Some have been asking me why I haven't posted any links or reports regarding Mr. Clinton's reportedly positive remarks on our population size. The reason is primarily editorial: this blog posts either links to, or the entire text of, whole speeches or papers touching on matters directly relevant to the RH Bill. Mr. Clinton's remark praising our large population was merely a small remark within a larger presentation that had little to do directly either with the RH bill or with human life issues.
In addition, the Clinton administration was one of the worst-ever supporters of the promotion of the contraceptive mentality and of abortion rights. While he may have complemented us on our large population, there are no indications that his remark -- and it really was just a small remark -- somehow signified a change of opinion or direction for him. If a pro-RH bill supporter were to quote some liberal-sounding remark from Joseph Ratzinger -- Pope Benedict XVI -- in order to defend Lagman's bill, I would rightly rebuke him for taking it out of context, thus abusing it for his own purposes. We must not commit the same mistake, even if done in the name of defending life.
Now, some might point to my post on the campaign of an atheistically-oriented blog against the RH bill as a sign of double standards. No, I'm not using double standards. The articles of "The Vinceton Post" against the RH Bill contain useful and fully-elaborated arguments that can be deployed against the RH Bill. Mr. Clinton's remark, on the other hand, may be useful, but it is neither a fully-developed argument nor does it directly address the RH bill. Had Mr. Clinton made the reported remark as a direct attack or as a stand-alone take on the RH bill, then I would report it here, but he didn't.
Lagman and Clinton are brothers and have the same father( The father of death and lies). They are both De Molays - a Masonic organization. Check the background of all pro-Rh bill people and you will find out they have one father.
ReplyDelete