Everything about : RH Bill ( Reproductive Health Bill)

[r3roble]

---

Yeah, I agree, education is better. But generally, this education should be focus to legitimate couples. For high-school students, it is not necessary to have this as a subject. Film showing regarding ***, about contraceptives and STDs is enough, so making this as a separate subject is just plainly ridiculous.

na... kung separate subject ni, wala jud cguro muabsent ani.. he he..
kini ra cguro subject nga 100% attendance... bisan gihilantan, iskwela gihapon... he he..

seriously, educating the people is really better. however, we already know that each of us has different capacity when it comes to understanding.. so hopefully ila pud unta ni maconsider if they will fuse this to our current education system, because high degree of caution must be observed when it comes to *** education because it's somewhat different from mathematics, science, history and other subjects...

[diatabz]

Yeah, I agree, education is better. But generally, this education should be focus to legitimate couples. For high-school students, it is not necessary to have this as a subject. Film showing regarding ***, about contraceptives and STDs is enough, so making this as a separate subject is just plainly ridiculous.

Film showings aren't enough man gud. You need to have a knowledgable speaker together with a forum of sorts so teens can discuss *** openly without being embarassed. We all know parents have a hard time explaining *** to their kids, which leads to them knowing about it through friends nalang. That in turn leads to poor decisions regarding intercourse and of course, unwanted pregnancies.

The problem is, religious conservatives see this as a way of encouraging pre-marital ***. "Moderate liberals" like me see pre-marital *** as completely normal, so it all boils down to a debate of ideology rather than practicality.

[bcasabee]

As far as I understood. What you want is a place for kids to talk about *** with a guidance of a resource speaker. That's good, there is nothing wrong with that. This is just like giving a regular seminar or having an educational tour or engaging in a social activity where students see real large families having difficulty where to look for food. We had this in high-school and it was a Catholic School I attended. If this is the case, what do we need this bill for? Useless ang Bill di ba?
Anyway, curios lang ko bro, unsa man jud ang topic nga i-discuss about ani nga *** education subject bro? Kung sa movie pa, naa may rated PG, rated 18, rated X, rated XXX. Kani nga subject bro, unsa may unod jud ani?

Film showings aren't enough man gud. You need to have a knowledgable speaker together with a forum of sorts so teens can discuss *** openly without being embarassed. We all know parents have a hard time explaining *** to their kids, which leads to them knowing about it through friends nalang. That in turn leads to poor decisions regarding intercourse and of course, unwanted pregnancies.

The problem is, religious conservatives see this as a way of encouraging pre-marital ***. "Moderate liberals" like me see pre-marital *** as completely normal, so it all boils down to a debate of ideology rather than practicality.

[diatabz]

@ bcasabee

The bill helps in setting a much needed "standard" when it comes to contraceptiveprograms, sexual education, etc.. With the bill, health workers can now follow a set of guidelines para standardized na jud ang family planning programs, etc.. Though as I've said, the bill has gray areas and needs more consideration before actual implementation.

As for sexual education, it depends ra jud. I also went to a Catholic School when I was in HS. IMO, contraceptives and safe *** should be taught, but schools have the discretion to do it in a much more conservative manner. Naa ra nila if they want chastity and abstinence to be considered higher priorities than safe-*** and contraceptive teachings. I absolutely have no problem with that as long as schools promote an environment of tolerance rather than intolerance.

[mannyamador]

we already prove it. we posted it in bisaya.

That's a lame excuse for NOT having proof. You have totally failed to demonstrate the causal relationship between the effects you see and the alleged cause, and now you're just using language as an excuse to hide your FAILURE. Judging from the style of your past posts, and your aversion to reading information here, I'm not surprised.

On other topics:

Education is a good thing. Parents have to be educated as well as children. What is important is to make sure we don't try to impose some kind of "values-free" education. There's no such thing. You can't teach *** apart form values and morals. If you try to do so, you already communicate that *** is a casual activity -- which implies its own set of values and morals.

On the bill, I find it coercive since it forces health workers to dispense contraceptives and abortifacients. Health workers should be allowed to refuse and NOT have to refer people to someone else. This is one of the primary reasons for opposing the bill. Compulsory contraceptive distribution has never been a mandatory part of the medical profession, but this bill makes it so.

[wakkanakka]

Is it the population? Causing poverty? No way. It is the corruption!

[wng]

@gwapo_gyud
Just note that the Catholic church is against all forms of artificial contraception, including condoms and sterilization techniques, that don't have anything to do with a hostile endometrium. Also, as discussed earlier on this thread, the failure of the embryo to implant is naturally present and one of the studies even showed that the rhythm method actually causes this to happen more often than other methods.
Just also to enlighten your thoughts on this matter.

@bcasabee
More for public schools ni Dong, kaysa sa private. Ug more tolerance lang unta para sa mga Catholic schools. Wa sad tawon ni mo ingon nga entire subject nang *** education. Or reproductive health education as it is called in the bill. Kung motuo ka sa Catholic teachings, di mi mamugos nimo nga mo support ka ani nga bill. Kay mao man imong religion ug hing tuo man ka sa mga pari. Ako mismo, in support ko ani, pero di sad ko mo ingon nga perfect ni siya. Basta ayaw lang gud ug post ug misinformation. Or in your case, palihug lang sad ta basaha na lang tawon ang bill ug research ug imo diha kung unsa nang *** education and other things nga wa pa nimo masabtan (kay murag single pa man ka). Kay if you engage in fault finding unya sige ka ug palag namo diri, saktoha sad na imong facts diha. Imong computation nga tag P10 nang 1 condom, makapalit man tawon ka ana nga 3-pack for mga 5 pesos (retail price na gani na, kung volume, barato ra gyud kaayo na oi). Wa man sad ni mo ingon nga absolutely free gyud nang tanang contraceptives diha. Taas kaayo ang suwat sa bill Dong, unya mo ingon ka diha nga pareho diay na sa among Catholic school sauna ang education nga gisuwat diha? Wa na diay pulos? Ang uban diay gisuwat diri? Tan-awa sa na diha kung pareho ba na ang quality of education nang most public schools diri ug kana imong gigikanan nga Catholic high school oi.

[bcasabee]

Ang akoang gipangayo brad, pilay yearly budget ug target decrease sa population. Mao ra brad. Pag-research usa brad unya balik lang unya kung naa na kay answer.
To give you a hint brad, start with the 3-pack for 5 pesos ug pilay sulod sa usa ka pack. Unya kwentaha dayon pilay magasto aning pag-distribute ug condom or contraceptives yearly. Kwentaha pila ka tawo ang tagaan. Ug hatag ug bana-bana kung pila ka porsyento mo minus ang population growth. FYI brad, minyo na ko brad. Usa ka tip brad para maka abtain from ***, magbusy sa huna-huna brad.
One thing brad, mosamot nuon ka bati ang quality sa education sa public brad, kay kuhaan man ug budget para palit ug condom. Kana lay huna-hunaa brad.
One last thing brad, I didn't say that 1 condom is 10 pesos a FACT. I only ASSUMED 10 pesos is to 1 condom. Please read my post carefully brad. Anyway, thanks for giving the exact figure. Now, given the fact that you have given brad, I hope you can compute the yearly budget and the target decrease of population that we can achieve with this bill brad.

More for public schools ni Dong, kaysa sa private. Ug more tolerance lang unta para sa mga Catholic schools. Wa sad tawon ni mo ingon nga entire subject nang *** education. Or reproductive health education as it is called in the bill. Kung motuo ka sa Catholic teachings, di mi mamugos nimo nga mo support ka ani nga bill. Kay mao man imong religion ug hing tuo man ka sa mga pari. Ako mismo, in support ko ani, pero di sad ko mo ingon nga perfect ni siya. Basta ayaw lang gud ug post ug misinformation. Or in your case, palihug lang sad ta basaha na lang tawon ang bill ug research ug imo diha kung unsa nang *** education and other things nga wa pa nimo masabtan (kay murag single pa man ka). Kay if you engage in fault finding unya sige ka ug palag namo diri, saktoha sad na imong facts diha. Imong computation nga tag P10 nang 1 condom, makapalit man tawon ka ana nga 3-pack for mga 5 pesos (retail price na gani na, kung volume, barato ra gyud kaayo na oi). Wa man sad ni mo ingon nga absolutely free gyud nang tanang contraceptives diha. Taas kaayo ang suwat sa bill Dong, unya mo ingon ka diha nga pareho diay na sa among Catholic school sauna ang education nga gisuwat diha? Wa na diay pulos? Ang uban diay gisuwat diri? Tan-awa sa na diha kung pareho ba na ang quality of education nang most public schools diri ug kana imong gigikanan nga Catholic high school oi.

[bcasabee]

Thank you bro for a very sensible reply. Yes, certainly, there are dark areas in this Bill and the one that I am attacking is the sustainability of distributing contraceptives. So I hope you'll agree with me that they should make it clear in this Bill that no public funds be use in distributing contraceptives. Right?

The bill helps in setting a much needed "standard" when it comes to contraceptiveprograms, sexual education, etc.. With the bill, health workers can now follow a set of guidelines para standardized na jud ang family planning programs, etc.. Though as I've said, the bill has gray areas and needs more consideration before actual implementation.

Bro, I don't get why we should teach them safe ***. In my highschool years. I can only count students who are so sexually liberated. They were the exception rather than the rule. This will give the wrong signal actually. If I was taught about safe *** in my highschool years, then this will give me a hint that its ok to have *** as long as I am using condom. Right? And the more students who will indulge in ***, the more problem we will have. Right? Also, it doesn't make sense for the poor students to learn about how to use a condom, since we already know that they are poor and their parents couldn't afford to provide them condom (Ulbo ang kaspa sa parents bro kung ang bawn ipalit ra diay ug condom). Right? And problems will just compound bro if this poor students will treat *** as if it is a need (like food) for how can they get constant supply of this contraceptives?

As for sexual education, it depends ra jud. I also went to a Catholic School when I was in HS. IMO, contraceptives and safe *** should be taught, but schools have the discretion to do it in a much more conservative manner. Naa ra nila if they want chastity and abstinence to be considered higher priorities than safe-*** and contraceptive teachings. I absolutely have no problem with that as long as schools promote an environment of tolerance rather than intolerance.

[mannyamador]

@gwapo_gyud
Also, as discussed earlier on this thread, the failure of the embryo to implant is naturally present and one of the studies even showed that the rhythm method actually causes this to happen more often than other methods.

On the subject of that study, and in the interest of keeping all informed, we should note that this study has been thoroughly discredited. Let me quote three responses to that flawed study (there are many more):

Hogwash in the guise of research
Joan C Clements
http://jme.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/32/6/355#570

Thus, Bovens’ detours via these three assumptions are all found to be dead ends.
One lane of his dual-lane carriageway is found to be impassable – his “science” is
flawed. The other lane – philosophy – goes by way of direct action (presumably as
opposed to indirect action) and what he terms action/omission doctrine, though he
says “this is not the place to turn to this discussion”.

Sounds to me as though the carriage has ground to a halt – maybe the horse has
run out of oats. And we must be travelling by horse and carriage, because the really
glaring flaw in his argument, is that no-body now seriously advocates the Rhythm
Method, nor has done for at least forty years. It was in the early 1950s that research
began into a scientifically-based, clinical-proven alternative. The Billings Ovulation
Method of natural fertility regulation, has a success rate, for avoiding pregnancy,
equal to any chemical or surgical method, and a success rate for achieving
pregnancy which is substantially better than any interventionist technique currently
available.

'Rhythm Method Killing Embryos' Study is False on Science and Morality
By John-Henry Westen
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/jun/06060508.html

Dr. John Shea, MD, FRCP(C), the medical advisor for Campaign Life Coalition, told
LifeSiteNews.com that Bovens is wrong in that "'Rhythm Method' was not a method of
contraception and in fact, is no longer used. It failed to recognize the natural variation of
cycles which almost all current natural family planning (NFP) do."

Dr. Shea also points out that Bovens is far short of the mark on his science. "The
generally accepted figure for spontaneous abortion is not 50%, but 10 - 15 %. Ninety
percent of all such abortions are due to rejection of a maldeveloped embryo or fetus,"
notes Dr. Shea.

"As Dr. Mark F. Whitty pointed out in an eLetter published by the BMJ's JMEOnline, it is
not true that the mythical 'old sperm' or 'old ovum' reduce an embryo's survival chances,
or that there is such a thing as 'heightened fertility.' The ovum lasts 12-24 hours and the
sperm 3-5 days. Any conception is as viable as the next unless there is genetic or
developmental defect of the embryo," explained Dr. Shea.

Are these results of a study or suggestions only?
Guenter Freundl, Prof. Dr.
http://jme.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/32/6/355#548

There is no evidence that a conceptus has reduced survival chances if conception
occurred on the fringes of the fertile period looking into data concerning the first 6 weeks
of pregnancy (see also (Raith, E, Frank, P. et al. 1999; Freundl, G, Gnoth, C. et al. 2001;
Frank, P., Freundl, G. et al. 1985). Also no association was found between aged
spermatozoa and early pregnancy loss (Wilcox, A. J., Weinberg, C. R. et al. 199. In the
late 1980s, the issue of aging gametes and pregnancy outcomes was thoroughly
investigated, although the author does not seem to be aware of this literature (Simpson,
J. L., Gray, R. H. et al. 1988;Simpson, J. L., Gray, R. H. et al. 1997). Bovens fails to make
the necessary moral distinction between natural loss of an embryo and loss caused by
deliberate human intervention. Natural Family Planning does not cause loss of the embryo,
and is not intended to do so. On the other hand, the oral contraceptive pill, the
morning-after pill, Norplant, and the IUD all may cause abortions because one of their
mechanisms of action is to impede implantation of the embryo in the uterine endometrium.
Alcom (in the reference listed cited as Alcorn!!), who was cited in the paper (Alcom, R 2005;
Alcom, R and Larimore, WL 2006), stated that regardless of the likelihood of implantation
failure under such circumstances, any such failure is spontaneous, not induced, and thus, for
Alcorn, is a miscarriage, which he does not consider ethically problematic.