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: 18:59:15 06/25/12 Mon
Author: IMRD
Subject: June 18-23 news

http://opinion.inquirer.net/31291/contraceptive-morality

Contraceptive morality
By: Patricia Evangelista
Philippine Daily Inquirer
8:43 pm | Saturday, June 23rd, 2012
Tweet
Manila Auxiliary Bishop Broderick Pabillo is afraid. President Benigno Aquino III has met with the American head of state, a dangerous situation given that the United States is a known advocate of the Reproductive Health bill. There is a big push to pass the law from the outside by pharmaceuticals, he says, especially from America. He calls for vigilance from the Catholic faithful. He asks for vigilance from “pro-life” advocates. He warns against the actions of those who would rally against life.
“We are afraid of this, of the support for same-sex marriage, for divorce, for a contraceptives mentality that is not part of the Filipino culture but is being forced on us by foreigners. But our government allows this, because it means favors for us.”
It is difficult to understand what culture Pabillo and the Catholic hierarchy are afraid of losing with the distribution of free condoms and the sight of two men in suits promising to have and to hold. Yet Pabillo and his brethren are servants of the cloth, anointed by God and revered by men, and by virtue of this demands both respect and engagement. I write this as a result of 14 years of Catholic convent school education, with the belief that even the most misguided of misguided men deserve the benefit of the doubt.
The Church is against the tools, against divorce and same-sex marriage and free contraception, but forgets that a tool is only a tool and it is the human being who chooses to use it. It is the same odd rationale that the Church uses in its fight against divorce and same-sex marriage. Marriage is sacred, so sayeth the Holy Mother Church. It is between man and woman, now and forever, until death do us part. To allow same-sex marriages, to allow divorce, is to destroy the very foundation of the Filipino family, even when its members are battered, abused and unhappy, and have discovered that family is simply a word on a document.
For the men of the Church, the passing of the Reproductive Health bill implies that Armageddon is at hand, a portent far more ominous than the rise in extrajudicial killings and death threats against Italian priests in Arakan Valley. It is a measure so suspect, so fundamentally evil, that an entire culture will be eliminated just by declarations of public support. Yet the culture being protected by Pabillo is one that requires definition.
The Filipino, they say, will be destroyed by a “contraceptive mentality.” That catchphrase has been used to embody the evils of free contraception. Pop a pill, prevent a pregnancy, destroy a culture.
“They said they will fine-tune the bill to make it more acceptable,” said Fr. Melvin Castro, executive secretary of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines-Episcopal Commission on Family and Life. “I wish the people will see that behind [Mr. Aquino’s] nice words, there is a dark truth that this RH bill promotes a contraceptive mentality. Even if they promote natural means [of family planning] to make the bill acceptable, it’s still the same since they are also promoting the artificial.”
As the Church itself actively promotes natural contraception, the culture they are protecting does not seem to be troubled by sex that does not lead to repopulating the earth. Instead, this “contraceptive mentality” seems to focus on the artificiality of condoms and pills and injectables, and not its intent to stop pregnancy. It will end, so sayeth the men of God, in a culture of death.
“The Church advocates natural family planning as the only morally acceptable way of practicing responsible parenthood,” wrote CBCP president and Jaro Archbishop Angel Lagdameo in 2007. “The Church does not forbid the advocacy of the increase or decrease of population provided the freedom of the couple to exercise sexual and family morality according to their religious conviction is respected. Since the Church objects to the use of artificial contraception, the Church likewise objects to their dissemination, creating thereby a contraceptive mentality towards a culture of death.”
It is difficult to understand how artificial contraception leads to a “culture of death” any more than natural family planning. To open the doors to a pill that can stop pregnancy, they say, is to open that same door to abortion. The enormous logical leap that statement demands is coupled with another logical question. Why does a pill make a woman more susceptible to abortion than a woman whose belief in God includes faith in her momentary infertility? Were the Church effective in promoting natural family planning, were natural family planning in itself effective, then there would be lesser cases of small blue bodies left in dumpsters outside the Church of the Black Nazarene. The rise in abortion cases among Manila’s impoverished during the contraception ban is statement enough of how a lack of access to education and artificial contraception makes abortion a probability instead of a remote possibility. Every story of every woman who committed unsafe abortion begins and ends with the same line—“I did not know what else I could do.”
But the Church also claims the artificiality is the problem. The condom is evil because it is artificial. The pill is evil because it is artificial. Perhaps the Church should also consider the body-basal temperature method for natural planning a dangerous thing, as it necessitates the use of a thermometer, a man-made tool that is not grown in the sunny fields of Church property. And yet the gentlemen of the Church appear to have no problems with anesthesia and chemotherapy and the varying unnatural tools of the medical profession, and have been known to take insulin shots and migraine medication and whatever pharmaceutical invention is necessary for the relief of their physical suffering. That this choice is denied a woman is not only impractical, it is also discriminatory. Artificial is good enough for the clerics and the priests, but the woman is allowed natural and only natural—and don’t tell her it doesn’t really work. Welcome to the Philippines, pearl of the Orient, cradle of the brave where a woman can vote for the next occupant of the Palace but has no voice as to whether she will allow the occupation of her uterus.
This is what the Catholic Church is afraid of losing. The “Filipino culture” it is fighting to maintain is not virtue or morality or some sort of godly precept, the Church is afraid of losing its own moral authority to control the creation of a state where every citizen is allowed a choice, even when that citizen is a woman.

http://rhbillresourcepage.wordpress.com/2012/06/23/contraceptives-and-social-justice/

Contraceptives and Social Justice
Posted June 23, 2012 by crazycousin377 in Articles. Tagged: Contraceptives, Elizabeth Angsioco, Manila Standard, Maternal Deaths. Leave a Comment
Posted June 23rd, 2012 by Elizabeth Angsioco & filed under Opinion.
The reproductive health bill is not only about family planning or contraception. It has many other life-saving provisions that will address critical RH-related needs particularly of women and girls in poverty.
Some of these provisions have gained acceptance, albeit grudgingly, among some anti-RH people. For instance, provisions on upgrading the capacities of hospitals in the delivery of services to address pregnancy and childbirth complications, and the need for more trained health providers are unopposed.
Even Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines officials have seemingly accepted that maternal mortality is a problem although as expected, they vehemently deny that an RH law will address this.
Among the most unacceptable to the men in robes are provisions dealing with contraceptives. This despite the very alarming statement from Department of Health that based on the National Statistics Office 2011 Family Health Survey, our maternal mortality rate has gone up to 221 deaths per 100,000 live births in 2010.
This means that from 11 mothers dying daily from pregnancy or childbirth complications, it is now at least 12 mothers’ deaths!
In 2010, the population growth rate was 2.04 percent, translating to about two million births. If 221 died per 100,000 births, then 4,420 women died that year or an average of 12.11 women dying daily.
This is very tragic. Unjust.

Why do women die? Simple. It’s because of unplanned, mistimed, or unintended pregnancies many of which are characterized as high-risk.
High-risk pregnancies are those that happen too soon, too frequent, or too late, and pregnancies of women with existing medical conditions that can be aggravated by pregnancy.
Earlier reports indicated that 10 percent (about 200,000) of annual births are from adolescent pregnancies. Pregnancies among girls occur too early when their bodies are NOT yet ready. Thus, girls’ lives are threatened.
Women get pregnant too frequently and give birth to too many children, more than the number they want.
This is not because women do not have plans. Sixty-three percent no longer want additional children, 20 percent want another but later, and 11 percent want another soon (NDHS 2008).
But there is a disconnect between what women want and what actually happens. This is particularly true for the 83 percent wanting to delay or with no desire for another pregnancy.
Unwanted, mistimed, or unintended pregnancies result in abortions. No matter what many think, it is the married (91 percent), poor (68 percent), Catholic (87 percent) women with too many children (57 percent) who resort to abortions. And 1,000 of them die due to complications (UPPI and Guttmacher Institute).
On the average, women give birth to one child more than their desired number. However, by economic standing, the poorest women’s average number of children is more than five when they only want three. Conversely, the richest women want only two and have only two children (NDHS 2008).
Simply put, poor women give birth to almost three times the number of children of the rich who are able to achieve their desired number.
Therefore, it is reasonable to say that those who endure high-risk pregnancies (too soon, too frequent and too many) are the young and poor women. They are the ones who die.
One simple solution to maternal deaths is access to contraceptives or family planning services for those who need them—the 83 percent of currently married women.
This is the reason why contraceptives are included in the World Health Organization’s List of Essential Medicines. Family planning, particularly contraceptives, are known to reduce maternal deaths by as much as 50 percent because high-risk and unintended pregnancies are prevented.
But do young and poor women have access to this solution? The answer is NO, as clearly shown by the 2011 FHS. The survey indicates that: the unmet need for family planning rose from 15.7 percent (2006) to 19.3 percent; and the need is highest among married women aged 15-19 (37 percent), those with no or little schooling (50.4 percent), and poor (25.8 percent).
In contrast, contraceptive use went down from 50.6 percent (2006) to 48.9 percent and more significantly for the poor. Married women aged 15-19 had lowest use (28.7 percent) and those with no education (21.2 percent).
It is also disturbing that contraceptives are now more privately sourced (53.8 percent from 40.7 percent). In 2006, the public sector was the main source (58.1 percent and 45 percent now).
Quite clearly, the need for access to contraceptives, highest among young, poor, unschooled women is not adequately addressed by government.
So, more women die from maternal complications.
Yes, access to contraceptives is a social justice issue.
eangsioco@yahoo.com and @bethangsioco on Twitter
(Published in the Manila Standard Today newspaper on /2012/June/23)
Source: http://opinion.manilastandardtoday.com/2012/06/23/contraceptives-and-social-justice/


http://www.manilatimes.net/index.php/news/top-stories/25404-poverty-affects-implementation-of-family-planning

Poverty affects implementation of family planning
•
•
•
Published : Saturday, June 23, 2012 00:00
Article Views : 114
Written by : Mayvelin U. Caraballo, Reporter
Tweet
WOMEN in poor households use family-planning methods less frequently than their non-poor counterparts, indicating poverty’s direct role in its use, the National Statistics Office’s (NSO’s) 2011 Family Health Survey has revealed.

According to the survey, only 43.1 percent of women in poor households use family-planning methods, while 51.3 percent of women in non-poor households use them.

The poll said that the difference lies in the lower prevalence rate for modern methods among poor women (31.8 percent) than non-poor ones (38.9 percent).

It added that the 5.2 percent of poor women use sterilization, compared to 10 percent of non-poor women.

The survey also revealed that the Pill is still the top choice of contraception, with 18.7 percent of poor women and 20.3 percent of non-poor women using it, followed by ligation.

A less popular method—intrauterine device, or IUD—is preferred by more poor women (3.6 percent) than non-poor ones (2.8 percent)

The survey also showed a significant shift in sources of the Pill from the public sector to the private sector.

“The public sector provided most recent supply of pills to only 32.0 percent of poor women in 2011, compared to 55.4 percent in 2006,” the NSO said.

It added that the private sector provided the Pill to 64.0 percent of poor women in 2011, compared to 43.5 percent in 2006.

Among non-poor women, 80.1 percent obtained their pills from the private sector in 2011, compared to 63.8 percent in 2006.

The poll also showed that married women in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao rarely used contraceptives: with 19.1 percent of them using modern family planning methods and 4.4 percent using traditional ones.

It said that the practice of family planning is also influenced by the woman’s age and education, as contraceptive use is higher among married women aged 20 to 44 than those in the 15-to-19 and 45-to-49 age groups.

“Very young married women, that is, those aged 15 to 19 are the least likely to practice” family planning, the survey added.

The poll also revealed that the level of education also affects the use of family planning, with dating showing that married women with some elementary education are less likely to practice family planning than women with higher educational attainment.

It said that those with no education are least likely to practice family planning, with only two out of 10 women with no grade completed, and four out of 10 with some elementary education practice family planning.

It added that at least five out of 10 women with higher level of education practice family planning.

NSO said that the survey is a nationally representative survey of about 53,000 households. From these households, about 53,000 women age 15 to 49 years were interviewed.


http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=819725&publicationSubCategoryId=63

Pia to convince colleagues to support RH bill
By Marvin Sy (The Philippine Star) Updated June 22, 2012 12:00 AM Comments (1)



MANILA, Philippines - Sen. Pia Cayetano, the main proponent of the proposed reproductive health (RH) bill in the Senate, is looking to convince her undecided colleagues to support the measure to have it approved by August this year.
As far as Cayetano is concerned, the minds of the most vocal critics of the bill in the Senate are already closed and no amount of reasoning would convince them to support the measure.
“For those who do not want to be convinced, even if they see a mother die (due to complications from childbirth) with their own eyes, they will not believe (the deaths),” Cayetano said.
“But I’m sure of that. I’ve seen it. But for those who are uncertain, I believe data and surveys can help them make a decision,” she added.
The period of interpellation for the RH bill was closed before Congress adjourned its legislative sessions last June 8 and the committee and individual amendments would be introduced when the bill is taken up again next month.
Cayetano admitted that getting the RH bill approved would be difficult just as it has been in the past, starting from the first time it was introduced more than a decade ago.
However, Cayetano is counting on the support of President Aquino to secure votes in favor of the bill’s approval in the Senate.
“We have now a President who supports it. Then obviously this bill will have to be brought to the floor, as opposed to three years ago when we had a president who was very vocal about her non-support of RH,” Cayetano said.
“At the end of the day it is the President who (we need to) support the measure. He has the unique ability to also exert effort to have these expedited to come to the final conclusion, which is basically voting on the measure,” she added.
Cayetano said the key is to convince the people “in the middle” who could go for or against the bill, depending on how well the respective positions is presented to them.
Cayetano said she will use the voice of reason to convince the undecided senators.
She said the bill is consistent with the Constitution that mandates the provision of healthcare for every Filipino.
She said the bill cannot be ignored simply because of the mindset of some people that it would be unconstitutional.
“As policy-makers we must provide these services regardless of our personal opinions,” she said.
Cayetano said she is open to the amendments from her colleagues, particularly on the wording of the bill, just to make the vague provisions very clear.
“I just want that the bill is not altered to the extent that it is toothless but otherwise, I am open to amendments that will fine-tune the bill and also remove any provisions that maybe are a little bit vague,” she said.
Citing the 2011 Family Health Survey released by the National Statistics Office showing an increase in the maternal mortality rate, Cayetano said the passage of the RH bill has become even more urgent.
“The latest findings of the NSO are very consistent with the findings of the international organizations: that women who are educated and belong to higher economic brackets really are the ones who plan their families better,” Cayetano said.
“These NSO studies simply confirm that it’s the poorest of the poor that have bigger families, a lot of times because they have no access and no capacity to obtain family planning services and supplies for themselves,” she added.


http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?publicationSubCategoryId=63&articleId=818711

DOH: Maternal deaths up
By Mayen Jaymalin (The Philippine Star) Updated June 19, 2012 12:00 AM Comments (1)



Manila, Philippines - Health Secretary Enrique Ona disclosed that the latest survey of the National Statistics Office (NSO) showed an alarming increase in the number of deaths caused by pregnancy or childbirth complications.
Based on the 2011 Family Health Survey, maternal mortality rate in the country went up to 221 deaths per 100,000 live births in 2010, from 162 deaths in 2006.
Ona said that in 1993, the NSO recorded 209 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births.
“This is now a challenge for us in the government because we are working to reduce maternal mortality rate in the country to 54 by year 2016,” Ona noted.
He stressed the need for the passage of critical legislation and implementation of other appropriate measures to reduce maternal mortality in the country.
“Reducing maternal mortality to 54 and meeting our Millennium Development Goal requires critical legislation to address structural barriers to universal health care. Hence, we need to pass the Reproductive Health bill now,” Ona stressed.
He said there is also the need to amend the midwifery and other health professional laws as well as consolidate local health systems at the provincial level.
Ona said the reduction in maternal mortality is essential, for it serves as a gauge of the country’s health system.
“If you have a high maternal mortality rate it means that your health system is not good enough,” Ona explained.
NSO director Socorro Abejo, however, stressed that the results of the survey set to be released today may not be entirely accurate.
“The survey was based on a seven-year estimate and involves 53,000 women of reproductive age. Thus there is a high confidence interval, so for us the report may still be insufficient to state that mortality rate has increased,” she said.
Abejo said there was also an overlapping of the survey reference period, which could have also affected results of the survey.
“For us the figure merely indicates that the situation did not really change from a rough estimate of 200 maternal mortality rate in 1993 up to the present,” Abejo added.
Even if the statistical data would indicate “no change,” Ona said the results still indicate no improvement as far as maternal health is concerned.
“No change in the statistical data which means it did not get worse, but it also means that the situation for pregnant women did not get any better,” he pointed out.
He said the programs being undertaken by the DOH for the past two years should be slowly showing impact in reducing maternal deaths.
Maternal death, Ona said, is highly preventable through effective family planning health services, ante-natal care and access to health facilities.
Ona said the DOH has started upgrading health facilities and intends to distribute some P500-million worth of family planning commodities this year in an effort to reduce maternal deaths.
The DOH, however, admitted that family planning program has been very limited for the past 10 years, with an estimated six million women reported to having unmet need for modern family planning services.


http://www.journal.com.ph/index.php/news/national/32162-doh-vows-to-reduce-maternal-deaths

DoH vows to reduce maternal deaths
•
•
Published : Tuesday, June 19, 2012 00:00
Article Views : 108
Written by : People's Journal

HEALTH Secretary Enrique T. Ona said that the Department of Health will double its efforts in reducing maternal deaths as the 2011 Family Health Survey revealed that maternal mortality rates increased from 162 to 221 between 2006 and 2011.

“The road to attaining our Millennium Development Goal becomes even more challenging but all systems are in place,” Ona said.

He added that while this finding is alarming, he is not surprised that more mothers died as health services, especially for the poor, have been neglected in the past decade. He explained that maternal deaths are highly preventable through effective family planning services, antenatal care, and access to health facilities capable of handling complications.

Also, government support for the family planning program has been very limited in the past 10 years. As a result, some 6M women of which two million are poor, reported having unmet need for modern family planning services.

Ona said that investments in upgrading health facilities only started in 2010, leaving most facilities overcrowded and in poor physical state.

Some five million poor households still have to be enrolled in Philhealth to avail of its benefits.


http://www.malaya.com.ph/index.php/opinion/6441-still-on-responsible-parenthood

Still on responsible parenthood
•
•
Details
Published on Monday, 18 June 2012 00:00
Written by DAHLI ASPILLERA
By A Web design Company

‘Rep. Edsel Lagman, author of the Responsible Parenthood, Reproductive Health (RH) Act was named “International Legislative Champion.”’
FEAR is expressed about President Aquino considering too youthful (fifty-ish) Chief Justice nominees. Fear not! At half-a-century of age, nominated young’uns have lived long enough in that Age of Knowledge of Good’n’Evil. They have long ago internalized, put to habit their prudence, probity, discretion, wisdom--virtues warranting the righteous appointment. Corona, Ligot, GMA, Garcia, Reyes, Ampatuan, many other oldies--decade(s) way past their 50s–zigzaged their way up despite the lack of such virtues as prudence, probity, discretion, wisdom. And this lack brought defeat in their old age.
***
Rep. Edsel Lagman, RH/RP bill author and advocate is “International Legislative Champion” of the European Parliamentary Forum (EPF) on Population & Development.
Congressman Lagman, 1st District of Albay, received this very first of such award recognizing him as the leading global policymaker; ahead of all others, actively involved in population and development legislation.
Rep. Lagman, main author of House Bill 4244, the “Responsible Parenthood, Reproductive Health and Population Development Act” bested international population and development policymakers in the EPF. The award was conferred during the 5th International Parliamentarians’ Conference on the Implementation of the ICPD Programme of Action held this year in Istanbul, Turkey.
The awards selection committee includes a member of the Secretariat of the Romania’s Senate Sub Committee on Population & Development, a member of the European Parliament, and a former president of the European Population Fund (EPF), a non-government organization representative and one of the EPF Secretariat.
“The selection committee evaluated the contributions of Rep. Lagman on population and development policy advocacy and legislation at the national and international level. We in the Philippine Legislators’ Committee on Population & Development (PLCPD) are truly honored that our Chair, Rep. Lagman, is recognized by the international community. We hope that this award will further inspire him and his colleagues to continue the fight for the passage of the RH bill.”
Rep. Lagman is an outspoken advocate of sexual and reproductive health and rights in a very hostile environment, which is the Philippines.
The Philippines is disadvantaged by the religious force of the Roman Church. The RC community is alleged to be completely single, celibate males. These unmarried priests, claim to have sworn to life-long celibacy are forcing influence and threat within government. Threat of eternal damnation are imposed upon women on their reproductive health and rights, whether or not the women belong to the Romano Church.
“There is still enough time if [Congress] really wanted to vote on the measure. It has been pending for more than 11 years and it has been subjected to political blackmails. It is about time that we institutionalize a comprehensive RH education and services that will help end the deaths of eleven mothers every day due to pregnancy and pregnancy related complications,”--Romeo Dongeto, Executive Director, PLCPD.
Meanwhile, advocates renew their call on the leadership of the House of Representatives to follow the lead of the Senate and fast track and end the period of debates and to vote on the Reproductive Health/Responsible Parenthood bill.
For info, Vigie Benosa-Llorin, Media Advocacy Officer, Center for Advocacy and Policy Development, Philippine Legislators’ Committee on Population & Development (PLCPD) Foundation, Inc. 925-1800 local 4; 6309182936786; Email: vigiebenosallorin@gmail.com; www.plcpd.plcpd.org


http://www.malaya.com.ph/index.php/opinion/6440-its-all-about-responsibility

It’s all about responsibility
•
•
Details
Published on Monday, 18 June 2012 00:00
Written by JOSE BAYANI BAYLON
By A Web design Company

‘Make people responsible for what they do. And making people responsible for what they do is the essence of good citizenship, which is in turn the foundation for nationhood.’
SINCE leaving a beverage company and joining a mining organization I’ve been tracking the arguments pro and con about mining, and I cannot but feel that they revolve around almost the same principles important in many other controversies – whether it is birth control, diabetes and obesity, even citizenship and nationhood. And one key principle that should be at the center of it all is responsibility – at the center in more ways than one.
Take birth control. A lot of the argument revolves around the alleged sinful nature of using birth control of the artificial kind. The rhythm method is ok, say spokespersons of the Catholic Church, because you in effect use nature as a guide as you engage in a most intimate act, an act, by the way, that must only be engaged in by a man and a woman with God’s blessings to do so. The non-Church folks, on the other hand, claim that the rhythm method is so unreliable that the risk of accidentally getting pregnant is there. And the better way to eliminate most of that risk is to use artificial birth control.
But, argues the religious side, using artificial means is interfering with Nature’s processes which in effect is also interfering with God’s processes. And that’s bad. Worse, artificial methods can easily make men and women not otherwise authorized by God to engage in the sex act feel that they could easily do so now, without risk of the consequences of creating new life. So people begin to look at sex less as the sacred act it should be, between a married couple, and more like just another pleasurable moment that one can seek and satisfy whenever one desired and with whoever was willing to play along.
The argument and counter-argument will go on and on, and to make matters worse, argumentation and debate can often be overcome by name-calling, especially when passions reach a fevered pitch. And once reasoned debate gives way to name calling, you can say that is the end of civilized discourse.
There is something similar in confronting the issue of diabetes and obesity. There are proponents of bans on certain foodstuffs because these are “bad for you”. Others propose taxation that is an attempt to make it more “painful” for a consumer to purchase and consume a product that is alleged to be causing diabetes and obesity. Manufacturers have to be stopped, and now – activists claim. And so they move around the globe bringing their message to whoever wishes to listen, and act accordingly.
The “bad for you” argument is seen by others as dangerous. Who is to decide what is good for me and bad for me, except people I authorize to say so such as perhaps my personal physician? Labeling foods as “good” or bad” is making a judgment call, not only for the labeler, but for the rest of humanity. But what if what is bad for you is good for me? Or what is good for me is bad for you? Someone with very low blood sugar levels, for example, will look at a fizzy drink in a different way from the way someone with diabetes does.
And then there is mining, a hot topic for one or two commentators who seem to want to ban mining all over the country. And why not? Mining, the anti-mining lobbyists claim, damages the environment beyond repair. It doesn’t result in major benefit to the State and the rest of the people. And it doesn’t generate many jobs anyway.
On the other hand, those in favor of mining point out that anti-mining advocates seem to be using a shotgun approach in addressing issues that do exist in the mining industry. There must be a differentiation between the mining operations that are above board and comply with such requirements as the Mining Act’s provisions on mine rehabilitation and remediation. And the government cannot turn a blind eye to the existence of hundreds of illegal mining operations that are not subjected to the taxing powers of the State, do not comply with Labor, Health and safety standards, and are said to be the new form of “jueteng”.
What I find as a common thread in all of these is the principle of responsibility. When a couple – married or not – decide to engage in the sex act, my personal attitude is a hope that they are fully aware of the responsibility that they are taking on and they are ready and able to in fact do so. A pregnancy only becomes a problem because someone – or someone and someone else – has an issue with taking responsibility for the consequence of an act they engaged in. Now, if they decide to use artificial birth control methods, that to me is their choice and I simply assume that they are ready and able to take responsibility for that choice before their God, if indeed they believe using those methods is a sin.
When an individual, on the other hand, decides to live his life in a manner that ignores risk factors – I, for one, have many of these as my mother had diabetes and hypertension and therefore the chances that I will have them now or later on in life are very high – then he or she should be aware of the consequences of such actions and is willing to take responsibility for it. I consume Hershey’s Kisses because I just love them, but being aware of my risk factors I do not consume the Kisses as often and in such volume as I used to when I was a kid. On the other hand I am aware that some amount of physical activity of at least 30 minutes duration every other day can be a major contributor to the decreasing of my risk factors. That I find every excuse in the book to delay going to the gym robs me, I believe, of the moral ascendancy to criticize Hershey’s for producing Kisses.
Responsible mining is also the solution, I think, to the mining debate. We can no longer tolerate the type of mining that was engaged in in the past, one that had no concern whatsoever for the environment that was sure to be impacted by the operations. But that’s why a Mining Law was passed, in order to create a new paradigm of responsible and sustainable mining where no such existed before. That’s the solution to the excesses of the past, not the ban on mining that extremists seek to impose.
Make people responsible for what they do. That should be the bottom line in an effort to make this country achieve the promise it has long been said to have but has also long failed to realize. And making people responsible for what they do is the essence of good citizenship, which is in turn the foundation for nationhood.
So. If you feel we are not a nation or don’t feel the sense of nationhood, let’s start from the beginning. Lets you and me, all individual citizens and all corporate citizens as well, live responsibly.
It is all about responsibility.


http://www.tribune.net.ph/index.php/nation/item/269-divorce-bill-to-worsen-rh-bill-word-war-%E2%80%94-chiz

Divorce bill to worsen RH bill word war — Chiz
• Written by By Angie M. Rosales
• Saturday, 16 June 2012 17:54
• font size decrease font size increase font size
• Print
• Be the first to comment!
Rate this item
•
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
(0 votes)


Now is not the right time to push for divorce bill in the country, especially since it will only worsen whatever tension there is between the government and the religious sector over the pending reproductive health (RH) bill, Sen. Francis “Chiz” Escudero said yesterday.
Escudero’s position on the proposal legalizing divorce in the Philippines came as a surprise considering that the lawmaker was recently reported to have filed for the annulment of his marriage to estranged wife Christine Elizabeth Flores.
Annulment proceedings are considered a tedious and expensive process in the Philippines.
“There is an ongoing heated debate between the government and Congress with the Church regarding the RH bill. This is not the right time to fuel whatever tension there is brought about by differing opinion on the issue. If there (are things that) needs to be improved or addressed by Congress, it’s the accessibility and affordability of the present procedure for annulment under the Family Code, so those who cannot afford it (would) be able to avail of (that) legal remedy,” he said.
Escudero, chair of the Senate committee on justice and human rights, said the government could help alleviate the plight of those who do not have access to the public attorney’s office for help in annulment cases or to a pool of psychologists from the Department of Health or the Department of Social Welfare and Development for free professional services.
The senator, who is also a lawyer, noted that under Article 36 of the Family Code, the basis of psychological incapacity as a ground for annulment must exist at the time of marriage.
“And this is the questionable phrase, even though (the incapacity) became apparent after the marriage. It’s neither here nor there. There are legal and technical differences between divorce and annulment,” he said.
Escudero explained that in nullifying a marriage, the legal ground or basis of which should exist at the time of marriage while in divorce cases, the legal question can exist after the couple has been married.
“For example, in the US, after a couple has been married, both of you realized your incompatibility, (you) can avail of divorce. But our laws under the Family Code, there is a catch phrase that somehow opens a bit toward divorce,” he said.
Escudero said lawmakers needed to study the bases for allowing divorce as it could be open to “abuse” or misuse by those seeking such legal remedy.
“If one of the grounds to be used is physical abuse, then why don’t we just include in our laws that those who commit this kind of act should be prevented from getting married to anyone. It’s just one consideration that we should look at, that grounds to be considered (be) carefully studied,” he pointed out.

[ 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.