This is yet another lengthy blog entry about the controversial Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines, or CBCP, and their unswerving stand against the RH bill. This organization has employed almost every tactic, even dirty ones, in hopes of suppressing the clamor for the motioning of the said bill. We have here a Baguio priest using the pulpit to bombard the bill's supporters with very un-priest-ly insults, just to name one.
However, one of the most powerful paraphernalia the CBCP uses in its anti-RH bill propaganda are their pamphlets, which are supposed to show the dire consequences should the RH bill be implemented into law. Here are some screenshots of the pamphlet:
Link 2
Kudos to Filipino Freethinkers.
Examining the pictures, you'll see how the pamphlet explains the harmful effects of the RH bill, as well as the "abortifacient" drugs and equipment associated with it, complete with studies to back up their advocacies. But, to a well-organized mind, asking this question shouldn't come as a shock. "Is this true?"
And so, I have created this blog entry in an attempt to shed light in the contents of this shady pamphlet, in hopes of revealing the lies, the half-truths, and even the truths that the CBCP continues to spread amongst our fellowmen for their glorious crusade against the RH bill. Here I shall scrutinize every bit of the pamphlet's content, analyzing the logic it employs while offering my two cents at the same time. We all have different mindsets and opinions, and so we might disagree in several points of this discussion, but know that what I'm about to say is completely impartial; just out of my own observations and research. And so, ladies and gentlemen, let's be Sherlock Holmes for a couple of minutes and proceed to the investigation.
CBCP Anti-RH bill pamphlet
Section 1
Translation:
1. What is the House Bill 13 and Senate Bill 2497?
a. Only God has the authority to give and take lives.
b. Recognizes that the Law protects life especially unborn children.
c. Respects the rights of parents to take care of and raise their children.
d. Equality amongst all children, be they rich or poor.
e. Believes that a child is a treasure and not a burden or a threat of poverty.
f. Believes that maternal health must be given importance.
Interpretation:
The emotion enclosed in Section 1 isn't really hard to interpret. CBCP believes that the RH bill violates the laws which they expounded on.
Arguments:
- Why does the pamphlet have to mention God's authority over life? RH bill does NOT promote killing any lives. It aims to provide quality lifestyle to all kinds of people. Killing is a crime and is punishable by law.
- The Law truly is supposed to protect the lives and rights of the unborn, but why is there a need to bring this up in your argument? The RH bill's motives are NOT in conflict with the lives and rights of the unborn. The RH bill does not kill unborn children; it simply prevents fertilization. The withdrawal method that the Church advocates serves the same purpose, so the priests are somewhat contradicting themselves.
- Why does CBCP need to mention parental rights? The RH bill does not order anyone to stop bearing children or to surrender their children to the government. Instead, it gives parents and would-be parents a choice to make a plan for their families for better living. The RH bill does not imprison parents; it frees them.
- Please do explain to me if you see any connection between letter d and the RH bill, because I seriously don't. How is equality amongst children related to the bill? But, for the sake of a substantial comment, I'd say that the RH bill's benefits encompass all kinds of people; rich or poor, man or woman, young or adult.
- Although a newly born child can be called a treasure, let's face this fact; too much children, when not properly cared for and educated, can be a serious problem. And it's not only the society that will suffer. The children themselves will suffer. With shortages in physiological needs, these "treasures" will either die of starvation, grow with zero educational attainment, or even undergo forced labor, and this defeats the advocacy of CBCP of giving importance to children.
- So far this is the only point relevant to the RH bill CBCP so despises. We must take notice and give importance to the advantages and disadvantages of the RH bill to maternal health, since, should the RH bill be made into law, women will receive most of its impact.
Section 2
Translation:
2. What is the Reproductive Health Bill 96?
a. The usage of abortifacients (condoms, pills, IUD, etc.) endangers the health of the mother and her child. This leads to:
- Cancer
- Cause of heart attack and stroke
- The mother and her child suffering from injuries, psychological disorders and
abnormalities in the child.
b. Is overpopulation the reason behind poverty?
- There is no direct relation between population growth and poverty.
- Poverty is caused by corruption, greed, insufficient education and loss of jobs.
- The inability or negligence of the government to provide people with jobs is the reason why they are
squeezing through the cities.
c. Why is there a want to make RH bill into law?
- Incorrect governance, and also because big amounts of money were spent by capitalists profiting from
manufacturing and selling contraceptives.
Interpretation:
This section is mainly about demonizing contraceptives and the government. Just plain demonizing.
Arguments:
Answering a:
Please read these:
Link 3
Link 4
Link 5
Link 6
Paracelsus once said; "All things are poison, and nothing is without poison; only the dose permits something not to be poisonous."
This is true. Anything, when taken in inordinate amounts, can cause complications in the body; which is why there are these things called "dosage" and "proper usage." The same things apply to all kinds of medicine and medical equipment, including the ones mentioned in the pamphlet.
For those who still do not understand, what I'm trying to say is that everything can be beneficial or dangerous; it simply lies in the dosage and how the user handles his/her meds. Stating that condoms and pills cause cancer is a logical fallacy, since this is basically like saying medicines cause cancer and other stuff; everything depends on the dosage and proper handling.
Oh, and I have to point this out; why, of all things, must this pamphlet bring up injuries? I mean, injuries only come from IMPROPER HANDLING. Carpentry can cause injuries. Working in a power plant can cause injuries, even deaths! Should we stop building homes and shut down plants?
For the possibility of contracting unwanted diseases and complications (and injuries, lol) due to ignorance and misinformation, the RH bill also promotes sexual education for those who want to KNOW. The RH bill aims to inform people about what it advocates. Educating people is, in my opinion, a noble cause, in stark contrast to just telling people what to do and invoking His name to suit one's ideals.
Answering b:
- Thanks to quantum physics, it was discovered that what seemed like completely stationary atoms at absolute zero temperatures are actually moving somehow when viewed in the quantum level; such motions are called "quantum jitters." I believe we can relate this phenomenon to our economy. There are credible studies to back up this claim, but what we fail to realize is that economic trends are generalized concepts; the mean or the average of numerous studies. What seems to be a very smooth billiard ball might actually have numerous bumps and scratches when magnified enough.
This is the same with our economy. What seems to be a fairly stable economy might reveal hardships, famine and crime when viewed on a microscopic level. Suppose that this claim is true; that population and poverty aren't related. But what will happen to the small people who are poor because they have many mouths to feed? Those who suffer because population and poverty are actually related in small levels? Will we just ignore them because, well, majority wins? Remember that we're not just after the betterment of our economy. We're also after the quality of life of everyone. Given the Church's staunch stand against the correlation of population and poverty, I can't help but have the implication that they are indifferent towards those who suffer deep within the generalized trend of our economy, because economic instability and population aren't related in a large scale! But of course I shouldn't assume anything yet.
(Note: I have recently laid my hands on information that somehow supports my claim; that at smaller scales, at the poorer levels of society, poverty and population do affect each other.)
"Both the neo-Malthusians and their critics—who shared the same long-term goal of reducing poverty—were misled in thinking that their particular strategy would be the magic bullet. Family planning alone will not necessarily reduce poverty in developing countries, but neither will many of the present models of economic development. On the other hand, a slower rate of population growth, combined with sound and equitable economic development and the reduction of gender inequality, appears increasingly likely to achieve that goal.
While fertility decisions are a private matter, there is a role for public policy. In an increasing number of countries, public and private providers are enabling women to choose when and how many children they will have, by providing information and safe, effective means of fertility regulation. In cases where the health system fails to do this or when there is an imbalance between the individual and the social costs of reproductive behaviors, public policy needs to address these failures by improving the information and regulatory environment. Additionally, when cost is an obstacle to effective fertility regulation by poor women, subsidizing services may be an appropriate approach.
In sum, fertility and family planning do matter for poverty reduction—for poor households and for poor countries. They are not the only, or even the most important, factors in poverty reduction. The topic has been a controversial one, and critics have reacted to statements that exaggerate the links between fertility and poverty by minimizing or denying them. Thus, it is important that policymakers understand the new evidence supporting the view that lower fertility does contribute to poverty reduction, and that public policies that help poor people better manage their reproductive lives have societal as well as individual benefits."
Source: Link 7
-Yes, yes. Thank you for stating the obvious. But why is all the blame put on the government? Of course some politicians are indeed corrupt and incompetent, but do their actions solely determine the fate of a country? Is the CBCP like the poor people who make babies like a damn factory then blame the government for their poverty? The government has its faults, but it's not just the government that makes matters worse. It's also the sexual irresponsibility of some of our fellowmen, leading to, guess what, overpopulation.
- Although this is in a sense the same with the statement "poverty is caused by corruption, greed, insufficient education and loss of jobs," this line also gives an implication that the CBCP also believes that we're not overpopulated at all, but merely over-concentrated. Let me point out the flaw in this claim. While it's true that NCR is biting off more than it can chew population-wise, it doesn't change the fact that we're overpopulated. Why is this so? The 2009 population census stated that Philippines held around 91,983,000 people, so it's not really an exaggeration to say that we're around 100,000,000 now. The land area of the Philippines is roughly 300,000 square kilometers. This means that our population density is approximately 333 people per square kilometer. But it's not like we're using every bit of our land. What if we cross out lands reserved for agricultural purposes, roads, forests, commercial lots, and the islands that sink during high tides? Oh, and don't forget that not all of us have birth certificates.
Answering c:
I'll make this answer short. Capitalists can capitalize on anything. They benefit from value-added taxes. They profit from Ramos' law that gave rise to "contractual" employees. Each step in an attempt to move forward has disadvantages, but if the CBCP's mindset is really touchy about the cons, then it might as well suggest that the government not to do anything at all, so the capitalists won't have anything to capitalize on.
Section 3
Translation:
3. Why is the implementation of the RH bill not the solution to poverty?
a. The welfare of the citizens are more important:
- Setting up hospitals and health centers with new equipment and medicines.
- Improving the rural areas and building new infrastructures.
- Providing more opportunities, jobs, and better housing projects.
- Raising one's state in society by creating revolutionized way of earning a living.
Interpretation:
A diversion tactic of the CBCP in an attempt to delay the passage of the bill.
Arguments:
Answering a:
("There is no sense in building and building infrastructures and classrooms, then the population will just grow and grow until there is no space left to build, is there?")
This is like, so true. What the CBCP suggests make little or no sense, since the population will just keep growing! And then they're going to demand for another project whatsoever. Isn't this pointless? Is the CBCP actually taking the future into account as they criticize and throw these uh, suggestions here and there? Oh, and how are we to achieve the last suggestion? Unless you guys could come up with logical and practical answers, I'll just leave you and your utopian fantasies from this point.
Section 4
Translation:
1. The use of contraceptives, according to experts, cause the following:
a. Murder - Pills and IUDs prevent the settling of the embryo in the uterine wall so as to deliberately expel it from the womb. (American Medical Association, American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology)
b. Danger in women's health - Pills can cause cancer like smoking and asbestos. (International Agency for Research on Cancer). These can also cause heart diseases. (Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism - The Endocrine Society)
c. Danger in the newborn child's health - Pills can cause physical injuries or mental disorders in the newborn.
d. Destruction of families - Eventually, the widespread use of contraceptives in society degrades respect for the sacrament of matrimony together with the widespread extra-martial sex, the rise in the number of children without known fathers, mothers without husbands, as well as abortion. (Quarterly Journal of Economics - The MIT Press)
e. Spread of AIDS - According to the strongest and worldly evidence, the indiscriminate use of condoms result in a greater spread of AIDS because of confidence about the risks caused by too much sexual activity. (Edward C. Green, Harvard Director for AIDS Prevention) The reason: the AIDS virus is smaller than condom fibers (if viewed under a microscope), so there's a big possibility that the virus can pass through, resulting in the infected infecting his/her sexual partner.
Interpretation:
This is just a continuation-- no, a reiteration of the CBCP's campaign against contraceptives. Now with sources.
I have already discussed the stuff in b and c, so I'll just tackle a, d and e.
Answering a:
Just like what I've been saying in my previous arguments, anything can result to disasters when misused or used in excessive dosages. This is precisely why the RH bill also aims to provide education to people who are willing to be informed, so that they can make use of these medicines and equipment correctly and timely, to avoid fatal accidents and trauma. It is through this education that people will know the benefits, the risks, and the proper way of handling such contraceptives for the betterment of their lives.
It is true that pills and IUDs are capable of destroying life... if done in a wrong way. You who deprive people of the education they need to handle such things are enticing them to commit one of the most tragic mistakes they can ever make.
Answering d:
Firstly, why did the sexual revolution produce horribly negative results? Link 8
If you've read the entire thing, you'll see that it was just about the indiscriminate release of contraceptives, the emergence of underdeveloped philosophies and demoralization of the society. What could have caused such a catastrophe?
My answer in letter a is the same in letter d. The people lacked the proper EDUCATION to handle serious matters such as contraceptives, something businesses in the past took advantage on. Beware of the dangers posed by ignorance and misconceptions. The stuff Akerlof mentioned (rise in extramarital sex cases, separated families, etc.) are caused by people's lack of information. Their actions were misguided and capricious.
I repeatedly emphasize this, and I'm going to emphasize this yet again; an important program of the RH bill is public education. It aims to make people understand the real meaning of family planning. It aims to dispel misinterpretations which might result to our very own sexual revolution.
Oh, and it isn't like the Church won't cooperate with the government to keep families together, right? The Church will help, I'm quite sure of it.
Read this. Quickly. Link 9
Please take note these parts of the article:
"The claims of condom-use opponents regarding HPV are false and alarmist. Condom use cannot be blamed for the high prevalence of HPV or cervical cancer among women in the U.S. While condoms may not eliminate the risk of transmitting the HPVs that cause cancer, the CDC recommends them for risk reduction (CDC, 1998)"
"Condoms are effective because they block contact with body fluids that cause pregnancy and sexually transmitted infection. Most reports of condom failure are the result of inconsistent or incorrect use, not breakage (Macaluso et al., 1999). In the U.S., the actual breakage rate is a low two per 100 condoms (CDC, 1998). High failure rates in some studies occur because many people lie about contraceptive use to shift the responsibility for an unintended pregnancy to a "faulty" contraceptive. Such over-reporting artificially inflates failure rates (Trussell, 1998)"
Remember what the note said when Harry Potter received his Cloak of Invisibility for the first time?
"Use it well."
Section 5
2. Population is NOT the cause of poverty:
a. There is no correlation between population growth and economic prosperity. (Simon Kuznets, Nobel Prize Winner and author of Population Capital and Growth)
b. Prosperity is caused by proper governance, open-mindedness, stable trading system, fair and humane distribution of wealth, saving and investing. (The Growth Commission 2008, World Bank Publication)
c. Poverty is caused by corruption, greed, injustice, illiteracy and lack of opportunity.
d. More than P300-B goes to the pockets of corrupt politicians and government officials (World Bank)
e. There is no such thing as population growth in the Philippines but merely migration of people to specific places, like Metro Manila. (National Statistical Coordination Board)
f. Countries like China, Singapore, Hong Kong and others in Europe is currently facing severe problems (The elderly outnumbering the young), because of artificial methods of suppressing their population growths. (United Nations)
Interpretation:
This is the CBCP's attempt to divert the people's attention from the bill by discussing international conflicts.
Arguments:
I've already discussed a, c and e, so let's turn our attention to the remaining letters.
Answering b:
I don't really see the point in telling this. What it said is true, but what would the CBCP expect from saying this? They're just stating the obvious, and it does not really help. I don't really have much to say about this, because I'm not really supposed to say much about this.
Answering d:
Which politicians? Link 10
"The World Bank estimates the country's generals and gangster politicians stole $300 billion in the three decades to 2006."
Is the CBCP referring to this incident? Why didn't you provide the specifics regarding your claim? This so-called information will leave any inquisitive reader in a limbo of questions; who did this crime? Where was it done? When was it done? Were they caught?
Your information was so vague, readers might misinterpret that this was done by our very own government. I just hate it when a sinister thought comes to mind...
Anyway, I just have to ask this; did the State grant the Church power so that they can continuously bombard the government with ridicules and insults, while not really doing anything themselves? Is this really the purpose of the Church; the national nagger?
Answering f:
Kindly read these:
Link 11
Link 12
Link 13
Link 14
There is a whole bunch of articles concerning UN and the graying of the population. I just posted the most important ones in my opinion. If you're still interested in more of these stuff, visit Link 15
Here are more articles:
Link 16
Link 17
Now, assuming you've read the articles, or at least glanced through them, let's immediately proceed to a little Q&A.
Is the problem severe?
A graying population is a potential problem, but not so severe as to daunt the officials of the UN. As of now, they are thinking up of ways to help the elderly integrate into society and become a source of income and manpower.
Is this phenomenon really caused by birth control?
Yes and no. In Western countries, the rise in the number of the elderly is generally cause by advancements in the medical and social industries, enabling them to cope up well in society, while the decline in the youth population is caused by the rapid spread of AIDS, leaving surviving children in the care of the elder who are hardly knowledgeable in medicine and proper sexual health care, a problem which can be solved by appropriate education and the provision of equipment capable of reducing risks of contracting AIDS. (I recall saying this before)
Meanwhile, China and Singapore, among others, are known proponents of the one-child policy, which obliges parents to have at least one child (hence the name), and encourage them to pursue their own personal careers before settling down for family purposes. It was very successful at first, but then the problem of a graying population came quickly.
Are the countries promoting the said policy doomed to be filled with old people?
Not really. As of now, they are taking steps to balance the population of the young and old; slowly, but steadily, they are achieving favorable results.
The reason why they suffered problems in population age-wise, is most likely because they took things too drastically, and failed to anticipate the speed of decline in the youth population after mandating parents to restrict the number of their children. Thankfully, they are slowly recovering from their mistakes.
Since the CBCP pamphlet brought up China and Singapore's efforts, does this mean the Philippines is also planning to imitate their strategy, and so the Church tries its best to nullify the bill?
Anyone who read the bill properly will know that it does NOT promote something so totalitarian as to implement the one-child policy. What it merely advocates, summarizing all of the bill's contents, is the provision of "choice." The one-child policy doesn't have anything to do with choice, since it was mandatory. And so I also want to ask this question:
Why bring up the efforts of these countries in your pamphlet?
Are you suggesting that the bill actually paves way for such a policy? Not only is this "information" in your pamphlet vague, it is also misleading, especially for those who haven't read the bill yet. As informants, you most certainly have transgressed a cardinal rule: to give people every point and angle of your news, without holding anything back.
Section 6
Translation:
3. THE REAL REASON why artificial population control methods are being implemented:
a. America has a detailed strategy of promoting population control among less developed countries so that it can benefit from the natural resources of such countries. (US National Security Study Memorandum 200 or the Kissinger Report)
b. Huge amounts of money are earned from selling abortifacients which is why American and European capitalists with selfish interests are spending billions of dollars for the widespread use of condoms and others.
c. Avid supporters of the promotion of contraceptives receive lobby money from capitalists who have no regard for the welfare of the citizenry.
Interpretation:
CBCP's way of insulting supporters of the bill.
Arguments:
Answering a:
The NSSM 200: Link 18
I shall answer this briefly; the bill is NOT being passed because of some outdated political thesis (which, by the way, was already declassified and obtained by researchers) telling our government to reduce our population and serve America. Please don't let this issue be marred with nonsensical conspiracy theories.
Answering b:
Reiterating what I said earlier:
This is probably the most insulting statement in the pamphlet. Unless the CBCP dares to name specific people or organizations to support their claim, they put this statement for no other reason. I am for the bill, but I'm not corrupted as to receive bribes from capitalists or businessmen whatsoever. Same goes for a whole bunch of people, who just want to let our fellowmen gain access to "choice."
You are so good at stereotyping and ridiculing men who share different thoughts with yours. You are so good at making people look evil in the eyes of the masses, even equating them to Satan, just because you don't share the same beliefs. You never fail to make me lose hope in you.
Section 7
INSTEAD OF SPENDING HUGE SUMS OF MONEY ON POPULATION CONTROL, WHY COULDN'T OUR GOVERNMENT DO THE FOLLOWING?:
- ADD MORE MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS, LIKE DOCTORS AND NURSES???
- BUILD MORE HOSPITALS AND CLINICS, AND BUY MEDICINES AND MODERN EQUIPMENT WHICH OUR POOR FELLOWMEN DESPERATELY NEED???
- RAISE THE SALARY OF OUR TEACHERS AND ERECT MORE SCHOOLS???
- ESTABLISH BIGGER HOUSING PROJECTS AND LIVELIHOOD PROGRAMS???
Interpretation:
Another diversion tactic of the CBCP; throwing suggestions here and there in hopes of drowning the bill into oblivion.
Arguments:
INSTEAD OF WASTING TIME TRASH-TALKING AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT AND CALLING IT "FIGHTING FOR LIFE," WHY COULDN'T OUR CHURCH DO THE FOLLOWING?:
- USE THEIR PRIESTHOOD TO PARTICIPATE MORE IN THE PROFESSIONAL WORLD, SINCE THEY ARE PRACTICALLY EDUCATED PEOPLE???
- ASSIST THE GOVERNMENT OR CONDUCT CHARITY PROJECTS TO BUILD HOSPITALS AND CLINICS, AND STOP NAGGING THE GOVERNMENT ABOUT PROVIDING MEDICINES, BECAUSE THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THE GOVERNMENT IS TRYING TO DO???
- LESSEN THE PRIESTHOOD'S COST OF LIVING SO THE GOVERNMENT CAN BETTER UTILIZE ITS FUNDS?
- HELP THE GOVERNMENT AND NGO'S WITH THEIR FINANCES AND INFLUENCE TO PROVIDE HOUSING PROJECTS AND LIVELIHOOD PROGRAMS???
Scrutinizing this pamphlet was tedious work. After doing so, I realized a few things:
- I realized that I am on the right side of the issue. The CBCP's so-called information about the lies and risks of the RH bill just fortified my stand against them.
- I realized how the Filipino people are imprisoned within the "Church is always right" mentality.
- I realized that it's now time to promote rational and logical thinking to better understand the issues we as a country face.
- I realized that triple question marks are annoying.
Allow me to end this post with a few sentiments for those who still reject the availability of "choice."
For those who are motioning for the preservation of virginity until marriage:
I am not saying that what you support is wrong; it's a good thing to give importance to virginity. Nevertheless, I still have something important to tell you.
Stop being selfish. The bill is not just about you. It's also about the unfortunate families who are incapable of planning their future, the women deprived of pre-natal and post-natal care, those who are victims of rape, and the children whose lives and futures we're trying to improve.
Stop being so self-centered as to deprive your fellowmen of their needs just to satisfy your beliefs.
For those who think that the bill treats children as problems:
Think as you like, but has it ever occurred to you that millions of Filipino children are suffering from hunger, forced labor, orphan-hood and illiteracy? They are experiencing something they don't deserve. They are the products of ignorance of parents and the staunch rejection of choice. Tell me, is it okay for you to see more and more children live like this?
What you said is true; children are blessings, not burdens (although I'm not really fond of children). But are you really treating our youth like blessings? Are you blessing them by letting them live like vagabonds in such an unfriendly country? Ponder on this, my friends. The RH bill's purpose is also to provide a better future for the future generation by educating would-be parents and providing ample medical services. The RH bill DOES treat the youth as blessings.
For those who think that overpopulation and poverty aren't related:
This might as well be true in a large scale, what with the credible work of Kuznets and all. But is this issue merely an economical one? Are we considering social issues in our conclusions? Are we to simply ignore the fact that millions of Filipino families are fighting tooth and nail for survival, because they're not really relevant to the overall economy? I'm a pragmatist, but I'm not yet on the point of dismissing the sufferings of my fellowmen as insignificant to the national progress.
(Note: I have tackled this issue earlier in this post, and have provided a link that shows a new view on the correlation of poverty and population. If you haven't read it yet, I strongly recommend that you do so.)
For those who think that the bill is immoral and will promote sexual promiscuity:
You tell people that condoms (among others) are immoral, because it prevents fertilization. Now, tell me about your cherished withdrawal method. What does it do? Doesn't it also prevent the union of the sperm and egg? Now, tell me; don't condoms and natural methods serve the same purpose? And has it ever occurred to you that the natural method is undoubtedly risky, what with all the differences in the bodily functions of women?
Besides, which is more immoral; taking steps to ensure the welfare of future children by appropriate sexual education of would-be families, or simply letting them live poor and miserable lives because of ignorance and misinformation? Be the judge.
You tell people that this bill encourages people to have more sex. Okay...
Quoting the National Cervical Cancer Coalition (just in case you didn't read this)
"However, as this fact sheet will make clear, the effectiveness of condoms against unintended pregnancy and sexually transmitted infection has long been established (see below). Further, information about and access to condoms clearly do not increase sexual activity among adolescents (Kirby, 1997; Schuster et al., 1998). One World Health Organization review of 19 studies found no evidence that sexuality education programs lead to earlier or increased sexual activity among teens (NCHSTP, 1996). But easy access to condoms does encourage use among teens that are already sexually active (Schuster et al., 1998). And teens need protection – at least 60.9 percent of twelfth-graders report having had sexual intercourse (AGI, 1999; Kann et al., 1998)."
It all lies in proper guidance and education; something most people don't bother to do, but instead dismiss important things like these as "taboo" and "immoral." Are you deliberately making our fellowmen look stupid?
For those who think that we're not overpopulated, but merely over-concentrated:
Quoting my previous argument in Facebook:
"...Concluding that more people mean less jobs and space is modus ponens. Let’s stop contemplating about overconcentration and reflect on the findings that the population density of the Philippines is 306 or 307 people per square kilometer. And if we omit the islands that sink during high tides, lands reserved for agricultural and excavation purposes, mountainous regions that can’t support modern life, we see how cramped we are in this archipelago.
The government is not like God who can multiply loaves of bread and fish. Its funds are horribly limited and are being rendered more limited by the unstoppable increase in population. RH bill opponents always say, “why not focus on developing provinces to reduce over-concentration?” Why do you say that? You think that reforming a googol of provinces is so cheap and fast that implementing it is a piece of cake? Do you expect people to immediately come back to their provinces the moment the government announces reforms on the said places? A layman’s instincts will be to stick to what he has, and that’s the city. What better recourse than to settle population issues in the urban cities to give the citizens a better life in the quickest way possible, and THEN provide reforms to the provinces?"
Summary: Please do the math.
For those who reject the bill even if they haven't read the whole thing:
Read the whole thing. How can you decide properly if you don't know everything about what you're deciding on?
To Dr. Lucille Montes and Atty. Cristina Montes:
Your lecture was discussed here: Link 19
Kudos once again to FF.
The article gave emphasis on some stuff that were said during your campaign against the RH bill, and to be honest, they were not, by any means, pleasant to the ears.
If one of those Freedumbers go to the Chapel to disrupt the discussion, I will knock the senses out of them and wipe off the taste of their last meal out of their taste buds!”
One doesn't have to be a Freethinker to know how insulting this statement was. For a group that's supposed to be compassionate and Christ-like, this is pretty much hypocritical. What kind of speaking was that? Knocking someone's senses out of him? Are these words supposed to come out from the mouth of someone fighting the bill in His name?
“Ayokong isipin pero hindi ko ma-help i-connect yung disaster sa Japan doon sa facts na ang tagal-tagal na nilang nagaabortion at may policy on population control.”
(I don’t want to think about it, but I can’t help connecting the disaster in Japan with the fact that the Japanese have long been purveyors of abortion and population control.)
Reiterating what the Freethinkers posted, this statement was indeed a harrowing one. In all seriousness, I really thought that this tragedy should only procure sorrow and prayers from believers. I was wrong. I am saddened by this kind of mentality... saddened, I tell you.
"Thanks to the “vigilance of the pro-life people,” every time the RH Bill is about to be put to a vote in the Batasan, the pro-lifers go to the Batasan to protest, in effect delaying the said voting.
That time when the Bill’s sessions were delayed because the Batasan’s air-conditioning went kaput was actually a good thing."
So the fact that people's taxes are wasted, what with all of the delayed meetings and voting sessions, is actually a good thing? Oh, and treating a dysfunctional air-conditioning system as a good thing for the part of the anti-RH people reminds me of pathetic insults that only children will use, in all honesty.
"So it’s like a square circle when you’re saying a Catholic is pro-RH. It’s incompatible. It’s like water and oil. When you say that you repudiate the bishops, again that’s inconsistent. The bishops are the descendants of the disciples, the apostles of Christ."
That kind of mindset is exactly what kept us under the control of abusive friars for so long.
In summary, I can say only this; to think that you're professionals, I confess myself utterly disappointed.
To Mr. Eric Manalang:
With all due respect, sir, please stop saying that a person who is a Catholic and a supporter of the bill at the same time is an oxymoron. Because it's not. One who supports the bill supports the availability of choice for those deprived of it, and advocates the preparation of a better country for the future generation; it's being compassionate. Being a Catholic yourself, my good sir, is it wrong to be compassionate?
Also, telling those who support the bill that their mothers should have aborted them is a tad cruel and hypocritical, don't you think?
Oh, and have you any idea about the time when Satan actually won the day? Are you aware of the time when he stood triumphant amidst this issue?
The time when you degraded the Freethinkers, your own fellowmen, driving them away with rage from an event that was supposed to be open for all. The time when you sowed resentment among the bill-supporting Catholics. The time when you contributed to the growing gap between Christianity and the rest of our country.
To Ex-Archbishop Oscar Cruz and the CBCP:
I humbly ask you the following:
1. Don't label those who promote the bill as "Satan," "terrorists," "imperialists," "heretics," or any other degrading names you can think of.
Using such a horrible manner in your campaign against the bill just hurts your reputation as supposedly compassionate and benevolent individuals in the eyes of atheists, and even of Catholics. You might want to be reminded on what ad hominem is, and how unacceptable it is in an important and debatable issue such as the RH bill: Link 20
For my part, I am deeply saddened by your attitude towards those who support the bill, because I am one of these people. I believe in God. I do my best to make up for my sins by attending mass and joining youth activities aimed at spiritual and Christ-centered development. And yet the priesthood, who are supposed to be everyone's source of wisdom and love, label the likes of me as names mentioned above. It's insulting that I'm called a heretic, an oxymoron, and that I shouldn't exist, because a true Catholic cannot be pro-RH.
Please stop this. It's sad.
2. Please do not insult the kind of relationships pro-RH people have with their friends and loved ones.
You have no right to question, let alone ridicule how pro-RH people interact with others. You have no right to tell people that they are incapable of establishing a good relationship. To think that this balderdash would come from the very agents of the religion upon which our very State's virtues and doctrines are based, this is simply disheartening.
3. Please do not taint this issue with threats of another revolution and threats of excommunication.
What you are doing just promotes resentment towards you and your reputation.
Our country's societies are already drifting away from each other, we could no longer afford another national revolution, or even ostracism. Please do not contribute to the growing rifts among our people; rather, let us work together to keep our people intact, socially and spiritually, despite differences in our beliefs.
4. Please acknowledge that the bill is continuously being revised.
Here is the latest revision of the bill: Link 21
The RH bill is just like any law; it has its flaws, its risks. But it is being revised again and again to suit the political and religious beliefs of our people. The government is doing its best to provide, and the only thing the Church does is to constantly bombard the government with harsh criticisms and name-calling, while not really doing anything towards the issues of the nation itself.
Before we proceed to bashing someone's skull down with our sharp tongues, let us look into ourselves, and ponder on one thing; hadn't we somehow contributed to the degeneration of our economy and society, due to corruption and/or inaction? Is the purpose of the Church restricted to being the government's biggest critic, if it really wants to aid our nation? Is the Church creating an "us versus them" scenario its way of helping?
5. Finally, please do not misinform and imprison Filipinos in your mentality.
While I am sure that this is not your intention (I sure hope it's not), but what you do somehow imprisons some of our fellowmen to your way of thinking. No matter what you say, your influence causes some people to stop thinking for themselves and depend on your teachings. This should not be in any way. I advise you to stop circulating your misleading paraphernalia and start making the consolidated bill available to the eyes of the masses. I am not telling you to stand down. I'm asking the people bound by the very chain that kept us in the grasp of our conquerors to stand up for themselves.
I am for God, and I am for the RH bill.
0 comments:
Post a Comment