Killing fields

Media practitioners especially from the press have the main responsibility of according the people their inherent right to know the unvarnished truth. Discharging this responsibility is actually rendering them justice because it is nothing but granting their rights or giving what is due them. Hence, this column will keep on presenting the various views that are still pouring in regarding the RH bill now the subject of debate in the House of Representatives in the hope that its members will consider them and that the public will be enlightened by them.

This one comes from Leoniver (his real name) a 21-year-old, third year political science student in one of the universities in Cebu who is already blind since he was one and a half years old due to chicken fox and measles. Leoniver initially favored the bill because he was made to believe by its supporters that it is only trying “to promote medication especially for women who will be obliged to take pills for their health, complete with doctor’s prescription”.

But after learning more about the bill and listening to another viewpoint, Leoniver realized that, aside from promoting abortion since certain contraceptives prevent the implantation of the fertilized egg into the uterine wall thus killing the foundation of life”, the bill would: (1) “turn people like dogs since distributing pills or contraceptives is the same as saying you can have sex anytime with anyone as long as you don’t get pregnant; and (2) take away parental authority over their children because if children want to use contraceptives they don’t need to have their parents’ consent. The value of family is lost even as the same happens to the relationship between husband and wife. The bill is promoting kanya-kanya attitude.”

Actually Leoniver’s views were conveyed by Fr. Carmelo Diola, Overall Steward of “Dilaab Movement” based in Cebu in his article entitled, “Yes we choose life” (mailto:frmelodiola@gmail.com).

Fr. Diola wrote that some readers may consider Leoniver’s stance as “simplistic and out of touch with modern times”, and his article as “the close minded, unfeeling views of someone representing a group of men and women who do not experience the travails of family life”. But “if they have really read and pondered upon the consequences of HB 4244 and if they realized that after all his group also come from families, like him who was one of eight children who “did not have material comforts” but only “faith, each other and a society built on moral values… and who loved each other and shared hope”, they might be convinced that it is not really so, he added.

In expressing his views about RH 4244, Fr. Diola said that he “felt sad because the bill also contained needed provisions for the welfare of women and children, but it was so packaged that one is forced ‘to burn the whole house in order to roast the pig”. He also said he “felt bad because I saw that underlying the formulation of the proposed law was an ‘either-or’ spirit, as if mother and child, husbands and wives, parents and children, are natural enemies”.

Then he singled out certain questionable provisions in RH 4244, specifically the following:

Section 28 on “Prohibited Acts”, sub section (e) includes “any person who maliciously engages in misinformation about the intent or provision of this act”. Does this mean that once the law is implemented, any contrary view is prohibited? Is pro-choice about having it my way and smothering all contrary views? xxx Why should doctors who will not in conscience provide the services called for by law, be penalized, cf. sub-section (a)? If the law is really founded on truth, is not the splendor of truth its own convincing power? Why penalize (section 29)?

Why indeed is a wedge of division being inserted among members of the family and why is parental authority weakened, cf. sub-section (a.2)? Why introduce a foreign mentality that highlights conflict? Kanya-kanya indeed.

Section 10 defines “family planning supplies as essential medicines”. Is getting pregnant then a disease? Can people progress when their collective consciousness tells them they are fruits of a disease? This is absurd and looks at life as an enemy to be vanquished rather than a gift.

Then in conclusion, he pointed out that “for nearly a decade now I have been involved in advocacy work against graft and corruption. Every year P400 billion (not million) is lost to corruption. How many poor people would be adequately served if such money were used for education, social services, livelihood projects and legitimate health needs? Why blame the gift of life for the consequences of corruption? Why open up another venue for graft by pouring funds into the coffers of government for distribution of condoms and contraceptives? Why must a program be legislated for behavior best left between husband and wife in the quiet of the bedroom?

The Good Citizenship Movement, through it Chairman Bro. Rolando Dizon, FSC also gave a statement on the RH bill duly supported by documents and attachments. They pointed out three valid grounds “compelling enough to reject the RH Bill with fullness of conviction and finality” particularly the following:

*It will “turn mothers’ womb into killing fields because the contraceptive devices and substances it promotes are abortifacient or abortive in nature per the authoritative Randy Alcorn documentation and admissions of pharmaceutical manufacturers;

*Children aged 10-12 shall have the legal right to enjoyable sex with full access to all types of contraceptive devices and substances and parents who stop them will be imprisoned or fined or both. The bill will also legalize in effect child prostitution and pedophilia. Worst of all, children and adolescents will become jailers of their own parents who will refuse them their sexual rights;

*The mandatory sex education program from Grade 5, 6 to 4th year high school obliges parents to have their children undergo it or face penalties if they refuse. Also teachers, principals, school administrators, priests, pastors, ulamas, journalists or anyone who oppose the program or any part of the enacted RH law face the same penalties.

The movement says that these all are brazen violations of our Constitution (Art. II, Sections 11 and 12) and the UN Declaration of Human Rights. –Jose C. Sison (The Philippine Star)

*      *      *

E-mail us at jcson@pldtdsl.net