Sen. Tito Sotto III explains his vote versus the RH bill (December 17, 2012)

From the Facebook page of Senator Tito Sotto:

EXPLANATION OF VOTE OF SENATOR SOTTO 

Marami pong gumugulo sa kaisipan ko sa ngayon. Pabayaan po ninyong kahit papaano, isa-isa ay mailabas ko iyong mga tumatakbo sa kaisipan ko sa tinatalakay nating panukalang-batas. 

Lumalabas po ngayon, ang gobyerno natin, dahil dito sa RH bill na ito, sunud-sunoran sa mga international organizations. Kakuntsaba pa iyong mga ibang developed countries. Ang hangad lamang nila, pigilan ang pag-asenso at paglawak ng impluwensiya ng third world countries katulad ng ating bansa sa pamamagitan ng pagbabawas ng populasyon natin.

Kung ano pa iyong batas na lubhang humahati sa ating bansa ay siya pa iyong pinaapura ng Malacañang, imbes na inuna sana iyong mga katulad ng hinihingi ng karamihan ng mga kababayan natin na wala namang kumukontra sa atin. Hindi ko maunawaan kung bakit pahihintulutan ng ating Pangulo ang pagkakawatak-watak ng ating bansa para sa isang panukalang-batas na hindi naman tutugon sa suliranin talaga ng ating bansa. Kawawa naman ang Pilipinas. Kung nabubuhay lamang po ang ating yumaong mahal na Pangulong Presidente "Cory" Aquino, ni hindi naka-first base itong batas na ito. 

Ang kailangan natin ay batas na naaayon sa ating natatanging kultura. Mali namang sumunod tayo sa tema ng mga panukala ng ating mga karatig bansa kung salungat naman ito sa ating kinaugalian at paniniwala bilang isang bansang nagpapahalaga sa responsableng pagpapamilya na nakapaloob sa sagradong institution ng kasal. 

To top it all, Mr. President, magsasayang pa tayo ng bilyun-bilyong piso dito sa pagpapatupad ng batas na sisira lamang sa pagkakabuklud-buklod ng ating bansa. Pero isa lamang po ang masasabi ko, pagbutihin sana nila dahil tututukan natin ito. Pirmahan man ng Presidente ito, babantayan natin. Lahat ng--mayroon po akong record dito sa Senado. Mula noong 1992, noong natuntong ako dito hanggang sa ngayon, may mga tatlo hanggang apat na batas ang binutohan ko ng no. Lahat iyong tatlo, apat na iyon, pinagsisihan lahat. 

Una iyong GATT/WTO. Ang daming gumagapang sa akin noon, hindi po ako nagpatinag, binutohan ko ng no dahil alam kong masama sa mga magsasaka. Ano ngayon? Pinagsisisihan nating lahat. Bumuto ako ng no sa EPIRA, tumaas lahat ang kuryente natin. Hindi ba pinagsisisihan din? Ngayon gusto i-repeal. Nilabanan ko rin po iyong Oil Deregulation Law; ngayon gustong ibalik. 

Ito ho, ganoung-ganoon ang pakiramdam ko rito. Malamang pagsisihan po natin ito. Ang malungkot pa, isang parte, ultimo ang ating mga kasama rito, even our colleagues were made to believe the marketing strategy being used by these groups, these organizations from abroad. Iyong pinangangalandakan nilang 11 mothers a day, ultimo sa Uganda, iyon din ang gamit nila, 11 mothers die a day. Hiningan namin ng dokumento, ang Committee nanghingi ng dokumento, walang naibigay sa Committee hanggang ngayon. Ngayon, ang ginawa namin, kami mismo ang nag-research, hindi po ba, binasa ko dito noon iyon. 

Doon sa 2011 na lamang dahil everyday sabi nila mayroong 11 namamatay. Nueva Vizcaya Provincial Hospital, ang namatay dalawa sa loob ng 2011, buong taon. Sa Pangasinan Provincial Hospital ang namatay apat lamang. Sa Batangas Regional Hospital, out of 2,584 births, ang namatay pito. Sa Cavite Naval Hospital, wala. O, hindi ba marketing strategy iyong 11 mothers a day para mapaniwala iyong ating mga kababaihan? Nakakalungkot po talaga. Isipin natin na maraming lugar sa bansa na, lalu na sa Metro Manila, ipinagbabawal na iyong paggamit ng plastik, akalain ninyong isabatas natin iyong condom? [Laughter] Hindi ko maintindihan. Masyado silang marurunong. 

Upon our election as senators of this Republic, my term started in 2010, we took an oath before performing our functions. An oath is a promise to God, we promised among others, to support and defend the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines. We promised to support and defend the whole 1987 Constitution, not just the parts we agree to, the parts the suit our temperament, the parts that were convenient. It was a promise that did not have any qualifications. And because we promised to defend the whole Constitution, we must preserve and protect every part thereof. That is only logical and reasonable. Otherwise, we should not have promised if we did not intend to fulfill the import of our promise. Constitutional provisions, binanggit na po natin lahat lagi iyan.

What is left for us? May Almighty God understand this nation after this vote and forgive us if we do not keep our promise. I vote no to the RH bill, I have kept my promise. And if we approve this measure, may I ask God the Father to forgive us for we do not know what we are doing. 

Thank you, Mr. President.

Plagiarism Controversy - Nagtatanong lang po

Currently being shared over Facebook:

Filipinos for Life - Statement of Support for Senator Tito Sotto

A call that must be echoed throughout the Philippines

From Journal Online:

Be transparent, RH backers dared

Published : Monday, September 19, 2011 00:00 

Written by : Bernadette E. Tamayo

SENATOR Vicente Sotto III yesterday dared non-governmental organizations engaged in reproductive health services to allow themselves to be subjected to scrutiny to dispel suspicion that they are being used as “channels for abortions.”

He issued the challenge after proponents of the RH bill scored him for suggesting that they are pushing for legalized abortion. “Are non-government organizations being used as conduits to facilitate abortions in the country?,” Sotto asked.

He noted that one of these groups, the Family Planning Organization of the Philippines (FPOP) has admitted being a “proud” member of the International Planned Parenthood Federation, which supports and pushes abortion.

Likewise, Sotto said that FPOP has admitted that IPPF performs abortions in countries where the termination of life in a woman’s womb is legal. Last year the FPOP got P26 million from IPPF to push its agenda.

Another group, Likhaan, has taken Sotto to task for what it called “a witch hunt” for those advocating the RH bill. Like FPOP, Likhaan has not made any categorical statement denying they are pushing for a legalized abortion in the country.

Sotto pointed out that NGOs like FPOP and Likhaan have been receiving foreign funding to push for a national policy on artificial birth control methods, including abortion, as a means of controlling the population.

“Impliedly, a portion of these foreign grants was used to carry out ‘emergency contraception’ and abortion-related services, part of the conditions for the grants,” he said.

Sotto wants to know how many emergency contraceptions –- which he claimed is a euphemism for abortion — have been implemented by these NGOs and whether these are legal in the first place.

He said that abortion, whether safe or unsafe, remains illegal in the Philippines, punishable by six years imprisonment. The Revised Penal Code imposes imprisonment for the woman who underwent the abortion, as well those who helped facilitate the abortion. Article 2, Section 12 of the Constitution mandates the State “to protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception.”

Sotto said reports on how the funds were spent or disbursed form part of the requirement of the funding agency, and usually before more tranches of grants are given.

He dared the NGOs, which are supposed to be “epitomes” of transparency and accountability, to make their reports public.”

Filipinos for Life in defense of Senator Tito Sotto (and more on the maternal deaths issue)

FILIPINOS FOR LIFE’S OFFICIAL STATEMENT: Akbayan’s tirade vs. Sotto unfair, out of context, narrow-minded

Posted on 24 August 2011

FILIPINOS FOR LIFE OFFICIAL STATEMENT:

Akbayan’s tirade vs. Sotto unfair, out of context, narrow-minded

FILIPINOS FOR LIFE (F4L) strongly condemns Akbayan Citizens’ Action Party for unfairly and maliciously accusing Senator Tito Sotto of ignoring the plight of women.

The statement by Akbayan’s youth leader is at best narrow-minded and out of context.

Sotto was merely questioning the basis of the oft-repeated statistic of 11 maternal deaths a day, in the context of a legislative debate on a bill that seeks to establish a wide-ranging national policy. It is therefore fair to examine the basis of this bill. THERE IS NOTHING TO APOLOGIZE FOR.

In the first place, there was no derogatory statement on women, and the sarcasm, if at all, is directed at foreign lobby groups, some of them pro-abortion, that routinely peddle this statistic. The supposed offense is in the creative, nay, malicious imagination of Akbayan’s propagandists.

Based on our own estimates, the correct figure is 4.8 maternal deaths a day, based on 2008 data from the National Statistics Office and the National Statistical Coordination Board. This assumes a maternal mortality ratio (MMR) of 99 per 100,000 live births and 1.784 million live births in 2008. Assuming a high MMR of 169 per 100,000 live births, the figure is 8.3.

We do not downplay the problem of maternal deaths. Indeed, it is a problem that needs concrete solutions, like more birthing centers and midwives. But we should guard against the excessive emotional use of the outdated statistic to influence Philippine government policy.

If Akbayan is really pro-women, it should tell its women constituents that contraceptive pills that would be distributed for free under the RH bill are considered by a WHO agency as a Level 1 carcinogen. Pills, according to reputable literature produced by entities such as the US National Cancer Institute and the Mayo Clinic increase the risk of breast and other cancers.

If Akbayan really is pro-women, it should tell mothers that the pills it wants them to ingest daily could expel a fertilized ovum, which is already a human being. It should inform women that pills don’t always prevent ovulation. In case the pills do not prevent ovulation and fertilization occurs, the pills have been proven to create an environment that is hostile to the beginning of life. Akbayan’s lawmakers should be reminded of what the Constitution says about the protection of the unborn.

Likewise, may we remind former Rep. Risa Hontiveros-Baraquel to elevate the level of the debate on RH. Her repeated references in social networks to an incident decades ago involving a dead movie starlet are uncalled for and below the belt.

###

Contact: Anthony Perez (f4vita@gmail.com)