Philippine Population Control Issues - Compiled Threads [Archive] - Page 15

noli-kun

May 12th, 2011, 02:06 AM

Why the RH Bill is bad: The Real Truth behind the Supposed Truth about the RH Bill
Posted on 03 May 2011 by Dustin Celestino.

I used to support the RH Bill. I no longer do. By the end of this document, neither would you. I have not supported the RH Bill since I attended a lecture in Megamall about the truth behind it. That lecture truly enlightened me. My only hope is that this holy light of enlightenment passes through your monitor screen, into your optical nerves, and into your heart so it can touch your soul (because the soul is in the heart). My intent here is not to antagonize Pro-RH people, but to enlighten – so listen up, you narrow-minded morons. Open your minds to the real truth…
The RH Bill will put Filipinos at risk of extinction, because, at its very core, the RH Bill is an extension of a secret, global conspiracy – a western attempt – to implement principles of eugenics on unsuspecting, inferior populations in order to exclude them from the human evolutionary process, at the end of which would, at the apex, summon forth THE MASTER RACE. Anyone who failed to see this after the lecture is ignorant. I advise him or her to do his or her research, better yet, do some soul-searching to discover the real truth, because the truth is in our hearts, we just have to listen to it.
Initially, my layman’s interpretation of the RH Bill led me to think that it was just a bill meant to help educate the uninformed about ways to prevent them from fornicating their way to a very bad financial situation. My ignorant mind devised 10 simple points as to why the RH Bill was right.
I thought:

1. The minimum wage – the lowest an employer can pay an employee – of a non-agricultural Filipino worker is P404.
2. If there were 20 working days in a month (because most people don’t work on the weekend), the average minimum-wage-earning Filipino would earn around P8,000 a month.
3. Let’s call that person, Joey. If Joey, like other human beings, ate food on a regular basis, he will spend around P70/day on food (and that’s a very, very conservative assumption). There are 30 days in a month, so I guess, that would amount to P2,100 a month.
4. But if Joey had a wife that he loved, he might want to feed her too. Feeding her would cost another P2,100 a month.
5. P8,000 – P4,200 = P3,800
6. If Joey and his wife rented a home, or used electricity and bathed from time to time, the amount left from Joey’s salary would be significantly reduced. Let’s say their utility bills and rent amounted to P1800.
7. P3,800 – P1800 = P2,000
8. P2,000 is a lot of money, but I don’t think Joey and his wife should have more than 3 children, right? I mean, I don’t have children, but just by looking at one, I can safely assume that they cost more than P1,000/month. Babies need milk, diapers, toys, immunity injections, baby medicine…
9. From this I deduced that babies cost money. If babies cost money, I theorized that having more babies would cost more money. And from this data, I observed that a person who spent a lot of money on children, but didn’t earn a lot of money, would soon be broke and unable to provide for both himself and his children. Another word for this broke situation is poverty.
10. I theorized that a person can avoid being poor by making less babies. So, I thought that steps should be taken to inform people about this very little known fact. I also thought that the government should make contraceptives accessible so that people who don’t earn a lot can properly manage the little resources that they have. That’s why I supported the RH Bill.
But now I know that I was wrong. And here are some of the reasons why I know that. By the way, before I continue, I must say that this is the truth, guys. In fact, it’s more than the truth. It’s the Catholic truth, which means that it’s truer and more true than the regular truth.
I know that the issue of the RH Bill is not a religious issue, but make sure you pay attention if you want your soul to be saved. Here are some of the things I learned from the lecture I learned:

“The RH Bill is wrong because it assumes that the Philippines is overpopulated.”

read more. (http://filipinofreethinkers.org/2011/05/03/why-the-rh-bill-is-bad-the-real-truth-behind-the-supposed-truth-about-the-rh-bill/)

Maxxclip

May 12th, 2011, 02:48 AM

Church declares ‘all-out war’

MANILA, Philippines—It’s now an “all-out war” and the Catholic Church will say it with red.

Despite cutting communication lines with Malacañang on the reproductive health (RH) bill, Catholic Church leaders Wednesday vowed to mount a campaign opposing the family planning measure using pulpits and red-colored pro-life bumper stickers.

“The next step of the Church is to continue with its own ways of propagating and promoting the Gospel of Life and preaching the sanctity of life,” said Msgr. Juanito Figura, secretary general of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP).
Figura on Tuesday announced in a news conference the Church’s decision to discontinue its dialogue with Malacañang after President Benigno Aquino III disclosed plans to implement his own responsible parenthood agenda, which bishops deemed as the same as House Bill No. 4244.

Halting the dialogues, the Catholic Church would continue with its own means to fight the RH bill, Figura said. “We will also speak against HB 4244 if necessary.”

Red symbolizes life

Lipa Archbishop Ramon Arguelles said Wednesday the Church should step up its “all-out war” against the bill that would espouse and make available the use of artificial birth control methods among Filipino couples.

“It’s natural for us to declare an all-out war against the RH bill,” said Arguelles over Church-run Radio Veritas. “We should persist to campaign against it and to educate the people against the legislative measure.”

Catholic bishops agreed to the prolife advocates’ idea of asking people hostile to the RH bill being pushed in Congress to tie red ribbons and put up anti-RH bill stickers and posters in their homes, business establishments and even in their vehicles.

Cotabato Auxiliary Bishop Jose Colin Bagaforo has expressed his support for the sticker campaign to fight the RH bill. He said it was one way of raising public awareness on the family planning bill.

He even suggested that families can also put red ribbons outside their homes. Red symbolizes life, noted the prelate.

Issues not personalities

During the National Day of Prayer on Monday, Butuan Bishop Juan de Dios Pueblos encouraged people to observe the occasion by wearing blue or white shirts or ribbons to show their solidarity against the bill.

“The Church will continue to air its views and sentiments against the bills, not in dialogues but in pulpits and during homilies,” Figura told reporters.

“Part of the mission of the Church is to teach in season and out of season on the sanctity of life,” added the CBCP official.

He also stressed that the Church’s campaign against the RH bill was not centered on its proponents and supporters.

“We are talking of issues here, not of personalities ... we don’t take it against [them] personally ... we take it against the bill itself.”

inq (http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view/20110512-336024/Church-sees-red-symbol-of-life-declares-all-out-war)

skywalker2008

May 12th, 2011, 02:55 AM

Then what? Expect followers of other religions, e.g. Islam, not to follow state laws? Many have already defied the catholic church...

Bishop: Catholics obliged to defy RH law (http://www.gmanews.tv/story/220359/nation/bishop-catholics-obliged-to-defy-rh-law)
05/12/2011 | 07:45 AM

Filipino Catholics may be obliged to defy a reproductive health (RH) measure allowing artificial contraception if it becomes law, a bishop said Thursday.

Caloocan Bishop Deogracias Iñiguez Jr. said that while they are not pushing civil disobedience for now, Catholics are obliged not to follow any law that violates their faith.

"Eventually kung yan ay maging batas, hindi susundin ng mga Katoliko yan ... Sa inyong pananampalataya, maaring ang inuutos ng state [ay] labag [sa] pinaninindigan kaya obligado kang hindi sundin yan," Iñiguez, who heads the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) public affairs unit, said in an interview on dwIZ radio.

Meanwhile, another Catholic Church official called for an “all-out war" against the measure, after the CBCP withdrew from dialogues with Malacañang on the issue.

Lipa (Batangas) Archbishop Ramon Arguelles said the talks were "doomed to fail," because President Benigno Aquino III has long been a supporter of the bill.

“It’s normal that we are going to have a total war now against the RH bill ... I said it before that the dialogue is useless ... I know the President was not really open for a dialogue because of his fixed decision to push RH bill," Arguelles said on Church-run Radyo Veritas interview, excerpts of which were posted Thursday on the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines news site.

On the other hand, Iñiguez maintained the Church is not endorsing civil disobedience, at least for now. Bishops renewed their civil disobedience threat against the RH bill last February.

According to him, the Church is studying its options against the RH bill, including questioning its constitutionality before the proper forum.

“Pag naaprubahan yan, e gagawa tayo ng ibang pamamaraan... siguro titingnan din natin yung sinasabing this is against the Constitution. Titingnan natin ang anggulong yan (If it is passed into law, we will study our options against it. Some anti-RH advocates say the RH bill is against the Constitution. Perhaps we can follow that line of action)," Iñiguez said.

Moreover, he said opponents of the RH bill claim the proposed measure violates the Constitution’s provision to protect all life because it allows artificial contraception.

The Church allows only natural family planning.

Also, he said President Benigno Aquino III will not be excommunicated because of his stand for the RH bill.

Aquino told graduating students of the University of the Philippines last April he was willing to risk excommunication as he pushes his Responsible Parenthood bill.

“Hindi ko nakikita ang option na yan (I do not see that as an option)," Iñiguez said when asked about the chances of Aquino being excommunicated.

Lines still ‘open’ (http://www.gmanews.tv/story/220359/nation/bishop-catholics-obliged-to-defy-rh-law)

hugodiekonig

May 12th, 2011, 03:22 AM

s40

May 12th, 2011, 03:31 AM

sarcastic yang article pre

skywalker2008

May 12th, 2011, 03:50 AM

^^

It is a SATIRE.

SATIRE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satire)

"Satire is primarily a literary genre or form, although in practice it can also be found in the graphic and performing arts. In satire, vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, and society itself, into improvement.[1] Although satire is usually meant to be funny, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit as a weapon.

A common feature of satire is strong irony or sarcasm—"in satire, irony is militant"[2]—but parody, burlesque, exaggeration, juxtaposition, comparison, analogy, and double entendre are all frequently used in satirical speech and writing. This "militant" irony or sarcasm often professes to approve (or at least accept as natural) the very things the satirist wishes to attack.

Satire is nowadays found in many artistic forms of expression, including literature, plays, commentary, and media such as lyrics."

s40

May 12th, 2011, 04:07 AM

hey look, we have such a power economy and giving people jobs they need to pull themselves out of poverty...... FILIPINOS JUST DO THIS FOR KICKS AND BRAGGING RIGHTS........... Anak talaga ng PI pakielamerong mga pari na pulpol... Kayong mga Anti RH, paano niyo ma solve eto? HA?

http://globalnation.inquirer.net/news/breakingnews/view/20110512-336081/Filipinos-use-every-trick-in-the-book-to-work-abroad

Filipinos use every trick in the book to work abroad

MANILA, Philippines—Six women dressed as nuns stood anxiously in a queue at the chaotic Ninoy Aquino International Airport, unaware their shoes were about to end their dreams of an illegal job abroad.

At the immigration counter, an official looked up after stamping a genuine traveler’s passport and surveyed the women.

“People were wondering, if they were nuns then why was one nun in rubber shoes and another in red shoes,” said airport immigration chief Lina Andaman Pelia.

“And all six just had one bag. You could tell they weren’t real.” Under questioning, the “nuns” admitted they were not heading to a religious seminar in Hong Kong as claimed, rather to Lebanon to work illegally as maids.

And so—just like thousands of desperate Filipinos before them who have tried to use a dizzying array of tricks in an effort to head overseas for a higher paying job—their journey was over before it had begun.

Deep poverty has for decades driven Filipinos abroad and about nine million—or 10 percent of the population—currently work legally and illegally in a wide range of jobs overseas, according to government data.

While the government allows its citizens to work overseas, it requires them to have guaranteed labor contracts and to register with state-approved recruiters.

The government says these measures are needed because Filipinos who go abroad can easily be exploited in many ways and, at worst, be forced into crime or prostitution.

Sometimes the country they want to work in has been blacklisted completely, such as was the case with the fake nuns, with the Philippines banning people from working in Lebanon in 2007 due to security and labor concerns there.

But many Filipinos seek to circumvent these rules, with illegal recruiters often setting up the scams.

“We have economic problems in this country and sad to say, they become willing victims,” Pelia said, referring to the Filipinos who sneak overseas to work illegally.

Pelia said many prospective illegal workers simply presented themselves at airports as tourists, and it was up to the immigration officials to determine their real motive for travelling overseas.

At the immigration desk, staff look for signs to distinguish the illegal workers from legitimate tourists.

Pelia said the give-away could be a bare passport indicating the person had not travelled abroad before, or a plan to “holiday” in areas of the Middle East not normally known to attract Filipino tourists.

She said illegal workers were sometimes caught out by being unable to answer the simplest of questions, such as: “Where are you going?” or: “Who is providing for your tour?”. But on other occasions, they put more thought into their ruse.

Pelia said the government now coordinated with sports bodies to verify which athletes were heading overseas, after some workers made it to Japan by claiming to be volleyballers bound for an Asian Games there in the 1990s.

Immigration officials are also constantly on the lookout for Filipinas seeking to head abroad for work as prostitutes who travel with fake boyfriends, Pelia said.

“Carlos”, a 35-year-old laborer, said he beat the system three years ago when he entered Japan to escort his mother on a vacation there.

When his mother returned home two months later, Carlos did not come back.

Instead, under a plan hatched by his family, he was sheltered by his sister, who already had permanent residency in Japan.

“We were always terrified that Japanese immigration would track me down to her house and burst in at any time. But they never came,” said Carlos, who spoke to AFP by telephone on condition his real name was not used.

Carlos said his sister helped him find a job as a construction worker in Japan, and he now earns the equivalent of about P26,000 ($600) a month, three times what he could earn at home.

The problem of Filipinos being exploited saw the US State Department place the Philippines on its “tier 2 watchlist” for human trafficking in 2009.

This meant the US government believed the Philippines was failing to comply with “minimum standards” on stopping human traffickers.

The government says it has since sought to tackle the problem more seriously.

About 25,000 would-be illegal workers have been stopped from leaving the Philippines since a crackdown began in August last year, according to Chrissy Avila, a lawyer with the government’s anti-trafficking task force.

And 28 traffickers have been convicted since the start of last year, with some of them being sentenced to life in jail, according to the task force.

But Avila said the prospective workers, who are not punished if caught, often remain determined to try again because of the deep social problems and poverty at home.

“What they have in mind is that they are going abroad to have a better future, to earn dollars. They don’t mind the fact that they might be victims of illegal trafficking,” she said

icarusrising

May 12th, 2011, 12:52 PM

Color purple drive for women’s rights, RH bill (http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view/20110512-336022/Color-purple-drive-for-womens-rights-RH-bill)

By Tarra Quismundo
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 03:39:00 05/12/2011

MANILA, Philippines—Amid the raging debate on the reproductive health (RH) bill, former President Fidel V. Ramos Wednesday called on President Benigno Aquino III to certify the measure to Congress as urgent if he wants “to do the right thing.”

Speaking at the launch of the “purple ribbon” campaign of family planning advocates, Ramos called on Mr. Aquino to mobilize support for the bill, largely hailed by civil society and women’s groups but opposed by the Roman Catholic Church.

Purple symbolizes women’s rights, organizers said.

“Mr. President, with due respect, for you to do the right thing, you must now certify the RH bill as urgent,” said Ramos to the applause of some 500 people, mostly women, at Crowne Plaza hotel in Pasig City.

He said Aquino, who has expressed support for the bill, should not fear critiques as the people are behind him.

“Let me appeal to our highest elected leader who occupies Malacañang, our beloved President Aquino. As your boss—that’s us—we ask his excellency to lead the campaign for the enactment of the RH bill,” Ramos said.

Ramos noted that the country was among nations who signed an agreement in Cairo back in 1994, when he was President, to cut infant mortality and maternal deaths that the bill hopes to address.

He cited figures counting some 500,000 maternal deaths every year, 97 percent of which are recorded in developing countries.

Some 4,700 Filipino mothers die of pregnancy or childbirth complications, said former Health Secretary Esperanza Cabral.

Cabral joined former Health Secretary Alberto Romualdez, Risa Hontiveros of Akbayan, RH bill authors House Minority Floor Leader Edcel Lagman and Iloilo Rep. Janette Garin, artists and representatives of academic and medical communities, civil society groups and NGOs at the launch.

“This is to empower each of us to make our own choices about our own bodies and not allow anyone bully us to doing otherwise. It’s no biggie really, it’s common sense. It’s no great lightning bolt from heaven,” said international theater artist Lea Salonga, before singing the Beatles’ classic “Imagine.”

Health Secretary Enrique Ona reaffirmed the Aquino administration’s commitment to reproductive health and said the government has remained focused on poor families who do not have access to proper family planning methods.

Unwavering support

“The Aquino administration has never wavered in its vow of enacting a national policy for responsible parenthood and reproductive health. This policy seeks to enable couples and individuals to choose the number, spacing and timing of their children based on the demands of responsible parenthood and informed choice,” Ona said.

“We are having political mappings. We are sure that if a vote is taken now, the RH bill could pass,” Lagman said in a separate press conference.

“It’s hard to disclose numbers. Numbers could make the enemy worry or wary. I am telling you, we can take a vote anytime, the RH bill could pass,” he said.

Lagman said he was assured by the House leadership that plenary debates on the bill would resume on Tuesday.

Manila Rep. Amado Bagatsing, one of the staunch opponents of the bill, said he expected rough sailing for the measure on the floor. With a report from Cynthia D. Balana

skywalker2008

May 13th, 2011, 09:25 AM

These anti-RH groups are setting very bad precedents. First, they are calling for non-compliance to a "potential" state law (if ever RH passed) and now, this non-payment of taxes. If that is the case, anyone can freely be a tax evader.

If the catholic church and other religious groups want to maintain their tax-free operations in this country, they must learn how to correspondingly honor established state laws or else they can relocate to vatican. Catholic churches occupy vast prime lands while many of their members are informal settlers and they maintain schools that only a handful can afford.

Aquino: Sedition raps await anti-RH group's tax boycott (http://www.gmanews.tv/story/220483/nation/aquino-sedition-raps-await-anti-rh-groups-tax-boycott)
AMITA LEGASPI, GMA News
05/13/2011 | 11:28 AM

President Benigno Simeon Aquino III on Friday said sedition charges may be filed against anti-reproductive health activists who threatened not to pay their taxes if the RH bill is enacted into law.

In an interview with reporters after the launching of the National Greening Program, Aquino said he would consider it a serious offense if the Citizens Alliance for the Protection of Human Life (CATH-Life) made true its threat not to pay taxes if the RH bill is passed into law.

"I will be surprised if anybody will say that publicly because if I'm not mistaken mabigat na kaso po yan," he said.

Lawyer Lyndon Caña of CATH-Life made the threat not to pay taxes if the RH bill is passed.

Caña said they have talked with some of their members and other anti-RH groups based in Bacolod, Cebu and Negros Oriental, among others.

"I think sedition would be the charge that would be filed for not doing your civic obligation. Marami nang precedent yan," Aquino said.

Aquino said even a mere threat could be considered a serious offense.

"Talagang mahigpit ang ating batas. Pag nagmungkahi ka na wag magbayad ng buwis ay feeling ko a very serious offense. Hindi ko maalala kung sedition papasok yan o rebellion, pero mukhang sedition," he said.

The non-payment of taxes was a form of civil disobedience that some Catholic bishops have suggested as a response to the state-sponsored promotion of artificial contraceptives.

Aquino's mother, former President Corazon Aquino, launched a civil disobedience campaign in February 1986 against the regime of then-President Ferdinand Marcos. Her campaign mainly called for a boycott of products of companies owned by Marcos cronies.

Marcos and his family fled the country soon after the civil disobedience campaign started.

State funds for artificial contraceptives

While the Aquino administration favors the passage of the RH or the Responsible Parenthood bill, the Catholic Church is against it as it would mandate the use of state funds to make available artificial contraceptives to couples.

The Catholic Church accepts only natural methods of family planning. - VVP/HS, GMA News

Maxxclip

May 13th, 2011, 09:39 AM

Belmonte to block dilatory tactics

Eager to have the Reproductive Bill put to the vote, Speaker Feliciano Belmonte, Jr. yesterday vowed to eliminate dilatory tactics when the House tackles the measure.

Belmonte said he will block attempts to derail the proceedings.

“We should really try to control dilatory tactics like repetitive questions. We will be coming up with ground rules for both sides,” he told reporters. Minority Leader and Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman earlier asked Belmonte to streamline the proceedings to block the delaying attempts of some lawmakers against the passage of the RH bill. Lagman said repetitive questions should not be entertained to save time.

The Speaker said it’s time for lawmakers to vote on the bill.

“Everybody is so confident, the pro and anti-RH. Let’s put this bill into a vote,” he said.

He admitted that the House of Representatives will not be able to pass the measure before Congress adjourns on June 9. However, he is certain that they will reach the major vote when session resumes on the fourth Monday of July.

Belmonte said the Catholic Church may influence some individual members but it cannot pressure the entire House of Representatives.

He said President Benigno Aquino III who supports the responsible parenthood measure has not asked them to deliberate the measure so that it can be approved with dispatch.

Lagman said around 50 lawmakers who opposed the measure expressed the desire to interpellate when the bill is tackled on second reading.

journal (http://www.journal.com.ph/index.php/news/national/5081-belmonte-to-block-dilatory-tactics)

Bricken Ridge

May 13th, 2011, 09:58 AM

s40

May 13th, 2011, 10:05 AM

bartstrife99

May 13th, 2011, 02:56 PM

Dire scenario from Erap

http://www.mb.com.ph/articles/317978/dire-scenario-erap

MANILA, Philippines — Former President Joseph Estrada predicts that 10 to 15 years from now, if the current population growth continues, there will be a revolt by the masses. The elite and their ilk might as well pack up their bags and escape to more developed climes to enjoy their wealth, he said.

Estrada, during a recent tete-a-tete with members of the media, said that in the Philippines, those belonging to Class A and B, the well-to-do and the highly educated, usually have one or at most two children. This is to give their siblings better health care and first-class education.

On the other hand, Class C and D, the poor and those who barely finished schooling, usually have four, six, eight, or ten children. This is because the poor, even if they wanted to limit their offspring, are either too ignorant to take advantage of contraceptives or fearful of the church’s prohibition from using any artificial means of birth control.

Two decades or more down the road, these children will have grown up and will be needing jobs and sources of income, and if not gainfully employed, they may resort to criminal activities.

“A hungry stomach knows no law,” he repeats a hoary aphorism.

He said there would be revolt from the masses if the country’s economy remains mired in the doldrums, there is mass unemployment, and the political establishment continues to ignore the country’s high population growth, now estimated at 2.4 million babies a year.

Erap says that the Catholic church meddling makes it difficult for the government to adopt a population control policy. Yet in Rome, the seat of the Vatican, contraceptives are sold and promoted openly.

spearhead

May 13th, 2011, 03:57 PM

"The Philippines is poor not because of a growing population. There has been no evidence in any part of the world or at any point in world history that poverty is caused by population growth."

-Dr. Bernardo Villegas, Economist, one of the Framers of the 1986 Philippine Constitution.

Dr. Bernardo Villegas, is one of the reason why the 1987 constitution is flawed.

I totally disagreed with his statement. He was one of the framers of that constitution, then where is he now, hiding? Perhaps sucking up his past mistakes by his couch. He was one of those who were covering up the RCC's fault and their disagreement of total birth control system that was initiated by former first lady Imelda Marcos. He shouldn't be trusted, and not all professionals like him are always right, as no body is perfect.

So just to answer him, the Philippines is already experiencing over-population. Our country is one of the most over-populated country. It is the 12th most over-populated country in the whole world. Many of the people here in the Philippines, especially teenagers, are engaged in prostitution and pre-marital sex, which is two of the most common causes of over-population.

Over-population is existing and increasing because also of poverty. Many of the female teenagers nowadays tend to sell "themselves" just for money, so that they will be able to have something for their expenses, and in some cases, for their school fees or their families. In fact, because of these things Philippines is also starting to suffer from some diseases, such as, AIDS, STD, HIV, and also malnutrition - only common to some parts or provinces of the Philippines.

While a big population with enough young manpower to run a country is good to any nation as long as their economy are capable of providing them with all the necessities.

Meanwhile, how can a nation sustain their population if they are short in money because their population exceeded the capacity of their supply and demand of food, and jobs?

Indeed, poverty will cause over population (by producing uneducated citizens), and an overpopulated nation will cause poverty.

GodIsNotGreat

May 13th, 2011, 07:34 PM

^^ The guy belongs to Opus Dei.

_____________________________________

If he can perform miracles, why can't he heal amputees?

http://www.whywontgodhealamputees.com/

spearhead

May 14th, 2011, 01:34 AM

^^ The guy belongs to Opus Dei.

_____________________________________

If he can perform miracles, why can't he heal amputees?

http://www.whywontgodhealamputees.com/

I wouldn't be surprised then. :lol:

mwg12a

May 14th, 2011, 01:57 AM

I'd say let the catholic church do what they want, along with their supporters and the government should do what it takes to help it's own people where the catholic can't help. Poverty and over population.

Askal82

May 14th, 2011, 04:03 AM

Manila-X

May 14th, 2011, 04:29 AM

spearhead

May 14th, 2011, 04:29 AM

noli-kun

May 14th, 2011, 05:03 AM

Ady001

May 14th, 2011, 05:18 AM

Ady001

May 14th, 2011, 05:20 AM

azriel915

May 14th, 2011, 05:32 AM

And I thought Erap has no vision for the country at all. :lol::lol:

It's because people always portray him as stupid and dumb just because he doesn't have a college diploma to brag about. Just because you have a diploma it doesn't mean you're intellectually superior already :)

Maxxclip

May 14th, 2011, 06:37 AM

In RH war of words, bishop compares Aquino to Marcos

A senior Roman Catholic bishop on Friday compared Philippine President Benigno Aquino to the ousted dictator Ferdinand Marcos, in an escalating war of words over a controversial bill promoting artificial contraception.

The plan before Congress has put Aquino on a collision course with the country's powerful Catholic church leaders, who this week walked out of talks on the Reproductive Health bill.

Anti-RH groups supported the bishops and stepped up pressure against Aquino, calling for a widespread civil disobedience campaign, including non-payment of taxes.

"Not to pay taxes, I will be surprised if somebody will say that publicly because if I am not mistaken, that's a serious criminal offence," Aquino told reporters on Friday.

"I think sedition will be the charge that will be filed for your not doing your civic obligation."

Aquino's latest statement in the battle over the bill, which includes measures to promote sex education and the use of artificial contraceptives, immediately drew criticism from Catholic bishops, who have blocked similar measures since the 1990s.

"He can put us all in jail," Ramon Arguelles, archbishop of Lipa, south of Manila, told reporters, adding Aquino sounded like the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos, who also threatened groups calling for civil disobedience during his regime.

"We are willing to pay the price to save the unborn from modern Herods and save the executioners from the grasp of the evil one."

Archbishop Angel Lagdameo, former head of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines, said the government must consider the moral aspect of the issue.

"In the end, we must obey God and not man," he added.

The Catholic church is a powerful political force in the Philippines, playing a key role in the overthrow of two presidents, including Marcos, during the past 25 years, and politicians generally avoid picking fights with the clergy.

The president's mother, democracy heroine Corazon Aquino, herself called for a campaign of civil disobedience against Marcos after she said he stole her election victory in 1986.

The allegations of poll fraud helped spark a popular revolt that toppled Marcos's 20-year rule and swept Cory Aquino to power.

Aquino said his government would prioritize the passage of a reproductive health bill in Congress as a tool to cut poverty in the poor but resource-rich Southeast Asian state.

Aquino pledged last month to push for the enactment of the reproductive health bill in Congress in a bid to lower maternal death in the Philippines, even at the risk of excommunication from the Roman Catholic Church.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Church in the World

Obey the Pope, cardinal chides Jesuits
Robert Mickens - 12 January 2008

The Vatican cardinal who deals with religious orders this week publicly challenged the Society of Jesus to demonstrate greater adherence to the Pope and official church teaching, as Jesuit delegates gathered in Rome for a lengthy meeting to elect a new Superior General and set a direction for the future. (http://www.thetablet.co.uk/article/10871)

spearhead

May 14th, 2011, 06:45 AM

^^Here comes the catholic church again, using the name Marcos again. Tsk tsk tsk.... Anga kakapal nilang mag preach at gamitin pa ang ngalan ni Hesus ni sila nga di man magturo ng Biblia, instead puro paganism ang tinuturo sa simbahang katoliko. 'tong mga RCC bishops talaga eh mga ipokrito. Mag preach sila na tularin si Hesus pero sila panay ang turo na sumamba sa mga imahen. BS!

Dapat talaga mabago na ang government system, dapat mag federalism na para lahat na ng conservative catholics ay manirahan nalang sa metro manila federal state or NCR state, dahil nandu lahat nakatira lahat ng malalakas na bishops.

The rest of federal states wag nang gayahin ang NCR para magkaroon na sila ng freedom na sumunod sa total birth control system.

bledzoe

May 14th, 2011, 07:47 AM

Bricken Ridge

May 14th, 2011, 09:45 AM

Christian_123

May 14th, 2011, 01:12 PM

Boycott na dapat ang catholic church. Masyadong kupal un mga pari...dapat sa kanila ay itapon sa spratlys para target practice sila ng mga chinese soldiers.

spearhead

May 14th, 2011, 01:43 PM

Boycott na dapat ang catholic church. Masyadong kupal un mga pari...dapat sa kanila ay itapon sa spratlys para target practice sila ng mga chinese soldiers.

Uy sobra ka naman but thats funny hahahaha :lol:

Askal82

May 15th, 2011, 04:05 AM

PNoy should be careful with the way he handles this issue. The power of the Catholic Church cannot be underestimated...

Some Church extremists might just be planning behind the scene and collaborating with the "Black Mamba" to plot his eventual downfall. :ohno:

I say, "BEWARE OF THE BLACK MAMBA!".

It doesn't matter. The RH bill should be passed to set a precedent and validate the principle in our democratic institution that the separation of religion and state does exist. It shows that our government has the balls to do whatever is necessary and fair for everyone regardless of beliefs. This is going to be a landmark law when it pushed through. What about those minorities who are not Catholics? Don't they deserved a voice on this issue as well?

The Catholic church in the Philippines are over reacting and are desperate to get support - they go to extreme means by blackmailing and instigate fears among the faithful when the law merely provides us the benefit of the alternatives that are equally safe and sound with the natural methods.

Manila-X

May 15th, 2011, 08:20 AM

Debating the RH bill
By Randy David
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 00:11:00 05/15/2011

ON SO fundamental a proposal as the Reproductive Health bill (HB 4244), there is bound to be wide and passionate disagreement. The bill touches on matters that lie within the scope of three basic institutions: the State, the Church, and the family. Although differing views on such matters may not always be reconcilable, they can be made—in the spirit of democracy—to accommodate one another.

To get to that point, it is essential that the parties must give up the use of threats or coercion to bolster their respective position. The mere mention of excommunication or criminal prosecution in the course of an ongoing debate is enough to fuel extreme reaction. Debaters and discussants must stick to the main issues, avoid name-calling, and not indulge in polemics. They must try hard to see issues from the standpoint of the other, instead of privileging their own way of seeing as “commonsensical” or “rational” or truly “moral.” Such words can be conversation-stoppers.

On this issue, I don’t expect much from the encounter between the Church hierarchy and the leaders of the State. Each side will reiterate and promote its own definition of reality. More than that, both institutions will try to stretch their sphere of influence on society to the extent they can. The Church cannot be expected to view the world from the standpoint of secular leaders. That is not its role. In like manner, political leaders in a modern state cannot allow decision-making to be controlled by any religion without violating the autonomy of politics that is crucial to a democracy.

In transitional societies like ours, the vulnerability tends to hobble largely the political side. We see this in the way political legitimacy is routinely and brazenly sought from religious leaders—not only during elections but especially during times of crisis. When citizens habitually ask bishops to sanctify the political choices they make, they make it hard for them to back off on all other matters of state. Perhaps at no other time was the vulnerability of government to religious interference as evident as during Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s presidency. She served as the clergy’s principal conduit to Congress. She made sure that the RH bill would not move an inch during her term, even if her own allies were among the bill’s fervent supporters. In turn, the Church rewarded her by softening public criticism of her governance.

In contrast, we have today a president who not only supports the bill but also risks antagonizing the Church by repeatedly expressing his stand in public. Instead of allowing the fate of the bill to be decided at closed-door meetings, this administration has encouraged free and open discussion of its merits and demerits.

One can immediately see the effect of this readiness to debate in the boldness of the growing number of legislators who support the bill. But, it is obvious as well in the stance taken by those who oppose it. Though their objections are fundamentally religious, they find themselves having to couch these in non-religious language. They frame their arguments in moral and constitutional terms, raise issues of practicability, or argue from economic and political rationality. They do not flash the religious card, knowing they are legislating for an entire nation and not for a particular religious community. That’s how it is supposed to be in a democracy.

But though it may not be obvious at first glance, rapid ferment is taking place within the Philippine Church itself. One cannot think of any other time when there was more open questioning by the faithful of the hierarchy’s rigid position on reproductive health than today.

The key issue is whether the ban on contraception is dogmatically defined and thus irreformable. The famous Catholic theologian Karl Rahner does not think that the papal encyclical “Humanae Vitae” can be considered “irreformable doctrine.” Still, he believes that “the presumption should be in favor of the Pope’s declaration.”

But so complex are the issues, Rahner goes on to say, that many may be unable to accept the Pope’s doctrine. A cogent summary of his highly nuanced position, written for a German publication in 1968, has been provided by Cardinal Avery Dulles, S.J., who taught religion and society at Fordham. (http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id= 10722) It is useful to cite Rahner at this time because he shows the Church to be the living institution it should be, staunchly defending its place in a changing world while remaining sensitive to dissenting voices within it.

“Bishops,” Rahner makes clear, “should surely instruct the faithful about the meaning and weight of the pope’s decision, and warn the faithful to take it seriously…. On the other hand, bishops should not act as though the encyclical were irreformable or as though everyone who dissented were guilty of contempt of authority or were separating himself from the church. They should refrain from imposing canonical penalties on persons who respectfully and discreetly propose another view…. If no one could voice his opposition to reformable doctrines, the development and correction of the Church’s official teaching would be seriously hampered.”

Rahner’s views stand in contrast to the intolerance with which some members of our clergy have treated those who differ with the official teaching on contraception. My sense is that, in the last analysis, the strength of the Church will be tested not by what happens to the RH bill but by the grace with which it is able to deal with the dissenting voices within it.

chris_nigel

May 15th, 2011, 08:29 AM

This bill will be a law in a years time for sure..Easy for the priest to say na ok lang ang madami cause they haven't experience to have a child na poproblemahin ang ipapakain pag walang pera or much worst tinatago nila ang mga nagiging anak nila kasi bawal sa kanila yun hindi ba??

Mahiya naman kayo mga ANTI RH BILL kung meron man dito???

Mercato

May 15th, 2011, 08:55 AM

Posted on May 9, 2011 by Carlos Emmanuel Quiapo

A Jesuit Commentary on The RH Bill

http://darkcheddar.wordpress.com/2011/05/09/a-jesuit-commentary-on-the-rh-bill/

Commentary: ‘For he is our peace’ (Eph. 2:14)

By John J. Carroll, S.J.
Philippine Daily Inquirer

Posted date: May 04, 2011

As I watched Christ’s faithful gather symbolically in the Upper Room on Holy Thursday, around Calvary’s cross on Good Friday, and at the empty tomb on Easter Sunday, a wave of joy flowed over me. Swept up like a chip of wood on the surface of a boiling wave by the power of the community singing, I recalled the unity in faith and hope of the millions who gathered 25 years ago at Edsa. But still there was an undercurrent of sadness, sadness due to the realization that the official Church no longer stands with a united people but with one part of a nation divided; and that the struggle is carried on, no longer in the respectful manner of the crowds at Edsa, but in an atmosphere of personal animosity and demonizing.

The sadness is made deeper by the sense that in the debate over the RH bill, the Church seems to have backed itself into a no-win situation. If the bill passes over the total opposition of the hierarchy, there will be gloating in some quarters and a sense of “Who’s afraid of the big bad Church?” If it is defeated by the opposition of the Church, I fear a powerful backlash at the Church’s “interference in politics” and “reliance on political power rather than moral suasion”—the beginnings of an anti-clericalism such as has overwhelmed formerly Catholic bastions such as Spain and Ireland.

With all due respect for the position of the Philippine bishops, I do not see that total opposition to the bill necessary, once one gets past the polemics. First of all, the bill does not legalize contraceptives; they are already legal and may be purchased in any drugstore. What the bill proposes to do—rightly or wrongly—is to subsidize the cost of contraception as well as natural family planning to the poor. Neither does the bill legalize abortion; on the contrary it reaffirms the constitutional prohibition. It is highly probable in fact that if contraceptives become more available to the poor, the scandalous number of illegal abortions performed annually will be dramatically reduced.

On the tricky scientific question whether the IUD and some contraceptive pills may prevent the implantation of a fertilized ovum in the mother’s womb and so destroy a human life, the current draft of the bill passes the responsibility to the Food and Drug Administration, which should ban any such “contraceptives” from drugstores throughout the country.

On the matter of sex education in the schools, the same draft allows parents to “opt out” for their children, i.e. to have them exempted from such classes. This is an improvement, although it would seem better to allow religious schools to develop their own programs. It may be still possible to negotiate for this. There is a graded set of modules on sex and population education already available, prepared by teachers of Catholic schools under the leadership of the Office of Population Studies Foundation of the University of San Carlos, and bearing the imprimatur of Ricardo Cardinal Vidal.

Other improvements may still be possible. One might be to strengthen the “conscience clauses” protecting health workers and teachers whose religious values conflict with certain aspects of the bill. Another could be representation of religious bodies on an oversight committee to make sure that freedom of conscience is fully respected in the field.

A sticking point for many is that the bill would subsidize the distribution of contraceptives to the poor. The Catholic Church, while recognizing the fundamental moral difference between contraception and abortion, still insists that the former is wrong. It debases the most sacred act which a husband and wife can perform: cooperation with the Creator in bringing into existence a new human person destined for eternity with God. Here it would seem more consistent for the Church to initiate a vigorous program of family life and natural family planning education for its people, helping them to form their consciences and make responsible decisions on this matter, rather than trying by political means to keep them away from “temptation.”

Which brings up what to me seems to be the most important issue here, namely, the family and family values. The charge is made that the RH bill will destroy the Filipino family. On the basis of more than 25 years of pastoral and social work in Payatas, and some seven years sponsoring natural family planning programs, I can say that the family is already at great risk—and not because of contraceptives.

While the dedication of many young people—our scholars and former scholars—to helping their families, and the sacrifices that they are willing to make, are sometimes overwhelming, these are often one-parent families abandoned by the fathers who have gone on to father second and even third families. Or no-parent families abandoned by both father and mother and being raised by grandparents. Moreover, one main reason why only some 20 percent of the women who take our seminars on natural family planning actually practice it is precisely the unwillingness of the husbands to cooperate.

Our family-life seminars seem to be much appreciated. If only the effort and resources being now invested in opposition to the RH bill were being used for serious family-life education and family support services, there might be little reason to oppose the bill. And our Holy Week services might be true celebrations of unity, mutual respect and love.

—-

When I’ve read this post, I said to myself, this is going to be on my blog. I admire how the priest unified his ideas based on the ideologies of a member of the society and member of the Church. Both parties of the intriguing debate must read this. This is one of the reasons why I admire Jesuit Priests. And for all people out there, I’m pro-RH Bill.

Here’s a little stand. Everything that he said is right. I agree to what he is saying. Now, just a little message to those who doesn’t agree with the Reproductive Bill, is a woman (more like a girl), 17 years of age, normal to have a quadruplet-baby? Is a man (more like a boy), 16 years of age, normal to have two children already?

:colgate:

Mercato

May 15th, 2011, 09:20 AM

http://www.newsflash.org/2004/02/ht/ht009647.htm

MALAYA: JESUITS ON THE RH BILL

MANILA, OCTOBER 29, 2010 (MALAYA) DUCKY PAREDES - ‘(T)he debate has focused only on whether the Bill should be passed or rejected in its present form. Either option would not be good for Filipinos.’ )

SOME Jesuits (Fr. Eric O. Genilo, S.J., Fr, John J. Carroll, S.J., and Fr. Joaquin Bernas, S.J.) have issued a letter on the Reproductive Health Bill under the auspices of the Loyola School of Theology and the John J. Carroll Institute on Church and Social Issues. I pass this on (slightly abridged for length) without comment but welcome readers’ comments:

The polarization of Philippine society over the Reproductive Health Bill has been a source of discouragement and discontent among Filipinos. It is unfortunate that the debate has focused only on whether the Bill should be passed or rejected in its present form. Either option would not be good for Filipinos. The Church sees in the proposed Bill serious flaws that can lead to violations of human rights and freedom of conscience. It would not be acceptable to pass it in its present form. Total rejection of the Bill, however, will not change the status quo of high rates of infant mortality, maternal deaths, and abortions. It is a moral imperative that such dehumanizing conditions should not be allowed to continue. What is needed is a third option: critical and constructive engagement.

The Church insists on protection of human life upon fertilization. The question to be answered by the State is if this is the same position it will take regarding the protection of human life.

The Philippine Constitution says that the State will protect the life of the unborn upon conception. It is not specified in the Constitution whether conception means fertilization or the implantation of an embryo in the womb. The Constitutional Convention seemed to favor fertilization. The definition of conception will have a bearing whether contraceptives that prevent the implantation of embryos would be legally allowed or not. This definition of conception in the Constitution must be worked out both by medical and legal experts in order to determine the parameters of what reproductive services can be provided by the Bill.

At the center of the controversy regarding abortion and the RH Bill are IUDs and other contraceptive medications and devices that may have the possible effect of preventing the implantation of an embryo, which for the Catholic Church, is considered an abortifacient effect.

Proposal: The State first has to make a clear position whether it considers the prevention of implantation of an embryo as an abortion. If the State takes this position, there must be a careful and scientifically based evaluation of each of the medicines and devices provided by the Bill. Those contraceptive medicines and devices which are determined to have abortifacient effects are to be banned even now and regardless of whether the RH Bill is passed or not.

The mandatory nature of the sexuality education curriculum proposed by the Bill is a concern for the Church because it would compel Catholic educators to teach parts of the curriculum that may be unacceptable for Catholics. The Church is also concerned that the parents’ right to decide on the education of their children would be denied by such a mandatory curriculum for all schools.

Proposal: For the purpose of protecting academic freedom and respecting religious traditions, should not the right of religious schools to write and implement their own sexuality education curriculum according their religious traditions be respected? For public schools and non-religious private schools, an appointed panel of parent representatives, educators, experts in child development and psychology, medical experts, and representatives of religious traditions can write the sexuality education curriculum and the DepEd can monitor the implementation. Parents with children in public schools should have the right to have their children exempted from the sexuality education class if the curriculum is not acceptable to them. The Constitution allows religious instruction in public schools only if the parents consent in writing. Should a similar provision be enacted relative to sexuality education? The Bill must also respect the conscientious objection of individual educators who refuse to teach a sexuality curriculum that violates their religious beliefs.

Even if the majority of the population of the country are Catholics, our democratic system should ensure that public polices are not determined solely by majority vote but also by a careful consideration of the common good of all, including non-Catholics.

The Compendium of the Social Teaching of the Church rejects any imposition of norms by a majority that is discriminatory of the rights of a minority: (#422) "Because of its historical and cultural ties to a nation, a religious community might be given special recognition on the part of the State. Such recognition must in no way create discrimination within the civil or social order for other religious groups;" (#169): "Those responsible for government are required to interpret the common good of their country not only according to the guidelines of the majority but also according to the effective good of all the members of the community, including the minority."

It is the duty of various religions to teach their faithful and form their consciences about what their religious tradition allows and prohibits with regard to family planning. It is the duty of the government to provide correct and comprehensive information on all non-abortifacient (as defined by law) family planning methods that are available. Consciences will thus be better equipped to make informed choices according to their religious traditions.

Proposal: There can be two separate parallel programs for providing information and training, one for NFP and another for artificial methods of family planning (with separate budgets). The separation of the programs will ensure that NFP will get adequate funding and those trainers who wish to teach only NFP for religious reasons will not be forced to teach artificial methods. The conscience of health workers and trainers should be respected. If a Catholic health worker or trainer conscientiously objects to teaching contraception methods, he or she should be allowed to teach only NFP methods.

The current Bill prohibits the refusal of health care services and information based on a patient’s marital status, gender or sexual orientation, age, religion, personal circumstances, and nature of work. This provision must have parameters. For example, if a doctor refuses to administer an IUD to a minor who requests for it, would that be considered age discrimination?

Should the provision apply equally to both in the public and private health care providers or shouldn’t private practitioners have more leeway in practicing their medicine as they see fit?

Proposal: The question of whether contraceptives are essential medicines should be resolved by a panel of objective medical experts such as the Philippine Medical Association. What contraceptives actually prevent diseases? It would be helpful to be able to present cases where the use of a contraceptive is a medically indicated treatment for a particular disease or emergency situation. If some contraceptives are ultimately decided as essential or emergency medicines that should be stocked in government health centers and hospitals, no contraceptives with abortifacient effects are to be allowed.

The above proposals are intended to generate constructive and respectful dialogue leading to concrete actions that would correct the RH Bill. It is hoped that the parties involved in the RH debate would move away from hard-line positions and consider negotiations as a more positive step towards working for the good of all Filipinos, with special consideration for the unborn, the youth, women and families in difficult circumstances.

Finally, we can turn to the following Christian maxim as our guide in our search for answers and solutions regarding the RH Bill: "In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; and in all things, charity." For things pertaining to protecting human life and dignity, we need to come to a consensus for the common good; for things that can be left to individual decisions without violating human life and dignity, we need to respect freedom of conscience of every Filipino both Catholics and non-Catholics; in all our discussions, we need to speak and act with charity and understanding as members of the same human family and community.

*** :storm:

noli-kun

May 15th, 2011, 10:35 AM

chris_nigel

May 15th, 2011, 10:43 AM

^^ from the contribution of the church members which ang karamihan ehh mahihirap din kaya qwits lang..lol

San-Mat

May 15th, 2011, 09:22 PM

What are the key point of the RH BILL that is controversial?

Manila-X

May 16th, 2011, 05:27 AM

What are the key point of the RH BILL that is controversial?

It is because alot of it are against the principles of the Roman Catholic Church. More of its Filipino branch.

wynngd

May 16th, 2011, 08:37 AM

Chant the RH mantras
By Antonio J. Montalvan II
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 01:17:00 05/16/2011

Filed Under: Legislation, Population, Protest, Congress, Health
Most Read
YOU WERE born yesterday. Your science is outdated. Your faith should be schizophrenic—leave it at your doorsteps.

That, in recap, seemed to be what pro-RH Bill adherents are saying to those who oppose it. Watching ANC’s “Harapan” more than a week ago, the time has come for us to shift to what is not being said because these actually speak volumes. To get anywhere near the truth which precisely cannot be afforded any denial is what is owed to a public on the verge of making an informed decision. But by arguing with the “follow what I say, not what I do” mode?

Edcel Lagman, for instance, was clearly caught on the defensive when confronted with what he had repeatedly claimed, that the RH Bill is not a population measure. Lagman could not counter the fact either that the Philippine population growth rate has been steadily declining. Why the need for the bill?

Esperanza Cabral did not deny saying that the pill can cause breast cancer. Yet that fact is slurred over by pro-RH advocates precisely because it will demolish their cause. I am sure Cabral did not commit a boo-boo. She is a medical doctor and knows the truth and for that we must be grateful to her. In fact, we must now use her statement as a mantra. The medical evidence on the link between contraception and breast cancer is well established. But in downplaying that fact of science, is that not lying?

Risa Hontiveros-Baraquel kept on saying “no name calling” yet could not stop colleague Carlos Celdran from making an unkind cut on the still-speaking Joey Lina by saying, audibly to televiewers, “liar!” Who started the Damaso trend of name-tagging anyway? Wow, so much integrity is indeed at stake here, let alone proper manners.

A Thomas-Aquinas-quoting Sylvia Estrada Claudio admitted she was no Catholic yet could not explain how the RH Bill could in fact impose its domination on those who deem it contrary to their faith. Imagine an employer who is Catholic face the specter of jail if that employer refuses to make available contraceptive services to employees.

Again, the mikes picked up Carlos Celdran, muttering audibly without being asked, that “We have the Pulse Asia and SWS surveys behind us, where the respondents did not have to pay 2.50 to text in their answers.” Precisely, the inutile selectivity for surveys. We are pleased with them only when the results are in our favor. But when a soaring 65 percent is against the bill?

It is the taxpaying public who will pay the costs of the RH Bill, truly a bonanza to multinational pharmaceuticals. Going base in denying the truth about contraception is a vicious approach at educating the public. That approach will be futile: the history of contraception is long.

We have much to learn from one of the most astute contraception magistrates of the world. To Hillary Rodham Clinton goes that credit. At the G8 Foreign Ministers meeting in Gatineau, Canada, Clinton chastised the host Canadian government, a conservative at that moment, for focusing on maternal health by omitting discussions on contraception.

“I’m not going to speak for what Canada decides, but I will say that I’ve worked in this area for many years. And if we’re talking about maternal health, you cannot have maternal health without reproductive health. And reproductive health includes contraception and family planning and access to legal, safe abortion.” (underscoring mine)

There you have it. A bogey it is not.

Besides the Cabral mantra we must now chant, add the Clinton mantra that contraception and abortion are, verily, conjoined twins. Thank you, Mrs. Clinton.

The US Secretary of State could not have skimmed over the fact that in Canada, the birth control pill was legalized there in 1969, the same year it legalized abortion. Just a year after, Canada Statistics reported 11,152 abortions. Today that number is a whopping 106,418, a ten-fold increase since 1970. And yet how pervasive is contraceptive use in Canada? The World Health Organization reports that “among Canadian women age 15-44, 86 percent report using the pill.”

“There is no culture or subculture in the world that has permitted contraception and then has not gone on to permit abortion,” writes Natalie Hudson in “The Contraception Misconception.”

“As acceptance of contraception increases, so does acceptance of abortion. Why is this the case? Because at the root of contraception is the notion that a couple can engage in sexual activity and avoid its natural consequences. Couples who unintentionally conceive a child while using contraception are far more likely to resort to abortion than others.

“Contraception alters our understanding of human sexuality by changing its purpose. The effects are far reaching and affect the way that we understand relationships, gender roles and the human person. Contraception has historically been promoted as a means of women’s emancipation, yet ironically it has led to a much greater objectification of women. Women’s bodies have become a testing ground for pharmaceutical companies to reap profits from the myth that the natural consequences of sex can be avoided; women are put out of touch with their bodies as their fertility cycles become chemically controlled; and contraception can also be used to hide the evidence of abuse that is sometimes perpetrated among young or marginalized women.”

“It is a sin to tell a lie,” medical doctor Rep. Janet Garin, sworn to the Hippocratic oath, says. If my understanding is correct, I suppose the Garin Morality also covers not lying to the public that now has to make an informed decision on the RH Bill? Transpose that to a doctor not disclosing all the medical consequences to a patient. No wonder the ignorance is much.

Now comes Death knocking on the Philippines’ doors. But chant the mantras.

http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view/20110516-336731/Chant-the-RH-mantras

Manila-X

May 16th, 2011, 10:01 AM

Palace to Church: Cool it
Tension over reproductive health bill escalates

By Christine O. Avendaño
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 01:21:00 05/16/2011

MANILA, Philippines---Appealing for sobriety, Malacañang on Sunday sought to heal a widening rift between Church and State over the controversial parenthood bill that last week saw prelates threatening civil disobedience and President Benigno Aquino III warning he would jail them.

“We have different positions here, but probably we should explain our positions within the means of the law. That is what the President is saying. There is room for debate, it doesn’t have to degenerate to illegal acts or anything like that,” Communications Secretary Ricky Carandang told reporters.

“It would be better that we calm down a bit and discuss the issue at hand,” the President’s deputy spokesperson, Abigail Valte, said over the state radio, adding that Mr. Aquino was merely reminding that Filipinos have a civil duty to pay their taxes used to finance public programs.

Tension flared when several members of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) last week declared an “all-out war” using pulpits against the reproductive health (RH) bill pending in Congress and warned they were prepared not to pay taxes in a civil disobedience campaign.

Mr. Aquino, a 51-year-old bachelor who has said he is prepared to face Church excommunication in supporting the RH bill, countered that tax boycotts were seditious and could lead to criminal cases.

“He can put us all in jail. We are all willing to pay the price to save the unborn from modern Herods and to save the executioners from the grasp of the evil one,” Lipa Archbishop Ramon Arguelles said in response to the President’s statement.

“He sounds like Marcos when his mother called for civil disobedience. What happened to his mother’s terrorist and his father’s tormentor?” Arguelles told CBCPNews, the bishops’ news website.

The archbishop was referring to the late Corazon Aquino’s action against Ferdinand Marcos following allegations of fraud in the snap election of 1986 that led to the ouster of the dictator.

‘Charge us all’

Cotabato Auxiliary Bishop Jose Colin Bagaforo said Mr. Aquino’s sedition threat was “most welcome.”

“Let him charge us all bishops, priests, religious, all the faithful with sedition,” said Sorsogon Bishop Arturo Bastes.

Jaro Archbishop Angel Lagdameo called for calm and a “wait-and-see attitude” but also added that, in the end, Catholics have to “obey God and not man.”

Fr. Jerry Oblepias, director of the Diocesan Family and Life Ministry in San Pablo, Laguna, over the weekend said the Church had always been consistent and strong in its opposition against the RH bill.

“The Church is motivated by genuine love and concern for the people and the poor, unlike the RH bill proponents who are certainly motivated by the love of money and they use the poor for them to stay in power,” said Oblepias, whose statement was also posted on the CBCPNews.

Emotional tantrums

Oblepias was reacting to Gabriela Rep. Luz Ilagan who said that the Catholic Church was already showing “a symptom of scarcity of arguments” when the CBCP disengaged last week from a dialogue with the Palace.

The CBCP’s move was an indication that the Church was “bankrupt” of reasons why the RH bill should not be legislated, with Church leaders resorting to “threats, name-calling and emotional tantrums,” according to Ilagan.

Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago on Sunday acknowledged that civil disobedience was a valid form of protest.

“That is an accepted method of dispute resolution provided that the passive resisters are willing to go peacefully to jail when they violate the existing law,” Santiago, a former trial court judge, said in an interview.

That’s why, in the event of a nationwide movement to boycott payment of taxes, the delinquent taxpayers should not resist “if they are haled to court by the BIR, and accept the decision of the judge, either a fine or imprisonment,” she added.

Enrile against bill

Sen. Panfilo Lacson agreed: “If they don’t want to pay taxes, they’re liable for tax evasion. If we allow this, what about the rest of the 94 million Filipinos who depend on social services? If we pay and you don’t pay and you don’t get punished, that’s unfair.”

As the debate rages, Mr. Aquino may have a tougher time convincing the leaders of the Senate to pass the bill.

While his counterpart in the House is keen on getting the measure approved on final reading, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile maintained that he was opposed to it.

“I don’t know whether we can tackle it here. I have many questions. I don’t know if they’re going to have enough numbers to pass it. I already said I’m against it and I can’t support it,” Enrile told reporters.

Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III also has openly opposed the measure, recently exposing that the government’s allocation for family health did not reach its beneficiaries from 2008 to 2010.

Senate approval seen

Sen. Pia Cayetano is set to present for floor deliberations the health committee report on the lone RH measure authored by Santiago, her colleagues said.

Santiago predicted that a majority of the senators would vote for the approval of the committee report.

“I see a win in the Senate,” she said, adding that even reelectionist senators would vote for its approval to endear themselves to voters who favor the bill.

“Some astute senators recognize the fact that a greater majority of voters are in favor of the bill. If they want to win the election, they have to support the RH bill,” she added.

Manila-X

May 16th, 2011, 10:02 AM

Lacson urges the church to stop insulting RH bill advocates
By Maila Ager
INQUIRER.net
First Posted 13:47:00 05/16/2011

MANILA, Philippines - Senator Panfilo Lacson cried foul on Monday at how pro-Reproductive Health (RH) advocates were being insulted inside the church.

Lacson said he himself witnessed a priest spending at least 10 minutes insulting and criticizing the RH advocates.

“Dapat lang ipagpatuloy yung dialogue, huwag nating daanin sa pang insulto kasi na experience ko mismo sa aming pagsisimba, pagtapos ng misa, napakahaba nun siguro mga 10 minutes yung iniinsulto, inaalipusta yung mga advocate sa RH bill (The dialogue should be continued. They should not stoop to insulting advocates of the RH bill),” he said in an interview with reporters in the Senate.

“Sana huwag namang gamitin kasi hindi level yung playing field dun. Kasi yung nagsisimba nakikinig lang, hindi naman masagot , o hindi naman makapangatwiran sa sinasabi ng pari na minsan mali na, taliwas na sa katotohanan (They should level the playing field as most people who go to church intend to hear the mass and cannot answer or defend the issue),” he said.

Lacson specifically cited claims by some priests that the enactment of the proposed RH bill would legalize abortion.

“Alam naman nating hindi totoo yun so dapat sa dialogue daanin (It should be taken up during a dialogue as we believe that it is not true),” he said.

Instead of restoring to insults, Lacson said advocates and critics of the proposal should continue their dialogue or they could request for additional public hearings in the Senate on the issue.

Mercato

May 16th, 2011, 10:04 AM

This paragraph caught my eye. I was taken by surprise because I always believed the conventional wisdom that the trends were towards the opposite direction... I am physically not present in the country so I didn't have access to that famed debate nor to most other articles. However, we still keep an open mind on things. Please feel free to provide your own inputs and data since we are all still learning. But for now, we are content to take a closer look at those numbers... beyond the emotional diatribes from both sides :D
Edcel Lagman, for instance, was clearly caught on the defensive when confronted with what he had repeatedly claimed, that the RH Bill is not a population measure. Lagman could not counter the fact either that the Philippine population growth rate has been steadily declining. Why the need for the bill? Are we to believe then that all this is fanned by the frenzied Media hype financed by the Pharmaceutical corporations? ;) The US Dept of Commerce estimates that the Philippines will peak at a population of 113million by 2020 and thereafter taper off albeit slowly. There are other factors at play to which I have no knowledge of. Is there any population expert in the house? :colgate:

http://www.census.gov/ipc/prod/ppt92-11.pdf
U.S. Department of Commerce
Economics and Statistics Administration
BUREAU OF THE CENSUS
Population Growth and
Population Change

If present trends continue, the
population of the Philippines will
increase from its current 73 million
persons to some 81 million by the
turn of the century and to about
113 million by the year 2020 (table
1). The Philippines’ population will
grow somewhat older, largely as a
result of falling fertility. During the
next 25 years, both the working
age population and the number of
women of childbearing age will
grow more rapidly and will become
larger proportions of the total than
in the past (figure 1).

http://www.indexmundi.com/philippines/population_growth_rate.html

US National Library of Medicine
National Institutes of Health
Philippine population trends.
Philippines. National Economic and Development Authority.
Abstract

This paper presents an overview of Philippine population trends and prospects. The population growth rate, which has been 2% in this century, is declining in most regions of the Philippines. The 1980 census showed a decline in the proportion of the population under 15 uears old. The size of the working-age population and the aged rose slightly. The median age in 1980 was 18.6 years as opposed to 16.9 years in 1970.
Percent changes since 2009 had all been in the negative.

2009 (-)1.51%
2010 (-)1.53%
2011 (-)1.56%

CIA Factbook as of March 11, 2010.

http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=rp&v=24
The highest percentage was 2.07% in 2000 and is now down to 1.96% in 2009.
Definition of Population growth rate: The average annual percent change in the population, resulting from a surplus (or deficit) of births over deaths and the balance of migrants entering and leaving a country. The rate may be positive or negative. The growth rate is a factor in determining how great a burden would be imposed on a country by the changing needs of its people for infrastructure (e.g., schools, hospitals, housing, roads), resources (e.g., food, water, electricity), and jobs. Rapid population growth can be seen as threatening by neighboring countries.

noli-kun

May 16th, 2011, 10:53 AM

“It would be better that we calm down a bit and discuss the issue at hand,” the President’s deputy spokesperson, Abigail Valte, said over the state radio, adding that Mr. Aquino was merely reminding that Filipinos have a civil duty to pay their taxes used to finance public programs.

If only we have non-swayable non-sectarian people in the government, we can threat the church by tax imposition! What right have they to interfere, they are remiss of the civil duty that invigorates the economy!

Gildong

May 16th, 2011, 02:29 PM

We should not believed and listen to the catholic priests at all time. Meron ba silang idea kung anu ba talaga ang nangyayari sa paligid natin? kung gaanu na kahirap ng buhay sa pinas? kung ilang pilipino ang gumagawa na ng masama para lang may maipakain sa kanilang pamilya? WALA silang alam.. Hindi naman nila nararanasan ang hirap ng buhay sa labas ng simbahan. Basta sila kumakain ng masarap at natutulog sa komportableng higaan.
Pangalawa.. sumosobra sila sa pakikisawsaw sa pulitika, kahit hindi naman dapat sila involved sige pa rin, wag lang mawala sa eksena..
Not only for this issue (RH Bill), tutol sila sa death penalty.. kaya ang mga kriminal sa pilipinas parang pusa lang din kung pumatay ng tao, bakit sila matatakot pumatay e the worst na siguro ang 5 years in jail.. kung may maimpluwensya ka pa o mayaman ka, 10 libo lang abswelto ka na..
CATHOLIC PRIESTS ALSO HAVE A BIG CONTRIBUTION IN SEVERE POVERTY AND DISORDER IN OUR NATION..
Dapat sa kanila ikulong at wag pakainin ng kahit 1 buwan para alam nila ang pakiramdam ng nagugutom..:bash:Comic Sans MS"][/FONT]

icarusrising

May 16th, 2011, 05:26 PM

‘I am ready for a shootout’—Miriam (http://www.newsbreak.ph/2011/05/16/%e2%80%98i-am-ready-for-a-shootout%e2%80%99%e2%80%94miriam/)

Published on May 16, 2011
By NEWSBREAK

The senator says she’s prepared to defend the RH bill on all fronts, while Palace calls for a ceasefire

MANILA, Philippines—Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago on Monday said she is preparing her “battle gear” to defend the Reproductive Health bill, which is expected to be reported out to the plenary by Sen. Pia Cayetano next week.

Santiago, who authored Senate Bill No.2378, said she intends to defend the controversial measure on all fronts, “not only political front, but also economic, democratic, theological, and medical—meaning to say scientific.”

“I’m ready for a shootout. I’m preparing my Navy SEALS, my stealth bombers, so that we can rescue the people,” Santiago told reporters. “I can debate all of them on any of these topics. They can sit in one row and I can sit all alone by myself. And then defend the bill because the merits of the bill will ensure victory.”

The Catholic Church has launched a campaign against the bill, asking its priests nationwide to use their pulpits to persuade Filipinos about the negative effects of the proposed law. Anti-RH bill proponents have argued that the bill implicitly encourages abortion, a point that has been denied by lawmakers and groups pushing for its approval.

Santiago said she is not bothered at all by the Catholic Church opposition to the RH bill, citing the support of the majority of Filipinos for the controversial measure. She reiterated the separation of Church and state, and that the clergy should respect this.

Ceasefire!

Malacañang on Friday also called for an end to name-calling in relation to the debate.

“It’s just sad that it has degraded to name-calling and we would wish that we would refrain from making statements of insulting each other by calling each other names and branding each other murderers or Osama bin Laden or Herod. It’s not healthy,” Presidential Spokesman Edwin Lacierda said in a news briefing.

Lacierda said that certain Catholic bishops who did not participate in discussions with the executive on the reproductive health bill have been “insulting the President” by calling him names, but Palace officials would not respond using the same tack.

“We will turn the other cheek, as what we’ve always done. The President is very respectful of the bishops. We expect men of faith to behave accordingly,” he said.

Lacierda said that when Mr. Aquino was first told that the Church had reportedly threatened to excommunicate him for his views on reproductive health, which the Church later denied, “The President said, ‘Let’s not throw stones. Let’s give them bread.’”

“That’s the attitude that the President has taken with respect to the bishops so we will continue our cooperation with them in areas where we can share agreements with. Insofar as the disagreements that we have, we will respect them for that. We will not throw stones. We will continue to throw bread at them,” Lacierda said.

He said, however, that the communication lines of Malacañang remain open for the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP), which had formally withdrawn from dialogs with the Palace on the RH bill, citing Mr. Aquino’s position on the issue.

On the other hand, Cayetano, chair of the Senate committee on health and demography, said she is already routing the committee report for signature among senators. She expects to deliver sponsorship of the bill next week.

She also urged Filipinos to be open-minded and critical about the issue, and not to be easily swayed by misleading criticisms against the measure.

“Contrary to the misinformation campaign being spread by some, the Reproductive Health (RH) Bill pending in the Senate does not allow abortion, and will not force any contraceptive method on anyone,” according to Cayetano.

“[The Bill] will respect the moral convictions and religious beliefs of all, but at the same time, protect the unborn child by providing health services for the pregnant mother, and likewise save the lives of mother from dying at childbirth. Currently, 11 mothers die from giving birth daily, as per the latest estimates of the United Nations (UN),” she said.—Newsbreak

greenice

May 17th, 2011, 03:58 AM

Jinkee Pacquiao admitted to using birth control pills in article published January

(SPOT.ph) A few minutes after anti-Reproductive Health (RH) Bill advocate Manny Pacquiao said in a live interview yesterday that he and his wife Jinkee practice abstinence, an article published in January, in which Jinkee admitted to using contraceptive pills, resurfaced, reports GMA News Online.

On State of the Nation yesterday, the Sarangani congressman compared practicing abstinence to boxing, saying the act requires self-discipline. After the interview, pro-RH Bill group Filipino Free Thinkers Tweeted a link to a Philippine Star story, reports GMA News Online. In the article published January 30, the boxer's wife was quoted as saying, "Hindi pa ako nagpa-tali, pero nagpi-pills ako (ngayon)." ("No ligation, but I do take birth control pills.")

In the article, Jinkee also said she told her husband that four children are enough. However, the boxing champion said yesterday that they will have another child after Queenie, their youngest.

According to GMA News Online, the Filipino Free Thinkers also Tweeted, "If @MannyPacquiao makes a statement that Jinkee will no longer use the pill, it will show how anti women the anti #RHBill are."

Today, Pacquiao will discuss the RH Bill with members of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines (CBCP), reports GMA News Online. "This is his personal way of expressing support and not a celebrity endorsing the position of the Church. It is his personal initiative to be with the Church in the advocacy against RH because of his religious conviction," CBCP Secretary General Juanito Figura said in a statement.

For more on this story, log on to GMA News Online and The Philippine Star.

Maxxclip

May 17th, 2011, 04:10 AM

There are other factors at play to which I have no knowledge of.

Ruminations on the RH Bill
by Em P. Guevara

MANILA, Philippines — Before anything else, what a bloody mess. The country is divided. The thinking populace (and the ones who like to believe they think) are at each other’s throats…wanting to kill each other in the name of “life”.

And it has become my mind-numbing task to make some sense of this hullabaloo for this week’s Inside Business Agenda. After raking through the material, the arguments, the debates, I just chose to see how the different aspects of the RH Bill speak to me.

As a woman and potential mother: I have a choice.

I am an independent woman who values being able to think and do freely. I exercise my free will, my freedom to choose all the time. I may have considerations in mind when I make certain choices, but ultimately, it boils down to what I personally believe in or stand for and what I want. I make sure that my choices are as informed as possible and as needed, depending on the nature or gravity of the matter.

In this case, what I hear the RH Bill giving me is the right to choose if and when I want to have a child, and the right to choose what contraceptive I want to use for that purpose. Do I have a problem with this? None whatsoever. I have the means to find out what I need to know about each contraceptive.

I have the ability to understand what my spirituality upholds about sex and its “regulation”. It is my body and my life and I have all the right to make decisions about it where having babies are concerned. That is a matter between me and my God and my partner, and I believe the RH Bill is cognizant and respectful of that fact.

As an Economics graduate: It’s not about population.

I think this is mainly where the problem lies. As much as there are studies that support the theory that population leads to or causes poverty, there are studies that debunk that theory. It’s not as if we are going to get rid of the “excess population” we already have. But to focus efforts on suppressing population growth among the marginalized just sounds anti-poor to me, as well as not addressing the real problems we are facing: lack of education, lack of employment opportunities, lack of healthcare services. I think the RH Bill should focus really on Reproductive Health, and not on curbing population via the Population Commission.

When it comes to this aspect, I am one with those economists and socio-economists who say that the budget and efforts should instead be given to the Department of Health, the Department of Education, the Department of Social Welfare and Development, and other apt government agencies, instead of the Population Commission.

I agree that the Philippines is poor, not because of overpopulation, but because of mismanagement, because of graft and corruption, because of the people’s general lack of good education, and because of the lack of employment opportunities in the country.

As a journalist: Enough with the misinformation.

Okay, here are the facts plain and simple. The Catholic Church upholds that life begins at the moment of conception or fertilization. So if you are a Catholic, you would want to stick to contraception methods that are not abortifacient. Scientifically (this is science now, not religion), the birth control methods that do not cause abortion are as follows: Continuous Abstinence; Periodic Abstinence or Fertility Awareness Methods ; The Male Condom; The Female Condom; Diaphragm; Cervical Cap; and Surgical Sterilization (Tubal Ligation or Vasectomy).

The birth control methods which can cause abortion are as follows: Copper T IUD; Progestasert IUD; The Mini-Pill; and Emergency Contraception (“Morning After” Pill, Postcoital Contraception, Plan B, etc.). These methods cause abortion because if fertilization does occur, they would prevent the fertilized egg from implanting in the lining of the uterus.

The birth control methods which might be able to cause an abortion are: Oral Contraceptives; Depo-Provera; The Patch (Ortho Evra); and The Hormonal Vaginal Contraceptive Ring (NuvaRing). With these methods, there is much debate within the pro-life community whether they are abortifacient or not, hence the “might be able” qualifier.

There’s the science. Between our conscience and the hard facts, we should be able to come to a position minus the name-calling and judgments.

[b]As a believer in God: There should be real separation of Church and State.

Why is it—and not a few have noticed it—that we seem to have gone back to the time of Rizal and the friars, when the so-called representatives of God find it within their rights and territory to spew judgments from the pulpits, to say pretty much anything that clearly crosses the line of politics, in the name of safeguarding the morality of their followers? Ours is a country where no real separation of Church and State has ever been, and times like these only highlight such a situation.

The Church’s duty is to transmit the Church’s teachings to its followers, that’s all. They have no right meddling in affairs of the State. But try telling that to them in this country and be ready to face threats of excommunication and

even court cases (or withdrawal of the Church vote, if there really is such a thing). Ridiculous, but also sadly true.

As a Filipino: It is government’s duty to pass legislation for the real progress of the Philippines and the Filipino.

He may seem “extreme” in his ways of expressing it, but I cannot question Carlos Celdran’s patriotism. I generally agree with what he expressed in the ABS-CBN TV debate last May 7 and in his blog: “We’re still plagued by high infant mortality, high maternal deaths, overpopulation [I already said what I think about this] and a skyrocketing HIV and abortion rate and it’s the worst it’s ever been in our history.

“And for the last 16 years, people in Congress have been trying to pass the RH Bill, a piece of legislation that would holistically address these issues. And this bill has been held back, delayed and shot down by anti-RH lawmakers for reasons that were either legal, economic or religious.”

I say to government: Address the concerns about certain aspects of the RH Bill, shut up the parties that need to be shut up, then have the balls to implement an RH Bill that you are willing to back up no matter what already! How difficult is that really? You are in power and we are your boss, so step up to the plate and address the people’s needs once and for all.

As a human being: Respect life and quality of life. And then, above all, respect man’s inherent free will.

I don’t know why there even has to be a debate about this, between the so-called pro-lifers and those who are pro-quality of life. Life begins at fertilization, but it doesn’t end there! So the fight for quality of life should be everyone’s concern. Fight for the right of the unborn, by all means, but don’t forget the rights of the born in the process.

As for respect for free will, what are certain members of the Catholic Church so afraid of? Do they really think that their Church-goers are so mindless and so lacking in faith/loyalty as to commit abortion? Do they really believe that their education, reminders and admonitions in Church and in Catholic schools are not enough for their followers to be able to form and exercise their conscience?

I don’t know about you, but the God I believe in created me free. So free that I know He smiles down on me every single time I choose to exercise my freedom. He watches over me, and never leaves me or punishes me, or condemns me to the burning fires of hell. He is actually a God I don’t fear, only love.

Ady001

May 17th, 2011, 04:25 AM

^^ Thread 4~!

:lock:

Mercato

May 17th, 2011, 05:32 AM

Ruminations on the RH Bill
by Em P. Guevara
Ajejeje. That was not quite the context nor what I had in mind with my phrase which was slyly cherry picked. :) Like I said, beyond the emotional diatribes and if I may add further, the histrionics perhaps? Because on this one, I am not easily swayed by histrionism, theatrical performances nor religious dramatics which by the way both sides are quite guilty of. Proof galore on the previous incarnations of this thread. :lol:Originally Posted by wynngd
Edcel Lagman, for instance, was clearly caught on the defensive when confronted with what he had repeatedly claimed, that the RH Bill is not a population measure. Lagman could not counter the fact either that the Philippine population growth rate has been steadily declining. Why the need for the bill?I’m afraid I am zeroing in on numbers and statistics, old boy. Why can't Lagman refute these statistics? Even without the existence of the RH Bill, it had already been predicted by a neutral outside third party that there will be a decline in population. May I add further that these are even W.A.S.P. institutions on Census and related data. ;) ... (you know, White Anglo Saxon & Protestant) :lol:

So why are all and sundry hell bent on passing this RH Bill in its present form? And I am not saying to junk it entirely either but a healthy dialogue has to be made for a meeting of the minds. You cannot just bludgeon your way through the will of the Catholic majority just because you think that your minority position alone is absolutely perfect. If it were so, then why are some still questioning it? Is that your idea now of a democracy, the will of the minority prevails over the will of the majority? Which is precisely why I am sounding out for a population expert in the house for further explanation, if there are any? :lol: And there seems to be none. Furthermore, both sides had already declared that their positions alone are correct and absolute beyond any chance for dialogue. A call had been made for dialogue but due to the adamant stance by both incorrigible sides, dialogue is now out of the question. Pity.

True, the population is exceedingly large which is why we are trying to replicate the successful methods of Singapore. But even with Singapore's economic might, she had not been able to reverse nor arrest the decline in her population – that other side of the coin which we had spoken of. And to which she is now trapped in right now. Are you prepared to take that path? Are you prepared to take responsibility for a potent cure all but which also has a potent & dark side effect? Once the measures are effective and the decline starts (which it has already anyway), can you guarantee that you can arrest that decline, knowing how things work in the Philippines? I leave that up to you and that much vaunted individual conscience. (If the Pharmaceutical multinationals hadn't gotten there first :lol:)

This paragraph caught my eye. I was taken by surprise because I always believed the conventional wisdom that the trends were towards the opposite direction... I am physically not present in the country so I didn't have access to that famed debate nor to most other articles. However, we still keep an open mind on things. Please feel free to provide your own inputs and data since we are all still learning. But for now, we are content to take a closer look at those numbers... beyond the emotional diatribes from both sides :D
Edcel Lagman, for instance, was clearly caught on the defensive when confronted with what he had repeatedly claimed, that the RH Bill is not a population measure. Lagman could not counter the fact either that the Philippine population growth rate has been steadily declining. Why the need for the bill? Are we to believe then that all this is fanned by the frenzied Media hype financed by the Pharmaceutical corporations? ;) The US Dept of Commerce estimates that the Philippines will peak at a population of 113million by 2020 and thereafter taper off albeit slowly. There are other factors at play to which I have no knowledge of. Is there any population expert in the house? :colgate:

http://www.census.gov/ipc/prod/ppt92-11.pdf
U.S. Department of Commerce
Economics and Statistics Administration
BUREAU OF THE CENSUS
Population Growth and
Population Change

If present trends continue, the
population of the Philippines will
increase from its current 73 million
persons to some 81 million by the
turn of the century and to about
113 million by the year 2020 (table
1). The Philippines’ population will
grow somewhat older, largely as a
result of falling fertility. During the
next 25 years, both the working
age population and the number of
women of childbearing age will
grow more rapidly and will become
larger proportions of the total than
in the past (figure 1).

http://www.indexmundi.com/philippines/population_growth_rate.html

US National Library of Medicine
National Institutes of Health
Philippine population trends.
Philippines. National Economic and Development Authority.
Abstract

This paper presents an overview of Philippine population trends and prospects. The population growth rate, which has been 2% in this century, is declining in most regions of the Philippines. The 1980 census showed a decline in the proportion of the population under 15 uears old. The size of the working-age population and the aged rose slightly. The median age in 1980 was 18.6 years as opposed to 16.9 years in 1970.
Percent changes since 2009 had all been in the negative.

2009 (-)1.51%
2010 (-)1.53%
2011 (-)1.56%

CIA Factbook as of March 11, 2010.

http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=rp&v=24
The highest percentage was 2.07% in 2000 and is now down to 1.96% in 2009.
Definition of Population growth rate: The average annual percent change in the population, resulting from a surplus (or deficit) of births over deaths and the balance of migrants entering and leaving a country. The rate may be positive or negative. The growth rate is a factor in determining how great a burden would be imposed on a country by the changing needs of its people for infrastructure (e.g., schools, hospitals, housing, roads), resources (e.g., food, water, electricity), and jobs. Rapid population growth can be seen as threatening by neighboring countries.