VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, [3], 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 20:46:31 12/04/12 Tue
Author: IMRD
Subject: Dec. 4-5, 2012 news

http://www.malaya.com.ph/index.php/news/nation/19248-senators-dwell-on-rh-proviso-on-safe-and-satisfying-sex-life
Senators dwell on RH proviso on ‘safe and satisfying sex life’
•
•
Details
Published on Tuesday, 04 December 2012 23:00
Written by JP LOPEZ
By A Web design Company
View Comments
SENATORS yesterday rejected an attempt of Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile to delete from the reproductive health bill the phrase “safe and satisfying sex life.”
At the resumption of the period of individual amendments to the measure, 11 senators voted against the amendment of Enrile, with six in favor.
Sen. Francis Escudero himself was caught in the middle of a heated debate, after expressing belief there is no need to put a proviso of a “safe and satisfying sex life” into law.
When Sen. Pia Cayetano asked Escudero what he would prefer, Escudero said he liked both safe and satisfying but insisted there is no need to put it in the law.
The “safe and satisfying sex life” in the RH refers to the “state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity, in all matters relating to the reproductive system and to its function and processes. This implies that people are able to have a safe and satisfying sex life, that they have the capability, to reproduce and the freedom to decide if, when, and how often to do so.”
Also, the Senate rejected Enrile’s proposal to delete the phrase “pleasurable and safe sexual experiences” in the definition of sexual health which “refers to state of physical, mental and social well-being in relations to sexuality. It requires a positive and respectful approach to sexuality and sexual relationship, as well as the possibility of having pleasurable and safe sexual experiences, free from coercion, discrimination and violence.”
At the start of the amendment deliberation, Enrile insisted that the question about “when life begins“ has already been answered during the Constitutional Commission, contrary to the claims of the proponents that there is no clear consensus on conception.
Enrile read the speech delivered by Commissioner Bernardo Villegas (who has an Opus Dei orientation) during the 1986 Con-Com which states that conception happens at fertilization, or the point at which sperm and egg meet.
Enrile introduced the RH bill amendment on the definition of conception in the previous RH bill deliberation, which reads as: “Conception refers to the successful penetration of an ovum with spermatozoa in the fallopian tube, otherwise known as fertilization, when a new life begins to form in the mother’s womb.”
But Cayetano and Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago refused to accept Enrile’s proposal, saying that it is not under the scope of the bill.
This prompted Enrile to ask for a division of the house in which 11 senators voted against the particular Enrile amendment.
In an interview with reporters, Enrile said that he intends to raise the issue to the Supreme Court.
Recto, resuming his own individual amendments, said: “Some might not agree with this, (but) this is in my conscience: that all youth, 13 years and above, should be educated on RH to become responsible individuals while those below 13 should get their RH mentoring from their parents.”
He said the bill must also have clear funding so that it is known how much resources are required to determine its implementability, operability, and sustainability.
“The government should not coerce local government units and private health providers to deliver RH services for free because that track is not sustainable,” he said.
Meanwhile, Senate majority leader Vicente Sotto disclosed that the Department of Health already allocated over half-a-billion pesos (P500 million plus) in its 2013 budget to buy and supply condoms and other contraceptives purportedly to check overpopulation.
In contrast, Sotto said, only P31 million was set aside for natural family planning.
Sotto bared the “huge discrepancy” during the period of interpellations on the proposed DOH budget for next year.
“The amount is lumped under the Family Health and Responsible Parenting program, which has a budget of P2.539 billion,” he pointed out.
He this only shows “there is no need to pass” the controversial RH bill, arguing that the major provisions sought by the measure is “already being implemented by the DOH.”
The leadership of the House of Representatives is growing tired of the delaying tactics that opponents of the reproductive health bill has been resorting to, saying it is high time that they walk the talk by showing their strength during the plenary voting on the measure.
House majority leader Neptali Gonzales II said critics led by Reps. Pablo Garcia of Cebu and Rufus Rodriguez of Cagayan de Oro have nothing to fear when the measure is put to a vote since they have been boasting that they have the numbers.
“If they are truly confident that they have the numbers, what’s the reason for delaying it? We might as well expedite the individual amendments and proceed to interpellate it as soon as possible so that they will have the opportunity to really kill the bill, especially (because) they are boasting to have that numbers,” Gonzales told a weekly news forum at the House.
The House on Monday night had to spend almost two hours just to dispose of the anti-RH’s motion that they nominally vote on the motion to allow Palawan Rep. Dennis Socrates to speak on a matter of personal and collective privilege for him to air his gripes on the adoption of the RH substitute bill last Monday.
Congressmen voted 99-90 with one abstention against Socrates who wanted to speak longer than the five minutes.
Lagman said the results of the viva voce and nominal voting last Monday show that the RH advocates and supporters invariably win the vote. – With Wendell Vigilia

http://www.manilatimes.net/index.php/news/top-stories/36706-house-leader-sees-passage-of-rh-bill
http://www.manilatimes.net/index.php/news/top-stories/36706-house-leader-sees-passage-of-rh-bill

http://www.tribuneonline.org/index.php/headlines/item/7761-%E2%80%98safe-satisfying-sex%E2%80%99-start-of-life-stump-rh-vote-anew
‘Safe satisfying sex,’ start of life stump RH vote anew
• Written by By Gerry Baldo and Angie M. Rosales
• Wednesday, 05 December 2012 00:00
• font size decrease font size increase font size
• Print
• 2 comments
Rate this item
•
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
(0 votes)
Proceedings on the Reproductive Health (RH) bill in the Senate was stumped as a result of a clash over a seemingly conflicting term “safe and satisfying sex life” the removal of which was sought by Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile but he was nevertheless thumbed down by his peers.
As upper chamber leaders inched closer into approving on second and third reading the controversial bill, Enrile warned his colleagues over a possible legal issue that could arise as to how they will set to define the issue of how human life actually begins.
As senators continue to be in

conflicting views of the matter of “when life begins,” the Senate leader noted what could serve as a precedent, saying that the matter was already defined by the 1986 Constitutional Commision (Con-com) — the body that crafted the country’s Charter.
“I want to put that into the record, in this proceeding because I think what we are approving, if we will approve it, without my amendment would be unconstitutional and I intend it raise that to the Supreme Court,” Enrile told reporters in an interview prior to him taking the matter on the floor and deliver a speech on this issue.
In reading into the records the proceedings that took place in Sept. 12, 1986, Enrile quoted the sponsorship speech of then Commissioner Bernardo Villegas who noted, taking into consideration all legal, logical manner and medical science that “human life begins at conception.”
Enrile and other critics of the bill had earlier argued that there already exists a provision in which they could use as a basis in defining the terms contained in the measure.
Based on the constitutional provision, “the mandate of the State should equally protect the life of the mother and the unborn from the moment of conception,” Enrile emphasized that the issue of abortion in exercise of freedom of choice is not applicable in this case.
The Senate chief vowed to bring the matter before the high court if the upper chamber will move to pass the bill, to challenge the legality of the said arguments in the Con-com.
The main House proponent of the Reproductive Health (RH) bill lashed out at legislators opposing the measure for their supposed dilatory tactics which, he said, uselessly prolong the proceedings.
In a press statement, Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman said “the dilatory antics of anti-RH lawmakers are abusive and offensive to the rules of the House.”
“The rules were made for orderly procedure and should not be used as a shield for inordinately delaying tactics just to derail legislation which is patently the objective of the oppositors of the measure,” Lagman said.
His statements came a day after the period of individual amendments was finally started on the substitute version of RH 4244.
The proceedings last Monday was continuously delayed as anti-RH lawmakers proceeded to use parliamentary tactics which included using lengthy privilege speeches and moving for nominal voting when their amendments are rejected by the bill’s proponents among others.
Lagman said fellow lawmakers are already tired of the delaying tactics of RH detractors.
“The results of the viva voce (voice voting) and nominal voting last Monday showed that the RH advocates invariably win the vote,” the main author of the RH bill noted.
“If the anti-RH lawmakers persist on throwing monkey wrench killer amendments which have no prospect of being adopted, then the House leadership will be justified to move for the termination of the period of individual amendments,” Lagman said.
House Majority Leader Neptali Gonzales I, during a forum, said the bill should be passed this week but the pace by which amendments are being introduced is painfully slow.
“Last night we were only on line 2 page 2 (of 27 pages),” Gonzales said in response to question about whether the bill has a chance of passing.
He said, however, that the period of individual amendments is going very slow even as he noted that during its first day.
Gonzales said Aquino had wanted the bill voted on this week possibly until third and final reading.
The majority leader, one of the pro-RH advocates, said that the passage of the RH Bill is going to be won in a “parliamentary battle.”
“Strategy and it’s going to be a battle. Monday night was an indication on how it is going to be,” he said noting that the pro-RH lawmakers won by a close margin in one of the amendments being introduced by Cebu Rep. Pablo Garcia, a staunch anti-RH advocate.
He said the process of introducing amendments does not have to be done through nominal voting as provided for under the rules of the House but that it was a strategy available to anti-RH advocates.
The lawmakers also spent much time in voting on whether to allow Palawan Rep. Dennis Socrates would be allowed to speak for then minutes on “a matter of individual and collective privilege” on alleged failure of due process when Gonzales made an “amendment by substitution” on Nov. 26, to make the bill agreeable to the anti-RH advocates and the Catholic Church.
When asked whether the anti-RH advocates are delaying the passage of the bill, Gonzales answered in the negative.
“But I don’t want to believe that there is no intention on their part to improve on the bill,” the majority leader said.
Gonzales dared the anti-RH lawmakers to come out in the open and vote against the bill.
Gonzales admitted that the House of almost divided equally between the anti and the pro-RH lawmakers.
The Palace also sees President Aquino’s call to legislators to vote on the controversial reproductive health bill in accordance to conscience, as enough to seal the passage of a Palace legislative priority agenda that would cost the government more than P13 billion in contraceptive purchases.
Deputy presidential spokesman Abigail Valte sees no need for any leverage to convince the members of Congress to vote for the passage of the RH bill. Not even the pork barrel which they refer to as the priority development assistance fund (PDAF)
“(There is) no basis for the fears. We have always been transparent. You can even check it yourself. PDAF releases are posted on-line,” Valte was quoted as saying.
Valte went on to cite an issue that was raised at the height of the Senate impeachment proceedings against former chief justice Renato Corona.
“I remember this was also raised during the impeachment of the former Chief Justice— and when they referred to the online material on the DBM website, they actually saw that the administration isn’t singling out the opposition (on withholding PDAF), because there were also those from our camp who haven’t got their pork. So that will disprove these fears, the so-called ‘fears,’ that the pork barrel allocations will be used as leverage against members of the Lower House.” With Fernan J. Angeles

http://www.tribune.net.ph/index.php/headlines/item/7762-senate-may-pass-foi-bill-ahead-of-rh
Senate may pass FoI bill ahead of RH
• Written by Angie M. Rosales
• Wednesday, 05 December 2012 00:00
• font size decrease font size increase font size
• Print
• 9 comments
Rate this item
•
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
(1 Vote)
The passage of the Freedom on Information (FoI) bill in the Senate should come ahead of the controversial Reproductive Health (RH) bill considering that its implementation “could just radically change the bureaucratic landscape because transparency is the issue involved.”
“I think the FoI bill should be approved first before the RH bill because whatever decisions we make (in the RH bill), the impact will be felt in the succeeding generations, unlike in the FoI bill...it becomes automatic, the matter of the government making accessible to the public on the way how it’s running (the affairs of the country),” said Sen. Gregorio Honasan, main sponsor of the Senate’s version of the bill, No. 3208 or the People’s Ownership of Government Information (POGI).
Except for Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile who has not seen the report yet, Honasan said all 22 of his colleagues had affixed their signatures on his panel report and expresed support to its recommendations.
“I hope this will be passed soon even if the Senate is ahead of the lower house in deliberating on this bill, probably
because they’re still addressing some of the controversial provisions such as the right of reply. We at the Senate are at least on track,” he said.
Under the proposed Senate version of the bill, the chairman of the public information and mass media committee, Honasan, said they had opted not to include the provision on the right of reply in the bill.
“It’s a separate issue because there may be some constitutional and legal issues. It could have an impact on the (provisions on) freedom of the press, freedom of expression, freedom of free speech,” he said.
But the matter of putting in the agenda the bill as a priority legislation over the RH bill will depend on the decision of the members of the upper chamber, Honasan said.
Enrile said the possibility of the bill being approved before Congress goes on Christmas break is not remote considering that there is no strong opposition among his colleagues on the provisions of the bill.
“We passed the same bill in the past (during the last Congress). I see no problem with it getting approved here,” he said.
Sen. Loren Legarda and Minority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano stood as co-sponsors of the bill
Legarda, in her sponsorship speech, said that the government has been hounded by many controversies, each leaving a dent in the credibility of the bureaucracy.
“The Hello Garci scandal, the Fertilizer Fund scam, the Euro Generals scandal, the NBN-ZTE deal—these are among the controversies in the past decade that have left our citizens doubting the capacity of government to do its mandate of serving the best interest of the people.
“While the present administration is undertaking efforts to elevate the citizens’ trust and confidence in the government, we must give the people something that they can hold on to.
“It is on this note that I express my fervent hope that we will soon witness the approval of this measure that I wish to co-sponsor today, Senate Bill 3208, An Act Fortifying the People’s Right of Ownership over Information Held by the People’s Government.
“Under this proposed measure, we aim to feed our people with information about us, the leaders they elected in office, and the businesses our offices deal with. All government agencies will be mandated to disclose information on public interest transactions, documents or records. The compulsory disclosure shall be done by posting these documents on government websites for easy access, aside from providing these documents upon a person’s request. Furthermore, vital information must be translated into major Filipino languages and made easier to comprehend.
“However, we acknowledge the fact that there is certain information that must be kept confidential especially that which may compromise the nation’s security, jeopardize negotiations or diplomatic relations with other nations, and intrude on the privacy or endanger the life and safety of an individual. We have covered these exceptions, and if such may cause the denial of access to information, the agency concerned is required to make the appropriate explanation,” she said.
“By enacting the Freedom of Information (FoI) Act, we help empower our people to bring about lasting solutions to these problems. It will finally create the change that will make a difference in their lives not only today but for all tomorrows.
“FoI provides the mechanism to share knowledge and information about governance with our people, it allows every Filipino the opportunity not only to become a graft buster but actively help prevent the commission of graft and corruption that leads to high prices, lack of job opportunities and income,” Cayetano said in his speech.

http://www.malaya.com.ph/index.php/column-of-the-day/18894-still-on-rhrp-bill

Posted on Wednesday Dec 5th at 12:00am
By Helen Flores
MANILA, Philippines - About eight in 10 young people – 15 to 19 years old – in Metro Manila are in favor of a law on family planning and reproductive health (RH), a recent survey by the Social Weather Stations (SWS) showed.
“Here in NCR (National Capital Region), 83 percent of adolescents ‘agree’ that there should be law in the Philippines on RH and family planning as against only eight percent who ‘disagree’,” Forum for Family Planning and Development president Benjamin de Leon said.
The SWS survey said 78 percent of adolescents in Metro Manila are aware of the RH bill, with nine out of 10 saying television is the main source of information.
The survey, conducted from Oct. 26 to 28, was commissioned by The Forum for Family Planning and Development, Inc. using face-to-face interviews of 600 respondents.
Eighty-five percent of the respondents believe that students of age 15 to 24 years “should be given adolescent health education in school.”
The survey said 84 percent agree that men and women – 15 to 24 years old – should be given family planning information and services.
The poll revealed there “should be a law that requires government to teach family planning to the youth.”
The RH bill, which promotes both the artificial and natural family planning, is still being debated in Congress.

Still on RH/RP Bill
•
•
Details
Published on Friday, 30 November 2012 00:00
Written by DAHLI ASPILLERA
0 0 0 42

By A Web design Company

0 Comments
‘The Roman Catholic vote is for the enactment of the RH bill. This has been validated and documented in all nationwide surveys for many years now.’
REP. Edcel Lagman, RH/RP bill author and advocate, “International Legislative Champion” explains in his email why the Reproductive Health/Responsible Parenthood is necessary.
Surveys show that 71 percent of Roman Catholics favor the enactment of the RH bill (Third Quarter 2008 Social Weather Survey, 16 October 2008). The same survey reveals that the percentage of those in favor of the bill is even higher among weekly church-going Romanos at 73 percent, which means that the pulpit as a platform for anti-RH homilies is a failure.
Moreover, the SWS also says that among registered voters surveyed, “most will vote for pro-RH bill candidates” with 38 percent of Filipino voters choosing to vote for candidates who support the RH bill while only 6percent said they will not vote for candidates supportive of the measure. Among those surveyed, 20 percent said that a candidate’s stand on the issue will not affect their vote while 35 percent claimed they were not aware enough about the contents of the bill (SWS, 11 March 2010).
In predominantly Romano communities like Cebu, Manila and Parañaque, respondents in various surveys are overwhelmingly pro-RH. A huge number of Cebuanos at 76 percent support the passage of the RH bill (SWS, April 2009); in Parañaque, 84 percent of the respondents are in favor of the bill (SWS, March 2009); and in Manila, a whopping 86 percent of those surveyed support the enactment of the bill into law (February, 2009).
In the staunchly Catholic province of Bohol, majority of the respondents at 53 percent are in favor of the RH bill compared to only 17 percent who are against it, according to a survey conducted by Holy Name University, a leading Catholic university in Bohol.
Pulse Asia reports that 93 percent of Filipinos consider it important to have the ability to plan their families and 82 percent believe government should inform couples about all methods of family planning.
The faculty members of leading Romano Catholic Universities like Ateneo and De La Salle Universities support the passage of the RH bill.
RH advocates should not fear a negative Romano vote because the alleged backlash has no empirical basis.
Fear has always been used by the clergy as an instrument of repression and reprisal like fear of eternal damnation, fear of excommunication, fear of offending religious ministers, fear of contraceptives as abortifacients and carcinogenic, and fear of a demographic winter.
Fear is bankrupt of reason and should not be allowed to deter legislation and policy making.
Priests at the local parishes do not articulate with the same ferocity anti-RH tirades of some bishops because they are more aware of the ill-effects of the population problem on their parishioners.
The parish priest and the political leader are natural and logical partners in addressing the population problem because they witness on the ground grinding poverty, maternal and infant mortality and the inadequacy of pre-natal and post-natal care and facilities, all of which are addressed by the RH bill.
It must be underscored again that there were more RH advocates and supporters who responded to the roll call even during the session days when there was no quorum.--Edsel Lagman.
For the reader’s reference on the RH Bill - Philippines: Full text of reproductive health bills filed at the Philippine Senate and House of Representatives, from the current (15th Congress) to as far back as 1999 (11th Congress). The final (2011), full text of the consolidated RH bill from the House of Representatives can be browsed here.
15th Congress - Senate Bill 2865 (consolidated bill, SB 2865)
15th Congress - Authors’ Amendments to HB 4244
15th Congress - House Bill 4244 (full text, final consolidated RH bill, HB 4244)
15th Congress - Senate Bill 2378 (Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago)
15th Congress - Consolidated RH Bill
15th Congress - House Bill 3357 (Hons. L.C. Ilagan, E.A. De Jesus, Gabriela Women’s Party)
15th Congress - House Bill 1160 (Hon. Rodolfo G. Biazon)
15th Congress - House Bill 513 (Hons. Kaka Bag-ao and Walden Bello, Akbayan)
15th Congress - House Bill 101 (Hon. Janette Garin)
15th Congress - House Bill 96 (by Hon. Edcel C. Lagman)
14th Congress - House Bill 5043
14th Congress - Senate Bill 3122
13th Congress - House Bill 16 (by Hon. Edcel C. Lagman)
13th Congress - Senate Bill 1280 (Sen. Rodolfo G. Biazon)
12th Congress - House Bill 4110
11th Congress - House Bill 8110
For more information: Center for Advocacy and Policy Development (CAPDEV) Philippine Legislators’ Committee on Population and Development(PLCPD)
Foundation, Inc. (02) 9251800 local ealmocerajr@gmail.com; www.plcpd.com; www.plcpd.org.ph.


http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/315473/be-wary-of-catholic-effort-enrile-tells-rh-backers
Be wary of Catholic ‘effort,’ Enrile tells RH backers
By Norman Bordadora
Philippine Daily Inquirer
1:33 am | Friday, November 30th, 2012
10 402 179
There may not be a Catholic vote but there is a “Catholic effort.”
Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile on Thursday reminded reproductive health advocates who say there is no such thing as a Catholic vote that it was Jaime Cardinal Sin’s call to the faithful that brought the people out to Edsa in droves against Ferdinand Marcos in 1986.
“What brought about Edsa? Who were the people who went there to bring down an administration? Didn’t Cardinal Sin call on the faithful who went to Edsa to bring down [Marcos]? You have forgotten that event?” Enrile said at Thursday’s Kapihan sa Senado news forum.
“That should be food for thought for anybody who claims that there is no Catholic vote. But there is such a thing as a Catholic effort if it becomes necessary,” he said.
“You can just imagine what will happen if the bishops link their arms with nuns and priests and a crowd to march in the streets and push their position on this particular issue. Do you think any policeman or soldier would be crazy to raise his guns against these people?” Enrile said.
“Don’t ever think that this issue is that simple. We must use our heads because this is a very explosive issue,” he added.
Ironically, Enrile said he would still vote against the reproductive health (RH) bill even if all his 17 amendments to the measure were adopted.
“I’m not a hypocrite. I speak out according to my best assessment of what is good for the country. My vote is against the reproductive health bill … even if they accept my proposals,” he said.
Asked why he was proposing amendments when he was against the measure, Enrile said: “Just to show them that we are not delaying it and we want to refine it.”
“And to tell you the truth, my purpose in proposing some of my amendments is to show to the people that this bill is not really all for the health of women. It’s camouflaged as a health bill but its real purpose is to contract the population,” he said.
On the possibility his anti-RH bill stance would adversely affect the senatorial bid of his son, Cagayan Representative Jack Enrile, next year, he said: “If my son should lose because of that issue, then so be it.”
“Even my life I will put at stake for something I believe in,” he added.
Enrile doubted the Senate would be able to vote on the RH bill before Christmas.
“How can they do that? We have not finished the process. Each one of us has a right to present our amendments,” he said.
Enrile recalled that one senator had reserved the right to interpellate proponents of the bill creating a new province from Camarines Sur (CamSur), and then went abroad for a good period of time. Up to now, Enrile said, the CamSur bill is pending in the upper chamber.
“If they respect that senator, why can’t they wait for us on a very major issue?” he said.
Told of the pro-RH senators’ supposed plan to move for a vote on terminating the period of amendment, Enrile said: “That is cloture. Senator [Pia] Cayetano is only one senator. She cannot impose her will on the Senate.”
Cloture is a procedure by which a Senate debate on a measure is ended and put to an immediate vote.


http://www.mb.com.ph/articles/383695/birth-spacing-and-family-planning

BIRTH SPACING AND FAMILY PLANNING
By FR. EMETERIO BARCELON, SJ
November 29, 2012, 7:12pm

DISTINCTIONS between population control, reproductive health, and family planning are needed. Population control is what some in developed countries want the underdeveloped countries to practice. They do not want extra mouths to feed on this earth. Their reasons can be selfish but this is for each country to decide for itself. But money talks in this matter. Those who have money to spare want to impose their will on others who are willing to accept.
However, this is of dubious benefit to developing countries. Countries like Singapore are now regretting that they initiated population control. Many countries in the world now have a comparatively larger ratio of non working population to support, like the elderly and the young, compared to the working population. And many countries like Japan and European countries now have reached ratios where rates will never recover to a point of steady population. It remains to be seen what the effect of China’s one-child will be.
Reproductive health is sometimes used to mask population control. Who does not want reproductive health? The health of parents and children are of primary importance but this term is often used to mask population control, which is reprehensible. Family planning and birth spacing is a valid objective. It means couples will bring up children that they can nurture to be responsible human beings both physically and intellectually as well as spiritually. It stands to reason that parents have the right to space their children according to their capacity to bring them up. Birth controls both artificial and natural methods – may be appropriate. Using artificial methods seem to be the easy way but it has both moral and physical detrimental side effects.
The proponents of the RH bill in Congress are really asking for funds for artificial birth-control methods. Naturally the pharmaceutical companies stand to profit from such a budget. And this is the main reason for objections to the RH bill. Why should we use government money for a questionable birth control system? There is no prohibition for those who want to use artificial means except for abortifacient methods. Why should the government subsidize the pharmaceutical companies?
The propaganda of the pharmaceutical companies is so loud that many couples are ignorant of natural family methods of birth control. There are at least six scientifically proven methods, including the temperature, the Billings method, and the mucus test, that are as effective as the artificial methods without the bad side effects. Half the Philippine couples of reproductive age are not aware of natural methods which are simple and just as effective. There is some need for sacrifice in abstention from intercourse during the wife’s fertile period which is usually from the 11th to the 18th day from the start of menstruation. Some of these methods are as simple as asking if there is mucus secretion of wife yesterday and today which indicate a fertile period and requires abstinence. This requires communication between the couple and a bit of sacrifice but it is worth the sacrifice.
We are not interested in population control but birth spacing with natural methods may be worthwhile. Nor are we interested in government money paying for artificial methods of birth control.


http://www.tribune.net.ph/index.php/nation/item/7577-tagle-to-be-%E2%80%98pope%E2%80%99s-collaborator%E2%80%99-vs-rh-bill
Tagle to be ‘Pope’s collaborator’ vs RH bill
• Written by Conrado Ching
• Saturday, 01 December 2012 00:00
• font size decrease font size increase font size
• Print
Rate this item
•
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
(0 votes)
Newly installed Cardinal Manila Archbishop Luis Antonio Cardinal Tagle said he would stand with the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) against the Reproductive Health (RH) bill.
The new Filipino Cardinal arrived yesterday morning after being formally installed by Pope Benedict XVI as a new member of the Catholic Church’s College of Cardinals.
Cardinal Tagle planed in from Rome aboard Cathay Pacific flight CX901 via Hong Kong. He was accompanied on the flight by his parents, Milagros and Manuel, together with his private secretary, Fr. Reginald Malicden.
Tagle said the CBCP has already issued a stand against the bill and he would also oppose any proposed RH bill that is against life.
The new Cardinal explained his new position given to him comes with great responsibilities.
“As a Cardinal, we are tasked to be the Pope’s collaborators in the country,” Tagle said, adding he has to continuously work with the Vatican and work for the advancement of the Church in the country.
The CBCP had been vocal against the RH bill for its provisions allowing artificial contraception. The CBCP allows only natural means of family planning.
When asked about his immediate plans, Tagle said he will comply with Pope Benedict XVI’s instruction to be “one of the closest collaborators” of the Pope to commune with the people.
As a cardinal, Tagle is qualified to elect a Pope.
Tagle at 55 is the second youngest cardinal of the Catholic Church after Archbishop Baselios Cleemis Thottunkal of India, 53.
He is the seventh Filipino cardinal following Rufino Cardinal Santos, Julio Cardinal Rosales, Jaime Cardinal Sin, Ricardo Cardinal Vidal, Jose Cardinal Sanchez and Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.