, radio, movies, magazines, etc. Both at home and in school, parents and educators alike have become seriously negligent of the responsibility of molding the character dimension of the youth. Today's educational systems seem to have failed to prevent the destruction of the balance between material prosperity and spiritual prosperity. More and more focus has been given to career and profession building while less and less focus is given to character formation.

If societies are to succeed in the fight against the consequences of sexual irresponsibility in today's nihilistic and narcissistic world, one key and major factor to be given big focus in the overall strategy is the [re]formation of people's character particularly in the young minds of the youth. Molding them and guiding them spiritually with right values and imparting virtues into their young minds. Approaching the problem this way targets the underlying psychological dimension of the problem of irresponsible sex right at its very core.

Read more: Character Formation: The Only Right Alternative to "RH Bill" for the Youth

"Reduction" Goes Beyond Meddling to Murder

By Albert Mohler
Crosswalk.com

"There are demands worldwide for a procedure to reduce twins to a single pregnancy and it has grown steadily. The Two-Minus-One Pregnancy is one of the most twisted thinking that justifies the killing of the unborn, and the people opting for this procedure try to evade moral responsibility by calling the procedure a “reduction.” But the procedure so dishonestly called “reduction” is really not about mere “meddling.” It is murder!" --Article Quote


Euphemisms are the refuge of moral cowardice, and no euphemism is so cowardly or so deadly as “reduction” — a word that sounds like math, but really means murder. The August 14, 2011 edition of The New York Times Magazine makes this fact clear in its cover story, “The Two-Minus-One Pregnancy.”

Reporter Ruth Padawer first takes her readers into the examination room of an obstetrician who is about to abort one of two fetuses within the womb of a woman identified as “Jenny.” Padawer writes:

As Jenny lay on the obstetrician’s examination table, she was grateful that the ultrasound tech had turned off the overhead screen. She didn’t want to see the two shadows floating inside her. Since making her decision, she had tried hard not to think about them, though she could often think of little else. She was 45 and pregnant after six years of fertility bills, ovulation injections, donor eggs and disappointment — and yet here she was, 14 weeks into her pregnancy, choosing to extinguish one of two healthy fetuses, almost as if having half an abortion. As the doctor inserted the needle into Jenny’s abdomen, aiming at one of the fetuses, Jenny tried not to flinch, caught between intense relief and intense guilt.

Of course, Jenny was not “having half an abortion,” for she was aborting a baby who was just as alive as his or her twin. The “reduction” of multiple pregnancies is now part of the practice of obstetrics, though largely kept from public view. Ruth Padawer explains that the demand for reductions is driven by advances in reproductive technologies and the reluctance of many women to accept a multiple pregnancy. Some of the most widely-used fertility drugs increase the likelihood of a multiple pregnancy, as does the usual process of IVF procedures.

The procedure was first proposed as a means of reducing the risk of having three or more babies in a single pregnancy. In more recent years, the demand to reduce twins to a single pregnancy has grown steadily. At one New York City medical center, over half of all reduction procedures were to reduce twins to a single pregnancy. Padawer’s report is largely about that phenomenon, for the reduction of a pregnancy from twins to a single baby is not about increasing the odds of a healthy delivery, but about the ominous rise of what amounts to personal preference.

Jenny makes this clear. She explains that she had conceived through IVF and an egg donor. Had the pregnancy occurred naturally, she said, “I wouldn’t have reduced this pregnancy, because you feel like if there’s a natural order, then you don’t want to disturb it.” Nevertheless, “The pregnancy was all so consumerish to begin with, and this became yet another thing we could control.”

Those words are amazingly revealing. Those who have tried to justify any and all means of controlling reproduction must face squarely the fact that they have created what amounts to a consumer market for babies — and customers eventually find someone to provide what they demand. When it comes to human life, the stage is set for tragedy.

As Ruth Padawer reports, obstetricians were at first reluctant to reduce twins to a single pregnancy on moral grounds, and many doctors who perform reductions refuse to reduce below twins. But the practice is growing, reflecting a shift in medical practice. She profiles Dr. Mark Evans, who at first refused to reduce twins on moral grounds. In 1988 he co-authored ethical guidelines for reducing pregnancies that declared reductions below twins to be unethical. Evans wrote that doctors should not allow themselves to become “technicians to our patients’ desires.”

And yet, in 2004 Dr. Evans reversed his position on the issue. Padawer explains his rationale:

For one thing, as more women in their 40s and 50s became pregnant (often thanks to donor eggs), they pushed for two-to-one reductions for social reasons. Evans understood why these women didn’t want to be in their 60s worrying about two tempestuous teenagers or two college-tuition bills. He noted that many of the women were in second marriages, and while they wanted to create a child with their new spouse, they did not want two, especially if they had children from a previous marriage. Others had deferred child rearing for careers or education, or were single women tired of waiting for the right partner. Whatever the particulars, these patients concluded that they lacked the resources to deal with the chaos, stereophonic screaming and exhaustion of raising twins.

Note carefully that the justification offered for killing an unborn baby is clearly identified as “social reasons.” The medical rationale he cited cannot be taken seriously, even as he cites “recent studies” that “revealed that the risks of twin pregnancies were greater than previously thought.” As this article makes abundantly clear, the main risk of a twin pregnancy these days is the risk that one of the twins will be intentionally aborted.

“Ethics,” Dr. Evans told Padawer, “evolve with technology.” That is a foundation for murderous medical ethics. The Culture of Death has worked its way into the logic of modern medical ethics to the extent that these obstetricians justify killing healthy babies just because the parents do not want the burden of twins.

Padawer allows many of the mothers seeking reductions to speak of their intentions without any effort to filter their language. One mother said she felt like her triple pregnancy “was a monster.” She eventually found Dr. Evans, who reduced her pregnancy to a single baby. Padawer candidly reports that some women use reductions to choose the sex of their baby. “Until the last decade, most doctors refused even to broach that question,” she reports, “but that ethical demarcation has eroded, as ever more patients lobby for that option and doctors discover that plenty opt for girls.”

In other words, sex-selection abortions would be unethical only if the demand for either sex was out of balance?

To her credit, Ruth Padawer points to the growing consumer market for babies as the root issue. She writes:

We’ve come to believe that the improvements are not only our due but also our responsibility. Just look at the revolution in attitudes toward selecting egg or sperm donors. In the 1970s, when sperm donation took off, most clients were married women with infertile husbands; many couples didn’t want to know about the source of the donation. Today patients in the United States can choose donors based not only on their height, hair color and ethnicity but also on their academic and athletic accomplishments, temperament, hairiness and even the length of a donor’s eyelashes.

“The Two-Minus-One Pregnancy” is one of the most significant articles of recent years. With chilling and unflinching candor, Ruth Padawer virtually forces her readers to see the twisted thinking that justifies the killing of the unborn, and then she tries to evade moral responsibility by calling the procedure a “reduction.”

There is a story behind this story, of course. The intersection where modern reproductive technologies and legal abortion meet is now a deadly place for many unborn babies. In the name of personal preference and for “social reasons,” some women now demand that their multiple babies be aborted so that they will have only the one baby they want.

Padawer says that many Americans are uneasy about this knowledge, perhaps “because the desire for more choices conflicts with our discomfort about meddling with ever more aspects of reproduction.”

But the procedure so dishonestly called “reduction” is really not about mere “meddling.” It is murder.

The Illusion of Freedom Separated from Moral Virtue

By Raymond L. Dennehy
University of San Francisco
Ignatius Insight

(The following are excerpts from Dennehy's essay. Read the complete text of his essay here.)

Liberal democracy cannot survive unless a monistic virtue ethics permeates its culture. A nation whose members lack moral virtue cannot sustain its commitment to freedom and equality for all.

What about a nation whose inhabitants are allowed the freedom to do everything they may wish to do as long as they do not violate anyone else's personal freedom, but do not realize that they have been programmed to desire only what their government determines them to desire? This raises the question: "Is freedom the personal state of being objectively unrestrained or the subjective state of not being aware of being restrained?"

Is it within the realm of plausibility that the majority of members of a political society could think they are free when, in fact, they are not? The answer is "Yes." The principal cause would be the attempt to preserve a freedom that is separated from moral virtue. But "would be" is the subjunctive mood and, thus, belongs to the realm of the merely possible. It is undeniably possible for a population to suffer from the illusion of being free, but the real cannot be inferred from the possible. Agreed. But the reality is already here, evident from practices ratified by legislatures and popular vote, as well as ratified by the courts as constitutionally protected. Each counts as an example of the freedom to "choose one's own ends." In terms of the public vs. private model, they are alleged to belong in the sphere of private behavior insofar as they pertain to actions that do not violate the rights of others. One relevant example is the rapid decline of public and private support for objective and substantive ethics in favor of relativism.

There are two clashing concepts of liberty: negative liberty and positive liberty. Simply expressed, negative liberty holds that freedom is the absence of external restraint, while positive liberty holds that freedom is the opportunity to do what is worth doing.

The argument against a morally neutral conception of freedom collides not only with a fundamental premise of liberal democracy, but also, it seems, with a central tenet of what is accepted as the public philosophy. Michael Sandel succinctly sets forth that tenet:

"The central idea of the public philosophy by which we live is that freedom consists in our capacity to choose our ends for ourselves. Politics should not try to form the character or cultivate the virtue of its citizens, for to do so would be to "legislate morality." Government should not affirm, through its policies or laws, any particular conception of the good life; instead it should provide a neutral framework of rights within which people can choose their own values and ends."

Both conservative and liberal politics are in agreement that "freedom consists in the capacity of people to choose their own ends." The disagreement occurs when one asks whether any specific traits of character are needed for an individual's exercise of freedom, and who has the responsibility for overseeing the acquisition of those character traits. Since republican political theory sees the government's role as that of preparing people to acquire the virtues needed for sharing in self-rule, deliberating with other citizens about what the common good is and how it is to be realized, it entertains a formative conception of politics that demands its involvement with the moral virtues and chosen goals of its citizens. In contrast, the past decades have witnessed the greater influence of the procedural politics of liberal political theory, with its commitment to ensuring equal justice for all without any officially expressed concern for its citizens' personal moral state. The differences between the two theories are real, but they are not what they seem. Both denounce the government's unjustified interference in the lives of its citizens, but differ on what constitutes the injustice.

If positive freedom, especially the metaphysical version, poses threats to a people's freedom to choose their own ends by imposing the state or a higher self as one's true self, so that one is deluded into believing that by obeying the law, one is really obeying oneself, negative freedom hardly offers a better prospect. The possibility of a nation enslaved in their respective and collective actions by their vices, but believing they act freely because they do what they wish, is as disturbing as it is plausible.

The illusion reveals itself in the inconsistency between the criticism of objective moral norms as the fulfillment of personal freedom and the fact that living and acting without moral virtue inevitably yokes one's will to one and the same object of desire. The standard criticism of positive freedom is that the demand that one act according to putative objective standards in order to be free is to confuse freedom with things, which, however laudable--truth, justice, beauty, goodness, or the law--are not what freedom is. The criticism goes on to say that the confusion is dangerous, since it can delude a population into believing that their adherence to those kinds of lofty standards makes them free when it fact it allows an oppressive regime to control their lives.

But a characteristic of the lack of virtue, and surely of the state of vice, is the will's enslavement to a specific object of desire. So, despite insisting that to be free, the individual must have before him a range of options, the lack of virtue produces the opposite: prospective choices are inevitably evaluated in terms of their relation to the principal object of one's vice.

Virtue ethics offers the solution to the extent that it furnishes the standard for action based on understanding and choice unhampered by un-disciplined passions and appetites. For the virtuous person, freedom is negative in the truest sense insofar as he or she enjoys a freedom from both external restraints and the inner restraints of vice. That is the route to human flourishing, both for self-fulfillment and preparation for citizenship. The argument for a virtuous society must not be allowed to go begging. Thomas Aquinas observed that after one loses the virtue of chastity, thereby succumbing to the vice of lust, the next virtue to be lost is justice, the obligation to pay each his due. That is because vice, being a malignancy, metastasizes.

The enduring ideal is a democracy that confers the widest latitude for personal freedom on its members, the vast majority of whom, including elected officials and judges, have characters shaped by a monistic virtue ethics. The crucial question is, who has the responsibility of inculcating ethics in society? The cackling of the sacred geese warned ancient Rome of impending danger. Where are our geese?

The Allure of the Hive: Social Networking and Social Change

.

WYD (Whacked Youth Day) in London

.

.

----------
See beyond physical eyes -- discern with spiritual eyesight; for in the likeness of the dark spirit this thing has happened today, so shall it be like at an inappropriate time to come. On that day, physically, things are not exactly the same, yet the spirit behind it all is the same dark spirit as today.

Therefore to those who are able to see with the eyes of the Spirit, there is yet enough time to strengthen yourselves and your brothers in the Lord, for your strength is in His might.

[Ephesians 6:11-18]

Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.

For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world's rulers of the darkness of this age, and against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.

Therefore, put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and, having done all, to stand.

Stand therefore, having the utility belt of truth buckled around your waist, and having put on the breastplate of righteousness, and having fitted your feet with the preparation of the Gospel of peace; above all, taking up the shield of faith, with which you will be able to quench all the fiery darts of the evil one. And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God; with all prayer and requests, praying at all times in the Spirit, and being watchful to this end in all perseverance and requests for all the holy ones.