Home > noynoy aquino, reproductive health, RH Bill 5043 > noynoy aquino vs the catholic church on birth control method

noynoy aquino vs the catholic church on birth control method

September 29, 2010 Leave a comment Go to comments

noynoy aquino says he is for open and free choice of contraceptive method for couples. he says he will leave it up to the couples to decide the contraceptive method that they think is best for them – either the traditional method like rhythm or calendar method or  modern methods like the use of pills, condoms or surgery (vasectomy, ligation).

the catholic church is only for traditional methods of contraception. the church is saying the government should not be involved in promoting or allowing modern methods of contraception.

where do you stand on this one?

  1. jlocute
    September 29, 2010 at 12:15 pm

    We are really at the end of times era. These are all Satans works. We should be aware of him especially during this time where he is triumphant. As he said “I Pretend to love men, in order to destroy them; serve them, in order to ruin them and deceive them; help them, in order to pervert them and draw them into these my hellish regions.”

    Isn’t it this bill is one of its form that says will help us? We are deceived then by him if this one will be approved. Satan’s plan is to destroy us by having and committing sins against God.

    People have been persuaded by the devil that they are entitled to have sex when they choose, rejecting any unwanted life that may result. The enemy may tell you “God is too demanding and unreasonable”. “If we distributed more condoms we would not have disease or the need to abort babies”. “It’s God’s fault because God’s Church is against the use of condoms”.

    Sexual intercourse, by its nature and intent is potentially life giving act. This is God’s version. The enemy’s version is that sex can be closed to give life and used for physical pleasure only. Enemy’s version of sex is selfish, emotionally dangerous, and bad for humanity. The enemy offers an answer to this too, and led souls to avoid consequences by offering widespread contraception and abortion. Both men and women are now told that sinful sexual behaviors are allowable and acceptable. God intends that a man and woman enter a blessed union (through marriage) and then share their sexuality with one another. The devil is mocking God because he depicts God’s purpose. He is laughing because many led astray on this sin. Wa-is si Satan… eto ang hindi nakikita ng mga tao. We always look at human’s perspective and thinks that since it will be beneficial for most human being then it would be fine for God too!

  2. mark
    September 29, 2010 at 3:53 pm

    it is time to the government promote a program for males to have “Free Vasectomy consultation and procedure”. Imagine, this would make a huge impact of controlling our population.

  3. mark
    September 29, 2010 at 3:57 pm

    Pati mga “pare” nakikialam sa gobyerno. It is not surprising to see many incidents in the province many young females are being impregnated by preverted priest. Many incidents was not made public. Try solving there own problem first before they oppose such methods.

    September 30, 2010 at 11:12 am

    the issue is skewed. there is no actual conflict between church and state. church wants to preserve life and it cannot deviate from this but it imposes pro life and reject pro choice as immoral . state must respect couple’s choice and cannot restrict or impede this freedom. there is no debate because eventually the bishop, priest or neighbor cannot impose to a couple their choice. i support pro choice

  5. Denise
    October 1, 2010 at 9:49 am

    I agree to pro-choice but I am not pro-abortion. The church has a point. Why can’t people stop engaging in sex and try to focus on work more and recreation? If the people start to act like crazy whenever this topic comes up then contraceptives are indeed needed to control our population. I think our teens have little knowledge about the use of condoms; that is why Sex Education will be of help but that doesn’t mean we should encourage them to keep having sex. I think both sides have their disadvantages too. In order to solve this problem, I challenge the parents out there to concentrate on your young and to guide them. PLEASE REMEMBER TO MONITOR THEIR FRIENDS TOO. BUT REMEMBER TO NOT OVER DO IT.

  6. Neigyl R. Noval
    October 3, 2010 at 3:48 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.

  7. jlocute
    October 4, 2010 at 10:32 am

    I am a Catholic, and I stand by the Church decision!! I am sad that many other Catholics are opposing against it. Many are Catholic by name and doesn’t understand and work to deepen its faith. We must support our Church; it knows what’s good and bad, for it is from God. If it is from God, then who are attacking it? Satan, the enemy. He only wants to ruin our soul and help us to offend God more thru his wise tactics that many are not aware. He often mixed good with bad and truth with false to confuse us. Exactly as what this RH bill is.

    He said “I Pretend to love men, in order to destroy them; serve them, in order to ruin them and deceive them; help them, in order to pervert them and draw them into these my hellish regions”. Exactly, this RH bill is one of his ways.

    It is indeed true that words of Jesus from visionaries and mystics are happening right now “My Church will be persecuted to a degree never seen before as evil has reached a height that has never before been seen on Earth. She shall suffer and be persecuted. She has been judged already in this scourging soon to carry the great cross to Her Calvary where she shall be crucified, tormented and mocked, and believed to have died and been destroyed”
    Its true that Jesus Christ kingdom is not of this world. Satan’s claim is fulfilling “I am the King of this world” because many are under his control and power.

    We will be accountable to God on everything that we do. Do not judge especially our priests and even more the bishops. Jesus said to Gloria Polo, “Who did you think you were making yourself God and judging my anointed? They are human, and the holiness of a priest is built by his community, that prays, loves, and supports him. When a priest sins his community is questioned, not him.” Jesus showed her how the many demons were attached to her when she do it.

    John 8:7 “He that is without sin among you, let him cast first a stone”.

    Our Church is from God, it is the only one that’s opposing to the attack of the evil right now. Nobody is opposing but only the Catholic Church. Many had gone to the other side embracing the enemy in attacking the Church and its children. Be careful my friend, these are signs of end times.

  8. October 7, 2010 at 7:00 pm

    i believe to the catholic church because using contraceptives has a side effect in our body and it can be the cause of having complication to the body of the person that will use it ….and contraceptives is not the right answer in our problem the answer in our problem is by telling our people that each one of use will know about the family planning…..and contraceptives is not the right answer for it…..but it is my own suggestion on that problem

  9. Wilberg
    October 9, 2010 at 7:29 am

    “the catholic church is only for traditional methods of contraception.”

    The Church is not promoting, supporting, or condoning any kind of contraception. Catholics go with the Architect’s design. God is not stupid.

  10. marvin santos
    October 9, 2010 at 11:00 am

    Wilberg :“the catholic church is only for traditional methods of contraception.”
    The Church is not promoting, supporting, or condoning any kind of contraception. Catholics go with the Architect’s design. God is not stupid.

    the catholic church supports the use of natural methods of contraception. they have said that time and again. the whole objection of the church against the RH Bill is precisely that they do not want people to use articificial method of contraception except natural methods.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

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

%d bloggers like this: