Harmful and illegal bill

The main purpose of any legislation is to promote order and prevent controversy. Hence clarity and consistency should be its main characteristics. Unfortunately these are not found in the proposed House Bill 5043 or the RH Bill.

Even before its passage, the bill is already mired in highly contentious debates. And this is simply because the statements and declarations of its authors and supporters do not seem to reconcile with its contents and real intent.

Actually the true intent of the bill can be found in the very words of its various provisions. Sometimes however some words are vague and variedly interpreted or do not really reflect what their authors have in mind or what they are telling us. Under these circumstances, the bill’s true intent can be determined by finding out its chief architect and principal designer.

So far, it has not been denied nor refuted that the RH Bill’s chief designer which is aggressively pushing for its passage is the Philippine Legislative Committee for Population and Development (PLCPD) a foreign funded NGO that has its offices right at the very place where our laws are made—in the Batasan. It is likewise undisputed that the main financier of PLCPD are certain Foundations which are recognized as staunch supporters of abortion rights in the U.S. and elsewhere more specifically the International Planned Parenthood (IPPF) that initiated the UN Population Fund (UNPFA), as well as the David and Lucile Packard Foundation.

For the information of the members of the Lower House and the public in general especially those who are misinformed about the purpose of this Bill, “reproductive health” is a euphemism for abortion. The Foundations backing PLCPD by their very own words explicitly say that”:

“The long term goal of Domestic Reproductive Rights sub-program is to protect and promote rights of individuals to make informed choices about their reproductive lives. This includes access to reproductive health information and reproductive health care services particularly safe and legal abortion. We fund efforts to defeat onerous restrictions on abortion access and to inform policies upholding comprehensive access, to build an influential and active base of supporters willing to educate policy makers, community leaders and other decision makers about the importance of reproductive health and rights and access to abortion”.

This intent is confirmed by the provisions of the RH Bill itself that, as repeatedly pointed out and so far not denied nor refuted, promote and subsidize the use of: (1) contraceptive pills directly causing or indirectly leading to abortion or have side effects like cancer, premature hypertension, heart disease etc; (2) intra uterine devices (IUDs) that cause abortion or result in intrauterine trauma, pelvic infections and ectopic pregnancy; (3) condoms allegedly for “safe sex” but have high failure rate even against pregnancy and thus do not protect against AIDS and other STDs; and (4) tubal ligation and vasectomy especially targeting the poor leaving them without the chance to have more children in case of improved economic situation or death of their present children, and no support in their olds age.

It is argued that the bill gives women the right to make an informed choice between natural family planning and artificial contraception. Considering however that the natural methods do not entail any cost to couples and individuals but only a lot of self sacrifice and abstinence, it is quite obvious that the main bulk of the P33 billion budget will be used to subsidize the purchase and use of these contraceptives to be given free. Thus the bill in effect supports the use of these artificial contraceptive as against natural family planning. It is clearly detrimental not only to the physical but also the spiritual health of couples and individuals as they are taught the quick fix and easy way rather than the hard and enduring way.

Aside from contraception, the bill also requires value free sex education to school children. Undoubtedly, this weakens parental authority and incites adolescents to early sexual activity. Countries that have such sex education such as UK and USA show that it has only resulted in increased sexual activity among the teenagers that led to increase in STDs and unwanted pregnancies that lead to abortion.

The bill also limits family size and set the stage for a two-child policy that has now been the bane of countries which adopted it where, in a complete reversal, couples are now being encouraged to have more babies because of graying and dying population. At the same time it imposes stiff penalties of 6 months imprisonment on conscientious objectors or those who do not comply with the proposed reproductive health program. This clear transgression of individual freedoms is further aggravated by the application of the stiff penalty to any person who “maliciously engages in disinformation about the intent and provision of this Act”. 

All these harmful and unconstitutional provisions are being justified allegedly to alleviate poverty. But it has already been proven time and again that there is really no overpopulation in this country but only over concentration of population in some areas and that this population density cannot really be used as the scapegoat for poverty but rather the defective resource allocation and unequal wealth distribution as well as graft and corruption in the government.

Our Congressmen and women should seriously consider the position paper of a group of students from UP, Ateneo and UST who came up with the conclusion that: (1) the RH Bill is not the solution to poverty; (2) there is no overpopulation in the country; (3) there is no causal link between poverty and population increase but rather between poverty and corruption; (4) contraceptives are not only harmful, they could lead to deaths; and (5) sex education does not reduce teenage pregnancies and prevent spread of STDs.

Instead our lawmakers should heed their recommendations to redirect the P33 billion budget to strengthening the existing Social Reform and Poverty Alleviation Act (yes, there is already an existing law on poverty alleviation) as well as the institutions and NGOs now actively involved in poverty alleviation, like the Community Education Programs, Groups and initiatives on Microfinance (RA 8425) and the Gawad Kalinga housing projects.

Our legislators should not allow this country to suffer the same fate of countries that adopted this deceiving and enticing reproductive health program but are now regretting it.