MANILA, Philippines – It seems that the issue of plagiarism involving Senator Tito Sotto has yet to die down, following claims made by a number of Filipinos that parts of his second speech were lifted from online sources.
Among them are Filipino novelist Miguel Syjuco, who said on his Facebook page that Sotto’s office “lifted, verbatim, from three sources easily found online.”
Syjuco, who is based in Canada, won the 2008 Man Asian Literary Prize. He also posted some passages in Sotto’s speech which he claims were copied from others.
Here are the said passages, as mentioned by Syjuco:
1.
Sotto’s speech:
Sanger was so intent on reducing family size that she seemed to not stop even at abortion. Many believe that under the right circumstances, Sanger would have condoned infanticide. Indeed she wrote in her book Woman and the New Race: “The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.” This comes from the woman who formed the philosophical base for IPPF.”
But there was even a darker side to Margaret Sanger: a side that IPPF people try to cover up or explain away. That was her belief in “eugenics.” Eugenics is defined as “the application of the laws of hereditary to physical and mental improvement, especially of the human race.” To Sanger this meant the systematic elimination (through birth control, including abortion) of all those people she and her cohorts considered to be of “dysgenic stock” in order to create a race of superior intellectuals.”
From a 2008 article titled “Re-Imagining Life and Family” by Marlon C. Ramirez:
Sanger was so intent on reducing family size that she seemed to not stop even at abortion. Many believe that, under the right circumstances, Sanger would have condoned infanticide. Indeed, she wrote in her book “Woman And the New Race: “The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.” This comes from the woman who formed the philosophical base for Planned Parenthood. You can also see that her interest in birth control was not just due to some humane concern for health of women (which birth control doesn’t help anyway), but was driven in part by her desire to encourage women to engage in sex without having children.
But there was another side of Margaret Sanger; a side that Planned Parenthood people try to cover up or explain away. That was her belief in eugenics. Eugenics is defined as “the application of the laws of heredity to physical and mental improvement, especially of the human race.” To Sanger this meant the systematic elimination (through birth control, including abortion) of all those people she and her cohorts considered to be of “dysgenic stock” in order to create a race of superior intellectuals.
2.
Sotto’s speech:
The two activists met in December of 1936 when Sanger traveled to India to speak with Gandhi about birth control, population and the plight of women in India. At that time, Sanger staunchly advocated the global use of artificial contraceptives and, in order to make the acceptance of such contraceptives easier to the Indian populace, sought to make Gandhi an ally.
Despite the fact that the movement was gaining popularity in a society with a serious poverty crisis, Gandhi was an outspoken critic of artificial birth control. His general attitude was that “Persons who use contraceptives will never learn the value of self-restraint. They will not need it. Self-indulgence with contraceptives may prevent the coming of children but will sap the vitality of both men and women, perhaps more of men than of women. It is unmanly to refuse battle with the devil.”
From a 2010 blog post titled “Gandhi’s birth control of choice” by Janice:
The two activists met in 1936 when Sanger traveled to India to speak with Gandhi about birth control. By that time Sanger was advocating internationally for artificial contraceptives and sought to make Gandhi an ally.
Despite the fact that the movement was gaining popularity in a society with a serious poverty crisis, Gandhi was an outspoken critic of artificial birth control. His general attitude was that
“Persons who use contraceptives will never learn the value of self-restraint. They will not need it. Self-indulgence with contraceptives may prevent the coming of children but will sap the vitality of both men and women, perhaps more of men than of women. It is unmanly to refuse battle with the devil.”
3.
Sotto’s speech:
A study undertaken by Raymond Pearl, a JohnHopkins professor and noted authority on this matter, wrote: “Those who practice contraception as part of their sex life, by their own admission, resort to criminally induced abortions about three times as often proportionately as do their comparable non-contraceptor contemporaries.” Also in a report prepared for the Royal Commission on Population in Great Britain found that the incidence of induced abortion as a percentage of all pregnancies was nine times higher for women using contraceptives than for women not using birth control.
From a 2010 blog post titled “Case Study: The Use of Contraceptives Lowers the Number of Abortions:”
In 1939 Raymond Pearl, a Johns Hopkins professor and noted authority, wrote: “Those who practice contraception as part of their sex life, by their own admission, resort to criminally induced abortions about three times as often proportionately as do their comparable non-contraceptor contemporaries.”
In Great Britain, in 2949, a report prepared for the Royal Commission on Population found that the incidence of induced abortion as a percentage of all pregnancies was nine times higher for women using contraceptives than for women not using birth control.
Journalist Raissa Robles, a blogger for ABS-CBNnews.com, noted that a total of five instances of plagiarism were found in Sotto’s second RH speech, citing observations made by Syjuco and Internet user Vincent Bautista.
“Perhaps Senator Sotto did not mean to copy and paste. Perhaps an aide did this for him. Or perhaps someone else fed it to him and he trusted the source completely. Or perhaps one of the bloggers was even his friend.
“However, all those copied words became Senator Sotto’s very own when they were officially entered into Senate records,” Robles wrote.
Sotto’s chief of staff reacts
In a text message to ABS-CBNnews.com on Friday, Sotto’s chief of staff, Atty. Hector Villacorta, said "I can't comment yet without meeting my staff."
US blog first plagiarized
On Thursday, Villacorta admitted that they copied the work of an American blogger in the lawmaker’s turno en contra speech on the RH bill.
Villacorta has posted a message on the Facebook page of blogger Sarah Pope, saying that it was Sotto’s staff who lifted the content of her work without the proper attribution.
Earlier, Sotto denied plagiarizing parts of his RH bill speech.