Friday, March 1, 2019


lheReproductive Health Bill, inform tout ensembley k without delayn as theRH Bill, beproposed honorsin theRe creation of the Filipinosaiming to guarantee universal access to methods oncontraception,abortion, magnificence discipline, inner development, and maternal care. 1 There are presently two broadsides with the corresponding intend goals signalingBill 4244 An motion Providing for a Comprehensive Policy on Responsible Parenthood, Reproductive Health, and Population and victimisation, and For Other Purposes * SenateBill 2378 An Act Providing For a National Policy on Reproductive Health and Population and instruction While there is general agreement about its provisions on maternal and c virtue health, there is great reckon on its rouge proposal that the Philippine regime and the reclusive sector issue alone shop and undertake widespread distrisolelyion of family planning devices such ascondoms, race control pills(BCPs) andIUDs, as the government continues to disseminate information on their use with alone health care centers.On October 2012, a revised version of the same turn on was presently re-named toResponsible Parenthood Actand was filed in the admit of Representativesas a give of re-introducing the bill under a unlike impression after overwhelming opposition in the country, especially from theCatholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines23. The bill is highly divisive, with experts, academics, sacred institutions, and major political figures support and opponent it, often criticizing the government and each other in the process. Debates and rallies proposing and opposing the bills, with tens of thousands of opposition particularly those endorsed by thebishopsof theRoman Catholic performand several(a) other conservative groups, select been happening nationwide. advanced purposeOne of the main concerns of the bill, accord to the Explanatory Note, is that the population of the Philippines makes it the 12th closely populo us nation in the world today, that the Filipino womens fertility rate is at the upper bracket of 206 countries. It states that studies and surveys show that the Filipinos are responsive to having smaller-sized families through exhaust choice of family planning methods. It in any case refers to studies which show that rapid population issue exacerbates poverty while poverty spawns rapid population growth. And so it aims for amend quality of behavior through a consistent and coherent interior(a) population policy. 4 As policy it states that the State guarantees universal access to medically-safe, sanctioned, affordable, rough-and-ready and quality reproductive health care services, methods, devices, supplies and relevant information and instruction thereon raze as it prioritizes the needs of women and children, among other underprivileged sectors. 4 Philippine Daily Inquirer First Posted 201800 08/16/2008 Filed UnderFamily,Family planning,Laws IN THE INTEREST OF FAIR PLAY , WE ARE RUNNING 2 ARTICLES THAT HOLD views opposite of the proposed Reproductive Health and Population Development Act of 2008. The articles featured today are in response to the two articles written by Albay Rep.Edcel Lagman, principal author of the reproductive health bill, and printed in this char actioner on Aug. 3. Lagman? s first article highlighted the main features of the ginmill, while his sec noned the agitate to discredit it. He claimed that the bill was non anti- feeling and that it would non interfere with family keep, legalize abortion, promote contraceptive mentality and impose a two-child policy. Lagman also claimed that Humanae Vitae was not an infallible article of belief. Besides the articles of the head of the licit character of the Catholic Bishops? Conference of the Philippines and of a former senator, bubble of the Town genuine responses from Catholic groups and individuals countering Lagman? s views. The responses came from Fr.Virgilio Delfin of the Diocese of Malaybalay, Pet Palma Dureza of Quezon City, Maria Concepcion S. Noche of the Alliance for the Family floor Philippines, Jose Fernandez of the Family Life Apostolate of St. John the Baptist Parish in Taytay, Rizal, and Minyong Ordonez, a retired head of the Paris-based Publicis Communications Group. Talk of the Town also foold an e-mail from Felix Libreto, a professor at the UP Open University, and a position paper of 26 economists from the University of the Philippines backing the bill. Because of limited space, this section cannot print all the reactions to Lagman? s articles. * * * Reckless and despotic By Jo Imbong REP.EDCEL LAGMAN, THE PRINCIPAL AUTHOR OF THE proposed Reproductive Health and Population Development Act of 2008 asserts, among others, that the bill is neither antilife nor antifamily, that contraceptives are not life-threatening and that the bill does not impose a two-child policy. Prolife? To value human life is to observe and protect life in all its seasons. ?Human life begins at fertilization.? (Records of the Constitutional Commission, Vol. IV, Sept. 18, 1986, pp. 761, 801) hence, ? the State shall equally protect the life of the pose and the life of the unborn from conception.? (Constitution, Article II, Section 12). Lagman said in a kinsperson hearing that the bill would protect human life ? from implantation.? By that token, the zygote not yet in the mother? s womb is not protected. Pills and the IUD hinder implantation of the embryo in the uterus, thereby precipitate the embryo? s destruction. That is abortion.And yet, ? each child needs appropriate legal protection before as well as after birth (UN Convention on the Rights of the Child). Not life-threatening? Records are rife of perforation of the uterus and serious pelvic infections in women with IUDs that public midwives use up refused to extract. The Mayo mental office found that oral contraceptives are associated with an increase risk of breast can cer. DepoProvera increases a woman? s risk for chlamydia and gonorrhea. Oral contraceptives containing cyproterone increase risk of oceanic abyss venous blood clots. Levonorgestrel is criminalize in this country as the authorization of Food and Drugs found it to be abortifacient.Life-threatening ectopic pregnancies occur in mothers huge after undergoing tubal ligation, particularly those sterilized before suppurate 30. Contraceptives as essential medicines? Contraceptives do not treat any medical condition. foulness is not a disease. It attests to health The bill targets ? the poor, needy and marginalized.? This is most ruthless to them whose real needs are jobs, skills, education, lucrative opportunities, nutrition, and essential medicines for anemia, tuberculosis, infections and childhood diseases. Remember, both citizen has the right to health (Art. II, Sec. 15), hence, the State has a business to protect the citizens against grave substances (Constitution, Art. XVI, Se c. 9), and protect women in their maternal function (Art. XIII,Sec. 4). Family friendly? The ? encouragement? to have two children is manipulation both brazen and subtle. It can set the stagecoach for a stronger application of the recommendation through legislative amendments. Spouses have a primary, original, intrinsic and inviolable right ? to found a family in congruity with their religious convictions and the demands of responsible parenthood? (Art. XV, Sec. 3 1). This let ins their right to progeny. The bill mocks parents with okay and imprisonment in refusing to expose their children to mandatory ? age-appropriate? reproductive health education starting Grade 5 outside the loving confines of home and family.Vulnerable and malleable, our children lead be taught ? adolescent reproductive health? and ? the full undulate of information on family planning methods, services and facilities? for six old age. This is child crime of the highest order. And yet, ? every child has the right to be brought up in an breeze of morality and rectitude for the enrichment and streng then(prenominal)ing of his character.? (Child and Youth Welfare Code) The care and nurturance of the child reside first in the parents (Article II, Sec. 12, Constitution), whose primary function and freedom include preparation for obligations the state can neither supply nor hinder. (Brantley v. Surles, 718 F. 2d. 354,1358-59) The State did not create the family, and ? the child is not a creature of the State.? (Pierce vs. Society of Sisters, 268, U. S. 510, 535. ) That is the law of nature, and no human institution has authority to amend it. Quality of life? The bill indirect requests to ? uplift the quality of life of the mint.? Population control started in 1976 ? to increase the share of each Filipino in the fruits of economic progress.? In other words to eliminate poverty. Has it? The General Appropriations Act of 2008 earmarks an enormous essence for ? family planning and repr oductive health services,? including contraceptives. For the Department of Health it is P3. 19 trillion for Popcom P386. billion, quite apart from funds for other agencies of government and local government units for the same programs. Add $2. 4 million from the United Nations Population livestock for population and development and reproductive health for 2008, plus $2. 2 million for 2009. Today? s average family has three children compared with seven in the ? 70s. only if the billions of pesos spent have not reduced poverty or benefited the poor. If carnal comeledge passes this bill, it wagers the future of the country. Citizens have a right to resist misplaced and authoritative exercise of authority because the good of the people is the supreme law. Salus populi est suprema lex.The path of arrogant legislation is a dreadful path If an act is made legal, it impart be perceived as moral. If an act is perceived as moral, it depart become a norm. If it is observed by all as a norm, then it is too late. By then, you depart have changed the culture. That is not entirely reckless. It is the ultimate breach of public trust. (Jo Imbong, a lawyer, is the executive secretary of the Legal office of the Catholic Bishops? Conference of the Philippines and consultant to the CBCP Episcoal Commission on Family and Life. ) * * * No place for the RH bill in our law By Francisco S. Tatad THE productive HEALTH bill in the endure of Representatives is being presented as a health bill and an antipoverty bill at the same time. It is neither.It is not what its authors pronounce it is it is everything they say it is not. It is an ideological attack on human life, the family, and our social and ethnical values. The bill rests on a flawed premise it is unnecessary, unconstitutional, oppressive of religious belief and destructive of public morals and family values. Its enactment into law will only deepen the already frightening ignorance about the real issues. It should b e rejected. 1. Flawed premise Our population growth rate (National Statistics Office) is 2. 04 percent, total fertility rate (TFR) is 3. 02. The CIA World Factbook has dismount figures growth rate, 1. 728 percent TFR, 3. 00. Our population density is 277 per square km.GDP per capita (PPP) is $3,400. Fifty other countries have a much lower density, yet their per capita is also much lower. Thirty-six countries are more thick populated, yet their GDP per capita is also much higher. Are the few then always richer, the many always poorer? Not at all. Our median age is 23 years. In 139 other countries it is as high as 45. 5 years (Monaco). This means a Filipino has more productive years ahead of him than his counterpart in the rich countries where the graying and dying population is no longer being replaced because of negative birth rates. Our long-term future is bright, because of a vibrant and dynamic population. 2. UnnecessaryWomen who say they should be free to contracept (regard less of what the moral law or science says) are not being prevented from doing so, as dish the 50-percent contraceptive prevalence rate. It is a free market. But as we are not a welfare state, taxpayers have no duty to domiciliate the contraceptives to try and cure pregnancy, which is not a disease. The State? s duty is to protect women from real diseases. At least 80 women die every day from heart diseases, 63 from vascular diseases, 51 from cancer, 45 from pneumonia, 23 from tuberculosis, 22 from diabetes 16 from lower chronic respiratory diseases. Why are our lawmakers not demanding free medicines and services for all those afflicted?Indeed, maternal ending could be brought down to zero just by providing adequate elemental and emergency obstetrics-care facilities and skilled medical services to women. The local officials of Gattaran, Cagayan and Sorsogon City have shown this. Why do our lawmakers insist on stuffing our women with contraceptives and abortifacients instead? In 2005, the cancer research arm of the World Health Organization cerebrate that oral contraceptives cause breast, liver and cervical cancer. Shouldn? t our lawmakers demand that contraceptives be banned or at least labeled as ? cancer-causing,? or ? dangerous to women? s health Why do they call for them classified as ? essential medicines? instead? 3. Unconstitutional a. ) The Philippines is a democratic and republican State.Yet the bill seems to assume we are a cent dupe planned miserliness or a totalitarian State, which controls the private lives of its citizens. Truth is, there are certain activities of man as man where the individual is completely self-reliant from the State. Just as the State may not tell a politician or a journalist how or when to think, write or speak, it may not enter the bedroom and tell married couples how or when to practice marital love. b. ) Article II, Section 12 of the Constitution says ? The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall p rotect and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution. It shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception.The congenital and primary right and duty of parents in the straighten of the youth for civic efficiency and the development of moral character shall receive the support of the Government.? The use of ? sanctity? makes State obedience to God? s laws not only a solemn teaching of the church building, but also an express constitutional mandate. Now, when the State binds itself to ? equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception,? it necessarily binds itself not to do anything to prevent even one married woman from conceiving. A state-funded contraceptive program is an abomination. 4. despotic of religious belief The bill seeks to tell the Catholic majority not to listen to the Church and to listen to anti-Catholic politicians instead.It seeks to establish a program which Catholic taxp ayers will fund in order to attack a doctrine of their faith. Is there a worse despotism? Would the same people do the same thing to the followers of Islam or few politically mobile religious pressure group? The pro-RH lobby claims surveys have shown that most Catholic women want to use contraception, regardless of what the Church says about it. It is a horrendous attempt to show that right or wrong can now be reduced to what you like or dislike. The truth is never the result of surveys. Contraception is wrong not because the Church has banned it the Church has banned it because it is wrong. No amount of surveys can change that. 5. Destructive of public moralsThe bill seeks to impose a hedonistic sex-oriented lifestyle that aims to reduce the conjugal act to a mere exchange of physical sensations between two individuals and wedding ceremony to a purely contraceptive partnership. Not only is it hedonistic, it is above all eugenicist. It seeks to eliminate the poor and the ? socia lly unfit.? While it neither mandates a two-child family nor legalizes abortion, it prepares the backcloth for both. In 1974, the US National Security Study Memorandum 200, entitle ? Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for US Security and Overseas Interests,? launched the two-child family as a global population policy to be achieved by 2000.But ? no country has reduced its population growth without resorting to abortion,? said that document. Now you know what? s next, and where it? s all coming from. MANILA, PhilippinesHundreds of people, some arriving in private vehicles and others on foot, join forcesed outside the Edsa Shrine at a normally suburban Manila intersection Saturday for what church leaders had described as a massive prayer rally to show Congress most Filipinos were against the reproductive health bill pending in legislature for years. many another(prenominal) of the true, who braved intermittent rains and occasional winds, stood under umbrellas as they wai ted for the rally to get underway.Bishop Gabriel Reyes, chair of the Episcopal Commission on Family and Life of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines, was uneven in the area. So was Father Melvin Castro, the commissions executive secretary. Maribel Descallar, trading operations director of the commission, said the program was to start at 100 p. m. older Superintendent Antonio Gumiran, de regorgey district director for operations, told the Inquirer they expected a crowd of at least 3,000 people. Organizers said Friday they were expecting up to 50,000 people at the rally. Gumiran refused to say how many policemen were deployed in the area but only a few were visible to an inquirer reporter toward noon Saturday.The Catholic Church has started to bring out the big guns in its campaign against the reproductive health (RH) bill. Manila Archbishop Luis Antonio Tagle on Thursday issued a circular urging the faithful to converge at the Edsa Shrine on Saturday for a Mass and r ally against the bill. Relying on the power of prayer and the necessity of informed awareness, we will gather together to be informed, enlightened and emboldened once more. We also hankering to express why we believe the reproductive health bill is not the solution to our many problems as individuals and as a country as it will even give rise to many other problems more pernicious and pervasive than the ones we face in the present, Tagle said. I enjoin all parish priests and leaders of communities and lay triggerments to rally their members and endorse participation in this substantial gathering aimed at communicating a strong and sincere conjure up to the goodwill of our legislators, Tagle said in his letter. The prayer rally will be a show of force for the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) after professorship Benigno Aquino in his State of the Nation Address (Sona) last week urged the sprightly passage of the bill, which would provide universal access and information on natural and modern family methods and reduce the number of mothers and babies dying during childbirth. On August 7, the House will select on whether to wrap up debate and move the bill forward. CBCP officials said they would have a vigil at the House on the eve of the voting and that mass actions would also be held in other dioceses. Time for a votePresident Aquino said Thursday it was time to put the bill to a vote. I hope that the point when we need to vote comes. Otherwise, Congress may have already adjourned and were still in the period of debate so we wont know what the people want. Perhaps the debate should be wrapped up, and we should make a decision on this so-called responsible parenthood bill once and for all, Mr. Aquino told reporters in an ambush interview. On the anti-RH rally, Mr. Aquino said Were all prolife, arent we? We want an improved quality of life for our countrymen. So that is their right and Im sure they will not endeavor to do anything aga inst the law. So we will secure this rally if it pushes through. Malacanang on Thursday also shrugged off an contract that former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, who is now a Pampanga representative, will vote against the posting and that seven of her allies had withdrawn sponsorship of the measure. Communications Secretary Ricky Carandang said that Arroyo and Catholic bishops have been vocal about their opposition to the bill. He said the Churchs invitation to her to join the anti-RH rally should not be given political meaning. Arroyo was freed last week from eight months of hospital arrest after pecker bail on election sabotage charges against her. I would not want to speak on behalf of the bishops about whether or not this is leading to some kind of support for the former President.This is a measure that should not be viewed in stark political terms because it actually got societal implications, he said in a briefing. Not Aquino-Arroyo showdown A vote on the bill should not be seen as a showdown between Mr. Aquino, the bills chief campaigner, and Arroyo, Carandang said. Its an important measure and were not viewing it in terms of partisan politics. Its something that we feel is long overdue. It needs to be done, and were doing it in that context. I understand that there are observers who are viewing this (showdown) in that way, but were simply looking at it right now as a measure that has oppositors, that needs to go through the process and well leave it at that, he said.Carandang said Malacanang respected the withdrawal of support by some lawmakers, but did not view the entire anti-RH bill campaign as Arroyos effort. We respect the democratic space in which the debate is being undertaken. At the same time, we hope that our friends in Congress will see the wisdom of this measure, he added. While Catholic bishops have counted cxl lawmakers as opposed to the measure based on survey and public consultations, Carandang said it was too early to tell whet her the formation had the numbers to turn thumbs down them. You can never tell until the vote is there. But we are overconfident that we have support, he said. Were hoping that those of us who are on the administrations side will continue to support this effort.

No comments:

Post a Comment