Marwil Llasos' response to the INC support for the RH bill

From the blog The Knight of Mary - Marwil N. Llasos, O.P. comes the following comprehensive critique of the Iglesia Ni Cristo's support for the RH bill:

A CRITIQUE OF IGLESIA NI CRISTO EXECUTIVE MINISTER EDUARDO V. MANALO’S STATEMENT ON THE RH BILL 

PART 1

PART 2

PART 3

PART 4

Marwil Llasos on why the RH bill is anti-women -- a short and sweet little note

The following note from Atty. Marwil Llasos is currently being shared across Facebook.

The RH Bill is anti-women. Kanino ginagamit ang condom? Sa babae. Sino ang linalagyan ng IUD? Ang babae. Sino ang nila-ligate? Ang babae. Sino ang iniineksiyonan? Ang babae. Sino ang NAGPAPAKASASA sa sarap? Ang LALAKI. Bow.

The RH Bill and the Law, 1: A Critique by Atty. Marwil Llasos J.D.

The Reproductive Health Bill is Unconstitutional
Atty. Marwil N. Llasos J.D.

The Reproductive Health Bill (House Bill No. 4244) in its entirety is unconstitutional because its very premise is at war with the philosophy embodying the 1987 Constitution, dubbed as the Pro-Life Constitution.

The RH Bill proponents hail it as a solution to poverty in our country. They insist that the RH Bill will spare children, especially those who are unwanted, from a life of poverty. The RH Bill will save mothers from emotional trauma brought about by child bearing. These arguments are not new. They were already discussed and voted on the floor of the 1986 Constitutional Commission. The result is the present Article II, Section 12 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution:

“Section 12. The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect 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 natural and primary right and duty of parents in the rearing of the youth for civic efficiency and the development of moral character shall receive the support of the Government.”

Constitutionalist Rev. Fr. Joaquin G. Bernas, S.J., in his annotation on the 1987 Philippine Constitution, expresses the sense of Article II, Section 12 that it “denies that the life of the unborn may be sacrificed merely to save the mother from emotional suffering or to spare the child from a life of poverty.”[1] The commonsensical and constitutional solution to the problem was stated by Fr. Bernas, thus: “The emotional trauma of a mother as well as the welfare of the child after birth can be attended through other means such as availing of the resources of welfare agencies.”[2]

What does Article II, Section 12 seek to achieve? Fr. Bernas answers that the provision was intended “primarily to prevent the state from adopting the doctrine in the United States Supreme Court decision of Roe v. Wade which liberalized abortion at the discretion of the mother any time during the first six months when it can be done without danger to the mother.”[3]

Clearly, the provision constitutionally outlaws abortion. There’s no chance that abortion can ever be legal in this country as long as the 1987 Philippine Constitution stands.

***

To read more, click HERE.

Videos of the RH Bill Forum in St. Peter's Church, Fairview (May 7, 2012)

Talk by Dr. Rene Bullecer:


Talk by Anna Cosio, a registered nurse:

 

 Talk by Atty. Marwil Llasos Ll.M, legal expert and Catholic apologist:

 

Radio discussion on Demographic Winter

Two radio interviews on the RH bill with Atty. Marwil Llasos

Atty. Marwil Llasos on why the RH Bill is Unconstitutional

Excerpts from the May 1, 2011 interview of Marwil Llasos on DZXL (RMN):

Recording of Marwil Llasos' interview on DZXL

Roilo Golez also spoke via phone patch. This interview is part of the Filipinos for Life series of anti-RH bill interviews on RMN-DZXL.

Interview with Atty. Marwil Llasos tomorrow

Cheap shot against the Church

"Excommunicate me" - PNOY

by Marwil Llasos

(originally posted on ML's Facebook page)

I was one of those "good" Catholics who voted President Benigno Simeon C. Aquino III into office in May 2010. I campaigned for him in all my spheres of influence - to my students, to the members f my religious groups, to my province mates in Albay, my neighbors in Quezon City, etc. I campaigned for him through the various forms of social networking. I even debated anti-Noynoy forces the last campaign. I did all these without any expectation of a reward. I simply did so because I believed in the promise that my candidate represented. I thought that my candidate was in the mould of his parents. I was wrong.

Many well-meaning Catholics told me that Noynoy was pro-RH as he was in fact one of the sponsors of the Senate version of the RH Bill. Cardinal Rosales of Cebu also pointed that out. During the campaign, Noynoy and his handlers tried to downplay the issue. I thought that once elected into office, we could prevail upon Noynoy to change his stance because his mother was a good and practicing Catholic and he he would listen to the constituency that elected him into office - us. Catholics, especially the "churched", went for Noynoy because of his mother - one who is even popularly canonized as the "saint of democracy."

Yesterday, I saw on TV PNOY's speech, full of bravado, effrontery and arrogance, that he could risk excommunication by the Catholic Church just to push the RH Bill through.

I was shocked! the son of Cory and Ninoy could ever say that? Someone who went to Catholic schools can say that? Not even Ferdinand Marcos ever dared say such a thing!

As a Catholic, I am appalled by the arrogance of that statement. What PNOY did was an open declaration of war on the Catholic Church founded by Our Lord Jesus Christ whose Passion and Death we are commemorating this week.

PNOY's statement is totally uncalled for. There is no threat from the Church to excommunicate him on the RH Bill issue especially now that Malacanang is claiming to have a dialogue with the Church leaders. Why did the President fire the opening salvo?

I believe that PNOY wanted to score points in the UP community when he made that statement. He was pleasing the crowd he might have considered "godless." Sure, he drew some applause. He did please men, rather than God. (NB: Marwil Llasos and the owner of this blog are UP alumni. So, think twice before posting a smart-aleck comment that we're just too unintelligent compared to UP graduates - CAP)

PNOY's statement is a sneak attack on the Church. PNOY's dastardly attack was done at the start of the Holy Week when all the Christian world is solemnly commemorating the sufferings of Christ. This is unacceptable. I condemn the slyness that went with it. Church leaders - bishops and priests - as well as the laity are all busy in the Holy Week activities of the Church when PNOY threw the gauntlet.

This issue is no longer about the RH Bill. It has something to do with even the slightest modicum of respect for the Church and its hierarchy. The timing is so bad - in the holiest week of the Christian world. When love, peace, reconciliation and peace are emphasized the world over, PNOY was in fighting form, even without any provocation.

He justified his act by saying that his conscience is clear. But is his a formed, informed and transformed conscience? or one that is deformed and malformed?

I condemn PNOY's attack on the Church by saying that he is willing to be excommunicated just to push the RH Bill. This is a scandal. He is showing a bad example Catholics especially to children. It is OK to be excommunicated just so that we can pass an immoral, anti-life, anti-family and anti-God piece of legislation.

PNOY already declared war on the Church, on Christ and on the Church. A sad day for the Church. There is all the more reason for all of us Catholics to increase our mortification, prayer and penance this Holy Week as an act of reparation for the President of the Philippines who chose to please men rather than God.

TV discussion on the RH Bill this Saturday

On Saturday, December 4, 2010, at 8:00 P.M., Atty. Marwil Llasos, a fervent defender of the Catholic faith, will appear on NBN-4 (on the TV show "Heart to Heart Talk") wherein he will expound on the total moral bankruptcy of the RH Bill and its unconstitutionality. He will expose it as a gross violation of Christian consciences, and as an infringement on Philippine national sovereignty by foreign interests.