Each morning the children were bathed, fed and sent off to school. While they were away, the woman kept house, sold the extra butter that she made, and still had enough time for her various interests.
Soon, the children grew up and because they did not have health education in school, they had children of their own as soon as they reached puberty. The woman had to work harder because there were extra mouths to feed. The grandchildren kept on coming because the children were still oblivious to contraception. (And besides, the religious authorities made it clear that artificial contraception led to immorality.)
Soon, the house was bursting at the seams with children and the smell of dirty diapers permeated the air. Unwashed children crawled all over the place. The milk had to be watered down so that it would go around. The bread was sliced paper-thin and oil was added to the butter to feed the entire bunch. Eventually, the cow dropped dead, practically dry as a raisin from over-milking. The family took to chewing cud.
A welfare officer visited the house one day and scolded the (now, old) woman, "Why don’t you take better care of your family," he said. The old lady replied, "There’s only enough of me to go around. I’ve spread myself out too thinly already." And then dropped dead herself.
I went to church last weekend and the homily was about artificial means of contraception. The gist of what the priest said was that sex is supposed to be the purest expression of love and one should not indulge in it unless one is married. Even so, natural methods of contraception are recommended to "space" children rather than using artificial means. The priest was very democratic about his views, but it seemed to me that his homily was laden with innuendo. It was a reaction to the two-child policy proposed by Congressman Edcel Lagman.
The proposal caused a lot of brouhaha. Some people took it as an infringement on the human rights of the poor. Undeniably, however, there is only so much of the economic pie that can go around. A burgeoning population would mean that government resources have to be "spread out thinly." The public complains about deteriorating health, education and other public services, but catering to a vast number of people (who expect to get all this for free) is virtually impossible for a government with finite resources.
The solution is to educate everyone about human sexuality. We take it for granted that everyone knows about reproduction and sex education. However, as we debated the merits of the two-child policy, an older cousin shared this disturbing story that illustrates the need for more comprehensive sex education: Her neighbor, a middle-aged school teacher, noticed that her stomach was growing. She claimed that she was pregnant. She didn’t have sex with anyone, and she asserted that she could have gotten pregnant from sitting on a toilet bowl seat. My cousin insisted that it couldn’t be another immaculate conception and urged her to see a doctor. The teacher refused and eventually the cancerous growth in her stomach killed her.
This may be an extreme case, but for a school teacher to be ignorant about sex is ridiculous. Teachers are responsible for educating their students and thus should be qualified and knowledgeable about the subject. If a teacher who went through college believes in something as ludicrous as getting pregnant from a toilet bowl seat, can you imagine what fallacies the unschooled might believe?
Sex education should be approached with more candor and open-mindedness. People should be made to understand that they have to take responsibility for their offspring. Solely relying on the government for free education, health care and other services is irresponsible especially in these times where the country is in dire straits. Government will be the proverbial "butter spread too thinly" if a multitude of people free-load on it.