Everything about : RH Bill ( Reproductive Health Bill)

[johnny22aa]

---

On the contrary, these so-called "modern" contraceptives are unhealthy and are actually abortifacients. The IUD, pill, mini-pill, Depo-Provera, and others all have a baackup method in case they fail to prevent ovulation. They change the uterine wall, creating a "hostile endometrium", which does not allow the fertilized egg (which is already a human being) to implant. With nowhere to cling to, the baby is eventually flushed out and destroyed. This is an early chemical abortion.

There are also medical side effects to these chemicals and devices. There have been reports of bleeding, increase in the likelihood of cancer, depression, mood swings, etc.

These abortifaceints should be banned. They directly violate the Philippine Constitution which explicitly recognizes and protects the life of the unborn from the moment of conception (Article II, Section 12, Philippine Constitution).

Overpopulation is a myth. The real causes of poverty are massive corruption, inidscriminate debt servicing, war, and greed. We have all of these in the Philippines right now. Population control will do NOTHING to solve these causes. Population control wastes resources on such useless measures that do not address the real problems and in fact takes attention away from them as well.

bro, di ko mo agree aning imong gi ingon nga "overpopulation is a myth". let's take for example a couple who earns minimally, as in minimum ra jud. (I think it's P250 per working day right now) The husband is the only one working. The wife stays at home. They were both excited to see the fruit of their love. And it's coming. And it comes. and again. and again. and again. and again. and again. and it would not be sure if this would be the last time. and still it's coming. Sooner they are aware that they already had 10 fruits of love waiting for their care, attention, and longing. and the couple are now in doubt whether they can provide everything the needs of these "fruits". And this is a common story to tens of millions of filipinos that you'll hear especially in depressed areas.

Bro, this is a fact whether u like it or not, whether u deny it or not. Of course, you can NOT resist couples not to have ***. c'mon bro, we're humans. part of being human is to satisfy our carnal urge (catholic priests deny this). and we definitely do NOT deserve to have a fruit every time we tend to express this natural urge of us. unsa man diay gusto nimo, taga "ana" nimo, anak jud diay dayn? or pugong2x ka nya dha ra mo mag "ana" kung safe imong partner? u think productive ni nimo? u think productive ni sa imong partner? u think productive ni ninyong duha? and the millions of filipinos?

yes, there are pills that are not so safe to take. Yet there are million kinds of birth control pills awaiting for human consumption. and yet they are proven and tested to be clinically & medically safe. In fact bro if ur still not convinced, birth control pill is the most studied and examined kind of drug in the world (according to dra. abesamis-chan, i saw it on tv). the known side effects has become lesser & lesser and become more & more bearable for humans to take. so y not encourage people to consult an ob-gyne (for depressed areas, the gov't would provide one) to let couples know which one is safe & bagay sa mo inom.

we really need this bill. we need to move on.

[mannyamador]

bro, di ko mo agree aning imong gi ingon nga "overpopulation is a myth". let's take for example a couple who earns minimally, as in minimum ra jud.

I'm afraid you are making a common error. Small-scale economics do NOT translate directly onto a large scale. You have to ask: why are there some families that can raise many children with few resources, and some others that cannot do the same even with more resources?

National-scale Economics

The answer comes down to the economic system. If the economy is properly managed, even ordinary couples with blue-collar (low-end) jobs can raise many children. On the other hand, if the economy is badly managed, even couples with more will still have difficulty.

The truth is that it really doesn't matter then how few people you have. If the economy is very badly managed, you will have poverty with or without population control. The solution, therefore, is NOT to lessen the number of people, because that will make the economy even worse (smaller markets, less production, less labor, etc.). The answer is to improve the economy so couples can raise as many children as they choose to have.

History and statiscial evidence prove this point. When the Philippines had a very high Total Fertility Rate (7 per woman) and high population growth rate, the economy was booming. Before Marcos, we were the envy of Asia. But now we have poverty despit ehte fact that our Total Fertility Rate is very low (less than 3 per woman in some studies), while our population growth rate is the lowest ever (under 2%). Why then, after three decades (since Marcos) of population control nothing has really improved?

You can look all over the word and the results are the same. Population control has not been proven to improve large-scale economies. In fact, it's the other way around. When the economy improves, population growth stabilizes.

I can appreciate that you can see the hardships of individual couples and families. That is good. But you have to look at the bigger picture because population control is a NATIONAL policy and will affect the economy as a whole. You have to look at the MACROECONOMIC view of things. If you don't you will think you are improving the lives of a few couples, but this weill be temporary. The economic effect of concentrating on population control is that the real causes of pvoerty are ignored. Then the economy gets even worse and the temporary improvements will go away.

Even worse, population control introduces negative attitudes towards the value of life and ***. Promiscuity will increase and then more people will turn to abortion and start murdering their children!


Safe and pro-family/life birth control

Now let us pretend that we are overpopulated (we are not, but I'm assuming you probably won't agree with me). If we must have birth control (we don't need it but just suppose we do) then the least you can do is use methods that are not anti-family or anti-life. The Church actually approives of Natural Family Planning (NFP). It is effective and 100% safe. And best of all, it encourages commitment and fidelity. Millions of couples have tried it and it works.

There is no need for any artificial contraceptives. They encourage promiscuity, casual attituds toward *** and commitment, and will eventually lead to a mentality that will accept abortion. In fact, most of the artificial contraceptives ARE abortifacient. And there are the side effects that up to now -- after five decades -- cannot be eliminated! That is the REALITY.

So again, there is no way to justify artificial contraceptives. The are abortifacient, have bad side-effects, and encourage dangerous, promiscuous behavior. Natural Family Planning is the opposite. NFP is not abortifacient, has no side-effects whatsoever, and encourages commitment and fidelity.

God bless!

[pop_cola]

On the contrary, these so-called "modern" contraceptives are unhealthy and are actually abortifacients. The IUD, pill, mini-pill, Depo-Provera, and others all have a baackup method in case they fail to prevent ovulation. They change the uterine wall, creating a "hostile endometrium", which does not allow the fertilized egg (which is already a human being) to implant. With nowhere to cling to, the baby is eventually flushed out and destroyed. This is an early chemical abortion.

mao b? wa ko kahibaw nga ing.ani d.i purpose sa uban contraceptives. tsk tsk tsk...

[t3ChNo™]

I really appreciate your opinions(Pro or Con). Sa mga balita man gud, most opinions relayed are from politicians, religious organizations, NGOs, militant groups atbp. At least dinhi opinion sa mga mamumuo ang atong ma subay

[carbrill]

i myself is against abortion cause it is already killing a person. for the church they are protecting the dignity and the value of the human life. but i also agree that if ever the woman or the man doesn't like to become parents yet, they can used contraceptives. i hope that the church will agree on this by using contraceptives so the woman will not be pregnant...

[c_cebrecus]

I am quite angry at the priests and people who call the supporters of this bill "anti-life", "pro-abortion".. it seems they are immature people.. they don't see the big picture here why this need to be implemented.. if the Church is against this, here is my proposal:

1. Hold the bill for about 5 years.
2. Let the Church control the population growth of the Philippines.
3. If things go bad (which I know it will), turn this bill into a law.

[Motownkid]

i-review, klarohon ug sabton ug tarong ang bill aron magkasinabtanay tanan...

uyon kaayo ko sa family planning.. but a big NO to abortion!

[johnny22aa]

I'm afraid you are making a common error. Small-scale economics do NOT translate directly onto a large scale. You have to ask: why are there some families that can raise many children with few resources, and some others that cannot do the same even with more resources?

National-scale Economics

The answer comes down to the economic system. If the economy is properly managed, even ordinary couples with blue-collar (low-end) jobs can raise many children. On the other hand, if the economy is badly managed, even couples with more will still have difficulty.

The truth is that it really doesn't matter then how few people you have. If the economy is very badly managed, you will have poverty with or without population control. The solution, therefore, is NOT to lessen the number of people, because that will make the economy even worse (smaller markets, less production, less labor, etc.). The answer is to improve the economy so couples can raise as many children as they choose to have.

History and statiscial evidence prove this point. When the Philippines had a very high Total Fertility Rate (7 per woman) and high population growth rate, the economy was booming. Before Marcos, we were the envy of Asia. But now we have poverty despit ehte fact that our Total Fertility Rate is very low (less than 3 per woman in some studies), while our population growth rate is the lowest ever (under 2%). Why then, after three decades (since Marcos) of population control nothing has really improved?

You can look all over the word and the results are the same. Population control has not been proven to improve large-scale economies. In fact, it's the other way around. When the economy improves, population growth stabilizes.

I can appreciate that you can see the hardships of individual couples and families. That is good. But you have to look at the bigger picture because population control is a NATIONAL policy and will affect the economy as a whole. You have to look at the MACROECONOMIC view of things. If you don't you will think you are improving the lives of a few couples, but this weill be temporary. The economic effect of concentrating on population control is that the real causes of pvoerty are ignored. Then the economy gets even worse and the temporary improvements will go away.

Even worse, population control introduces negative attitudes towards the value of life and ***. Promiscuity will increase and then more people will turn to abortion and start murdering their children!


Safe and pro-family/life birth control

Now let us pretend that we are overpopulated (we are not, but I'm assuming you probably won't agree with me). If we must have birth control (we don't need it but just suppose we do) then the least you can do is use methods that are not anti-family or anti-life. The Church actually approives of Natural Family Planning (NFP). It is effective and 100% safe. And best of all, it encourages commitment and fidelity. Millions of couples have tried it and it works.

There is no need for any artificial contraceptives. They encourage promiscuity, casual attituds toward *** and commitment, and will eventually lead to a mentality that will accept abortion. In fact, most of the artificial contraceptives ARE abortifacient. And there are the side effects that up to now -- after five decades -- cannot be eliminated! That is the REALITY.

So again, there is no way to justify artificial contraceptives. The are abortifacient, have bad side-effects, and encourage dangerous, promiscuous behavior. Natural Family Planning is the opposite. NFP is not abortifacient, has no side-effects whatsoever, and encourages commitment and fidelity.

God bless!

i think i am talking to an economist right now. i may not aware or very knowledgeable from the terms you mentioned but im grateful u explained it well. being so technical couldn't be so boring to read i guess, as if everything u knew & understand about this bill can be found in books or from trivias pretty sure u hardly understand its purpose. il give u some reasons.

u said small-scale economics do not translate directly onto a large scale. ur right. but with the present situation, it is a common knowledge, a common story, a common event, a common scene, a common situation to millions of filipino couple to have at least 8 or more children where only one couple earns minimally. worse most of them don't have jobs. and even a concerned laymen don't have to study "economics" just to know this, coz we know this is happening everywhere in this country. so in this case, this small-scale example is really translating the large picture.

ok u want my answer y there are some familiies can raise many children but w/ few resources? yes, because it's a choice. they want to raise more children because it's their decision. but u also can not stop couples NOT to have more children as well. it is also a choice. it is definitey a decision. so y resist and encourage them to have more even it is against their will?

cge lets talk economics. u think mga blue collar workers would still worry the economic system of the country kung nagproblema pa unsa ilang kaonon unyang gabii ky ubay2x ra ba ilang pakan on nga bata. and u think u can have good economy in the future kung ang mga bata karon wa naka skuyla, way palangga sa ginikanan tungod ky daghan kayo cla sa blay. this is a common scene. & ul expect more of this in the next generation and the generations to come unless we will do something on it.

population control per se is not stopping people from giving birth or lessening the number of people. its purpose is to educate people about *** (especially to minors) and let couples plan ahead so that they can raise their children properly and provide them a quality life they really deserve. if couples are aware of their actions, then all children born will be raised how we expect them to be, there would no longer be unwanted ones. mao ra na. mao nang wa ko kasabot ngano na anti-life, anti-family, anti-God na nuon ni. cge, u may now look at the bigger picture bro.

dli ko motoo ana imong giignon nga Philippines has lowest %$&*^#@, aw i mean TRF, ug lowest population growth. nga kta man gali 1st honor ani nga ranking along w/ other poor Asian countries. you ask after 3 decades population control went nothing? its because we dont have genuine laws and enforcement about this matter. ug kana pung pag apil2x sa simbahan. cge clag babag maayo ra bag clay mobuhi sa mga bata. that's the true answer.

u said population control has not been proven to improve large-scale economies. ngano man lagi ang canada, japan ug ang singapore, u think poor ni cla? ang canada succesful kaayo ang birth control mao nang kailangan cla ug daghang immigrant ky mawad an na clag tao. but they still think population control is still one of their important policies ky mabahin man ang tanan resources. and so w/ japan & singapore, just look at their quality of life. they may be worried they may have few younger generations & new programs will be introduced to encourage them to giving birth, at least they proved na population control is really important to them. ambot lng kaha y u keep insisting population control is just a temporary solution.

then u said this is a question of morales. i dont think morale would be an issue here coz part of the law is *** education. if the people knows about ***, especially the students, at least they'll know the consequences what they will be doing. kysa karon magpataka clag bikaka coz they only know these important issues from friends ug ka age nla nga parehas pong confused. unlike kung naa juy educator, like a teacher, or a parent, they would be guided in a right manner. ergo, mas aware cla on their selves, mas productive cla, mkatabang cla. and millions of them like this. mas nindot nuon ang dagan sa atong nasud. d ka ganahan ana? d ka ganahan madatu ang pilipinas?

d ko mokontra anang $%^&#@!, aw NFP diay kay nindot ra ba na. i mean it should NOT be d only choice. laliman ba kag magpugong ka? kung ganahan diay kag *** ron, pugngan pa jud nimo till safe na imong partner? i will say this again nga dli jud ni cya productive to everyone. MACROECONOMICALLY (sorry to use ur technical term), this is a disadvantage one, ky millions will have the same situation as this. and i wont agree nga tanan birth control are abortificient. yes, there are some, but most of them are not. they work before fertilization takes place. they just prevent the egg cell not to keep contact from the sperm. so y conception mahitabo, no living organism will be rid off. so ambot lng ang simbahan cge bulgar ani nga rason nga wa jud raba nahitabo. im sure gus2 lng jud cla managhan ang pilipino para padayon ghpon ilang negosyo ug gamhanan ghapon cla even Filipinos will suffer & have the lowest quality of life sa Asia.

So kinsa ra dha ang tinood nga anti-life, anti-God, anti-family, dangerous, very10x bad side effects.

God bless u 2. Amen!

[wng]

Why is there even a controversy about a family planning bill? Don't we have other bigger problems to take care of?

For me, there is nothing anti-life or pro-abortion regarding birth control. The Catholic church has its own opinion, but it should remain as that, an opinion. They can teach their congregations what they believe in. But the government is separate from the church, as is written in our constitution. The church should stop intimidating people on not giving communion and stop calling this bill names that misrepresent its intention.

We're no longer in the Middle Ages. We're in the information age. We have to help people, especially the poor, make an informed decision. Give them more knowledge so that they can better plan their lives. If some things are against the teachings of the church, then tell that to them as well. No one is forcing anyone to use any product or method. The purpose is just to disseminate information that such products and methods are available, the correct usage, the costs involved, etc. Why will someone call that "evil"?

The church has to set its priorities. With these strong statements against the use of condoms, I have even heard of teenage girls getting pregnant due to no contraceptives. They'll say, it's against the Catholic church to use condoms! Well, duh!!! It's also against the church teachings to have pre-marital ***! What is a father to say to his teenage daughter, thank God that his daughter did not "sin" as she didn't use contraceptives?

Why are we labeling couples who use contraceptives as sinners? There are millions taking communion everyday. Included are drug users, corrupt government officials, maybe even rapists and murderers. And we're calling those who advocate family planning the most evil that they have to be denied communion?

[wng]

Am with johnny22aa on this.

I'm afraid you are making a common error. ...

I can appreciate that you can see the hardships of individual couples and families. That is good. But you have to look at the bigger picture because population control is a NATIONAL policy and will affect the economy as a whole. You have to look at the MACROECONOMIC view of things. If you don't you will think you are improving the lives of a few couples, but this weill be temporary. The economic effect of concentrating on population control is that the real causes of pvoerty are ignored. Then the economy gets even worse and the temporary improvements will go away.

It's not a common error. I don't think we need to discuss any economics theory here. If 70% of your population (or 70% of the families) is under the poverty level, then the country is poor. In short, if most people are poor, the country is poor. How can those making up the population be mostly rich and then the country is poor?

Even worse, population control introduces negative attitudes towards the value of life and ***. Promiscuity will increase and then more people will turn to abortion and start murdering their children!

How? If couples don't have unwanted children, then there will be no abortion.

The Church actually approives of Natural Family Planning (NFP). It is effective and 100% safe. And best of all, it encourages commitment and fidelity. Millions of couples have tried it and it works.

NFP is safe, but effective? Maybe we need to give more information. Millions have also tried it and ended up with unwanted pregnancies. And how does this encourage commitment and fidelity

[*]Section 9 (Hospital-Based Family Planning) specificially subsidizes the use of IUDs (insertion of the device is performed in a hospital). The IUD, however, is NOT a contraceptive. It is an ABORTIFACIENT. The IUD does not prevent ovulation. Rather, it works by affecting the uterine wall so that it prevents a fertilized ovum — which is already a human being — from implanting. The Philippine Constitution specifically protects human life from the moment of conception. The IUD clearly violates that principle.

Most of them prevent ovulation or fertilization. It is only rare that such event as failing to implant happens. For me, that is still not the same as abortion. People can choose anyway... condoms, vasectomy, ligation, etc. They have nothing to do with abortion. Even the common pill, it just prevents ovulation. It is the "morning after" pill that is different.

[*] Section 16 (Ideal Family Size) defines the “ideal family size” as having two children. This idea has no scientific basis whatsoever and further perpetuates the myth of “overpopulation”, which has been discredited around the world. Poverty in the Philippines is NOT caused by overpopulation, but by massive government corruption and economic mismanagement. This so-called “ideal” number of children is also below replacement level, which is 2.1. Should this be be widely practiced, the Philippines will soon be faced with the prospect of population stagnation and population ageing. There are no economic structures or even agreed-upon solutions to counteract the grave negative economic effects of such a situation in the Philippines.

Replacement level is 2.1. So what's wrong with "ideal family size" is 2 children? You want us to say ideal family size is having "2.1 children"? It's just an average. No one is to dictate who should have 2 children and who should have 3 or 4.

For me, we're overpopulated already. We have millions working overseas and remittances are our major income. We have to import rice too. What are we waiting for? Famine to prove that overpopulation has come? It's the government who has to take care of additional citizens. If the church wants booming population, why doesn't the Catholic church offer free education starting from the third child? That way, someone can take responsibility for those children their parents or the government cannot take care of anymore.

[*] Section 21 (Prohibited Acts), number 5 mandates that any health care provider who refuses to dispense certain services or information based on religious grounds (for example, a Catholic health worker who will not dispense IUDs or other abortifacients like the birth control pill), is still forced to recommend a “patient” to someone who will perform the objectionable deed! To make such a referral, however, still makes the conscientious objector an accomplice in the objectionable act. Those who refuse to make such a referral are threatened with 1-6 months imprisonment and a fine of P10,000-50,000. This provision is therefore highly coercive and tramples upon religious freedom.

Has nothing to do with religious freedom. There are only a handful of health workers and they have to be able to do their jobs. Same with the military. It is against nearly all religions to kill. But the military has be ready to kill in a war. They'll be tried for treason if they'll surrender due to church beliefs. If they are not capable of that, then find another job.

This situation has all the elements of a deadly, tragic farce: a bill that is coercive, has no scientific basis, and violates the Constitution is being rammed down our throats without the people in general even knowing aboiut it. Talk about being shafted!

Sorry that I don't share your opinion. As much as I dislike our government and I also still consider myself Catholic, it is the church trying to exert pressure on the government despite the constitution separating state and church.