An Honest Commentary on the RH Bill

‘For he is our peace’ (Eph. 2:14)
By Fr. John J. Carroll, S.J.
Philippine Daily Inquirer
Posted date: May 04, 2011

Note from me: This is to further your education, so that informed, you may be able to form your conscience. Doing so, you will be able to make your own decision on the matter. It is good that you get different opinions and perspectives. I have worked with Fr. Carroll SJ in Payatas and I can attest to his holiness, sincerity and credibility.

AS I watched Christ’s faithful gather symbolically in the Upper Room on Holy Thursday, around Calvary’s cross on Good Friday, and at the empty tomb on Easter Sunday, a wave of joy flowed over me. Swept up like a chip of wood on the surface of a boiling wave by the power of the community singing, I recalled the unity in faith and hope of the millions who gathered 25 years ago at Edsa. But still there was an undercurrent of sadness, sadness due to the realization that the official Church no longer stands with a united people but with one part of a nation divided; and that the struggle is carried on, no longer in the respectful manner of the crowds at Edsa, but in an atmosphere of personal animosity and demonizing.

The sadness is made deeper by the sense that in the debate over the RH bill, the Church seems to have backed itself into a no-win situation. If the bill passes over the total opposition of the hierarchy, there will be gloating in some quarters and a sense of “Who’s afraid of the big bad Church?” If it is defeated by the opposition of the Church, I fear a powerful backlash at the Church’s “interference in politics” and “reliance on political power rather than moral suasion”—the beginnings of an anti-clericalism such as has overwhelmed formerly Catholic bastions such as Spain and Ireland.

With all due respect for the position of the Philippine bishops, I do not see that total opposition to the bill necessary, once one gets past the polemics. First of all, the bill does not legalize contraceptives; they are already legal and may be purchased in any drugstore. What the bill proposes to do—rightly or wrongly—is to subsidize the cost of contraception as well as natural family planning to the poor. Neither does the bill legalize abortion; on the contrary it reaffirms the constitutional prohibition. It is highly probable in fact that if contraceptives become more available to the poor, the scandalous number of illegal abortions performed annually will be dramatically reduced.

On the tricky scientific question whether the IUD and some contraceptive pills may prevent the implantation of a fertilized ovum in the mother’s womb and so destroy a human life, the current draft of the bill passes the responsibility to the Food and Drug Administration, which should ban any such “contraceptives” from drugstores throughout the country.

On the matter of sex education in the schools, the same draft allows parents to “opt out” for their children, i.e. to have them exempted from such classes. This is an improvement, although it would seem better to allow religious schools to develop their own programs. It may be still possible to negotiate for this. There is a graded set of modules on sex and population education already available, prepared by teachers of Catholic schools under the leadership of the Office of Population Studies Foundation of the University of San Carlos, and bearing the imprimatur of Ricardo Cardinal Vidal.

Other improvements may still be possible. One might be to strengthen the “conscience clauses” protecting health workers and teachers whose religious values conflict with certain aspects of the bill. Another could be representation of religious bodies on an oversight committee to make sure that freedom of conscience is fully respected in the field.

A sticking point for many is that the bill would subsidize the distribution of contraceptives to the poor. The Catholic Church, while recognizing the fundamental moral difference between contraception and abortion, still insists that the former is wrong. It debases the most sacred act which a husband and wife can perform: cooperation with the Creator in bringing into existence a new human person destined for eternity with God. Here it would seem more consistent for the Church to initiate a vigorous program of family life and natural family planning education for its people, helping them to form their consciences and make responsible decisions on this matter, rather than trying by political means to keep them away from “temptation.”

Which brings up what to me seems to be the most important issue here, namely, the family and family values. The charge is made that the RH bill will destroy the Filipino family. On the basis of more than 25 years of pastoral and social work in Payatas, and some seven years sponsoring natural family planning programs, I can say that the family is already at great risk—and not because of contraceptives.

While the dedication of many young people—our scholars and former scholars—to helping their families, and the sacrifices that they are willing to make, are sometimes overwhelming, these are often one-parent families abandoned by the fathers who have gone on to father second and even third families. Or no-parent families abandoned by both father and mother and being raised by grandparents. Moreover, one main reason why only some 20 percent of the women who take our seminars on natural family planning actually practice it is precisely the unwillingness of the husbands to cooperate.

Our family-life seminars seem to be much appreciated. If only the effort and resources being now invested in opposition to the RH bill were being used for serious family-life education and family support services, there might be little reason to oppose the bill. And our Holy Week services might be true celebrations of unity, mutual respect and love.

28 Comments

  1. ang hirap nu? we’re really trapped between reality and tradition, kaya tayo nahihirapan magdecide. i really do hope people will see the essence of the bill. and start changing what has been nakaugalian, to something more practical.:)

    Like

    Reply

  2. Which came first ? The chicken or the egg?

    Regarding the RH debates…..

    It isn’t about who is to blame or who wins/won the debate.

    Each sector…each person can make a difference … to do whatever is in ones capacity individually or collectively to ADDRESS our problem of poverty as a person and as a people.

    It isn’t about solving who came first the chicken or the egg? But rather…. AM I OK? ….ARE WE OK?

    -If the answer is a “NO” …. Enter the WALK OF TRANSFORMATION ….from one of WOUNDED to WOUNDED HEALER.

    Hmmm… did you watch Kite Runner?

    Bellow are some Kite Runner quotes :

    * I became what I am today at the age of twelve, on a frigid overcast day in the winter of 1975. I remember the precise moment, crouching behind a crumbling mud wall, peeking into the alley near the frozen creek. That was a long time ago, but it�s wrong what they say about the past, I�ve learned, about how you can bury it. Because the past claws its way out. Looking back now, I realize I have been peeking into that deserted alley for the last twenty-six years.

    Ch. 1

    * Children aren’t coloring books. You don’t get to fill them with your favorite colors.- Rahim Khan
    o Ch. 3

    * With me as the glaring exception, my father molded the world around him to his liking. The problem, of course, was that Baba saw the world in black and white. And he got to decide what was black and what was white. You can’t love a person who lives that way without fearing him too. Maybe even hating him a little.
    * There is only one sin, only one. And that is theft. Every other sin is a variation of theft….When you kill a man, you steal a life. You steal his wife’s right to a husband, rob his children of a father. When you tell a lie, you steal someone’s right to the truth. When you cheat, you steal the right to fairness.
    * One time, when I was really little, I climbed a tree and ate these green, sour apples. My stomach swelled and became hard like a drum, it hurt a lot. Mother said that if I’d just waited for the apples to ripen, I wouldn’t have become sick. So now, whenever I really want something, I try to remember what she said about the apples.
    * I wondered if that was how forgiveness budded, not with the fanfare of epiphany, but with pain gathering its things, packing up, and slipping away unannounced in the middle of the night.
    * I think that everything he did, feeding the poor, giving money to friends in need, it was all a way of redeeming himself. And that, I believe, is what true redemption is, Amir jan, when guilt leads to good.
    * But coming close wasn’t the same as winning, was it? … He had won because winners won and everyone else just went home. (56)

    * It was Homaira and me against the world… In the end, the world always wins. That’s just the way of things. (99) Rahim Khan
    * War doesn’t negate decency. It demands it, even more than in times of peace. – Baba (115)
    * I stepped back and all I saw was rain through windowpanes that looked like melting silver. (109)
    * You’re gutless. It’s how you were made. And that’s not such a bad thing because your saving grace is that you’ve never lied to yourself about it. Not about that. Nothing wrong with cowardice as long as it comes with prudence. But when a coward stops remembering who he is.. God help him. (275) Amir
    * But that’s what I’m saying to you… That there are bad people in this world, and sometimes bad people stay bad. Sometimes you have to stand up to them. (319) Amir
    * Quiet is peace. Tranquility. Quiet is turning down the volume knob on life. Silence is pushing the off button. Shutting it down. All of it. (361)
    * How could I of all people, chastise someone for their past? – Amir
    * I ran. A grown man running with a swarm of screaming children. But I didn’t care. I ran with the wind blowing in my face, and a smile as wide as the valley of Panjsher on my lips. I ran.
    o P. 391
    * There is a way to be good again. (2) – Rahim Khan

    Like

    Reply

  3. Thank you very much for this excellent post.

    I am a community worker and I have been to many farflung areas and this this further supports my argument that the priests who have worked closely with the poor or are into community work in the farflung are the ones supportive of the RH Bill. The (dominant) Church should start doing some field work, they definitely need an exposure trip. Plus, they also need to read the bill! (for crying out loud).

    Priests like you have solid support from many Filipino graduate scholars (+many OFWs), most of whom are devout Catholic, at the National University of Singapore.

    Like

    Reply

    1. I am very happy that you liked the post. And your sharing about your experiences as a community worker grounds the dialogue to basic experiences. Maraming salamat and will keep you and your work in my prayers.

      Like

      Reply

  4. greetings of peace!

    YES! yes! yes!. .its not enough that the Church opposed the RH Bill. .what is essential is that they have to have a concrete and continues program on family life and family planning. . .

    If only the Church hierarchy really understands and knows the plight of the POOR, if they can initiate programs, as concrete as PONDO NG PINOY. .to help the poor and the hungry! or,

    the PRIESTS do their work of evangelization. . the RH bill is nothing. .if only. . .if only. .

    The Bishops are old and tired, we are not sure if their priests still follow them . .they’re busy with their laptops, E-Pad, etc.
    where are they? . .in the comforts of their air-con homes and offices. . if not, wandering across the globe?

    We, the lay people can do their work but we do not have the authority like them. . nor the money to support programs like the Jesuits, the Dominicans, etc.

    May God have mercy on us all and help us find solutions. . and fast! God bless us!

    Like

    Reply

  5. Dear Fr. Gonzales,

    I found your commentary on a friend’s FB page and was glad to read that there are rational thinkers among the religious and if somebody from your ranks could speak like this, perhaps we can forge a better discussion on how to EDUCATE people and not enhance FEAR like using tactics such as excommunication, and the like. This is not from a church i subscribe to and unfortunately the culture of Filipinos have learned to accept and expect this type of homily from the church. Unfortunately it is one of FEAR and miseducation. Yes. A grave mis education. I have sat at numerous homilies from my parish here in Pampanga and the role of the priest is powerful because he has the opportunity to educate. I have had discussion with my parents, “saradong katoliko” and i have told them that the church has failed to educate the masses on the contents of the bill and seeks to just instill fear rather than understanding.

    The Bill not just subsidizes contraception. It also increases subsidies for the allocation of midwives to areas where hospitals are too far and doctors are scarce. It also subsidizes tubal ligation which at the moment is not. SO it means a poor mother who wants to have her tubes ligated must pay the price of about 8k for the operation. Or another mouth to feed and another. It subsidizes the cost of contraception products which according to health workers i have talked with in QC that cost about 30 – 50 pesos. Cheap by middle class standards but not for a daily wage earner. A condom costs 5 pesos or more, a cost of an sms load, but in the scheme of things, one that no one pays attention to until the need for it arises which opens the adults to health risks by unprotected sex. The bill also protects patients rights when health professionals are compelled to direct the patient to someone who can give information which may be against their religious belief. It not only protects them but also secures the right of the patient to seek information without being maligned and shamed. it legally compels health professionals to treat patients with respect and ensures that a professional can give adequate information. This is the key – ACCESS TO UNBIASED INFORMATION.

    You have rightly pointed out the main root of the destruction of families. I do not understand when one preaches about family values and protecting the families when one does not educate the women and men who are parents. We are still stuck in the reasoning that children are there to help their parents and support them in their old age. this is a dogma that i wish the church would seek to eradicate. The children are individuals and must be supported to fulfill their potential and not just another being born to live for their parents. The concept of ownership of bodies and being responsible for choices is something i thought the church would encourage. Only when one can be made responsible for every action, can one truly be a citizen, and a member of a family and society. If we empower parents and especially women who are tied to failed relationships and lack of education, we can not hope for an educated brood. Natural family planning ASSUMES that both parents are aware, mature and responsible to make choices. That is not what is happening as you can see in your neighborhood. This is a problem shared by women all over in all classes. i include myself there so i understand the politics of contraception and the problem it poses for women.

    I had hoped given the resources and the influence and education of members of the clergy, one could get a sense of the malaise in Philippine society. Unfortunately, it seems to seek its continuation in order to provide a role for them. Perhaps a re-ordering of a new role and updated role is in order. The proliferation of other Christian groups indicate to me the failure of the Catholic Church to stay in touch with the populace. The INK seems to me possess a more stronger and values formation drive including the education of parents and children. I am not an INK but i know people who are. It is time for all of us to subscribe that the Philippines must be seen as a multicultural country. Then it would be an inclusive theology that is really what the first Church espoused.

    Like

    Reply

  6. The real problem is coercion. The RH bill forces health providers to provide “reproductive health” services, incuding contraceptives. Some of these contraceptives — which are still legal today — are know abortifacients. This is problematic for many persons, yet the bill does not allow a way out. If conscientious objectors refuse to provide such abortifacients, they must still make referrals. This means they are forced to materially cooperate in a morally objectionable act.

    The bill still forces schools to provide sex education — including training in contraceptive use and population control ideology. This would violate the institutional values of many schools.

    The amendment allowing parents to “opt out” is impractical or impossible. The bill mandates that sex education will be integrated in all relevant subjects. How can parents opt out their children from so many subjects?

    I would also like to point out that many professional, perr-reviewed studies have shown that increased contraceptive usage encourages risk compensation (increased risky behavior because of a false sense fo security). More risky behavior (more partners, greater frequency of casual sex) leads to more contrtaceptive failures, thus more more unplanned pregnanices and more demand for abortion. This is a reality that many people do not yet realize.

    Finally, you note that there are many other dangers to the family. True, but how is that relevant? Adding yet another threat to the family in the form of widespead government-funded contraception and population control ideology cannot but make things worse.

    God bless!

    Like

    Reply

    1. Thanks Mann for your comment for whatever it’s worth. Here’s my reply.

      First, when I was in grade school in Bicol, I was taught to read carefully the articles give to us. COMPREHENSION is a skill of the literate. The article is written by Fr. Jack Carroll SJ, not me. And I re-posted that article, because Fr. Jack is, not only someone I love as a mentor and brother Jesuit, but someone who is credible to speak about the issue because his work is right in the middle of the people who will greatly be affected by the RH Bill IF it is passed. He runs a feeding center for mothers in Payatas, he has long pastoral experience. His academic background and a doctorate in sociology, tops his credibility. And thus, Mannix, first sentence pa lang, di mo gets?

      Second, the note in italics will tell you WHY I re-posted it. It is for DIALOGUE, for DISCUSSION. It is for people to exchange their ideas and opinions about the RH Bill. All ideas are welcome. I want a blog that has social interaction. So I am greatly happy for those who contributed their LEARNED opinion on the matter. So that, whoever reads, may form their own decisions. THUS, I DO NOT DICTATE what people should follow because I believe that those who visit and read blogs are the LITERATE. You proved otherwise.

      Third, Fr. James Reuter SJ is also a great and well-admired Jesuit. You didn’t get the rhetoric. We Jesuits have different opinions, but one love: JESUS and the Church. Fr. Reuter said, “the Ateneo teachers who are pro-RH Bill are FREE to go.” That is TRUE to ALL: No one is FORCED to STAY in the Ateneo. Whoever does not agree with us, are FREE to go.

      However, think again: ANYONE is. FREE TO GO also means FREE to STAY. So, if a faculty who is PRO-RH BILL decides to stay, WE RESPECT THEM, as Fr. Nebres SJ said. Of course we do respect people, not like some people. Because JESUS respected those who did not agree with HIS Teachings. Did HE send fire and brimstone and kill the Pharisees, the Roman soldiers, and those who betrayed HIM during the passion? NO HE DIDNT. We, in this matter, cannot FIRE a teacher for their beliefs and we honor their opinion. In fact, ATENEO moves because we listen to ALL.

      SO, MANNIX. It is said that I shouldn’t leave you to where you are. I should give you a concrete suggestion.

      Since I cannot be OUT of the Ateneo since I am a Jesuit, but YOU can be out, since you’re not, we are still charitable. So the proposal: Call the Office of Admission and Aid, and ask for their program to uplift LITERACY. We will give you a scholarship. On the house. The Grade School by the way, is very generous. If you need a recommendation, just write. But ask someone to edit it first.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  7. This is in reaction to Mann’s comments.

    The constitution provides for a separation of politics with religious beliefs. If so, then let us assume that not all Filipinos are Christians or more specifically not all Christians are Catholics or practitioners who follow the Church. In this case, the only coercion that is happening are the threats of the Church which are not on the merit of the contents of the bill. Scare-mongering is not what we need but a rational discussion.

    Health providers are not just individuals with their own personal moral beliefs. They have an obligation to their patients who seek their help regardless of the patient’s gender, religious beliefs, economic standing. They are obliged to present all information available to them. Your opinion that some contraceptives are abortificients are not supported by the Food and Drug Administration which makes the product safe for public consumption and use. Medical health professionals must refer patients whom they wish not to treat if it is against them because it is the patient’s right to get the information or to seek a second opinion if they wished. Patients have the right to be treated with respect and humanely. In the equation of patient to doctor, we can see that there is an unequal balance of power – doctors have more power vs. the patient. This law ensures that patients can find the information that they want to know and not leave the health centers or hospital with little choice. Sectarian hospitals turn away patients suspected of having had the unfortunate effects of unsafe abortion at the risk of their deaths and most of them dying. Public hospitals are the only recourse but not necessarily of receiving respectful care. This is what the RH Bill secures – dignity and rights of the patients to get adequate medical treatment and information which in this case is a doctor if not a nurse or midwife.

    Sex education is ideally within the home but it is rarely discussed and parents themselves find it a loss and relies on schools to provide that information. We can perhaps debate about the kind of sex education that is appropriate. But once the child asks about sex, genitalia and the context surrounding it, i hope that the education that schools and the government provide is an impartial or at least respectful of human sexuality. Sectarian schools have a leeway in the type of education that needs to be discussed but given that i studied during my primary and secondary school in one – there is hardly any education that happened. Unfortunately only fear and vagueness that does not help at all. I don’t mean just the production of the baby which we discussed in Third Quarter Biology which constituted only 30 minutes out of all the years i spent in school. There was no context in which discussions were given (how the heck did the penis get inside the vagina in the textbook picture) about dating, attraction, physical attraction, STDs or VDs and the such. It was no wonder that given the strict surrounding of the school it was still surprising that a few students got pregnant. If we had sex education – sex as a word is used to mean the sexuality which involves male-female relations, etc – then children and young adults would receive information that would let them understand the extent of situations and context in which they find themselves in and can deal with (i.e. attraction, bodily changes and hormones, etc.) – the objective of which is to postpone early sexual relations. This is the sex education that i am hoping the educators would strengthen.

    Unplanned pregnancies, STDs, and dangerous abortions remain and consequently on the rise WITHOUT education. Fr. Jboy raised that the dangers of the family are central to our discussion of the RH Bill because it is only with adequate education of the population can we attain ownership of our bodies and therefore our decisions we make for our children and future children. To space and to refuse to have more children in a difficult household is a primary concern of mothers who are struggling with failed relationships and must work to feed their families. Given that their situation is tough as it is, we must assist them in their need for information to do this. Contraception is a joint exercise of mature adults and in the real world is something lacking and in which Fr. Jboy continually encounters in his communities. our goal is to educate in order to produce more responsible and mature adults.

    Like

    Reply

  8. I would also like to congratulate Dazzie Zapata who have first hand experience of working with families and the real world problems encountered by them. I like her challenge to the clergy who have reached high positions and therefore have little contact with their communities.

    Like

    Reply

  9. +amdg

    Father, my name is Jopet and I am 24 years old from Manila.

    Much as I appreciate John Carrol’s opinion, my family and I will remain in the guidance of the bishops.
    I know I will get ridiculed for this, but then this is a personal decision borne out of prayer and discernment.
    We just can’t imagine myself catholic and not in communion with Peter. Call us pathetic, out of sync, archaic, but
    we want to remain where the Church is.

    Thank you.

    Like

    Reply

    1. Yes, that’s why there’s the dialogue. I appreciate that you are. But the issue is not dogmatic, thus it leaves many to discern what’s best. We must contribute what we think, so that we will be able to arrive at a decision. Not all people are born like you, or have the same education as you, nor the experience that Fr. Jack has. So sure, disagree with the article. The objective is not to persuade you but to add that whatever your decisions – or family – has arrived at is INFORMED and FORMED. That is Vatican II. But it should be clear that the RH Bill is a debate, no one will be excommunicated nor be judged unfaithful to the Church if one disagrees (Gaudium et Spes).

      Like

      Reply

  10. Hi Father! forgive me and I hope I am wrong, but based on the thread, I feel you are partial to the RH bill – which by the way, I don’t see anything wrong. But then what about Humanae Vitae? is it safe to say that Pope Paul VI may have erred in not seeing the practicality of the bill in the present time? and that John Paul II and Benedict XVI may have done the same?

    @ Jopet, I find your family’s obedience to the pope and allegiance to the bishops passe. You are young, please use your head.

    Like

    Reply

  11. @Carla, the issue here isn’t whether or not Catholic teaching on the use of contraceptives is correct. That matter was settled by Pope Paul VI in Humanae Vitae, and that hasn’t changed. Our faith still compels us to only resort to natural family planning methods.

    The issue here is whether or not the CBCP is correct in its approach in dealing with the RH Bill and its possible passage. Should the CBCP be directly interfering with the political process of legislation, especially now that the RH Bill has been heavily revised from its original state to accommodate many of the objections of Catholics? I believe that the PCP and Deus Caritas Est passages that Fr. JBoy cited are definitive and compelling.

    Like

    Reply

  12. Thanks Raggster for the reply.

    Lovely Jesuits should make a corporate stand on this issue. The splintered opinion of Nebres, Reuter, Carrol, Bernas, addsa to the confusion. Believe me when I hear my son talk about how Jesuits too intelligent are conflicting each other, diba? I guess the boy has a point, although differing in opinion, one must come to a certain stand.

    Although the bishops are threatening, I somehow understand where they are coming from. I mean, its like “damned if they speak, damned if they don’t” the situation here. And if they choose not to speak, I am pretty sure they will be called to the principal’s office in Rome.

    Admittedly, I am for the RH bill. You know that “freedom of choice” clause Risa Hontiveros advocates is liberating. I can engage in whatever pleasures me, and from there not feel guilty about the repercussions because I have made a choice, but what if this choice is wrong? what if this total freedom to choose is not freedom at all?

    Sorry for the long reply. This issue has gone personal for me. matter of fact I should have not read scriptures and thought about what I read: “HE WHO HEARS YOU,HEARS ME” – lalo akong naguluhan.

    Like

    Reply

  13. O, Master of the Vineyard, send forth more laborers, please; there’s a lot of work to be done. Grant us grace to be steadfast in doing the work you entrusted to us. Be our guide, go ahead of us and prepare the hearts and minds of the people we will encounter. May all the peoples praise you, Lord.

    Like

    Reply

  14. People should be aware what’s in the bill.

    Before, when I first heard about it, I had the same impression like those who go against the Bill. But when I’ve read the copy and have understood it, I realized that it’s concern is more about to HELP THE POOR afford family planning and give them a chance to improve their lifestyle. And just like what Fr. John said (and according to the Bill) it’s NOT about LEGALIZING ABORTION here in the Philippines.

    For those who are against the Bill, I respect your opinions, but think about this. It’s the right of married people to enjoy sex and have children. It’s also their right to decide how many kids they should have — it’s either due to their economical status or simply they want a certain family size. If, however, these people are those who are poor and have no knowledge on planning their families, where can they go if they only have left is their money for food and education? How can they exercise their rights if their sources are limited?

    Like

    Reply

  15. This is one of the best things I’ve read about the RH bill from a religious. It shows true caring for people, an honest and down to earth rationality, and sincerity from the heart which comes from true spirituality. Thank you for this!

    Like

    Reply

  16. In Tokyo last July, the Vice Premier of Japan told Philippine Vice President Jejomar Binay in official conversations that their two countries should work closely together because the Philippines had something which Japan no longer had—its young labor. True to that statement, more Japanese companies are coming to the Philippines to take advantage of the opportunities offered by a younger workforce, which is no longer available in Japan. What is most pathetic though is that while other countries have recognized our young and robust population as an irreplaceable resource, and are wishing they had what we have, our dysfunctional politicians think it is a cancer that must be taken out. Thus while the others are trying to do everything to increase maternal fertility and childbirth, our mindless politicians are trying their best to empty the cradle in every home through their stupid obsession with “reproductive health” and zero or below-zero population growth. Everyone else is jumping off the sinking ship, but they are desperately trying to board it. Only in the Philippines! – Francisco Tatad

    Like

    Reply

  17. there is a lot good in the bill, its just many useless politicians who are scandalizing the true essence of the bill.may they find light in the darkness.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s