Print Article | Email Article | Write To Us

Daily News

Filipino Church Vows Continued Opposition to ‘Reproductive Health’ Bill (1538)

Despite determined resistance from Catholic leaders, Philippine lawmakers passed legislation Dec. 17 promoting contraception for poor people.

12/20/2012 Comments (9)
Alan Porritt-Pool /Getty Images

Philippine President Benigno Aquino

– Alan Porritt-Pool /Getty Images

MANILA, Philippines — Despite a strongly worded, last-minute plea from the nation’s Catholic bishops and a large laity-led demonstration outside the halls of congress, Philippine lawmakers in both houses this week passed the hotly contested Reproductive Health Bill that promotes contraceptives for poor people and opens the way for the legal use of abortifacient drugs.

Viewed by opponents as a population-control measure promoted by international agencies such as the United Nations Population Fund, the "RH Bill," as it is commonly known, also provides for contraceptive-based sex education.

The legislation would require government-sanctioned sex education for adults, middle-schoolers and high-school children, as well as a population-control program that includes fully subsidized contraceptives under government health insurance.

President Benigno Aquino, who was elected two years ago on a platform that included support for the bill, was expected to sign the bill before Christmas, after the two houses completed a bicameral session to harmonize their two versions.

In a heartfelt statement titled “Contraception Is Corruption” that was released the day before the vote, Archbishop Socrates Villegas of Lingayen-Dagupan called on lawmakers to vote according to conscience and the Catholic values underpinning Filipino culture and law. Writing for the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP), Archbishop Villegas stated that the “RH Bill is being gift-wrapped to look like a gift for maternal health care,” yet it “will put the moral fiber of our nation at risk.”

He added, “A contraceptive mentality is the mother of an abortion mentality. The wide and free accessibility of contraceptives, even to the youth, will result in the destruction of family life and in greater violence against women.”

The poor will not be served by ingesting powerful hormones to curb fertility; instead, funds allocated for free contraceptives should be used to provide real assistance, the archbishop argued. “The poor can rise from their misery through more accessible education, better hospitals and less government corruption.”

Remarking on the fact that young people will be taught that sex outside marriage is fine as long as it is “safe,” Archbishop Villegas said, “Is this moral? Those who corrupt the minds of children will invoke Divine wrath upon themselves.”

The statement was designed to be read at all Masses on the Third Sunday of Advent, which featured the Gospel reading of John the Baptist calling people to repentance and instructing workers and soldiers how to live their lives. Dec. 16 also marked the beginning of the Philippine Misa de Gallo (Mass of the Rooster) tradition in which Catholics gather at dawn liturgies for nine consecutive days before Christmas.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that “every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible is intrinsically evil” (2370).

“Legitimate intentions on the part of the spouses do not justify recourse to morally unacceptable means ... for example, direct sterilization or contraception” (2399). 

The fact that the RH Bill was passed despite strong opposition from the bishops and an appeal to the nation’s religious traditions indicated new limits on the Church’s influence, which for decades had exercised great moral power in the Philippines, including a lead role in the "People Power" movement against dictator Ferdinand Marcos, who was deposed in 1986.

 

Maternal-Health Arguments

Supporters hailed the passage of the bill, which had been debated in numerous sessions over the course of 14 years, as a historic breakthrough for maternal health in a country where the poorest often go without adequate medical care.

Sen. Edgardo Angara, who voted for the measure, called the bill “an affirmation of human rights,” asserting that the entire population, which includes Muslims, Protestants, Buddhists and atheists, should not be forced to live under the moral laws of the Catholic Church. Catholics make up more than 80% of the nation’s 94 million people.

In a press conference before the vote, Aquino repeated a story he had told before, of meeting a 16-year-old mother while visiting an extremely poor enclave in the capital city of Manila. The young woman, the president said, had just given birth to her second child with her common-law husband, and two years later was now pregnant again with a new man.

“You have a responsibility to those being born into this world,” he told reporters. Poor people especially need information on family planning and access to free contraceptives for the sake of the children they do have, he claimed.

Pointing out the bill’s focus on the poor, opponents call the measure a thinly veiled population-reduction plan with eugenic overtones. Abortion is illegal in the Philippines, though contraceptives are legal and widely available to those who can afford them. Thus, opponents note, the main effect of the RH Bill will be to provide free contraceptives — some of them abortifacient in nature — to poor people who presently cannot afford them.

 

Power Politics

With strong pressure from President Aquino to vote before Christmas recess, both the Senate and the House of Representatives passed the measure on Dec. 17, with significant majorities. The vote in the House reflected a sea change in support, since, just five days earlier, representatives had voted narrowly in favor of the bill on its second reading, 113-104, with more than 50 lawmakers abstaining.

In view of that narrow victory margin, Aquino took the unusual step of certifying the bill as “urgent” and thus eligible for an emergency third reading and expedited final vote, an executive privilege usually reserved for the dispersal of disaster-relief funds.

Opposition to the bill also included a procession of thousands of laypeople and clergy from a nearby church to the congressional building in Quezon City, a Manila suburb, with dozens of red-shirted anti-RH Bill advocates filling the gallery as lawmakers debated and voted.

A new group, Catholic Vote Philippines, also was formed in response to the bill, with the goal of making the voting record of every legislator known within his or her own district before the May elections.

In addition, opponents accused the president of promising government funds for the districts of legislators who voted in favor and decried the presence of administration officials in the halls of the legislature during the debates.

The close tally in the Dec. 12 vote, following intensive lobbying by the president and pro-contraception international organizations, had given the bishops and other Catholic opponents hope that the vote might turn against the bill in the final reading. But the result in the House was 133-79 in favor, while the vote in the smaller Senate chamber was 13-8.

 

Continuing Battle

Following the vote, opponents pledged to continue their struggle against the RH Bill. The Thomas More Society of the Philippines and other legal groups promised a court challenge, since the nation’s constitution recognizes the “sanctity of family life” and the “natural and primary right and duty of parents in rearing” their children.

Officials from the bishops' conference said they would support efforts to challenge the bill before the nation’s Supreme Court.

Church leaders will also continue to highlight flaws in the pro-contraception arguments.

“In the long term, we are concentrating on educating our people on the issues and showing how the bill is not the answer to their problems,” said Msgr. Pedro Quitorio, director of communications for the bishops’ conference.

“This vote was not about conviction or principle,” Msgr. Quitorio said. “It was about party lines and pork barrels, so we know that they stand on a weak foundation. No vote can change the truths about family life, procreation, human dignity and the person created in the image of God. We have the truth on our side.”

Stephen Vincent writes from Wallingford, Connecticut.

Catholic News Agency contributed to this report.

 

Filed under abortion, catholic faith, catholic morality, contraceptive mentality, culture of life vs culture of death, philippines, reproductive-health bill, u.n. population fund

Comments

Post a Comment

The further erosion of moral values in an already degenerating Philippine society makes one ill, and I fear it will take on all the woes that already plague the Western nations that have adopted this contraceptive mentality.  Obviously, not much proper thought was given to the social, familial and economic ramifications of this bill.  It is as the article states - financial blackmail with pork barrel funds used by this puerile President to force knavish legislators to support its passage. Harsh as it may sound, this latest example of another vile idea borrowed from Western society - thinly disguised as being “for the greater good” - is simply par for the course.  There’s a propensity of many Filipinos to ape everything in the West so as to make them seem ‘modern’, no matter how socially and morally destructive the practices are. 
.
How do I know this?  I grew up in the Islands amid such a mentality that continues to pervade the nation today.  It is a truly sad day for the country, and now more than ever, she needs our fervent prayers. Hope that something will come up to stop us from continuing down this path to perdition.
.
And that’s not the end of it, oh no!  There is now talk of a divorce bill being bandied about in the country!  We cannot even hold fast to our own, more conservative Filipino values anymore - we want to seem hip and up-to-date with the Western mores, just because doing so seems so politically correct.

The sad irony of this situation is the vast ‘undiscussible’ elephant in the room—there is no such thing as afilsafe form of contraception.  The Catholic advocacy of use of the safe period was ridiculed as ‘Vatican roulette.  But in truth, all forms of contraception are games of roulette.  And when the fail, all the evils they are supposed to avert multiply exponentially—out-of-wedlock births, abortions and STD epidemics.  The ‘progressive’ denial of reality is tragic.

There is a lot of politicking in the Philippines. Both on the sides of those legislators against the bill and in favor of it. One of the problems many of the laity had with the Church is the lack of a clear educated well-informed explanation of the Church’s opposition to the RH Bill. Instead we heard a lot of motherhood statements, which proved false upon an actual reading of the bill. 
Don’t get me wrong. I am against the bill. Government-funded contraceptives and the sex education curricullum is horrible! I attended a talk and they intend on teaching 5th graders how to use condoms! And it’s integrated in the curricullem not an individual separate subject parents can have their children opt out of!
I am in total agreement with the Church against the RH Bill. But the shepherding of some bishops in the CBCP left a lot to be desired. Hopefully the CBCP will improve under the guidance of Cardinal Tagle.

Catholic Church “NO” is in service to the higher level!  Philippines’ RH law reduces the goodness of Marital sex to mere recreation of the poor and the sinners (to include out of marriage freedom of sex with anyone). So sad to see the extinction of the Filipino people in the future. “Blessed is the womb that carried you and the breasts at which you nursed.” He replied, “Rather, blessed are those who hear the WORD of GOD and observe it.” Luke 11:27-28

In 1917 Our Lady of Fatima alerted the three shepherd children that the Communist were about to take over Russia. She said, “They will spread their errors around the world”. The Communists imposed Birth Control and Abortion on the serfs they rule over.  This is one of their ‘Errors’ that they have successfully ‘Spread around the World’.  Today, they are known as ‘Progressives’ or ‘Liberals’. We Catholics need to stand united against them.

I’m Filipino…and a law student And I was really depressed by the results of the RH Bill. I just wish the CBCP did a better job of campaigning against it. Don’t get me wrong. They made it very clear that they were against the RH Bill. But I wish they gave a more well-informed stance against it. Instead we saw motherhood statements which did not attack particular provisions of the RH Bill head on. Under the guidance of Cardinal Tagle, I hope they will improve.
As for the divorce bill, we already have legal separation and annulment in our Family Code. We do not need a divorce bill! Annulment declares a marriage void from the beginning under certain circumstances. And strongly considers the the ruling of Canon law annulments.
There are those that argue that annulment is insufficient to deal with drastic situations of men who are violent against their wives and children. But this is not true. One cause for annulment is psychological incapacity, which is quite general in its scope.

I don’t know what goes on in the Phillipines, but in the USA - Bishops and their Parish Priests do not educate ALL ADULT Catholics of child bearing age regarding approved Natural Family Planning.
Nor do they encourage people to read the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition” as instructed by Pope Benedict.

CCC: ” 2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality.
These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom.
In contrast, “every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible” is intrinsically evil:
Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other.
This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality. . . . The difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle . . . involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality. “

CCC: ” 2399 The regulation of births represents one of the aspects of responsible fatherhood and motherhood.
Legitimate intentions on the part of the spouses do not justify recourse to morally unacceptable means (for example, direct sterilization or contraception). “

I wonder how much money the RP government received from the various Culture of Death organizations.

After the first edition of David Yallop’s book, ‘In God’s Name’ was published, in 1984, steps were taken to ensure the Vatican divested itself of assets in a company called Istituto Farmacologico Sereno, whose best selling product was a female contraceptive pill, Luteolas.

The Church in Rome had remained silent for years about investments it held in a company which made the very product it insisted Catholics, even in a loving marriage, were committing a sin of selfish hedonism for using, as decreed in Humanae Vitae, an Encyclical letter of the supreme pontiff Paul VI.

Until Yallop shone a light on this blatant hypocrisy the Church would have happily carried on privately making money from something they publicly declared sinful. That it took an investigative journalist, charged by a secret Vatican insider to discover the truth about who murdered Pope John Paul I, to unearth this fact, makes it all the more amazing that the murdered man himself had been elected to become Pope, by his popularity among the African bishops, who understood that Albino Luciani had a rather more progressive attitude on matters of contraception than did his predecessor and, as it turns out, each of his two successors. Source: How Good Is That?

Post a Comment

By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.

The time period for commenting on this article has expired.