11/29/08 - "Digitized" College Pics

Baguio

Photos of the good old days.

From the Likas logbook # 8 (PROTeri)

The entry below was written on the second week of December 1997.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Ang lahat ay inaanyayahan kong sumali sa PROTeri movement.

Chairperson: Arlene Anne A. Abella
IVP: Jan Denton Chua
EVP: Sheryl Siao
Secretary of Finance: Joanne Cheryl Baldonado
Secretary of Health: Jannel (*"Health is the greatest wealth of Teri")
Undersecretary of Defense: Mia Isadora Loyola
Executive Secretary: Genejane Adarlo
Sgt. at Arms: Chito Boy Flores

Actually, marami pang positions na kulang.  So, kung interesado kayo, just approach any of the officers.

[The following notes were added by various people.]

P.R.O.: Macky (PRO ni Teri)
Fashion Consultant: Larry Y.
"To-fan-the-flames-of-romance" officer: Rocky
"Secret-agent-spy-harder" officer: Jag

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

11/29/08 - Megamall

Met up with Ella and Edvic. The whole point of going there was for Ella to give her wedding invitations to us. Well, she forgot them, to make long story short. But we still had a good time catching up and reminiscing on college days.

Took a few test shots of the traffic and some scale models on exhibit in the Building A lobby.

Olga is back!

          Finally, after months of waiting, Olga's repairs were finally completed and I finally was able to take her home.  The first photo shows the actual part that needed replacing.  If you look closely, you can see where exactly the corrosion occurred.  Anyway, when the new part was installed, the camera reverted to factory default settings, so it actually feels like new.

          Since I'm so pleased that Olga is back, and since this coincided with me receiving my P25,000.00 unexpected "bonus" from FSI, I bought two items to better take care of the camera.  These are:



          A DSLR camera bag, by QPaq; and



          A Dry Box.

          For the camera bag, I was actually tempted to purchase the one manufactured by Case Logic which cost over P2100 and was on sale for only P1900.  Good thing I looked around for a cheaper one.  The QPaq bag was of the same size and had basically the same features as the Case Logic bag.  And for only P1,600, had only a few pockets less and was better looking too.

          The dry box is to keep the moisture out of the camera in order to keep vital parts from corroding, and for the lens to remain fungus-free.  There was only one shop in the whole of Megamall that was selling one, so I bought it.  Now, in my excitement, I didn't ask the store attendants how to use the moisture remover that went with the box - I assumed that there were written instructions inside.  Lo and behold, the instructions were all in Chinese, and there were no helpful illustrations.

          I'm not sure how to proceed.  The moisture absorber is a fist-sized gizmo that has a plug.  (see dry box photo)  When you shake it, it sounds like it's filled with sand-like particles (silica gel, perhaps?)  Since the Dry Box itself is airtight, it doesn't seem like you need to plug the moisture remover while it is inside the Dry Box.  So here's what I think - the moisture absorber is indeed filled with silica gel.  I will place this inside the Dry Box with the camera and lock it.  It will then absorb the moisture.  Once the silica gel is too saturated, that's the time when I need to take it out of the box and plug it in an electrical socket order for it to be heated and for the moisture to be released.

          If there's anyone out there who is familiar with how to use a dry box, can you please confirm if I have the right idea?  Thanks!

Betcha you didn't know this...

          Did you know that our hero Juan Luna, the great Filipino painter, was once convicted of murder?

          The crime occurred in Paris, France where Luna was residing at the time.  In a jealous rage, he mercilessly shot to death his wife Maria de la Paz (of the illustrious Pardo de Tavera clan), and his mother-in-law.

          The crime was a sensation in Parisian society, where Luna's name was known because he already gained a measure of fame as a painter.  The story even made it to the front page of many Paris newspapers.

          Curiously, Luna never served any jail time for his crime.  A French court ruled that the killings were a crime of passion, and thus were mitigated.  Luna was ordered to pay a symbolic fine of only 2 francs - one for each victim.

photo credit: http://en.wikipilipinas.org/images/thumb/6/6e/Juan_Luna.png/200px-Juan_Luna.png

Selective Baptism

          In what is seen as his second most-boneheaded statement of this year, Lingayen-Dagupan Archbishop Oscar Cruz declared that he will not allow the baptism of babies whose parents are not wed in accordance to Church rites.  He justifies his statement by saying parents should be good examples of Christian piety first before introducing their children to Christian life - and this is not possible if the parents have not solemnized their union through the sacrament of matrimony.

          Somewhere along the lines of his reasoning, the Archbishop lost sight of the fact that he is actually advocating the punishment of infants for the sin of their parents.  This is worse than excommunication in the sense that an infant is prohibited by a Church official from being part of God's family - a patent abuse of the authority God bestowed to the Church when Jesus gave the keys of the Kingdom to St. Peter.

          To be fair, it is indeed hypocritical on the part of unwed parents to have their children be baptized.  But this is hardly a reason to withhold the gift of the Holy Spirit from an innocent child who has absolutely no control over the circumstances of his/her conception.

          Thankfully, he seems to be alone in his opinion on how Church authority can be exercised in this particular case.  Many clergymen have already voiced disagreement to Archbishop Cruz's prohibition, and have instead offered the much better solution of making the child's baptism an opportunity to reach out to unwed parents to encourage them to take part in the sacrament of matrimony.  The CBCP has not issued a statement on the issue, probably in deference to the Archbishop's stature in the body.  But we can be sure that he will be asked to reevaluate his judgement on the issue. 

          Oh, and just in case you are wondering, the Archbishop's top boneheaded statement of this year was when he declared that there is nothing wrong in holding gay Santacruzans.  Wow.  The Church has enough problems dealing with the right people doing things the right way for the wrong reasons.  (And even the right people doing things the wrong way for the wrong reasons.)  Now he thinks that the wrong people doing things the wrong way for the wrong reasons is ok.

photo credit:

http://www.veritas846.ph/images/Bishops/Oscar%20cruz2.jpg

Dear Mang Tsito...

 

Dear Mang Tsito,

          Kailangan ko po ang insights ng isang lalaki.

          Ito po ang situation: Meron po akong kaibigang babae, may sense siyang kausap at masarap kasama.  Always on the go pag niyaya sa labas, at mabait na kaibigan.  Kunwari po ay best friend mo siya, at lagi mo siyang kasama simula noong nagkakilala kayo.  She's perfect in all aspects. 

          Kaya lang, kamukha niya si Patani ng Eat Bulaga. Medyo mas maganda lang ng konti.

          Tapos bigla siyang umamin ng pag-ibig sa iyo.  Papatulan mo ba siya?

         

Lovingly yours,

broken_heart

 

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

 

Dear broken_heart,

          Iha, tutal nagtago ka na rin lang sa likod ng isang pseudonym, aminin mo nang and sinasabi mong kaibigan na kamukha ni Patani ay walang iba kundi ikaw. 

          Ngayon, dahil hiningi mo ang insights ko, ito ang masasabi ko: Sorry ka na lang at dahil sa ginawa mo, iiwasan ka na ng "best friend" mo.  Bakit 'ka mo?  Ano ka sinusuwerte?  Umamin ka lang tapos gusto mong patulan ka na?  Eh hindi ka naman kagandahan.

          Bumalik tayo sa kuwento mo, pero baliktarin natin ang mga kasarian.  Kunwari yung yung kamukha ni Patani ay lalaki.  Sa tingin mo ba papatulan siya ng babae?

          Ganito ang ugali ng tao:  kung lahat ng ibang katangian ay pantay, ang pipiliin niya ang mas magandang tingnan.  Ganun lang kasimple yun.  Pwedeng may sense kang kausap, napakabait, masarap kasama, etc.  Pero kung merong iba pang babae na ganun din tapos maganda pa, iyon ang pipiliin ng best friend mo.  In mathematical terms, x + 1 > x.

          Wala sa pagiging lalaki o pagiging babae ang ugaling ganyan.  Nasa pagiging tao iyan.

          Kaya nga nanliligaw kaming mga lalaki eh, dahil alam naming karamihan sa amin ay hindi naman kaguwapuhan.  Yun lang ang paraan para magkaroon kami ng pag-asang patulan kami ng babaeng napupusuan namin.

          Ngayon, kung ang reklamo mo ay hindi naman ugali ng babae ang manligaw ng lalaki, problema mo na yun.  Pero garantisadong kung wala kang ibang gawing maliban sa pag-amin ng pag-ibig mo, malabong patulan ka ng best friend mo.

 

Lovingly yours,

Mang Tsito

 

 

 

 

photo credits:

http://www.survivorphilippines.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=67&Itemid=187

http://www.thestatesmanonline.com/images/storypics/man_silhouette.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

Random Discovery # 5

 

The Filipino equivalent of ADHD is .... KSP.

Think about it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Corporate Social Responsibility

          Among companies and businesses today, there is a trend towards undertaking what is called "Corporate Social Responsibility" (CSR).  The basic idea of CSR is that companies should be doing more to ensure that the community they operate in is taken care of.  This could take various forms - anywhere from feeding programs to livelihood projects, and even environmental cleanups.

          It's a good concept, and I don't see anyone disagreeing with this in principle.  The thing is, a great many companies that supposedly practice CSR are under the mindset that it is an opportunity for self-promotion.  If one surveys each of these companies and tries to find out which specific department is in charge with CSR, then most likely one will be pointed to the company's public relations (PR) department.

          The are many problems associated with practicing CSR with a PR mindset.  On top of all these is the fact that a company's actions are dictated by what would benefit its own reputation, rather than what is actually needed by the community.  And speaking of the community, most companies (which are located in highly-urbanized centers) do not really have an idea of which community they belong to, or which community needs their help.  Worst of all, CSR is sometimes used to coverup a particular company's unfair treatment of its own employees.

          I've worked for a company which undertakes various CSR projects in different provinces - and must have spent millions of pesos already to that end - but whose record of treating it's own employees right is downright dismal.  Every pay date, there are at least 50 disputes (a conservative estimate - and this is just for one site) for reasons ranging from invalid deductions, non-payment of agreed-upon allowances, to actual non-payment of salaries.  (For more information on this company see this previous blog entry.)  Curiously, with all these, it still has a good corporate reputation, no doubt considerably brought about by its PR machinery and well-publicized CSR projects.

          One point that is so easily missed by companies like these is the fact that the foremost communities that they should be serving are their own respective corporate communities.  If a company's leaders can't treat their employees right or treat them in a manner that leaves them gravely disadvantaged, then there is no moral reason to keep helping distant communities.  As the old saying goes, one should clean one's own backyard first. 

          The more relevant social responsibility of a corporation is the responsibility of safeguarding the welfare of its own employees.  Addressing the needs of some distant community while neglecting the interests of those who are occupying the lower ranks of the corporate hierarchy is not is not being socially-responsible - it is called hypocrisy.

          If companies are really sincere in undertaking CSR projects then the following guidelines are helpful:         

1.  They should not advertise themselves doing these CSR activities.  CSR is not PR.

2.  They should not make participation in CSR projects mandatory unless such participation is expressly indicated in the employees' job contracts.

3.  CSR being a corporate activity, it should be held during office hours and not during rest days or holidays.

4.  Employees who choose to participate in CSR should have full death, accident and medical insurance coverage, regardless of tenure.

5.  Participation in CSR should not be used as a basis for rating or promoting employees unless such is expressly indicated in the employees' job contract.

6.  Most importantly, an index should be devised which measures employee satisfaction.  If it is found that employee satisfaction falls below a certain prescribed limit, then a moratorium on CSR activities should be enforced.  Resources should then be directed towards raising employee satisfaction before undertaking new CSR activities.

photo credit: http://www.ethicalcorp.com/resources/images/content/large/2007311122713_paper%20men.jpg

From the Likas logbook # 7 (Betbet and Ella)

January 14, 1998

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Quote of the Day [Yesterday]:

Ella:  Bakit binabaliktad yung Blizzard bago ibigay sa iyo?

Betbet:  Para hindi matapon yung ice cream.



[Chito's note:  Betbet, paki-explain naman o.  Masyadong profound.]

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

From the Likas logbook # 6 (guess the writer)

The entry below was circa November 1997.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

SSSSSHHHEEEET!

Nakakahiya talaga, sobra!  I am so embarassment!  Hay naku, alam nyo ba, kaninang Th131 dini-discuss ni Fr. Dacanay na dati noong unang panahon (well, a few decades ago anyway) sexual intercourse, adultery and fornication was evil.  (I say "was" because now, only adultery & fornication is bad.)

          He was about to elaborate on this when he suddenly said, "But first, what is fornication?  Anyone?  *****!  What is fornication?"  Having the abdabs (see previous page for meaning), I said "sexual intercourse".  He said, "Well yes, but pertaining to what kind of sexual intercourse?" <-- not exact words, but that's how I understood him.

          Now I was thinking... "fornication...fornication...f...f...", then I blurted out: "...foreplay"? 

          AARGH!  Syempre lahat sila tumawa!  Sheesh!  This is so humiliation!

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Clues:

1.  "Turon"

2.  Male (?)

From the Likas logbook # 5 (Bryan)

Classic Bryan (Nespral).  Valentines' 1997.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

BRYAN'S PAPER POLDENG Lesson # 02
(a.k.a. kulam for no one!)

[How to make a paper] Ferrari
- 1 pc of intermediate pad paper
- 1 mirror
- 1 candle (psychadelic color) [Mia's note: wrong spelling! -> psychedelic!!!]

1.  write the following word for word on all pcs.
"I can not really make a FERARRI from paper. It is physically impossible.  I am such a dope and wallflower thinking I can make a FERRARI from paper."

2.  fold the intermediate pad into the same no. of letters in EDVIC PAUL JAVIER DIAZ (okey)

3.  and at the strike of 2:02 and 02 seconds light the candle

4.  unfold the paper and read the message against the mirror in its German equivalent.

5.  then in the morning call Edvic and ask him for the FERRARI and listen to his words of wisdom.

6.  Enjoy!

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

From the Likas logbook # 4 (guess the writer)

This entry was written on January 14, 1997.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

bestpren ,

          alam mo, wala pa ring tatalo kay _ _ _ _ _.  He's still more handsome, mas mabait, at mas matalino.  And you see _ _ _ _ _ more than the Kaingay guy.  (pasensya na kahit new year na ganito pa rin ako.  Old habits die hard kasi.  Peace na lang uli.)

          onto other topics...

          alam naman naming tamad ka.  'Wag mo nang ipagkalat.  sabihin mo na lang kay _ _ _ _  _ na tulungan ka para astig!  atsaka lahat naman tayo tamad.  It's just another one of those diseases that have no cure basta may inspiration ka, kaya 'yan.

          good luck na lang sa buhay.  good luck na lang sa management.  Good luck na lang sa lovelife.  Good luck na lang kay _ _ _ _ _.

          Basta keep yourself alive and you'll do fine.  Keep yourself focused and you'll do fine with _ _ _ _ _.



bestpren

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Clues:

1.  "Life is bogus"

2.  Male

3.  Former Fincom head

From the Likas logbook # 3 (Macky)

Classic Macky.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

"you've got to
live a little
laugh a little
little two little
three little indians
that's the story of,
that's the glory of
ten little indian boys!"
(ang labo nito, ah!)

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

From the Likas logbook # 2 (guess the writer)

The entry below is dated December 6, 1996.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Dear Stelle,

          While I'm writing this, Rico Peña is staring (and probably admiring) [at] my back!  Yup, he's right here in our tambayan sa Colayco - making pa-cute.  Hindi, joke lang, hindi siya nagpapa-cute sa akin.  Pero pa-cute pa rin siya.  Siguro kaya siya nandito kasi hinahanap ka niya...

          Hmmm.  Ano kaya kung mabasa niya itong sinusulat ko?  Patay, Stelle, buking ka na ...  Oops, I mean, buking na siya.

Cheers!

**********

P.S.

O, anong ginagawa ni Jon Chua rito?  (Hindi joke lang) =)

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Clues:

1.  Has a very short nickname.

2.  Crush ng Kaingin

From the Likas logbook # 1 (guess the writer)

The entry below is circa December 1996. 

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

I'm Obsessed!

Obsessed!

I tell you!  It's like dandruff - I can't get it out of my head!  it's like a nightmare but I can't wake up!

Aaargh!!

Any moment now you'll see me running around campus stark naked!

It looms over me day and night!  Anywhere I look it is staring me right in the face!

It's driving me crazy!

I'm obsessed and I love it.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Clues:

1.  Female (?)

2.  Non-conformist

3.  Trying hard to be ambidextrous.

Random Discovery # 4

         
          I just discovered that my phone's stylus is missing.

          *%&$@#*

Concession and Statesmanship

          Election lawyer Romulo Macalintal claims to have shed tears when he watched John McCain's concession speech when Barack Obama's victory became definite.  He said, "It's not because I pity him, but because I pity our country, asking myself when we could have men like McCain who could accept the will of the people and put the nation's interest paramount to their own political interest."  This is a sentiment shared by most of those who watched the progress of the US elections (but perhaps in less-emotional terms).

          It maybe because of our collective experience in having atrocious elections in this country that we are easily awed and touched by displays of grace in the face of defeat, which are common in any country that has reached a high degree of political maturity.  Somebody loses an election in a manner that does not leave any room to doubt, subsequently concedes to his opponent as he is supposed to do, and we think it is a display of virtue which is nothing short of exceptional.

          Think about it, Obama not only breached but demolished the 270-vote mark en route to a victory.  (For those of us who were tracking the progress of the elections, this happened literally within a matter of seconds as poll projections from a number of states began to pour in.)  What else was McCain going to do?  Conceding the elections was the only option, and delaying such a concession would have only worked against him.

          If we are looking for a much better model for statesmanship, then we should be looking at Al Gore.  This man should have been President instead of the unlamented George W. Bush, but was cheated of victory due to machinations of the latter's political strategists.  But rather than expose his country to a divisive electoral protest, he chose to finally concede even though he was actually leading his opponent in the popular vote.  To add insult to injury, he presided over the official tallying of his "defeat", and repeatedly rejected protests against his opponent's "victory".

          If we follow the McCain model of statesmanship, then unscrupulous politicians can always justify that only landslide losses are worthy of concession.  On the other hand, close contests are fair game for protests and allegations of cheating.  In short, the Philippine status quo.  In even shorter terms, "nothing changes".

          Now, I'm not going to fully advocate the Gore model either, for the simple reason that I still think the person who gets more votes, no matter how small the lead, should win an election.  But our politicians can probably emulate Gore on the manner by which he put the well-being of the country above his own political ambitions despite being so near to his goal.

          Many politicians in this country believe that "almost there" entitles them to be "there".  Hence, the tendency to make full use their resources to undertake legal, extralegal, and sometimes illegal means to  prevent a winner from being proclaimed once they lose an election.   This is done partly in frustration, and partly due to a malicious intent to subvert the electoral system in order to perpetuate themselves in power (in the case of reelectionists) or to take power from those who are lawfully entitled to it.

          We are hoping, therefore. that Al Gore's statesmanship is emulated by those politicians who are in an "almost there" situation (which accounts for a large number of losing candidates in this country) but whose factual bases for claiming victory are tenuous.

photo credit:

Al Gore: http://blackliberal.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/al-gore.jpg
John McCain: http://thepoliticaltipster.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/040416_mccain_vmed_1p_widec.jpg

That's it! No more text promos for me! (Grrrrr....)

          No matter how much I think I've advanced from the common man's compulsion to make a quick buck, I still find myself lured every now and then by promos that have a billion to one chance of winning but which offer attractive prize packages.

          This false (and rather elitist) sense of self-worth has so far enabled me to prevent myself from lining up shoulder-to-shoulder with blue-collar types whenever the Lotto pot hits the P100 million mark.  Text promos, however, are harder to avoid in as much as we all are more inclined to do things against our own convictions in the privacy of our own homes.

          Yesterday, I was watching my favorite kapamilya TV show "Game Ka Na Ba".  Part of the game rules is that if any contestant answers 5 consecutive questions correctly, s/he will win the money pot.  This pot increases in amount each day that no wins it the day previously.  So it came to a point where the money pot was already P750,000 and a female contestant won.  The thing was, there is an additional rule that says the text home partner will get the same amount whenever the pot is won.

          I listened carefully to Edu Manzano's instructions on how to send a text entry.  What he said was that a person should just send a message which says "GKNB <correct answer>" and then send it to 2366.  Since I did not know if there was a limit to the number of entries I could send, I sent out 5 messages with 1 - 2 minutes space in between each of them.  Here's what happened afterwards:

          Throughout the afternoon, I got 5 separate messages which were marked as "Ringing tone", but which said upon opening "This message type is not supported".  That was the first hint that I got duped.  But I gave them the benefit of the doubt and rationalized that maybe sending an entry involves requesting a ringtone at the same time.  And besides, there were some words in fine print when I was watching the show on TV.  That might have explained why.  My mistake, but that's fine.

          Later in the evening, I got another batch of 5 messages, but this time they were all saying, "Tnx 4 dloading! P15/ dload. Sori no valid entry for ds download, reply w/ <letter of answer> Ex. B. Reply is free. Up2 3 entries ang pde mkuha 2day. My featurd 3 monotones 4d day. Watch GKNB 2know d correct answer. Cut-off 4earning entries: 11am-11:59pm. 1 unique dload=1entry. Promo fr 7/28/08-1/9/09. C flyrs & TVplugs 4details. DTI-NCR#3752S2008. Call (02) 4158766 for help." 

          I subsequently checked my load balance, and true enough, I was deducted a total of P75.  So my only mistake was in texting the actual answer instead of just the letter of the correct answer.  What irks was that even though the format was invalid, they still took my money, and it took them 8 hours to inform me of that fact.

          To put it in everyday terms, imagine yourself in a McDonalds restaurant.  You see the latest Disney toy freebie advertised in their display rack.  You decide that you want to buy a Kiddie meal just for the purpose of getting the freebie.  You then place your order with the cashier, who promptly punches it in and gives you a number (because your kiddie meal needs at least 5 minutes to prepare.)  When your order finally arrives, it doesn't contain the freebie.  When you ask for it, they then tell you that it is not available.  And when you ask for your money back, they tell you that what has been punched in and paid for can no longer be refunded.

          I did call the help number, but I was told that my P75 can no longer be refunded - even when I pointed out that show host never mentioned anything about needing to download ringtones just to send an entry, and that the words on the TV screen that might have elucidated on the rules were flashed very briefly.

          So that's it.  No more text promos for me.









P.S.  Does anyone know what the Lotto jackpot amount is these days?

My take on the separation of Church and State

          I've shared my views on this issue so many times in various online fora that I have almost memorized my replies on every post that I make.  And so, in order to have a place where I can just copy [from] and paste [somewhere else] should the need to share my views again arise, I can just access it here.

= = = = = = = = = =

          The thing about people who advocate the "separation of Church and State" is that many of them (bluntly speaking) do not know what they are talking about.  More concretely, they don't know the constitutional basis for such a separation, and most take the principle for granted just so they would have something to throw against the Church.

          The principle of the separation of church and state had its roots during the Enlightenment, but it's application in the Philippines is the direct result of the influence of American constitutional law.  There are two aspects to the principle: (1) the Church (or any religion) is not permitted to interfere in the government's exercise of its duties; and (2) the State is not allowed to institute an official religion.

          The test therefore is whether any of these two aspects of the principle is violated whenever Church officials speak out against certain or proposed governmental policies that they are against.

          (From this point onwards, the term "Church" will refer to the Roman Catholic Church, which is the usual suspect when discussing this principle in this country.)

          Let's take, for example, the Church's opposition against contraceptives and artificial family planning methods and see whether they pass the two-fold test.

          First, is the Church interfering in the government's exercise of its duties?  To answer this question, we first have to establish what qualifies as "interference".  Whenever Church officials make pronouncements or mobilize people to rally against contraceptives/artificial family planning methods, do they prevent the government from doing its job?  No.  Ultimately, the decision to formulate and execute policy rests solely in the government's hands, and this is beyond the control of the Church.  Unless somebody can prove that Church officials have usurped governmental authority, then there is no basis to conclude that the Church is guilty of interference.

          What many people fail to understand is that the Church, as an institution, has the same rights as individuals with regard to the constitutionally-guaranteed freedom of expression.  Telling the Church to stop speaking out because we disagree with it has exactly the same effect as telling a friend that he has no right to disagree with you - clearly an absurd and indefensible position.

          Second, is the State favoring the Church to the point that the latter has become an official religion?  This test is actually more applicable to the government rather than the Church because it measures how much the government has done in establishing the Church as the State's official religion.  The easiest way to do this is to check whether part of the national budget goes directly to the coffers of Church.  Another is on whether any law has been passed wherein the Church has been placed at an unfair advantage over other religions. 

          As far as I know, there is no such law, and that no government funds are allotted for the benefit of the Church.  There are of course, other ways to measure this.  But in the absence of a clear law that favors the Church, any other action of the government that somehow coincides with what the Church thinks is not sufficient proof of an establishment of an official religion.

          The second test rather underscores the fact that as far as the principle of the separation of Church and State goes, it takes two to tango.  The State, as much as any religion, can be equally guilty of violating it.  Furthermore, Church interference is only possible if the government allows such interference to take place.  So in this regard, those who accuse the Church of violating the principle are barking up half the wrong tree.  For example, if the current population bill sponsored by Edcel Lagman does not pass into law - whether due to being vetoed by the President, or not gaining enough votes in Congress - we can rightly say that the Church's oppostion had a part in the bill's demise.  But see, it's not the Church that would vote on it, and neither does the Church have any veto power over acts of congress.  The only thing they could do is lobby against it - which is perfectly legal.

          In any case, even the previous example does not really qualify as interference.  Church officials will always (and have every right to) speak their mind on matters which they believe are within the realm of their brethren's spirituality and faith.

          So taking everything into consideration, is the Church in the practice of violating the principle of the separation of Church and State?  The answer is clearly, "No".