Who's afraid of the RH bill?

The valiant efforts of the champion of the Reproductive Health bill, Rep. Edsel Lagman, seems to have fallen on barren ground at the House of Representatives. With two weeks prior to recess, the bill seems to have been de-prioritized and shelved — virtually a cold bill.

Apparently, the 200-plus congressmen have other concerns that they deem more important.

Re-electionists are wary of incurring the Church’s wrath; frustrated con-assers are still licking their wounds, while those who are against the bill are gleefully sitting on it, determined to make its passage as elusive as the search for the Holy Grail.

On the other hand, in the Senate, there’s still some glimmer of hope as Senator Rodolfo Biazon, the main proponent of Senate Bill 3122, plods on, hoping to convince his colleagues to at least get the discussion of the bill on the floor before they take their break. The pro-RH faction are holding their breath and keeping their fingers crossed.

Both Houses and their watchers know that if this session ends without a vote on the bill, it will most likely languish until after May 10, 2010, tabled until a new, more enlightened administration finally takes over.

Why is the RH bill or any attempt at defining a coherent population policy for a country that needs one so badly such a mission impossible? Every attempt since the Marcos regime has been thwarted or watered down and made totally inutile. Is the Catholic Church versus the population activists so hopelessly gridlocked that they share the blame for canceling each other’s efforts out and remaining at base zero?

Let’s rewind to the very beginning, and look at the basic premise. Is there a pressing need for a rational population policy? Even the most antagonistic parties will have to say yes! Is our country able to provide the social services needed for a healthy and educated citizenry? Even a cockeyed optimist would have to say no. So there is enough common ground where two opposing, “ideologically different” parties could sit across the table and begin with a premise that both can agree on. The sad part is that Juan has very clearly and resolutely spoken, but has been largely ignored thus far. 

In the Social Weather Survey, fielded from Sept. 24 to 27, 2008 all over the Philippines, the survey asked six questions on the RH topic:  The first test statement was, “The use of legal contraceptives like condoms, IUDs, and pills can also be considered as abortion.” On this, the survey found 33 percent agreed, 50 percent disagreed, and the balance was undecided.

The second statement was phrased, “There should be a law that requires the government to give away legal contraceptives like condoms, IUDs and pills to people who want to avail of them”: 68 percent agreed and only 15 percent disagreed.

The third statement was, “If family planning would be included in the school curriculum, the youth would become sexually promiscuous”: 25 percent agreed, and the majority, 54 percent, disagreed.

The fourth and last item was, “There should be a law that requires the government to teach family planning to the youth.” On this, the survey found 75 percent agreed and only 10 percent disagreed.

Then respondents were informed of the RHPD bill (“… a proposal in the House of Representatives that gives the government the duty to promote responsible parenthood by giving enough information to the people, and having safe, legal, affordable and quality reproductive healthcare services for people who want it”) and asked if they had heard of it or not: 46 percent already knew of it prior to the survey; 71 percent were in favor, 21 percent undecided, and a mere eight percent opposed.

Among those who originally knew of the bill, the score is 84 percent in favor, and six percent opposed. While for those who learned of the bill for the first time because of the survey, the score is 59 percent in favor, versus 11 percent opposed.

Seventy-one percent of Catholics and 68 percent of non-Catholics are in favor of the RH bill. Eighty-two percent of voters say they will vote for candidates who will support the allocation of funds for family planning.

Is the Catholic Church so hopelessly fundamentalist in its perspective that it can actually convince itself that there is no population problem brought about by rapid growth? Are the RH defenders, on the other hand, so battle-weary that they have developed a kamikaze attitude, refusing to budge one inch and preferring to fall on their swords, too myopic to imagine that agreement can be reached? And as the immovable forces lock horns, poor Juan and his family have borne the brunt for the last four decades: lack of livelihood, involuntary hunger, inaccessible education, inadequate health services.

Let it not be said that either the Church or the population promoters blinked first. Neither one refuses to budge an inch from their hardened positions, lest it be seen as a sign of weakness or worse, of surrender. The denial from the Church and the stubbornness of activists leave little room for a reconciled position. The most conservative of the clergy, when shown the suffering of the poor, look to the heavens and proclaim, “God will provide.” The rabid RH activists refuse to change one word in their position paper, even if it means a greater chance of being passed. Negotiation is always challenged when confronted by moral arrogance or fanatic cause orientation. It becomes a duel to the end. Meanwhile, many more Filipino families wallow in extreme poverty as the population policy, and with it, the necessary direction, budget and logistics, remain unresolved, because neither side refuses to compromise.

Population growth is at 2.04 percent, the second highest in Asia. The poorest, least-educated households have the most number of children. Ten Filipina mothers die in childbirth every day. Out of every 1,000 births, 24 infants die before they reach one year and 32 do not make it to age five. Almost half a million women had abortions in year 2000, 91 percent of whom are married or in consensual unions.

In reality, there are progressive elements within the ranks of the Catholic Church, just as there are less rabid activists from the RH side. The Jesuits believe that the decision to use the most effective method for planning their families belongs to the couple, based on their conscience and their beliefs. The moderate population experts are willing to excise words and provisions that are anathema to the Church as long as the substance is unchanged. The problem is they are not at the forefront of the discussions as they should be. The numbers do not lie. And if we factor in the natural and manmade disasters plus the unmitigated corruption, it is difficult to feel optimistic and hopeful about the future.

But there is one person who is not afraid of the RH bill or any repercussions it might bring. He is Noynoy Aquino, now the target of demolition texts from his rivals, who would rather pussyfoot on their stand about a population policy. I wonder if the Church realizes that it is being used for politically motivated offensives against a frontrunner who has expressed his unwavering support for a controversial bill. The same political wannabes label Noynoy Aquino as unprepared, lightweight, gullible to the dictates of the Rasputins around him. But he has not buckled amid the orchestrated attacks on his stand and threats from the GMA-fed faction of the Catholic hierarchy.

So who’s afraid of the RH bill? Hint: Start with the other presidential aspirants.

* * *

Contact the author at e-mail ms.comfeedback@gmail.com. And log on to http://mscomaskscanyouhandle thetruth.blogspot.com/.