How to improve this country

Solving poverty by helping the poor, not eliminating their children

From CBCP for Life: 

If RH pushers want to help the poor, spend P3.7 billion on jobs creation, skills training – speaker

ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE, Dec. 8, 2012—Some 1,500 youth, teachers and residents of the municipality of President Manuel A. Roxas in Zamboanga del Norte joined forces and gathered for the “Walk for Life and Anti-RH Bill Symposium,” marching around the municipality then taking part in a symposium in which economics teacher and law student Jan Louenn Lumanta spoke about the reality of the reproductive health (RH) bill and the country’s real needs.

RH Bill not for the poor

The guest speaker from the Dipolog diocese pointed out that referring to the measure as pro-poor is a misnomer.

So, who is intolerant? Who is closed-minded? Two articles on the UP Forum on the RH Bill on Sept. 19, 2012

From CBCP for Life:

Pro-lifers show class amid discourtesy

MANILA, Sept. 24, 2012—Those who spoke for the most defenseless in society and who championed genuine freedom showed class and composure amid discourtesy from some supporters of the reproductive health (RH) bill during a forum on the legislative measure at the University of the Philippines’ National Institute of Physics last week.

Dr. Ligaya Acosta, regional director of Human Life International – Asia & Oceania, and Edgardo Sorreta, Pro-Life Philippines Foundation Chairman, both held their composure even as purple-clad RH advocates spoke out from their seats, apparently in disagreement with what was being said by the speakers.

“We let the other speakers talk and we kept quiet. So we ask that you do the same for us,” Sorreta requested in the course of his presentation.

At one point, Acosta – toward the end of her talk – paused for a few moments when those seated in the first couple of rows in the audience became somewhat unruly and prevented the invited guest from proceeding as they chanted “Time! Time! Time!” – signaling that her time in the program was up.

“Okay lang,” Acosta calmly said with a smile as she waited for the disruption to end.

Mere opportunity for Church-bashing

The glaring difference between the speakers, too, did not go unnoticed by the students. Dash Cordero, a senior Statistics major, was immensely disappointed by the repeated jabs against the Church by one of the speakers, particularly due to the emphasis on academic and “research-based” information made in pre-event announcements.

“I was expecting that Dr. [Ernesto] Pernia would present his arguments the same way as economicst Dr. [Bernardo] Villegas does – which is precise and easily understandable by non-economics people. But it was just a mixture of pang-aaway sa Church and presenting statistics that were really not that well-explained,” Cordero lamented.

She also pointed out that the surveys on perception of Catholics of the RH bill were “irrelevant, at the same time insensitive. I didn’t really like his talk because he kept dragging the Catholic Church into the issue – even making side comments that were insulting to us [Catholics].”

The student pointed out that it was unfair of Pernia to make “rude remarks about Dr. Villegas” since the latter was not present.

The talk was not worth her time, Cordero said, adding that what was presented was not new to her and companions anymore and that economists advocating a culture of life had already refuted arguments brought up by Pernia.

What came as a surprise to Cordero and probably to most of the 100-plus attendees at the forum were Atty. Elizabeth Pangalangan’s remarks and demeanor in the open forum.

Responding to a question regarding the rights of mothers and their unborn children, the lawyer’s answer betrayed a belief that the equal protection of “the life of the mother and the life of the unborn” by the State as provided in the Philippine Constitution is not really equal.

Insisting on the inequality of mother and unborn

As observed by Cordero, though Pangalangan recognized the Constitutional provision, the lawyer put forth “the condition that the life of the mother is not endangered. Clearly, she doesn’t consider the mother and the baby having equal rights and dignity under the law.”

“She even said that it’s okay to use ‘procedures’ – which can be taken as their euphemism for ‘abortion’ – since the baby is not yet born,” the student continued, adding that the lawyer’s view was even worse than that of many, since it implied recognizing the baby’s personhood only after birth.

John Walter Juat found the implications of inequality between born people and babies in the womb objectionable, “as if it is the law that states that the life of the mother is worth more than the unborn. One cannot define anything based on what it has or doesn’t have. You define it by its identity,” the Education student said.

Human beings are defined by their DNA, Juat explained, and an unborn child or a person who has been born bur has disabilities is not less human just because of the inability to do certain tasks that most people can do.

“It’s really wrong to say the mother has more worth because she can work, earn money, can walk, talk, etc. And the unborn child has less worth because it cannot do these yet,” he said. “But when the lawyer said something about the circumstances to veer away from the equal protection of the State, it really makes me question…”

Unwittingly revealing an abortion agenda

“And now they still deny that they are in favor of abortion? [Pangalangan] had just revealed their intentions – and that is to eventually find a way for abortion to be legalized [in the Philippines],” Cordero lamented.

During the open forum, the lawyer responded to a question concerning the rights of mothers and of their unborn children. When she answered, betraying a belief in the in equality in dignity between mother and unborn child, she was visibly peeved by the reactions of disapproval from the audience. This prompted her to ask the audience in clipped tones, “Are you a law student?”

The arrogant manner in which Pangalangan delivered the question and succeeding remarks generated yet more comments of protest.

During the lawyer’s presentation, she stated her belief of human beings “from the moment of birth” as entitled to human rights that are universal and cannot be aliented.

Cordero admitted being saddened by insinuations of the absence of facts in the arguments presented by anti-RH bill folks when “we are presenting the facts while their side always finds ways not to answer directly. Their response has often been derogatory remarks about the Church, the fallacy of ’11 maternal deaths per day,’ … and many more fallacious statements.”

“I’ve noticed that the pro-RH people fear so much when the truth is revealed – based on their reactions when Dr. Acosta revealed things about Likhaan and the RH bill budget,” the student continued. “Then their speakers didn’t have the same composure as ours did. And most of them were also very rude – you know, that ‘Time! Time! Time!’ incident.”

It is a challenge for life-affirming people to practice charity toward these persons who condemn the Church and destroy the sanctity of life, Cordero admitted. “I think our Lord is doing this for us to grow in virtue. Kaya sana the Lord always gives us the grace to love and to pray for them.” (CBCP for Life)


******************************************************************************

Pro-life speakers in UP forum urge students to protect freedom threatened by coercive RH bill

MANILA, Sept. 24, 2012—Forty years after the declaration of Martial Law in the Philippines, Filipinos are still hounded by attempts to impose legislation despite vehement opposition. Fortunately, the opposition is sustained – and continuously growing, as more and more life-loving, God-respecting citizens learn more about a measure which seeks to earmark P14 billion  of taxpayers’ money annually for its implementation.

The reproductive health (RH) bill – which includes penalties of fines and imprisonment for those who insist on recognizing conscientious objection, abortifacient effects of certain contraceptives, and the freedom to inform others of the truth on the issue – was the subject of a recent forum held at the University of the Philippines’ National Institute of Physics, which had a former Department of Health (DOH) public information officer as one of the speakers.

“In 2004, I discovered deadly deception of contraception. For a year I was quiet, I made intensive research, and the more I read, the more I cried. I realized that contraceptives kill and cause horrible side effects. And that there is no overpopulation – it’s a myth,” said Dr. Ligaya Acosta, regional director of Human Life International  – Asia and Oceania.

Reacting to insinuations of economist Dr. Ernesto Pernia, who peppered his supposedly academic presentation with jabs against the Catholic Church for “holding Catholic countries hostage” and for “being in the Dark Ages,” Acosta ran through the salient points of House Bill 4244, at one point stressing the punitive measures contained in Section 29.

Overwhelming evidence

“The RH bill curtails freedom,” she said, explaining the penalties even for employers and health workers, and pointing out that even cases of youngsters’ requests for condoms being refused at health centers may mean punishment being meted out.

“Where is freedom of choice there?” she asked.

She gave a rundown of the various contraceptives and their damaging health consequences, making sure she didn’t leave out the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) study establishing oral contraceptives as Class 1 carcinogens. The IARC is an agency under the World Health Organization (WHO).

“Twenty-one scientists from eight countries ‘yan – hindi po Simbahan ang nagsabi niyan. Hindi po Catholic Church ang nag-conduct ng study na ‘yan,” she casually remarked.

“Bakit nga ba tumututol ang napakarami sa RH bill? Let me tell you that it is overwhelming scientific evidence… and of course coming from [the other side], I have a lot of documents,” said Acosta, who was part of DOH for more than 20 years.

Strategic use of “reproductive health” rather than “abortion”

She also revealed that the use of the use of the phrase “reproductive health” was a well-thought-out strategy in the global effort to make abortion on demand an acceptable option in as many parts of the world as possible – and eventually a legal one in nations where it is currently illegal.

“They were told that they would lose [in efforts to convince people  if they used the word ‘abortion’ so they used ‘reproductive health.’”

Pro-Life Philippines Foundation Chairman Edgardo Sorreta likewise alluded to the coercion being carried out on the Filipino people via the RH bill.

"The government has no right to fund the purchase of bibles, crucifixes, copies of the Koran etc. because these are [personal] preferences. In the same way, the government has no right to fund the purchase of contraceptives,” he explained.

He addressed the audience – composed of over 100 students mostly of UP Diliman – and told them that the proposed P14 billion that will fund the population control bill is the same amount that could enable over 50,000 scholars to finish a 4-year course in the university.

Why give the poor what they are capable of buying?

Sorreta also pointed out that oral contraceptives, contrary to the message RH supporters have been trumpeting, are within the buying capacity of the country’s poor. At P40 per sheet containing 28 pills, the expense comes up to less than P1.50 a day.

“Kaya bang bumili ng mahirap niyan?” he asked the audience, who was visibly surprised by the figures presented. “Yes!”  the audience called out.

“So bakit natin ibibigay sa mahihirap yung kaya nilang bilhin samantalang puwede namang ibigay sa kanila yung hindi nila kaya? Edukasyon…” he pointed out, interrupted by applause and cheers.

“Bawal bang bumili [ng pills]? Hindi bawal. Mahirap bang bumili? Naka-distribute ‘yan, umaabot pa sa bundok. Hayaan niyo na ang mga pharmaceutical [companies], sila na ang mag-distribute. That’s their marketing challenge,” he added. “But don’t get government to do the distribution and spend my money for that.”

“Is the Church forcing people not to use contraceptives? No, you are free to use them. But don’t expect the Church to keep quiet and be remiss in its mission to proclaim the Truth,” Sorreta added, again eliciting applause from the students.

Besides Sorreta, Acosta and Pernia, also speaking at the forum was Atty. Elizabeth Pangalangan, who delved on a rights-based approach to evaluating the issue of the RH bill.

While Pangalangan stated that “every human being is recognized as a person and as a right-holder,” her remark that everyone from the moment of birth — not from conception —  is entitled to human rights, angered the audience.

During the open forum, suggestions by the lawyer that the unborn baby is of lesser value than the mother carrying the unborn further unveiled an openness to the justification of abortion on demand, thereby generating more reactions of disapproval from the audience. (CBCP for Life)

Sayang ang Pera

Condoms can't be eaten

Hunger isn't eliminated by eliminating the hungry

Filipinos for Life responds to vasectomy campaign in Tondo

Priorities

Money that could be better spent elsewhere...

From CBCP for Life, two articles on the massive price tag of the RH bill:

New revelation: RH bill price tag = P13.7 billion

MANILA, Oct. 5, 2011–It took a Lito Lapid to finally reveal one of the pro-RH lobby’s well-kept secrets: the gargantuan price tag of the proposed contraceptive welfare program.

The Pampango senator, ridiculed by the pro-RH side for his inability to debate the “reproductive health” (RH) bill’s proponents in English, managed to eke out the figure Tuesday from one of the measure’s sponsors, Sen. Pia Cayetano.

After hemming and hawing, Cayetano admitted during interpellations on Senate Bill 2865 that the Department of Health (DOH) had asked for P13.7 billion to implement the RH bill for the year 2012 alone – an amount bigger than the individual budgets of the departments of energy, finance, foreign affairs, justice, labor, science, tourism, and trade. The figure also dwarfs the budgets proposed for the Office of the President and Congress, as well as for the entire Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao.

The revelation of the huge RH budget is the latest in the string of exposes to hound the pro-RH lobby, which had earlier been found to be using outdated data on maternal deaths and abortion. RH proponents had long been saying that the budget would only be P3 billion annually.

Lapid pointed out that even at P3 billion per year, slum dwellers could already be sent back to the provinces and given their own land over a 10-year period.

“[Iyan ay] sapat na halaga para bigyan ng lupa ang squatter sa probinsya,” he told Cayetano.

The gargantuan RH budget prompted Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile to interject, asking why DOH officials did not mention the amount in budget hearings.

Enrile blasted RH proponents for not being transparent on the real purposes of the bill, pointing out that billions of pesos in taxpayers’ money could go only to artificial birth control and that this could all boil down to “tawaran” or haggling.

“This now suggests to me that at the bottom of this bill this is a measure to control the population of the country. Why is DOH not telling us that it is anticipating that it will involve such a huge amount of funding coming from tax money? We have to scrutinize this bill very carefully. This might be a trap for the country.”

Enrile recalled that the Marcos regime did not entirely implement a US-funded population control program, as it was a US foreign policy dictate. True enough, the declassification in the 1990s of the National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests, written by former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger in 1974, showed that the Philippines was among 13 countries targeted for depopulation to protect American commercial interests.

“This bill is unfair to the Senate. It does not tell us what it wants to do. Maybe I’m dense or not as intelligent as the sponsors of the bill but my impression is this bill is not candid enough on what is its real purpose,” he said.

In response, Cayetano again resorted to appeals to emotion, nearly shedding tears in describing the situation of poor families and mothers dying of childbirth – ignoring recent studies that maternal deaths have gone down by more than 80% since the 1980s.

Cayetano said part of the funding would go to “basic” and “comprehensive” facilities, or birthing centers at the community level.

Senate Majority Leader Vicente “Tito” Sotto III, however, said such facilities have long been put up in the communities, even without an RH bill. (CBCP for Life)

****

RH funding could lead to more taxes, higher health premiums – Recto

MANILA, Oct. 6, 2011–Brace for higher taxes, more expensive healthcare premiums.

This scenario was raised by Sen. Ralph G. Recto on Wednesday, citing provisions in the controversial “reproductive health” (RH) bill that would require billions in taxpayers’ money.

Interpellating one of the Senate sponsors, Sen. Pia Cayetano, Recto pointed to Sections 9 and 10 of Senate Bill 2865, concerning state subsidies for contraceptives.

Section 9, which declares family planning supplies as “essential medicines,” requires that hormonal contraceptives, intrauterine devices, and injectables, among others, “be included in the regular purchase of essential medicines and supplies of all national and local hospitals, provincial, city, and municipal health offices, including rural health units.”

Meanwhile, Section 10 mandates the Department of Health (DoH) to lead in the procurement and distribution of family planning supplies for the whole country. The section prescribes a formula for determining budget allotments: “(a) the number of women of reproductive age and couples who want to space or limit their children; (b) contraceptive prevalence rate, by type of method used; and (c) cost of family planning supplies.”

Reading the two sections together, Recto said the bill would require the government to pay for the contraceptives of as much as 44 million people.

On Tuesday, Cayetano admitted that the DoH had sought P13.7 billion in funding for the RH bill for 2012 alone. On Wednesday, Cayetano said P7.5 billion would be needed yearly to pay for 22,000 nurses and 4,500 midwives.

Such huge funding requirement would take away resources needed to combat the leading causes of deaths in the country, which are heart disease, cardiovascular disease, pneumonia, tuberculosis, respiratory diseases, and diabetes, Recto argued.

“Are you going take it from these? It’s a zero sum game, unless you ask people to contribute more payroll tax or through PhilHealth,” he said.

Recto added: “We’re promising too much and you can’t deliver … And is this the best way to help the poor?”

Cayetano offered to delete Section 10. (Dominic Francisco)

To solve poverty...

...the following should be given to the poor.

Philippine Daily Inquirer Editorial Cartoon, October 3, 2011

The PDI webpage for this particular cartoon has the following comment by a certain "bgcorg" as well, which deserves to be published on this and other blogs dedicated to the pro-life crusade against the RH bill.

The Editorial Cartoon today, October 3, 2011, eloquently paints in "a thousand words," the pressing needs of most people in the country today just surviving in a deluge [what a wet, floody day!] of poverty. Jobs, education, basic health care [hi, senior citizens!], livelihood opportunities, timely government aid [read: prospective efforts to anticipate climate change calamities or at least mitigate their devastating consequences included], government support to absorb the impact of high prices in fuel and transportation, basic and prime commodities and essential needs, if salaries do not cope up with inflation [as it happens now], affordable housing and a better quality of life worthy of human dignity to spread the blessings of democracy. The life saving device thrown to the almost drowning constituents of this country would give them HOPE AND SOCIAL JUSTICE symbolized by jobs, education and basic health care, among others that are directly what they would need under the circumstances, not condoms or artificial contraceptive methods, devices and procedures (mechanical, surgical/medical, chemical) that would only be devastating to achieve zero or negative population growth in 40 years. Advocates of the rh bill surprisingly are looking at canned solutions foisted by interest groups greedy for profit, not the overall national interest in the long-term perspective. In pursuit of hope and social justice, eminently stand the keywords of JOBS AND OPPORTUNITIES, especially for those who have less in life. Level the playing field! 

The people are asking for "bread" and the cute proponents of the rh bill are giving them "cake." We should, instead, apply to the problem of poverty what is the correct and proper solution as true patriots of this country: GIVE THE PEOPLE FISHING RODS so that they can earn fishing for a lifetime, not just food on the table for a day, as the old proverb goes. We would be used, against our true national interest and our cherished patrimony by giving in to the subtle campaign of international assistance in exchange for 40 years of commercial domination and colonialization not only in the billions of pesos annually for the purchase of "essential medicines" such as condoms and artificial contraceptive methods, devices and procedures. This is giving the people cake when they ask for bread. On the other hand, if this government works for the full human development of its constituents so that social justice is restored in Christ in this country, seeing hope and preoccupied with gainful livelihood or employment opportunities, less pre-occupation in sex during reproductive age could result, for a more healthy and sound population growth rate that allows for a "replacement rate in population growth. Proponents of the rh bill are silent about the evil consequences of a zero or negative growth rate, deliberately, or feigning innocence, just to satisfy their hidden agenda! No patriotic vision for our country, caring nothing about the future of the youth of our Fatherland, its cultural values and positive core values of life, love, sex, marriage and the family. 

I congratulate the Editorial Cartoon of the Inquirer today. In a nutshell, you have picturesquely captured the message against the legalization of condoms and artificial contraceptive practices. While information is good leading to an informed choice, it would be mental dishonesty to disparage the use of modern Natural Family Planning Methods in favor of artificial contraception and condoms, injecting the wrong idea to those "needing the information" that modern Natural Family Planning Methods are expensive, unsafe and not reliable [the very contrary is true and statistically proven by research to be so] while supplying them with a liberal stock of contraceptive devices with the assurance that they are now "legal" and not against one's conscience to use, all at the expense of public funds and with the full force of the "Daang matuwid." Thinking Filipinos should really now say, "NO TO THE RH BILL!!!!"

Sen. Pia Cayetano: "Pregnancy is a burden".

Thank you for your candor, Senator Cayetano. Thank you for unmasking the real thinking of the supporters of the RH Bill.

From CBCP for Life:

RH bill sponsors questioned on birth control supplies as “essential medicines”

MANILA, September 14, 2011–If contraceptives are only meant for birth control, then why are they tagged as “essential medicines” under the RH bill?

Senate President Juan Ponce-Enrile asked this and other questions as the Senate resumed the period of interpellation for the controversial “reproductive health” (RH) bill Tuesday.

Enrile cited Section 9 of Senate Bill No. 2865 titled “An Act Providing for a National Policy on Reproductive Health and Population and Development,” which orders the inclusion of hormonal contraceptives, intrauterine devices, injectables, and “other safe, legal and effective family planning products and supplies” in the National Drug Formulary.

“These products and supplies shall also be included in the regular purchase of essential medicines and supplies of all national and local hospitals, provincial, city, and municipal health offices, including rural health units,” the Senate version of the RH bill states.

The section is titled “Family Planning Supplies as Essential Medicines.”

Interpellating one of the RH bill sponsors, Sen. Pia Cayetano, Enrile noted that condoms do not cure anything while pills, injectables, and intrauterine devices work to prevent fertilization.

Enrile reiterated his belief that the RH bill is a population control measure disguised as a health measure, since “You cannot reduce the size of the family without reducing the population of the country.”

“There is no coercion but the result is population control,” he said.

Aiding Cayetano, Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago, also an RH sponsor, said birth control, the supposed aim of the bill, was different from population control. The former allows women to control the number of children while in the latter, the State uses its power to reduce the population, particularly those of the unfit.

Enrile, however, pointed out that the RH bill is particularly aimed at the poor.

“This is a law where the state itself intervenes in the size o the family. It is cleverly devised and disguised as a health measure. It is not health, it’s reproductive health, a very specific kind of health,” he said.

He asked: “Why zero in on reproductive health? How many people have died of dengue, malaria, cancer of the breast, cancer of the cervix, cancer of the uterus, hypertension, stroke, tuberculosis, cholera, typhoid, dysentery?”

Explaining why the poor was being targeted by the RH bill, Cayetano claimed they are being discriminated against when it comes to access to contraceptives.

Families should be allowed to space births, she said, as “pregnancy is a burden,” a “physical, emotional, financial burden.” (Dominic Francisco)

"Colorful Rag" on the RH Bill and Statism

The following passage is from the "Colorful Rag" article RH Bill, Poverty and Big Government. (Not that I fully agree with libertarianism either...)

It’s also nonsense to say that Filipinos’ quality of life is being “decreed” by bishops, just because they’re opposing a coercive program. Are these Catholic Church representatives calling for a coercive ban on contraceptives? Are drugstore owners facing fines and imprisonment for selling these products? People should learn to distinguish between being bugged by their conscience, and being harassed by the government.

THE STATE WILL SOLVE EVERYTHING! 

And so not only do we have an example of the refuted Malthusian fallacy of ‘overpopulation,’ but are witness to a misplaced trust in the state to determine the production and distribution of the disputed resources that are already freely available. There is a considerable percentage of the population that advocates the bill ― are we still to suppose that charities and other ‘pro-choice’ organizations won’t have enough funding for the contraceptive and reproductive health programs they envision? 

But it’s the government’s job, many would contend. It is exactly this mentality ― of dependence on inherently violent institutions ― that lovers of liberty oppose, whether the issue involves contraceptives, mobile phone plans, food safety, or whatnot.

And maybe in the not-so-distant future, if government no longer exists, we could laugh about the destruction reaped in earlier centuries by socialism-statism, in the same way we laugh today about embarrassing experiences in our adolescence.

Yes, the poor can exercise self-control!

Realizations on my encounter with the Poor
By "Teachertwish" of "Eat My Chalk Dust"

Yesterday, the members of the faculty had a Parmenie Encounter Program organized by the Lasallian Mission Office. We went to Balibago Complex and we were supposed to interact with the poor there. I was privileged to talk to a 9 year-old and a couple.

CONTINUE READING HERE.

Treating human beings as dogs

From Dr. Quirino Sugon's latest blog post: Reproductive Health Bill: How to treat humans like dogs by spaying and neutering them:

The reason why human owners spay and neuter their dogs is because of the inconvenience of having a dog litter–the danger of overpopulation in so little house space. The owners don’t also like that their dogs behave like dogs in mating season: urinate, mount, and copulate. 

I wonder if human owners ever asked their dogs whether they like to be spayed and neutered in the first place. This goes against the very nature of dogs. This is very inhumane and uncanine. Animal rights activists should protest against spaying and neutering of dogs. 

Now, the proponents of the Reproductive Health Bill are similar to dog owners in that they cannot afford to have another dog or human in the house. By raising the spectre of overpopulation, the proponents of the RH Bill wants to limit the number of children to two. To achieve this, they have to neuter many Filipinos, especially the poor, by promoting the use of condoms and contraceptive pills through sex education starting at the Grade 5 level, giving them free contraceptives at government’s expense, and subsidizing their sterilization surgical procedures. The message to the poor is clear: “Stop littering the streets with your hungry children. We don’t want you in the Philippines.” 

II. How to treat humans as humans 

I was watching the Dog Whisperer in National Geographic. Caesar Millan, the man who knows more about dog psychology than anybody else in boob tube (now flat screen), tells us one fundamental principle: “Do not treat your dogs as human beings. Treat dogs as dogs. It is the humans who must lead dogs and not vice-versa.” 

In case of the Reproductive Health Bill, I say this: Do not treat humans as dogs. Treat humans as humans. Humans need to be led to what is right and wrong. Who shall tell the human what is right and wrong? The congressmen and senators who think they are more intelligent than a poor boy from the province? Dogs must be led by a higher intelligence (man), and humans must also be led by a higher intelligence (God). 

God is not a theoretical concept, but a being who intervened in human history, who promulgated his laws in the Ten Commandments. And when the fullness of time came, God sent His Son born of a woman, in order to become a role model for all of us. Christ is the way that we must follow, the truth that we must believe, the life that we must live. When Christ departed from this world, He did not leave us orphans but sent the Holy Spirit to guide his Church–the Pope, bishops, priests, and laity–into all truth. In matters of Faith and Morals, the Catholic Church could not err, because God Himself, Christ, promised to Peter and his apostles:  

“Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. (Mt 16:19)” No other human institution has this divine seal. 

Let us pray the Cong. Lagman, Cong. Hontiveros Baraquel, and Sen. Santiago would listen to the voice of the Catholic Church.

The RH Bill and Poverty

From Federico Pascual's May 22, 2011 column entitled The world didn't end; RH debate continues:

Since birth control is a core RH issue and since the burgeoning population is being blamed for widespread poverty, one is wont to ask if our population growth rate of 1.9 percent is really the cause of poverty and its manifestations. 

But even if contraception and abortion result in every family having only two children, if the government is hardly moving to generate enough jobs, poverty will continue to hound the population. 

Even if children from Grade V to high school are given sex education and taught how to have sex without risk of pregnancy, there will only be heightened experimentation with sex and more teenage pregnancies if the youngsters are not taught values. 

Even if we succumb to the lobby and flood public clinics with condoms and contraceptives, the standard of public health will remain low if frontline clinics and hospitals catering to the poor are not stocked with basic and critical medicines.

Even if Filipinos become world-class experts in safe sex, that will not enhance their chances for employment and liberation from poverty if the government has neglected quality education and training for technical skills. 

Even if we are able to achieve zero population growth, poverty and its attendant ills will continue to stalk the land if the government does not move to disperse opportunities (for jobs, schooling, etc.) and stem migration to urban centers. 

* * * 

ABORTIVE PROCEDURES: The RH bill (HB 4244) speaks grandly in Section 2 (Declaration of Policy) of guaranteed “universal access to medically-safe, legal, affordable, effective and quality reproductive health care services, methods, devices, and supplies.” 

In Section 3 (Guiding Principles), it also says: “While this Act recognizes that abortion is illegal and punishable by law, the government shall ensure that all women needing care for post-abortion complications shall be treated and counseled in a humane, non-judgmental and compassionate manner.” 

But critics counter that the RH bill would pave the way for easier access to abortion.

Under Section 4 (Definition of Terms), the bill speaks of providing “Basic Emergency Obstetric Care” which refers to “lifesaving services for maternal complications being provided by a health facility or professional, which must include the following six signal functions: administration of parenteral antibiotics; administration of parenteral oxytocic drugs; administration of parenteral anticonvulsants for pre-eclampsia and eclampsia; manual removal of placenta; removal of retained products; and assisted vaginal delivery.” 

If a woman starts bleeding because of contraceptives, under the “compassionate” law, her case can be declared a failed abortion or miscarriage and she can then demand a full repertoire of emergency services that are in effect those for an abortion. 

* * * 

SIPAG APPROACH: The fight against poverty need not concentrate on just curbing population growth, but must also help the poor become more productive and fulfilled. 

In Las Piñas, there is the Villar Sipag Center rising in the sprawling grounds of a memorial park a stone’s throw away from Diego Cera Ave. where the world-renowned bamboo organ is. 

This project of the Villar Foundation (established in 1995) seeks to empower the poor and enhance their humanity. Set for completion next year, the center will house a library or resource center for poverty reduction, a reception area, a theater, and an exhibit hall. 

More Sipag Centers for the poor will be put up near churches that the foundation plans to build around the country after the completion of the Santuario de San Ezekiel Moreno church beside the Las Piñas center. 

* * * 

BANISH POVERTY: Sen. Manny Villar, the foundation’s founding chairman, explains, “Social enterprise experts say that poverty should be banished to a museum. I share their vision… And until that happens, we’ll work tirelessly to ease poverty wherever we find it in our country.”

The United Nations reports that close to 900 million of the world’s poor, who survive on less than $1 a day, live in Asia Pacific, and that nearly one in three Asians is poor. 

Over 40 million Filipinos are living on less than $2 a day. Although poverty incidence in the country has been reduced, the actual number of people still in the grip of poverty has increased over the last two decades. 

The country’s economic growth has not been robust enough to speed up poverty reduction, one of eight targets that the Philippines pledged to fulfill under the United Nations’ Millennium Development Goals. 

* * * 

A BEEHIVE: Cynthia A. Villar, the foundation’s managing director, says the Villar Sipag Center will be a proactive beehive of activity. 

“We’ll promote industriousness or hard work to beat poverty,” the former Las Piñas congresswoman says. “We’ll guide, train, teach and empower womenfolk, the youth, jobless and even relatives of overseas Filipino workers to persevere in life.” 

Although being pursued quietly, the livelihood-generation and skills training initiatives of the foundation have caught the eye of the world. 

One of its programs, the Las Piñas-Zapote River System Rehabilitation program, recently bested those of 38 other countries for the United Nation’s “Water for Life” Best Practices Award. It won the UN award because it did not only rehabilitate the river, but also improved the living conditions of the poor along the banks.

Manny Pacquiao: the fight versus corruption is the solution to poverty

From Rep. Pacquiao's straightforward and heartfelt speech at the March 25, 2011 rally for life at the Quirino Grandstand:

"Colorful Rag" versus Pro-RH Rag

And YET ANOTHER response to the "Salve" controversy stirred up by the PDI.

LARGE POOR FAMILIES: ‘STRONG CASE’ FOR RH BILL?

From the "Colorful Rag" blog.

For a news article, the Inquirer’s ‘Salve’s life: A strong case for RH bill’ is sure opinionated. Sa title pa lang. And there’s nothing logical about it too.

If we’re going to be pilosopo about it, how would education on contraception and providing contraceptives help Salve now? As far as I know, the bill contains no provisions involving time travel, that would allow Salve to never conceive some of her eight kids. Nor does the bill provide a ‘Salve’s choice’ where she is burdened with deciding which of her spawn to have obliterated (RH bill advocates are implicitly saying that poor kids are of little value and better off never being born).

CONTINUE READING THIS ARTICLE.

Not even the poor deserve to be spayed or neutered

Another response to the "Salve" tearjerker from the Philippine Daily Inquirer:

Yet still more discussions...

"Petrufied" of Drawing Lines

The Philippine Daily Inquirer last Thursday came out with a front page story that detailed the life of a poor woman and her husband struggling to raise their eight children in poverty. I'm not linking the article here because I believe it's one of the worst the Inquirer has ever done, and it puts their motto, "balance news..." in jeopardy. I didn't take up journalism but I recognize a title seeping in bias when I read one. And on the front page with a miserable photo, too.

The reason I brought this up is that it was the core of a discussion my mother and I had that day; she thinking that in cases such as those, the RH bill should be beneficial, and I--very inarticulately--insisting that that woman does not need a freebie ligation but help in the form of better livelihood and education. I learned one thing from Mama that day, too; I learned that for some people, the RH measure is acceptable because it is hard to believe that the poor will ever change.

One of the things we can easily forget is that a person is a person no matter how much he makes, where he lives, how many limbs he's got, or in what stage of life he is. He has a heart, he has a mind, and if you're Christian, you know he is a child of God, therefore that he possesses the same dignity as any of the "better" folks out there.

No one, not even a poor person struggling to raise eight children, deserves to be neutered/spayed, because that is only done to cats and dogs. You do that to cats and dogs because if you don't they just multiply and get galis and spread diseases. People are not like that. People are better than that. We people can be taught, and we have a will, and besides, all of us at some point in our genealogy, were once dirt poor, too.

RH is not a solution to help people in poverty. It is a license to solve poverty by eliminating the poor. Not convinced?

FVR: “I think the philosophy of RH bill is that we must learn to produce quality people in this world instead of producing people who only end up as, say, beggars on the streets, scavengers, or sellers of cheap or prohibited items. This, I think, is the real valid argument in favor of the RH bill.” (May 18, 2011, PDI)

Makes you wonder what "quality people" are.

David versus Goliath: "People for Media"' versus Philippine Daily Inquirer on the "Salve" issue

Salve's life, according to the Inquirer

Jun Daryl Zamora

I shall scrupulously report and interpret the news, taking care not to suppress essential facts or to distort the truth by omission or improper emphasis. I recognise the duty to air the other side and the duty to correct substantive errors promptly. -- The Journalist’s Code of Ethics, No. 1

THE Inquirer steps up its campaign for the passage of the RH bill — this time, in a front-page “news” article.

Kristine Felisse Mangunay’s article “Salve’s life: A strong case for the RH bill” (5/26/11) is an account of the woes of a 37-year-old woman living with her 64-year-old partner: her eight children. Generously sprinkled with vivid descriptions of Salve’s destitution, the article appears as a heart-rending argument against those who oppose the passage of the RH bill. “RH services would have prevented Salve’s poverty,” the article seems to cry.

CONTINUE READING THIS ARTICLE

Simple reasons why the RH Bill should be opposed

(Out of respect for the sentiments of the author of this post, I'm closing the combox for this one)

Unheard of reasons why I am against the RH Bill

by "Trish" of "Eat My Chalk Dust"

Conversations with pro-RH and watching debates on TV made me realize these new reasons why I’m against the RH Bill:

1) It condones negligent parents by saying: “Parents are irresponsible. Who else will teach the children on sex? The Government needs to intervene.”

2) It also condones corruption in government: “Alam naman nating mahirap pugsain ang corruption sa Pilipinas. When else will we start helping the poor?”

3) It demeans the ability of the poor to practice discipline in NFP. “Natural doesn’t always seem to work for the very poor that’s why they have 6-11 children ” – Karen Davila

4) For the sake of choice, the pro-RH wants the poor to choose between natural and Group 1 carcinogens (contraceptive pills), and provide the latter for free.

5) The pro-RH are “not aware” of the abortifacient nature of contraceptive pills. Their comment? “In my opinion, they are not abortifacients.” Now medicine has become a matter of opinion. Add to that the opinion on where life begins.

6) The pro-RH will always downplay the obvious connection of contraception and abortion as if they are two different advocacies in the real pro-life stand. They will not answer the question of Plan B if contraception fails.

7) Rep. Hontiveros’ idea of sex education is contradicting: A – bstinence, B-e monogamous, and C-ontraception. Why put abstinence and contraception together? Why A if there is C? Why C if there is A?

8 ) Carlos Celdran is one name-calling pro-RH. No need to elaborate. (Rep. Hontiveros needs to tame him down.)

9) The pro-RH camp would last resort to destroying the person (and the Church) in their defense. These politicians do not know how to engage in a sustained reasonable debate. Can they just stick to the issue?

On NFP.

Pro-RH: “If it is so great, then why hasn’t the church teach about it with vigor like what they’re screaming about it now?”

Me: “Naku, you put in the Church na into our discussion. I wanted to keep the Church out of it. Now that you mentioned it, let’s put the Church in.”

Pro-RH: “My bad. I thought your linking it to there stand [sic].”

10) “Iba ang moralidad niyo sa moralidad ko.” – Dr. Sylvia Caludio. Aba! Then why should we let you impose your morality that contraception and abortion are okay on us? Dr. Claudio by the way is the chairman of WGNRR, an organization that supports abortion. “[Dr. Claudio] and her org can promote it all she wants. I don’t, and will not start advocating it.” – Ms. Lea Salonga.

11) The RH Bill is filed under the Commission on Population and Development. But they push on health benefits. It should then be files under Health, di ba? I smell something fishy.

Why I support the Catholic Church in its fight against the RH Bill:

1) The Church believes that the poor are human persons who are capable of practicing discipline.

2) She has been consistent in her arguments against the RH Bill. There is no need for strategy changes.

3) They protect the real essence of the woman, her uterus, by keeping the dangerous pills from destroying it.

4) The Church does help save the women’s lives by not promoting Group 1 carcinogens (e.g. contraceptive pills).

5) She supports PNoy’s slogan: “Kung walang corrupt, walang mahirap.”

6) The pronoun for the Catholic Church is actually female.

7) The Church has always been pro-poor: Caritas. Visit the website, you’ll see the programs for the poor there. Some Catholics are active also in helping the poor: Gawad Kalinga.

A brief message for those who claim themselves to be Catholics but are pro-RH: Have you read the Catechism of the Catholic Church? For sure, you haven’t. I suggest you read it. It’s very reasonable. It is “faith seeking understanding.” Then, and only then, can we have a decent discussion involving the Church without destroying its credibility.

I am entitled to my own realizations, and these are just based on my experiences. For sure there are exceptions to these instances. When I sound like I am generalizing, I am only referring to the people I had been exposed to.

My blog, my rules. For a change, comments section will only be dedicated to understanding the side of those against the RH Bill. This blog will be dedicated to fully understanding the Anti-RH Bill side. I expect questions about and supporting facts for the Anti-RH stand in the comments section. Any comment posted that doesn’t follow the rules will not be posted.

Cheers!