Home > RH Bill 5043 > Reproductive health bill: Facts, fallacies

Reproductive health bill: Facts, fallacies

we are printing in full this article that appeared at PDI.

Reproductive health bill: Facts, fallacies
By Rep. Edcel Lagman
Philippine Daily Inquirer

THE BILL IS NATIONAL IN SCOPE, COMPREHENSIVE, rights-based and provides adequate funding to the population program. It is a departure from the present setup in which the provision for reproductive health services is devolved to local government units, and consequently, subjected to the varying strategies of local government executives and suffers from a dearth of funding.

The reproductive health (RH) bill promotes information on and access to both natural and modern family planning methods, which are medically safe and legally permissible. It assures an enabling environment where women and couples have the freedom of informed choice on the mode of family planning they want to adopt based on their needs, personal convictions and religious beliefs.

The bill does not have any bias for or against either natural or modern family planning. Both modes are contraceptive methods. Their common purpose is to prevent unwanted pregnancies.

The bill will promote sustainable human development. The UN stated in 2002 that “family planning and reproductive health are essential to reducing poverty.” The Unicef also asserts that “family planning could bring more benefits to more people at less cost than any other single technology now available to the human race.”

Coverage of RH. (1) Information and access to natural and modern family planning (2) Maternal, infant and child health and nutrition (3) Promotion of breast feeding (4) Prevention of abortion and management of post-abortion complications (5) Adolescent and youth health (6) Prevention and management of reproductive tract infections, HIV/AIDS and STDs (7) Elimination of violence against women (8)

Reproductive health bill: Facts, fallacies
Counseling on sexuality and sexual and reproductive health (9) Treatment of breast and reproductive tract cancers (10) Male involvement and participation in RH; (11) Prevention and treatment of infertility and (12) RH education for the youth.

Strengthening of Popcom. The existing Population Commission shall be reoriented to promote both natural and modern family planning methods. It shall serve as the central planning, coordinating, implementing and monitoring body for the comprehensive and integrated policy on reproductive health and population development.

Capability building of community-based volunteer workers. The workers shall undergo additional and updated training on the delivery of reproductive healthcare services and shall receive not less than 10-percent increase in honoraria upon successful completion of training.

Midwives for skilled birth attendance. Every city and municipality shall endeavor to employ an adequate number of midwives and other skilled attendants.

Emergency obstetrics care. Each province and city shall endeavor to ensure the establishment and operation of hospitals with adequate and qualified personnel that provide emergency obstetrics care.

Hospital-based family planning. Family planning methods requiring hospital services like ligation, vasectomy and IUD insertion shall be available in all national and local government hospitals.

Contraceptives as essential medicines. Reproductive health products shall be considered essential medicines and supplies and shall form part of the National Drug Formulary considering that family planning reduces the incidence of maternal and infant mortality.

Reproductive health education. RH education in an age-appropriate manner shall be taught by adequately trained teachers from Grade 5 to 4th year high school. As proposed in the bill, core subjects include responsible parenthood, natural and modern family planning, proscription and hazards of abortion, reproductive health and sexual rights, abstinence before marriage, and responsible sexuality.

Certificate of compliance. No marriage license shall be issued by the Local Civil Registrar unless the applicants present a Certificate of Compliance issued for free by the local Family Planning Office. The document should certify that they had duly received adequate instructions and information on family planning, responsible parenthood, breast feeding and infant nutrition.

Ideal family size. The State shall encourage two children as the ideal family size. This is neither mandatory nor compulsory and no punitive action may be imposed on couples having more than two children.

Employers’ responsibilities. Employers shall respect the reproductive health rights of all their workers. Women shall not be discriminated against in the matter of hiring, regularization of employment status or selection for retrenchment. Employers shall provide free reproductive health services and commodities to workers, whether unionized or unorganized.

Multimedia campaign. Popcom shall initiate and sustain an intensified nationwide multimedia campaign to raise the level of public awareness on the urgent need to protect and promote reproductive health and rights.

* * *

Smear offensive

Rep. Edcel C. Lagman

THERE IS A CONTINUING campaign to discredit the reproductive health bill through misinformation. Straightforward answers to the negative propaganda will help educate and enlighten people on the measure.


The bill is not antilife. It is proquality life. It will ensure that children will be blessings for their parents since their births are planned and wanted. It will empower couples with the information and opportunity to plan and space their children. This will not only strengthen the family as a unit but also optimize care for children who will have more opportunities to be educated, healthy and productive.

The bill does not interfere with family life. In fact, it enhances family life. The family is more than a natural nucleus; it is a social institution whose protection and development are impressed with public interest. It is not untouchable by legislation. For this reason, the State has enacted the Civil Code on family relations, the Family Code, and the Child and Youth Welfare Code.

The bill does not legalize abortion. It expressly provides that “abortion remains a crime” and “prevention of abortion” is essential to fully implement the Reproductive Health Care Program. While “management of post-abortion complications” is provided, this is not to condone abortion but to promote the humane treatment of women in life-threatening situations.

It will not lead to the legalization of abortion. It is not true that all countries where contraceptive use is promoted eventually legalize abortion. Many Catholic countries criminalize abortion even as they vigorously promote contraceptive use like Mexico, Panama, Guatemala, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Paraguay and Ireland. The Muslim and Buddhist countries of Indonesia and Laos also promote contraceptive use yet proscribe abortion. According to studies, correct and regular use of contraceptives reduces abortion rates by as much as 85 percent and negates the need to legalize abortion.

Contraceptives do not have life-threatening side effects. Medical and scientific evidence shows that all the possible medical risks connected with contraceptives are infinitely lower than the risks of an actual pregnancy and everyday activities. The risk of dying within a year of riding a car is 1 in 5,900. The risk of dying within a year of using pills is 1 in 200,000. The risk of dying from a vasectomy is 1 in 1 million and the risk of dying from using an IUD is 1 in 10 million. The probability of dying from condom use is absolutely zero. But the risk of dying from a pregnancy is 1 in 10,000.

The bill will not promote contraceptive mentality. The bill does not prohibit pregnancy. Critics are mistaken in claiming that because contraceptives would be readily available, people would prefer to have no children at all. Couples will not stop wanting children simply because contraceptives are available. Contraceptives are used to prevent unwanted pregnancies but not to stop pregnancies altogether. Timed pregnancies are assured.

The bill does not impose a two-child policy. It does not promote a compulsory policy strictly limiting a family to two children and no punitive action shall be imposed on parents with more than two children. This number is not an imposition or is it arbitrary because results of the 2003 National Demographic and Health Survey show that the ideal of two children approximates the desired fertility of women.

Sexuality education will neither spawn “a generation of sex maniacs” nor breed a culture of promiscuity. Age-appropriate RH education promotes correct sexual values. It will not only instill consciousness of freedom of choice but also responsible exercise of one’s rights. The UN and countries which have youth sexuality education document its beneficial results: understanding of proper sexual values is promoted; early initiation into sexual relations is delayed; abstinence before marriage is encouraged; multiple-sex partners is avoided; and spread of sexually transmitted diseases is prevented.

It does not claim that family planning is the panacea for poverty. It simply recognizes the verifiable link between a huge population and poverty. Unbridled population growth stunts socioeconomic development and aggravates poverty. The connection between population and development is well-documented and empirically established.

UN Human Development Reports show that countries with higher population growth invariably score lower in human development. The Asian Development Bank in 2004 also listed a large population as one of the major causes of poverty in the country.

The National Statistics Office affirms that large families are prone to poverty with 57.3 percent of families with seven children mired in poverty while only 23.8 percent of families with two children are poor. Recent studies also show that large family size is a significant factor in keeping families poor across generations.

Family planning will not lead to a demographic winter. UP economics professors in their paper “Population and Poverty: The Real Score” declared that the threat of a so-called demographic winter in the Philippines is “greatly exaggerated, and using it as an argument against a sensible population policy is a plain and simple scare tactic.”

The National Statistical Coordinating Board projected that a replacement fertility of 2.1 children per couple could be reached only by 2040. Moreover, despite a reduced population growth rate, the effects of population momentum would continue for another 60 years by which time our total population would be 240 million.

Humanae Vitae is not an infallible doctrine. In 1963, Pope John XXIII created the Papal Commission on Birth Control to study questions on population and family planning. The Commission included ranking prelates and theologians.

Voting 69 to 10, it strongly recommended that the Church change its teaching on contraception as it concluded that “the regulation of conception appears necessary for many couples who wish to achieve a responsible, open and reasonable parenthood in today’s circumstances.”

However, it was the minority report that Pope Paul VI eventually supported and which became the basis of Humanae Vitae.

Even 40 years ago when the encyclical was issued, theologians did not generally think that it was infallible. Monsignor Fernando Lambruschini, spokesperson of the Vatican at the time of its release, said “attentive reading of the encyclical Humanae Vitae does not suggest the theological note of infallibility… It is not infallible.”

Five days after the issuance of the encyclical, a statement against it was signed by 87 Catholic theologians. It asserted that “Catholics may dissent from … noninfallible Church doctrine” and that “Catholic spouses could responsibly decide in some circumstances to use artificial contraception.”

http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/talkofthetown/view/20080803-152296/Reproductive-health-bill-Facts-fallacies

read this: the case for the reproductive health bill – losyang pinays

read more:

  • SWS Poll January 2010 – 38% will vote for candidates who support the bill, 68% favor all forms of family planning made available in public health centers
  • Reproductive health bill: Facts, fallacies
  • presidentiables stand on population growth
  • Ateneo Professor’s Position Paper RH Bill 5043
  • RH Bill 5043 SWS Survey
  • RH Bill No. 5043 Full Text
  • UP School Of Economics : Population, Poverty, Politics and the Reproductive Health Bill
  • read this:

    DoH chief cabral pressured by CBCP to resign but will continue to distribute condoms

    About these ads
    1. Vishnu B Palacio
      January 18, 2010 at 4:51 pm

      The Reproductive Health Bill must be given a chance for activation on the community. It is a cure to the growing population of our country. An obviouse reason to our having difficulty regarding housing, dwindling food supply and a corruptive, uncivilized society. The advocacy to provide alternative reproductive oppurtunity may go against the litteral teaching of the church but if we can only show the examples of Japan and Singapore with a controlled number of population. We are all led to believe that the younger generation is the countries future, but where is the future if the younger generations lack the dedication and moral ascendancy, even deciency due to lack of education, to lead these nation. One obviouse example was then President Erap Estrada who enjoyed filandering while in public office. Is these the examples we intend to lead these nation. The reason why so many Filipinos are deciding to work abroad.

      • October 7, 2010 at 9:54 pm

        i agree on that

        • October 27, 2010 at 1:39 pm

          I agree on that too because i care about the population of our country even if im only 11 years old girl im still concern about our country…..

      • ayie
        October 8, 2010 at 4:33 pm

        it is really a question of overpopulation i suppose. it is a matter of self discipline or self control. when you know that you cannot support a big family, why would you still choose to have more children?

        • sylvain
          November 6, 2010 at 2:11 pm

          korek…kun dai kaya kontrol and not to look for ways to satisfy sexual desires…he he.

        • Johnpierre
          December 8, 2010 at 9:59 am

          Half correct

          the RH Bill will be the avenue for self control and sexual discipline to happen. Its not in suppressing sexuality that one can control his or her own sexuality. In fact it is in suppression that the youth seek more.

          Your statement support the RH bill as you stated the key word “choose” the right to choose. But if you do not support the RH bill you just stated an oxymoronic statement

        • duh
          February 4, 2011 at 3:39 am

          I can guarantee you are not married, no family / children of your own, and perhaps single and a virgin… Obviously, you are clueless about “married life”. Go and just watch your telenovelas… your assumptions are invalid. LOL

      • Speak
        October 21, 2010 at 11:37 pm

        “We are all led to believe that the younger generation is the countries future, but where is the future if the younger generations lack the dedication and moral ascendancy, even deciency due to lack of education, to lead these nation. ”

        Yes, that is true. But I only agree with this statement, though.

        “An obviouse reason to our having difficulty regarding housing, dwindling food supply and a corruptive, uncivilized society.”

        Corruption is the main reason for all these difficulties. We have so much land – it just seems as if we are overpopulated because those from the provinces go to the dominant cities to find a job and help sustain their family. But ask them if they think their own town is overpopulated… I went to Negros Occidental recently – You will be amazed by how much land there is there, and how few the inhabitants were in those areas. Their concerns were not of “overpopulation”, they were concerned about how long they could last with what money they were making each day.

        Corruption is what is taking away our jobs, and giving us this false idea of “overpopulation”. Many of our fellow countrymen only want what they WANT instead of providing for what is NEEDED by those around them. If the corrupt would only let go of what they don’t need and provide for the jobs, healthcare, homes, food and necessities of those who are in need of them, then this false problem of “overpopulation” will disappear and CHARITY will replace it.

        • john
          March 5, 2011 at 9:44 am

          yes i agree

        • mename
          May 8, 2011 at 8:23 pm

          Corruption yes is part of our problem but that’s not the main cause. Another factor is irresponsible people who keeps on having kids even if they can’t afford. Is the governments fault?Or Government officials fault?Remember the 1st unit of society is “family” if you belong in a poor family who experience a lot of hardship before becoming successful you either stick by the right and good principle or be tempted to gain more and more money that leads to corruption.

          • johnny
            June 3, 2011 at 2:54 pm

            still corruption!!!

            eliminate and then provide proper services to the people.

            we will progress by then!!!

            we could not have progress bcuz:
            - no business confidence/no investor
            - even if wt investor, gains will be eaten up by corruption

            gov officials, start from your side.
            the people are looking up to you

        • johnny
          June 3, 2011 at 2:50 pm

          I agree. Business confidence will be high. Investments will pour in. More income to government. People will have jobs. the higher population could further increase economy with the more buying power.

          just eliminate corruption and we will see the progress!!!

      • Eelos
        April 20, 2011 at 10:23 am

        “It is a cure to the growing population of our country.”

        Just like you, I support the RH Bill. But I would just like to qualify that a “growing population” is not a problem. And that the RH Bill is not a means of population control. It is the “unbridled population growth” as mentioned above that is the problem.

      • nhed
        May 16, 2011 at 2:11 pm

        i agree w/ u dear ! why not try it ..
        we Filipinos should grow up now ..

    2. Tim
      January 20, 2010 at 3:26 pm

      This is what exactly the Philippines need is to control its own population. We already reached 90 million people. According to the Philippine census bureau, it is expected that in 10 years it could reach to 100 million. How are we going to feed all this people? The Catholics should lighthen up and stop interferring with the current bill. The governemt should set up free clinics for vasectomy for males and free pregnancy counselling for women. they should put emphasies on the poor rural area especially people living in shanties. In comparison, Canada is a huge country with only 33 million people versus the small country the Philippines with 90 million people.

      http://www.census.gov.ph/data/pressrelease/2002/pr02178tx.html

      • October 8, 2010 at 5:40 pm

        Does Canada find it good to have a small population? If yes, why do they want the people to populate the country, and they are even giving incentives for that purpose? Can you please tell us what should be the population of the country? How many young and how many old? And why?

        • duh
          February 4, 2011 at 3:42 am

          You crack me up. LOL.

    3. RIa Marifosque
      January 27, 2010 at 11:17 am

      WHy do we always compare ourselves to other countries? We should make our own stand. Filipinos are God-Fearing people and will not be influenced.

      • -Samia-
        April 19, 2010 at 1:17 am

        weeh?! I hope God can feed 90 million people. Man should also do something how to solve this problem. We are not comparing ourselves to other countries. that is what you call research!!! they are trying to do comparative analysis whether this process could also be done in our country.. i hope you use your brain!!

        • nhed
          May 16, 2011 at 2:32 pm

          GOD is always there w/us .. but we can’t always rely on Him .
          man should really make move !
          “nasa TAO ang gawa nasa DIYOS ang awa”

      • 69
        August 27, 2010 at 2:59 pm

        because compared to us…other countries has learned the lessons of what will happen if we don’t control population…WAKE UP!!! take a good look around you…do you know how many people are starving because they can’t feed themselves due to not sufficient resources because the resouces are not enough to support numerous children…even the Chinese are now making efferts to control their population…..

        • March 6, 2011 at 4:31 am

          “to feed themselves”?
          Philippines is blessed with many natural resources around..the mistake there is that we try to produce and produce children that we cannot afford or take responsibility on it… some cannot take responsibility in there actions..
          another thing is that we are unique individuals why can’t we stand in our own?
          control our population? there still many islands that are not yet occupied..
          why can’t we feed ourselves? its because we lack the support from our government.

    4. Timo
      January 27, 2010 at 7:06 pm

      “God-Fearing people and will not be influenced.”

      Yet you are influenced by god. LOL

      • Speak
        October 21, 2010 at 11:42 pm

        SO, you are not influenced by God in any way? How did you come into being then? Where did you get your wit from? This is not a laughing matter.

      • chris
        February 17, 2011 at 7:58 pm

        SABI NI GOD HUMAYO KAU AT MAGPARAMI!!!
        NGAUNG MARAMI NA TAU TAMA NAH KAYA I MAINTAIN NA NATIN TUNG BILANG NG POPULATION NATIN!!!

      • shinning daggers
        May 16, 2011 at 2:31 pm

        THERE IS NO GOD.!

        • July 4, 2011 at 11:08 pm

          how could you say that there is no god ? i cant believe you.. even devils said that there is a god, so.. so.. how could you…. it’s not yet late dear, we all must worship god.. esp. you who does’nt believe in him.. before you find yourself burning in eternal flames of hell..

        • Christian
          January 12, 2012 at 2:33 pm

          For the choir director: A psalm of David. Only fools say in their hearts, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, and their actions are evil; not one of them does good!

          Psalm 14:1

          try to understand that…

    5. sean
      January 31, 2010 at 9:31 pm

      The manifestation of us being overpopulated is overwhelming. We can do as many listings just to jot down its bad outcomes. Imagine an individual person earned a Philippine government mandated salary (which is very low) and that individual produces let say “8″ children. Everyone with a simple set of commonsense will tell that it will be hard for that parent to give its 8 children a basic needs for right clothing, nutritional food and safe home. It will also hinder a good education that is vital to the child’s future.

      As we become over populated, we became poorer and poorer because resources will be shared by many. It will become a very small in amount in due time.

      Because of people being poor, (mostly our rural areas) some politicians take advantage on such dilemma. In our community alone, people tend to be exited when election time is coming. This is the true time that they will have a blissful experience to purchase things that they cannot usually bought in their wretched normal days.

      This is an endless vicious cycle that continue to happen since Marcos time. It is still uncontrollably materialized today. We are “held hostage” by the fact that politicians are afraid of “loosing votes” just to please Religious authorities and at the same time this politicians gains an advantage by buying votes from this same poor unfortunate people.

    6. bren
      February 7, 2010 at 2:53 pm

      I don’t really understand why some of our co-Filipinos are up on what the church stands up on this bill.Why can’t they understand that this bill is to educate our people on how to control reproduction.i don’t see the fact in this country to have a church interfering opinion which our damn co Filipinos believed.My God!!! Passing this bill will not go against the words of the bible but instead make our people realize that family is about right decisions.

    7. Twin-Skies
      February 8, 2010 at 2:07 pm

      If the CBCP is going to be so vocal about meddling in the bill’s passing, I say let them.

      Then we’ll have good reason to tax their fat asses off.

      • October 8, 2010 at 5:54 pm

        The Church is not exempted from tax in exchange for shutting up its mouth. Why, if the Church is vocal about supporting the bill, will it be taxed for using its voice regarding public policies?

      • duh
        February 4, 2011 at 3:45 am

        I think the church wants the population coz its business for them – imagine how many babies are being brought to them for baptism…oh and lets not forget, theres other sacraments too. Why dont we give the church the responsibility to feed and educate all these people? The vatican is packed with gold. If they know for sure what God’s will is, then let them handle it.

        • March 5, 2011 at 7:45 pm

          oh!my gosh!
          4 heaven sake…
          naku!
          you know, the church has the right to speak it’s bcoz almost all filipinos are catholic.
          you cannot say ” let the church handle it”

      • cha
        July 13, 2011 at 4:56 pm

        yeah..tama db di nila nagegetz ang point ng RH bill..in fact malaking tulong sating lahat to cure to the growing population of our country ..

    8. Mon
      February 12, 2010 at 11:22 am

      Hmm… I still don’t quite agree with some of the points the bill seeks to implement. One, that ideal family size thing. If no punitive action would be taken for couples with more than 2 kids, and it’s not mandatory, etc, etc… then why would they even mention it as the ideal? How exactly will they encourage people to stick to 2? On a purely economic point-of-view this makes sense, of course, but that’s not the only thing couples consider. The state should not legislate that a certain family size is ideal, even if no corrective measures are implemented. Does that mean that a family with 3 kids then is not considered ideal? That certain families are not ideal? How exactly will they express and encourage people to stick to 2 then?? This is very telling, quite frankly, disturbing. Now that the state has expressed its preference for 2 kids/family, then what’s to stop them from imposing measures to keep it at two in the future? It might seem far-fetched, but it just doesn’t make sense that they will explicitly state an ideal family size and not back it up with the corresponding measures to enforce it unless they’re planning to leave a door open for “something” in the future.

      • Twin-Skies
        February 12, 2010 at 4:15 pm

        So you’re worried that this policy might lead to something more stringent like China’s one-child policy, or that the bill is not clear on why two children are “ideal”?

      • February 12, 2010 at 10:14 pm

        Mon :

        This is very telling, quite frankly, disturbing. Now that the state has expressed its preference for 2 kids/family, then what’s to stop them from imposing measures to keep it at two in the future? It might seem far-fetched, but it just doesn’t make sense that they will explicitly state an ideal family size and not back it up with the corresponding measures to enforce it unless they’re planning to leave a door open for “something” in the future.

        to impose the 2 child family size, they need to make another law. but i dont think any congressman will agree to that. we are in a democracy, this is not china whicj has 1 child policy.

        • Jean R
          March 5, 2010 at 8:27 am

          Hello Socialism; that’s what I see.

        • rah
          April 29, 2010 at 1:03 pm

          There are scientific and mathematical basis having two children are ideal. It is not imposed but is recommended. Something must be done about the population problem in the Philippines. God helps those who help themselves.

          To the church – pay your taxes!

          • June 13, 2010 at 11:32 pm

            What’s the formula? On the other hand, there is eugenic and American influence in this so-called ideal. Actually, it is purely American.

            “Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S.
            Security and Overseas Interests” That is the long title of USA’s bible — the NSSM 200. US is threatened by the growing population of some countries, just like Egypt was of Israel’s. Security is also the main factor of the depopulation attempt of Egypt against Israel; thus, the no-male policy. NSSM 200 says, “Our aim should be for the world to achieve a replacement level of fertility, (a two-child family on the average), by about the year 2000.” The students will also be brainwashed, just like in a socialist government, that the number 2 is the perfect number: “That AID stimulate specific efforts to develop means of educating children of elementary school age to the ideal of the two-child family.” Sex education for elementary students; sounds familiar? Besides, Edcel Lagman is not the true writer of the proposal.

    9. Mon
      February 13, 2010 at 2:59 am

      @Twin-Skies: Yes. The bill isn’t clear on that point. It mentions 2 children as ideal, but then it doesn’t clarify what “ideal” means. And even if there aren’t corrective measures in place at the moment, I want to know how then are they planning on making the distinction between 2-child families and others. Will they promote this teaching in schools? Will there be posters encouraging families to stick to 2? And yes, they won’t “punish” families with more children, but on the flipside, can they give incentives to families that do stick to 2?

      @wawam: Yes, you’re right. We’re not china. We’re a democracy, but then, enacted laws will influence the culture and thought of society. It might seem implausible and downright unrealistic now, but if they are indeed encouraging and promoting 2-child families (albeit without corrective measures YET), it might make future generations more open to the possibility. Hey, who would have thought we’d be debating on something like the RH bill 75-100 years ago?

      I think certain aspects of the RH bill are still in need of revision, or at the very least, clarification.

    10. antenna1
      February 13, 2010 at 10:39 am

      the parents themselves, specially those coming from the poor want to control births or at least space them properly. this bill is responding to the needs of the people.

      arroyo and the bishops are putting up barriers to satisfy the people’s needs.

      • June 13, 2010 at 3:10 pm

        Birth control would take self control. Sounds unfair? If you cannot control yourself, how would you control and discipline your children? How would you be loyal to your marriage? How would you master your desires?

        Does responsibility mean condom, pill, IUD, diaphragm, emergency pill, or injectables? In what wisdom book will you find that? Responsibility means self mastery. Arroyo and the bishops are not putting up barriers for the people to develop that virtue.

        • June 13, 2010 at 9:09 pm

          couples should be allowed to make the most use of what modern medicine has to offer. they should be allowed to make a choice on their own – between modern methods of contraception or traditional methods of contraception. the government should not restrict information and education only for one, both should be promoted to give the couples the chance to make an informed choice.

          • June 14, 2010 at 1:54 am

            Should be allowed to make a choice? Are they not? We are, as far as I know. Now wait, we are not talking about modern medicine. We are not curing any disease here. What prevents pregnancy is not a medicine but a contraceptive; and it is in no way modern. On the other hand, to call something as “traditional” to imply lesser effectiveness is not really promoting it, but discrediting it. And for the information of everybody, BOM is in fact far more modern than artificial contraceptives. And mind you also, it is not like what Edcel Lagman claims as a contraceptive method. It does not frustrate conception.

      • March 6, 2011 at 5:34 am

        but remember RH BILL is a big thing. There are some points in the context of RH BILL that i disagreed.
        responding to the needs of the people? for what? to have sex???
        people will be more to “in” in that sex bcoz of the use of contraceptives. now the question is that how can you CONTROL???
        yes population can be controlled by that contraceptives, but sex can it???

    11. Mon
      February 13, 2010 at 5:45 pm

      SEC. 16. Ideal Family Size. – The State shall assist couples, parents and individuals to achieve their desired family size within the context of responsible parenthood for sustainable development and encourage them to have two children as the ideal family size. Attaining the ideal family size is neither mandatory nor compulsory. No punitive action shall be imposed on parents having more than two children.

      I find this section of the bill quite confusing. First, it says that the state will help couples to achieve THEIR desired family size, and then it contradicts itself by saying that it will encourage them to stick to 2. So what is it really? Why the fixation with 2 kids if it follows it up with “no punitive action shall be imposed on parents having more than 2 children” IF there’s no follow-up later on (probably when the culture is already more receptive) to more aggressive means of enforcing this preference of the state.

      Don’t get me wrong. The bill has valid points as well. But these dubious insertions to the bill make one wonder if there is any truth to all those rumors that a lot of hidden stakeholders (pharmaceutical companies, aid organizations, pro-choice orgs, even abortion advocates, etc.) are indeed very much involved. If they are truly an influence behind the scenes, we shouldn’t in conscience pass the bill in its present form because it might mask interests of theirs that conflict with that of the nation’s.

      This and other similar concerns (restrictions on health care providers, free contraceptive dissemination, etc.) should be scrutinized first before we jump on the bandwagon. Who knows? This bill might actually be more than what it seems to be.

      • February 18, 2010 at 10:58 am

        there is no contradiction there. the bill is not dictatorial nor is it punitive. the whole intend behind the bill is to provide its citizens the complete resources and knowledge to make an informed choice but it does leave the final decisions on individuals and couples. and that includes number of children. the bill respects in full the rights and freedoms of the citizens but it makes the state fulfill its obligation to its citizenry to provide them with all availables resources.

        • Mon
          February 19, 2010 at 11:01 am

          There’s a difference between the supposed intent of the bill and how its specific sections and provisions are worded. As much as we’d like to adhere to the spirit of the law, the letter of the law is something we also cannot overlook. In our enthusiasm to promote everything good that the bill stands for, we run the risk of glossing over how it was crafted and the intentions of the people who crafted it.

        • June 13, 2010 at 2:55 pm

          Dictatorial? Punitive? Of course not! It will just punish all those who would not adhere to it. The parents, the children, the doctors, the teachers, and all the individuals that will say what we are saying now. It will just use Catholic taxes to promote anti-Catholic practices. Well, what should I call that? Punishment? Yes, true, it may not be. But it is stealing. Stealing means getting or using something without the consent of the owner. Have I applied the definition accurately?

          Regarding the intention to provide resources to make an informed choice, it does not appear to be like that. RH bill advertises contraception. It discredits natural family planning, although of course it does not say that explicitly. Besides, if the proponents trust NFP, will they still promote artificial family planning, which aside from being dangerous, requires billions of pesos? Is that what we call wise spending?

          • June 13, 2010 at 9:12 pm

            you need to understand what the RH Bill is trying to do.

            but even before that, understand that under the arroyo administration, all modes of promotion and even just information have been stopped for modern methods of contraception. public health centers and hospitals no longer give information on these. the RH Bill intends to level the playing field, so to speak. it will engage the government to once again promote and give information on both, not on just one.

            • June 13, 2010 at 10:47 pm

              “You need to understand what the RH Bill is trying to do.” I completely agree. When you said RH bill is neither dictatorial nor punitive, it appeared that you do not understand even just the 21st section of the bill.

              “The RH Bill intends to level the playing field.” I beg to disagree. It has no intention to promote both methods. As I have already said somewhere, it discredits NFP because first of all, it requires true discipline, and because there is no money in it. The very famous “traditional” and “modern” comparison is one of the more obvious proof of the word game that the contraceptive industry is playing.

              To deceive people is what RH bill tries to do.

              • June 13, 2010 at 11:26 pm

                section 21 sanctions health providers who do not provide health services as defined by the bill. what is wrong with that? that is much like the law we have where hospitals will be sanctioned if they violate the law on accepting patients to give them health services for whatever reason. hospitals by law are required to accept all patients, violating that law has penalties.

                • June 14, 2010 at 12:04 am

                  You have written the point but have actually missed it. Why would you need another law if one already exists?

                  With the question, “What’s wrong with that,” I would give you a picture. If you are a doctor, and it is against your personal belief to kill a baby, is it right for the government to punish you for not killing one? We all know the answer, no need for you to respond. Now, this is the real scenario: Many health care providers, especially Catholics and those who respect their Hippocratic oath, believe that it is morally wrong to use contraceptives, but even more to prescribe an emergency pill because it is abortifacient. (Where was emergency pill mentioned in the bill? It is for you to see.) These are the doctors that the bill will punish. What do you call that now? Anti-conscience. What’s right with that?

    12. April 1, 2010 at 5:32 pm

      we have a huge population, its a real problem for any government, its a problem for our own government and needless to say our people.

      we must be pro-life , but we must also be open-minded to the goals of a measure that wants to address the issue of the problems that a huge population brings.

      we must examine the bill exhaustively, but we must not be a fanatic.

      God has His way of revealing what is essential.

      we must look, probe and evaluate. let us not be blinded by polarity caused by our affiliation or political patronage. we all have heads to discern that which is good.

    13. mwah
      April 12, 2010 at 9:43 pm

      http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleid=546265 <<dead RH bill.

      1987 Constitution: No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.<< If ever the bill be passed, and it compromises the exercise Catholic faith, would it then be unconstitutional?

      • June 13, 2010 at 2:34 pm

        RH bill does not give a damn whether one is a Catholic or someone who believes that contraceptive use is immoral and that there should not be a contraceptive sex education for elementary and high school students; every citizen is under the law. Whoever resists shall be punished.

        Questions about the constitutionality of the proposal are just being shrugged by the proponents.

        • June 13, 2010 at 11:31 pm

          you grossly misrepresent the punitive provisions of the RH Bill. the RH bill DOES NOT punish citizens at all, it only gives citizens the freedom to choose which method best suits them.

          • June 14, 2010 at 1:19 am

            Okay, the last comment may be gross; let me give details to compensate. But let me make it clear first that doctors are citizens, and you already admitted somewhere that they can be punished. If the bill does punish doctors, and doctors are citizens, then “the RH bill DOES punish citizens”.

            “…it only gives citizens the freedom to choose which method best suits them.” If that is the case, what is section 22 for?

            Okay, let me give you the benefit of the doubt. Maybe you are trying to say that the bill would not punish private citizens. But still, it is not accurate. [Here is the detail that I promised.] Section 21e will punish “any person who maliciously engages in disinformation about the intent or provisions of this Act.” Any includes all, right? It is the opposite of what you have just said. Now, how would you define malicious in this context? And what is disinformation?

            “…it only gives citizens the freedom to choose…” Don’t you have a freedom to choose? I do. I do not need a law to give me that freedom; it is innate to me. The government did not and could not give it to me. In the context of contraceptive use, does the present government prohibits anyone to contracept? No. So there is no prohibition to lift up by a bill.

    14. mwah
      April 12, 2010 at 9:55 pm

      Mon :
      Now that the state has expressed its preference for 2 kids/family, then what’s to stop them from imposing measures to keep it at two in the future? It might seem far-fetched, but it just doesn’t make sense that they will explicitly state an ideal family size and not back it up with the corresponding measures to enforce it unless they’re planning to leave a door open for “something” in the future.

      The State hasn’t expressed anything about preference. The bill isn’t passed.

    15. April 26, 2010 at 11:05 pm

      The bill attacks the family, life and marriage. The distribution of condoms promotes promiscuity and it gives the wrong signals about the sanctity of marriage. SEX should only be for married people – not for extramarital affairs and premarital affairs.Sex is sacred created by God to procreate- not to be abused as a tool for entertainment. The family breakdowns are causing society to fall apart. There is no more meaning in marriage as SEX cannot hold the couples to stay together. The Philippines is poor not because of over population- the country is poor because of GRAFT AND CORRUPTION- the economy was continusouly raped by many past administrations. Sadly, corruption has become a way of life. The poor are entitled to have children according to how many they prefer. Babies from poor families have the same right to live! Children are not liabilities, they are blessings from God. Countries like Singapore, Russia, Germany and Canada worry about the graying population. The Filipino caregivers help elderlys and handicaps of the First world countries. Our OFWS are our heroes and have become the missionaries of the world. In Russia and Singapore, the government give incentives to copulate and ti procreate more. Here, we talk about controlling our population. We are the citizens of the world. God has big plans for our country and for our people. The problem with our politicians and legislators is that they play GOD- they want to control the number of children each family plan to have. We cannot teach our children to enjoy SEX without facing the responsibilities of their actions. This RH Bill has been dead and needs to be BURIED for ever. We have a loving GOD who takes care of our needs. Instead, let us pass laws that need to curb pornography, teen suicides, perversions like video taping private sexual acts and spreading the footages in celfones and in emails , and let us stop the violent video games that affect our young boys. They are more lethal than having more babies. Let us think of how the conscience of our YOUNG people are formed morally well — even the politicians need to re-examine their conscience– what is wrong has become accepted ! There is a widespread confusion now in figuring out what is right from what is wrong ! We have lost our sense of SIN and our sense of GOD ! This RH Bill is not of GOD !

      • Danceljoy
        April 29, 2010 at 2:47 pm

        RH Bill cannot solve all our problems, but it will help many. I pray for it to be passed.

        I agree with your whole point about preventing pornography and promiscuity but you need careful of what you say about RH Bill, or else you might be saying blasphemy. Did you actually read the Bible?

        Only once did God say be fruitful and multiply, and we forget the command that comes after it; rule over the creation. Look at the meaning of “rule” it means manage, if we can’t manage what we create, we’re disobeying God.

        Then after that, sex is purely described as holy union of a man and woman. And it’s even shown in the Song of Solomon that a married couple can freely enjoy sex and eroticism with each other. In 1st Corinthians 5 it says that “Do not deprive each other.” God actually says that if your spouse wants sex, you should give it because your body is not yours alone but also your spouse’s.

        It’s been said in Corinthians that a woman is the glory of man, and you can see in Proverbs 31 that a wife is a greatest treasure that a man can have. Yes, wives are blessings. But what does 1st Corinthians 7 says? It says that it’s better to be single and serve the Lord, (but marry if urged to.)

        Children are blessings, that you get through a spouse, but it’s better to have no children if it’s hindering your service for God. And what does Paul say? “The family is the first ministry.” Family first.

        Sex is beautiful, not sinful inside marriage and not only for reproduction but for the holy union of a male and female, reflecting the glory of God. It’s long been distorted not only by promiscuity, fornication and adultery but by other religions sects as they view it as as sinful union with a woman even in marriage, only necessary to for procreation.

        So let me summarize my two points:
        1. Sex in marriage is wonderful, sacred and private. It’s holy and shouldn’t be tainted with malicious or worldly content.
        2. Contraceptives can enable married couple to freely enjoy sex and at the same time manage their families

        Then are contraceptives okay? Not all the time. I repeat, not all the time. It’s not for non-married people. Also the notion that couples marry just because of the sex and not to honor God through raising a family is a sin(case of foreign countries) Ephesians chapter 4 tells us that we must always be with the Holy Spirit.

        Also, though I strongly say that the RH bill is not against God, it’s not enough to cure our country. There are many more to do, but RH Bill can improve the Filipino family.

        P.S. Poor people indeed have the right to have as many children as they like. But those children have the right for healthy food, homes, education and safe environment. It’s hypocrisy to say that contraceptives are evil yet condemn mislead children for indulging in drugs and illegal activities instead of school. Parents have no right to have children if they cannot give them their rights.

        -Dancel T., UP Diliman.-

        • April 29, 2010 at 3:10 pm

          will be putting this into a thread on its own.

          • Danceljoy
            April 29, 2010 at 3:23 pm

            It’s fine with me, I’m prepared for any criticism.

        • June 13, 2010 at 2:16 pm

          “Only once did God say be fruitful and multiply.” Wrong. “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it” (Genesis 1:28); “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth” (Genesis 9:1); “As for you, be fruitful and multiply; Populate the earth abundantly and multiply in it” (Genesis 9:7). What’s ironic is your question: “Did you actually read the Bible?” If you read all the 73 books of the Bible, how come you missed some parts of the first?

          “Look at the meaning of ‘rule’ it means manage.” Right. I would recommend my title: “Kung Mahal Ninyo Sila…Magplano” regarding this point. But let me leave a short line here. Using contraceptives does not in anyway imply true management. It is like drinking liquors everyday and taking a liver supplement “to be safe”. That is irresponsible. To rule also means to become master of something. Now, how to be a good ruler? The answer: rule yourself first. Be your own master. Be not a slave of carnal desires. You are a Bible reader, right? Using contraceptives shows that you want physical satisfaction here and now but does not want extra responsibility. Again, rule yourself. If you want birth spacing (which every couple should practice), you should learn sex spacing. Even dogs and other animals do not copulate everyday. “If we can’t manage what we (or rather HE) create, we’re disobeying God.” Did you hear that?

          “God actually says that if your spouse wants sex, you should give it.” I do not think so. Paul actually said, “Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time.” Did Paul contradict himself by using “except” and “mutual” on the same line? No. Whatever the reason is; may it be for prayer, birth spacing, or self-discipline, Paul is saying that you can actually refuse (in a positive manner) your spouse especially if you have a prior agreement. Your body is your spouse’s but it is not his/her slave. Even prostitutes refuse because of preference. A wife or husband is much more dignified than a prostitute when it comes to sex.

          “RH Bill cannot solve all our problems,” it would add up to it.

        • June 16, 2010 at 6:20 pm

          I agree! Sex is beautiful when done within the sanctity of marriage. And what Maria said is not correct–that sex should only be for procreation. God created Eve to be Adam’s partner; He didn’t say, “Oh, Adam, you need to be a father so I’ll make you something that can give you kids.” Women weren’t created to become just childbearers–it’s one of the wonderful things we can do but our purpose is not limited to that!

          • June 16, 2010 at 6:21 pm

            I was replying to Dancel’s comment, not with Vanillae’s, btw.

          • June 17, 2010 at 12:48 pm

            Now, this is a very complicated issue, especially if we are not walking on the same ground. But since Adam was mentioned, I should break the news that although it is said in the Bible (not a reference book for history) that Adam was created first, God’s obvious reason for making him a man is so that he could co-create with Him. And God does not intend to create hundreds, thousands, or even millions, but as many as the stars in the sky and as the sands on the seashore. Is it a form of God’s vanity? No. It is his overflowing love. He wants to create multitudes of souls for heaven, that is for life.

            Through God’s gesture, he actually said to Adam, “You need to be a father.” And as Adam was made man, Eve was made woman. One is a male human being and the other a female human being. Both have the dignity of a human but the words male and female connote differences in functions — those are what we call complementary differences. Some may not agree but the Bible implies that Eve was made from and for Adam as Adam was made for God. The female was made for the male, although that conclusion does not conform with what some naive people claim that every man has a woman destined for him, romantically speaking. It only means that all of a woman’s components, from anatomy to physiology to psychology, are designed to complement the man’s. It does not make a man more of a “bida” and the woman a sidekick. You cannot make a functional aquarium if you do not have either the glass or the element that will seal it together such as a glass glue. Neither the glass alone nor the glue alone can make an aquarium even if the glue was made for the glass.

            “Women weren’t created to become just childbearers–it’s one of the wonderful things we can do but our purpose is not limited to that!” I agree. There should be woman inventors, woman politicians, woman lawyers, woman doctors, woman soldiers, etc. That is because as women, they will contribute to the feminine benefits of those functions. However, the truth still remains that women were mainly designed to be mothers, although they have different callings; just as men were designed to be fathers although they have different callings. God is wise. He would not remove genitals just because one is not called to become a mother or a father. We have one design and that is the fruit of God’s wisdom. What we will be in the future depends on God’s calling and our answer to that call. What comes to mind as a very great example is the computer. It is mainly designed for computing tasks but now we can use it as a word processor, a television, a video player, a radio, a mailer, a communication device, and many more…even as an alarm clock.

            • 25
              August 27, 2010 at 3:56 pm

              sex is not just for the sake of making babies and you ain’t gonna do a shit about it…welcome to the 21st century old man…people express their love not just by giving flowers etc…we don’t want to couples to have unwanted babies…to be honest w/ you…sex is not just for making love…it has a new definition…”one night stand”…hehehehe

              • August 28, 2010 at 4:22 pm

                We don’t say that sex is just for making babies, did I? Now, regarding “unwanted babies”, you should be the one who must be reminded (or rather educated) that there are no unwanted babies in a truly civilized society. We know and understand human dignity now more than ever; I hope you do. Those people who do not want their babies…well, I don’t have to describe them. If we are not ready yet to make a bigger family, then we don’t intentionally make another babies, but we welcome them wholeheartedly if they come unexpectedly. Actually, we intentionally avoid fertile days in that case, but we don’t intend to frustrate conception…that’s the difference.

                Sorry to hear that you actually believe that you can redefine things arbitrarily as if you can change its nature. If you are a modern man, then you should think like a man with understanding. Sex is for man but man is not for sex. Nothing should enslave man, whether money, power, or pleasure; he should be over them. A modern man should say, “I do what I will, I do what is right, and not as my drives tell me to,” or else he is more animal than man.

                Now, will you wash your face from a used toilet bowl if the current culture redefine its purpose? Will you drink using a bedpan if its already acceptable to the society? Well, actually, you can do it if you want; but still, you cannot redefine man and his purpose and of everything that is part of him. It’s just a matter of recognizing the nature of things as they really are. To try to redefine them is a great stupidity that a true modern man would not do.

                Don’t try to listen with your nose; it won’t work.

              • ayie
                October 8, 2010 at 4:42 pm

                you are wrong.
                sex is solely for pro-creation and nothing else.
                and it should be done in the context of marriage..

            • Sean
              October 9, 2010 at 9:44 pm

              adam is a MYTH

      • June 13, 2010 at 2:22 pm

        KUDOS!

      • johnzkee92
        October 4, 2010 at 8:37 pm

        Controlling population is not playing god, Killing is playing God. Controlling the population does not kill, it just prevents a birth of a life, that, under our current situation, has the possibility to be killed. And oh, Pornography and Video Games has nothing to do with this, I wonder when people will leave the shadow of Spanish Occupation and realize that we live in a modern world, and if we don’t follow modern principles, we don’t prosper, milyun milyong pilipino ang mamatay ng dilat ang mata sa gutom dahil walang maipakain sa pamilya nila.

        • March 6, 2011 at 6:27 am

          but controlling population using contraceptives can also be a form of killing the living organism in the womb.
          so therefore controlling population is playing God!

      • March 6, 2011 at 6:08 am

        @ maria: yes I Strongly agree!
        God is always here for us..
        let us not think of our own greedy self.. Politicians are been blinded by money. Money that had been sent by the central government had gone to the pocket of some greedy politicians. let us think of others who are more in need than ourselves.
        there are many ways to help us. let us cooperate with each other to attain the life we want to be.

    16. andy bandag
      April 29, 2010 at 8:22 pm

      contraceptives are ok for married couples? i suggest please review the principles of morality using right not erroneous conscience

      • Danceljoy
        April 30, 2010 at 12:50 pm

        Yes, contraceptives are okay as long as its with good conscience. Should husbands force their wives to have sex even if she isn’t feeling well? Isn’t that obeying God’s command to love your wives and love their body as their own? Should women abandon their gift of child-bearing in the fear of losing their beauty? Should contraceptives be use for some women’s selfish notion of prioritizing their career rather than bearing a child in her twenties where it is the safest?

        Contraceptives aren’t inherently evil, but should be used for God’s purposes of managing a healthy family with children who get what they should have and for a mutual, loving relationship of spouses.

        • Danceljoy
          April 30, 2010 at 12:52 pm

          Danceljoy :
          Yes, contraceptives are okay as long as its with good conscience. Should husbands force their wives to have sex even if she isn’t feeling well? Isn’t that DISobeying God’s command to love your wives and love their body as their own? Should women abandon their gift of child-bearing in the fear of losing their beauty? Should contraceptives be use for some women’s selfish notion of prioritizing their career rather than bearing a child in her twenties where it is the safest?
          Contraceptives aren’t inherently evil, but should be used for God’s purposes of managing a healthy family with children who get what they should have and for a mutual, loving relationship of spouses.

          CORRECTED

          • June 16, 2010 at 6:03 pm

            It isn’t selfish if women want to prioritize their career. How come no one accuses men of this? Also, mommies are so hot right now–think Angelina Jolie, Halle Berry, Jessica Alba, etc. And you don’t even need to be a celebrity to be a mom and be sexy at the same time. So you can’t accuse women of not wanting kids because they’re vain.

            Is it so hard to understand that some women don’t want to have kids because they simply do NOT want kids? Is there a law somewhere that says all women must get pregnant and be mothers to be considered human beings? This is such sexist thinking!

            • June 17, 2010 at 11:48 am

              “It isn’t selfish if women want to prioritize their career.” I agree…that is if the person is really not selfish. Being a career woman itself is not worthy of the accusation. In fact, even altruism can be a mask of greed or selfishness. My point is whether you are a teacher, a call center associate, a lawyer, a janitor, a fastfood service crew, or a full-time mother, selfishness and self-donation will still apply. It is really about the person and not the job.

              “How come no one accuses men of this?” Because there is no such thing as career men as it applies to women. Having a culture that is rooted in Christian perception of the relation between sexuality and functions, Filipinos generally accept that men are providers. For a man to have a “career” such as being an employee or a businessman is not just common but is normal; even obligatory. There is of course an exemption. It is not always applicable for a man to be an employee or a business person, but it is still the norm. To accuse a man of being selfish because he has a job is nonsense.

              “…you don’t even need to be a celebrity to be a mom and be sexy at the same time.” Let us settle first to a more acceptable definition of terms. When you say “hot” you mean “sexy” as it appears here. Besides, even dictionaries recognize the word as related to sex. When you say “sexy”, that denotes tending to arouse sexual desire or interest. Now, here is the confusing part: some women say that they want to look sexy and they mean what they say, but there are those who say they want to look sexy or hot but they do not mean (as they say) to arouse sexual desire. That is going against the norm. Angelina Jolie, Halle Berry, and Jessica Alba are some of the best examples of hot/sexy women..that is they tend to arouse sexual desire. That is why I always object when I hear parents proudly praise a child by exclaiming, “Wow, sexy!” Should a child be sexy? Now, going back to the issue, should a married woman be sexy…that is sexually desirable for everybody’s eyes? If yes, why?

              “…mommies are so hot right now…So you can’t accuse women of not wanting kids because they’re vain.” I do not agree with the conclusion. Eventual social acceptance of an idea does not change its nature. Abortion for example remains evil in America even if Americans accept it. Cheating in exams is still wrong even if it is common. Angelina Jolie, Halle Berry, Jessica Alba, and even hundreds of celebrities and/or “hot mommies” cannot change a thing when it comes to the rightness and wrongness of a concept. But then again, I am not accusing anybody of wrongdoing for being both hot and a mommy at the same time.

              Now, one more word that is very much acceptable but should not be: VAIN – having an exaggerated sense of self-importance. Why are we not scandalized by the casual use of the term as if it is a good trait? That is the power of mind conditioning. That is the fruit of Californication. Here I should agree with the Red Hot Chili Pepper that “everybody’s been there and I don’t mean on vacation.” All of us (almost) are into this, and we no longer know where this influence comes from, whether there is wrong with it, and whether we can still get out of it. I should also mention the line before it, saying that it was “born and raised by those who praise control of population.” Even Hollywood superstars themselves recognize the facts.

              I will leave the rest of the arguments to those who want to object. What I could say on my part at this moment is that I do not see anything wrong with a woman who does not want to have kids, but I would not encourage contraception.

      • June 13, 2010 at 12:21 pm

        I agree. Good intention is not always the same with good conscience. That is why there is a saying that the road to hell is paved with good intentions, or as St. Bernard said, “Hell is full of good intentions or desires.” Human cannibals in a cannibalistic culture do not think that what they do is wrong, but it is. Not all criminals perceive themselves as criminals, but they are. Many abortionists honestly believe that they do not sin, but they do. A good conscience is shaped by a good moral foundation, not just by good intentions.

    17. Nrxs
      May 8, 2010 at 8:54 pm

      “Contraceptives do not have life-threatening side effects.”
      Yes, they may not have life threatening side effects but they have detrimental adverse effects. These two effects have different meanings. Side effects are expected reactions while the other one means the opposite.

      • June 13, 2010 at 11:44 am

        In addition to that, to say that contraceptives do not have life-threatening side effects is devious. All side effects are never life threatening but it does not mean that contraceptives cannot be life threatening. It has numbers of complications which include the following:

        * Blood clot in the legs, lungs, heart or brain
        * High blood pressure
        * Liver tumors
        * Gallstones
        * Jaundice

        These are not side effects but rather worse than that.

        • June 13, 2010 at 11:29 pm

          what is the rate of occurrence of these? very minimal.

          • June 14, 2010 at 12:45 am

            Oh, sorry, I forgot to add breast cancer.

            Well, WHO has reported that the pill is carcinogenic. Do we have to “risk” the health and the life of women for the pleasure of men? I thought I heard the proponents that the bill is pro-women. How?

            Should a guy tell a girl to swim in a river where periodical presence of crocodiles were reported just to get him his favorite shrimp, and then say, “Don’t worry, most of the time, they are not there”? Would it have a bearing if the occurrence of wives being killed by crocs are “very minimal”?

            • June 16, 2010 at 6:14 pm

              That is why you always go to a doctor first! Some women can’t go on the pill because they have a medical history, some women are allergic to condoms, etc. So discuss your options first with a gyne. A lot of the time, the doctor will suggest another form of medical contraception or even recommend natural forms like rhythm method. Then there are women whose health will be seriously compromised if they get pregnant so it’s always best to check with a doctor!

        • 69
          August 27, 2010 at 3:07 pm

          that’s why before using any of them…you should consult a specialist…tanong mo naman…pano kung walang pambayad…well…the bill will provide…kaya nga masdadagdagan pa ang mga specialist sa mga health centers eh…masayado kang relihiyoso…kala mo naman…lahat ng bagay madadaan mo sa dasal…kahit ang diyos mayayamot sa atin kung lahat na lang ng bagay iaaasa natin sa kanya…kaya nga nya tayo binigyan ng utak eh…para gamitin…yung sa’yo kaya…kailan mo gagamitin…..

          • August 28, 2010 at 7:55 pm

            “that’s why before using any of them…you should consult a specialist”

            When you consult a specialist, will you not experience side effects? For your knowledge, side effects are not just user dependent; there are many factors in it. The so-called specialist will give you the “best” that you can use, but it does not mean the best would have no undesirable effects.

            “tanong mo naman…pano kung walang pambayad”

            Mali. Hindi ko itatanong ang tungkol sa pambayad. Unang-una, hindi ito tungkol sa kung may pambayad ka o wala; ang pinag-uusapan ay tama ba ito at mabuti. Pangalawa, hindi kami willing na ibigay ang pera namin para sa mga taong gustong makipag-sex pero walang sense of responsibility, at gustong gastusan ng kapwa nila ang sarap na kanilang pagpapasasaan.

            “masayado kang relihiyoso”

            Hindi ako masyadong relihiyoso, you just don’t understand religion, as you don’t understand reproduction and human dignity.

            “kahit ang diyos mayayamot sa atin kung lahat na lang ng bagay iaaasa natin sa kanya”

            Mali. Pinapatunayan mo lang na wala kang alam tungkol sa Diyos. God wants our full trust and dependence. Hindi nun ibig sabihin na hihiga ka lang o wala nang iisipin, it simply means that everything that we do should be in accordance with his will, whether it is comfortable or a bit strange for us. You cannot even follow God without thinking, willing, and doing. So it’s the people that obey God that truly think and work. You must also know that God was first angered by mankind when they decided “to know” without God, and to believe that they, by themselves, are able to determine arbitrarily what is right or rather what “should be right”. It is directly opposed to your idea.

            “kaya nga nya tayo binigyan ng utak eh…para gamitin…yung sa’yo kaya…kailan mo gagamitin…”

            Unang-una, ina-apply ko lang sa usaping ito ang kaalaman ko bilang nag-training tungkol sa basics ng obstetrics at pharmacology. Nagkataon lang na alam ko at naiintindihan ang sinasabi ko. Masasasabi ko nang higit sa lahat ng sumagot sa comments ko na mas tama ang paraan ko ng pag-iisip dahil nagmumula ang mga impormasyon ko sa isang pormal na pag-aaral. Kahit gaano mo gamitin ang utak mo, kung mali naman ang impormasyong linalaman nito, sa huli ay mali pa rin ang mga argumento at konklusyon na mabubuo nito. Ginagamit ko ang utak ko, at maaaring ganun ka rin; ang pagkakaiba, sa tama ko ito ginagamit.

            • nhetty
              October 5, 2011 at 8:45 am

              “Mali. Pinapatunayan mo lang na wala kang alam tungkol sa Diyos. God wants our full trust and dependence. Hindi nun ibig sabihin na hihiga ka lang o wala nang iisipin, it simply means that everything that we do should be in accordance with his will, whether it is comfortable or a bit strange for us. You cannot even follow God without thinking, willing, and doing. So it’s the people that obey God that truly think and work. You must also know that God was first angered by mankind when they decided “to know” without God, and to believe that they, by themselves, are able to determine arbitrarily what is right or rather what “should be right”. It is directly opposed to your idea.”

              Vanillae: Reading your views about this RH bill made me an instant fan of yours. Thankyou for your ideas that could help open up people’s minds. Sana marami pang makabasa ng mga comments mo. God bless. :)

    18. John Jefferson A. Velasco
      May 9, 2010 at 10:28 pm

      In fact, we are facing socio economic crisis, food shortagae, global warming, crimes etc… it is because of what kind of goverment we have. There are things which are misinterpreted like issues on reproductive health bill. Yes I really agree of using contraceptives as long as it could help the couple to satisfy their needs as partner. There is no wrong about it, in fact overpopulation can hinder the socio-economic advancement of a country. If you are going to take a glance to the China’s program on population control, Chinese gov’t had One Child Policy…that is the better way to control and limit the problem on population.

      • June 13, 2010 at 10:45 am

        Just for additional information:
        China’s population is 1.3 billion
        Philippine population is 94 million

        Which one is much larger and which one is richer?

        According to the data, does larger population mean poorer economy?

        As per NSO, the estimated population of the country in 2040 is 141.6 million. If that is true, then even after 30 years from now, China’s population today is still several millions larger, and yet they are much richer.

        How would you defy logic and math?

        • 69
          August 27, 2010 at 3:12 pm

          GOD DAMN IT!!! you really are a moon…ok…you looked at the population size…well you have forgotten to look at the land area…w/c is bigger…philippines or china…even china are making efforts to limit their population…damn…sometimes i wish we’re a communist country to shut stupid people like you….

          • August 28, 2010 at 8:36 pm

            I’m a moon? Sorry, not familiar with the idiom!

            Who told you I forgot to consider the land area? Who is your source? First of, we’re not talking about land area here when Philippines is compared with China; it is, who has the much higher population and yet much richer, not to mention the comparison regarding natural resources. China is much wealthier despite the fact that we have much smaller population and much greater resources. Now, if you really like to use land area as an alibi, then let us analyze your proposition. How much part of the country’s land area are inhabited? How much of it are cultivated? Don’t you realize that the only crowded place in the Philippines is Metro Manila? I currently reside in Tarlac and we don’t have many neighbors in the area. We also have a place in Quezon Province; you can shout and be heard from hundreds of meters away because the area has a wide space — almost no neighbors. Do you suggest that people in this country are overflowing, and that in around 2050, some of us would need to build houses on the water? Even if you make it 2200, it is still far from reality. Just do the math, I’ll give you the formula. Population of all Filipinos minus immigrants (and OFWs) to other countries plus population of foreigners here divided by the land area of the country. Or you might want to use just the inhabited area of the land. You would still have lots of space. What more if you divide it using the whole land area as the dividend!

            “i wish we’re a communist country to shut stupid people like you…”

            I wish you live in China so your wish to be a part of a Communist country would be granted, and that you might realize what is the real payment for their economic wealth. The RH bill has a touch of Communism; no wonder you want it passed. But sorry for you, we (I mean “we”) don’t have a Communist mind like you, and we will not let this bill be a law.

            Don’t forget to do the arithmetic, wise man; and consider migrating to China — it might fulfill your dream.

    19. John Jefferson A. Velasco
      May 9, 2010 at 10:30 pm

      I mean food shortage….

    20. rafael bordado
      June 11, 2010 at 4:27 pm

      how come the CBCP if not the priests (not all) lecturing us on family planning & stuffs regarding married life were in fact they dont experienced a single second of husband-wife everyday life, im just curious.Why would we listen to them on issues specifically the RH bill were the proponents are in a no win situation against them. Its non-sense to argue with them coz they pretend to be always RIGHT with regards to family matters as though they did something to uplift poverty in RP…

      • June 13, 2010 at 8:51 am

        First of all, CBCP is composed of priests, although they have laity co-workers, so the “if not the priests” phrase is not appropriate for the argument. Second, it is one of the “jobs” of the priests to lecture (as the term you use) about family planning and stuff regarding married life, not because they themselves are married but because as workers of Christ, they were given the task to teach and remind every Christian about the principles and sacramental meaning of marriage. You do not have to be a fly to be an expert about flies. You do not have to be a baby again to know what a baby feels or wants. You do not have to be a woman to understand the value of motherhood. I myself, when I was a radio show host in our community, gave solicited advises to everybody — fathers, mothers, students, out of school youth, security guards, employees, and many others — although I am not in the same state of life. We are talking about principles and experience, but experience does not mean that you are the one who undergoes the situation. An experienced health care provider, for example, does not need to have a cancer to specialize in it, because if that is the case, they should be a patient who has had every kind of disease first before they can be a doctor. The argument that “they (the priests) don’t experienced a single second of husband-wife everyday life,” is ignorant and overhasty. Priests, as we call them, are fathers and they give advises to couples (husbands and wives) both from principles and experience. I am not a priest but I know it. Besides, do I have to be one to understand? It is true the proponents of RH bill are in a no-win situation, but not just against them. All true Catholics are against the RH bill. You might say, “Survey results show that many Catholic women are in favor of contraception,” but I will say it again: all true Catholics are against the RH bill. Anti-HB5043 comments in the title “RH Bill No. 5043 Full Text” in this site might give you a clue.

        “…as though they did something to uplift poverty in RP.” You need more studying than talking. The priests, the bishops, and the whole Church always contribute a very significant development not only in the Philippines but in every country. And when I say “development”, it includes livelihood, but most of all, a sense of purpose in life and an energy to do everything that everybody needs to do. Think of this: What will you do with a billion pesos if you no longer find meaning in your existence? Conversely, you will have the potential to earn a billion if you know why you are here.

    21. June 13, 2010 at 11:27 pm

      vanillae :

      “You need to understand what the RH Bill is trying to do.” I completely agree. When you said RH bill is neither dictatorial nor punitive, it appeared that you do not understand even just the 21st section of the bill.

      “The RH Bill intends to level the playing field.” I beg to disagree. It has no intention to promote both methods. As I have already said somewhere, it discredits NFP because first of all, it requires true discipline, and because there is no money in it. The very famous “traditional” and “modern” comparison is one of the more obvious proof of the word game that the contraceptive industry is playing.

      To deceive people is what RH bill tries to do.

      where is the deception there?

      deception is where govt health providers are prohibited to promote modern methods of contraception while promoting the more risky traditional methods of contraception.

      • June 14, 2010 at 12:28 am

        You are proving my point again; but then again, you are still missing it. Proponents say that RH bill promotes both methods, but instead of using the terms “natural family planning” and “artificial family planning”, they use the term “modern” in favor of the latter to imply that NFP is primitive and “more risky”, as you — yes, you have pointed out. Is that the way to promote something? And who says NFP is risky? And what does “risky” mean? Actually, WHO said that Billing’s ovulation method is 99% effective. And who’s WHO? I assume you know. I would add, NFP has no side effects and it is free. Will you buy a bottled water that is not 100% clean, has been reported as cause of diarrhea to some individuals, if you already have a source of perfectly pure, healthy, and free water? What’s behind the contraceptives craze? Is it on sale?

        Now, in what way are the artificial contraceptives modern? It can only be called because it is contemporary but all the concepts are just the same hundreds and thousands years ago. To honestly believe that this is new is ignorance.

    22. June 13, 2010 at 11:32 pm

      vanillae :

      Dictatorial? Punitive? Of course not! It will just punish all those who would not adhere to it. The parents, the children, the doctors, the teachers, and all the individuals that will say what we are saying now. It will just use Catholic taxes to promote anti-Catholic practices. Well, what should I call that? Punishment? Yes, true, it may not be. But it is stealing. Stealing means getting or using something without the consent of the owner. Have I applied the definition accurately?

      Regarding the intention to provide resources to make an informed choice, it does not appear to be like that. RH bill advertises contraception. It discredits natural family planning, although of course it does not say that explicitly. Besides, if the proponents trust NFP, will they still promote artificial family planning, which aside from being dangerous, requires billions of pesos? Is that what we call wise spending?

      stop misrepresenting what the RH Bill says.

      EC. 21. Prohibited Acts. – The following acts are prohibited:

      a) Any health care service provider, whether public or private, who shall:

      1. Knowingly withhold information or impede the dissemination thereof, and/or intentionally provide incorrect information regarding programs and services on reproductive health including the right to informed choice and access to a full range of legal, medically-safe and effective family planning methods;

      2. Refuse to perform voluntary ligation and vasectomy and other legal and medically-safe reproductive health care services on any person of legal age on the ground of lack of spousal consent or authorization.

      3. Refuse to provide reproductive health care services to an abused minor, whose abused condition is certified by the proper official or personnel of the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) or to duly DSWD-certified abused pregnant minor on whose case no parental consent is necessary.

      4. Fail to provide, either deliberately or through gross or inexcusable negligence, reproductive health care services as mandated under this Act, the Local Government Code of 1991, the Labor Code, and Presidential Decree 79, as amended; and

      5. Refuse to extend reproductive health care services and information on account of the patient’s civil status, gender or sexual orientation, age, religion, personal circumstances, and nature of work; Provided, That all conscientious objections of health care service providers based on religious grounds shall be respected: Provided, further, That the conscientious objector shall immediately refer the person seeking such care and services to another health care service provider within the same facility or one which is conveniently accessible: Provided, finally, That the patient is not in an emergency or serious case as defined in RA 8344 penalizing the refusal of hospitals and medical clinics to administer appropriate initial medical treatment and support in emergency and serious cases.

      b) Any public official who prohibits or restricts personally or through a subordinate the delivery of legal and medically-safe reproductive health care services, including family planning;

      c) Any employer who shall fail to comply with his obligation under Section 17 of this Act or an employer who requires a female applicant or employee, as a condition for employment or continued employment, to involuntarily undergo sterilization, tubal ligation or any other form of contraceptive method;

      d) Any person who shall falsify a certificate of compliance as required in Section 14 of this Act; and

      e) Any person who maliciously en ges in disinformation about the intent or provisions of this Act.

      • June 14, 2010 at 1:33 am

        Where did I misrepresent the bill? How would “actually” depend its totalitarian approach? Section 22 talks about fine and imprisonment, is it not punishment? Will the phrase “any person” on section 21e exclude “the parents, the children, the doctors, the teachers, and all the individuals that will say what we are saying now”? Do you believe that the government with this bill as a law will just shrugged when these people do not adhere?

    23. antenna1
      June 14, 2010 at 7:47 am

      vanillae :
      Should be allowed to make a choice? Are they not? We are, as far as I know. Now wait, we are not talking about modern medicine. We are not curing any disease here. What prevents pregnancy is not a medicine but a contraceptive; and it is in no way modern. On the other hand, to call something as “traditional” to imply lesser effectiveness is not really promoting it, but discrediting it. And for the information of everybody, BOM is in fact far more modern than artificial contraceptives. And mind you also, it is not like what Edcel Lagman claims as a contraceptive method. It does not frustrate conception.

      it is modern medicine, that cannot be disputed. and the modern methods of contraception are far more effective than the old ways of contraception.

      • June 14, 2010 at 11:08 am

        Medicine – something that treats, prevents or alleviates the symptoms of disease.

        We are talking about pregnancy; is it a disease? Am I less informed than you when it comes to obstetrics and gynecology? It just happened that I was trained to be a medical transcriptionist and it was actually my job. Again, “what prevents pregnancy is not a medicine but a contraceptive.”

        Who said it cannot be disputed? You just need to read encyclopedias (or even Wikipedia) to have information about that. Haven’t you heard about marbles inside a camel’s uterus, or about sterilization potion? Even Christianity was not yet born when these concepts were used.

        And are you better than the World Health Organization?

        • 69
          August 27, 2010 at 3:22 pm

          fortunately…you’re not the only one trained in the field of medicine….i repeat…before using any contraceptives…consult a specialist…if you don’t have money…go to your nearest health center…there is a family medicine doctor or an ob-gyne on duty there…he or she could help you decide…parang gamot lang sa laganat yan…kapag kahiyang mo yung gamot…bababa ang lagnat mo…pero kapag hindi mo kahiyang…kumonsulta muna sa doctor…ahm…sana alam mo po na tinituro yan sa…pharmacology…teka…med. transcriptionist ka ba talaga…bkt hindi mo ata alam yun……

          • August 28, 2010 at 8:58 pm

            Talaga bang sinabi ng professor mo na parang lagnat lang yan? May mga kakilala ako dito at sa ibang bansa na gumagamit ng birth control pills (am not comfortable using the term OCP) sa payo ng health care providers nila pero hindi sila nakaligtas sa side effects. Dahil tulad nga ng sinabi ko, hindi komo sinabing best option e ligtas ka na. May mga babaeng hindi nakakaranas ng kahit anong hindi magandang epekto, pero ang punto, may mga nakakaranas kahit pa ito ang “best”. Hindi ito kailangang ipadanas sa mga kababaihan para lang pagbigyan ang hanap ng katawan.

            Itinuro din ba ng professor mo ang detalyadong mechanics ng pills at IUDs? Maayos niya bang naipaliwanag ang pagkakaiba ng pregnancy, conception, fertilization, at implantation; at na-realize mo ba ang implikasyon nito sa pagamit ng contraceptives? At ayon sa kaalaman mo, hindi mo ba nakitang nagsisinungaling ang RH bill tungkol sa contraceptives, o mali ang pagkaunawa mo sa mga itinuro sa iyo?

            Hayaan mong linawin ko sa iyo na ang pagbubuntis ay hindi sakit; hindi ito nangangailangan ng gamot para mawala o humupa. Ang paracetamol ay pampahupa ng lagnat at tulong para mawala ang sakit ng katawan; sa kabilang banda, ang kontraseptibo ay malayong-malayo sa pagiging gamot.

    24. antenna1
      June 14, 2010 at 7:49 am

      vanillae :
      Where did I misrepresent the bill? How would “actually” depend its totalitarian approach? Section 22 talks about fine and imprisonment, is it not punishment? Will the phrase “any person” on section 21e exclude “the parents, the children, the doctors, the teachers, and all the individuals that will say what we are saying now”? Do you believe that the government with this bill as a law will just shrugged when these people do not adhere?

      yes the bill talks about punishment but it does so on those government officials who will not follow the law.

      this blog should ban you from posting here if you continue to misrepresent facts.

      • June 14, 2010 at 11:23 am

        the world health organization endorses modern methods of contraception.

        • June 14, 2010 at 1:26 pm

          That’s the point. The World Health Organization promotes artificial methods, that is why it cannot be accused of bias when it issues reports in favor of NFP, and also about the pill being carcinogenic.

      • June 14, 2010 at 11:27 am

        Whow! Does section 21e said that it would punish just government officials? I thought what I saw are: any health care service provider, whether public or private (21a), any public official (21b), any employer (21c), and any person (21d, 21e). Don’t you think you are the one who misrepresents facts? Where in the proposal does it say that it is about government officials only? Can you point it out?

        If you judged that I am misrepresenting HB 5043, then section 21e might sentence me “to an imprisonment ranging from one (1) month to six (6) months or a fine ranging from Ten Thousand Pesos (P10,000.00) to Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) or both such fine and imprisonment at the discretion of the court” (Section 22). There is another penalty for the public officials who you say are the only punishable persons here: “An offender who is a public officer or employee shall suffer the accessory penalty of dismissal from the government service.”

        Haven’t I given you the facts? Have you on your part?

        Definition:
        Any – one, some, every or all without specification

    25. antenna1
      June 14, 2010 at 7:53 am

      vanillae :
      You have written the point but have actually missed it. Why would you need another law if one already exists?
      With the question, “What’s wrong with that,” I would give you a picture. If you are a doctor, and it is against your personal belief to kill a baby, is it right for the government to punish you for not killing one? We all know the answer, no need for you to respond. Now, this is the real scenario: Many health care providers, especially Catholics and those who respect their Hippocratic oath, believe that it is morally wrong to use contraceptives, but even more to prescribe an emergency pill because it is abortifacient. (Where was emergency pill mentioned in the bill? It is for you to see.) These are the doctors that the bill will punish. What do you call that now? Anti-conscience. What’s right with that?

      there is no existing law on reproductive health such as the RH Bill. enacting this law is in fact intended to fix that loophole in our laws.

      not having a law has allowed the administration of gloria macapagal arroyo to bring back the country’s reproductive health programs to the 60s where it pretends modern methods do not yet exist.

      arroyo as unilaterally imposed here religious beliefs on the whole country by allowing only old but high risk methods of contraception and ignoring modern medicine and science.

      • June 14, 2010 at 11:42 am

        Again, I should repeat that if an agent’s main purpose is to prevent pregnancy, it is not a medicine but a contraceptive.

        Regarding efficacy, maybe I should share one article with you: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/02/070221065200.htm. I could also recommend a book if you want.

        You are actually representing the stand of RH bill against (not regarding) NFP. You are helping to show that the bill is not true to its words when it comes to the promotion of both natural and artificial methods.

    26. antenna1
      June 14, 2010 at 7:56 am

      with the arroyo administration out in a few days time and the aquino administration to take over, the RH Bill will have a chance to get passed. aquino has been supportive of this bill. finally, married couples and specially women will be given the freedom to choose the method that suits them best.

    27. June 14, 2010 at 1:15 pm

      Haven’t you heard the news? Didn’t you watch the first press conference that was called by Noynoy after his proclamation as the new president-elect? And he was right when he said, “Para na akong sirang plaka,” because he already said his recent position regarding this in many occasions. And this is he always say: “Ang Estado ay may tungkuling sabihin sa mga magulang, ‘May responsibilidad kayo sa lahat ng anak na ipapasok ninyo dito sa mundong ito.’” (The State has a duty to say to the parents, “You have a responsibility to all the children that you bring into this world,” and in one occasion I heard him said, “…sila [ang mga magulang] ang dapat tumugon sa pangangailangan ng kanilang pamilya.” It is not the duty of the State to provide condoms when the citizens are (almost) dying of hunger, or else Jesus will tell them in the end, “Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me CONDOMS, I was thirsty and you gave me PILLS.” I thought Filipinos are familiar with the Chinese proverb that says, “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.” This is the duty of the State. Let me give you a clue: Give a man some pills and they would have sex the whole day. Teach a man to contracept and he will be irresponsible and miserable for a lifetime.

      Para na rin akong sirang plaka, but I would still repeat, the State could not give married couples (neither the men nor the women) the freedom to choose, because it has no power to give or to take freedom. I for one have the freedom that is innate to me; I am not sure if you are aware of yours. Are you at the mercy of the government?

      Now, regarding this claim that “Aquino has been supportive of this bill,” I would quote Mr. President-elect verbatim: “I purposely did not sign because I have questions about certain provisions of the RH bill.” In an ABS-CBN report, he said, “There are provisions that I cannot support. I was mistakenly labeled as co-author [of the bill].” Yes, in 2009 he gave his all-out support to the bill when he said, “I don’t care if the Catholic Church will abandon me because of my support for the reproductive health bill.” But it is 2010 now, things have already changed.

      • June 16, 2010 at 5:57 pm

        Oh my. This just isn’t true: “Give a man some pills and they would have sex the whole day. Teach a man to contracept (sic) and he will be irresponsible and miserable for a lifetime.”

        I have been on the pill for over a decade and I didn’t have sex all day. I also know that I am a very responsible person. Now I am pregnant and I am so happy I and my husband have prepared a beautiful home, have money in the bank, and can afford a ton of things we couldn’t have had years ago, if we had gotten pregnant when we weren’t ready. We are ready to welcome our child into this world and he will have a glorious life because his parents are very responsible people.

        • June 17, 2010 at 9:17 am

          “I have been on the pill for over a decade and I didn’t have sex all day. I also know that I am a very responsible person.”

          =)

          My first question is were you given the pills for over a decade? I am not trying to imply that taking the pill transforms a woman into an irresponsible person. There is no component in the substance that affects the sense of responsibility. It is the combination of the person’s situation (e.g. poverty), current moral disposition (e.g. indifferent), and the solution offered (e.g. easy way out) that really affect the attitude. Take for example an exam that is very well known to be almost impossible to pass. Will the majority of students who has a very low moral standard choose to take the “risk” of failing the exam than to take advantage of the leak that is being offered them for free? And will these students be responsible the next seconds or the next decades of their lives if they took the offer? You yourself might have a good intention for preventing pregnancy (besides, everybody have good intentions about something), and I assume that you took responsibility for this, just like what I have quoted from Noynoy: “…sila [ang mga magulang] ang dapat tumugon sa pangangailangan ng kanilang pamilya,” but you are not the majority. If someone wants to contracept, he/she has the freedom to do so, but to demand from the government some supplies of pills and condoms like a spoiled brat who demands for a thing (or an action) that the parents do not have the duty to give, is very wrong. Furthermore, the parents or the government who will give in or encourage this attitude is more than wrong.

          “The whole day” doesn’t necessarily mean the whole day, just like “all” may sometimes mean “some”. It is a way of speaking that gives emphasis to the point and makes it easier to remember. The phrase refers to the attitude where abuse means limitation, limitation means moderation, and moderation means abstinence. One concrete example is the expression, “Sige, kaya pa,” wherever that applies. When somebody say, “You are doing nothing but to eat all day long,” it does not literally mean you are just eating the whole day. It just means you are being abusive of your body and of the opportunity. In today’s way of thinking, how do people know their limitation? Kapag hindi na kaya. It is not anymore we who actively set the limitation according to what is really moderate; we (not literally WE) just “know” when it is time to stop. Even boars know when to stop eating. Again, this argument is not about people who know they are exempted and really are exempted.

          Last point: If you teach 100 men to fish, you will never be sure that the same 100 men will use the knowledge to feed themselves. Some of them might go back to begging for fish, stealing fish, or even resort to a fishy job. However, it does not mean that the phrase, “you feed him for a lifetime,” is no longer true. You have still done your part of feeding them but they do not want to eat what you have given. Using the same argument in the opposite situation, a government who will give supplies of contraceptives to those who want to contracept will still be the main contributor to the possible misery that they might or might not (for some reason) end up to. That is because just like the exam and the spoiled brat scenarios, they are encouraging an irresponsible attitude as opposed to what they claim.

    28. rafael bordado
      June 15, 2010 at 1:56 pm

      i hope you’ll agree with me on this, married couples who belong to the lowest of lower class experienced happiness only when they have sex as if its their pastime, thats why expecting baby after baby is just an ordinary thing, can we just let them go on with the NFP method? do you think it will work? kung ang syota nga nang pari nga ng ko contraceptive tayo pa kaya…

    29. June 15, 2010 at 5:48 pm

      I understand where you are coming from. I agree that many of the lower class people, especially those who are unemployed, were bound to make sex as pastime because they have no reason to be busy. Actually, that might be true to all groups and classes. That is because being addicted with sex is multifactorial. But then again, the word “addicted” implies a negative state of being. Why? Because it is negative. It is not normal, though it is common, to treat as thus because even commonsense tells us that it is not healthy to be “too” engaged in sexual activities as if there is nothing more for you to do. Responsible citizenship, responsible parenthood, and responsible manhood are not equal to imbalance in any aspect of life.

      It is not right for the government to promote liver supplement on the ground that there is nothing anymore that it can do to help alcohol addicts; or to promote lungs supplement because the people cannot be educated about cigarette smoking. The problem is the citizens’ state of life and way of thinking; it is not right to ignore the true issue and to engage in a wrong solution instead. A sober parent would not say to his/her kids, “Okay, dahil tamad kayong mag-aral at nakasanayan nyo nang mangopya, basta huwag na lang kayo magpahuli.” Contraceptive culture plainly says, “Have fun, be wild, don’t think about health and balance, and do whatever you want, wherever you want, whenever you want…JUST DON’T GET PREGNANT. In this culture, diving into sex frenzy is completely understandable but being pregnant is irresponsible. Isang malaking iskandalo at “imoralidad” ang pagkabuntis nang walang lalaking maipakilala, pero hindi imoral o nakakahiya ang makipagtalik sa hindi asawa (premarital and casual sex). We have individual and social attitude problem but instead of rectifying the issues, what many of us want to do is to give way to the attitude and just avoid the consequence. Remember the former DOH Secretary Juan Flavier proudly reported that he has given condoms to male OFWs? To think that there is no law like HB 5043 that led to that action of the government, what more can the government do if it is already legalized? What DOH has done then is undoubtedly anti-Constitution, anti-family, anti-dignity, and morally evil. I want to repeat, it is illegal, and yet it was done with heads high. Just come to think what would happen if it is legal?

      Education, livelihood, and moral way of life are the solutions to the issue of poverty, not contraception.

      If animals can be trained, it is a shame that humans cannot. Where is the high intelligence that we boast about?

      • 69
        August 27, 2010 at 3:37 pm

        the root of all poverty…is too much population…more population means more people will consume the resources…eh kulang na nga yung resources anak pa ng anak…tapos sino sisisihin…gobyerno…sino ba may sabi na maganak sila ng mag-anak…gobyarno ba…hayyy…may dignidad ka nga…moral ang pamumuhay mo…just so you know…you can’t eat morality & dignity…you can’t feed starving people with you’re so-called morality & dignity…you said…

        “Education, livelihood, and moral way of life are the solutions to the issue of poverty, not contraception.”

        -how do you educate & give livelihood to almost 90+ million people…and still counting…..

        • August 28, 2010 at 9:39 pm

          “Korapsyon ang problema, kahirapan ang resulta. –PNoy”

          “Kung walang corrupt, walang mahirap.” –PNoy

          With the way you think, I would assume that you did not vote for Noynoy, and that until now, you don’t believe his principles.

          “the root of all poverty…is too much population…”

          So it would automatically mean that China should be poor…but that is not the case. What it really means, on the other hand, is that you are simply wrong.

          “you can’t eat morality & dignity”

          Wrong. Are you employed? Is it okay with your employer to hire a criminal or a person who cannot be trusted or has a scandalous lifestyle or dishonest? This is the morality and dignity that you casually discard; and just so you know, true morality is objective. Maaaring ang isang imoral ay kuning trabahante ng kapwa niya imoral dahil imoral ang kanilang trabaho, pero walang publikano (public sinner) ang tatanggapin ng isang matinong kompanya. “Bakit ko ilalagay sa iskandalosong posisyon ang negosyo ko para lang sa iyo,” yan ang isa sa mga praktikal na argumento. Ang totoo, kung moral kang tao, abutin ka man ng hindi maiiwasang kawalan o paghihirap na dinadanas din ng mga walang moral, marami pa rin ang hindi mag-aatubiling tumulong sa iyo dahil sa iyong pagkatao. Ang totoo niyan, di ko na ito dapat sinasabi pa. Alam mo na dapat yan.

          “how do you educate & give livelihood to almost 90+ million people…and still counting…”

          How do other countries give livelihood to its citizens that are also growing in numbers? Haven’t you watched the first SONA of Noynoy? Are you not aware that we were robbed billions of pesos by the past immoral government? Haven’t you heard the news that several billions of pesos also are not in the country’s fund because we are continuously being robbed by immoral businessmen. How much money do you need to give livelihood to the Filipino people? Will the immorality of a country feed you? We don’t need to be poor if only these people are moral and dignified.

        • March 6, 2011 at 7:28 am

          ” by the people, FOR the people, of the people”
          we are a democratic country… we elected our leaders to be responsible and to lead our country. we pay taxes.we are a filipino citizens. And the government should take the responsibility for us bcoz they want to lead our country.
          I agree with vanillae and PNoy had said that ” Korapsyon ang problema, Kahirapan ang Resulta”
          then cnu ba ang mga kuropt?
          ang mga kuropt and dapat ccchin.!

      • babe
        October 4, 2010 at 4:57 am

        Sex is not merely for procreation. Wanting to have sex doesn’t equate to being addicted to it. It improves intimacy and relationship between couples. Seems like sex frowns on you, Vanillae, and as your defense mechanism, you frown on people who enjoy it and do it often.

        • October 4, 2010 at 4:54 pm

          I suggest that you read first all of Vanillae’s and Wilberg’s comments before you reply.

          #44: We don’t say that sex is just for making babies, did I?

    30. June 16, 2010 at 4:12 pm

      the RH Bill seeks to correct the current imbalance where only traditional methods of contraception are promoted and modern methods of contraception ignored. the bill aims to give the couple the ability and resources to make an informed choice on what method they will adapt for themselves.

      the anti-RH Bill proponents also believe family planning is important, it’s just they want to only promote traditional methods of contraception that science and medicine has proven to be high risk and very unreliable. the bill wants to stop the bias on these methods and also promote and give information on modern methods of contraception to aallow couples to choose the method the best suits them.

      • June 16, 2010 at 5:29 pm

        All of the arguments here are already answered in this same thread. You can watch all TV ads and research through other media in the Philippines and you will find which method have a really dominant promotion and patronage.

        The issue of efficacy was already tackled.

        Everything has already been answered and are just running round in circle.

        I should agree with Noynoy when he said, “Korapsyon ang problema, kahirapan ang resulta,” although it is still the Filipino attitude that is the root of all these problems.

        • 69
          August 27, 2010 at 3:42 pm

          for the 1st time…i agree w/ you…

          “Filipino attitude that is the root of all these problems.”

          -blind faith…using you’re heart & not you’re brain…less corrupt nations like U.S. are making efforts to lessen their population…w/c means we need to lessen our population because more people to serve means less allocation for resources…that’s not good…..

          • August 28, 2010 at 4:41 pm

            “more people to serve means less allocation for resources”

            You might want to say, “More people to be served means less allocation for resources.” But then again, it is still not true, logically speaking. You should realize that everybody is getting old and nobody is getting young or maintaining their age. When a country has more old people than young ones, then more are served than those who give service. Simply put, the working force of the country becomes much smaller than the dependents. Haven’t you heard yet about those countries that are almost desperate to increase their population? They just happened to realize that low birth rate is not really good. Russia, I think though, tries to solve the problem in a wrong way.

            [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-471324/Sex-motherland-Russian-youths-encouraged-procreate-camp.html]

          • March 6, 2011 at 7:40 am

            We cannot always build the future for our youth, but we can build our youth for the future.” – Franklin D. Roosevelt

    31. gerard
      September 4, 2010 at 9:59 am

      absolutely, rh bill is against family life and that is completely against the natural way of life. it is not in accordance with the nature which God has created for. May God bring those who promote those rh bill to the life they want, may God enlighten their mind to in accordance with God’s will and design. destroying human dignity is the aim of that bill…. don’t make a human life an animal life.

    32. gerard
      September 4, 2010 at 10:04 am

      population is not the main problem but those people who leads us. look at the Philippine setting, there are lot of resources if you will just observe, how come that there will be a shortage of sources of such… where in fact the main problem is, there is an unjust distribution of goods. don’t be blinded by that brainwashing idea of population, it is just the front, but deep within it, they want to destroy human life for their own benefit.

      • March 6, 2011 at 7:45 am

        yes again I strongly agreed.
        it is the corrupt leaders that is the main problem..

    33. September 21, 2010 at 8:36 pm

      Were talking about the REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH BILL . why is that your topics are isnt in the Subject .. Ang layo ;………………

      • October 4, 2010 at 5:03 pm

        Can’t see which comment is this replying on.

    34. September 23, 2010 at 8:36 am

      to.69
      kabobohan ang iniisip mo na ang ugat ng kahirapan sa ating bansa ay populasyon.. mag isip-isip ka namn,,, hindi populasyon ang problema ng bansa kundi CORRUPTION!!!! we have enough resources in our country.. mayaman tayo pero mga gahaman ang nasa posisyon ng ating bansa kaya naghihirap tayo…

    35. Sean
      September 29, 2010 at 7:31 pm

      we are so OVER populated that it’s outcome continue to sink us as a nation, and resulted to many chain reactions of ugly events that makes HEADLINES. Corrupt officials are another facet. In nature, an over populated species can interrupt its balance. It can also affect other species.
      Resources…even if plenty and if no “corrupt practices” will still lead to shortage because it is being shared by to many. The Church still imposes such blind, unscientific, irrational stand in this issue. It is dangerous and will affect greatly the future of Filipinos as a nation.

      A pie will not satisfy if being shared by to many mouths. (a simple mathematical equation)

      • October 4, 2010 at 5:13 pm

        A pie will not satisfy if being shared by to many mouths. (a simple mathematical equation)

        You forgot that this is not just about math…this is also about logic applied to real situation. Who is that wisest guy who told you that there would still be shortage despite the rich resources and even if there is no corruption? Corruption is not another facet — it is the main problem of this country.

        A pie will not satisfy many mouths if only one hand is working. That’s reality, and that also applies math. Do you carry the world on your shoulder?

        Let me give you a more realistic formula: large graying population + small working population = ?

        What do you suggest? That we let the old people die of hunger and let the young people grow old and die of hunger? What happened to the saying that the youth is the hope of our country? Did the truth change? What’s the trend now? “Don’t let another young generation live because it will sink us as a nation”?

        • Sean
          October 9, 2010 at 9:33 pm

          just allow the state to control our “obviously bloating” population…don’t impose a religious (MYTH) doctrine just to oppose state affairs. (separation of church and state!!)

          i see that you are a witty person blinded by your irrational “faith base” myth

          • October 10, 2010 at 1:35 am

            You’re not seeing it. The Church does not impose religion on politics, it is some congressmen who impose politics on religion. These congressmen act, the Church reacts. Is it the Church who wants to pass an ecclesiastical or civil law that violates politics? It is these congressmen who wants to pass a bill that violates not only the Church but the Catholic conscience and the Filipino values. It is the politicians who are acting, the Church is just reacting. Masama na palang sumigaw ng “aray” kapag natapakan ka at nasaktan? Again, it is not only the Church hierarchy but the Catholic people as a whole. We don’t impose anything, we just don’t want these folks to do that on us.

            If you want to see who is really imposing something, read the RH bill again and focus on the meaning of the word “impose”, and you will find it all over the document.

            • Sean
              October 10, 2010 at 5:44 am

              you are reacting because RH bill is hurting the DOCTRINE of your church. that’s the bottom line.

              religion really poisons the critical faculties…EVER SINCE

              • October 10, 2010 at 7:31 am

                If you will keep on assuming others’ reasons instead of stating yours, you’re showing that what you really want is to win a debate and not to be of help to the Filipino people. There will be no exchange of opinions if you will keep on making tantras out of things that you don’t have even a bit of true knowledge.

                Better explain yourself rather than assume that you know what others think, believe, and fight for. Your opinions are yours, our opinions are ours — don’t try to speak for us, you can only do that for yourself.

                If you are not open for a real debate, and all you can say is a litany of the same arguments that prove nothing and help nobody, then the stage is all yours.

                • Sean
                  October 10, 2010 at 7:41 am

                  :-) just allow the RH to pass…that’s all

                  • March 6, 2011 at 7:57 am

                    we are a democratic country.
                    ” by the people, for the people, by the people”
                    we have the right to object that bill.
                    and also we have the right to fight for our own beliefs and understanding

                • leyla_16
                  October 10, 2010 at 5:33 pm

                  hindi ko po kayo maintindihan vanillae. ang galing galing nyo pong magsalita. pero di ko alam kung opposing o affirmative side kayo. gusto ko pong mabasa mga sagot nyo para manalo ko sa debate namin sa school. haha

                  • October 10, 2010 at 8:41 pm

                    I’m on the negative side, strongly opposed to the real intentions of this bill. Sa akin lahat ng comments from Vanillae and Wilberg. May account kasi ako sa wordpress kaya nadodoble name ko.

      • mannix fortz
        February 26, 2011 at 9:22 am

        I hope before you imply that overpopulation is the cause of our nation to sink, and before you unfairly judge the church, please google about the topic first so that you will have a better idea on what you are talking, ok?

    36. rafael bordado
      October 2, 2010 at 9:00 am

      wlang katapusang argumento..,at the end of the day married couples should have the last say, we have a choice so lets exercise with utmost responsibility. go RH Bill

      • October 4, 2010 at 5:17 pm

        Right! We have a choice, so don’t push a bill that violates that right. You want condoms, you want pills, you want all sort of things to wear on your vaginas and penises? Then buy one or all. Don’t make us buy it for you.

    37. JSLY
      October 2, 2010 at 10:58 am

      NO BS. the only reason RH is getting pushed HARD is money. Who’s paying the influence peddlers? DUH. condoms = MONEY. Why the F would i pay my taxes to give free condoms to people who don’t work? My only objection is this.
      Educate. go ahead, people have a right to know.
      Provide? F that. If you take my money i work for, give it to people who don’t work, we are at odds.
      Especially since rubbers are temporary, they’re more money for the kurakot in gov’t. I won’t pay for that. I will pay for surgery. Permanent fix and should these breeders want to multiply they can do that on their own dime.

      Free temporary fix? NO WAY.
      If govt will take my money for contraception, it better be for good. I don’t want this to become another opportunity for kurakot. I want permanent solutions.
      Mr. Politician, if you’re going to take my money to build a road, make it last. make it concrete. If you’re going to fix the breeders make that last too. Make it contraceptive SURGERY.
      STOP THE BREEDERS.

      • johnzkee92
        October 4, 2010 at 8:25 pm

        Why? you fear that the Catholic will condemn you to hell for supporting RH Bill?
        According to the Phil. Constitution, There should be inviolable SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE, meaning they can’t meddle in politics and law-making using religious principles and besides stop looking at your own opinions and be open-minded, look at the nations who practiced family planning, prosperous, progressive, modern. We Filipinos should stop being in the medieval age. the Catholic Church’s meddling is disgusting, the corruption in their ranks can be traced from the Spanish Occupation period, where they used religion to suppress nationalism, they used a FAKE BIBLE to manipulate the Filipinos, they taught our ancestors that giving into their lies is pleasing god.
        Srsly, you guys need to grow up, the time is changing.

        • October 10, 2010 at 10:07 pm

          johnzkee92 :
          Why? you fear that the Catholic will condemn you to hell for supporting RH Bill?

          You are barking at the wrong tree. JSLY’s arguments are not even close to being Catholic.

          johnzkee92 :
          According to the Phil. Constitution, There should be inviolable SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE, meaning they can’t meddle in politics and law-making using religious principles…

          Okay, can you please make a complete citation from the Constitution regarding the separation of Church and State, then explain them to us one by one.

          johnzkee92 :
          …and besides stop looking at your own opinions and be open-minded, look at the nations who practiced family planning, prosperous, progressive, modern.

          It’s getting more obvious that you don’t really read and understand the posts that you are replying to. JSLY’s stand, FYI, is that contraceptives must be permanent and not consumable like the pill and condoms. To make it more simple, JLSY is pro-depopulation just like you are. So again, you are barking at the wrong tree, and you should learn some lessons from this embarrassment.

        • mannix fortz
          February 26, 2011 at 9:55 am

          saan ka galing johnzkee92? basa ka muna from the beginning at research ka muna bago ka mag comment, ok? nakakahiya yang ginawa mo eh.

    38. October 3, 2010 at 10:55 am

      i think khit 16 yrs old lng ako we need 2 use condom bcoz almost all filipino is so GOBILAM …. and some filipino ang pas sesex lng ang gnagawang libangan

      • March 6, 2011 at 8:10 am

        gaya nga ng sinbi mo ” sesex lng ang ginagawang libangan”
        well kung papasa dn ang bill n yan then how much more immorality ang mangyayari?
        hndi kah mkakaassure na ang condom ay safe dhil somtmes eh ngkakaruon ng butas…

    39. October 3, 2010 at 10:57 am

      aanuhin mo ang paniniwala kung mahihirapan ka nmn?? sa hirap ng buhay ngyon kailangan maging praktikal……

    40. Neigyl R. Noval
      October 3, 2010 at 3:40 pm

      There are good things about this bill. But, there are also bad things in it. However, the bad things prevails–that is the reason why I will present the bad things. You need to have a copy of the RH Bill on sight for you to be guided accordingly.

      Here are the irregularities of the RH Bill. Please read this carefully so that you may be aware of this:

      Section 2. First paragraph: “…respect for life in conformity with internationally recognized human rights standards.”
      –> Why not in conformity with the Philippine standards? Why international? Do we need to follow other countries’ way of population control and reproductive health? Or are we undermined or enslaved by the first world countries? Philippines is known for its good and kind people like being hospitable, which other countries are seeking to learn. We have our own standards.

      Section 2. Third paragraph: “…sustainable human development is better assured with a manageable population of healthy, educated and productive citizens.”
      –> If you love our country, or if you love other people, you will see that this statement may promote euthanasia, divorce, etc. If you don’t see it, seek more of its meaning. It lies beneath the underneath. There will be an unequal distribution of wealth. Don’t you see it?

      Section 3. (a): “In the promotion of reproductive health, there should be no bias for either modern of natural methods of family planning;”
      –> Nothing in this bill that promotes the natural family planning.

      Section 3. (e): “The limited resources of the country cannot be suffered to be spread so thinly to service a burgeoning multitude that makes the allocations grossly inadequate and effectively meaningless.”
      –> Whoa, more money for the rich! If you look at this bill only on its presented purpose and overlooking its effects, then we have a problem. You see? This promotes more wealth for the rich.

      Section 3. (f): “Freedom of informed choice, which is…”
      –> What is meant by informed choice? Does it mean everyone is free to watch x-rated films? How about the kids? How about a demonstration in class? Oh, it’s our choice! We are free to be informed of it. Really?

      Section 3. (g): “While the number and spacing of children are left to the sound judgement of parents and couples based on their personal conviction and religious beliefs…”
      –> This statement is contradicted by Section 10.
      Continued: “…such concerned parents and couples, INCLUDING UNMARRIED INDIVIDUALS, should be granted…”
      –> This includes minors, and lovers not capable of being a parent. This promotes pre-marital sex, non-marital sex, abortion, promiscuity, fornication, incest, etc. Anyway, we are free to do it!
      Continued: “…and should be guided by qualified State workers and professional private practitioners;”
      –> Why are church leaders not included? Why do priests, bishops, nuns, etc not involved?

      Section 3. (j): “Development…that seek to uplift the quality of life of the people, more particularly the poor, the needy and the marginalized;”
      –> What assurance will the poor benefits? Please reflect on this. Is it really for the quality of life?

      Section 3. (l): “Respect for, PROTECTION and FULFILLMENT of REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH RIGHTS…not only the rights and welfare of adult individuals and couples BUT THOSE OF ADOLESCENTS’ AND CHILDREN’S AS WELL;…”
      –> What reproductive health rights for the adolescents and children? Children are included, whose mind are not yet mature enough! This may promote a dirty knowledge about this to the children. Parents will be responsible for this.

      Section 3. (m): “…as abortion remains a crime and is punishable, the government shall ensure the women seeking care for POST-ABORTION COMPLICATIONS shall be treated…and compassionate manner.”
      –> This is again contradicted in Section 10. The bill doesn’t only contradicts the Law of Nature but violates the bill itself as well. Post-abortion complications in this statement is only an admission that abortion really has complications.

      Section 4. “Definition of Terms”
      –> This may not be a big deal but redefining the common understanding of everyone does not need to be defined.

      Section 4. (b): “…which enables couples and INDIVIDUALS to decide freely and responsibly the NUMBER and SPACING OF THEIR CHILDREN…”
      –> “Individuals.” Does this mean that unmarried couples have the right to have children? I’m using my common sense here. You should use yours also.

      Section 4. (c): “Reproductive Health – refers to the state of physical, mental and social well-being…”
      –> Why spiritual and moral well-being not included here?
      Continued: “This implies that PEOPLE are able to have a SATISFYING and SAFE SEX LIFE, that they have the CAPABILITY TO REPRODUCE and the freedom to DECIDE if, WHEN AND HOW OFTEN TO DO SO, provided that these are not against the law.”
      –> Take note of the phrases that are in UPPERCASE. People to have satisfaction includes the youth, unmarried, homosexual, etc. And, they may decide when and how often to do so? How about teenagers doing it every minute on the grassland? It is not against the law as long as no one saw them.

      Section 4. (d): “Reproductive Health Rights – refers to the rights of INDIVIDUALS and couples to DECIDE FREELY AND RESPONSIBLY the number, spacing and timing of their children.”
      –> Again, the ‘individual’ word. Does this bill really promotes population control in which I can decide freely and responsibly the number of children? Suppose I receive great pay, I can raise about 15 children. What a population control. This bill is too vague.

      Section 4. (g): “10. Male involvement and participation in reproductive health.”
      –> Number 1 to 8 of this section may be considered okay. But on 10, how will I be involved and participate with reproductive health? Isn’t it obvious that this refers to sex? Take note that on Section 4 (c) doesn’t include the spiritual well-being.

      Section 4. (h): “…relevant information on all matters relating to the reproductive system its functions and processes and human sexuality…”
      –> This may promote promiscuity in education.
      Continued: “…developing NECESSARY SKILLS to be able to distinguish between facts and myths on sex and sexuality…”
      –> How? Doing actual sexual intercourse in class? What necessary skills? Does it mean the techniques, the positions and the likes? Does it mean the class will have a film showing on pornographic films?

      Section 10: “Contraceptives as ESSENTIAL MEDICINES – hormonal contraceptives, intrauterine devices, injectables and other allied reproductive health products…shall be considered under the category of ESSENTIAL MEDICINES…”
      –> This is the most interesting part. Contraceptives are now considered as ESSENTIAL MEDICINES–not only an ordinary medicine but an ESSENTIAL medicine. We can buy condoms the same way we buy Biogesic. Teenagers can buy those too at an affordable price. Better advertise it so that small children will learn too and if possible imitate it through experiments and practice for better reproductive health learning and to master the NECESSARY SKILLS as depicted in Section 4, h.

      Section 12. (g): “Abstinence before marriage”
      –> How can this be promoted when the unmarried are allowed to have sex and reproduction (See Section 4)?

      Sections 22 – 27:
      –> If this become a law, people like me who loves humanity will have no choice to obey it. One reason for peoples immorality may be from this law.

      I know you are tired of reading my sharing. That only proves that this Bill has many irregularities. Erase all those above mentioned parts on the Bill, and the Bill may become better for the people and logical.

      • babe
        October 4, 2010 at 5:02 am

        you are taking the bill out of context and proportion. That’s all I can say about your analysis.

    41. October 4, 2010 at 10:45 am

      ,,ahh ok..

    42. October 4, 2010 at 10:48 am

      ,,whatever,, im just sharing my opinion…

    43. October 4, 2010 at 10:54 am

      ,,i think the most effective solution is that, we should have a self discipline,,,

    44. October 4, 2010 at 5:33 pm

      hay naku,,,,,patingin lang page na toh…kasi gawa ako ng editoryal bout’ this issue..hehehehe

    45. daniel
      October 4, 2010 at 10:50 pm

      I am a catholic, but i do not get the reaction of the church regarding this issue. I think it’s very important the RH bill be passed because it is one way to solve our country’s population problem and of course connected to it, poverty. Religion dictates politics. Only in the Philippines.

      • Wilberg
        October 6, 2010 at 5:20 pm

        You do not get why the Church protects women from being objects of selfish pleasure? You do not get why the Church protects women from the adverse effects of contraceptive devices and drugs? You do not get why the Church protects human zygotes (human person) from being killed by devices and drugs that were named contraceptives but acts as abortifacient? You do not get why the Church protects the young minds from being confused and deceived by the propaganda of the contraceptive and abortion industries? You do not get why the Church protects the Filipino conscience? You do not get why the Church opposes a proposal that wants to take the people’s freedom of speech? You do not get why the Church is fighting against a bill that tries to miseducate the youth and ruin their relationships with parents and with others? You do not get why the Church prevents the country from being completely promiscuous? What else you don’t get?

    46. rafael bordado
      October 6, 2010 at 4:47 pm

      isnt it hard to understand that overpopulation breeds poverty? you know nman people loves SEX, kung sino p yung medyo hirap sa buhay yun p yung anak ng anak.. hindi nman mdadala yan kung puro sex education lng, noypi pa tigas ulo yan mdali lng mdadala ng kalibogan..

    47. rafael bordado
      October 6, 2010 at 4:50 pm

      rafael bordado :isnt it hard to understand that overpopulation breeds poverty? you know nman people loves SEX, kung sino p yung medyo hirap sa buhay yun p yung anak ng anak.. hindi nman mdadala yan kung puro sex education lng, noypi pa tigas ulo yan mdali lng mdadala ng kalibogan kaya we need contraceptives para more sex less children.

    48. October 6, 2010 at 8:44 pm

      what the hell is that? government should stop that reproductive health bill! They are just wasting their time giving contraceptives to all the people! Giving contraceptives is a kind of abortion , the priests said. Yes, I agree to the priests but rapid population growth may affect our economy.

      • niel
        October 7, 2010 at 12:48 am

        No, the use of other contraceptives is not abortion, because abortion is ending the life of a fetus while contraceptives prevents the fusion of the sperm and the egg cell so that there will be no offspring. How could that be abortion when in fact no life is taken

        • Wilberg
          October 7, 2010 at 8:51 am

          This issue has been already discussed many times in this same thread and in other titles. So that I would not need to repeat everything, just understand this:

          • Sir
            October 11, 2010 at 4:33 pm

            @Wilberg
            part of your reply is missing.

        • gerry
          October 22, 2010 at 1:01 pm

          u missed the point! contraception is towards abortion, from the word itself, conte means against conception, pagbubuntis. pag nabuntis, eh di ipalaglag, kasiun na ang mentality ng tao. kaya dapat walang mga contraceptions

    49. marvin santos
      October 9, 2010 at 11:10 am

      Wilberg :This issue has been already discussed many times in this same thread and in other titles. So that I would not need to repeat everything, just understand this:
      http://www.youtube.com/v/Z96eKLwnJ2s&rel=1&fs=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1

      this is one more of the many lies the catholic church is using in bullying the govt into disallowing the passage of the RH Bill. its interesting that the church itself resorts to lies.

      • October 9, 2010 at 1:49 pm

        Again, I will say it here, my doctor-trainer and our modules as well in medical transcription school are both neutral regarding the morality of contraception, but the medical facts that they teach regarding these drugs and methods has no difference whatsoever from what the Church knows. How about you, what do you know and where did it come from?

    50. marvin santos
      October 9, 2010 at 11:15 am

      the RH Bill provides its citizens a free choice on thetype of contraception they decide to choose and provide them the information they need to make an informed choice. it also seeks to help those with their choices if they needed help from the state.

      • October 9, 2010 at 1:55 pm

        This is a very old and obsolete tactic — to say in many words a point that can be expressed in one short sentence to hide its true meaning. It’s all over the RH bill. Your point here is as simple as this: The RH bill will give contraceptives to whoever wants it.

    51. marvin santos
      October 9, 2010 at 11:35 am

      vanillae :Should be allowed to make a choice? Are they not? We are, as far as I know.

      no, the church is trying to limit the choice to only traditional method of contraception which they allow. the church wants the people to be blind and dumb on modern methods of contraception.

    52. October 9, 2010 at 2:02 pm

      marvin santos :

      vanillae :Should be allowed to make a choice? Are they not? We are, as far as I know.

      no, the church is trying to limit the choice to only traditional method of contraception which they allow. the church wants the people to be blind and dumb on modern methods of contraception.

      Did the Church limit your choice? Or you just want a share of condoms and pills from the health centers? In what way your choices has been limited by the Church?

    53. gerry
      October 9, 2010 at 3:19 pm

      filipinos! don’t be so animalistic! using condoms and contraceptions are mere manifestations of animalistic attitude towards sex.. u are absolutely missing the point why the Church is always against it…think! don’t be like a person like idiot,.. don’t let other manipulate you.. recognize your dignity Christians! we are human with souland body, not only body…

    54. marvin santos
      October 9, 2010 at 6:32 pm

      vanillae :

      marvin santos :

      vanillae :Should be allowed to make a choice? Are they not? We are, as far as I know.

      no, the church is trying to limit the choice to only traditional method of contraception which they allow. the church wants the people to be blind and dumb on modern methods of contraception.

      Did the Church limit your choice? Or you just want a share of condoms and pills from the health centers? In what way your choices has been limited by the Church?

      condoms and the pill were removed from publuc health centers during the arroyo administration. they are now available again because of the efforts of cabral and the present aquino afministration.

      the church wants to bring back the limitations that the arroyo administration imposed on the people. the current efforts of the church is a continuation of what it did during the arroyo admin – force the govt to follow what it wants. it threatened aquino with excommunication as aquino has said he will allow free and open choice of ctonraception among the people.

      • October 9, 2010 at 7:54 pm

        This is very simple — so simple that it is always ignored. You have your choice and you will always have it. If you want condoms, wear as many as you want; if you want pills, take as many as you want, no one will hinder you. Now, who do you want to buy them for you? The government? Will Noynoy and the congressmen buy it for you? Good for you if they will. Unfortunately, they will not. So, you need to buy it for yourself, which is just right. You want it, buy it — and buy a lot of it. The choice is always yours.

    55. marvin santos
      October 9, 2010 at 8:18 pm

      vanillae :This is very simple — so simple that it is always ignored. You have your choice and you will always have it. If you want condoms, wear as many as you want; if you want pills, take as many as you want, no one will hinder you. Now, who do you want to buy them for you? The government? Will Noynoy and the congressmen buy it for you? Good for you if they will. Unfortunately, they will not. So, you need to buy it for yourself, which is just right. You want it, buy it — and buy a lot of it. The choice is always yours.

      having a choice is what the church does not want to happen. the RH Bill in fact will give citizens the freedom to choose the contraceptive method they think is best for them – artificial method or natural method.

      • Wilberg
        October 9, 2010 at 8:25 pm

        Hehe! This has no end. Just give everyone here an straight answer: Are we responsible for giving you free condoms?

        • marvin santos
          October 9, 2010 at 8:35 pm

          read the RH Bill

      • Mia
        October 10, 2010 at 2:53 am

        Should be “Not For Sale!”

    56. October 9, 2010 at 8:29 pm

      Wilberg :

      Hehe! This has no end. Just give everyone here an straight answer: Are we responsible for giving you free condoms?

      vanillae/willberg – please refrain from using two usernames in posting in this blog.

      ~wawam~

      • October 10, 2010 at 1:08 am

        Sorry about that. Sometimes I am not logged in so it uses the other name. Will be more careful from here on. =)

    57. cecilla
      October 9, 2010 at 8:38 pm

      katoliko ako pero sobra naman ang simbahan sa pakikialam.

      • October 10, 2010 at 1:12 am

        Katoliko ka pero hindi mo yata alam na ang Simbahan ay ang konsensya ng lipunan. Pwede mo bang sabihin sa konsensya mo na sobra siya sa pakikialam?

        • Sean
          October 27, 2010 at 10:37 am

          “konsensya ng lipunan”? this is simply “a self righteous” claim of your religion.

          i have mostly read your post in threads, i see that you are a witty person blinded by irrational faith..just like a scientist who still believe in a “talking snake” of Genesis and still believe that the earth it self is less than 10,000 years old…

          • mannix fortz
            February 26, 2011 at 10:12 am

            sean, paki liwanag lang po sa mga sinasabi ninyo, hindi ko maintindihan eh. hindi mo ata alam anong ibig sabihin ng irrational faith, ano? parang ikaw mismo ang irrational dito eh.

        • November 19, 2010 at 2:29 am

          ipagpaumanhin mo po ang akin kapangahasan, pero sa pagkaalam ko ay binigyan tayo ng PANGINOON ng sariling pag isip upang mag isip, eh,..hindi namn po pwede na hindi natin pakialaman ang ating paligid eh,.. parte nman po kasi ang simbahan sa ating paligid kay malabo po ang hindi ito mapakialaman,..and besides ang pangingialam naman ng tao dito ay walang maling intensyon,..salamat

    58. leyla_16
      October 10, 2010 at 5:45 pm

      wooo. reproductive health bill! ang galing pala magdebate ng mga pilipino!

    59. leyla_16
      October 10, 2010 at 5:48 pm

      vanillae, opposing po ba kayo o affirmative side para sa RH bill?

      • October 10, 2010 at 8:31 pm

        I oppose the bill.

        • genesociety
          December 2, 2010 at 6:27 pm

          I seconded.

          • March 6, 2011 at 8:38 am

            I strongly oppose the bill!

      • mannix fortz
        February 26, 2011 at 10:29 am

        kung nagbabasa at nag research ang isang tao sa topic na ito, at kung maliwanag sa kanya na itong RH Bill na ito ay isang kagaguhan lamang, at pandagdag sa uutangin ng bansa, at sigurado na mapunta na naman sa mga kurakot, ay naku, siguro walang mag affirmative sa botohang ito, di po ba?

    60. October 12, 2010 at 2:00 pm

      good day. as i read so many aspects on RH bill, i get interested about it. however, i have many doubts in my mind. i get confused.am i too innocent? please help me. i want to know more with regards to that matter.i don`t know where to believe.i don`t where my mind and heart belongs to.i want certainty.please.guide me.thank you.

    61. October 12, 2010 at 2:02 pm

      i don`t know where my mind and heart goes..

      • mannix fortz
        February 26, 2011 at 10:36 am

        yanyan, just follow your conscience and do the right thing. walang tanong na negative dito ang hindi nasagot ni vanillae at sa iba pa. at wala pa akong nabasa dito galing sa pro bill na matino, puro hindi sigurado at mali pa ang mga sinasabi nila. ok?

    62. October 14, 2010 at 1:31 pm

      i’am favor in the rh Bill.

    63. Lhei fame
      October 16, 2010 at 5:04 pm

      Yes. RH Bill has it’s advantage.. it controls the increase of the popuLation.. but what’s the sense of a better nation if we are to violate God’s Law by adopting RH bilL?.. in whatever aspects, we shouLd do alL thing by faith.. we shouLd think if it gives gLory to the Lord.. if not, no matter how we insist, it wilL never be right..

    64. flamersss
      October 18, 2010 at 8:55 pm

      RH Education has many Pros, but I would like to focus more on its Cons. First of which is that why teach it in school. Human anatomy, which includes the reproductive system, is somewhat relevant to Sex Education, but let us not forget that the subject is called Biology, not Sex Education. It so happens that Biology and Sex Education share some same concepts, but Sex Education is not the same as Biology. Those two fields cannot be combined. I believe that Sex Education should be taught only at home. Parents should be the ones responsible for their children. I believe that sex is a sensitive, critical concept and thus it shouldn’t be trusted on teachers because most of the teachers don’t really know the attitudes of their students outside the school because most of the time they only teach their students inside the school premises, but rather it should be taught by parents who can observe most of their children’s doings which reflects their attitude. Teachers may have the ability and capacity to teach sex education, but most of them won’t have the capability of teaching sex education. Sex Education varies depending on whom it will be taught. Ignorant children would interpret sex differently from those who know it. Girls would interpret it differently from boys.

    65. flamersss
      October 18, 2010 at 9:07 pm

      ^ pls delete my previous comment because it is in my critical paper. I might be accused for plagiarism.

    66. October 21, 2010 at 8:03 pm

      I have a question how reproductive health aliviate population explosion

    67. gerry
      October 22, 2010 at 12:54 pm

      reproductive health bill is nothing but a promotion of immoral activities. it is a deliberate toleration of immoral activities, gearing towards animalistic view of life. we are human, we are not an animal that whenever, wherever we want to have we can do so… NO! that is not absolutely what humanis made for. think about it people of the Philippines. if you love your own sons, daughters, families, are you going to support this kind of bill? do not let our country be like other countries who, in their present state are mostly liberated people….which causes destruction of human life. may God be praised in whatever we do…

      • October 23, 2010 at 4:20 pm

        the catholic church also promotes contraception. it promotes natural methods but it does not endorse artificial methods. the question is not contraception, the question is the method of contraception. given that, the church promotes immoral activities too?

    68. rafael bordado
      November 4, 2010 at 10:37 am

      go RH hyaan nyo na yang mga MORAL ‘kuno” kaya nga merong PADRE DAMASO dali nyo nmang mka 4get…

    69. ANTI RH
      November 14, 2010 at 12:59 am

      have you ever read kung ano ang content ng book na ibibgay nila sa mga bata tapos umuoo na kayo, lam nio ba kung cno ngpauso ng birthcontrol frend lang namn ni hitler, eh ng sex ed? you can search it on google if you want, at kung bkit nila gusto ito ipromote. xempre hindi, I had this Bosh training earlier, one of the lecturer, open my mind about this RH bill. Pills? synthetic estrogen? alam nio ba na ang epekto nito? heart problems,related to tumors? .. 100% ba gumagana ang gamot? of course not, sometimes it doesnt stop ovulation? if it doesnt stop ovulation pills also stop implantation of the embryo? ano ang ibig sabihin nun chemical abortion? well sabi ni DOH nde pa daw buhay yun hanggat nde na iimplant? by the nag multiply na mga cell nun habng papunta sa uterus tpos pinigilan ng pills? my god that embryo has life already? it move, it grows? lahat tayo dumaan dun correct? pills, IUD and condoms? will be given out like candies? accessible to all without you guys not knowing anything about the said medicines? mas malala ang IUD? causes uterine contraction thus preventing implantation, at the union of sperm and ovum, sabi ni doh WALA DAW BUHAY YUN EHH GAT NDE NAIIMPLANT? wlang buhay pero nag ceceldivide na tapos pipigilan ntin? if women can to this to their own, what is the worst thing that they can do. we filipinos are brainwashed since birth, sabi saten ni teacher mahirap tayo kasi anakanak ang mga pilipino? Alam nio ba na 2nd ang phil. pagdating sa goldmining. Sex educ? in america? ano palagay nio nanyre ng abstinence ba sila? idol natin sila ehh? they become promiscous or not? gwin ba nmng legalize ang pagbibigay ng condom, at pills? anyway bkit nga ba tayo magartificial contraceptive? ksi there’s ,money involved, lam nio na mas epektib pa ang natural way of family planning kesa pills/IUD na nakakacancer at ngcaucause ng heart attack? at yung sinasabi nilang figure na 1/10000? nahiwalay ba dun yung naabort dahil pinalalag, naabort dahil biglaan, diba nde? vasectomy and tubal ligation? self mutilation, we are temple of god… Ano ba ang health risk ng vasectomy? at Tubal ligation?..

      I suggest go at this site, http://www.vigilantcitizen.com
      - this things is just one of their agenda, open your minds, study; please be informed and vigilant, always asked God where we are going? Pills and condoms accessible to anyone? are we going to wait na ibigay ang condom at pill sa school ng mga anak natin?

    70. November 19, 2010 at 2:18 am

      hi guys!i read all of of your suggestions about the reproductive health bill,..and its all good,..all are aiming for our country’s best
      but we, FILIPINO PEOPLE ; must balance everything,..instead of debating, why not to try to suggest a law that could be implement by our mambabatas, which is a law that cannot disobey the rule of the church which based by the rule of GOD, and a law that cannot disobey the government,..
      so that everything is fair,..the GOD wont be set aside, also with the government.
      why not try to value both,..maybe it can lead to peace and the end of debate,..

      by the way im just a high school student but like all of you who burp out their opinion, i also care for our country’s best,..so hope you wont feel bad about my opinion and the grammar,..thank you for reading,..

    71. nella
      November 27, 2010 at 2:39 am

      …kapag naaprubahan ung mga sinasabi nyong diff. contraception. mababawasan na ang mga matitinong babae at lalaki sa pilipinas.kakaunti na nga lang mababawasan pa.imagine gngw nlng un,dahil nagiinit na lang.at isa pa,bakit hindi na lang ang education ang bigyan ng budget.

    72. demiar
      November 30, 2010 at 7:20 pm

      hi to all of you …………….. i am worried about the reproductive health bill because the church always counter it……… what will happen if the RHbill will be approved?

      • November 30, 2010 at 10:08 pm

        if it is approved, then it becomes a law and the government will need to implement it.

    73. demiar
      November 30, 2010 at 9:47 pm

      Umm…. its me again… can answer my question…..
      if you are a student and they will ask you for what will you do in the approvemnent of the reproductive health bill.

    74. Regalado Tafalla
      December 2, 2010 at 11:05 am

      If you want to fight POVERTY in our country, then lets support REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH BILL…OVERPOPULATION is the main cause of poverty…the supply of food is decreasing and the standard of living is LOW majority of the Filipinos…

      • March 6, 2011 at 8:52 am

        again it is not overpopulation that is the problem…
        the problem there is the GRAFT and CORRUPTION..!

    75. genesociety
      December 2, 2010 at 6:24 pm

      NO NO! to RH BILL

    76. chrislyn antonio
      December 7, 2010 at 2:47 pm

      It’s a no!no! to support RH Bill.It’s not acceptable to those who really the LAW OF GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    77. annie
      January 6, 2011 at 10:45 pm

      , I support RH bill , it is not simply because i have no respect in our religion , it is simply bcoz , we need to be practical .. Hindi gobyerno ang may problema , ang problema ay ang mga taong gngawang libangan ang pag aanak , hndi na nila inisip na maaring wla silang maipakain sa mga ito ,,,,,,,,,,,

      • January 7, 2011 at 7:30 pm

        annie :
        , I support RH bill , it is not simply because i have no respect in our religion , it is simply bcoz , we need to be practical ..

        Define practical? What do you call the teachings of the Church — theoretical? And which part of the RH Bill is “practical” in the Filipino sense of the word? The government buying billions of pesos worth of contraceptives to satisfy those whom you call, “mga taong ginagawang libangan ang pag-aanak”? I don’t think it’s practical; it is rather ironic. Mali na nga ang attitude ng mga tao tungkol sa sex, bibigyan mo pa ng condom at pills; anong gagawin nila? Magiging matino ba ang isip nila dahil dun o lalo lang nilang gagawing laruan ang dapat sana ay iginagalang nila? Hindi ba dapat mga babae ang unang maka-realize nito?

        • January 28, 2011 at 2:09 pm

          let’s be realistic – sex between a married couple happens. and that can happen very often. that means unplanned pregnancy has a high degree of occurring.

          that makes it practical for married couples to use contraception so that the risk of unplanned pregnancy is reduced if not eliminated.

          • March 6, 2011 at 9:00 am

            let’s consider the whole state of life..
            eh..you are sticking and pointing to the married ones..
            try to think those unmarried people..

    78. rC
      January 8, 2011 at 1:37 am

      i think that most of the people here saying that they’re “anti” rh bill didn’t think well enough…first let me ask you a question, when are you going to approve the rh bill? when Philippines is overpopulated and almost half of its population is infected with aids? we must think of what will happen in the near future and stop acting dumb. yes contraceptives have their side effects but they give us a slim chance of fixing one of the biggest problem here in the Philippines. if you’re asking what’s the problem, it is the fact that we are so over populated here in the philippines that not all filipinos have jobs. that’s a fact. honestly, if you really read the rh bill, IT IS STATED THAT RH BILL DOESN’T CHANGE THE LAW OF ABORTION WHICH MEANS IT ISN’T PRO ABORTION! instead of saying it is against the teaching of God or it is unacceptable in the LAW OF GOD, you should think properly! is there in the bible or the commandments of God saying that we are not allowed to control our population? think! if we are only thinking about morality then what about reality? Sa totoo lang, ano ang nagpapakasigurado sa inyo na pagnilabas o pinatupad ang RH bill e lahat ng Pilipino ay makikipagsex kung kani-kanino? hindi ba nkadepende un sa tao mismo? sana pinapagana niyo rin isip nyo. at isa pa, practical in the sense that we are a growing country, would we let our country be ruined by our thinkings like those some of the people here think? isa lang masasabi ko sa inyo, kung ang nasa isip mo ay sex lang, anong klaseng tao ka? sana naisip mo rin na hindi lahat ng tao ay sex lang ang nasa isip. Sex ed? ano ba naiisip mo sa sex ed? tuturuan ka makipagsex? hindi! ang sex ed tinuturo pra malaman ng tao kung ano ang mga “risks” pag nakipagsex, kayo lang naman ang nag iisip na mali ang pagturo ng sex ed. isipin nyo rin na kung mali ang pag turo ng sex ed e mali rin pla ang pagturo ng reproductive system sa science subjects.

      • Jomari Baay
        February 11, 2011 at 10:33 pm

        i think you are just parroting,you don’t even know what you are saying..don’t you know that on 1987 Thailand and Philippines has around 100+ cases of Aids…and now, Thailand has 750,00 despite of the Full Condom Implementation compared to the Philippines has only 1000+ cases which don’t even has that kind of policy,what does it means?discipline is still a factor. another point, for your information,not all contraceptives are capable of protecting human from HIV like pills,it has no capability of doing such…!

        • RD
          May 19, 2011 at 11:44 pm

          I agree. Discipline is the key. Discipline is absolute. If every government official practiced this virtue, we probably will not be having this discussion in the first place.

    79. elay fork
      January 12, 2011 at 3:48 pm

      RH Bill?

      why pass that bill if in the first place our legislators can’t even create a law that shows full responsibility to all Filipino people without any bias. Philippines is Philippines and should not subject itself to all the mandates of big super power entities (oh sino mang Pontio Pilato). Why argue over this bill if what our country needs is a government who can provide the needs of the people like work, education and equal legal rights. This bill and the proponents of these bill are hypocrite. Should have think of it before making such a horrifying bill. wag po sana ninyong hintayin na maging katulad ng iba ang Pilipinas. wag po sana tayong pumayag sa dikta ng iba.

    80. rheanne
      January 28, 2011 at 12:28 pm

      NO TO RH BILL

    81. rheanne
      January 28, 2011 at 12:34 pm

      who said that Philippines is overpopulated? do you people know that in the Philippines, we have 333persons living per square kilometer? compare it to Hong Kong with thousands of persons living in a square kilometer.. . but Hong Kong is progressive right? RH bill won’t help our country’s development.

      • January 28, 2011 at 1:55 pm

        hong kong’s brith rate is 0.9%, the philippine birth rate is twice that – 2.04%.

        • Jomari Baay
          February 11, 2011 at 12:00 am

          There’s no way of passing this bill..

          First question is “it is constitutional?”
          Base on Article II Section 2
          “[State] shall equally protect the life of the mother and the unborn from conception”
          Now what is conception?
          Based on the framers of such provision and Hector de Leon’s Textbook on Philippine Constitution issued last 2008, page 90 “Human life commonly believed to begin from the moment of conception when the female egg and the male sperm merge at fertilization.” it is the fatal weakness of this bill.
          Also, what RH bill advocates always say that “RH Bill is science so therefore it is the truth”
          this is the biggest foolishness I’ve ever heard regarding this matter. Even SCIENCE did betray RH bill.
          Why did I say so? Philippine Medical Association and Harvard Medical School both agree that life begins at fertilization unlike what Representative (one of the authors of this bill) was saying that “life begins at implantation”.whom will i believe?to a REPRESENTATIVE or to groups of people which really know what science is? I think he said this because if and when the “life begins at fertilization” is accepted as the interpretation of the word “conception” it will derail the bill into a junk and it is. The RH bill advocates shall accept that fairly.
          Another point
          One of the sections of this bill is very alarming. It is said that it will impose fines, force and charges against the process. it is a direct violation of article 3 section 5 of the constitution, why? I’ll give you a situation.
          if I don’t want to do that thing because of my religious belief or just i think it is not benificial for me, so i will be punished by this law if passed? This law violated my right to believe as stated at article 3 section 5….the case of Ebralinag et. Al. vs Division of City School of Cebu can also support my point.

          Those facts that there are holes in this bill are really fatal.
          I am not defending this argument not just because i am a Roman Catholic, It’s because i do agree that this bill is unconstitutional. As long as the 1987 Constitution stands as the fundamental law of the land, there’s no level of argument that can change that!
          Even if this bill may be benificial for all of you, there’s no room for this bill to be passed. “Dura Lex Sed Lex!”(The law may be harsh but it is tha law)

          • mhyko
            February 19, 2012 at 9:38 pm

            technically, fertilization is a term used in recognition of an on going cell division which later on would develop into a fetus, and once born, into an infant.. implantation on the otherhand is a mechanical term wherein a said “object”, sperm cell, is introduced unto another “object”, a egg cell.

            with that being said, let’s give the benifit of the doubt to that non-medically inclined “representative”.. as i see it, coming from a doctor’s point of view, the term implantation and fertilization are one of the same.

        • agatha
          June 28, 2011 at 8:52 pm

          So eh ano ngayon ang ibig sabihin ng data mo?

          Kung ayaw mong maraming Pilipino , eh bakit hindi ka magpa-kapon? para hindi na dadami pa lahi mo?

          Kung gusto ninyo ang kontraception eh kayo na lang, bakit pati sa mga anak namin eh ipinipilit nyo?

    82. Jomari Baay
      February 11, 2011 at 10:36 pm

      for the information of everybody, there’s no word such as overpopulation in technically speaking…….

    83. mannix fortz
      February 25, 2011 at 10:31 pm

      hi vanillae, i love your answers and comments to the questions. yes, a lot of people needs education with regards to the bill that only advertises condoms and pills and contraceptions for the gains of the businessmen who wants more profits at the expense of the govt. and general health of our women. thank you for making the points clear. i noticed that those who support the bill seems to study and read more about the facts and information. thank you very much for all your time answering the questions here. i really learned a lot from you and now i realized why the church whose only intention is for the welfare of the people has really been opposing this bill. now i know. God bless u and your family and may your tribe increase!

    84. mannix fortz
      February 26, 2011 at 7:55 am

      Regalado Tafalla :
      If you want to fight POVERTY in our country, then lets support REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH BILL…OVERPOPULATION is the main cause of poverty…the supply of food is decreasing and the standard of living is LOW majority of the Filipinos…

      I believe your having an access to internet could give you a good idea about overpopulation. Please google if overpopulation is the main cause of poverty and try to read and understand what it says. Maybe you can also google the cause of poverty, and you will be able to find that it’s graft and corruption in our gov’t that causes poverty. By the way, if this RH Bill passes Congress and becomes a law (God forbid), see to it that its huge budget will not go to the pockets of the corrupt officials and politicians and you and I will pay for it because we need to pay our taxes.

    85. karen
      March 6, 2011 at 10:43 am

      ewan,maski aq nalilito na.kung ipapatupad ba ang RH BILL ay hindi na maghihirap ang bansang pilipinas??uunlad ba ang ating ekonomiya?if thats the case,it shuold be implemented!!!

      ang mga kabataan kaya??nakikita ba nin’u kung ano mangyayari?lalo pat ipapatupad ang sex education.sana magtalaga din kau ng batas na nagbabawal sa mga kabataan ay bumili ng contraseptive pills.

      im just a concerned youth.

    86. eLi
      March 14, 2011 at 9:48 am

      d ang over population ang problem kng bkT mhrap ang Pilipinas kung hindi ang mga taong nsa gobyerno na mga “CORRUPT”…TAMA???

    87. von
      March 15, 2011 at 7:48 pm

      I agree with RH bill.however, the government must think thoroughly regarding the implementation of sex education to the youth. Since children from grades 5 up to high school are more curious and immature.If they can teach the children not about sex itself but its being sacred.since we humans are sacred beings.It would be good,in my own opinion, to implement sex education to the college students.

    88. SaintPhilippic
      April 20, 2011 at 10:43 am

      THE CHURCH instead of clamoring against RH should do something to influence its principles and transform it to be a PRO-life bill.

      I am not against the preaching of righteousness, but certainly against HYPOCRISY and how about priests who molest teenage boys and girls, we dont see any clamor against that.

      Priests would say “we cannot condemn our brother” when confronted about the recent incident of child molestation in the archdiocese.. further more, the bishop called the child victim to sign a waiver of rights, whew!

      if you want to chastise others, chastise your own house first… dont spread the confusion and a mentality that is anti-government because people are looking up to you for guidance so that they understand.

      I say how about the government.. is it not a “brother”? WHY not appeal to the government to participate in the implementation of the RH bill, and transform the program into a holistic and respectable execution!

    89. M
      May 9, 2011 at 2:47 am

      I’m a teenager and quite frankly, I don’t fully understand the debate on the RH Bill. I’m also Roman Catholic, but I’m having a hard time deciding which side is more logically correct. Please do enlighten me.

      ps. I believe that the main cause of poverty in the Philippines is not directly attributed to “overpopulation” but the lack of discipline.

      Again, please do enlighten me.

    90. goodseid
      May 17, 2011 at 6:39 pm

      OVERPOPULATION IS NOT THE PROBLEM OF THE PHILS., RATHER IT IS THE “OVERCONCENTRATION” OF POPULATION. RH BILL IS ANTI-LIFE BECAUSE SUPPOSE YOU HAVE, SAY A THIRD SOON-TO-BE CHILD, THE GOVERNMENT WILL PUNISH YOU BY ABORTING THE FETUS IN YOU. ITS IMMORAL AND A WORK OF SATAN.!

    91. Riza Damiles
      May 19, 2011 at 11:29 pm

      Learn us all learn about condoms as early as grade 5 so we can be certain to be rich and successful in life, and miraculously lift this country from poverty. Because overpopulation is the reason we are poor….golly, all this time I thought it was poor governance and widespread corruption. How silly of me.

      • May 20, 2011 at 5:41 am

        Sex education will be age appropriate. Sex education is not all about condoms, it’s much wider and more meaningful than that.

        • kiko laurel
          June 27, 2011 at 8:46 am

          Gusto mo bang ang anak mo ay ipasa-ilalim sa isang proseso ng brainwashing? Para lang matuto at kumilos na sang-ayon sa paghihikayat ng gobyerno? Ito ang adhikain at proseso ng Enforced or Mandatory Sexuality Education para mahikayat ang mga kabataaan na gumamit ng contraceptives.

          Gusto mo ba na may isang guro (na maaring lalaki at manyakis) na magtuturo sa iyong anak na dalagita, kung paano gumamit ng condom at paano makipag-talik na safe? Ok ba sa iyo ito? Isipin mo ang kalagayan ng public school system sa Pilipinas.

          • August 9, 2011 at 11:52 am

            education is no9t brainwashing, since you think education is brainwashing, that means you never went to school?

            • zatho
              September 14, 2011 at 11:19 am

              I AGREE, THIS RH BILL IMPOSES MANDATORY SEX EDUCATION. WHEN YOU IMPOSE AN EDUCATION, TO CHANGE VALUES – IT IS CONSIDERED AS INDOCTRINATION.. BRAINWASHING.

    92. June 19, 2011 at 11:37 am

      As expected, conflicts of interests and different views based on individuals beliefs and prejudices may arise… if we believe that RH bill is a must.. then by all means necessary… we will uphold it…

      If you are not with us, then by definition, you are against us. Those who believe RH bill is a threat to humanity and to life itself have their right to oppose and to do so whatever they believe is just.

      Nevertheless, the debate must be continued. Hearing must be done. And whoever camp shall win in the election process, must be respected by the other.

      God help us all… and i do so believe, RH bill is not anti-life. In fact those who claim it is, and believe it is… should think otherwise.

      Personally, i don’t wanna end up like Pakistanis, like Indians… like Bangladeshis… they are NOT cursed by their tremendous numbers but because of their uneducated mind towards population control… look at them closely… and tell me… where we are heading right now? Are we not far from where they are now? You tell me.

      I am not selfish neither all of us, i believe. But to let my children drown in poverty just because of this teachings of the other side… twisted and manipulated by them whose trying to dictate us what to do and when asked for explanations as to why and why not we should abide by their impositions and manipulations of our Faith, simply returns with an answer “wala yan sa biblia” . This is very… outlandish!

      I believe the Almighty wants his creation to enjoy the bounty of nature. I do also believe that many well-informed and intellectual individual will agree on me. They will concur on my side without any doubt if i say that…

      “if a population of a certain specie rise infinitely, the greater the competition will be to their environments’ FINITE resources”

      And by law of natural selection, the fittest will survive the fight. With this competition of huge number struggling to survive, i can’t imagine life for my children if they are those ones fighting to live today and more fighting to get what they need for tomorrow.

      I will not deprive my children to a life of bounty. I will not let my children suffer like those in countries of blurred population control. I will not be ignorant. I will not let my free will be controlled and manipulated by those teachings claiming they are PROLIFE when in fact, when look closely, for me, are misguided… misinformed and twisted by their fear of being cursed by God.

      Again, many of you will disagree. In fact, many of you might hate me after i make a stand. I do not care anyway. My choice is based on my own thinking. It may not be right, but at least i am not manipulated by anyone or anybody. If i am mistaken, i do not care also. God has blessed me with a heart full of compassion, with a mind full of logic and intuition… shall i not make use of it to make a choice?

      Let that choice be…. to PASS RH BILL NOW!

      • kiko laurel
        June 29, 2011 at 10:24 pm

        Mabuti pa nagbigay ka sa pulubi, napupunta sa pagkain,sa gamot,sa tirahan, sa emergency at pwede din sa kalokohan. PERO pag condom ang binigay mo sigurado ka sa KALOKOHAN lang mapupunta. .

        Sa charity — may natutulungan ka, for the good of man at society. Pag condom sino tinutulungan mo? YUNG NAGPAPASARAP !! Habang ikaw ta-tanga-tanga lang at naiingit

        SINO DAPAT TULUNGAN MO YUNG NAGPAPASARAP na ikaw ang gagastos o YUNG MAHIRAP na binibigyan mo relief sa harshness ng buhay?

        That’s how ridiculous it is to give away condoms.
        ————————————
        To have sex while knowing you are sick with STD/HIV/AIDS is criminal

        No contraceptive can ensure that you will not be infected if your partner has STD HIV AIDS
        ————————————-
        “If and what if a married couple wants to make love, and yet they are aware that one of them has HIV/AIDS? Are you denying them that basic right of a married couple? Yes or no will suffice. “

        DIYOS KO PONG MAHABAGIN !! .WALA NG HUMAN HUMAN RIGHT TO HAVE PASARAP pag alam mo na may HIV/AIDS ka na. You should already practice abstinence.

        If a person infected with this disease continues to have sex, they should be put to a gas chamber.
        ——————————————-
        THE MAIN GOAL OF THIS RH BILL IS POPULATION CONTROL, all the other provisions are just decorations

    93. nicka
      June 23, 2011 at 5:27 pm

      i agree,because RH bill can help us to control our population growth.
      and also to prevent pollution in our country….
      that’s all my opinion…….

    94. zatho
      July 1, 2011 at 6:55 am

      We don’t need the rh bill to control population growth.

      Our population growth has been declining almost at every census, without the rh bill. Huwag kayo maniniwala sa mga propagandist ng rh bill. :Look at the statistics from

      http://www.nscb.gov.ph/secstat/d_popn.asp

      1970 36,684,486 3.08 Census

      1975 42,070,660 2.78 Census

      1980 48,098,460 2.71 Census

      1990 60,703,206 2.35 Census

      1995 68,616,536 2.32 Census

      2000 76,504,077 2.36 Census

      2007 88,574,614 2.04 Census

    95. zatho
      July 1, 2011 at 7:00 am

      We don’t need the rh bill to control population growth.

      Our population growth has been declining almost at every census, without the rh bill. Huwag kayo maniniwala sa mga propagandist ng rh bill. :Look at the statistics from

      http://www.nscb.gov.ph/secstat/d_popn.asp

      Projected

      Average Annual Exponential Growth Rates, Philippines: 2000-2040

      Year Growth Rate
      2000-2005 2.05
      2005-2010 1.95
      2010-2015 1.82
      2015-2020 1.64
      2020-2025 1.46
      2025-2030 1.27
      2030-2035 1.09
      2035-2040 0.92

    96. jay nicole ponan
      July 27, 2011 at 11:08 pm

      i strongly agree with that>> without rh bill, we can live happy and peacefully>>
      and if we want to minimize our population., just used the natural family planning method>

    97. mitch
      August 1, 2011 at 2:07 pm

      Rh Bill

      regarding human life that all of us have cherished since time immemorial. Simply stated the RH Bill does not respect moral sense that is central to Filipino cultures…

      • August 9, 2011 at 12:05 pm

        NFP has a very high rate of failure (means pregnancy). when explained to users, they realize their sexual practices are high risk of pregnancy and opts to use modern methods instead.

        the RH Bill is about free and open choice of methods where the users are allowed to choose the method they see best for them. the RH Bill will enable couple to have an informed choice on the method best for them.

    98. August 5, 2011 at 7:37 pm

      Reproductive Health Bill should consider the Filipino Culture. . and also, the degree of being responsible as parents, as a Filipino Citizen and as Christian country are lacking. . Child care, for example, .For me, the Bill should also widen the issues on mothers how to take care of their children. Any 0-12 yrs old, for example, should not leave by their mother or father alone or to anybody unless to those people that will consider under the Law. And those children 13-17 yrs old should not leave unattended by the those who are responsible under the Law. This should be strictly implemented by the responsible authority and punishment will be given immediately to those who will not obey. This idea would lead to be more responsible as parents and would answer the issues on Child care, self disciple, Pro-God and Pro-Life issues, would have a GREAT IMPACT on the Population control (just think of the reasons). I am not a lawyer to expand the bill or to suggest all the details, i am not a writer to further explain this idea. . but as a Filipino who are trying to preserve the Morality of the Christian Country Philippines. . You don’t need to pass the bill that obviously have a direct and great impact to Morality. .unless it cited clearly the full responsibility of the authorities or persons involve under the Law. .and that Graft and Corruption should not be exercised. . Big Funds will be allotted to when Bill turns to Law. .

    99. August 5, 2011 at 7:38 pm

      You don’t need to pass the bill that obviously have a direct and great impact to Morality. .unless it cited clearly the full responsibility of the authorities or persons involve under the Law. .and that Graft and Corruption should not be exercised. . Big Funds will be allotted to when Bill turns to Law. .

    100. August 5, 2011 at 8:25 pm

      Flora Eduardo Ulayan :

      You don’t need to pass the bill that obviously have a direct and great impact to Morality. .unless it cited clearly the full responsibility of the authorities or persons involve under the Law. .and that Graft and Corruption should not be exercised. . Big Funds will be allotted to when Bill turns to Law. .

      how does this “greatly impact morality”?

      modern contraceptives have been in the market for years. why would these being in the RH BIll suddenly affect morality?

      the catholic church ALSO promotes contraception. it has the exactly the same objective as modern methods, only this is free and no cost. so the catholic church is also promoting contraception that greatly impacts morality?

      • zatho
        August 8, 2011 at 10:15 pm

        wawam

        No amount of explanation can make you see what you do not want to see.

        Wag ka namang mag-panggap na eksperto ka sa mga principles na itinataguyod ng Catholic Church. Malinaw na malinaw na gusto mo lang manlinlang kapag binabanggit mo ang Catholic Church sa mga comments mo.

        • August 9, 2011 at 11:49 am

          none has been answered. do you have an answer?

          • zatho
            September 14, 2011 at 11:39 am

            Yes, basahin mo lahat ng posts ko, para maintindihan mo.

    101. xyz123
      August 9, 2011 at 11:36 am

      there are interesting new findings from an SWS survey on RH, will be posting data, ana;ysis and opinion here by today.

    102. August 9, 2011 at 11:43 am

      zatho :

      We don’t need the rh bill to control population growth.

      Our population growth has been declining almost at every census, without the rh bill. Huwag kayo maniniwala sa mga propagandist ng rh bill. :Look at the statistics from

      http://www.nscb.gov.ph/secstat/d_popn.asp

      Projected

      Average Annual Exponential Growth Rates, Philippines: 2000-2040

      YearGrowth Rate
      2000-20052.05
      2005-20101.95
      2010-20151.82
      2015-20201.64
      2020-20251.46
      2025-20301.27
      2030-20351.09
      2035-20400.92

      at current rates, the philippine population will double in size within our lifetime, in about 20 u=years.

      the philippines as one of the highest birth rates in the region but the lowest per capita income and one of the lowest GDP in the region.

      that tells you family size is an issue among families and so is population growth.

    103. zatho
      September 14, 2011 at 11:32 am

      Nevertheless, the population growth rate is decreasing even without the rh bill. Out country do not no need the rh bill.

      If you want the population control, then start with yourself. Have your vasectomy or have yourself ligated. To each his own.

      You and any pro rh have no right to impose mandatory sex education on other peoples children and thus violate our constitution.. You have no right to penalize those who oppose the rh bill; why are there penal provisions in the rh bill?

    104. October 12, 2012 at 9:21 am

      hahai pilifino talaga walang magawa debate ng debate .i would to suggest magtulangan kaya tayo para maka haon tayo sa kahirapan …….

    105. :)
      June 10, 2013 at 8:48 pm

      ang galing. this is actually our topic in third year for first sem.. i thought it will be so boring.. but then, i’ve read this website and i find it now interesting.. its cool. :)

    106. :)
      June 10, 2013 at 9:10 pm

      im currently in high school

    1. June 17, 2010 at 6:06 pm

    Leave a Reply

    Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

    WordPress.com Logo

    You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

    Twitter picture

    You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

    Facebook photo

    You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

    Google+ photo

    You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

    Connecting to %s

    Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 2,298 other followers

    %d bloggers like this: