Personality Complex Case #3

 

He was crowned King even before he gets a throne. For all his talent as an athlete, he deserves the accolade. But he ain’t got the attitude to truly become one. For a King, it is said, must be both loved and feared.

LeBron James was a “marked man” even before he came to the NBA. He was a dominating High School player in Akron, Ohio. He was too big and too skillful for his contemporaries. He was a phenom by sports standards and quickly made headlines catching the eyes of not only collegiate and pro basketball teams but also international sports brands such as Nike. He was seen as a good investment in and out of the court – apparently dubbed as the next Michael Jordan, who exudes an aura of greatness.

Alas, he was top pick by Cleveland, a team desperate for victories, much more a championship. He never disappointed in his pro debut. He grew better and stronger after every season. He is the best as others proclaim because like Mike, he can slash through, soar, and score. Like Mike, he can grind, pound, and rebound. Like Mike, he can wow and make opponents vow.

The comparison with MJ, however, stops right there – for he was good only while he is winning, not when he is failing. He refused to shake hands in defeat. He believes too much in himself yet loses himself when it matters the most. He does not acknowledge his shortcomings. He knows no loyalty and would rather take a short cut to his goal than achieve it through hardship.

No wonder he is more hated than adored by many. That critics see more of his weakness as a person than his strength as an athlete. It is because he is bent on proving others wrong rather than making himself right. It was our fault we made him believe he is King.

He will someday eventually get what he aspires for through sheer skill and with the right company – a championship.

But until he changes from within, he cannot attain the price of ultimate glory – respect.

--

Image taken from:

http://www.faniq.com/blog/LeBron-James-And-The-Cavs-Play-Tonight-Nightly-Wrap-Up-Blog-24156

Rx for RH: Change of Perspective

IT IS said and it is a fact that our country does not lack on laws that protect our rights and interests as individuals and citizens of a State. It even seems we have so many; with some laws covering trivial matters and some having little or no significant contribution at all to our development. Still, there is a need for new legislation as our laws need to keep up with the evolving times and heed the demands of a changing society.

Spawning a great debate in and out of the House of Representatives is the proposed Reproductive Health Bill. This House Bill No. 4244 is an Act providing for a national policy on reproductive health, responsible parenthood and population and development as its formal title suggests.

The RH Bill, as the proposed legislation is popularly known, is in consonance with what the Constitution espouses – protecting the life of the mother and the unborn from conception, development of the family, the right to health, and liberty of choice. The Bill intends to serve not only the welfare of women, but also of men as part of the family. It also seeks to strengthen society by providing aid in family planning to ensure sustainable development.

A “touchy" issue, however, threatens to tear the Bill apart with the Catholic Church branding the Bill as “Anti-Life” because it promotes the use of contraceptives as a family-planning method. The Church sees the Bill as a population-control mechanism that goes against its “Pro-Life” doctrine.

The Church tends to focus on its main enemy – the contraceptives – and lose sight of the overall picture that offers a solution to a huge yet often ignored "illness" that plague most Filipino families, especially the poor. The Bill does not impose the use of contraceptives but rather gives information and guidance on the options available so that one can discern properly what control method to use. We cannot speak well of reproductive health, responsible parenthood, and population development if we turn our blind side to some already existing things that could have an impact on these concerns.

There is nothing in the Bill that is immoral either. Morality has always been the basis of our laws. Morality here is not the standards of any particular religion, but what is naturally right and proper. The proliferation of contraceptives in the market is an indication that they are not perceived by the public as a natural evil that society must get rid of.

It is also impossible to think that the Bill would endanger or kill our population. The Bill is neither about creating nor destroying life. It is about “health” that sustains life – health of the women who carry life in their wombs; health of the families that provide children with a better life in the future; and health of a nation that ensures greater opportunities for all in every aspect of life. And in this regard, we can trust our lawmakers to represent our best interest.

To put a clamp on what could be the most sensible law to be ever crafted by our legislators in years would move us further back in time. We need a change of perspective from our old views. Our world constantly evolves and we cannot afford to stay stuck in our belief, when everything that surrounds us tells otherwise. Our laws must cope, and so should we.

--
Image taken from: http://www.chikkadora.com/the-rh-bill-battle-escalates/