The Great Debate: To RH and not to RH

For RH bill advocates, the logic is simple: to eradicate poverty, eradicate or lessen population. There are abortions here and there, women are not being given the right for their bodies, and poor people are having babies as many as ten per family. Government is helpless in taking care of them, that's why, let's give them condoms and contraceptives. They can have all the sex that they want, for as long as they use condoms. 


Recent studies show that condoms are not effective in population control. Condoms even induce cancer among women. Condoms are not effective in preventing pregnancies. Condoms have a 15% failure rate, according to the Mayo clinic study.


Anti-RH bill advocates believe that population is not the root cause of poverty. They blame the inefficient allocation of the government's resources. They blame graft and corruption. Why not put that 2 billion pesos worth of the people's money in other priority projects, like job generation? Instead of giving it to contraceptive or condom companies, give it to the government so that the money will be used in other purposes.


I am surprised that democratic socialists like Pia Hontiveros believe in the RH bill. This is a US backed initiative and something which is more pro-government than anything. It is like admitting that the problem is not the system but the people. I thought AKBAYAN is pro-people?


Why blame the people, says Congressman Roilo Golez and former Laguna governor Joey Lina when the Philippine population density is one of the best in the world (18th in rank). Golez says that contraceptive companies will only benefit from the bill, since they would be given at least 2 billion pesos by the government thru the Department of Health. Lina, meanwhile said, that in the Philippines, the more populous an area is, the more prosperous it is. So, the population is not the root cause of the problem.


Let's admit it---BEHIND THIS RH BILL IS THE PROGRESSIVE LOBBY OF CONTRACEPTIVE COMPANIES HELL-BENT IN MAKING A KILLING. 


CONDOM COMPANIES ARE FUNDING RH BILL INITIATIVES ALL IN THE NAME OF CAPITALISM--THAT IS WORTH TWO (2) BILLION PESOS. 


I URGE RH BILL PROPONENTS TO MODIFY THE BILL AND SAY THAT GOVERNMENT WILL NOT BE THE ONE WHO WILL SHOULDER THE PROCUREMENT OR BUYING OF CONTRACEPTIVES AND GOVERNMENT WILL IN FACT, ENCOURAGE CONDOM COMPANIES TO EVEN LOWER THEIR PRICES FOR THE SAKE OF THE FILIPINO PEOPLE.


I DARE THEM. OF COURSE, THEY WILL NOT ADMIT THIS NOR WILL THEY EVER STRIKE THIS PROVISION IN THE BILL. WHY?


BECAUSE THIS IS THE "KITA" PORTION OF THE BILL. WHY ARE CONGRESSMEN INTERESTED IN PURSUING A DEFECTIVE BILL WITHOUT CONSIDERATION OF LOBBY MONEY?

Catholic Church Show of Force Against RH Bill: A Serious Challenge for Pro-RH Bill Advocate and to the Aquino administration

In what could be billed as the very first "big demonstration" against this new administration, the Catholic Church yesterday rallied some 40,000 plus people at the Rizal park against the Reproductive Health bill. 


Three things about this event:


First, this was something of a strong showing of collective force against the RH bill, countering pro-RH bill propaganda that the bill enjoys strong public support. 


Second, this is a political message to the Aquino administration. That figure, 40,000, is best remembered only in EDSAs. There is some subtle message being sent by the Church, and that is, if this administration does not want to be toppled by a popular revolt, it better withdraw its support of the bill. 


And third, this is a challenge to those who support the RH bill---mount a bigger rally than what we did. 


Question--is the pro-RH bill advocates up to the challenge?


The Catholic Church is determined to pursue this issue up to the very end. The question is---does the administration and those who support the bill feel the same thing?


President Aquino has consistently issued support for the Reproductive Health bill. Publicly, he was quoted as having second thoughts about it. However, there are reports that Malacanang is moving its allies and marshalling them to support the RH bill, in  deference to the United States. 


Reports also verified the strong lobby of the makers of condoms and contraceptives. This billion dollar industry is moving its muscles and using its lobby money to make this bill a reality. 


Really, this issue broke the tenuous relationship of the Church with that of civil society, who largely support the bill. Fact is, this bill seems to have split the ranks of civil society so much so that groups allied with the Church, and once populated the ranks of the political and ideological opposition have broken themselves from the coalition. 


Most of the opposition centers on the use of public funds to buy contraceptives and distribute them to the poor. Most of those opposing the bill say the funds have better uses. Most feel that immorality will somewhat rise when the State allows the mandatory teaching of sex education to students as young as ten or twelve years old. 


Use of public funds is not an expression of free choice. Rather, it is a subtle way of the State telling the individual to exercise extreme caution.


Free choice means respecting the right of the individual to engage in sexual activity and the liberal use of any method to avoid contraception, be it natural or artificial.


The State does not have the right to dictate upon an individual what method of contraception he should use. It is up to the individual to determine that.


Using public funds to distribute contraceptives is not an expression of free choice. By procuring these condoms, the State already expressed its preference towards artificial contraception, something which violates the religious beliefs of majority of Filipinos.