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

Wednesday, August 24, 2011

The moral costs of the RH bill

Melissa A. Poblete

(Melissa Poblete is an Evangelical Christian -- CAP)

At the TV5 RH Bill debate televised last Sunday, August 21, 2011, the studio audience was comprised of people who were all undecided about the RH bill.They were the ones allowed to vote on the questions. Results of the voting were flashed after two seconds. The pro-lifers and the RH advocates were there but were not voters, only spectators.

At the end of the program, after hearing all the arguments and debates, the undecided-on-the-RH-bill audience was asked: "Pabor ka ba sa RH bill?" This picture shows the results. 100% -HINDI pabor sa RH bill. ONE HUNDRED PERCENT.

Given all the arguments and information, the undecided see what is wrong with the bill and decide against it.

Again, we say that there is nothing wrong with maternal health, prevention of disease and responsible parenthood in themselves. But this bill is a part of the package of a culture of death--it is the means and the ways to achieve these health goals which is immoral. Six years of state-controlled mandatory non-moral, non=Biblical sex education is unacceptable in any form to Christians, because sex is always a moral issue. Even in many states in the US they have no such mandatory sex ed. And it is not six years where it is mandatory. The next generation, starting with next year's students, if the bill is passed, will be recipients of the sex ed. The sexualization of an entire generation of Filipino young people will begin.

State provision of free contraception is also not done in a first world country like the US. Why should it be done in our country?

Population control is not Biblical. The Bible always welcomes children and considers them a blessing. Successful population control in the Bible was done by Herod and Pharaoh.

Freedom of conscience of health professionals is also trampled upon by the RH bill. Freedom of speech of those who disagree with the RH bill is also trampled upon as it promises to punish anyone who will give disinformation on the bill. Moreover, the RH bill's declaration of policy says that it will eradicate any laws or policies that infringe on reproductive rights. In countries where abortion is legal, reproductive rights include access to abortion.

RH bill advocates, save for one doctor, consistently, though unethically, deny medical research from the WHO and the Mayo CLinic and cancer research journals that say that oral contraceptives are carcinogens. RH bill advocates also absurdly say that life begins at implantation in the womb when any embryology text book and elementary/middle school science textbook will tell you that life begins at fertilization, when the egg and the sperm unite and the zygote forms. There is consistent dehumanization of the zygote, the embryo and the fetus by some RH bill advocates to suit their stand on embryocidal and abortifacient contraception and abortion. Some RH bill advocates and lobbyists are vocal for their support of legalization of abortion. There is not one provision nor mention on the humanity of the zygote,embryo,or fetus in the entire RH bill. Children are called "unplanned/mistimed pregnancies".

Therefore those who support the RH bill for its health ends ought to rethink what they are bargaining for. The RH bill is not merely a health care program. It will be a law if passed, with a huge budget, implementation mechanisms to ensure it is followed, punishments and imprisonments for violations. The DOH already has maternal health care programs, family planning programs, and already purchases contraceptives to be given for free. Half of its budget goes to such programs already. An existing law,The Magna Carta for Women, RA 9710, already contains all the maternal health, obstetric care and family planning provisions seen in the RH bill. RA 8504, Philippine AIDS Prevention and Control Act, already addresses HIV and AIDS.The health ends of the RH bill are already addressed by existing programs and laws. Therefore the RH bill is not necessary for the health ends it wants to address. We must not let the soul of our nation be sold to an immoral, God-hating culture of death. The moral costs of the RH bill are too great for the benefits it claims to give.

No comments:

Post a Comment