Podcast
Questions and Answers
Flashcards
Police Power (Recto's Argument)
Police Power (Recto's Argument)
State power to require reading to foster appreciation of Rizal's times.
Senate Bill 438
Senate Bill 438
Mandates Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo as compulsory reading in colleges.
Anti-Rizal Bill Argument
Anti-Rizal Bill Argument
Argued compulsory reading violates religious freedom.
Religious Concerns (Anti-Rizal Bill)
Religious Concerns (Anti-Rizal Bill)
Signup and view all the flashcards
Laurel's Explanation (RA 1425)
Laurel's Explanation (RA 1425)
Signup and view all the flashcards
Hagiography
Hagiography
Signup and view all the flashcards
RA 1425
RA 1425
Signup and view all the flashcards
Hopes of Senate Bill 438
Hopes of Senate Bill 438
Signup and view all the flashcards
Study Notes
RA 1425
- Also known as the Rizal Law
- Mandates the study of Dr. Jose Rizal's life, works, and writings in the curricula of all public and private schools, colleges, and universities
Origins of The Law
- Senate Bill 438 sought to make Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo compulsory reading in all public and private colleges and universities
- The goal was to educate people about the oppression suffered by Filipinos during the Spanish era
Recto's Argument
- Under the principle of police power, the state can require reading of the novels to foster better appreciation of Rizal's times
- Rizal's works inculcated civic consciousness among Filipinos, as well as national dignity, patriotism, and personal pride
Anti-Rizal Bill Arguments
- Senators Decoroso Rosales, Mariano Cuenco, and Francisco "Soc" Rodrigo opposed the bill
- It was argued that it would violate religious freedom
- The compulsory reading was argued as an impairment of both freedom of speech and religion
- Some viewed it as a measure to discredit their religion
- It was argued the novels contained views inimical to the tenets of their faith
Fr. Jesus Cavanna's Stance
- The novels belong to the past
- Reading the novels would be harmful because they presented a false picture of conditions in the country at that time
- Noli Me Tangere is an attack aiming to ridicule the Catholic faith
- The novel was not patriotic because out of 333 pages, only 25 pages contained patriotic passages whilst 120 were devoted to anti-Catholic attacks
Laurel's Explanation
- The law requires the reading of Rizal's novels and other works, including those written by others about him
- In the substitute bill, compulsion was removed, but the reading of unexpurgated or original forms is required
What the Law Imposes
- Inclusion in the curricula of studies of the life and works of Rizal
- Reading unexpurgated versions of Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo is required
- Schools should have adequate copies of Rizal's works
- Signed into law by Ramon Magsaysay on June 12, 1956
- The law authorizes the translation of Noli & Fili
- The doctrine of separation of church and state is upheld, while the teaching of Rizal as a subject is required
Ideals
- There is a need to give utmost importance to the ideals of freedom, nationalism, and patriotism through an understanding of the works and life of Rizal
Studying That Suits You
Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.
Related Documents
Description
This lesson explores RA 1425, also known as the Rizal Law, which mandates the study of Dr. Jose Rizal's life and works. It covers the origins of the law, including Senate Bill 438, and the arguments for and against its implementation. Key figures like Recto, Rosales, Cuenco, and Rodrigo are discussed in relation to the bill.