TASK 1 - PAGE 8 (BSA 1C_TRIXY BUSTAMANTE)

1. What was the major argument raised by Senator Francisco "Soc" Rodrigo against
the passage of the Rizal Bill?

Senator Francisco Rodrigo's main argument against the passage of the Rizal Bill was that
Rizal's novels were written to attack and mock the Catholic Church directly since most of Jose P.
Rizal's works shattered many Christian ideas or beliefs. The Rizal Bill is one of the most
contentious bills ever passed in the Philippines. When new laws are presented, they usually
trigger a debate between the upper and lower houses of the Senate and the House of
Representatives before being officially passed as a law. However, in the case of the Rizal Bill,
things became unusual because the church became involved in the debate over the bill's proposal.
The bill's goal was to require all educational institutions in the Philippines to offer Jose Rizal
courses. Nevertheless, Senator Rodrigo was a sincere Catholic with strong ties to the CBCP or
the Catholic church. That explains why he was opposed to the bill's passage. According to
Rodrigo (1956), it violates the Canon Law of 1933, and the books are anti-Catholic. He also
stated, "Let us not create a conflict between nationalism and religion, between the Government
and the Church."

2. What was the major argument raised by Senators Jose P. Laurel and Claro M.
Recto in support of the passage of the Rizal Bill?

Senators Jose P. Laurel and Claro M. Recto made the main point that there is a need to
remember Rizal's lives and works, which shaped our national character. They supported the Rizal
bill because of their patriotism, which served as a foundation for their support. They argued in
favor of the bill that it was critical to save the country from the hands of others and to ensure that
they could stand on their own. Furthermore, they both made arguments about Rizal novels,
claiming that each generation should read those novels because they contain nationalism and
morality. To make Filipinos aware of the sacrifices and sufferings of past people and events to
help and connect today's life and future. This bill wants us to open our minds, especially that
Rizal's novels contain the true meaning of the word "freedom," to instill consciousness in the
Filipino.
3. Are there points of convergence between the supporters and opposers of the Rizal
Bill based on these statements?

Yes, there are points of convergence in both supporters' and opposers' statements about
the Rizal Bill. They are still linked to Bill's ideas about religion or morality that Filipinos should
preserve and spread. Both arguments are valid and reasonable, as they both want the best for all
Filipino citizens. For example, Senator Francisco concludes that Rizal's novels are anti-church,
whereas Senator Recto claims that the books are about nationalism, patriotism, personal pride,
and national dignity. Furthermore, Sen. Francisco wishes to unite religion and nationalism, the
church, and the government. In contrast, Sen. Recto and Laurel want us to reflect on the past and
apply it to the present and future. Both arguments are fundamentally linked because they teach
Filipino citizens to protect what we have, specifically our religion or morality.
 TASK 1 - PAGE 8 (BSA 1C_MONIQUE ANGEL CARMONA)

1. What was the major argument raised by Senator Francisco "Soc" Rodrigo against the
passage of the Rizal Bill?
Senator Francisco "Soc" Rodrigo opposed the Rizal Bill's implementation, claiming that he did
not want to create a confrontation between nationalism and religion, or between government and
church, since researching Rizal's works or writings would expose him. Rizal's books, as we all
know, revealed the Spanish's unfairness and improper rule during their invasion of the nation.
This contains problems such as the Spanish Priest and the Spaniards' oppressive government in
our land at the time. Senator Rodrigo is afraid that this may cause a clash in the Filipino people's
beliefs, leading them to abandon their faith. I believe, Senator Rodrigo does not want to confuse
Filipinos or instigate a rebellion because Christianity is a part of their culture. But, in my
opinion, Filipinos ought to know the truth and to understand our history in order to foster
nationalism and to understand what our National Hero suffered and battled for back then.

2. What was the major argument raised by Senators Jose P. Laurel and Claro M. Recto in
support of the passage of the Rizal Bill?
Senators Jose P. Laurel and Claro M. Recto both backed the adoption of the Rizal statute, which
they believe should be read by all Filipinos. This rule will awaken us and provide us with the
right knowledge of our own past. Their support for the bill demonstrated that we, the Filipino
people, have a right to know who our National Hero is and why he earned that title, as well as his
sacrifices and patriotism for the love of our country, and to be reminded that our independence
was not easy. I agree with what they promote; Filipinos need to know not just about our past, but
also about how we battled for our independence.

3. Are there points of convergence between the supporters and opposers of the Rizal Bill
based on these statements?
Yes, there are factors of convergence. The supporters of the Rizal Bill only wanted to figure out
how the novel or book became our weapon in defending the Filipino people against foreign
accusations of ignorance and lack of awareness; to demonstrate how the Filipino people lived
during the Spanish colonial period. Supporters still want to commemorate our forefathers' efforts
in the fight for our country. Rizal's writings have been widely misconstrued as being anti-
Catholic, but it is merely a figure of phrase that portrays Spaniards. Opponents of the Rizal Bill
claimed that our National Hero's book was ammunition for tearing down the Church and the faith
of our Filipino Catholic countrymen. As previously indicated, he claims that the novel was
written to confront and denigrate the Catholic Church, and that it would be in violation of the
Canon Law of 1933. He also claims that the novels are anti-Catholic. That is why they oppose
the bill's passage

TASK 1 - PAGE 8 (BSA 1C_REY JOHN CAUNTAO)

1. What was the major argument raised by Senator Francisco "Soc" Rodrigo against
the passage of the Rizal Bill?

✓The major agreement raised by Senator Francisco against the passage of the Rizal Bill
was the book of Rizal, The Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo. He states that "Let us
not create a conflict between nationalism and religion between the government and the
church". And also that the passage is violates the Canon Law of 1933.

2. What was the major argument raised by Senators Jose P. Laurel and Claro M.
Recto in support of the passage of the Rizal Bill?

✓The major argument raised by Senators Jose P. Laurel and Claro M. Recto in support of
the passage of the Rizal bill was about Rizal Novel/writings telling that Noli Me Tangere
and El Filibusterismo must be read by all Filipinos and Rizal aimed at incalculating civic
consciousness in the Filipinos, national dignity, personal pride and patriotism and also a
certain religious practices.

3. Are there points of convergence between the supporters and opposers of the Rizal
Bill based on these statements?

✓Yes, there are points of convergence between the supporters and opposers of the
supporters of Rizal Bill based on there statements because the statements of the two have
points of convergence about the Rizal Bill and still connected about the thoughts of the
bill stating all about religion or morality that we should be preserved spread as a
Filipinos.
 TASK 1 - PAGE 8 (BSA 1C_AGUSTINA CORDERO)

1. What was the major argument raised by Senator Francisco "Soc" Rodrigo against the
passage of the Rizal Bill?
Senator Rodrigo argued that Rizal's novels, particularly Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo,
were designed to openly condemn and disrespect the Catholic Church. Where it is obviously
against the law, the church should be separated from the state, as stated in Article II, Section 6 of
the Philippine Constitution of 1987, which is still the core and backbone of our country today.
“Let us not create a battle between nationalism and religion, between government and church,”
he urged.
2. What was the major argument raised by Senators Jose P. Laurel and Claro M. Recto in
support of the passage of the Rizal Bill?
Senators Jose P. Laurel and Claro M. Recto presented a strong case for the passing of the Rizal
Bill, stating that Rizal's novels and essays should be read by all generations since they include a
strong sense of nationalism and morality.
3. Are there points of convergence between the supporters and opposers of the Rizal Bill
based on these statements?
Yes, absolutely. As per the discussions, there were areas of agreement between proponents and
opponents of the Rizal Bill since the ideas are fundamentally related in such a way that it
encourages Filipinos to safeguard what they do have, notably their religion or morality.
 TASK 1 - PAGE 8 (BSA 1C_JEANNIE CUANICO)

1. What was the major argument raised by Senator Francisco "Soc" Rodrigo against
the passage of the Rizal Bill?

 Senator Francisco "Soc" Rodrigo was against to the passage of the Rizal's Bill which is a
famous as one of the most controversial bills passed in the Philippines. The church was
getting involved with the debate on the proposal of Rizal's Bill. Where in fact, the church
should be seperated from the state, as it was clearly stated in the Constitution of the
Philippines, Article II, Section 6, which is still the core and the backbone of our country
as of today. Rizal's novels, particularly Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo, were
designed to openly condemn and disrespect the Catholic Church. Where it is obviously
against the law. Senator Recto was a pious one and had a close tie with the Catholic
Church which he opposed to such bill and persist that “Let us not create a battle between
nationalism and religion, between government and church”.

2. What was the major argument raised by Senators Jose P. Laurel and Claro M.
Recto in support of the passage of the Rizal Bill?

 Senator Recto brought the bill to the Senate and Senator Jose B. Laurel Sr. who was then
the Chairman of the Committee on Education sponsored the bill that consequently led to
exchange of arguments from the Congress. Of course, Recto and Laurel defended the bill
and argued that the only objective of the bill is to keep the memory of the national hero
alive in every Filipino’s mind, to emanate Rizal as he peacefully fought for freedom, and
not to go against religion. Senator Laurel’ created an amendment to the original bill in
which, other that Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo, works written by Rizal and
works written by others about Rizal would be included and reading of the unexpurgated
revision of the two novels would no longer be compulsory to elementary and secondary
levels but would be strictly observed to college level.

3. Are there points of convergence between the supporters and opposers of the Rizal
Bill based on these statements?

 Yes, both of the statement between the supporters and opposers have points of
convergence about the Rizal Bill because it is still connected about the thoughts of the
Bill stating all about Religion or morality that should be preserve and spread by Filipino.
 TASK 1 - PAGE 8 (BSA 1C_JOHN CHRISTOFHER DATING)

1. What was the major argument raised by Senator Francisco “Soc” Rodrigo against
the passage of the Rizal Bill?

• The Rizal bill is a re-dedication for the youth’s acquired freedom and to pursue
realization, instilling a patriotism towards our nation. Its main purpose was to
study Rizal’s famous novels specifically, the Noli Me Tangere and the El
Filibusterismo where it tackles the fraudulent acts and imposes negative portrayal
of the Catholic church. Henceforth, an argument was raised by Senator Francisco
“Soc”, a religious and a devout catholic, against the passage of the Rizal Bill
because according to him, the book is an anti-Catholicism. His major argument
which I quote “Let us not create a conflict between nationalism and religion,
between the Government and the Church” which morally explain why he opposes
to the approval of Rizal bill.

2. What was the major argument raised by Senators Jose P. Laurel and Claro M.
Recto in support of the passage of the Rizal Bill?

• The major argument of both Senators, Jose P. Laurel and Claro M. Recto in
support of the Rizal Bill was about Rizal novels specifically the Noli Me Tangere
and El Filibusterismo where it truthfully narrates the sacrifices and sufferings of
Filipinos in Spaniard times, and must be read by generation to build patriotism,
morale and Independence. That is, by supporting the general passage of the bill
and approving thereof.

3. Are there points of convergence between the supporters and opposers of the Rizal
Bill based on these statements?

• Certainly. There are interconnected points between the supporters of the bill and
those who opposes to the statements, a part that is intertwined where it discusses
the religion and morality that should be maintained and propagate up to
generations.
 TASK 1 - PAGE 8 (BSA 1C_ANGELINE DOLORFO)

1. What was the major argument raised by Senator Francisco “Soc” Rodrigo against the
passage of the Rizal Bill?
- Yes, mainly because Rizal bill violates religious freedom. Senator Rodrigo also criticized it for
separation of the church and the state must be upheld. Works of Rizal such as Noli Me Tangere
and El Filibusterismo disrespect religion and it is against the law so according to him, we must
not create a battle between nationalism and religion, between government and church.
2. What was the major argument raised by Senators Jose P. Laurel and Claro M. Recto in
support of the passage of the Rizal Bill?
- Senators Jose P. Laurel and Claro M. Recto presented a strong case for the passing of the Rizal
Bill, stating that Rizal’s novels and essays should be read by all generations since they include a
strong sense of nationalism and morality. It is to remind every Filipino of the sacrifices that our
ancestors and national hero done for us. It creates and embody the empowerment of ideals,
principles in life, importance of education, patriotism, and the belief that the youth are
tomorrow's hope.
3. Are there points of convergence between the supporters and opposers of the Rizal Bill
based on these statements?
- Yes, there are points of convergence between the supporters and opposers of the Rizal Bill
based on statements, particularly about religion and morality. Both parties agreed in one thing,
protection for their religion and morality.
 TASK 1 - PAGE 8 (BSA 1C_ANTONETTE JOSH ESCORIAL)

1.) What was the major argument raised by Senator Francisco “Soc” Rodrigo against
the passage of the Rizal Bill?

Senator Rodrigo was against the passage of the Rizal Bill for he believed that it
contains scenes and events in the past that could taint the perspective and view of the
Filipino people towards the Catholic Church. His argument focuses on the fact that
allowing and putting the passage in the student’s curriculum would only just create a
negative line and notion to the church and as well as to the leaders of the said church. He
believed that when students are able to know and understand Rizal's book it will only
create conflict between the audience love for their nation and to their faith. He stands on
the thought that we should just move forward in loving both our country and faith
without making things complicated for both sectors and through that we can live
harmoniously.

2.) What was the major argument raised by Senators Jose P. Laurel and Claro M.
Recto in support of the passage of the Rizal Bill?

Senator Roel highlights that the excerpt must be read by all Filipinos for it
contains our rich History especially during the trying times. He said that the books would
greatly help motivate the Filipino people to pursue their dreams even if it seems
impossible and to practice resiliency in times of struggles. On the other hand, Senator
Recto stresses that Rizal's intention in writing the book is not to discredit the church but
only to show and portray the reality of events that had occurred in the past. The senator
wants to highlight Rizal's purpose in writing the book was to only enlighten the Filipino
people of the reality that is happening to their country and to be an eye opener in regards
to the oppression that the country has suffered.

3.) Are there points of convergence between the supporters and opposers of the Rizal
Bill based on these Statements?
 Indeed, both of the assertion between the allies and opposers have points of
combination about the Rizal Bill since it is as yet associated about the musings of the Bill
expressing about Religion or ethical quality that ought to be save and spread by Filipino.

TASK 1 - PAGE 8 (BSA 1C_ANGELA ESPLEGUERA)

1. What was the major argument raised by Senator Francisco "Soc" Rodrigo against the
passage of the Rizal Bill?
Answer:
The Rizal Bill or known as Republic Act No. 1425, raised an argument by the Senate and House
of Representative.
Senator Francisco Rodrigo, a devoted Catholic, opposes this bill to be pass on. According to him,
conflicts between government and churches should be avoided. Knowingly that the teachings of
Jose Rizal in his novels such as; Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo attacked nationalism and
religion.
In conclusion, Senator Rodrigo was eager to protect the peace of the church as it will be involved
in the debate proposal.

2. What was the major argument raised by Senators Jose P. Laurel and Claro M. Recto in
support of the passage of the Rizal Bill?
Answer:
The major argument of Senator Jose P. Laurel and Claro M. Recto supports the Rizal Bill.
They highlighted the essence of this to every Filipinos' life. According to Senator Jose P. Laurel,
the literary works of Rizal is worth to read as it shows the reflection of our own situations.
Otherwise, Senator Claro M. Recto supports that this bill will set consciousness to the history
and reality.
In conclusion, both Senators highly think to be transparent about this bill.

3. Are there points of convergence between the supporters and opposers of the Rizal Bill
based on these statements?
Answer:
Yes, definitely. Even though they have different arguments, yet it was supported attentively.
Indeed, every claim was after nationalism and religion.