Starting September 8, 2012, anonymous comments -- whether for or against the RH bill -- will no longer be permitted on this blog.

Friday, May 6, 2011

Emil Jurado speaks out versus the RH Bill

From his May 6, 2011 column at the Manila Standard Today, entitled Scientific facts on reproductive health: 

Here are some scientific facts in connection with the controversial reproductive health bill, which President Aquino also likes to call responsible parenthood.

First and foremost, we have to answer the question “when does human life begin?” so that we can agree on premises. Without this, our arguments will never end.

The answer is at fertilization, when the sperm from the male penetrates the female egg. This was the overwhelming agreement in countless scientific writings, and of experts, including scientists from Harvard Medical School and the Mayo Clinic in an eight-day hearing at the US Senate.

Do birth control pills and the IUD kill the unborn human being? The answer is, yes, aside from preventing fertilization. The pill also works to kill a young human being if ever a sperm gets to penetrate the egg.

This is according to the scientific journal of the American Medical Association. The American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of 2005 pronounced that the IUD or intrauterine device brings about the destruction on the early embryo.

And is the pill safe? The International Agency for Research on Cancer is a 2007 study made by 21 scientists and reported that the pill causes cancer, giving it the highest level of carcinogenicity, the same as cigarets and asbestos.

The same study found that it also causes stroke, and significantly, increases the risks of heart attack. Several scientific journals have stated that the natural way of regulating births through the Billings Ovulation Method has no side effects, and is 99.5 percent effective.


Now, we come to condoms which advocates of the RH bill claim are essential to the prevention of HIV/AIDS in a country like the Philippines.

Studies show that instead it will increase it. This is what the director for AIDS Prevention, Edward C. Green said. Availability of condoms makes people take a wilder sexual risks, thus, worsening the spread of the disease.

He showed that fidelity and abstinence are the best solution to the AIDS epidemic.

Now, take note of this. Wide use of contraceptives which the RH bill promotes in the name of freedom of choice leads to the destruction of families and other great social evils. Contraceptive use will definitely lead to more pre-marital sex, more fatherless children, more single mothers, more poverty and more abortions; and also a decline of marriages, more crimes, more social pathology and poverty. This is according to studies of Nobel price winner George Akeriod. Many more studies reached the same conclusion.

The premise of the RH bill is that poverty is caused by a ballooning population, and thus, population must be controlled. But Nobel prize winner Simon Kurnets in the Science of Economics says that there’s no clear association between the premise and the conclusion. Many late studies confirmed this, including a study of the RANI Corporation, a world leader in research associated with 30 Nobel Prize winners.

Thus, we have to answer the question whether or not population control is an essential ingredient for high economic growth and poverty reduction. The answer is a big No. Population control is not among the five solutions of ingredients found by the 2008 Commission on Growth and Development headed by Nobel Prize winner Michael Spence.

There’s no substitute for good governance, openness to knowledge, stable finance market allocation, investments and savings.

Santa Banana, note that these are scientific facts that do not come from the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines. Those who advocate freedom of choice as envisioned by the RH bill may not realize it, but the use of contraceptives presents a clear and present danger to them! And to all of us Filipinos.

1 comment:

  1. Good!And this article would expect bombardment from filipino-liberalists who might by this time already are into contemplating endorsement of same sex union bill or a bill that would allow same sex union.
    This info is good enough for a thinking filipino and good points of reflection for a reflecting one.This is not to say others are not.The point is, for ordinary citizen to be in "word war" because of something only the proponents knew the real motive is less rational. One can argue for instance on the economic advantage (of the bill)with matching studies, but others simply negate.Or one may argue that (this bill)is the answer to....with scientific blah!blah!blah!But this argument may also be negated with overwhelmimg blah!blah!blah!and so on...
    On the moral side, listen with your conscience.Assuming it is true that God ordained eternal and natural laws, can there be scientific proof that God really ordained so?For the faithfuls, it is without doubt!Now, what if in ths precepts any act that curtails the process itself is evil?(This is now in the context of "Sex-reproduction in view of our being co-creator by virtue of reproduction...and that "SEX" is in no other purpose but reproduction---at least for us human because if "SEX" is sensual/physical gratification, then human is of no big difference than the brutes?)Anyway, marami din namang nagsasabi na sex desire is so hard to control, and so there should be measure(s) necessary along this line
    This subject (morality)is in the province of the church...and for the church, it's not about winning...because whether or not majority of the finoys are really pro-rh, it would never made rh bill morally acceptable. for what is immoral should not be made moral because many are into it, immoral is immoral even if it seemed to be everybody is into it, and moral is moral even if it seemed to be everybody is into it.
    Ano nga ba ang motive(real one) bakit insistent ang mga pro?Ano man yon, isa lang ang sigurado, may kumikita at may kikita sa batas na ito.