Truths behind the RH bill

By Fr. ROY CIMAGALA, roycimagala@gmail.com
December 16, 2012

There’s a little, handy booklet entitled, Handbook of truths behind the RH Bill, which I think is good to have for the campaign to clarify this delicate issue that is now swamped with all sorts of confusing arguments.

It focuses more on the medical, economic, demographic and legal aspects of the issue rather than on its morality. And so, it is good for those who want to reach out to those who are a bit allergic to religious arguments but are more open to its more secular, scientific or empirical perspectives.

I, of course, believe that the issue is first of all moral – the reason why the Church is very much involved in it – before it is a medical, economic or legal issue. But since people have different sensitivities and attitudes, it would be good if they too can get hold of some clarificatory materials that satisfies their preferences. This handbook does that.

First of all, I wish to say that our first freedom, the most intimate freedom we have is religious freedom, on which is based our sense of morality, among other things. It is not freedom of speech and assembly, nor even freedom to live, since all these rights and freedom are based on our religious freedom.

I feel urged to make that clarification because when I read the arguments used by some of our congressmen who voted on the issue in the second reading, I now understand why many of them took what I consider as wrong positions regarding the issue.

Their idea of our first and ultimate freedom can be reduced to freedom to be oneself, as expressed in some allegedly absolute freedom to life, expression and assembly, right to liberty, etc.

To me, it sounds like a freedom that does not talk about where it came from and how it used to be exercised. It is presumed to be self-generated or spontaneously created that in the end is like saying that we too in our life, in our very being are self-generated and spontaneously created. That’s, of course, a ridiculous presupposition.

In short, they are saying that there is no creator for us. There is no God. This is a form of atheism that may be considered as practical atheism, not so much the theoretical one, since it may not be formally professed but is simply practically and consistently lived.

This, I think, is a point that needs to be ventilated more widely, since this is not yet fully appreciated by many. That’s why we have an understanding of democracy, supposedly based on freedom, that is actually weak and vulnerable to be exploited by those who have power in one form or another.

Going back to the handbook, it is a well-written piece by a team of experts in the area of economics, demography, education and law. It takes the issue to its deeper and wider implications, exposing the hidden but clear maneuvers of powerful groups and ideologies averse to supernatural faith and religion in general.

It is written by competent authors who are very much into the intricacies of this issue. They are Dr. Bernardo Villegas, economist; Miss Rosa Linda Valenzona, demographer; Jo Imbong, lawyer; Roberto de Vera, economist; Raul Nidoy, educator; and Robert Cortes, educator.

Among the points taken up and developed, supported by relevant studies and researches, are the following:

-The RH bill is harmful to the Filipinos because it endorses drugs and other family planning supplies and techniques that have serious deleterious effects to their physical health and to the environment.

-Pills and the IUD kill the human embryo.

-Pills cause serious environmental problems.

-The RH bill is harmful to Filipino society because its intent to control population is based on wrong facts and wrong economics, and naive to the negative social effects that will come in its train.

-It implies that a rapidly growing population causes hunger and shortage of resources. It does NOT.

-It neglects the fact that societies that have aggressively pushed for contraception are now suffering from a “demographic winter.”

-The RH bill is harmful to Filipino society because it violates the Philippine Constitution and seeks to enshrine into law forced and artificial ‘rights’ that may even threaten more basic and genuine human rights.

Let’s hope that this handbook can contribute to a more meaningful discussion and dialogue with everyone regarding the issue. We need to be open-minded but clear about our views and positions that are supposed to be grounded on well-established principles and assumptions.