Monday, October 6, 2008

Petition against RH Bill

Got this link through a friend, who got it from Pro-Life Philippines. Go here to sign the petition and say NO to the RH Bill.


To the Philippine Congress:

We strongly oppose the passage of the Reproductive Health Bill (HB4110) for the following reasons:

1. AS EMPLOYERS, we don't want to be compelled to provide free reproductive health care services, supplies, devices and surgical procedures (including vasectomy and ligation) to our employees, and be subjected to both imprisonment and/or a fine, for every time that we fail to comply. (Section 17 states that employers shall provide for free delivery of reproductive health care services, supplies and devices to all workers more particularly women workers. Definition of Reproductive Health and Rights Section 4, paragraph g, Section 21, Paragraph c and Section 22 on Penalties)

2. AS HEALTH CARE SERVICE PROVIDERS, we don't want to be subjected to imprisonment and/or a fine, if we fail to provide reproductive health care services such as giving information on family planning methods and providing services like ligation and vasectomy, regardless of the patient's civil status, gender, religion or age (Section 21 on Prohibited Acts, Letter a, Paragraphs 1 to 5 and Section 22 on Penalties)

3. AS SPOUSES, we don't agree that our husband or wife can undergo a ligation or vasectomy without our consent or knowledge. (Section 21 on Prohibited Acts, Letter a, Paragraph 2)

4. AS PARENTS, we don't agree that children from age 10 to 17 should be taught their sexual rights and the means to have a satisfying and "safe" sex life as part of their school curriculum. (Section 12 on Reproductive Health Education and Section 4 Definition of Family Planning and Productive Health, Paragraph b, c and d)

5. AS CITIZENS, we don't want to be subjected to imprisonment and/or pay a fine, for expressing an opinion against any provision of this law, if such expression of opinion is interpreted as constituting "malicious disinformation" (Section 21 on Prohibited Acts, Paragraph f and Section 22 on Penalties)

6. We also oppose other provisions such as losing our parental authority over a minor child who was raped and found pregnant (Section 21, a, no.3)

7. We also don't agree to the provision which reclassifies contraceptives as essential medicines (Section 10) and appropriating limited government funds to reproductive services instead of basic services (Section 23)

Thus, we urge you to immediately stop deliberations on the bill and stop wasting taxpayers money.

The Undersigned


DJB Rizalist said...

A thoughtful post!

Please join the lively debate and discussion on this topic over at Filipino Voices
Is the Reproductive Health Bill Unconstitutional
Resolved: That Abortion Be Decriminalized
Remove the Anti-poor Bans on Divorce and Abortion
When Does Human Life Begin?
The Catholic Magisterium on Contraception
Support the Reproductive Health Bill

We'd love to hear your opinion on this crucial national issue.

John-D Borra said...

This is very interesting reading. There are so many elements in the RH Bill which should concern all citizens. I've always held the belief that the authors of the bill could charitably be termed "well-meaning", but that doesn't change the fact that the bill itself is severely flawed.

Again, good job Nicole! :-)

DJB Rizalist said...

I agree with John that the bill has some flaws. There is a heavy handed State provision on "disinformation"--clearly in response to the Catholic Church's campaign of confounding contraception and abortion.

But the bigger flaw are those 800,000 abortions that could be prevented by ... contraception! Prevent unwanted and unplanned pregnancy and you prevent unwanted, unplanned abortion.

petrufied said...

@djb_rizalist, i dropped by the debate that you linked...interesting discussions over there! :D

Using contraception to "solve" abortion fails in a lot of ways--for one thing it breeds irresponsibility. Just read the title of the bill and you know instantly there's something wrong there. As a friend of mine says, there's nothing "reproductive" and "healthy" about it to begin with!

@John-d: Thanks for dropping by my blog! The authors of the bill are trying very hard to please everybody, but with the solutions they propose, they're more likely to cause problems if the bill ever gets signed into law. :O

DJB Rizalist said...

We certainly appreciate your comment at Filipino Voices where the motto is: "Learn from those who disagree!"

Regarding the point you made about contraception and abortion, however, how do we explain the fact that abortion is at an all time historic low in countries where contraception is not so controversial as to risk eternal damnation?

Do you have any empirical data to support the assertion that abortions would increase if fewer pregnancies occurred??

I for one really want to reduce the number of abortions being reported (whether 200,000 according to the CBCP or up to 800,000 according to WHO).

Consider also the seemingly cruel position of the church on condoms: it would rather that married couples risk infecting each other with STDs rather than use condoms because the latter is allegedly against God and nature.

Best regards. Keep on blogging your honest opinions. There is room for all points of view in these dark times.

petrufied said...

Hi djb, well i never said abortions would increase if fewer pregnancies occurred. I said "unwanted" pregnancies would increase. And this will certainly open doors to legalize abortion in the country...simply because people will want to cure the increased rate of unwanted pregnancies that contraception definitely does not address, let alone solve.

About condoms preventing STDs for married couples: marriage as you know is a commitment between only two people, and as such the marital act is theirs alone. Where will the STD come from? Surely, STDs are only borne out of having multiple partners, and that's definitely out when it comes to marriage. So i don't see what's so cruel about it... it's actually pretty simple and sound, if you think about it :)

petrufied said...

oops, i meant: unwanted pregnancies would increase IF contraception is promoted.

sunnyday said...

Signed the petition already =)

I wonder how our country and our people will be, 50 years down the line. Will babies be regarded generally as a burden? Will sex be treated by young people as a mere casual activity? Will elementary school students be studying taking up "how to put on a condom properly" lessons as part of the curriculum? I shudder at the thought!

Will government health centers have more contraceptives in supply while cough and cold medicines are nowhere? Sigh.

John-D Borra said...

The comments on this entry, with the notable exception of yours truly, have been incisive and informative. Already Mr. Bocobo has elevated this debate from the pedestrian to the truly thought-provoking.

I would like to agree with Diana. How do we see ourselves in 50 or so years? Are we putting ourselves in the best position to enjoy life? Are we dehumanizing love by promoting an atmosphere where it is okay to take it for granted?

We might be missing the issue here. Shouldn't we be doing more to improve the delivery of social services and encourage a higher quality of living? Might not such initiatives go a long way in addressing pressing social concerns such as unwanted pregnancies and deplorable living conditions?

Just my two cents worth. :-)

Anonymous said...

DJB said: Do you have any empirical data to support the assertion that abortions would increase if fewer pregnancies occurred??

Why don't we listen to the statements form the PRO-ABORTIONISTS themselves on how contraception is linked to abortion?

British Abortionist Judith Bury, Brook Advisory Centres, 1981:
"...women...have come to request [abortions] when contraception fails.
There is overwhelming evidence that, contrary to what you might
expect, the provision [availability] of contraception leads to an
increase in the abortion rate." ["Sex Education for Bureaucrats," The
Scotsman, 29 June 1981]

-- Abortionist and international contraception promoter Malcolm Potts
[former director of Planned Parenthood of England] 1976 (even as early
as 1973) quoted in Sex and Social Engineering by Valerie Riches.- "As
people turn to contraception, there will be a rise, not a fall, in the
abortion rate...".

In Abortion, he noted, "...those who use contraception are more likely
than those who do not to resort to induced abortion..."

At another time he said, "No society has controlled its fertility...without recourse to a significant number of abortions." [Malcolm Potts, "Fertility Rights," The Guardian, 25April1979]

-- Pro-abortion Alan Guttmacher Institute has repeatedly reported on major surveys that show 56%-58% of all women having abortions were using contraception the month they became pregnant.

-- Alan Guttmacher [former President of Planned Parenthood] stated, "...when abortion is easily obtainable, contraception is neither actively nor diligently used... there would be no reward for the woman who practices contraception... Abortion on demand relieves the husband of all responsibility; he simply becomes a coital animal." [Rutgers Law Review 22, 1968]

-- Alan Guttmacher Institute researcher Stanley K. Henshaw: "Contraceptive users appear to have been more motivated to prevent
births than were nonusers."

-- Alan Guttmacher Institute researcher Stan E. Weed: "[F]or every 1000 teens between 15-19 years of age enrolled in family planning clinics, we can expect between 50 to 120 more pregnancies."

-- Infamous "sexologist" Alfred Kinsey, 1955: "At the risk of being repetitious, I would remind the group that we have found the highest frequency of induced abortions in the groups which, in general, most frequently uses contraception."

Sociologist Lionel Tiger, 1999: "With effective contraception controlled by women, there are still more abortions than ever…[C]ontraception causes abortion."

-- National Survey of Family Growth- Contraceptive failure rates show 7%
for the pill, 16% for the condom, 22% for the diaphragm, and 30% for spermicide. Figures are even higher for unmarried people.

-- Planned Parenthood's Frederick S. Jaffe, in Abortion Politics,
admitted that "... even if everyone were to practice contraception, and
use the most effective medically prescribed methods, there would still
be a very large number of unwanted pregnancies."

"...even if women use 95 percent-effective contraception, seven out of
10 will eventually face an unwanted pregnancy," reported "The
Successful Animal", Science 86.

The abortion industry already admits what DJB erroneously tries to deny. There's no doubt about it: contraceptive usage causes an increase in the incidence of abortions.

Anonymous said...

By the way, the petition has been updated to reflect the new consolidated Bill (HB 5043). The URL of the petition is:

petrufied said...

Wow, thanks for those quotes, Manny! :-o They actually acknowledged it!

Is this updated petition gathering a different set of signatures? If it is I would need to sign again!