Abolition of Fraternities and Sororities.

[amico]

---

^ ah, mas maayo gyud iabolish nalang na sila oi para wa nay gubot.

[thadzonline]

mao may permi naa sa news..ehehe..
mao na silay nabuthan

but it still is not valid to single them out and still let the other orgs nga dili frat og soro to go on with their shadowy activities..if ingun ana na lang diay, i abolish na lang sad na ang PMA or PNPA

hay naku ang kulit. this is going nowhere. look people the man knew the risk, paulit ulit ko ng sinasabi. you cant undrstand chris kasi di kayo sigma rho at di kayo ang nagdesisyon. why is sigma rho being put into so much scrutiny eh partly may kasalanan din ni chris? he knew he was going to be f*** up when he joined? its not because he was pressured or because he had no choice but to become a member...hell no! he had a choice too bad he didnt make it...fair and square! and lastly may i add lang ako, naging susi lang yung fraternity ok, malas lang talaga ng sigma rho. it was his time to die ok, nagkaton nga lang na nakatakda sa palad niya na ang pagsama sa sigma rho ang papatay sa kanya. didnt you all ever stop to think about that? i have been through the process that he has endured and yet i survived and so does 99.99% of the population. i'am not a sigma rhoan pero kahit papano i think that they deserve some slack. yes they do in some way have to pay for what they have done. but to be bombarded and be blamed for everything? i dont think so....i truly beleive that chris should be held partly responsible and that it was truly his time to go...like i said malas lng talaga ng sigma rho. thats all i can say to this issue.

Passing the buck. No accountability? Ni ingon bako nga wlay tulubagon ang sigma rho? Naa silay sala pero dli nato e blame tanan nila. Naay sayop ang estudyante same as sa sigma rho.

if only they can transcend beyond their violent traditions, nothing would have happened. Even if Chris made that decision, it doesn't change the fact that a crime has been committed and somebody is accountable. and one more thing, why risk putting yourself behind bars for the rest of your life(kung kasama ka sa initiation or you aware of it), no matter whether a life is taken or not, you still violated a law, committed a crime. Even if Cris knew what he was getting into, he trusted that his soon-to-be-brothers would take care of him and not leave him for dead..now, is that what you call true brotherhood? na pabayaan mo good as dead ang ni recruit mo para maging brod mo? and by the way, in case you forgot: Cris is a victim, while he is accountable for his decisions, someone must pay for the crime that left him dead. Hindi ang buong sigma rho but those who were present during the initiation, their current officers and all alumni who knew about the hazing that took place as provided for in RA 8049

He only knows what's good for him or not. Dli na mahitabo kng ni balibad pa sya? Sakto?

Do you think g pugos na sya og maau? Do you think g hulga na sya nga kng dli sya mo apil patyon iyng pamilya? Wla. Free well na nya. Wla ko ni laban sa murderers naa silay sayop cguro na sobraan. Atong unahon ang ugat sa problema which is nganong ni enter.

intelligent nga si Chris, and I assume, an elite frat like what he got himself into, yung mga nagbigay ng initiation rites are also intelligent(hard to believe kung hindi, UP students pa naman sila)..and if they were sensible enough, they should have known better kung sobra na ang ginagawa nila at hindi na sana umabot sa kinahantungan ni Cris.

- FRATMEN who still engages in HAZING vilated a code of the FRATERNITY . How does the FRAT know about it ? Kung naay namatay na . Then pass it on sa local authorities so it can be investigated sa cause sa death . That is ACCOUNTABILITY , FRATMEN are not AUTHORITIES , INVESTIGATORS , DOCTORS etc . Kung kana patay na lawas gi chop chop , sulod sako or gi sunog ... that is HARDLY ACCOUNTABILITY !

The whole team who conducted the initiation is accountable for violation of RA 8049, and accountability means them owning up to that act, the death of Cris Anthony Mendez resulted from the commission of the unlawful act of hazing as a prerequisite to being accepted into the frat..these people are accountable not only for the death of Cris per se but also, as mentioned, violation of the Anti-Hazing Law...If fraternities/sororities and other orgs claim to only do it out of respect to tradition, are they saying that they are above the law of the land? Maybe the point of Miriam is: If frats/soro cannot abide by the law of the land where they exist, no point of letting them exist, because if they insist on carrying on with the hazing practice, they are nothing more but a bunch of criminals

- Locating the GUILTY PARTY is needed thru the COOPERATION of the AUTHOITIES and the FRATERNITY to the best of their KNOWLEDGE . Ug ni tago or ni sibat gyud diay ang killer , unsay mabuhat sa FRAT ? Mo ingon dayon mo gi taguan namo ? Mo ingon dayon mo na gi protektahan namo ? Let the police do their job and we'll do ours . Thats being ACCOUNTABLE for all actions that was done .

the way I see accountability now, maybe you can drop by a lawyer's office and sign an affidavit/a disclaimer that since the law on hazing (RA 8049) had been instituted, you have not violated it and if you did you are willing to face the consequences..that is more than accountability, that can only be done if these people are honorable enough to know what is a crime and what is not and own up to their actions, their traditions and the principles that their organization stands for that allowed them to break the law of the land

Talk about ACCOUNTABILITY eh ? I pardon na man lang gani na ang KILLERS ni NINOY AQUINO kay wala gyud ma prove ang pagka guilty nila much more kung sila ba gyud ang guilty party . Much more sa issue na aspiring na FRATMAN who died ( RIP ) who is in part to be blamed on . Heard of SIGNING A WAIVER ? Naa man gani WAIVER ang AKRHO , mga ELITE LAW FRATS na ba nuon .

the presence of a waiver does not necessarily get those who inflicted harm on you off the hook..the law of the land supersedes whatever agreement the individual has with that org because the last time I checked, commission of a crime invalidates that waiver, in effect what was signed was null and void..

another thing, your point about Ninoy's alleged assasins which I think is off track..Those who killed him are accountable too, but that is totally another issue, it does not concern those who are involved in the death of Cris. lain man ila accountability. True accountability is not relative to the accountability of others who do not own up to their deeds. True accountability is owning up to your acts no matter if you are the only one doing it..and while they are entitled to due process, it would make the case move faster and lessen the workload of the court staff if they just own up to what they did..

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

the way I see accountability now, maybe you can drop by a lawyer's office and sign an affidavit/a disclaimer that since the law on hazing (RA 8049) had been instituted, you have not violated it and if you did you are willing to face the consequences..that is more than accountability, that can only be done if these people are honorable enough to know what is a crime and what is not and own up to their actions, their traditions and the principles that their organization stands for that allowed them to break the law of the land

The FRAT already aknowledges that ACT . ANything close to becoming HAZING is a LAW waiting to be VIOLATED . Now the argument here is the FRAT is accountable for kay mao man gi sudlan but the FRAT does not SANCTION HAZING if indeed they follow it . When an INITIATION RITE occurs , dili man tanan naa diha , mao na ang ARGUMENT na go for the violators . Its loophole , ngano ang FRAT man na ang FRATMAN man ang nakasala ?

the presence of a waiver does not necessarily get those who inflicted harm on you off the hook..

WAIVERS are for INITIATION RITES , its not for HAZING .

the law of the land supersedes whatever agreement the individual has with that org because the last time I checked, commission of a crime invalidates that waiver, in effect what was signed was null and void..

True . But in the case of CRIS , its very technical and complicated whom to go after . I dont know the autopsy report kung na ni agi ba gyud ug HAZING si CRIS but it is stupid to assum na wala kay na hospital man as reported . A person can die due to HEART FAILURE during HAZING which HAZING has nothing to do , a person can die due to SYSTEM SHUTDOWN during HAZING but HAZING has nothing to do with it . My point is , tuod ni gi violate na nila ang HAZING ACT but it doesnt mean na sila ni patay ... pero technical na kaau na .

another thing, your point about Ninoy's alleged assasins which I think is off track..Those who killed him are accountable too, but that is totally another issue, it does not concern those who are involved in the death of Cris. lain man ila accountability. True accountability is not relative to the accountability of others who do not own up to their deeds. True accountability is owning up to your acts no matter if you are the only one doing it..and while they are entitled to due process, it would make the case move faster and lessen the workload of the court staff if they just own up to what they did..

It was only anexample for comparison . Wala pa man gani na nila masulbad much more on CRIS case ? It is indeed COLD ... because JUSTIC in the PHILIPPINES is JUSTICE in the PHILIPPINES .

[thadzonline]

It was only anexample for comparison . Wala pa man gani na nila masulbad much more on CRIS case ? It is indeed COLD ... because JUSTIC in the PHILIPPINES is JUSTICE in the PHILIPPINES .

if those involved are responsible enough to own up to the crimes they committed, justice will be served faster.

True . But in the case of CRIS , its very technical and complicated whom to go after . I dont know the autopsy report kung na ni agi ba gyud ug HAZING si CRIS but it is stupid to assum na wala kay na hospital man as reported . A person can die due to HEART FAILURE during HAZING which HAZING has nothing to do , a person can die due to SYSTEM SHUTDOWN during HAZING but HAZING has nothing to do with it . My point is , tuod ni gi violate na nila ang HAZING ACT but it doesnt mean na sila ni patay ... pero technical na kaau na .

and well benefit of the doubt that the process of hazing caused the death..with how bad Cris looked when he was brought to the hospital, it is also stupid to assume hazing has nothing to do with it..heart failure can result from the acts of hazing so is systems shutdown..now tell me, was he diagnosed with some chronic condition prior to the incident?

WAIVERS are for INITIATION RITES , its not for HAZING

and when hazing was present during initiation, that just invalidates the waiver as well kay naa na man crime na commit during the rites.for sure wala to siya mo sign ug disclaimer allowing those would-be brods nga pwede lang sila mo commit ug crime..still dili mo supersede ang waiver sa law sa land.

The FRAT already aknowledges that ACT . ANything close to becoming HAZING is a LAW waiting to be VIOLATED . Now the argument here is the FRAT is accountable for kay mao man gi sudlan but the FRAT does not SANCTION HAZING if indeed they follow it . When an INITIATION RITE occurs , dili man tanan naa diha , mao na ang ARGUMENT na go for the violators . Its loophole , ngano ang FRAT man na ang FRATMAN man ang nakasala ?

I never said the frat shall pay..Individuals who belong to the org and who knew of it are accountable or those who did it, as well as their officers, that is provided for in RA 8049. kung wala nila gi sanction ang hazing tungod kay mao ila practice, much more naa accountability ang officers(as well as members who turn a blind eye) sa provisions sa RA 8049..but kadtong wala kahibalo about it, are off the hook..they cann argue all they want, pero mas maayo sa siguro they need to get acquainted with RA 8049 before they can debate who is going to be charged or not..

by the way, reread the phrase which you rebutted kay it never meant frat ang basulon, I meant ang individual ang mo sign ug affidavit or disclaimer

[Minuano27]

i understand the point of the fratmen here - there will always be bad apples that will give the entire basket a bad name.

but i think we should remember that hazings are done in the name of the frats as organizations. that's why when things go wrong, the focus is on the frat and not on the fratmen responsible because after all, those guys are not known to the public, and worse, usually vanish into thin air, so to speak.

what makes it worse for the frats is that they clam up and give the impression that they are protecting their own. while that would be again be understandable from their point of view, it certainly isn't in the eyes of the public. after all, someone died in their hands, yet they make it difficult to find out who. take the case of cris mendoza - until now, no one really knows who was present during the initiation that led to his death.

i don't think that frats are bad per se. However, when someone gets killed in the name of a frat, then the frat and/or its leaders should step up and do the right thing.

as for "abolishing" the frats, well, that's actually a misnomer. from the legal viewpoint, what that actually means is to criminalize membership in frats, with the end result that no one would want to become a member and hence, its ultimate "abolition". of course, the frat could simply go "underground", but that's a different story.

the frats will argue that "abolishing" them will violate their constitutional right to freedom of association. but then again, such freedom is not absolute, and can be regulated by the state. where this issue is going to end is anybody's guess, for only the supreme court can ultimately decide on this.

[thadzonline]

i understand the point of the fratmen here - there will always be bad apples that will give the entire basket a bad name.

but i think we should remember that hazings are done in the name of the frats as organizations. that's why when things go wrong, the focus is on the frat and not on the fratmen responsible because after all, those guys are not known to the public, and worse, usually vanish into thin air, so to speak.

what makes it worse for the frats is that they clam up and give the impression that they are protecting their own. while that would be again be understandable from their point of view, it certainly isn't in the eyes of the public. after all, someone died in their hands, yet they make it difficult to find out who. take the case of cris mendoza - until now, no one really knows who was present during the initiation that led to his death.

i don't think that frats are bad per se. However, when someone gets killed in the name of a frat, then the frat and/or its leaders should step up and do the right thing.

as for "abolishing" the frats, well, that's actually a misnomer. from the legal viewpoint, what that actually means is to criminalize membership in frats, with the end result that no one would want to become a member and hence, its ultimate "abolition". of course, the frat could simply go "underground", but that's a different story.

the frats will argue that "abolishing" them will violate their constitutional right to freedom of association. but then again, such freedom is not absolute, and can be regulated by the state. where this issue is going to end is anybody's guess, for only the supreme court can ultimately decide on this.

Maybe the point of Miriam is: If frats/soro cannot abide by the law of the land where they exist, no point of letting them exist, because if they insist on carrying on with the hazing practice, they are nothing more but a bunch of criminals

siguro taken out of context kay wala man sad niya giclarify..So for frat/soro: Stop violating RA 8049, The Anti-Hazing Law, and we will all be fine

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

MINUANO27 ... I was really just waiting for your reply being the GURU here at ISTORYA of PHILIPPINE LAWS .

THADZ ... akong gi stress lang regarding FRATS and FRATMEN for the general publics consumption and dili specific sa statements nimo bai . Sorry na mislead tika but my point lang is uban tao mo direct dayon ug issues where it does not belong to . They just bark at the wrong tree .

[thadzonline]

yeah, pero I think you have made your point clear man sa akoa..dili frat ang nakasala, na aggravate lang ang issue tungod kay miyembro man sa frat ang involved. maskin si Miriam gane wla ma clarified

[Velvett]

i understand the point of the fratmen here - there will always be bad apples that will give the entire basket a bad name.

but i think we should remember that hazings are done in the name of the frats as organizations. that's why when things go wrong, the focus is on the frat and not on the fratmen responsible because after all, those guys are not known to the public, and worse, usually vanish into thin air, so to speak.

what makes it worse for the frats is that they clam up and give the impression that they are protecting their own. while that would be again be understandable from their point of view, it certainly isn't in the eyes of the public. after all, someone died in their hands, yet they make it difficult to find out who. take the case of cris mendoza - until now, no one really knows who was present during the initiation that led to his death.

i don't think that frats are bad per se. However, when someone gets killed in the name of a frat, then the frat and/or its leaders should step up and do the right thing.

tells me there's not much accountability present.

no accountability = no change = status quo = continued protests against hazing and frats in general

[fingolfin]

.. abolition ?? " mupiti na lang ang uwak ". It will never happen. Sen Miriam is probably dreaming when she wrote those proposed bills.