Philippine e-Legal Forum

27 Responses to “Full text of House Bill No. 5043 (Reproductive Health and Population Development Act of 2008)”

1. 1 anne08 Oct 5th, 2008 at 4:25 am

   how about for those family who cant afford to supply the contraceptives. for those family has less income to buy those modern contraceptives such as injectibles or pills.

   how about for those less fortunate family that dont have any idea or knowledge about the health bill.

   pls send your answer in my e-mail

2. 2 Eustaquio Bungangkahoy May 3rd, 2010 at 10:44 am

   Proponents of H.B, 5043 “Reproductive Health” bill always cite that that the Philippines is over-populated at 90+ million people to rationalize their support for artificial birth control. But is the country really overpopulated? And the implication is that our country is poor because of that 90-million figure.

   Population figures are meaningless if we don’t take into consideration the area where that figure lives. For example, what does it mean that Japan has 127 million people? Or that the U.S.A. has 309 million?

   Let’s take a look at a sample of Wikipedia’s listing of countries according to population DENSITY, or the number of people in every square kilometer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_population_density), April 24, 2010:

     Rank   Country     People/Sq.Km.
      1     Macau         18,534
      2     Monaco        16,923
      3     Singapore      7,022
      4     Hong Kong      6,348
      …
      43    Philippines      307
      …
      129   Ethiopia          71

   Compared to the thousands of the top 4 most-densely populated countries, the Philippines at 307 is hardly “over-populated”!

   And what about the overpopulation=poverty myth? The top 4 countries are so RICH! Macau is Asia’s playground for billionaires, streets choked with Rolls Royces. Monaco is summer capital to Europe’s kings, princes, dukes and other royalty. No need to say anything about Singapore and Hong Kong.

   These top 4 countries are so small and have no natural resources to brag about but yet so rich. So is the Philippines poor because there are “too many” Filipinos and that we have no natural resources? Look at Ethiopia in Africa. If less people means more wealth to be shared, Ethiopia should be at the top of the list, instead of being one of the world’s poorest.

   Some people may argue that the top 4 are rich because they are small and easy to manage in spite their large population. So let’s look at huge China with its 1.3 BILLION. It is the fastest growing economy in the world, predicted to overtake the U.S.A. in about a decade, and even now lends money to the U.S.A.!

   Right within our own country, compare the population-to-wealth ratio of Sequijor, Cebu and Manila. Obviously, the more population, the wealthier the place!

   Now guess what is our country’s biggest dollar earner? It’s our Overseas Foreign Workers – human life.

   Clearly, life is God’s GIFT and a nation’s WEALTH!

   So what is causing our poverty?

   RIIIGHT! CORRUPTION! And the guilty ones hide their sins by blaming us the people for having too many children! What if by a miracle, our population is cut in half a year from now, will our country start getting richer if corruption is still there? Of course not!

   (How true is the rumor that those who support H.B. 5043 are offered millions by giant foreign pharmaceuticals who make birth control pills and devices? Hopefully not true…)

   =====

   So okay, the Philippines is not over-populated AND over-population does not cause poverty. But what about on the family and personal level?

   No one can argue that feeding more mouths requires more money. But will it make us poor? We have all heard of stories of immigrants from China escaping the poverty and oppression there. They came in dirt-poor, ate “lugaw”, had 10 children, worked hard, became millionaires, and now control our economy! Many successful Filipinos share the same life story, coming from very large families, and struggling and sacrificing all the way to the top. Yet we also know many families with only one or two children but remain very poor all their lives.

   Children do not make us poor. Poverty is caused by many more crucial factors like lack of education, lack of opportunities, lack of drive, lack of discipline, lack of inheritance, even lack of luck. But one thing is sure, lack of children will not make us rich.

   =====

   But what if we just want to give more quality time and better education to fewer children? Now THERE is a very good and very noble intention! The healthiest and the BEST way to do this is to abstain during fertile days.

   Abstention (self-denial) is self-discipline and builds our character. It is the same discipline we use to abstain from stealing government money; to abstain from cheating at school and at taxes; to abstain from extra-marital affairs; to abstain from skipping classes and cutting work hours; to abstain from bribing policemen; and to abstain from selling our votes.

   And this abstention we practice is exactly the same abstention we are teaching our children: to abstain from eating too much candy, to abstain from over-spending, to abstain from pre-marital sex, and to abstain from drugs… to be children of strong character and will-power, not weaklings and spoiled brats.

   Artificial birth control on the other hand, offers us the “choice” of indulging in pleasure without responsibility; the same easy “choice” of accepting bribe money instead of hard work and sacrifice; the same easy “choice” to cheat during exams rather than study diligently; the same “choice” for instant gratification over self-denial and patience; the same “choice” to behave like dogs and monkeys, urinating and copulating, anytime and anywhere the urge strikes them, rather than conduct ourselves as the noble descendants of Lapu-lapu, Gabriela Silang, and the Katipuneros.

   Let us re-learn the values of abstention, self-denial and discipline. Such virtues will harden us, strengthen our character, enrich our families, make our country great again, and get us to heaven some day.

3. 3 jlocute May 7th, 2010 at 8:22 am

   We are really at the end of time era. These are all Satan’s work. We should be aware how he works. As he said “I Pretend to love men, in order to destroy them; serve them, in order to ruin them and deceive them; help them, in order to pervert them and draw them into these my hellish regions.”

   People have been persuaded by the devil that they are entitled to have sex when they choose, rejecting any unwanted life that may result. The enemy may tell you “God is too demanding and unreasonable”. “If we distributed more condoms we would not have disease or the need to abort babies”. “It’s God’s fault because God’s Church is against the use of condoms”.

   Sexual intercourse, by its nature and intent is potentially life giving act. This is God’s version. The enemy’s version is that sex can be closed to give life and used for physical pleasure only. Enemy’s version of sex is selfish, emotionally dangerous, and bad for humanity. The enemy offers an answer to this too, and led souls to avoid consequences by offering
   widespread contraception and abortion. Both men and women are now told that sinful sexual behaviors are allowable and acceptable. God intends that a man and woman enter a blessed union (through marriage) and then share their sexuality with one another. The devil is mocking God because he depicts God’s purpose. He is laughing because many led astray on this sin.

4. 4 José Miguel Oct 3rd, 2010 at 1:49 am

   Sec 3 on Guiding Principles of the Reproductive Health Bill stated at paragraph e: The limited resources of the country cannot be suffered to, be spread so thinly to service a burgeoning multitude that makes the allocations grossly inadequate and effectively meaningless.

   Is it because the rate of number of lives to be sustained is higher than the rate of the amount of resources that could provide sustenance?

   I agree that our resources are limited as everything in this world is limited right from the beginning. Did we perish when we did not stop population growth from the beginning? That means we did not run out of resources then as to have caused us to perish today. That means that each family had food available. Now how come that today, in this supposedly advanced technology of the world, not all family can have food available for them? If true, then how is it that today, we can have one family who, aside from owning long chain of supermarkets and large tracks of lands, could very well afford to eat food the quantity equivalent of more than one hundred meals at three times a day if they could accommodate that much in their stomach? Is this amount, not more than the equivalent of three good meals a day for 30 families with 10 children each? Is this amount of food not excess? Yet how is it that today, for every one family who could afford to eat that much quantity of food, we have thirty families of 6 children who could not eat three adequate meals a day?

5. 5 banshee rabidcat Oct 6th, 2010 at 11:39 am

   Mr Bungangkahoy, I implore you to read before ranting. may I highlight the following for you since you obviously are too lazy to gather necessary information before yapping.

   SEC. 12. Mandatory Age-Appropriate Reproductive Health Education. – Recognizing the importance of reproductive health rights in empowering the youth and developing them into responsible adults, Reproductive Health Education in an age-appropriate manner shall be taught by adequately trained teachers starting from Grade 5 up to Fourth Year High School. In order to assure the prior training of teachers on reproductive health, the implementation of Reproductive Health Education shall commence at the start of the school year one year following the effectivity of this Act. The POPCOM, in coordination with the Department of Education, shall formulate the Reproductive Health Education curriculum, which shall be common to both public and private schools and shall include related population and development concepts in addition to the following subjects and standards:

   a. Reproductive health and sexual rights;

   b. Reproductive health care and services;

   c. Attitudes, beliefs and values on sexual development, sexual behavior and sexual health;

   d. Proscription and hazards of abortion and management of post-abortion complications;

   e. Responsible parenthood.

   f. Use and application of natural and modern family planning methods to promote reproductive health, achieve desired family size and prevent unwanted, unplanned and mistimed pregnancies;

   g. Abstinence before marriage;

   h. Prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS and other, STIs/STDs, prostate cancer, breast cancer, cervical cancer and other gynecological disorders;

   i. Responsible sexuality; and

   j. Maternal, peri-natal and post-natal education, care and services.

6. 6 José Miguel Oct 9th, 2010 at 12:12 am

   Sec 3 on Guiding Principles of the Reproductive Health Bill stated at paragraph e: The limited resources of the country cannot be suffered to, be spread so thinly to service a burgeoning multitude that makes the allocations grossly inadequate and effectively meaningless.

   Is it because the rate of increase of number of lives to be sustained, to the increase of amount of resources that could provide sustenance, is higher?

   I agree that our material resources are limited as everything in this world is limited right from the beginning. Back to thousands of years earlier than 2000 years ago, did the people live in a situation of abundance of material resources for sustenance? Sustenance for material resources was derived merely from gathering and hunting. Was that abundance compared to today? Even during the later period, when agriculture became the technology for material resources sustenance, there was yet no such mass movements to suppress population growth. There were those who lived with enough. But there were those like the rich and powerful kingdoms who conquered other territories of other kingdoms and slaughtered or enslaved the vanquished and looted their resources as a means to sustain the conqueror kingdom. They lived then, as if resources for them was limited. From those events, was there actually a shortage of material resources at that time? Or was it more of fear due to greed? Was the behavior of people then, towards the share of material resources any different from that of now? The technology then, was mass murder of the living.

   Today, the same fear of limited resources is gripping us. Yet, inspite of all the supposedly more advanced technology for material resources sustenance of the world, why is it that not all families can have food available for them? How is it that today, we can have one family who, aside from owning long chain of supermarkets and large tracks of lands, could very well afford to feed each member of that family of say 12, the quantity equivalent of more than one hundred meals at three times a day if they could accommodate that much in their stomach? Is this amount, not more than the equivalent of three good meals a day for 70 families with 12 children each? Is this amount of food not excess? Yet how is it that today, there are families who could afford to eat that much quantity of food, while there are families of 6 children who could not eat three adequate meals a day? Is this not greed causing hunger?

   Some of those who belong to such families who could well afford to be fed more than a hundred meals in one mealtime if their stomach could accommodate that much, have blamed families who could not afford to have three meals a day to be lazy. Have they not seen family members who had to labor 12 hours a day to be able to eat two times a day everyday because that is the only capability they have as a result of the business of this well-fed family members which: control markets; have contractual policies; have oppressive compensation policies; or which have been displacing small retailers from the areas they have established their own giant businesses? Is this the general result of greed or laziness? Is not the RH Bill then promoting greed for blaming high population growth as cause of hunger while ignoring greed as the cause? Or is it promoting laziness for providing easy instant artificial technology to an imbalance of nature which can be corrected by a long and hard working natural developmental process?

   By having the same fear and technology for material resources sustenance of many of the powerful people back in the period of more than 2000 years ago, this time is it not a more subtle technology which the bill is promoting RH or Replicating Herod?

7. 7 José Miguel Oct 12th, 2010 at 1:12 am

   The name of the Bill is, Reproductive Health and Population Development. Is it really healthy for a reproductive organ to be invaded by synthetic substances? There have been numerous reports stating that levels of dependence of farms on synthetic substances for fertilizers and pesticides which are being injected into it, have progressively increased thru the years. These farms have already reached the point of already becoming sterile. Thus the nutrients of the plants on the soil will be perpetually sustained solely by synthetic substances. Is this the kind of food we want? As the natural cycle of nutrient production within the soil is continuously being damaged by synthetic substances, the cycle will reach the point of death. The life of plants then will be no different from a patient whose practically all organs are already dead but is till being made to pump oxygen to the body by machines, tubes, and synthetic substances just to make his heart beat continuously. As it is with the farm, so it must be with human beings who are more sensitive to life than farms.

   Is it really healthy to let our body be invaded by synthetic substances?

8. 8 Shango Nov 15th, 2010 at 2:04 pm

   I hope this bill will soon become a law. To all Religious leaders please respect the separation of state and church under our Constitution.

9. 9 lyjhugeo Nov 24th, 2010 at 8:23 am

   To: Eustaquio Bungangkahoy

   Your comment is very impressive but you’re not reading the RH Bill. What a waste of a good comment.

   RH Bill is not for population control as you have stated. This Bill is to empower the Filipinos the “Freedom of informed choice” and “Responsible Parenthood” for a better family living.

10. 10 kapoge Nov 28th, 2010 at 2:08 pm

    Information is unlimitted for those who seek it…nasa internet age na tayo…lahat mauungkat isang click lang…

    Responsible parenthood…are the RH bill proponents stating that majority of the Filipino parents are not responsible?or we just look on special cases…

    Let us not simply talk on majority favors the bill…lets look on the basis to whom will it apply…how many percent are ignorant filipino parent we have?are you one of them that’s why you favor it?

    This bill is out of place…a man with sound mind don’t even need to go to school to understand this things…very common sense…

11. 11 rbhebron Dec 6th, 2010 at 4:42 pm

    its really sad that the issue have dragged for so long. the lawmakers shud impose a time limit or a deadline to gather all opinions and then act on it. its time to decide whether its going to be beneficial to the filipinos or not. are we over populated? definitely… is there rampant corruption? definitely… are over population and corruption related? not really… are the solution to one problem a solution to all our problem? of course not… why not deal with the problem separately… address the problem of over population.. address the problem of corruption.. them perhaps we can say that slowly we are building our nation for the benefit of the next generation. let us not forget that the next generation is be the focal point of the debate. will the RH bill finally end our misery? of course not… will the church’s opinion make a for a better life? definitely not… as citizens, how do we take responsibility in these issue? be aware… as lawmakers, shud they weigh the benefits of the passage of the law? definitely… its really how the law will make for a better life and not the argument of just one personality that matters… is the passage of the law a path to a better life for all filipinos… absolutely!!

12. 12 cyber_grouch Jan 18th, 2011 at 5:34 pm

    On the question of whether we’re overpopulated or not, this is debatable. I have to agree with Mr. B, Singapore is not as resource-rich as the Philippines yet has a DENSER population. Yet it is more successful in managing its resources. Moreover, it is a country that as a regressing fertility rate. In fact, it is ENCOURAGING it’s citizens to reproduce. So thus, question of necessity of the bill is valid.

    On the question of what the true intent of the bill, I would agree with lyjhugeo that the bill seeks to “empower the Filipinos the “Freedom of informed choice” and “Responsible Parenthood” for a better family living” to quote verbatim. Yet I cannot discount that it is a population control bill. Sec. 5 defines within the responsibilities of the Population Commission the promotion of a national policy for ‘population development’ which is further defined in the bill itself (mentioned 4 times under this section). The bill’s definition of the term contains 5 items which is an uncomfortable mix of promotion of individual metrics (1-4 are derived from statistics on family size, improved reproductive health [DOH count on reproductive health statistics]) and state-policy metrics population distribution (now, how do we define and quantify this is beyond the bill so far). Thus, in itself is problematic because it does not state which metrics reconcile both thrusts.

    On the question of abortion, I would disagree with the bill when it says in Sec. 3m that this bill does not change anything on abortion laws but that blanket provision would not have little effect if there are provision that open up possibilities for state sanctioned abortions. I use the term state sanction abortions to make explicit that certain contraceptives are abortifacient and the bill does not explicitly distance itself from the use of those methods. In fact, the danger is that it a blanket statement that contraceptives should be classified as essential medicines which government it mandated to purchase. This is a very controversial point because this goes in direct contradiction to The Constitution (Article 2, Sec. 12 which reads: It shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the UNBORN FROM CONCEPTION). Thus, instead of making the anti-abortion policy stronger… this bill actually weakens it (if it passes to law) by introducing conflicts in law which will eventually need to be resolved by Jurisprudence or case law.

    Further to the question of constitutionality, the constitution (on the same section), outlines that the state should EQUALLY protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn. Bar one (mentioning that the laws on abortion shall not be overturned by provisions of this bill… which as discussed in the previous paragraph is basically useless), the bill has weighed more on the life of the mother.

    On the question of who’s decision is weightier with regards to reproductive health… the individual and couple, the bill again does not clearly outline that policy and rules surrounding this. Yet, with Sec. 21 b2, it seemed it weighed again more on the individual rather than the couple’s choice… a clear clash with Constituional policy. The bill reads on that section that one of the prohibited and penalizable acts is the refusal to “perform voluntary ligation and vasectomy and other legal and medically-safe reproductive health care services on any person of legal age on the ground of lack of spousal consent or authorization.” The effective term is LACK OF SPOUSAL CONSENT cannot be a ground for refusal of ligation/vasectomy. This clause is contradictory to the Constitution which says, “The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution.” How does it strengthen the family when one member can override the decision of the other by force of this law (as the law says such individual right shall supersede the right of the spouse for communal determination of the direction of the family)?

    Prior violations to the constitution discussed in previous paragraphs are not as gruesome as violations which will be discussed by succeeding paragraphs. Prior violations are against non-self-implementing provisions. Succeeding violations directly contradict provision under the Bill of Rights which are self-implementing. One in particular is with regards to the right to Freedom of Speech. This is one of the sacred freedoms that the Constitution RECOGNIZES. Notice the term used… RECOGNIZE. Time and time again, the Supreme Court used this term to emphasize that the Constitution did not GRANT these rights but RECOGNIZES these rights as part of humans’ natural constitution. Freedom of Speech in many of the Supreme Courts decision includes the freedom to make erroneous statements. Yet, this bill penalizes such speech. Sec. 22 provides for penalties for violations enumerated under Sec. 21 which includes paragraph e: “Any person who maliciously engages in disinformation about the intent or provisions of this Act.” Granted, that the disinformation must be malicious… that it must be proved… such provision is prior restrain to freedom of speech.

    Another instance by which freedom of speech is curtailed is to violate the Non-Establishment provisions which are offshoots of the freedom of speech. Concretely, this is the freedom to exercise religion (Sec. 5 of the Bill of Rights). Sec 12 of the bill mandates a reproductive health curriculum which shall be common to both private and public institutions which puts equal emphasis on both modern and natural family planning methods. Some religious institutions do not profess to modern family planning methods and prefer to teach the later. Sec 5 of the Constitution guarantees these institutions that such preference is respected. And this has been calcified by a number of Supreme Court decisions. Just look at the flag cases where national patrimony was placed lower in priorities over free exercise clauses.

    This objection also extends to what the bill calls reproductive health care provider which lacks in definition. At one point, it defines the provider as a medical practitioner. At another, it defines the provider as an educator. It seems that the provider is the main agent by which provisions of this bill aims to use to propagate its policies. Yet, it has not made any effort to formalize these roles and deputize them. To this end, it does not guarantee that these agents are depoliticized and de-commercialized. Such I believe fuels the suspicion that private contraceptive companies are the primary benefactors of this bill.

13. 13 rue Jan 26th, 2011 at 5:18 am

    I really disagree to the RH BILL. As a member of a christian country instead of condom why not moral recovery program? because if you say condom it is more likely saying you are promoting sexual immorality that even young people can freely use condom and have sex.
    LIFE is a gift. God has a purpose , we are not an accident,God created us for a reason.
    For example im an inventor,only me knows whats the reason for what i invented.then let me ask you,who created us?therefore Only God knows whats the reason why he created us. DID you know that we are the only creation of god that has a moral being because like animals,they only have life but not the moral being like human does.
    We are not perfect we fall into sin the mistake is in us PEOPLE!tHats why we are experiencing poverty because of the corrupt officials!
    Thats why there is so called free will to choose to sin or not.its a matter of choice meaning, if we can promote moral recovery program to the communities to those who are poorest of the poor ,to the people,they will know the true meaning of life and they would be afraid to commit sin because they already had a conviction to God.
    there was stated in the bible after the fall of man God said Go to the world and multiply.Yes thats true, But in a right way, not through sexual immorality and using contraceptives
    SEX is designed to married people and not to the unmarried ones.
    Let us not Fool ourselves.CONDOMS and other contraceptives are part of the monkey business of our government.they agree to the RH BILL because they are the ones who are truly advantaged,they gain a lot of money with that.Like Commercials.The models are teenagers or young individuals instead of married people.See?They are only just promoting SEXUAL IMMORALITY.
    remember, MONEY is the root of all EVIL.

    this is only my opinion,im a 2nd yr.college student Bs tourism,and im doing this because im aware to my fellow young people.let us all be guided,let us not choose the wrong path..

14. 14 BlueHuntress Feb 11th, 2011 at 2:06 pm

    i agree to what rue have said…..

    as a teenager this is my view/feedback:

    people don’t know that “Sex is Sacred”….Sex is not for fun! it is NOT FOR LUST! once they’re having S, the fruit of it should be their responsibility! if they don’t want to be pregnant or their couple to be….why have sex right?…and besides, SEX is for MARRIED people only…I hope People would be enlightened….LUST IS ONE OF THE CAPITAL SINS!

    But i know the RH bill has a positive Mission….
    just what my kouhai (my junior in High School since i’m a senior High School) have said: “the RH bill is not 100% wrong. just some points are against biblical views.”

    God Bless and please take note that God Loves us…..ALWAYS

15. 15 alipin ng kahapon Mar 29th, 2011 at 3:23 pm

    how dare these people rally up to the streets protesting: “RH bill is against God’s will” how the hell they know what God’s will is? thats what you call blind faith! these people think every change is against God’s will.

    these people will do everything to defend their backward beliefs and traditions…

16. 16 erros May 12th, 2011 at 10:13 pm

    After reading the whole text of this bill, I came to a conclusion that RH Bill is not at all anti-human life but rather a bill that will promote quality of life. It’s not about controlling our over-populated country but providing every woman and man a freedom of choice and how this choice helps them achive quality of life. I also like the fact that this bill promotes abstinence before marriage by educating our youth and subjecting partners to certification process before getting married. This bill may not be aperfect bill and I do believe that the reason why debates are going on is to add/delete items that may or may not be needed to make this bill happen. I suggest that ev everyone gets a chance to read the full text before commenting.

17. 17 alberte May 13th, 2011 at 2:11 am

    I believe we have an overpopulation problem. We may have a smaller population density compared to Singapore but this is not a good measure of overpopulation. If i see a lot of filipinos going out of the country to find jobs, less food to feed people, overflow of students in classrooms, less houses to shelter people, consistent traffic & pollution problems, etc. etc., that’s overpopulation. Therefore, we need a bill and its consistent implementation to control and manage the population.

18. 18 renenbantillo May 13th, 2011 at 3:11 am

    The church must read this, how come they mess with the affairs of the state so much while the state is too afraid to say a word against the church. THE FACT IS teenage pregnancy is rampant, HIV is here and there is no cure yet, our population is booming and a lot of poor families have nothing to eat. Palibhasa ang simbahan ay nakikinabang kapag maraming naghihirap, mas maraming mahirap, mas maraming magsisimba at magpapauto sa kanila, sigurado ang kita. At yung mga politician na gustong gustong marami masyado ang ating populasyon, sila yung nakikinabang sa mga Pilipinong hindi nakakapag-aral at ibinebenta ang kanilang boto.
    RH BILL must be a law or else, draft a bill that would tax the church tutal naman they do not respect the SEPARATION OF THE CHURCH AND THE STATE!

19. 19 louis_bas May 18th, 2011 at 11:35 am

    Hay nako…halos walang pinagkaiba sa sitwasyon natin ngayon. We can freey get lahat ng contraceptives na gusto natin mahirap o mayaman ka. Pumunta ka sa 7-11 maraming murang condom don. Implement the law or not you can still have more than 2 kids. I go for educating people and sana better education to strengthen self control. WITHOUT SELF CONTROL YOU CAN KILL SOMEONE THE SAME GOES SA ISSUE NA TO MABUBUNTIS PA RIN ANG GF OR WIFE MO.
    What I do not want after this is that everyone will claim that this solved the problem and they will get the credit for it.

20. 20 maldita0711 May 18th, 2011 at 4:29 pm

    I’m reading all the comments and I wanna laugh. All the anti-RH bill are pro-death. Hypocrites. You should read and understand everything about the bill and think of what comprises the majority of the philippines bago kayo mag-react, please!

21. 21 kamikaze May 23rd, 2011 at 3:05 pm

    Family Planning is Common Sense to those who Have it. But for those who doesn’t there’s the RH BILL.

    The Church and religious groups should not stick there noses to the responsibility of the state to make a law that would help us in controlling the growing number of unwanted children, then later become unwanted people, then later become WANTED individuals with a price on their Heads.

    That was just an ice breaker of course.

    I think what the church must do is to strengthen also their promotion of sex being sacred, that premarital sex is wrong and also promote natural family planning and the idea of abstinence to their followers. Because i think that this is a sign that they are/were not successful in teaching and advocating to these Natural Family Planning and Sacred SEX thing! for all I now since kindergarten i was taught that SEX is for married people only. I think i am one of those people who has a common sense and proud of it.

    I think this is Not the time for the religious people to go to the streets and say that the RH bill is a thing of EVIL. you’re just causing more traffic. I think this is the time that these people go to a room and ask themselves “WHY WERE THEY NOT EFFECTIVE?” just work hand in hand with the government in these endeavor for GOD sakes i mean really for his SAKE he will not be proud to see you guys on the streets ranting about something that you have clearly failed upon…HE now gave an authority to these people in power to make some steps a LAW in these case, so that people will be aware of the responsibilities of being a parent.

    The Church was and is still an Instrument of awareness of right and wrong But so is the the Government/STATE.

    It is wrong for us to battle this out. I know and we know that the government is not perfect…but so is the Church, any kind of it. But for the several or few of us who can understand and can accept the flaws of HUMANITY, just think what other things we can do aside from shouting that the RH bill is wrong.

    To cut it Short:

    “Let the Government do it’s job, flawed or not, just also do yours (CHURCH and Religious Groups), flawed or not”.

22. 22 Accountability May 27th, 2011 at 7:07 pm

    Nabasa ko po yung RH Bill pati yung mga comments. May comments and reactions na on the following:
    1. God’s will
    2. Population and density
    3. Separation of church and state
    4. Poverty
    5. Re-learning values
    6. Contraceptives
    7. Sex for married people

    Sana ang proponents ng RH Bill linawin at i-itemize alin services ang free at alin naman ang may bayad at sino allowed maka-avail ng services under sa RH Bill ng libre.

    Sa RH Bill under Sec. 5, one function ng POPCOM is “To ensure people’s access to medically safe, legal, quality and affordable reproductive health goods and services”.
    Mukhang may bayad pa rin po di ba?

    Pansinin po ninyo ang Section 10. Ang contraceptives, IUD, injectables and other allied RH products and supplies magiging “essential medicines and supplies” na at bibilhin na regularly ng national and local hospitals and other govt health units. Sino gagamit sa binili ng hospitals na ito? Ibibigay ba sa tao libre or ibebenta?

    Ang contraceptives, IUD, injectables and other allied RH products and supplies ba ma-categorize na rin as “Drugs and Medicines” ng RA 9502 Accessible Cheaper and Quality Medicines Act of 2008″ which will be subject to price monitoring and regulation?

    I believe in reproductive health education and family planning and management per se. However, please give attention sa contents of each sections ng RH Bill. Doon po tayo magdebate at magdiskusyon.

23. 23 tons_astigz Jun 16th, 2011 at 5:42 am

    @ alipin ng kahapon

    You really are ignorant about God’s will…

    i pity on you, will you please read a Bible first before
    saying anything…

    RH BILL is really against God’s will…

    this prevents life,..

    If RH BILL will be implemented most of the filipino people will live a life immorally…

    Fornication will be rampant, wickedness will be everywhere…
    we will just be like America who was before a God Fearing country but look at them now they are suffering from the curse of God, because they forsake God..,

    i fear that it will happen to us…

24. 24 markus2010 Nov 14th, 2011 at 11:23 pm

    i agree with BlueHuntress and rue and 90% disagree with the RHBill, why 90% disagree – - you can’t just tell the people to stop making kids! I, personally love kids.. It’s just that if you will make one, you have to consider that you will have a 100% FULL responsibility to that. For my own opinion, RH Bill is for the word RESPONSIBILITY, but, RH Bill thinks that Filipino’s nowadays don’t have that word when it comes to family planning, well for me, some of us. But, as I said, you can’t just budge into houses telling families that they have to stop making love after 1 or 2 kids, it’s insane! Sex is not a sin, and it’s not just for fun either. Sex will become sin if your main reason is your Lust. Making love is not breaking the law, you’ll just have to consider the responsibility of the outcome.

25. 25 Ferdinand Sapiandante Jun 4th, 2012 at 1:53 am

    Based on my own study about this pending House Bill, I am actually in favor of this bill not because I’m against pro-life movement but I think it’s necessary to add some important laws about what our country needs.

    It is important in such a way that we are sick and tired of seeing unborn children dumped in every corner of the streets, that every woman in our country needs more protection, to every child, for us to be informed, to recognize what other choices in our daily life which affect our hygiene, our health, and our needs.

    And this Bill says it all. We need to be more casual, more open to our mind.

    The House Bill No. 5043 must be passed as soon as possible. Because the longer it’s pending the more unborn children we’ll going to see, the more taking advantage to innocent women we’re going to hear.

    I have a faith in God. I am not against his will. But I am in favor of this RH Bill.
    These Bill is not about killing, not about abortion, not about prostitution but it’s about protecting, empowering women, saving innocent children, planning about future, and teaching about today’s life.

    If they will criticize my moral obligation,
    How dare these people rally up to the streets protesting: “RH bill is against God’s will” how the hell they know what God’s will is? That’s what you call “BLIND FAITH”! These people think every change is against God’s will. And these people will do everything to defend their backward beliefs and traditions. But no matter what happen to this Bill, whether it will be approve or not, I’m a Pro-Life. And I believe that This Bill is a Pro-Life.

    I hope this bill will soon become a law. To all Religious leaders please respect the separation of state and church under our Constitution.

26. 26 jaredson_19 Aug 6th, 2012 at 6:27 pm

    Guys Read Carefully the full text of this Bill before you say something. For me there is no reason to be against this proposed bill co’z some of you might argue on some matters like the immorality issue etc.. On what i have understand, this bill only promotes responsible parenting and protection against illness caused by irresponsible sexual contact and not promoting immorality on what way you are thinking. Did you read any article from this Proposed Bill that it will cover unmarried couples or even young generations who makes sex for nothing? Absolutely no! God said, go forth and multiply but it doesn’t says, multiply and let them die in hunger or other causes of poverty because of irresponsible parenthood. This Bill uphold the right of the people and not forcing you to follow, besides you have a mind to think what will be the best for your family which this bill promotes. The government will give fund for the less fortunate family (which is also included in this article) but the only thing i doubt right now is, do all this funds be really given to this family or it will be another source of corruption fund?!

27. 27 MRGV_15 Aug 12th, 2012 at 4:20 pm

    a strong NO to RH BILL!!!!
    population is not the problem of our country……kung merong dapat supilin it is not the population but the CORRUPTION!!!!!
    Contraceptives are just part of the business of the government

Leave a Reply

You must login to post a comment.