While the Scholastica admin/s has been taking all the heat after photos of its students circulate online, the parents/alumni stayed unscathed, until today.
The fierce one, Atty. Bruce Rivera joined the public outcry on social media against St. Scholastica for using school children in their political advocacies.
Atty. Rivera recalled his childhood lesson he learned from a disciplinarian Grandma who taught him that children are not allowed to butt in on “on sensitive matters like politics, sexual orientation etc. It is not that we were not allowed an opinion. It was because, we were too young to have an informed position on these matters.”
In the Facebook post, Rivera rebuked the parents and school alumni for failing to recognize the difference between child activism and child endangerment or worse child abuse.
Read the full post below.
NEVER LET CHILDREN FIGHT YOUR BATTLES
When we were young, my grandmother had a very strict rule that governed our family. When grown-ups were talking to other grown-ups not considered family, the children were not allowed to butt in on sensitive matters like politics, sexual orientation etc. It is not that we were not allowed an opinion. It was because, we were too young to have an informed position on these matters.
And even a child is informed, it was not the child’s role to fight for his or her political beliefs. That is the parents job: fight for their children. They are instrumental in molding their childrens minds and thus, they should insulate them on matters that may affect a child in a negative way. Hence, a child should not be thrust into a political advocacy that should be the fight of the adults.
It is unfair to the child and it is unfair to those who have to be the adversary of the child. Because how can an adult have a political argument with a child. As such, political debates and advocacies should belong to the domain of the adults or at least children who have achieved a certain level of discernment. It should not include young children who will believe that a unicorn exists just because the teacher said so or some textbook printed it and passed it off as fact.
The alumni of St. Scholastica have always been proud that their institution have always encouraged their students to be socially aware and take active participation in national issues. However, when will you draw the line where it a child activism or child endangerment or worst, child abuse.
When the administrators of an educational institution allow its student to carry a placard saying that someone is a murderer or a dictator, it places that child in a situation where she is being made to accuse someone of being a bad person or even a criminal. Something that the child cannot substantiate because she or he cannot file a case in a court of law personally and has to be represented by the parents. Why give the burden of accusing someone as a dictator or a murderer to a child when it should be the adults doing it. How can it escape someone’s logic not to think that if indeed PRD is the evil man they accuse him to be, it would put that child’s life in danger. How can adults allow children to fight their wars? How can parents even allow their children enter an institution that reckless?
I know I can never be a parent. I know that Duterte is not a dictator or a murderer. I know that he will never harm a child. And I am ready to fight for things I hold true.
But if I was a parent, I will never let my child fight for things I believe in. Not even if he or she believed it too. For as long as he or she is a child, I should fight for him.
It is just sad that some parents, natural or substitute, allow their children to fight their own battles.
Do you agree with Atty. Bruce? Share your opinion with us by commenting below.