Skip to content

NO To RH Bill (Law)!


Oppose RH Bill on rational grounds!

The RH bill would cause much higher prices of commodities and health care products in the Philippines because of the fact that businesses and hospitals would be compelled to offset the RH care expenses that they are going to pay for their workers. This bill is not good for everybody, as it would create a wave of economic regulations and controls. This might also cause the government to issue price controls and other regulatory edicts so to prevent companies and even hospitals from raising the prices of their products and services!

“Let there be no misunderstanding about me. If it is now the belief of my fellow men, who call themselves the public, that their good requiresvictims, then I say: The public good be damned, I will have no part of it!” | “The Moral Meaning of Capitalism,” For the New Intellectual, 98….

Health care is not a right! We’re not born with a right to a ride in Enchanted Kingdom. We are not born with a right to enslave other people by coercing them to contribute something for the benefit of the majority. We don’t live—and we’re so lucky that we don’t!—in a statist or socialist society, where a so-called presidium has the monopoly on all social, economic and political powers, including the authority to allegedly provide all the needs of all its communal members, be it health care, education, housing and other basic necessities. I do believe that this “man-is-his-brother’s-keeper” scheme is impractical and evil at best. No, we cannot contradict reality. This bill is just the beginning of the statist plan of some politicians in Congress. It is the creepy, evil face of the socialist tendencies of our politicians not only in the legislature, but also in other parts of public governance. One of the greatest fallacies ever invented to corrupt man’s mind is the distortion of the concept of “right!” That which you passionately call or claim as “right” means the “right” by, for, and of the socialists or the communists. There’s a big difference between a right and a privilege. A right is one that is incumbent upon an individual since birth. You have the right to exist, but you don’t have the right to command your neighbor to feed you. You have the right to education, but you cannot demand that you be spared from school fees to obtain a degree. You have the right to medical services, but you can’t tell the doctor, who spent a lot of money and years of his/her life studying medicine, to treat you for free. The proper concept of “right” means the right of every individual to choose and to reject self-destruction. Such a right cannot extend to enslave your neighbor. It simply means a right to choose or not to choose.

This is for all pro-RH bill fanatics who can’t just comprehend the very simple fact that one needs to read my blogs to understand that SECULAR ARGUMENTS are the best defense against the statist RH Bill: I DON’T SHARE THE CATHOLIC VIEW ON THIS ISSUE. If you still insist that the only argument against this bill is built on religious views, then YOU’RE A BUNCH OF IGNORAMUSES!

And to some educated idiots out there, my view is NOT the same as the Republican Party’s view (in fact America’s Republican Party has its own version of universal health care, which I completely oppose.) My arguments are purely built on the premise that the RH bill or any statist legislative proposals (e.g., universal health care, antitrust law) runs counter to our individual rights and the concept of the free market system! If you still don’t get this, then better undergo some reeducation process.

Now I’d like you to watch and understand the two videos below. It’s crucial message is health care- or reproductive health care, for that matter- is NOT a right! The only thing that I disagree with is the statement that a right comes from God. I believe that a right comes from our humanity or human nature.


JOIN OUR FACEBOOK GROUP:

FILIPINOS AGAINST REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE BILL

Our official Facebook PAGE:

FILIPINOS AGAINST REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE BILL

MUST-READ ARTICLES:

Why RP’s Welfare State is Both Intellectually and Economically Bankrupt

Balisacan and many other UP economists argue that for our country to reach demographic transition, our government must adopt aggressive population control. These people are not economists; they’re quackonomists. It is people like them that help destroy the concept of economics. They observed that rich and developed countries have low population or that their fertility rates are below the replacement rate of 2.1, then, they crudely concluded that economic growth follows population decline. That for the Philippines to achieve economic growth, all it needs to do is actively control population by throwing money at the alleged ‘overpopulation’ problem.

GMA News’ Pro-RH Law Semantic Propaganda

Remember that like Thailand, the Philippines also started its own pop control program during the rule of Marcos. And since the Marcosian era, our government has been allocating budget for contraceptives and population management/control programs. Do not forget the Population Commission that gets its yearly budget is still part of our government. Also, remember that Aquino had allocated over 30 billion pesos on RH services prior to the passage of the RH law. This means this country has an active population control policies long before the passage of the RH law.

RH Law Means Money, Money, Money Plus Corruption

Healthcare is just like any other consumer products available in the market. Its price is determined by market forces. Its practitioners are engaged in the provision of services, just like any practitioners in other industries. It is subject to the principles of market competition, laws of supply and demand and other reality-based economic laws. If the government is serious enough to make health services accessible, affordable and of better quality, then, it only has to adopt and implement proper free market reforms and reality based economic policies and principles. That is, by encouraging and guaranteeing free market competition and allowing foreign investors and foreign talents (doctors, nurses, and other healthcare professionals) to be part of our Team. But this remains impossible without revising first our protectionist, semi-socialist charter.

RH Law and RP’s Economic Prison

You should ask yourself, Mr. Lawyer: Why are some Asian countries that do not impose protectionism (or our version of protectionism and regulations) more progressive than us? Why are countries like Hong Kong, Singapore, Japan and South Korea– which have a higher degree of economic freedom and less restrictive economic policies– adopting PRO-NATALIST POLICIES to increase their fertility rates instead of population control programs?

Why Opponents of the RH Law Should Boycott Inquirer

Yet what is disturbing is that the government has been blatantly exploiting poverty in the Philippines. It has been taking poverty as an absolute excuse to expand its welfare powers and violate the “natural”, innate rights of others. However, what is more disturbing is how the people foolishly rejoiced in their loss of rights and freedom.

Top Ten Reasons Why RH Law is Unconstitutional

The RH law is unconstitutional, invalid, immoral and evil because it violates individual rights. This is the only reason why we must all oppose the law. It is not evil because it’s against the Catholic doctrines. It is evil because it against- and contradicts- rights. This is why I’ve argued repeatedly in the past that the proper concept of rights is what is at stake in the RH bill debate. This is because the RH law, which allegedly seeks to promote women’s rights, according to lawyers Miriam Defensor Santiago and Pia Cayetano and their ilk, simply bastardizes the real essence of rights.

What About Leave No Poor Filipino Behind, Miriam?

Not adopting the right economic policies- policies that will bring real economic wealth to this nation without resorting to unsustainable borrowings and taxation- is cruelty to the poor. The poor are miserable because they can’t find jobs. And we are poor because, unlike some of our Asian neighbors that adopted free market reforms two decades ago, our government stubbornly strives to maintain our welfare state, protectionism and regulatory, socialistic policies.

Did Anti-RH Bishop Garcera Actually Use the Word “Overpopulation”?

Now, all I can say is, the writer– and every pro-RH law opinion writer in these parts– should know the proper concept of “overpopulation”. When one talks about the advantage of a big population (most free market economists do this), that doesn’t mean he’s in favor of overpopulation, because the word/term cannot be objectively defined. “Overpopulation” has become a political term. It has no objective, clear meaning.

Aquino Regime’s Accomplishments: RH, Welfare Funds on Steroids, Higher Debt, More Taxes, Blame-Arroyo

If you supported or fought for the RH bill, the Conditional Cash Transfer program and  the universal healthcare program, then you don’t have a right at all to complain. By simply supporting these welfare programs, that means you have given the government more power to contract more foreign debt in your name.

RH Scam and the PH Government’s 21st Century Plantation

The government has to use force/compulsion against certain people/sectors, such as employers and healthcare providers. Yes, the government promises to serve the welfare of the poor at the expense of employers and doctors. To provide RH services to its intended beneficiaries, the government has to violate/negate religious (or Catholic or protestant) hospitals’ and religious people’s freedom of conscience and of religion. See? This means that those who passed and supported the bill somehow knew (but many of them are too ignorant to understand this self-evident truth) that there’s no such thing as “free” RH care or services. That the government had to use force against those who make wealth and services possible: employers and healthcare providers.

PNoy Signs RH Bill Into Law: A Faux Victory for Little Tyrants

There is no such thing as a Santa Claus government. In the real world, Santa Claus doesn’t use force– he doesn’t steal– in order to make children happy. The message of Santa Claus is voluntary, uncoerced gift-giving. In this welfare state, the government has to employ legal force against employers and healthcare providers to provide RH services to those who need them. Indeed, what we have is an inverted Robinhood government that steals from the innocent to help the poor.

Why It’s Impossible to Defeat the RH Bill

Those who reject the RH bill are currently engaged in an unwinnable war. They can only delay the passage of the measure (perhaps for a couple of years), but they can never defeat it. The truth is, the system supports every welfare measure our leftist or statist lawmakers can think of. In fact, they can even pass a law that would regulate or force building or real estate companies into lowering the prices of their housing or building products to serve the welfare of the poor. They can even pass a universal healthcare measure that would force all doctors and healthcare providers to follow certain government-mandated guidelines or to render a very extensive pro bono services in the name of the greater good.

Pia Cayetano: ‘Let ‘Em Have Pleasurable Sex’

Are they trying to legislate Filipino women’s vagina or people’s ‘sexual positions’? LOL!

If women want enjoyable, pleasurable sexual positions, all they need is good internet connection, not a stupid law! Google it, bitches!

When UAAP Meets the RH Bill: It Means More Than ‘Academic’ Tension!

Should the government force/coerce a person to support things or programs that he/she considers to be against his conscience or belief? The answer should be NO. If pro-RH bill politicians argue their proposal is all about a poor woman’s ‘freedom of choice’, what about the freedom of choice and rights of catholic and atheist doctors? Focus on that issue and we’ll WIN this debate!

When YELLOW is the New RED: Filipinos Protest Versus Aquino Regime’s E-Martial Law

It’s very ironic that we now see a lot of RH bill supporters who denounce the Cybercrime law as a ‘totalitarian’ political measure. It’s all about e-Martial rule, they say. Perhaps they naively think that only measures that restrict or violate people’s freedom of expression can be considered ‘totalitarian’ or ‘fascistic’, but not political measures that seek to help the poor by sacrificing or immolating some members of our failing society.

Singapore’s PM Lee Hsien Loong to PH’s Malthusian Economists and Intellectuals: ‘You Got it All Wrong, Stupid!’

But here’s one thing that many UP economists and intellectuals do not understand. Singapore, which is the world’s freest economy, started its free market reforms with “very minimal welfare”. It did not achieve economic growth by curbing its population, as what many UP economists and intellectuals like Balisacan have repeatedly argued to support/defend their neo-Malthusian, highly mediocre, anti-intellectual politico-economic policies.

The Utter Hypocrisy of the Pro-RH Bill Fascists

Suppose I successfully lobbied Congress to force you to purchase contraceptive devices for me. Is that an example of me exercising my rightful control over my own body? And if you peaceably refused to buy contraceptive devices for me, would that mean you’re some bigot violating my ownership over my own body?

In Defense of the Troublesome, Meddlesome Catholic Church

Some people in this country whom I call “statists” or “collectivists” presume that a collective, such as the Catholic Church or the CBCP, is, in fact, a living, breathing, thinking, and acting entity. A collective has no right, because rights only pertain to living and thinking entities or to human beings. Only an individual has rights. Only the individual can have the capacity to think, act, and pursue certain goal-direction actions. That is, he is the only source of all human action.

The Catholic Priests have a Right to Influence the Government!

What do you think you pro-RH people are doing? Are you not trying to influence the government? Anybody or any group in this country has the right to influence their respective congressman or solon to pass a bill that would say, protect their rights or interests. What is prohibited is when a group of individuals employs the use of force, fraud, or  illegal machination (like bribery or the use of indecent favor) to get what it wants. If you think that the Catholic priests have violated any of our laws, then why not lodge a complaint or a case against them?

How to Spot a Pro-RH Bill Moron

A pro-RH bill moron is a moron for not knowing the correct facts, for making utterly flawed arguments, and for making a fool of himself. A pro-RH bill moron can be dishonest as well. That is, it is possible that he knows his arguments to be utterly fallacious and non-factual, and that his intention is simply to ‘win’ an argument by fooling his opponent. But you cannot fool anyone by deliberately presenting fallacious arguments. The real victim here is none other than your ‘self’.

Sotto is Right, ‘Overpopulation’ in PH is a MYTH!

But there is no correlation between economic growth and poverty reduction, or between overpopulation and poverty. Such an alleged correlation is a fallacy. But there exists a correlation between poverty and repressive economic policies, as shown by the ranking of Doing Business and Economic Freedom Index. For instance, top ten countries with the highest fertility rate are Niger, Uganda, Mali, Somalia, Burkina Faso, Democratic Republic of Congo, Angola, Ethiopia, and Republic of Congo. What do these countries have in common? They’re all poor. But why are they so poor? They’re poor because of their failed, repressive economic policies.

Fr. Bernas’ Egregious, Sanctimonious Misunderstanding

Then Bernas concluded: “a Catholic university is not just an institute for teaching catechism…” First, the Pope explicitly said: “Catholic university or college must make a specific contribution to the Church and to society through high quality scientific research…” He also said: “the Catholic university or college must train young men and women of outstanding knowledge…” The Pope NEVER said anything about COMPROMISING the Catholic doctrines, beliefs, or dogmas.

Fr. Bernas: More of a Pro-RH Statist than Religionist

Did he ever forget, or did it ever occur to him, that freedom of religion is a limitation on government authority to prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion? Of course it means that every individual is free to act or not to act according to his faith/belief. His concluding remark is even more alarming. What did Bernas say? That the state should not prevent people from responsible parenthood?! Since when did the state ever prevent the people from practicing family planning? Where did he get the idea that the state is preventing parents from being ‘responsible’? Or: is he trying to say that by not funding contraceptives, the state is in effect depriving people of their alleged right to family planning or “responsible parenthood”? What Bernas said is utterly illogical and irrational. Is he trying to say that if the State is not funding people’s access to government services, that is tantamount to depriving the latter of their right to such services? Holy cow!

To NEDA Chief Balisacan: Demographic Transition Follows Economic Growth, Not the Other Way Around

The case of Singapore, Japan, South Korea and other developed nations shows that governments don’t need to adopt aggressive population control policy to secure economic growth. This is because demographic transition is merely the result of a nation’s economic success. In other words, demographic transition FOLLOWS economic growth, and this is what Malthusian intellectuals like Balisacan fail to see.

RH Bill: A Marxist, Politically Correct Policy

The RH bill is no doubt a Marxist policy. Many decades ago in Germany, the Frankfurt School, a term informally used to describe Marxist thinkers affiliated with the Frankfurt Institute for Social Research, worked to conceive and popularize new theories and concepts designed to cripple people’s, particularly young people’s, minds. Some of these anti-reason concepts include POLITICAL CORRECTNESS, CRITICAL THEORY, and SEXUAL EDUCATION.

A Heated Conversation With a Population Control Freak: The Main Cause of Pop Growth are Repressive Economic Policies!

Here’s my observation of those who rely on the fallacy that there’s a correlation between poverty and population to defend the infamous RH bill. They cannot honestly tell what’s the ideal fertility rate for the Philippines. This is a fact. The country’s fertility rate has been steadily declining in recent years, but the pro-RH camp is apparently trying to ignore this very basic fact. It appears that they want a sudden drop in our fertility and growth rates. For example, the question that NEDA chief Arsenio Balisacan deliberately tried to dodge is: “What’s the ideal fertility rate for the country?” This question was posed by Sen. Enrile. Balisacan did not respond directly to the question. Instead he mentioned the UN’s replacement rate of 2.1. By the way, did the UN actually give that figure? I didn’t actually try to find out… ;-)

RH Bill Deception: Congress Retains Punitive Provisions Vs Employers, ‘Malicious Disinformation’

It turns out that President Aquino is willing to appease the Catholic Church just to guarantee the passage of the controversial Reproductive Health bill. The President and his minions in Congress were willing to delete and modify some of the proposal’s ‘religiously controversial provisions’ to guarantee the “universal basic human right to reproductive health by all persons”. However, there are certain aspects that our neo-Malthusian politicians would like to retain: the punitive provisions against employers and acts constituting ‘malicious disinformation’.

The RH Bill’s LATEST Version: A Must-Read!

For those who value individual rights and freedom, they have a life-long responsibility to read, analyze and understand the welfare and economic policies of their government. This is because common sense tells us that in the highly confusing, complicated field of politics, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

UP Economists’ RH Paper = Emotionalism Plus Anti-Intellectualism

The Philippines is poor because of its protectionism, regulations and failed welfare and economic policies that discourage both local and foreign investors. It is poor because of our high level of corruption due to our highly intrusive political system. A number of Asian nations achieved economic growth, not by curbing their population, but by adopting sound free market economic policies. The only key to economic growth is economic freedom or liberalization, not population control policy. For instance, Japan, which has one of the highest populations in the world, is so much worried about its fast declining and aging population that it adopted drastic, aggressive measures to increase population growth.

Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago’s RH Bill Illogic

The idea that the government should provide, guarantee or promote people’s right to a good/accessible education, adequate medical care, RH services, housing, employment, etc. is so evil and immoral because— 1) the government is not a productive agency and that it only relies on taxation to defray its expenses; 2) the government has to use state force against certain social sectors in order to help or provide the needs of some beneficiary sectors; 3) it destroys economic and individual freedom; and 4) it destroys the true concept of justice.

PNoy’s Malthusian/Marxist Economist: ‘PH must manage its population and decrease its dependency rates’

Overpopulation is actually the best scapegoat that our corrupt, power-hungry politicians and their incompetent, anti-intellectual economic appointees could use to conceal, bury the simple fact that it’s the government’s protectionism, unsound/failed welfare and economic policies, and corruption that keep this country poor and impoverished. Instead of adopting free market reforms (but first our constitution needs to be revised or amended) to encourage both local and foreign investments, the President’s Marxist-Malthusian economic czar believes that the solution to our poverty problem is population control. This Marxist idea simply suggests the following corollaries:

Filipino People Need Jobs, Not RH!

The best contraceptive method is more jobs. But to achieve high employment rate, our government needs to do the exact opposite of what it’s doing today. It has to deregulate, adopt free market reforms, lower tax rates, and limit its scope of powers, which is the best way to fight corruption in the public sector. A question to RH bill supporters: Isn’t more practical for our government to focus more on sound economic policies?

Filipino Freefarting Hippies for Palamunin Culture

The freefarting protesters also held a banner that read: “PNoy, kung nabubuntis ka, ang RH batas na (PNoy, if you could get pregnant, RH would be a law by now).”

If I were PNoy, I’d tell these stupid parasites: “Don’t get preggy, stupid!” If you can’t afford to raise a child, then, don’t even think of having sex! It’s as simple as that. Plus, you can always buy a pack of condom almost anywhere.

To RH Bill Sluts: Pay for Your Birth Control!

In the United StatesRush Limbaugh, a popular conservative talk show host, called a pro-contraception freeloading Georgetown University law student a “slut” for advocating that the federal government- or the American taxpayers- should pay for people’s birth control.

I believe Limbaugh did the right thing, by calling the 30-year-old liberal law student “a slut”. The conservative talk show host said…

Rights Versus Entitlements

As to the controversial RH bill issue, RH care is not a right; it is an entitlement. To claim that millions of people are denied of their alleged right to RH care and services in this country is to shamelessly assume that certain group of individuals must be sacrificed in the name of the greater good. What the RH proponents and supporters are trying to say is that if you don’t have something (e.g., food, education, medicine, health care, housing, etc.), you must have been deprived of your right. Such kind of mentality merely proves that the country’s welfare statists are intellectually bankrupt and too clueless to understand that they are, in reality, anti-rights and anti-freedom. Rights do not require public immolation or any kind or form of sacrifice. Entitlements do.

Full Text of Senate Bill No. 2378

Full Text of Reproductive Health Act of 2011 (S.B. No. 2865)

What Kind of “Rights” and “Choices” are You Talking About, Sen. Cayetano?

Ironically, Sen. Pia Cayetano seeks to brandish herself as a champion of RH rights and of secularism yet she’s miserably unaware that she supports a bill that is violative of some people’s rights and freedom of conscience and of religion. Indeed, this welfarist Senator is neither an advocate of rights and freedom nor a supporter of secularism, as she supports the sacrifice of some group of individuals in order to serve the welfare of the bill’s intended beneficiaries.

Arguing With Pro-RH bill Idiots on Facebook

That’s exactly what a neo-Malthusian mentality is all about. Malthus wrote his thesis at a time when the life-saving, productive, innovative technologies… that we use today were beyond man’s and Malthus’s imagination. Such a premise- that it’d be better if fewer people vied for same resources- is utterly anti-economics, and that it presumes that someone, some group of elite people or some entity has to decimate population or control its growth. By the way, “what same resources” are you talking about? That presumes that all the things we use today are the only resources available on earth. Who knows in the near future the next generation would discover new technologies that generate cheaper electricity- new ways and cheaper methods to build structures, apartments and buildings- new machines to turn trash into useful materials- new agricultural technologies to produce more crops and meat products- new machines, innovative technologies and ideas?

The RH Bill ‘Miracles’

Suddenly, taxation became a hit thing. The RH bill did a miracle by making thousands- if not millions- of people accept the goodness and beauty of taxation. The Filipino Freefarters (freethinkers) say, “Taxes for RH: Public Funding for a Public Good” (just google it). So let’s just learn to embrace and love more taxes and higher tax rates because taxation for public good is after all a good thing. Yeah right!

Ateneo must FIRE its Pro-RH bill Professors!

“I believe the school has the right to FIRE THEM. If you own a school or a university, would you like to hire or retain teachers/professors who preach or teach ideas that are opposite to yours? Of course, we have a socialist labor code that protects the so-called “employment tenure” of these idiotic professors, but Ateneo can always argue its case in court. ATENEO SHOULD FIRE THESE STUPID PROFESSORS…”

To Altruistic RH Bill Supporters: You Got What You’ve Asked For!

Like I said before, everything will come from us, taxpayers! The government has no money. It is not a productive agency. The government is the worst parasite in this country. It can only achieve its stated welfare state goals by stealing wealth from the productive and successful. Is this difficult to understand?Like U.S. President Gerald Ford said: “A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.”To pro-RH bill people let me say this: YOU WON! You asked for all of this, brothers.

Why Expose the RH Bill’s ‘Trojan Horse Socialism’

First off, let me tell my readers why I kept on posting my online, public conversations/dialogues with some Reproductive Health bill supporters. One of the reasons why most anti-RH bill advocates can’t properly debate or argue with the modern-day Filipino statists is because of the latters’ attempt to obfuscate and to confuse this ongoing controversial public debate. It’s not the passion of the RH bill statists but the confusion of most of the measure’s avowed enemies that is bringing this country to a ‘legislated’ disaster. We have to confront the enemies of freedom, and by confronting them we have to identify that which motivates them- why do they believe in weird, anti-reality things and what fires them up.

If UP, Ateneo Profs Really Read the RH Bill Yet Still Support It, Then They’re A Bunch of IDIOTS!

First, let me tell my reader that I’ve written a number of blog articles to expose the evils of the RH bill. There’s a need to dissect the contents of the RH bill, which covers a number of issues, namely, philosophy, economics, politics, ethics, the law, and religion. However, based on my observation, most of the bill’s fanatic supporters simply focused their arguments on the alleged humanitarian side of the measure. They believe that our statist politicians should pass the bill because it was designed to help the poor and the marginalized. If humanitarianism is about helping the needy by sacrificing some group of people, then I say, down with humanitarianism!

Social Reproductivist Buddy Cunanan Just Got Pwned!

In a previous blog, I dealt with Mr. Cunanan’s columns, exposing his ignorance or lack of proper understanding of the basic concepts of the separation principle and secularism. I just learned that he promised to “debunk” my arguments “point by point”. I’ll definitely wait for that. However, I just hope that he won’t resort to misrepresentation and context-dropping. This is what most of my critics did. They simply resorted to context-dropping, which is a form of intellectual evasion. Context-dropping can be committed by tearing an idea or argument from its context and treat it as though it were independent so to invalidate the thought process involved. Once this act of intellectual evasion is detected, that means your arguments will not be valid no matter how you say it or rationalize it.

Pro-RH Bill Buddy Cunanan’s Cosmic Display of Ignorance

My problem with Mr. Cunanan’s pathetic piece is that he has a very sophomoric, shallow, and illogical understanding of the principle of separation of church and state. He wrote: “Unfortunately, the Church has just gone too far. For instance, emblazoned on the façade of the Manila Cathedral are two very big signs that read “Do we need the RH Bill? No!”. I have traveled extensively all over the Catholic world and this is the first time I have ever seen such a direct and barefaced manifestation of the Church’s interference in state affairs. What is even more shocking and alarming is that thousands of people pass in front of the Manila Cathedral everyday, yet no one seems to have noticed this or complained about it.” REALLY! Does that constitute the Church’s attempt to violate the separation clause?

Philippine Medical Association’s Pro-RH Bill Suicide Note

I wasn’t surprised to know the self-sacrificing position of the PMA in regard to this divisive issue considering the fact that they are  “in a dedicated selfless and humane service of the Medical Profession for a healthy Philippines and for the Glory of God.” They are selfless health care providers so their aim is to sacrifice their lives and profession to public service and for the glory of God. However, I see glaring, disturbing contradictions in the way they understand the nature and concept of their “rights.” They declare that “the rights of physicians to do what is best medically for their patients, the right to informed choice of the people, the freedom of religion, the right of the people to health services and proper health education shall be respected and emphasized at all times and no censure or penalty of whatever kind or nature shall be imposed on the exercise of said rights.”

I’m an Atheist and I Oppose the Fascist RH Bill

My life belongs to me. Your life belongs to you, and not to the state or to your neighbor. The life of every employer or doctor absolutely, exclusively belongs to him/her. Thus, no one has the right to force or to enslave anyone in this country in the name of anybody or any unknowable entity they call state. No one has the right to force any employer simply because he employs people or he earns more. If that employer goes bankrupt, he and he alone would bear and suffer the consequences of his actions.  However, the country’s statists claim that any business or profitable company, which went through years of struggle, automatically becomes part of public domain, by law or by public consensus, simply because it makes money and employs people who are entitled to RH services.

Freethinkers are Post-Modern Progressives, Social Reproductivists, Statists

Philosophically and philologically speaking, the term “freethinking” is a good example of floating abstraction. A floating abstraction is any concept detached from existents. It is a concept that people merely take for granted and accept as a species of truth and fact without knowing what specific units the concept denotes. In reality, you really don’t know what the term “freethinker” means, its nature, its scope, its validity. You accepted it yet you don’t know it. To know something is to see its connection to reality and its relationship to the rest of your knowledge. A floating abstraction is a concept or idea which is, in your mind, cut off from reality, i.e., which you have not reduced to its referents. It stands in your mind as a string of words disconnected from concretes. So, for example, if you say, “A unit is an existent regarded as a separate member of a group of two or more similar members,” and then I ask you for an example, and you shrug, the concept “unit” is – for you – a floating abstraction.

Social Reproductivism: The New Religion of, by, for the Pro-RH Bill Faithful

I call it Newton’s apple. I never thought that in just a few seconds, I’d be able to fully understand the kind of mentality of most pro-Reproductive Health mob after skimming through a Facebook comment that served as my surgical key to the brain of the country’s post-modern statists. It only took a few seconds to dissect what the hell is wrong with these pro-RH bill fanatics. Then I came to a conclusion that these people, particularly those who consciously and strongly support the measure, have maintained the tribal mentality. Believe it or not, the RH bill has become a new religion. I call this post-modern faith Social Reproductivism.

Killing RP’s Industry and Small Business with the RH Bill

It is very much unfortunate, disappointing and alarming that nobody in the mainstream media talks about the negative, unintended consequences of the fascist Reproductive Health bill, now euphemistically called Responsible Parenthood bill, on the country’s business sector, particularly small businesses.

The Most Needed Victims of the RH Bill: Businessmen and Doctors

Our government planners know very well how to pass every intrusive, rights-violating political measure intended to allegedly serve the public. Consider the curious case of the Reproductive Health bill, now euphemistically named Responsible Parenthood bill, concocted by some leftists and statists in Congress. Instead of talking of how they would provide public goods and welfare to the poor, these statist politicians prattle on about how their altruistic measure would help the poor, inferior women, and anyone who doesn’t have the mental or physical capability to improve his/her life on earth. In short, they talk about nice-to-hear terms and phrases like equality, social justice, freedom of choice (as if we don’t have freedom of choice in these parts), overpopulation, extreme poverty, social inequality, the tragic rate of unwanted pregnancies, the sorry fate of women, among many others.

Ateneo School of Medicine’s Self-Immolating, Self-destructive Letter in Support of the RH Bill

In their letter of support, they quoted a constitutional provision, which states that the “The State shall protect and promote the right to health of the people and instill health consciousness among them.” They should have asked: At whose expense? At the expense of productive employers, health-care providers and taxpayers.

The Evils of RH bill and Universal Health Care

My main problem with the pro-RH bill idiots is that they simply talk about the alleged welfare of the poor and women– the 2.5 million women who would be benefited by the bill, the 44 percent rate of unwanted pregnancies, among others– without trying to understand the bill’s consequences on their rights, freedom, and future, and on the entire economy.

Are You Ready for Higher, More Taxes?

We now witness an era of heightened progressivism in the Philippines, with the introduction by our statist/leftist politicians of a number of political measures allegedly designed to help the poor, address overpopulation problem and inequality, alleviate poverty, and provide everyone, especially the less privileged, free education, health care, housing, transport, RH care, among other welfare state boons.

What’s the Difference Between the New UP Prexy and the RH Bill Solons?

Is there any difference- or similarity- between the social programs of the newly elected University of the Philippines president Alfredo Pascual and of the fascist lawmakers who strongly push for the passage of the Reproductive Health bill now known as  the Responsible Parenthood bill? The answer is YES on both aspects. The two parties have both major similarities- and they have ONE big difference.

Responsible Parenthood Bill: A Fascist Legislation by Another Name

The neo-fascist and nanny state proponents in Congress, particularly at the Committee on Population and the Committee on Appropriations, have approved the controversial Reproductive Health Bill via an Orwellian tactic. The divisive bill, which is now known as Responsible Parenthood bill, has got the nod of 20 neo-fascists against only three opponents at the Committee on Appropriations.

A Friendly Letter to All Pro-RH Bill Freaks

I read a very interesting online news about RH bill supporters giving away free condoms before or during Valentine’s day. Good job then, RH bill crack-heads! We, secular anti-RH bill people, fully support your altruistic- or charitable- move. In fact, what you did is very much commendable. However, we do not support your call to make the government the provider of people’s RH care needs- or to call on the government to violate the latter’s rights by forcing them to provide the RH care needs of their workers against their will for this is a violation of the constitutional guarantee of equal protection under the law.

RH Bill Supporters’ Strawman Attacks

No one is trying to ban the use of condom or any other type of contraception, idiots! The alleged proposal to ban the use of contraception will NEVER succeed because that would be UNCONSTITUTIONAL… Buy your own condom and don’t ever ask for freebies, PARASITES!

Here’s Why Most Pro-Population Control Advocates Didn’t Actually Read the RH Bill

These new “isms”— environmentalism, feminism, pacifism, global warming alarmism, etc.— are part and parcel of the New Left. In the Philippines, those part of the New Left movement— who do not actually call themselves “Marxists” or “Communists”— are the RH bill supporters, Filipino Freethinkers (who are ardent supporters of population and government control), environmentalists, feminists, judicial activists (like former chief justice Reynato S. Puno who believes that the people have a right to demand the free delivery of education, health care and other welfare programs from the government), and all pro-welfare program advocates.

Collective Ignorance: The Root of Dictatorship and Economic Chaos

The people who are stupidly, ignorantly unaware of their own contradictions are the ones who are pushing this nation to political and economic disaster. It is very ironic that people like Tet Gallardo whine about oligarchy or the so-called cartels and monopolies, yet it is government intervention and controls, which they have been clamoring for, that caused and are causing the rise of the oligarchs and government-backed cartels and monopolies.

An Online Debate with an Ignoramus Filipino Statist: On RH Bill and the “Myth” of Capitalism

A Facebook friend posted my blog entitled RH Bill’s Fallacy of Overpopulation-Poverty Connection on his Facebook wall wherein someone reacted with the following comment:

“it was never about population, at least for us women, it has always been about choice; basically the choice that if men can’t be told not to stick it in, then we can still choose whether to bear their spawn or not.”

RH Bill’s Fallacy of Overpopulation-Poverty Link

It is true that population is increasing, but I don’t believe it can be legislated. It appears that the main reason of the bill’s supporters is theunfounded fear that overpopulation is somewhat linked to poverty. This contention is debatable and the burden of proof rests upon those who claim that overpopulation is the problem. It is wrong to totally attribute poverty to overpopulation, considering that fact that there are even worse social problems confronting this country, like corruption, people’s stupidity and faith-based fanaticism, and most especially massive government intervention.

The Clash Between Two Evils: Anti-contraception theocrats vs. Anti-rights Fascists

The only proper way to counter this activist group is to engage in intellectual debate and discussion (through blogs, discussion, online campaign, etc.) We are all engaged in a battle of ideas. Since this issue- and every issue, I must say- is both intellectual and ideological, the opposing party must have enough intellectual ammunition in order to expose what’s wrong with the ideas, beliefs and motives of this anti-contraception activist group.

Welfare State: The Evil Agenda Behind the RH Bill

My anti-reproductive health bill articles clearly show that I did not resort name-calling. I simply identified the ideological or philosophical “motivation” of my opponents—their belief system or that which motivates them to dogmatically cling on to their pro-RH bill position. I am motivated by my pro-free market and pro-reason convictions. I don’t believe in welfare-statism or nanny statism. The pro-RH bill mob, which I strongly detest, is motivated by its kneejerk belief that the government must provide the people, especially the poor, with their needs, that we are our brothers’ keepers, and that we must collectively contribute to the promotion of the common good or the greater good.

Deconstructing the Neo-Nazi Propaganda and Agenda of the Filipino Freefarters and the Socialists

What the hell is happening in this country? We have some groups of socialists, statists, nihilists, neo-mystics and neo-Nazis

who firmly believed they have a right to barge into a peaceful gathering of a group of people and then demand they are entitled to freedom of assembly and free speech. I’m talking about the latest Hitlerian, neo-fascist stunt of the pro-Reproductive Health bill mindless mob composed of socialists and a group of neo-mystics and neo-Nazis (the Filipino Freefarters) who protested and tried to desecrate the gathering of anti-RH bill Catholics inside the Manila Cathedral.

“Pro-life” Arguments Against Abortion are Fallacious

First, abortion is a philosophical issue. What the anti-abortion advocates try to do is criminalize abortion. Our anti-abortion law regards fetuses as fully developed human beings. We must understand that we have this concept of rights, and rights are important because they are a condition to man’s existence. Rights, which specifically and fundamentally means freedom of action or the right to act, pertains only to individuals. Rights pertain only to actual human beings, not to “potential” human beings. A fetus is a “potential” human life. Therefore, it is wrong to ascribe rights to a fetus or to a “potential” because “freedom of action” pertains only to an actual person.

Prof. Monsod Versus Free-Market Capitalism and Freedom

Yes, there are popular economists in this country today who are ignorant or negligent of the proper concept of rights and freedom and recommend statist policies to serve the greater good. In her October 23 column published in the Philippine Daily Inquirer, Filipino economist Solita “Winnie” Collas-Monsod clarified her stance on the Reproductive Health bill issue and family planning by labeling herself as “pro-life, pro-poor, pro-women”.  She then supported this label by citing depressing statistics that depict the country’s socio-economic condition.

Dr. Hendricks on the Reproductive Health Bill

“I quit when medicine was placed under State control some years ago,” said Dr. Hendricks. “Do you know what it takes to perform a brain operation? Do you know the kind of skill it demands, and the years of passionate, merciless, excruciating devotion that go to acquire that skill? That was what I could not place at the disposal of men whose sole qualification to rule me was their capacity to spout the fraudulent generalities that got them elected to the privilege of enforcing their wishes at the point of a gun.

The RH Bill’s Impact on Your Rights and Freedom

The system would corrupt the entire medical profession. Since RH services would be partly or even fully subsidized by the government and/or paid for by employers, hospitals might look at opportunities to get more patients or RH beneficiaries rather than focusing on quality health care. How much should a hospital charge for every RH care visit to be covered by Philhealth or a private company? How would the government or state regulators know whether a particular clinic or hospital mis-declare the number of its patients, its price, etc?”

On Science, Overpopulation Myth, and the Idiocy of the Filipino Freethinkers

There’s a fascist group of neo-mystics (atheists who have distorted concept of reason, of science, and of freedom) who strongly push for the passage of an anti-population bill in Congress. This neo-Nazi collective—the Filipino Free-Farters (Freethinkers)—claim that their arguments for the Reproductive Health bill are based on science and objective facts. However, my objective and honest analysis of their flawed and sophistic arguments reveal that nothing could be further than the truth.

On Malthus, Overpopulation Myth, and the Fascist RH Bill

Now I don’t believe in shrinking resources. There are shrinking resources because man’s freedom is shrinking. What do I mean by this? If world governments allowed economic freedom to flourish and if the stupid environmentalists and their nihilist cohorts (e.g., the secular humanists, freethinkers, and religious people) stayed at bay and kept their stupidity a private matter, there would have been a new technological and scientific renaissance on earth. Technological and scientific development is only possible in a free society. By free society I mean an informed society. A society that does not regard man as a sacrificial animal or the means to the ends of others. And we would only be able to achieve a free society if men truly understood the real essence and concept of reason.

Debunking the ‘Guiding Principles’ of the Fascist RH Bill

The supporters and advocates of a controversial legislative proposals don’t have a clue. The so dangerous and so divisive Reproductive Health bill authored by a statist in Congress is all about Fascism and Statism! There’s only one explanation why the strongest supporters and advocates of this anti-reason, anti-science and anti-freedom bill come from the academia, the media institutions, and the country’s intellectual hub. Most people who passionately and desperately push for the passage of this bill are educated and professionals. Well, it’s no surprise why most socialists/leftists are college graduates or students from public colleges and universities.

Secularists Against the RH Bill: WHAT WE BELIEVE IN?

I believe that I have to clarify “our” secular views or arguments against the fascist Reproductive Health bill. This is to counter the claim of most ignorant statist and dishonest proponents/supports of the RH bill that most or even all opponents of the bill are religionists or Catholics. We offer secular arguments against RH bill. Meaning, our secular arguments are founded on reason, individualism and free-market capitalism, not on faith or mysticism.

Reproductive Health Bill: A Fascist Bill!

We have to fight this bill by exposing its many contradictions and evil intents to violate our individual rights and freedom. We are all engaged in a battle of ideas. I oppose this bill not because it’s against the will of God, but because it is dangerous, non-objective and unconstitutional. We are still free to do what we want in this country. We are free to buy condoms at any convenience store without facing any legal threat to our liberty. Yes, the Catholic Church is against any kind of family planning method and contraception, but we are still free to disobey or follow its religious decrees. The Church threatened of “communication”, I say “excommunication” is a thing of the past- of the Dark Ages when the Catholic Church had an absolute monopoly on the fields of religion and politics.

The Height of Stupidity of Filipino Fascists

A rabid supporter of a fascist bill called the Reproductive Health bill and credulous anti-population advocate pulled a cheap, pathetic stunt in front of the Manila Cathedral altar during a mass with Manila Mayor Alfredo Lim and several Catholic bishops present. This Filipino fascist held a sign bearing the word “Damaso”, a reference to the diabolical friar from Jose Rizal’s famous novel “Noli Me Tangere”. To call the attention of the modern-day friars who perhaps represent Rizal’s ‘Padre Damaso’, this atheist protester then screamed: “Stop getting involved in politics.” He was seized by the police and taken to a nearby detention center.

The Fight Against RH Bill Continues: KILL THE BILL!

Apart from surrounding himself with well-known Marxists and progressives, President Noynoy Aquino recently showed his determination to support the fascistic, evil Reproductive Health bills authored by socialists in Congress. Reports said Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. said he is prepared to face the rage of the Catholic church in making sure the bills on reproductive health pending in the House of Representatives are tackled extensively and voted on by lawmakers.

A Comment on Population Control and Abortion

However, this doesn’t mean that I’m not in favor of abortion. I am an atheist for the very reason that I don’t want to destroy reason. Most atheists in this country, the free-FARTERS in particular, are the most ardent supporters of this anti-population bill. But this doesn’t mean that all women in this country must undergo abortion. I believe that every human being is responsible for his/her own body. Any woman who has no capacity- physically, financially, emotionally, intellectually or psychologically- to deliver and/or raise a child has the right to demand abortion. An embryo is not a person. This means that any society has no right to deprive any woman of her right to undergo abortion.

Don’t Vote for these pro-RH Bill Trapos!

As the old saying goes, ‘you know one when you see one. And this is exactly the case as the most ardent advocates of population control have compiled a list of politicians running for public office this May 10 national elections who made an either expressed or implied support to the controversial Reproductive Health bill that would force both employers and doctors to provide RH services to designated beneficiaries against their will.

The Tyranny of the Anti-Population Bill

The staunch supporters of the Reproductive Health bill authored by some communist politicians in Congress peddled a number of altruistic grounds and rationalization to ensure the passage of their socialist proposal. Some of their grounds are the following: a) to provide the needed reproductive health care services for women; b) to help the poor; and c) to curb the alleged population explosion in the country.

The Psychology of the Anti-Population Cult

Today the issue of population control in this country is widely seen as the battle between the anti-population mystics who support an altruist legislative proposal and the religionists, who tied their arguments to Biblical grounds. Unfortunately, none of the opponents of this legislative proposal—the Reproductive Health Bill authored by socialist representatives in Congress—offered a proper, rational argument to counter the assumptions of the anti-population cultists. This is the reason why the RH bill debate is gaining more supporters than opponents—and this is also the reason why this country is moving toward complete collectivism.

Reproductive Health Care is NOT a Right!

My fundamental premise is this: I don’t believe the government has the right to coerce anyone under the concept of common good or social welfare to provide for the needs of others, and I also don’t believe that need is a claim or a license to enslave a particular group of people. First, it is important to understand that we’re not yet talking about the legality of this bill, because its proponents are still in the campaign process. The wave of public opinion determines the life or death of this legislative proposal, and I’ve heard that the Arroyo regime ordered its temporary confinement.

Reproductive Health Bill Revives Old War Between Two Mystics

IT seems that a lot of people in this country, particularly those who ardently support a leftist bill being pushed by  Leftist politicians in Congress, have miserably inflated their flawed logic and way of thinking. They accused all Filipinos who expressed their opposition to the controversial Reproductive Health Bill as religionists or Christians. These misguided supporters of the legislative proposal firmly believe that anyone who is against it is a believer of a non-existent mystic entity they call God.

Reproductive Health Bill: It’s Evil, Not Just Wrong

I oppose RH Bill not on the grounds of religious argument (that it is anti-Life), but because it is not part of the function of a government to institutionalize slavery, by sacrificing one group to another group. I do not share the sentiments of the religionists and the Catholics that this bill is pro-abortion or against the sanctity of life. I believe this proposition is anti-Life, but I do not agree with the religious position and definition of the term. To me it is anti-Life in the sense that it kills man’s motivation to achieve and the value of man’s achievement.

Reproductive Health and Population Development Act of 2008

The State upholds and promotes responsible parenthood, informed choice, birth spacing and respect for life in conformity with internationally recognized human rights standards. The State shall uphold the right of the people, particularly women and their organizations, to effective and reasonable participation in the formulation and implementation of the declared policy.

Related Article:

Health Care Is Not a Right by Dr. Leonard Peikoff

254 Comments leave one →
  1. Nandy permalink
    February 28, 2010 3:38

    I agree

    • chili con carne permalink
      February 28, 2010 3:38

      Me too! Me too! Everything this man says is true! He is the second coming of Christ!

    • March 2, 2014 3:38

      Pro RH BIll
      With the rise of human population all over our archipelago, I believe it is high time that the act should be seen as a guide, especially for those who seem to be unable to sustain the basic needs of their families. Besides, it emphasizes on “responsible parenthood, informed choice, birth spacing and respect for life.” I also do not see the reason why the Catholic Church is reacting negatively towards this bill. I think it is very necessary for people to ponder on this bill because I do not see that it is trying to intrude into some people’s personal lives, as others see it.
      I AM A CATHOLIC… With my age, I have basic knowledge about the reproductive health care and at the same time, I consider family planning methods and techniques as helpful especially when we put our children’s future as our main concern and priority. While it is true that the Bible said: “Go and multiply,” I see no reason that we should let our children suffer from poverty, see them unable to eat three meals a day, and worst is, if we cannot even send them to schools for their education. Anyway, the bill says that it has no bias towards either the modern or natural methods of family planning.
      As a filipino youth the need to educate young students about contraceptives is not as awkward as others might perceive it to be. What more, if we are open about these topics, we will be empowered as we go through our adolescent stage and adulthood. I was taken aback when I heard of somebody saying that the RH Bill is encouraging premarital and extramarital sex as long as people use contraceptives. I think this is totally wrong. To campaign for and publicize the proper use of contraceptives is totally different from further promoting immoral acts.
      Ignorance of the law does not excuse us from being punished. This is one way of saying that if we did not use the contraceptives properly, let us not blame anyone for the ill condition that we experience. Let us not accuse others if we experience miscarriage because of improper health care. So when people decide to use contraceptives, they should initiate to be appropriately educated about such.
      Using contraceptives is not the same as aborting an innocent child inside a woman’s womb. Family planning should never be equated with abortion. Maybe it should be made clear to everybody that contraceptives intend to prevent pregnancy but not to disrupt pregnancy.
      We all need guidance no matter how young or old we are. We are not perfect individuals in this earth. I find the RH Bill helpful considering the current problems and issues that we are now facing in our modern society. We have abortion among teen-agers, thefts here and there, blocked canals because of excessive plastic trashes, extreme poverty, and the like because we refuse to be educated. We refuse to listen and be guided. We reject empowerment. We are insensitive to the needs and feelings of humankind. And why are all these problems both magnified literally and philosophically? It is because of the tremendous population growth that we are going through. So why hate the RH Bill???

      Josarel C.Piasan
      Contributor http://ourhappyschool.com

    • March 3, 2014 3:38

      Pro RH BIll

      With the rise of human population all over our archipelago, I believe it is high time that the act should be seen as a guide, especially for those who seem to be unable to sustain the basic needs of their families. Besides, it emphasizes on “responsible parenthood, informed choice, birth spacing and respect for life.” I also do not see the reason why the Catholic Church is reacting negatively towards this bill. I think it is very necessary for people to ponder on this bill because I do not see that it is trying to intrude into some people’s personal lives.

      Ignorance of the law does not excuse us from being punished. This is one way of saying that if we did not use the contraceptives properly, let us not blame anyone for the ill condition that we experience. Let us not accuse others if we experience miscarriage because of improper health care. So when people decide to use contraceptives, they should initiate to be appropriately educated about such.

      Using contraceptives is not the same as aborting an innocent child inside a woman’s womb. Family planning should never be equated with abortion. Maybe it should be made clear to everybody that contraceptives intend to prevent pregnancy but not to disrupt pregnancy.

      Josarel C.Piasan

      Contributor: http://ourhappyschool.com/extracurricular/rh-bill-online-voting-and-open-friendly-debate

  2. Chris permalink
    March 22, 2010 3:38

    I agree that the state should not coerce people to as to the number of children they should have!

    I also agree on what is stated on the RH Bill:

    “…individuals and couples do decide freely and responsibly the number, spacing and timing of their children; to make other decisions concerning reproduction free of discrimination, coercion and violence; to have the information and means to carry out their decisions; and to attain the highest standard of sexual and reproductive health.”

    Now how can I agree on both your argument and that of RH Bill???

    AHA! Maybe you’re ignorant of the contents of the RH Bill!

    Here’s the link to enlighten you: http://jlp-law.com/blog/full-text-of-house-bill-no-5043-reproductive-health-and-population-development-act-of-2008/

    • March 22, 2010 3:38

      Do not be ignorant and lazy and assuming. Read the rest of the articles, especially this one: The Tyranny of the Anti-Population Bill.

      In the first place, if you honestly understood and agreed with what your read, then you would be against the bill.

      • RioRio permalink
        December 6, 2011 3:38

        RH Bill should not be enacted!Thank you

      • Chris Andersen permalink
        December 29, 2013 3:38

        Sarcasm. froinviber. Sarcasm. Learn it.

  3. raskolanikov permalink
    May 2, 2010 3:38

    will be posting this in a forum to spread the word.

    forums.mukamo.com

  4. October 1, 2010 3:38

    Read the whole bill first! Sec.22 of the bill – RH Bill 5043 makes it criminally liable for any violations on the requirements of the bill thus making it mandatory and not really a matter of choice. All married males, medical professionals , teachers and local gov’t officials are now all liable to specifically follow each detail of the said bill. So no to the RH Bill.

    • danbrown permalink
      October 1, 2010 3:38

      your comment only shows what an idiot you are.
      sec22 are penalties to those proven guilty of the prohibited acts (sec21) of this act.

      i’m not a lawyer, but i can clearly see from your argument that you are an IDIOT.

      • October 1, 2010 3:38

        you’re the biggest IDIOT here. Did you ever read the bill? Read these:

        http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2010/02/09/the-tyranny-of-the-anti-population-bill/

        http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2009/10/20/reproductive-health-and-population-development-act-of-2008/

        This is the reason why any scheming potential dictator can easily turn this country into a slave pen because you don’t even bother to educate yourselves and protect your rights.

      • danbrown permalink
        October 2, 2010 3:38

        @froivinder : your latest post only reflects the level (read: LACK OF IT) of your
        “intelligence” .

        ’nuff said !!!

        go find some DAMASO to suck

    • danbrown permalink
      October 2, 2010 3:38

      hahaha. i will not argue with a bird brain fool.
      you have celarly advertised to the world what a complete IDIOT you are.
      even quoting an article authored by your “idol” . hahaha

      • October 2, 2010 3:38

        So what are those prohibited acts? Kindly enumerate. And what’s the right of the government to force anybody against his will to comply with an invalid, unconstitutional bill (if enacted into law)? Show me then that you’re not a trolling idiot who supports fascist Celdran and his stupid ilk.

      • wiz permalink
        October 21, 2010 3:38

        @danBrown..you cannot argue now coz you lack brilliant reasoning. All you do is cuss and puss..a total dumbA*%s#x is how you advertise yourself to the world!!!

    • Chris Andersen permalink
      December 29, 2013 3:38

      @Honorio: Violations to any law makes you criminally liable, you dumb fuck.

  5. danbrown permalink
    October 2, 2010 3:38

    @froivinder : your latest post only reflects the level (read: LACK OF IT) of your
    “intelligence” .

    ’nuff said !!!

    go find some DAMASO to suck

    • October 2, 2010 3:38

      It’s because it’s either you didn’t read the bill or you don’t have the brain to understand it. You cannot even enumerate those prohibited acts. Get real, troll. I know you’re one of the Free-Farters trolling my blogsite. Well, let me state here that ALL FILIPINO FREETHINKERS (FREE-FARTERS) ARE STUPID!

      • wiz permalink
        October 21, 2010 3:38

        good job there!

      • Christene Delacruz permalink
        November 29, 2010 3:38

        I read your blog but the thing is, you are so rude to call us freefarters when it only means we have a different opinion.

        The people who comment here say that there are loopholes, etc. Then why don’t you people say which items in the bill you agree on and which don’t you agree on? So far, all I could hear from the anti-rh bill camp are:

        “It’s immoral”
        “You’ll burn in hell” – What the hell?!
        “Condoms are evil” – What the fook?!

        I’m just an ordinary person but this comment struck my attention:

        …For instance, there this SELF-CONTRADICTING CLAUSE 3-M:
        “While nothing in this Act changes the law on abortion, as abortion remains a crime and is punishable, the government shall ensure that women seeking care for post-abortion complications shall be treated and counseled in a humane, non-judgmental and compassionate manner.”
        Abortion remains a crime and is punishable, but how can a case be promulgated if the person who had the abortion shall be treated in a non-judgmental manner? How can judgment be passed, then? Can anyone file a case against her, pursuant to Articles 256, 258 and 259 of the Revised Penal Code?

        — You know what I understood about this clause? Abortion remains a crime but if ever a person underwent abortion, (abortion inducing concoctions are readily available near the Quiapo church) the state will provide medical care for the said person. Do you even know how many mothers die because of illegal abortions? Just because the state recognizes that abortion as illegal, it doesn’t mean that they’d deny medical care to those who are suffering from complications and cannot afford to pay for one.

        The RH bill is for us women. If you have an opinion, say it nicely. Calling us freefarters is a low blow. State which parts of the bill have loopholes and post it (provided that it is not laced with religious bias etc.)

        You wouldn’t get asinine posts if you didn’t call free thinkers as freefarters. Is that your way of getting a lot of readers? Can’t you just be nice?

        My friend just commented on my post and she asks: “nagbigay ba sya ng country na may rh bill na nagkaroon ng slavery and dictatorship?” – I think you need to answer this question.

        And as for Celdran’s stunt, I also don’t think that anyone could just barge-in a mass or religious activity and protest. But the thing is, would CC do such a thing if one of the bishops here in the Philippines didn’t even mention EXCOMMUNICATION? Excommunication is no laughing matter, sure we can just laugh it off nowadays but to me, it’s something deeper. Did you know that during the Inquisition 50,000,000 people were slaughtered by the popes because they were viewed as heretics? Yeah sure, emotions run high with his stunt. But don’t forget that he was provoked to do such a thing. What do they intend to do? Burn the president?

      • November 29, 2010 3:38

        Christene Delacruz,

        I didn’t call your organization “freefarter” just because you oppose the RH bill. Try to use the blog’s search engine and then type in “filipino freethinkers” to know my previous posts about your nihilistic organization.

        But you may start with this… http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2010/11/21/welfare-state-the-agenda-behind-the-rh-bill/

        As to the RH bill, I have stated many times over that I don’t share the Catholic view. I have already tackled all the issues you raised here in my previous anti-RH bill posts.

      • November 29, 2010 3:38

        @Christene: I posted the part about abortion.

        You know what? It does not matter how you understand that part. The fact that an alternate interpretation of the law can easily be deduced from this part (aside from your own view) already is a serious matter that sheds negative light on the RH Bill.

        What if you have a different view? Your view is not exclusive, and it is not the only interpretation there is.

        How old are you? You say you haven’t heard any serious opposition without name-calling. So you thought my post is not a serious opposition?

        DO NOT CLOSE YOURSELF TO HEALTHY DISCUSSION ABOUT THE BILL.

        From how I see it, you people are not freethinkers. You have made closed up your mind and won’t take other opinion seriously. You are closed thinkers.

        Also, about the excommunication thing? Have you ever considered that the media has misinterpreted the bishop’s quote? I don’t think so. Close-minded ka kasi.

      • November 29, 2010 3:38

        @Christene: Maybe you should visit this blog if you want nice people to talk to you: http://peopleformedia.wordpress.com

      • Ms. Y permalink
        June 10, 2011 3:38

        Ooooh. I think you have just emphasised your moronic intentions. Do not call Filipino free thinkers stupid, because we believe the notion that would possibly save our country from sinking further into the depths of overpopulation.

        Then what do you suggest then we do, if we do not pass the RH bill? Educate the masses, the younger generations, millions of married men for MANDATORY ABSTINENCE?

        Good God. You’re losing your mind.

    • The Author Doesn't Have a Life permalink
      November 30, 2010 3:38

      For those who could clearly see the stupidity of the blog owner, don’t waste your time on him. He clearly doesn’t know what he is talking about.

  6. Christian permalink
    October 3, 2010 3:38

    i find it interesting!!! congrats, i like this page,, please make it known to the public through facebook. you have a very sound arugument, its very much convincing than the faith based argument.

    • RioRio permalink
      December 6, 2011 3:38

      You’re right Christian it gives a deep understanding on RH Bill is all about. :)

  7. mark permalink
    October 4, 2010 3:38

    kung sa mercury drug may contraceptives nga and sa mga 711or ministop may condom na binebenta bakit hindi yun hinaharang ng simbahan? anong problema kung maging abot kaya sa mahihirap yung mga contraceptives na yan na sila talaga ang mas may kailangan. its not killing life, when there is nothing to kill.

    • JASVEE permalink
      September 6, 2011 3:38

      I REALLY AGREE ABOUT THAT!!!

  8. geek permalink
    October 9, 2010 3:38

    The supporters here clearly want to keep everyone in the dark about the motives of the bill. I also think they do not read the bill in full, choosing only passages that they agree on. Why do they want to pass the bill in full without any revisions, when it is in fact full of loopholes? Is money involved?

    For instance, there this SELF-CONTRADICTING CLAUSE 3-M:

    “While nothing in this Act changes the law on abortion, as abortion remains a crime and is punishable, the government shall ensure that women seeking care for post-abortion complications shall be treated and counseled in a humane, non-judgmental and compassionate manner.”

    Abortion remains a crime and is punishable, but how can a case be promulgated if the person who had the abortion shall be treated in a non-judgmental manner? How can judgment be passed, then? Can anyone file a case against her, pursuant to Articles 256, 258 and 259 of the Revised Penal Code?

    What a sneaky, sneaky way to go on the way to legalize abortion.

    PLEASE READ THE BILL, UNDERSTAND IT, DIGEST EVERY WORD. DO NOT JUST READ AND GLOSS AND BE JUBILANT ABOUT IT. HAVE CRITICAL MINDS, PEOPLE!

    Free-thinkers are, in fact, close-minded individuals.

    Kudos to you froivinder. Keep it up! Can I request a post from you? What are the boundaries of freedom of speech? Many ‘free-thinkers’ tout Celdran’s stunt as ‘freedom of speech’, but is it, really?

    • October 9, 2010 3:38

      Hi geek!

      I tackled Celdran’s fascist, irrational stunt here… http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2010/10/01/fascist-celdran/

      No, he cannot practice his right to free speech by violating first the rights of others. That is, you cannot hold a protest inside a mall owned by Henry Sy and claim you are entitled to your right to free speech. Free speech is both absolute and limited. Yes, our right to free speech must not be abridged by Congress or anyone who wields political power. This means that our right to express our opinion is absolute. However, we cannot abuse it by maliciously defaming others or by holding disrespectful protests within the property of others.

      • wiz permalink
        October 21, 2010 3:38

        bilib ako sayo..cool!

      • Ms. Y permalink
        June 11, 2011 3:38

        Celdran is not the issue here. You cannot judge a group based on the actions of one person. That’s generalising.

        The bill is promoting the right of the woman, the man, THE FAMILY, a better lifestyle choice than what is being endorsed by the main perpetrators of centuries of bullshit and lies (you know who these are).

        Sadly, that is what you misunderstand from the bill and the people trying to promote it. “Free speech is both absolute and limited.” you said. But where does the responsibility lie? Don’t you think by voting against the bill that you ARE NOT exercising the right of the democratic people of the Philippines to have a choice? Where exists your “absolution” and “limitation”?

    • June 12, 2011 3:38

      “While nothing in this Act changes the law on abortion, as abortion remains a crime and is punishable, the government shall ensure that women seeking care for post-abortion complications shall be treated and counseled in a humane, non-judgmental and compassionate manner.”

      Abortion remains a crime and is punishable, but how can a case be promulgated if the person who had the abortion shall be treated in a non-judgmental manner?

      How can judgment be passed, then?

      Can anyone file a case against her, pursuant to Articles 256, 258 and 259 of the Revised Penal Code?

      What a sneaky, sneaky way to go on the way to legalize abortion.

      Indeed sneaky.

      How they’d sneak it in?

      That’s easy! Here it is

      SEC. 26. Repealing Clause. – All laws, decrees, Orders, issuances, rules and regulations contrary to or inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed, amended or modified accordingly.

      Therefore repeal the — 1987 Constitution

      Section 12. The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution. It shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception.

      (Potential repealing clause or amendment )

      >>> but in the event of imminent danger to the health, welfare and survival of the mother, the state shall give priority to the safety of the mother by providing the necessary life saving measures — considering possible termination of pregnancy. Just a possibility.

      Or else this will become a common scenario:

      Iha bakit ka nag-pa-abort alam mo bang illegal yan! Ok gagamutin ka muna namin pagka-tapos tuloy ka na sa kulungan ok!

      But wait, I don’t think that’s necessary because with the injectable abortifacient disguise as vaccine that they will “provide for free” to protect the Reproductive health of the “poor and marginalized” child bearing age women, the fetus will have no chance to reach implantation stage.

      There’s nothing to abort because miscarriage will take it’s place after conception. There’s no expulsion of fetus…just a little more than usual bleeding — an expected side effect of contraceptives (according to the fine print label).

      Remember the Tetanus Vaccine laced with human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) given to unsuspecting 3 million women ages 14-44 (child bearing age) back in the 90’s?

      If most of your readers are young and innocent then, I trust that they can Google and visit the history.

      So speaking of that vaccine…

      Guess what … one of the most influential proponent of depopulation agenda 21 A.K.A RH Bill, the Billionaire Bill gates spoke about this in a conference of the “good club” causing intentional serious blow to drastically reduce the number of “useless eaters” in the society — hmmm I wonder who those useless eaters are? — poor, marginalize and the inferior race.

      In his own words:

      Gates declares, “First we got population. The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.”

      Woah, 10-15% of the 6.8 Billion is astronomical!!!

      If they do a great job and we do the Math that’ll probably include those of us here who are not billionaires.

      You know I’d like to believe him because he’s got his billions on this program…matter of fact the Bill Gates Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation and Turner Conglomerate are the biggest donors that pushes fund for RH globally (they’re too nice to share their wealth, don’t they!).

      But the thing is, that funding is released through World Bank which is notorious in inserting clandestine conditions into the loan contract.

      With the recent WB approval of $250-million to the Philippines I wonder if they included in the contract to use this money for Comprehensive Reproductive Health, Planned Parenthood and Population Development…

      The string attached will be —- cut your f-in population or else. We know in history that that money will not come as cash but bound by the use of our resources for their vested interest.

      Sa madaling salita magbabayad tayo ng interest ng utang sa napakahabang panahon (through tax increase) “niluluto tayo sa sarili nating mantika”.

      Hmmm I maybe wrong. They don’t have the heart to do that. I think they really want to alleviate poverty in the Philippines. Right! Raaayyyyt.

      OK. I rest my case.

      JJ:>)

    • JASVEE permalink
      September 7, 2011 3:38

      indeed, what celdran did was wrong and he exceed the boundaries of “freedom of speech” and i really don’t agree about that…… but the real issue here is the RH BILL and not celdran…..

  9. October 23, 2010 3:38

    You got a really useful blog I have been here reading for about half an hour. I am a newbie and your post is valuable for me.

  10. homi permalink
    November 26, 2010 3:38

    Your arguments are all fallacious and totally ignorant. I pity the people you have been fooling. What have you been taking lately?

    • November 26, 2010 3:38

      Well, I’d be very glad if you can pinpoint and identify “all” of my “fallacious and totally ignorant” arguments, otherwise you’re nothing but a stupid troll.

      • homi permalink
        November 26, 2010 3:38

        You are stupid. No sense discussing with you, since your blog is just trash i trampled on. Good day human garbage! =)

    • November 26, 2010 3:38

      You resort to name-calling and poisoning the well? Are you able to answer the “fallacious” arguments?

      • November 26, 2010 3:38

        Well, if you trolls read any of my blogs, you’d find out that they’re answers to stupid pro-RH bill fanatics who know nothing about the intents of the bill. But it appears that you simply resorted to attack by intimidation, as you didn’t read any of my works, and that you’re simply here to annoy me.

        Usually I delete troll comments.

  11. November 26, 2010 3:38

    Goodness, froivinber. My reply was obviously for homi. See that it is on the comment level two, and not a reply to you? Which means which means which means I agree with you. Good day to you.

    • November 26, 2010 3:38

      Ok. Copied then. The time interval appeared too suspicious to me so you can’t blame me for that.

      Anyone who wishes to disagree and argue must follow these guidelines:

      1. Read my blogs and properly understand my arguments. Why? Because those who didn’t read my blogs and who simply called me names for espousing a different point of view mistook me for a pro-Catholic or a pro-RH bill religionist. I’m an atheist. They also thought I’m not in favor of family planning. So it’s important that they understand where I’m coming from.

      2. Identify and pinpoint my “fallacious” arguments by properly citing my works.

      3. Do not distort or misrepresent my views.

      4. Argue properly.

      • November 26, 2010 3:38

        I’m subscribed to your blog so I get all comments emailed to my gmail address. I’m also online 24/7. :-D

  12. November 26, 2010 3:38

    Dear homi,

    Stupid commenter is stupid.

    Just want you to know,
    homi bihon

  13. December 1, 2010 3:38

    This is for all pro-RH bill fanatics who can’t just comprehend the very simple fact that one needs to read my blogs to understand that SECULAR ARGUMENTS are the best defense against the statist RH Bill: I DON’T SHARE THE CATHOLIC VIEW ON THIS ISSUE. If you still insist that the only argument against this bill is built on religious views, then YOU’RE A BUNCH OF IGNORAMUSES!

    And to some educated idiots out there, my view is NOT the same as the Republican Party’s view (in fact America’s Republican Party has its own version of universal health care, which I completely oppose.) My arguments are purely built on the premise that the RH bill or any statist legislative proposals (e.g., universal health care, antitrust law) runs counter to our individual rights and the concept of the free market system! If you still don’t get this, then better undergo some reeducation process.

    • RioRio permalink
      December 6, 2011 3:38

      It is easy to understand fellas….
      nice blogs.

  14. December 1, 2010 3:38
  15. exnihilonihilfit permalink
    December 1, 2010 3:38

    Dear Author,

    U got good points, you really do! and the Catholics/Christians were enjoying them as well!

    but to help reduce future liabilities for our country (i.e. babysitting future non-productive, non-taxpayers and entities of national shame brought about by overpopulation, which will be brought about by simple and quick releases of libido from em uneducated, unfortunate and irresponsible citizens), RH bill is quite reasonable and I think must be passed.

    it might not be the most practical for the current state of affairs but its the bitter medicine.

    • December 2, 2010 3:38

      “RH bill is quite reasonable and I think must be passed.”

      What makes it reasonable? To be honest, I have covered all the lies, Marxist rhetoric, and pure stupidity of the pro-RH bill fanatics.

    • December 2, 2010 3:38

      Goodness, Mr. whatever your handle is. These are people you are talking about, and not liabilities. Many of your pro-RH Bill people are now showing your colors. Your are not fighting for the rights of the poor, but you actually desire to reduce their numbers. You just can’t stand the poor, no?

      It is not their fault that they are “non-productive, non-taxpayers and entities of national shame”, as you say. They are what they are today because the government has neglected them for so long. What have you done to help them?

      These “uneducated, unfortunate and irresponsible citizens” are not liabilities, but assets. Give them all jobs and the country’s production shoots up. I hope you can understand that. By the tone of your voice, you are saying you are an entity of national pride. Let’s see if you can prove that.

      • exnihilonihilfit permalink
        December 5, 2010 3:38

        @MC ooops, sorry did i press a button?

        by the tone of my voice or the way i expressed it, yeap, I did sound rude.
        and by the tone of your voice, you are being emotional.

        What I have done to help them? is paying my tax is not enough? Yes, its a selfish thing to say but really, I dont need to enumerate what i have done to some of our unfortunate brothers and sisters in the Philippines.. aside from the fact that I don’t owe you any explanation whatsoever. =p

        @froivinber

        yeap you may only have covered those of stupid pro-RH bill fanatics’
        and..
        I love you <3

  16. oopps permalink
    January 23, 2011 3:38

    RH bill will pave a way to slavery and dictatorship??? sounds like a conspiracy theory to me. LOL.

    • January 24, 2011 3:38

      It’s because you know nothing about the bill and its disastrous impact… That’s how stupid people gladly and willingly bought dictatorship in the past.

  17. Gene permalink
    February 22, 2011 3:38

    Bravo! This post is fresh air compared to most other discussions. I enjoyed the read, and indeed I’ve learned from this and another post

    http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2010/03/23/why-the-new-atheists-love-universal-health-care/

    However, your position looks very draconian – I am entitled only to that which I produce, and no one who cannot produce something of value to me has to right to share my produce as I have no right to share in other people’s produce if I cannot produce something of value to them – Against redistributing wealth from producers to non-producers – if I am not mistaken? This includes universal health care, under which is the RH bill which provides reproductive health care for the poor, right?

    To what extent should government involvement be with regards to providing health care and education to its less fortunate citizens, if at all? Should the government involve taxpayer money in giving the poor the means to jumpstart into high-productivity citizens?

    I would like to learn the entire gist of what you and your group are advocating. I’d read more of your articles, but our network proxy only allows a certain number of minutes to view non-work related websites.

    • February 22, 2011 3:38

      You can share whatever you produced to other people and that’s moral so long as you don’t put others above your own interest or welfare. However, it becomes immoral when you ask the government to redistribute wealth in order to serve those who have less in life. This is a situation wherein everybody becomes enslaved to everybody. In fact, this socialist/progressive scheme makes benevolence and charity impossible, because charity is supposed to be voluntary, NOT forced by the state. When charity or benevolence is forced by the state via the imposition of statist laws and edicts, that’s when some group of people are elected by law or political decree to be immolated or sacrificed in the name of the common good.

      For example, just give a look at the provisions of the RH bill or the Responsible Parenthood bill. It doesn’t take a lawyer or a law graduate to know the kind of individuals who would be sacrificed by our lawmakers in order to serve the interest of the poor and women. Try to read the provision of Section 17 of the consolidated bill passed by Lagman and his ilk. http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2011/02/16/responsible-parenthood-bill-a-fascist-legislation-by-another-name/

      As to Universal Health care. This one-payer system is the grand mother of all health care schemes by the government for it covers RH bill and others. Universal health care can cover individuals from WOMB to TOMB, although they vary from country to country. The single-payer system in Great Britain, France, Cuba, Venezuela and all socialist countries was founded on the premise that the government- like God- must act as the provider of people’s needs. However at the end of the day, this single-payer system has unintended consequences- higher and more taxes, brain drain as employers fled those countries, medical brain drain, more regulations, price controls, etc., long list of beneficiaries, inefficient service, corruption, unreported deaths (this is the case of some countries like Cuba in order to hide the truth from the international community), FORCED abortion by the state (the case of China), among others. In short, this scheme is EVIL and only breeds EVIL.

      You asked: “To what extent should government involvement be with regards to providing health care and education to its less fortunate citizens, if at all? ”

      The government has no power to provide health care except through the use of force. Health care must come from our private efforts. The only role of the government is to protect individual rights.

      READ THESE:

      http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2010/11/21/welfare-state-the-agenda-behind-the-rh-bill/

      http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2010/12/27/collective-ignorance-the-roots-of-dictatorship-and-economic-chaos/

  18. Joseph Perez permalink
    March 4, 2011 3:38

    We dont see eye to eye on many froivinber things and we oppose each other on many other but this one we can agree but I agree to it only as the other half of the truth. But your truth is compelling already so as to defend it very well :) Kudos

  19. PROLIFE PHILIPPINES permalink
    March 6, 2011 3:38

    vGreetings in the name of the God, Lord Almighty, Ruler of all Heaven and of Earth

    It saddens me to read such hatred. Even though I know deep in my heart that the Lord is using you as an instrument of his divine will. You may not not it or even admit it to yourself but the Lord works in mysterious ways and even in your lust for violence and horrid words, he still makes use of your efforts to undermine the evil that is the RH Bill.

    I only pray that in time, you will come to realize that we are only like ants beneath his omnipotent might and nothing we do can escape his notice. Pride comes before the fall. Remember that. I only pray that He, in his infinite goodness, will inspire you to see that everything we say or do only serves to glorify his almighty Name.

    Your sister in the Lord,
    Josie

  20. Life Chooser permalink
    March 25, 2011 3:38

    I choose life… you should too….
    kill the bill, kill it now! now NA!

  21. GabbyD permalink
    April 23, 2011 3:38

    ” We are not born with a right to enslave other people by coercing them to contribute something for the benefit of the majority.”

    this means you are NEVER in favor of government taxation and spending. true?

    • April 23, 2011 3:38

      I normally don’t feed troll. An AP guy knows you. He said you love to troll. But let me answer that. I should answer know, but since we have tax laws in this country, I should say I am in favor of CUTTING TAXES or even scrapping other taxes like income tax, estate tax, and capital gains tax.

      Do you know anything wrong about the bill?

      • GabbyD permalink
        April 23, 2011 3:38

        i’m legitimately curious in your positions. thats why i’m asking. is this what “troll” means?

        now, the quoted part of your words SEEM to tell me that you dont believe in taxation AT ALL. any taxation that works means to take money from you, to give it to things that dont necessarily benefit you, or to things you wont always believe in.

        now, this is the reality of the existence of the state. taxation is a necessary for govt to exist.

        all taxes do this, even the taxes you didnt list, like consumption taxes.

        arguably the only taxes that might pass this test are user fees, tolls — but only if they revenue are earmarked. some fees are earmarked, some arent.

        but one things’ for certain — govt cannot exist on user fees.

      • April 23, 2011 3:38

        Do you have any idea about the current tax system here? Answer this because whatever you say will be the foundation of my reply to your comment…

        Now, what do you think about the bill?

      • GabbyD permalink
        April 23, 2011 3:38

        as for the bill, there are a few things that are questionable, such as the “malicious talk” part , which is difficult to enforce as to be useless, and the required investment in maternal health (which i’m not sure the govt can afford, as no costing has been done on it). Benk also has an interesting take on the required target skilled birther stats; i think he’s right — the current consolidated bill mysteriously LOWERS the minimum service provision re skilled midwives.

        none of these demolish the logic behind the bill, but a good review would definitely help.

        now as for the concept of taking money and funding things i dont necessarily agree with, my idea has always been that this is a necessary evil of living in a democracy.

        yes, i know about philippine taxation. i know taxation, generally.

      • April 23, 2011 3:38

        First, you have to read my blogs. I have given the most comprehensive take on the bill. That if you want to critique it. Don’t do a “BeNk” (?) who simply read some internet entries written by dishonest critics to make a very funny, sophistic, pathetic, highly fallacious evaluation of Rand. That just made him look so STUPID!

        “none of these demolish the logic behind the bill, but a good review would definitely help.”

        — What do you know about the bill and which of my arguments are not enough to demolish the logic (???!!!) behind the bill? Kindly cite some…

        OK . To know whether you’re not trolling…

        Here’s how a proper debate or discussion is done… Since we’re talking about the RH bill, why not do the following:

        1. Cite some or all of my illogical arguments against the bill.

        2. Give your counter-arguments…

        3. I will respond.

        I hope this is clear. Capisce?

      • GabbyD permalink
        April 23, 2011 3:38

        oh, i didnt want to discuss the bill. notice i didnt ask you about it?

        i think people can have their own opinions about it. esp, people on the internet…

        now, what i AM interested in was your take on taxation and government, as exemplified in that quote.

        this is particularly important to what you think the job of govt is. if you dont think the job of goverment is to teach people on reproductive health, then you will be against the bill. thats obvious.

        however, surely you know that the govt ALREADY (or may already) does some of this NOW, without the need to pass this bill specifically.

        the govt might do many things, some things you or i may not agree with.

        but the question is this: should we then withhold our taxes BASED ON OUR DISAGREEMENT?

        also, Benk can be … ascerbic, but in this case (the midwives thing), he is correct. his math checks out.

      • April 23, 2011 3:38

        Then don’t pass any judgment on my position on the bill if you didn’t read any of my posts at all. Whenever I take on any opponent, I make it sure I study his/her position. That’s because I am an honest person.

        Don’t talk about my opinion on taxes if you’re aiming at my RH bill position. It’s obvious that that is what you’re aiming at. What’s the purpose of asking my opinion on taxation?

        Even if I’m going to tell you, that’d be a waste of time since I know it’s my RH bill position you’re trying to criticize.

        You can’t argue properly right? SO WHAT’S THE USE OF SAYING: ““none of these demolish the logic behind the bill, but a good review would definitely help.”

        I REPEAT.

        Here’s how a proper debate or discussion is done… Since we’re talking about the RH bill, why not do the following:

        1. Cite some or all of my illogical arguments against the bill.

        2. Give your counter-arguments…

        3. I will respond.

      • GabbyD permalink
        April 23, 2011 3:38

        when did i pass judgement on your opinion?

        i shall repeat: you are free to like or dislike the bill.

        “Don’t talk about my opinion on taxes if you’re aiming at my RH bill position”

        again: i am not interested in your RH bill position. (at least, not right now, in this thread)

        i am curious about your ideas on taxation and government. about taxation in a state where you dont necessarily agree with the state.

        hey, if you dont wanna talk about taxation, whatever. but if you dont, i’m gonna have to assume you dont believe in taxation AT ALL…. based on my quotation of your blog post.

      • April 23, 2011 3:38

        If you want my opinion, I can only give this…

        I believe in lower tax, or non-taxation, if possible. But I believe that is not the first reform, The first reform is economic freedom.

        The solution to poverty is ECONOMIC FREEDOM. The government must-

        1. Decontrol or deregulate (repeal regulatory edicts and laws)

        2. Lower OTHER taxes by half or more than one half, if necessary

        3. Remove income tax!!!

        4. Remove tariff

        5. Remove EVAT

        6. Lower government spending

        7. Privatize GOCCs (Sell MRT/LRT, Pagcor, MWSS, Napocor, etc.)

        8. Revise the Constitution and establish a Republican limited government.

        There is a need to revise the semi-socialist charter in order to–

        9. Abolish some government agencies, such as DPWH, DOH, DepEd, Ched, PRC, DSWD, among others.

        10. To allow foreign investors to invest and conduct business in RP without limitation and too much regulations

        11. Properly define the role of government, which is to protect individual rights only!

        12. To keep the government out of the economy, education, science, and from our private lives!

      • GabbyD permalink
        April 23, 2011 3:38

        all thats fine, but i’m really interested in this quote: “” We are not born with a right to enslave other people by coercing them to contribute something for the benefit of the majority.”

        here, you consider projects that benefit the majority, and here you advocate NOT supporting these, based (i guess), on ideological grounds.

        what i am saying is this: the government exists, in large part, to benefit the majority, even tho some people (call them minority), disagree with certain provisions.

        (e.g. RH bill — assuming its true that the majority are in favor)

        if you dont want a govt to “benefit the majority”, what KIND of govt are you envisioning?

  22. April 23, 2011 3:38

    @ GabbyD

    You say: “here, you consider projects that benefit the majority, and here you advocate NOT supporting these, based (i guess), on ideological grounds. what i am saying is this: the government exists, in large part, to benefit the majority, even tho some people (call them minority), disagree with certain provisions. (e.g. RH bill — assuming its true that the majority are in favor) if you dont want a govt to “benefit the majority”, what KIND of govt are you envisioning?”

    Where did I said I “consider projects that benefit the majority.” Did you understand what you just quoted?

    • April 23, 2011 3:38

      Nawala na yung BS troll kasi walang masagot… Yan ang hindi nagbabasa haha! Nice one!

    • GabbyD permalink
      April 23, 2011 3:38

      where did you say that?

      ““” We are not born with a right to enslave other people by coercing them to contribute something for the benefit of the majority.””

      this is YOUR quote. did you forget your OWN quote?

    • GabbyD permalink
      April 23, 2011 3:38

      cmon dude, are you changing your sentence now? thats fine, if so, instead of that, what would u write?

    • GabbyD permalink
      April 24, 2011 3:38

      hey, so what happened? what does the quote mean?

      • April 24, 2011 3:38

        you have a brain? analyze it…

      • GabbyD permalink
        April 24, 2011 3:38

        you have a brain, analyze it? geez, i didnt know being a randian meant being arrogant and unhelpful.

        ok. so you think there should be no govt at all. coz thats what the quote means — even in best of circumstances, no redistribution should take place.

        i wanted 2 ask you based on mutual respect and communication. clearly, you have none for me.

      • April 24, 2011 3:38

        After I published my latest blog? Yeah right! I have written more than 10 or 20 blog articles on the RH bill. It took me a year to write all of them. I believe it can only take you one day to read all of them. If you’re interested, I can only ask you to read them…

      • GabbyD permalink
        April 24, 2011 3:38

        huh? anong klaseng sagot yan? did i ask about your other RH articles, which i’ll believe you when you say you’ve written alot? — no.

        i asked about the quote. which is ONE SENTENCE.

        hay naku. i assume you dont really want to address the quotation. do you think its too strong? too weak a statement?

  23. May 13, 2011 3:38

    To Kantian who complained about his deleted comments:

    First, try to learn more about Objectivism before posting any BS comment. Learning means you have to read the works of its proponent and do not just rely on wikipedia articles and on the polemics of her dishonest critics.

    Second, try to learn more about altruism. Know what Auguste Compte had to say about altruism. It’s Compte who conceptualized and popularized the ethics of altruism.

    Third, learn to stick to the topic. The RH bill issue, Kantian IDIOT, is not about Ayn Rand.

    Fourth, be honest.

    Fifth, try to study an issue before making any BS comment.

    • Kantian permalink
      May 13, 2011 3:38

      “First, try to learn more about Objectivism before posting any BS comment. ”

      — I’m calling your bluff, pendeho. Which part was BS in relation to objectivism? Was this the comment about Ayn Rand being a crazy bitch? O.K. maybe that was Off-topic. Nevertheless, I’m not the only one who thinks so, her original followers did too.

      “Learning means you have to read the works of its proponent and do not just rely on wikipedia articles and on the polemics of her dishonest critics.”

      — Well, I’ve read some of her works. And who are you to say who’s being dishonest? Are they dishonest for you on account of their incredulity with Ayn Rand? Being much too generous to yourself aren’t we?

      “Second, try to learn more about altruism. Know what Auguste Compte had to say about altruism. It’s Compte who conceptualized and popularized the ethics of altruism.”

      — I don’t have to. The dictionary definition will suffice. Unless you can show me why it won’t.

      “Third, learn to stick to the topic. The RH bill issue, Kantian IDIOT, is not about Ayn Rand.”

      — Fair enough. On the RH Bill, I was asking if you had another argument against the RH Bill that isn’t in any way reducible to your anti-altruistic philosophy. Because, as you really ought to know by now, those kinds of arguments will not fly. Whether you feel people aren’t sophisticated enough to get the gist of such an argument should be irrelevant.

      “Fourth, be honest.”

      — I was honest when I said Ayn Rand was a lunatic. But, let’s not digress.

      “Fifth, try to study an issue before making any BS comment.”

      — Asserting that dissenting comments are just BS seems like a BS tactic.

      • May 13, 2011 3:38

        You said: “– Well, I’ve read some of her works. And who are you to say who’s being dishonest? Are they dishonest for you on account of their incredulity with Ayn Rand? Being much too generous to yourself aren’t we?”

        What do you know about her work and what do you know about altruism?

        And I must add: what do you know about Kant’s philosophy?

      • Kantian permalink
        May 13, 2011 3:38

        “What do you know about her work and what do you know about altruism?”

        –I know enough. One thing I’ll grant is that her philosophy is more consistent with naturalism than anything those New Atheists can dream up.

        “And I must add: what do you know about Kant’s philosophy?”

        — Very little. Only that it is compatible with theism.

        Now, like you said, the topic is the RH Bill. Your arguments would be convincing to someone only like yourself. It’s as simple as that.

        You rightly say that no one should legislate and force people to spend for the welfare of the poor. The problem is, scarcely anyone sees the bill that way. Taxes should be for the benefit of society. And the RH Bill proponents believe and have given persuasive arguments for the notion that population control IS for the benefit of society –so it is not anti-capitalism. One could even make an argument that it isn’t altruism ; we are spending for the poor, because it is in our interest to do so; too many poor people unable to feed themselves will mean too many uneducated people unable to play a role in society, and so forth.

      • May 13, 2011 3:38

        Kantian you said: “I know enough. One thing I’ll grant is that her philosophy is more consistent with naturalism than anything those New Atheists can dream up.”

        That’s wrong. See? It’s because you know nothing about her philosophy and just made an assumption based on you own prejudices and flawed philosophical base (if in case you were able to consciously identify your philosophy because all human beings have philosophy whether they like it or not.)

        Ayn Rand was against naturalism. I observed that it seems you know nothing about “Naturalism.” That explains your ignorance of Objectivism, in particular, and of philosophy, in general.

        In her book “The Romantic Manifesto” (page 125), Ayn Rand said:

        “The obvious question, to which the heirs of statistical Naturalism have no answer, is: if heroes and geniuses are not to be regarded as representative of mankind, by reason of their numerical rarity, why are freaks and monsters to be regarded as representative? Why are the problems of a bearded lady of greater universal significance than the problems of a genius? Why is the soul of a murderer worth studying, but not the soul of a hero?

        “The answer lies in the basic metaphysical premise of Naturalism, whether its practitioners ever chose it consciously or not: as an outgrowth of modern philosophy, that basic premise is anti-man, anti-mind, anti-life; and, as an outgrowth of the altruist morality, Naturalism is a frantic escape from moral judgment—a long, wailing plea for pity, for tolerance, for the forgiveness of anything.”

        On Kant’s philosophy you said, “– Very little. Only that it is compatible with theism.”

        See? You know nothing- NOT LITTLE- about Kantianism.

        I’ve written a number of blogs about Immanuel Kant. Why? Because I have to understand the premises of the worst enemy of reason. See? I can’t comment on Kant’s philosophy without studying it. That is, I cannot comment on any issue without sufficient knowledge of it. That’s intellectual honesty.

        Here’s what I stated on this blog http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2010/03/23/no-they-cant/ :

        “The philosophy of Kant waged war on man’s mind and this is the reason why Ayn Rand called him his greatest intellectual enemy. As a philosopher, Ayn Rand understood the role of philosophy in destroying or improving man’s mind. Kant was indeed the “witch doctor” of the Middle Ages whose intention was to close the door of philosophy to reason. We have seen the influence of his philosophy today. His followers and the mini-Kantians of today are simply carrying on the destruction of man’s mind.”

        … “Ayn Rand considered Immanuel Kant her intellectual enemy. Kant, according to her, did not directly destroy reason; his works were designed to distort the concept of reason. The main tenet of the philosophy of Objectivism is “existence exist” and its metaphysics is “objective reality.” Kant’s philosophy is the total opposite of Objectivism. Kant divided man’s world into two: the phenomenal world, which is not reality, and the noumenal world, which is unknowable. Logic tells us that if the noumenal world is unknowable or cannot be perceived by man’s mind, how did Kant discover it? Did he discover it through the help of an unknowable mystical being?”

        Must-read:

        http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2010/04/16/in-defense-of-truth-part-ii/

        http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2010/05/03/richard-dawkins-gibberish-on-absolute-morality/

        http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2010/04/18/ayn-rand-versus-immanuel-kant/

        On ALTRUISM, you should read the following:

        http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2009/12/23/the-psychology-of-the-anti-population-cult/

        “Based on the aforementioned statements, the kind of mongrel philosophy that deeply polluted the minds of these people is tied to the morality of altruism. This type of man-sacrificing ethical system conceptualized by Auguste Compte, states that it is the moral duty or obligation of individuals to serve the good and welfare of others and put their interests above their own.”[vi] Perhaps some of these people reject philosophy, but they cannot evade the fact that their altruistic statements and behavior are tied to a certain form of process of thought.

        “What can be deduced from their statements and advocacies is that they are so loud in proclaiming that they care for the poor, the weak, and the have-nots. They deeply believe that it is the duty of those who have in life to provide welfares and goods to those who don’t. If Compte argues that man has the “moral obligation” to serve others, Immanuel Kant, another anti-reason philosopher, solidifies this claim by declaring that man has a special sense of “duty” to serve others.[vii] It is Kant’s subjectivist philosophy, meaning a philosophy that is detached from reality and determined only by the perceiver’s consciousness, that claims that an action is moral only if the individual performs it out of a sense of duty and obtains no benefit from it of any sort.”

        http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2009/10/10/which-is-the-real-evil-self-interest-or-altruism/

        http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2010/04/30/on-ethics-and-politics/

        “Altruism is simply defined as a selfless concern for the welfare of others. The keyword here is “selfless.” Here’s the Wikipedia definition of altruism. “Altruism is an ethical doctrine that holds that individuals have a moral obligation to help, serve, or benefit others, if necessary at the sacrifice of self interest. Auguste Comte’s version of altruism calls for living for the sake of others. One who holds to either of these ethics is known as an ‘altruist.’”

        Before spewing idiotic words like “bitch”, etc. you should learn first to study an issue… or any issue. Your attitude and idiotic comments simply expose you as an IDIOT OF THE FIRST ORDER…

  24. May 13, 2011 3:38

    @ Kantian:

    This is one of the most IDIOTIC comments I’ve ever received: “You rightly say that no one should legislate and force people to spend for the welfare of the poor. The problem is, scarcely anyone sees the bill that way. Taxes should be for the benefit of society. And the RH Bill proponents believe and have given persuasive arguments for the notion that population control IS for the benefit of society –so it is not anti-capitalism. One could even make an argument that it isn’t altruism ; we are spending for the poor, because it is in our interest to do so; too many poor people unable to feed themselves will mean too many uneducated people unable to play a role in society, and so forth.”

    BETTER READ THIS BLOG. This answers your idiotic statement… http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2010/11/21/welfare-state-the-agenda-behind-the-rh-bill/

  25. Kantian permalink
    May 13, 2011 3:38

    Firstly, asshole, I said her views are more consistent with naturalism. I didn’t say that she was a naturalist. And I don’t claim to know a lot about that Bitch who, despite being long dead, still seems to be able to give you wood. I know she’s not a naturalist.

    “if in case you were able to consciously identify your philosophy because all human beings have philosophy whether they like it or not.”

    — Lol. Some nails do not need hammering. But It’s pretty obvious that you are the type who constantly wants to showcase his hard-won education –unfortunately to the point of sounding like an ass.

    “you know nothing about naturalism”

    — Nope, I know a lot about naturalism. I’m a theist, so it’s not something I subscribe to. I do, however, believe in methodological naturalism when it comes to science.

    “On Kant’s philosophy you said, “– Very little. Only that it is compatible with theism.
    See? You know nothing- NOT LITTLE- about Kantianism.”

    — Are you arguing that his philosophy is incompatible with theism? Really? That would be odd since he was a theist. And his ‘Critique of pure reason’ has always been opposed to Humean skepticism. If his philosophy is completely incompatible with theism, then fine. I’m not the one under the delusional impression that my knowledge is impeccable.

    “Before spewing idiotic words like “bitch”, etc. you should learn first to study an issue… or any issue. Your attitude and idiotic comments simply expose you as an IDIOT OF THE FIRST ORDER…”

    — I think reading comprehension is a problem for you. Oh, and it’s like the 10th time you’ve said something like this (“Your attitude and idiotic comments simply expose you as an IDIOT OF THE FIRST ORDER…”) to a dissenter. It’s getting old. And it’s starting to look weaselly. Please. Anyone reading our exchange can see that, logically speaking, you are my bitch.

    Now are you going to answer my question on the RH Bill, or not? Didn’t you just give me a pathetic rant about my digression into the topic of Ayn Rand, and yet… Funny that.

  26. May 13, 2011 3:38

    To “Kantian” idiot who know nothing or “very little” about Kant’s philosophy:

    Here’s your first troll comment: “Hmm.. So you subscribe to a Randian view of morality, eh? You do know that Ayn Rand was a nut case who physically and psychologically abused her followers to the point that they had no choice but to leave her crazy ass to die alone, right? Your against the RH Bill because you’re against altruism? Hell, even if your Randian philosophy made any sense –which it doesn’t– strategically, this kind of argument will get you nowhere, and will get zero people to your side.”

    Is this the comment of someone who wants to argue in a rational, educated way?

    Now it appears that you know nothing or “very little” about Rand’s philosophy, the morality of altruism, and the philosophy of Kant based on your highly stupid replies.

    GET HILO!

    • Kantian permalink
      May 13, 2011 3:38

      @froivinber

      “Is this the comment of someone who wants to argue in a rational, educated way?”

      — A comment which you deleted. And I don’t blame you for it. My first comment that you did not delete was me offering you an olive branch –which you poked yourself in eye with. Besides, look at the tone of your posts, are you really this much of a cry baby when people send you negative comments?

      “Now it appears that you know nothing or “very little” about Rand’s philosophy, the morality of altruism, and the philosophy of Kant based on your highly stupid replies.”

      — Well, It would obviously suit you to hold that opinion. I think you hold that opinion against anyone who thinks Ayn Rand is a crazy monkey. Geez, did you watch her interviews at YouTube? A real boner-shrinker. Oh, wait, I didn’t mean to hurt your feelings yet again! Lol!

    • May 13, 2011 3:38

      This moronic Kantian said: ” A comment which you deleted. And I don’t blame you for it. My first comment that you did not delete was me offering you an olive branch –which you poked yourself in eye with. Besides, look at the tone of your posts, are you really this much of a cry baby when people send you negative comments?”

      LMAO!!! That means you’re a moron who knows nothing about everything you talked about. You don’t even know what the RH bill is all about.

      Here’s a question for you: Why are you in favor of the RH bill and why do you think it needs to be passed?

      • Kantian permalink
        May 14, 2011 3:38

        @froivinber

        I get it. Whenever you can’t handle the heat, you call out your sockpuppet ‘aristogeek’ to speak for you. O.K. I’ll talk to your alter ego if it would make you feel better after that wall of pain you must have felt when you’ve heard me call Ayn Rand –your masturbatory object –a real “boner-shrinker”.

        @aristogeek

        Hi, froivinber, oh I mean, aristogeek. What makes you think I’m in favor of the RH Bill? You MORON. Seeing as both of you really have some reading and comprehension issues, me thinks you 2 retards are one and the same.

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        Here’s why you’re the BIGGEST MORON I’ve ever encountered online.

        You moron said: “Hi, froivinber, oh I mean, aristogeek. What makes you think I’m in favor of the RH Bill? You MORON. Seeing as both of you really have some reading and comprehension issues, me thinks you 2 retards are one and the same.”

        So you’re against the RH bill? Then you’re a MORON! It’s because you’re sick in the mind. Sicko!

        So why are you here then? First, you have to define your disagreement with the blogger. You’ve said lots of things that don’t make sense. It’s because you’re a MORON! .

        When Vincent ask what you know about Ayn Rand and Kant, you begged that he answer your RH bill question.

        Here’s your moronic question, MORON: “You are against the RH Bill for this very reason; “that the government must provide the people, especially the poor, with their needs, that we are our brothers’ keepers”. But most people DO NOT see the RH Bill as a charity thing. They clearly want the RH Bill because it will be for our own good. It isn’t altruism when we do something for someone knowing full well that there are be benefits to be had.”

        I have to lay it out this way because I’m arguing with a MORON:

        1.) Here’s why you’re the BIGGEST MORON I’ve ever encountered online.

        You moron said: “Hi, froivinber, oh I mean, aristogeek. What makes you think I’m in favor of the RH Bill? You MORON. Seeing as both of you really have some reading and comprehension issues, me thinks you 2 retards are one and the same.”

        So you’re against the RH bill? Then you’re a MORON! It’s because you’re sick in the mind. Sicko!

        So why are you here then? First, you have to define your disagreement with the blogger. You’ve said lots of things that don’t make sense. It’s because you’re a MORON! .

        When Vincent ask what you know about Ayn Rand and Kant, you begged that he answer your RH bill question.

        Here’s your moronic question, MORON: “You are against the RH Bill for this very reason; “that the government must provide the people, especially the poor, with their needs, that we are our brothers’ keepers”. But most people DO NOT see the RH Bill as a charity thing. They clearly want the RH Bill because it will be for our own good. It isn’t altruism when we do something for someone knowing full well that there are be benefits to be had.”

        I have to lay it out this way because I’m arguing with a MORON:

        1.) Here’s your main subject of criticism- ““that the government must provide the people, especially the poor, with their needs, that we are our brothers’ keepers.” That’s why Vincent and I said you only have to read the explanatory note.

        The bill’s explanatory note states: “The proposed bill is pro-poor, pro-women and pro-life. Its principal beneficiaries will be the poorest of the poor and the marginalized. Reproductive health and family planning significantly improves maternal health and lowers maternal morbidity. Having the ability to plan and space children will afford women more employment and educational opportunities and will significantly lower abortion rates. The bill will also prevent infant and child deaths. Family planning will likewise mean larger investments in children’s health and education and better health outcomes for children. With resultant lower maternal and infant deaths and capacity for more investments in health and education, RH is definitely pro-life.”

        It’s there. If you contradict Vincent’s statement, then that only means a) you don’t believe that the bill provides the people RH care needs, b) you’re a MORON.

        2.) You said: “But most people DO NOT see the RH Bill as a charity thing.” Who are these people? You? What I see is that the bill involves the use of government force and coercion. I think Vincent gave his answer already. That the bill is really not a charity thing. Of course it’s not a charity. Charity means voluntary giving. Do you thing the RH bill is about voluntary giving? Well perhaps that’s what you think because you’re a MORON… There can be no charity when the bill speaks of jailing and fining people who fail or refuse to obey its intents and provisions.

        3.) You said: “They clearly want the RH Bill because it will be for our own good.” So you believe that? Yet you said “what makes you think I’m in favor of the bill.” So if you’re not in favor of the bill what the hell is your problem? So why are you saying then that “they clearly want the RH Bill because it will be for our own good.” In the first place, the bill is NOT for their own good! You have to read Vincent’s anti-RH bill blogs to educate yourself…

        4) Here’s an epic fail that shows your utter stupidity. You said: “It isn’t altruism when we do something for someone knowing full well that there are be benefits to be had.”

        So is this statement coming from someone who “SOMEHOW” oppose the bill on any undefined grounds? How is it not altruism when “we do something for someone knowing full well that there are be benefits to be had.”

        You have to understand that that’s what the bill is NOT! There can be NO benefits to be had from implementing the RH bill. And it is altruism when you force other people to provide the needs of some group of people. That’s sacrificing other people to serve the interest of the poor and the marginalized. That’s what altruism is all about. It’s about sacrifices.

        Here are some questions for you:

        1. What are these benefits to be had from implementing the bill?

        2. What is your understanding of altruism?

        3. Why do you think the RH bill will offer some “benefits.”

        4. Since you said “What makes you think I’m in favor of the RH Bill?” so what’s your definite stand then? And what the heck is your problem?

    • Kantian permalink
      May 14, 2011 3:38

      @ froivinber

      “NO. A negative or a statement based on falsehood or naught can’t hurt anyone.”

      — You really should call yourself a Rortian, since you believe falsehoods are what you want to be false. Many people think Ayn Rand is crazy, so it’s more likely that it’s true. Ass.

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        Kantian MORON who knows very little about Kant said: “You really should call yourself a Rortian, since you believe falsehoods are what you want to be false. Many people think Ayn Rand is crazy, so it’s more likely that it’s true. Ass.”

        So what if many people think Ayn Rand is crazy? That’s the mentality of idiots. This is not about popularity contest. That’s why it’s useless to argue with a moron like you because you’re a SECOND-HANDER. Besides you know nothing about Ayn Rand. The only thing you know about her is what you read from some people who think she’s “crazy.” But we need want your opinion, MORON. You can suck your moronic opinion and shove it up your ass, MORON…

      • Kantian permalink
        May 14, 2011 3:38

        @aristogeek says:

        “So what if many people think Ayn Rand is crazy? That’s the mentality of idiots. ”

        — Not everyone who thinks Rand is crazy is an idiot. I know you would very much like to conclude that to justify your creepy ejaculatory feelings for her. There are many convincing articles about her craziness. The mere fact that her original followers thought it best to leave her old, senile, and wrinkly vagina out to die on her own is a bit telling. Your indignation at people who insult Rand is funny. =)

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        MORONIC KANTIAN: “Not everyone who thinks Rand is crazy is an idiot.”

        They’re idiot when they pass judgment without exerting some efforts to know what some people stand for. I can say Kant was evil and crazy because I fully understand his philosophy.

        A classmate of mine said “Aristotle was not a good philosopher”. However, when pressed with questions it appears that he know very little about Aristotle’s philosophy. When you talk about any issue which you’re not familiar with, then you’re a MORON… Besides, you didn’t even state why you think Ayn Rand was crazy. Let us know if you know better.

        You said: “I know you would very much like to conclude that to justify your creepy ejaculatory feelings for her.”

        I also admire Aristotle as much as I admire the philosophy of Ayn Rand. Would you say the same thing? That’s what most IGNORANT and MORONIC people say because Ayn Rand was a woman. If she were a man I believe it would be different.

        You moron said: “There are many convincing articles about her craziness.”

        So what are these articles? So that proves you merely rely on “these articles.” That’s the badge of a second-hander.

        When Vincent talked about the evilness of Kant’s philosophy (that time I was not familiar with Kantianism), O decided to find out whether Vincent was speaking the truth. I had to read Kant’s books, namely, Critique of Practical Reason, Critique of Pure Reason, Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals, Metaphysics of Morals. These are all available for FREE online. After reading his works, I found out that Kant was crazy and evil. He’s the most evil person in history in fact.

        But I won’t call Kantians “names” like what you do. I’ve lots of encounter with them on Facebook and on different forums. I won’t tell them they have “creepy ejaculatory feelings for” Kant. Why? Because people who talk about people are small minds. We talk about ideas. It’s the ideas of these people that we talk about and not the people themselves. You talk about Ayn Rand based on what you read from online articles, thus that proves you’re a moron. If you want to criticize Ayn Rand, do it the educated way. Read her works and do not just rely on online articles.

        You said: “Your indignation at people who insult Rand is funny.”

        LOL! You think you’ve pissed me off? Whatever you said has no power to piss me off because you know NOTHING… When someone tells you that your favorite professor is an “ASS” or “CRAZY” (and you know it to be a lie), will that hurt your? NO. You feel sorry for that person who has to concoct lies and fantastic statements just to express his/her idiocy.

      • Kantian permalink
        May 14, 2011 3:38

        @aristogeek

        “A classmate of mine said “Aristotle was not a good philosopher”. However, when pressed with questions it appears that he know very little about Aristotle’s…..blah blah blah”

        — Blah, blah, blah. I don’t care about your history, you turd.

        “So what are these articles? So that proves you merely rely on “these articles.” That’s the badge of a second-hander.”

        — And you rely on what? First hand experience? What’s wrong with reading other people’s work. A lot of them have more credibility than you, seeing that you are an imbecile. And haven’t you read the ‘argumentative theory’ by Hugo Mercier? People learn more by consulting different sources; merely relying on one source leads to things like confirmation bias and what have you. If all you read is Rand and every other philosopher that validates your own pre-suppositions, then you are a narrow-minded cock. There is much knowledge to be had in reading the work of critics — the credible ones.

        “Kant was crazy and evil. He’s the most evil person in history in fact.”

        — Hence the nickname. I admitted from the onset that I knew very little about Kant’s philosophy. But I know Randians hold Kant in low esteem.

        “But I won’t call Kantians “names” like what you do. I’ve lots of encounter with them on Facebook and on different forums.”

        — But you would call people with dissenting opinions “morons”, or “idiots”. Hypocrite much?

        “You talk about Ayn Rand based on what you read from online articles, thus that proves you’re a moron.”

        — How so? You asserting that proves you’re a moron, and still have a hard-on for that hag.

        “because people who talk about people are small minds. We talk about ideas.”

        — Really? Do you want me to point to you your own blog posts where you’ve “talk[ed] about people” –in a not so congenial fashion, I might add?

        “LOL! You think you’ve pissed me off? Whatever you said has no power to piss me off because you know NOTHING…”

        — I know something. I know you did get pissed off, no matter how you would like it to seem that you weren’t to hide your creepy necrophilic feelings for Rand.

        “NO. You feel sorry for that person who has to concoct lies and fantastic statements just to express his/her idiocy.”

        — Why assert they’re lies? I’m saying something a lot of people already know to be true –Rand is crazy.

        Now, can we talk about the RH Bill like two adults, or not? I would like, from now on, to refrain from the insults. You can throw another insult-laden comment on this one to make it quits.

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        You Kantian moron said: “Blah, blah, blah. I don’t care about your history, you turd.”

        Then I don’t care whatever you say. The blogger should delete your further comments because you’re not here to argue properly. You’re only here to expose your utter IDIOCY…

        You moron said: “But you would call people with dissenting opinions “morons”, or “idiots”. Hypocrite much?”

        Because you’re a moron. In the first place, I don’t call you a MORON because you dissented. It’s because of the ignorant, idiotic content of your statement. It’s because you know nothing. It’s because your statements are moronic at best.

        You moron said: “You asserting that proves you’re a moron, and still have a hard-on for that hag.”

        — So why not criticize the philosopher’s philosophy if you have enough brain cells. But doubt it. You don’t even know what altruism means, ergo you’re a moron. That’s why it’s useless arguing with you because you’re a moron.

        You moron said: “Really? Do you want me to point to you your own blog posts where you’ve “talk[ed] about people” –in a not so congenial fashion, I might add?”

        LOLOLOL!!! Moronic indeed.

        You moron said: “Why assert they’re lies? I’m saying something a lot of people already know to be true –Rand is crazy.”

        Then prove it. Again, why not criticize the philosopher’s philosophy if you have enough brain cells. But doubt it. You don’t even know what altruism means, ergo you’re a moron. That’s why it’s useless arguing with you because you’re a moron.

        YOU MORON SAID: “Now, can we talk about the RH Bill like two adults, or not? I would like, from now on, to refrain from the insults. You can throw another insult-laden comment on this one to make it quits.”

        How’s that possible if you know nothing about the bill?

        I have already addressed your utter idiocy here… http://fvdb.wordpress.com/no-to-rh-bill/#comment-10346

      • Kantian permalink
        May 14, 2011 3:38

        @aristogeek

        I see now what your tactic is.

        1. Answer every retort with “YOU’RE A MORON, you not understanding me, you is a moron!” LOL.

        2. Ayn Rand not crazy! She smart! And byutipul! Don’t insult her, I get mad!

        3. You’re an idiot! Read dis, and dis and dis! It show I’m smart!

        4. You’re a moron!

        5. Your comment show your idiocy!

        6. Your comment show your a moron!

        Hahahaha! Down to a tease. I’m sure you have a special key in your keyboard that will immediately spout random things of this sort when pressed, to save you time from having to use your fucking brain –not that it will be of any use.

        I’m sorry but, are you a virgin? Haven’t you been penetrated yet?

        LOL.

  27. Kantian permalink
    May 13, 2011 3:38

    @froivinber

    “Read the bill’s explanatory note. It’s stated there.”

    OHHH!! So it’s in the bill’s explanatory note! By Golly Gee I get it now! You stupid idiot! Who the fuck cares what’s in the bill’s explanatory note! Absent that explanatory note, it wouldn’t change anything, because people STILL believe that it is beneficial to society, and not simply because we are our “brothers’ keeper”! Even if they changed the wording in that explanatory note to “This fucking thing is beneficial to society, that’s why we are fucking doing it”, it wouldn’t change a thing! It’s like a long pedantic and wordy corporate mission statement that has but one imperative: to make more money!

    “You’re both an idiot and clueless…”

    — If you think we are doing it because the government thinks “we are our brothers’ keeper”, like you said in that dumb post of yours, then no, it is YOU who is an IDIOT and CLUELESS.

    • May 13, 2011 3:38

      MORONIC KANTIAN SAID: ” So it’s in the bill’s explanatory note! By Golly Gee I get it now! You stupid idiot! Who the fuck cares what’s in the bill’s explanatory note!”

      LMAO! Epic fail! Because the answer to your stupid statements are in the bill’s explanatory note! That shows you’re a MORON! LOL!

      Kantian moron said: “Absent that explanatory note, it wouldn’t change anything, because people STILL believe that it is beneficial to society, and not simply because we are our “brothers’ keeper”!”

      For you information, moron, that explanatory note explain the legislative intent of its proponents. Do you understand what “legislative intent” means, moron? That will answer you previous statements, moron! That shows you’re a moron and is sick in the mind.

      How is the bill beneficial to society? Kindly explain your idiocy? Just because Lagman and his ilk say so?

      Kantian moron then goes insane. He said: “Even if they changed the wording in that explanatory note to “This fucking thing is beneficial to society, that’s why we are fucking doing it”, it wouldn’t change a thing! It’s like a long pedantic and wordy corporate mission statement that has but one imperative: to make more money!”

      You really don’t understand what a legislative intent means. That explanatory note shows fidelity to and compliance with the Constitution. It establishes constitutional mandate and compliance. Don’t you understand that?

      MORONIC KANTIAN SAID: “If you think we are doing it because the government thinks “we are our brothers’ keeper”, like you said in that dumb post of yours, then no, it is YOU who is an IDIOT and CLUELESS.”

      If you want to help the poor, help them and nobody will stop you. If you read the bill, you’d understand, MORON, but I doubt it, that the bill seeks to force employers and doctors and penalize them for non-compliance with the bill’s intent and provisions.

      READ THE BILL, MORON!

      • Kantian permalink
        May 14, 2011 3:38

        @aristogeek

        “LMAO! Epic fail! Because the answer to your stupid statements are in the bill’s explanatory note! That shows you’re a MORON! LOL!”

        — That’s the dumbest answer. Wouldn’t expect much from a retard who masturbates to Ayn Rand. “Oh the answer is in the explanatory not! Bow!” Lol! Oh well then! [place my previous comment which you FAILED to answer here]

        “For you information, moron, that explanatory note explain the legislative intent of its proponents. Do you understand what “legislative intent” means, moron?”

        — Again, we’re going in circles. The Declaration of independence contains the phrase ‘one Nation under God’ arguably from which America was founded. That’s what it’s “legislative intent” was, if you will. Legislative intentions are therefore cheap. You can have corporate mission statements that are essentially meaningless because, as I’ve said earlier, the true mission of the company would be to balance it’s checkbook. It doesn’t matter what the expressed intention was at the time, what matters is what people actually believed. And people actually believe that the RH Bill is NOT some forced alrtuism, since they believed that it’s in everybody’s interest to live within a smaller population, YOU FUCKING DUMBASS.

        “LMAO! Epic fail! ”

        — LOL. Not everything is an “Epic” failure you MORON who uses sophomoric and ill-tempered words like “pawned”, “owned”, and “epic fail”. There is life beyond chat forums and the internet, you clown.

        “How is the bill beneficial to society? Kindly explain your idiocy? Just because Lagman and his ilk say so?”

        — Poverty, over-population, hello!? You haven’t heard their arguments? Do not take me for an RH Bill supporter, I’m neither for it nor against it. Which is why I’m asking questions, you retarded, four-eyed virgin.

        “You really don’t understand what a legislative intent means. That explanatory note shows fidelity to and compliance with the Constitution. It establishes constitutional mandate and compliance. Don’t you understand that?”

        — So, we’ve established that you 2 Ayn Rand fanboys (depending on how far-gone your multiple personality disorder is) are against the bill’s “legislative intent”. Then it’s proponents can now think of you narrowly. Good luck with trying to convince people that the bill was done in virtue of our realization of our role as our “brothers’ keeper”. Dumb.

        “If you want to help the poor, help them and nobody will stop you. If you read the bill, you’d understand, MORON, but I doubt it, that the bill seeks to force employers and doctors and penalize them for non-compliance with the bill’s intent and provisions.”

        — I take it you don’t understand what I said, when I said that the bill’s proponents have always been arguing that helping the poor, in this situation, is in society’s best interest. So your “help da poor ip you want, nobady will stap you!! Hmph!” amounts to nothing more than a comedic hissy fit.

        Wow.. is this the intelligence you love bragging about? Lol! Sounds more like a bunch of pre-pubescent fuck-heads who think they’ve got the whole world figured out, hahaha!

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        You MORONIC Kantian who knows very little about Kant said: “That’s the dumbest answer. Wouldn’t expect much from a retard who masturbates to Ayn Rand. “Oh the answer is in the explanatory not! Bow!” Lol! Oh well then! [place my previous comment which you FAILED to answer here]”

        Well, that’s the most MORONIC answer her. If you read the explanatory note you’d understand that that’s the answer to your BS and stupidity.

        You said: “The Declaration of independence contains the phrase ‘one Nation under God’ arguably from which America was founded. That’s what it’s “legislative intent” was, if you will. Legislative intentions are therefore cheap.”

        LMAO! OMG! You’re really a moron! For your information, EVERY BILL HAS ITS EXPLANATORY NOTE! Don’t you understand that? Of course you don’t because you’re a moron! And this is not about the Declaration of Independence. That clearly shows you’re a moron and IGNORANT OR ALL THINGS. And you’re the one who’s CHEAP because you know nothing…

        YOU’RE A CRAZY BITCH! LOL!

        THIS IS EPIC: “You can have corporate mission statements that are essentially meaningless because, as I’ve said earlier, the true mission of the company would be to balance it’s checkbook.”

        — LMAO!!! Explanatory note is far different from a corporation mission, MORON! Like I said, every bill has an explanatory note. It shows whether that bill complies with the constitution or not or addresses some pressing social issues. YOU’RE A MORON INDEED!

        YOU MORON SAID: “It doesn’t matter what the expressed intention was at the time, what matters is what people actually believed.”

        Well, the explanatory note matters because the lawmakers wrote it and included it in their bills! You’re really a moron! So tell me what do the people believe. Do you know what the people believe? Who are these people? YOU? LOL!

        Here’s another EPIC that shows your IDIOCY: “And people actually believe that the RH Bill is NOT some forced alrtuism, since they believed that it’s in everybody’s interest to live within a smaller population, YOU FUCKING DUMBASS.”

        — How could you understand what you said when you don’t know what altruism is all about? Vincent explained it very clearly yet you still don’t have enough brain cells to digest facts. Did you read the bill? At least the bill that has not yet been updated by the moronic lawmakers in Congress?

        Did you know that it will force employers and doctors to provide the RH care needs of the workers/people? If an employer fails or refuses he might go to JAIL or pay a corresponding fine?

        Did you know that if a Catholic doctor refuses to abide by the bill’s provisions he might also go to jail? So you don’t call that force and coercion?

        It’s really useless to argue with you because you know nothing and because you’re a MORON…

        You MORON said: “Then it’s proponents can now think of you narrowly. Good luck with trying to convince people that the bill was done in virtue of our realization of our role as our “brothers’ keeper”. Dumb.”

        So you MORONIC RH bill fan doesn’t have enough sanity to study facts. Because you’re a MORON.

        This is another EPIC: ” I take it you don’t understand what I said, when I said that the bill’s proponents have always been arguing that helping the poor, in this situation, is in society’s best interest.”

        Tell me moron, HOW WILL THE RH BILL HELP THE POOR? Why do you think passing the bill is in “society’s best interest”? I hope, you MORON, will answer these questions. Let us know whether you understand a bit…

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        You’re really brave to advertise your utter IDIOCY because you’re hiding behind a false nick.

        Heck! The very fact that you call yourself “Kantian” yet you know very little about the evil philosophy of Kant proves you’re a MORON.

        Tell us who you are if you’re really proud of your IDIOCY… Most troll commenters are brave to post BS and idiotic comments because they’re guaranteed 100 percent anonymity. They have the guts and gall to post stupidity because they know people/readers won’t find out their real identity…

        You’re not just a MORON; you’re also a BS COWARD!

      • Kantian permalink
        May 14, 2011 3:38

        @ aristogeek

        “If you read the explanatory note you’d understand that that’s the answer to your BS and stupidity.”

        — Tell me how so, instead of asserting things, you lazy bastard.

        “EVERY BILL HAS ITS EXPLANATORY NOTE! Don’t you understand that? Of course you don’t because you’re a moron! And this is not about the Declaration of Independence. ”

        — Yes and as I said, every explanatory note comes cheap. Try reading what I said, and understanding it, you imbecile.

        “Explanatory note is far different from a corporation mission, MORON! Like I said, every bill has an explanatory note. It shows whether that bill complies with the constitution or not or addresses some pressing social issues. ”

        — No analogy is a 100% representation, so your retort is weak. And like I said, explanatory notes come cheap. It’s easy to write one that complies with the constitution and addresses pressing social issues. You’re only arguing that you are against the bill’s intention. Wake up, you dumb monkey. If you think that that’s the bill’s only intention, then your argument does not have a leg to stand on. You may be breaking new ground inside a court, but with respect to the winning of hearts and minds, no. As I’ve said, this bill is going to get pushed not because people want to be their “brothers’ keeper” but because people see it as a benefit to society –you can dispute whether it is or not, but that’s beside the point. And given that the majority of people are in it not to satisfy some altruistic urge, your Randian anti-altruistic argument bites itself on the tail.

        “So tell me what do the people believe. Do you know what the people believe? ”

        — You mean you don’t know that they believe this bill will be helpful to society? Yo were under the impression that it’s all for helping the poor at the expense of tax-payers money? Then dance monkey, dance.

        “How could you understand what you said when you don’t know what altruism is all about? Vincent explained it very clearly yet you still don’t have enough brain cells to digest facts.”

        — Lol! Are you really that insane to refer to yourself in the third person? You mean he explained it by giving a link to one of his posts? Dumb.

        “It’s really useless to argue with you because you know nothing and because you’re a MORON…”

        — So you keep saying. But anyone reading this exchange can see who is the bigger moron. That be you.

        “Tell me moron, HOW WILL THE RH BILL HELP THE POOR? Why do you think passing the bill is in “society’s best interest”? I hope, you MORON, will answer these questions. Let us know whether you understand a bit…”

        — For argument’s sake, let me go with the popular intuition that over-population in a place with limited resources leads to poverty. I’ll assume for a minute that you have yet to encounter an argument like this. Wait.. maybe you really haven’t, since you’re obviously retarded. But please, go on.

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        @ Moronic Kantian:

        The rest of your statements reeks of idiocy and BS.

        Let me just focus on this one since this defines your sick mind.

        You moron said: “– For argument’s sake, let me go with the popular intuition that over-population in a place with limited resources leads to poverty. I’ll assume for a minute that you have yet to encounter an argument like this. Wait.. maybe you really haven’t, since you’re obviously retarded. But please, go on.”

        First off, it’s not my first time to encounter such an idiotic argument. That argument, which is not an argument at all, reeks of Malthusian imbecility.

        Now if you understand whatever you said about overpopulation, let me first know the context of your overpopulation. Is it local (in some areas of the Philippines only? National (the whole country is overpopulated)? Or Global (there’s a global overpopulation?

        Second, you have to get the country’s updated population, fertility rate, and density. Since you’re a moron, I don’t think you understand the connection of these variables.

        Third, do you absolutely believe in your stupid statement: “the popular intuition that over-population in a place with limited resources leads to poverty”?

        If this is the case, you have to answer the following:

        a. How will the RH bill solve overpopulation?

        b. Is there any connection between overpopulation and poverty?

        c. If you believe in the absoluteness of that statement, how about Japan, a country with big population and scarce resources?

        Here are some of the most populous countries on earth, MORON. Educate yourself.

        China – 1,341,335,000
        India – 1,224,614,000
        United States – 310,384,000
        Indonesia – 239,781,000
        Brazil – 194,946,000

      • Kantian permalink
        May 14, 2011 3:38

        @ aristogeek

        “First off, it’s not my first time to encounter such an idiotic argument. That argument, which is not an argument at all, reeks of Malthusian imbecility…blah blah blah, yakity-shmakity, blah blah blah….”

        — Well, thank you for this long nonsensical diatribe that has nothing to do with anything I’ve been arguing for.

        Get this into your thick, dumb, retarded skull:

        Whether or not there are benefits to society, the fact remains that THIS IS THE MAIN REASON WHY PEOPLE ARE PUSHING FOR THE BILL.

        And therefore, your pro-Capitalism and anti-altruism Randian NON-SENSE does not address the REAL reason why people are advocating the bill.

        Read and understand what I’ve just written above, you lazy bastard!

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        Again you’re becoming more and more moron. You’re going berserk because you’ve been proved more than a MORON…

        Relax and just answer my questions.

        Here’s what you said MORON: “– For argument’s sake, let me go with the popular intuition that over-population in a place with limited resources leads to poverty. I’ll assume for a minute that you have yet to encounter an argument like this. Wait.. maybe you really haven’t, since you’re obviously retarded. But please, go on.”

        Let me just re-post what I said:

        First off, it’s not my first time to encounter such an idiotic argument. That argument, which is not an argument at all, reeks of Malthusian imbecility.
        Now if you understand whatever you said about overpopulation, let me first know the context of your overpopulation. Is it local (in some areas of the Philippines only? National (the whole country is overpopulated)? Or Global (there’s a global overpopulation?

        Second, you have to get the country’s updated population, fertility rate, and density. Since you’re a moron, I don’t think you understand the connection of these variables.

        Third, do you absolutely believe in your stupid statement: “the popular intuition that over-population in a place with limited resources leads to poverty”?
        If this is the case, you have to answer the following:
        a. How will the RH bill solve overpopulation?
        b. Is there any connection between overpopulation and poverty?
        c. If you believe in the absoluteness of that statement, how about Japan, a country with big population and scarce resources?
        Here are some of the most populous countries on earth, MORON. Educate yourself.

        China – 1,341,335,000
        India – 1,224,614,000
        United States – 310,384,000
        Indonesia – 239,781,000
        Brazil – 194,946,000

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        See? You’re now going berserk because you cannot answer my questions. And because you’re now exposed more than a MORON. Lol!

        You said: “Whether or not there are benefits to society, the fact remains that THIS IS THE MAIN REASON WHY PEOPLE ARE PUSHING FOR THE BILL.”

        You can go on with your idiocy but the fact remains that you’re a moron.

        AGAIN…

        Here’s what you said MORON: “– For argument’s sake, let me go with the popular intuition that over-population in a place with limited resources leads to poverty. I’ll assume for a minute that you have yet to encounter an argument like this. Wait.. maybe you really haven’t, since you’re obviously retarded. But please, go on.”

        DID YOU NOT SAY THAT, MORONIC LIAR!

        Let me just re-post what I said:

        First off, it’s not my first time to encounter such an idiotic argument. That argument, which is not an argument at all, reeks of Malthusian imbecility.
        Now if you understand whatever you said about overpopulation, let me first know the context of your overpopulation. Is it local (in some areas of the Philippines only? National (the whole country is overpopulated)? Or Global (there’s a global overpopulation?

        Second, you have to get the country’s updated population, fertility rate, and density. Since you’re a moron, I don’t think you understand the connection of these variables.

        Third, do you absolutely believe in your stupid statement: “the popular intuition that over-population in a place with limited resources leads to poverty”?
        If this is the case, you have to answer the following:
        a. How will the RH bill solve overpopulation?
        b. Is there any connection between overpopulation and poverty?
        c. If you believe in the absoluteness of that statement, how about Japan, a country with big population and scarce resources?
        Here are some of the most populous countries on earth, MORON. Educate yourself.

        China – 1,341,335,000
        India – 1,224,614,000
        United States – 310,384,000
        Indonesia – 239,781,000
        Brazil – 194,946,000

      • Kantian permalink
        May 14, 2011 3:38

        @aristogeek

        I don’t have to answer your question, you retard. And don’t repost what you said that has nothing to do with anything I’ve been arguing for. And stop re-hashing your same old lines, as though you had nothing else to say. It’s coming against you and it’s getting to be really pathetic. It should be fine by me if you want to show everyone how pathetic you are, but it’s gotten to the point that I’m now getting saturated by it.

        you said: “Tell me moron, HOW WILL THE RH BILL HELP THE POOR? Why do you think passing the bill is in “society’s best interest”?

        I said: “For argument’s sake, let me go with the popular intuition that over-population in a place with limited resources leads to poverty.”

        Stop quoting people out of context you self-aggrandizing, delusional ball sac.

        I made that statement to show you what people believed. And that it wasn’t about welfare-statism, but pure self-interest. Not that I share this belief –which I’ve kept saying, yet you failed to comprehend. But it shows that your Randian arguments do not address the real reason why it is being supported by the majority.

        If you will still FAIL to understand this, then I’m done with you. You’re STUPID. And no matter how you’d like to proclaim you’re an intellectual, anybody can read this exchange and see how galactically DUMB you are. Go ahead, delete my comments and save yourself the embarrassment from your 2 followers and your handful of alter ego’s and sock-puppets.

        LOL.

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        You moron said: “I don’t have to answer your question, you retard.”

        That’s because you’re a moron.

  28. May 14, 2011 3:38

    TO MORONIC “KANTIAN” who knows very little about Kant, ergo he’s a MORON:

    Here’s why you’re the BIGGEST MORON I’ve ever encountered online.

    You moron said: “Hi, froivinber, oh I mean, aristogeek. What makes you think I’m in favor of the RH Bill? You MORON. Seeing as both of you really have some reading and comprehension issues, me thinks you 2 retards are one and the same.”

    So you’re against the RH bill? Then you’re a MORON! It’s because you’re sick in the mind. Sicko!

    So why are you here then? First, you have to define your disagreement with the blogger. You’ve said lots of things that don’t make sense. It’s because you’re a MORON! .

    When Vincent ask what you know about Ayn Rand and Kant, you begged that he answer your RH bill question.

    Here’s your moronic question, MORON: “You are against the RH Bill for this very reason; “that the government must provide the people, especially the poor, with their needs, that we are our brothers’ keepers”. But most people DO NOT see the RH Bill as a charity thing. They clearly want the RH Bill because it will be for our own good. It isn’t altruism when we do something for someone knowing full well that there are be benefits to be had.”

    I have to lay it out this way because I’m arguing with a MORON:

    1.) Here’s why you’re the BIGGEST MORON I’ve ever encountered online.

    You moron said: “Hi, froivinber, oh I mean, aristogeek. What makes you think I’m in favor of the RH Bill? You MORON. Seeing as both of you really have some reading and comprehension issues, me thinks you 2 retards are one and the same.”

    So you’re against the RH bill? Then you’re a MORON! It’s because you’re sick in the mind. Sicko!

    So why are you here then? First, you have to define your disagreement with the blogger. You’ve said lots of things that don’t make sense. It’s because you’re a MORON! .

    When Vincent ask what you know about Ayn Rand and Kant, you begged that he answer your RH bill question.

    Here’s your moronic question, MORON: “You are against the RH Bill for this very reason; “that the government must provide the people, especially the poor, with their needs, that we are our brothers’ keepers”. But most people DO NOT see the RH Bill as a charity thing. They clearly want the RH Bill because it will be for our own good. It isn’t altruism when we do something for someone knowing full well that there are be benefits to be had.”

    I have to lay it out this way because I’m arguing with a MORON:

    1.) Here’s your main subject of criticism- ““that the government must provide the people, especially the poor, with their needs, that we are our brothers’ keepers.” That’s why Vincent and I said you only have to read the explanatory note.

    The bill’s explanatory note states: “The proposed bill is pro-poor, pro-women and pro-life. Its principal beneficiaries will be the poorest of the poor and the marginalized. Reproductive health and family planning significantly improves maternal health and lowers maternal morbidity. Having the ability to plan and space children will afford women more employment and educational opportunities and will significantly lower abortion rates. The bill will also prevent infant and child deaths. Family planning will likewise mean larger investments in children’s health and education and better health outcomes for children. With resultant lower maternal and infant deaths and capacity for more investments in health and education, RH is definitely pro-life.”

    It’s there. If you contradict Vincent’s statement, then that only means a) you don’t believe that the bill provides the people RH care needs, b) you’re a MORON.

    2.) You said: “But most people DO NOT see the RH Bill as a charity thing.” Who are these people? You? What I see is that the bill involves the use of government force and coercion. I think Vincent gave his answer already. That the bill is really not a charity thing. Of course it’s not a charity. Charity means voluntary giving. Do you thing the RH bill is about voluntary giving? Well perhaps that’s what you think because you’re a MORON… There can be no charity when the bill speaks of jailing and fining people who fail or refuse to obey its intents and provisions.

    3.) You said: “They clearly want the RH Bill because it will be for our own good.” So you believe that? Yet you said “what makes you think I’m in favor of the bill.” So if you’re not in favor of the bill what the hell is your problem? So why are you saying then that “they clearly want the RH Bill because it will be for our own good.” In the first place, the bill is NOT for their own good! You have to read Vincent’s anti-RH bill blogs to educate yourself…

    4) Here’s an epic fail that shows your utter stupidity. You said: “It isn’t altruism when we do something for someone knowing full well that there are be benefits to be had.”

    So is this statement coming from someone who “SOMEHOW” oppose the bill on any undefined grounds? How is it not altruism when “we do something for someone knowing full well that there are be benefits to be had.”

    You have to understand that that’s what the bill is NOT! There can be NO benefits to be had from implementing the RH bill. And it is altruism when you force other people to provide the needs of some group of people. That’s sacrificing other people to serve the interest of the poor and the marginalized. That’s what altruism is all about. It’s about sacrifices.

    Here are some questions for you:

    1. What are these benefits to be had from implementing the bill?

    2. What is your understanding of altruism?

    3. Why do you think the RH bill will offer some “benefits.”

    4. Since you said “What makes you think I’m in favor of the RH Bill?” so what’s your definite stand then? And what the heck is your problem?

    • Kantian permalink
      May 14, 2011 3:38

      @aristogeek

      The rest are claptrap. But these are begging to be pointed out:

      ” You said: “They clearly want the RH Bill because it will be for our own good.” So you believe that? Yet you said “what makes you think I’m in favor of the bill.” So if you’re not in favor of the bill what the hell is your problem? So why are you saying then that “they clearly want the RH Bill because it will be for our own good.””

      — Read that again. “They” clearly have their reasons for wanting the bill. I didn’t say that I shared those reasons. You see now why I say that reading comprehension seems to be a problem for you?

      “It isn’t altruism when we do something for someone knowing full well that there are be benefits to be had. …. How is it not altruism when ‘we do something for someone knowing full well that there are be benefits to be had.’ ”

      — Are you saying that it is altruistic to do something good for someone even with full knowledge that there are benefits for yourself to be had? If I chose to eat at a restaurant and paid for the food, by your logic, I’m being altruistic to the owners of the restaurant. Just wow.

    • May 14, 2011 3:38

      @ Kantian moron who knows very little about Kantianism.

      You said: “Read that again. “They” clearly have their reasons for wanting the bill. I didn’t say that I shared those reasons. You see now why I say that reading comprehension seems to be a problem for you?”

      – Of course. But you should understand that you don’t speak for them since you call yourself an Rh bill “agnostic” because you’re a moron. See? You can’t even decide on an issue. That proves you’re a MORON.

      That’s the problem with you. Your first comments were all about Ayn Rand when in fact you don’t know anything about her philosophy except for the crappy reviews/articles you read online. That shows you’re a moron.

      If you’re not a moron, you should have defined your disagreement with Vincent. Instead you focused on your stupidity. What a SICK MIND.

      Here’s another proof that you’re a hopeless MORON.

      You said: “– Are you saying that it is altruistic to do something good for someone even with full knowledge that there are benefits for yourself to be had? If I chose to eat at a restaurant and paid for the food, by your logic, I’m being altruistic to the owners of the restaurant. Just wow.”

      I am saying that the bill won’t do anything good to its intended beneficiaries and to the Philippine society as a whole. Since the RH bill has not yet been revised by its mindless proponents, its dangerous provisions stand. That means there can be no good or benefits to be had from sacrificing some group of people, e.i., doctors and employers. You have to read the bill and Vincent’s blogs to educate yourself.

      By the way, did you read the bill? What do you think about it?

      Also, I am saying that the RH bill is not about doing good for “someone even with full knowledge that there are benefits for yourself to be had.” That’s why I was asking you what are the benefits to be had from this bill. This means that your premise is wrong. Thus, you’re a MORON.

      You said: “If I chose to eat at a restaurant and paid for the food, by your logic, I’m being altruistic to the owners of the restaurant. Just wow.”

      BUT THAT IS NOT THE BILL IS ALL ABOUT! You’re really a moron!!! Grabeee napaka-moron mo.

      What’s the connection of that moronic, STUPID, IDIOTIC analogy to the RH bill? Are the bill’s beneficiaries going to pay for the RH care services they’re going to receive?

      Of course you’re STUPID example of eating at a restaurant and paying your bill is NOT altruism. But if you force the restaurant owner to give you food for free lest he be jailed that’s not merely altruism; that’s slavery at best. And that’s the bill is all about, MORON!!!

      • Kantian permalink
        May 14, 2011 3:38

        @aristogeek

        “because you’re a moron. See? You can’t even decide on an issue. That proves you’re a MORON.”

        — So, people who are agnostic about an issue are morons, according to you. You’re much dumber than I previously thought you were if you seriously believed this.

        “Your first comments were all about Ayn Rand when in fact you don’t know anything about her philosophy except for the crappy reviews/articles you read online. That shows you’re a moron.”

        — More of the “Don’t insult Ayn Rand because I’m so hurt na! Hmph!” shtick. And once again, the reviews I’ve read are far from crappy. You want crappy, go look at the fucking mirror.

        “If you’re not a moron, you should have defined your disagreement with Vincent. Instead you focused on your stupidity. What a SICK MIND.”

        — My disagreement was defined. It’s not my problem you have problems comprehending what you read. And you yet again call something stupid without saying or explaining why it is so. Dumb tactic that you seem to keep relying on to hide the fact that you have no logical rebuttal.

        “I am saying that the bill won’t do anything good to its intended beneficiaries and to the Philippine society as a whole. Since the RH bill has not yet been revised by its mindless proponents, its dangerous provisions stand.”

        — Proved yet again that you cannot READ. I’m saying that WHETHER OR NOT it is actually beneficial to society is a different topic altogether, and a moot one at that! My argument is that, THAT’S THE REASON WHY THE BILL IS BEING ADVOCATED by many people. Given that, you’re anti-altruistic Randian philosophy FAILS. Do you get it now? How many times should I repeat this so it would sink in your thick skull!?

        “That’s why I was asking you what are the benefits to be had from this bill. This means that your premise is wrong. Thus, you’re a MORON.”

        — No, YOU’RE a MORON. Whether or not there are benefits to be had from this bill, whether or not the bill’s advocates are right about the benefits and what have you, is irrelevant to what I’m saying. They are advocating the bill because THEY believe that there are benefits to society, not because they want to be their “brothers’ keeper”. Therefore your anti-altruistic Randian philosophy FAILS. Keep this in frame, you dumb douchebag, and stop going off at another weird tangent.

        “What’s the connection of that moronic, STUPID, IDIOTIC analogy to the RH bill? Are the bill’s beneficiaries going to pay for the RH care services they’re going to receive?”

        — You stupidly said that what I said is STILL altruism, and I corrected you that it isn’t. That analogy has nothing to do with the RH Bill — and your thinking that it should have shows you to be an imbecile — and more to do with you’re previous faulty correction of what I said.

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        You MORON said: “– So, people who are agnostic about an issue are morons, according to you. You’re much dumber than I previously thought you were if you seriously believed this.”

        Of course you have to decide on an issue. It’s either-or. And you’ve already decided. You’re not just agnostic. You’re clearly in favor of the bill. Perhaps you still deny it because you’re a moron, but you’ve already made your decision.

        You moron said: “My disagreement was defined. It’s not my problem you have problems comprehending what you read.”

        OK then… Please address the points and questions I raised here, MORON… http://fvdb.wordpress.com/no-to-rh-bill/#comment-10362

        You moron said: “Given that, you’re anti-altruistic Randian philosophy FAILS.”

        Where’s your proof and argument? YOUR IDIOCY? You don’t even know what altruism means. You can laugh at your stupidity by reading this one http://fvdb.wordpress.com/no-to-rh-bill/#comment-10360 . LOLOLOL!!!

        You moron said: “You stupidly said that what I said is STILL altruism, and I corrected you that it isn’t. That analogy has nothing to do with the RH Bill — and your thinking that it should have shows you to be an imbecile — and more to do with you’re previous faulty correction of what I said.”

        LOLOLOL!!! THAT’S WHY YOU’RE A MORON AND A LIAR! Corrected? Where’s the correction, moron? That clearly shows you don’t understand what altruism means. You moron! lol! Pathetic moron.

  29. May 14, 2011 3:38

    Following this thread for the last hour through email alerts. Anyway, let me just dip my toes, just a little.

    If Kantian’s argument revolves around this nugget:

    “– For argument’s sake, let me go with the popular intuition that over-population in a place with limited resources leads to poverty. I’ll assume for a minute that you have yet to encounter an argument like this. Wait.. maybe you really haven’t, since you’re obviously retarded. But please, go on.”

    Then he is wrong.

    One, overpopulation is not a big problem. In fact, the population of the country is beneficial if harnessed. This is called human resource. Let the adults of the 85M people work, and the economy goes up.

    Besides, poverty exists in the Metro only because the density is too much. What if the government provides incentives to let these poor people move back to the provinces? What if the government creates industries in the provinces, so development will not be Manila-centric?

    Two, okay, let’s go by your overpopulation argument. Is the RH Bill the solution to this? No it is not. Do contraceptives prevent pregnancy in 100 percent of the cases? No it does not. A good RH Bill should include abortion in the programs because abortion is always the solution to pregnancies that result form failed contraceptives. This has always been the model in Western countries–the government encourages its citizens to use contraceptives, contraceptives fail, the citizens seek abortion.

    But does the RH Bill allow abortion? No it does not. So will the RH Bill be effective in curbing population? No it will not. Unless, of course, the RH Bill proponents plan to install abortion in the future when the RH Bill provision fail.

    Besides, you have said so yourself: we have limited resources. So why spend the government’s limited resources to buy contraceptives to give away?

    Your answer to this will be that the poor cannot put contraceptives in their budgets. But can they afford food, too? No they cannot. So the government should buy food instead, right?

    Let the poor decide if they want contraceptives. Give them their basic necessities, like food, and let them decide if they want to spend their surplus money for contraceptives. Isn’t that freedom? You let them decide if they want to buy them, not force them into their throats.

    Leave our taxes out of it.

    • Kantian permalink
      May 14, 2011 3:38

      @MC

      Well, thank you for a well-thought out response. Many of the answers you’ve given, however, are moot. And, if we were keeping tabs, it seems the other side’s counter-arguments are more convincing to the public at large. The question then is, why do we have people like Eric Manalang arguing for the anti-RH side.

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        You have to define your disagreement with the blogger. But first, you have to state whether you in favor or not with the RH bill. If you want a good debate, stop exposing your idiocy and BS by focusing on Ayn Rand because the RH bill is not about Ayn Rand. That will only expose your moronic tendencies.

      • Kantian permalink
        May 14, 2011 3:38

        @aristogeek

        Why do I have to be in favor or not in favor? I said I’m agnostic on the issue. But I’m slightly leaning towards being in favor of it, since I do see the benefits. That’s why I’m asking for answers that might convince me otherwise.

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        @ Moronic Kantian who knows very little about Kantianism:

        You said: “Why do I have to be in favor or not in favor?”

        – Then that shows you’re a MORON. A moron is someone who has no mental capability to decide on any issue. He’ll just rely on what the majority says or on the dictate of his feelings or emotion.

        You said: “I said I’m agnostic on the issue.”

        Yes, of course. Because you’re a moron. Whether you like it or not you have to decide because this issue affects every living idiot in this country.

        You said: “But I’m slightly leaning towards being in favor of it, since I do see the benefits.”

        – In short you’re a moron who just wants to confuse us. So what are those benefits you saw? Did you read the bill? Kindly mention some?

        You said: “That’s why I’m asking for answers that might convince me otherwise.”

        NO. It’s impossible to convince a moron like you. You’re asking the impossible. It’s not our job to convince morons like you.

      • Kantian permalink
        May 14, 2011 3:38

        @aristogeek

        In short, you have no sensible arguments but to call people “moron”.

        In short, you’re a dumb Randian fanboy who masturbates to Ayn Rand interviews. LOL.

        “Then that shows you’re a MORON. A moron is someone who has no mental capability to decide on any issue. ”

        — Nobody should take you seriously then if that’s how you define what agnosticism is. Face it, you’re retarded. You love to assert that your smart, because that’s possibly the only way someone like you can get attention. This type of authoritarian assholery makes it almost certain that you’ve the psychological disposition of someone who has been incessantly bullied as a child. When you have nothing to say, you weaselly retort that your opponent is a “moron”. Intelligent my ass. You’re so dumb, compounded by the fact that you think you aren’t, makes you tremendously pathetic.

        Nice that you also like bashing the Filipino Freethinkers and the writers from GetRealPinoy. I disagree with those people in a lot of ways, but they are way more decent than you, and way smarter.

      • Kantian permalink
        May 14, 2011 3:38

        @aristogeek

        LOL. look at yourself, you retarded douchebag. You have nothing left to say but rehash the line “you expose yourself as a moron” over and over again. Exactly how many permutations of that weaselly line can you come up with?

        Notice how you’re “intelligent” brain can’t seem to come up with any other type of answer and so keep rehashing that line over and over again to avoid having to come up with a sensible retort.

        Keep dancing you monkey.

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        Stop spreading your idiocy and moronic rhetoric.

        It’s time to face reality, moronic kiddie…

        You moron said: “– For argument’s sake, let me go with the popular intuition that over-population in a place with limited resources leads to poverty. I’ll assume for a minute that you have yet to encounter an argument like this. Wait.. maybe you really haven’t, since you’re obviously retarded. But please, go on.”
        First off, it’s not my first time to encounter such an idiotic argument. That argument, which is not an argument at all, reeks of Malthusian imbecility.
        Now if you understand whatever you said about overpopulation, let me first know the context of your overpopulation. Is it local (in some areas of the Philippines only? National (the whole country is overpopulated)? Or Global (there’s a global overpopulation?
        Second, you have to get the country’s updated population, fertility rate, and density. Since you’re a moron, I don’t think you understand the connection of these variables.
        Third, do you absolutely believe in your stupid statement: “the popular intuition that over-population in a place with limited resources leads to poverty”?
        If this is the case, you have to answer the following:
        a. How will the RH bill solve overpopulation?
        b. Is there any connection between overpopulation and poverty?
        c. If you believe in the absoluteness of that statement, how about Japan, a country with big population and scarce resources?
        Here are some of the most populous countries on earth, MORON. Educate yourself.
        China – 1,341,335,000
        India – 1,224,614,000
        United States – 310,384,000
        Indonesia – 239,781,000
        Brazil – 194,946,000

      • Kantian permalink
        May 14, 2011 3:38

        @aristogeek

        “Stop spreading your idiocy and moronic rhetoric.
        It’s time to face reality, moronic kiddie…”

        — Hahahahaha!! Got self-conscious at what I just said, and decided to say something new? LOL.

        I’m tired of your nonsense. Nothing in what you said above addresses what I’ve said. Which I will apparently have to repeat, since you’re too stupid to understand:

        reposted from above:

        Whether or not there are benefits to society, the fact remains that THIS IS THE MAIN REASON WHY PEOPLE ARE PUSHING FOR THE BILL.
        And therefore, your pro-Capitalism and anti-altruism Randian NON-SENSE does not address the REAL reason why people are advocating the bill.

        Read and understand what I’ve just written above, you lazy bastard!

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        Here’s my response to your idiocy, MORON…

        http://fvdb.wordpress.com/no-to-rh-bill/#comment-10372

      • Kantian permalink
        May 14, 2011 3:38

        @aristogeek

        “Here’s my response to your idiocy, MORON…
        http://fvdb.wordpress.com/no-to-rh-bill/#comment-10372

        –Your response, or froivinber’s response? Thanks for admitting you are one and the same. (not like the jury was out on that one)

        No one should respect anything you have to say now since you’ve essentially just admitted your sock-puppetry. Also, nice for you to admit that you’re a hypocrite, since you’ve accused people of that very thing at another of your crack-brained posts.

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        You moron said: “Thanks for admitting you are one and the same. (not like the jury was out on that one)”:

        You’re not just a moron but a hallucinating druggist. Lol!

        That’s because you can’t answer simple questions, MORON… Lol! Pathetic and sick in the mind.

        NICE TRY THEN… Sicko!!!

      • May 15, 2011 3:38

        Wow. You don’t have a good rebuttal to the points I put up, so you poison the well. I put up clear arguments, you put up a fallacy. I guess I win this argument. I hope we win it in the Congress too. And we will, if people like you, who don’t have rational thinking capacities, represent the pro-RH Bill side. Thank you for your ignorance.

      • May 15, 2011 3:38

        Eric Manalang? How about your side? In the Harapan debate you had: (1) Sylvia Claudio, who kept dragging the Catholic Church in the debate even though the RH Bill is not a Church issue; (2) Carlos Celdran, who tweeted before the debate that adrinking game must be put up whenever the anti-RH Bill says God in their arguments. They were disappointed because nobody said God, plus its the anti-RH Bill side who kept dragging the Church into the debate; (3) Garin, who kept telling the anti-RH side that its bad to lie, when she puts up one lie after another. Water is cancerous? The Vatican has an RH Bill program? All lies; (4) Bishop Rodrigo Tano, who wastes time whenever he open his mouth. I became a fan of him, wishing he would speak for you again and again to waste your allotted time, and (5) Lagman, who became irate immediately and called the anti-RH side liars. Who was lying again?

        I hope these people represent you in Congress so you would lose the debate. You could also join them for more losing power.

  30. May 14, 2011 3:38

    Kantian moron, here’s what you said: ” For argument’s sake, let me go with the popular intuition that over-population in a place with limited resources leads to poverty. I’ll assume for a minute that you have yet to encounter an argument like this. Wait.. maybe you really haven’t, since you’re obviously retarded. But please, go on.”

    Now you’re trying to evade this issue. I thought you’ve clearly defined your disagreement with the blogger?

    So define it now. You’re not just a moron but a liar!

    You’re worst than the idiots and morons of Filipino Freethinkers!

    • Kantian permalink
      May 14, 2011 3:38

      @aristogeek

      “Now you’re trying to evade this issue. I thought you’ve clearly defined your disagreement with the blogger?
      So define it now. You’re not just a moron but a liar!”

      — Why don’t you try reading the whole exchange and stop quoting people out of context, you retarded monkey.

      “You’re worst than the idiots and morons of Filipino Freethinkers!”

      — I don’t mind being worse than them. I would mind however being worse than you, seeing how you have got to be one of the lowest of the low, intelligence-wise.

  31. May 14, 2011 3:38

    Here’s a pending issue to a moron code-named Kantian who admitted he knows “very little” about Kantian philosophy:

    Here’s what this MORONIC Kantian said: “– For argument’s sake, let me go with the popular intuition that over-population in a place with limited resources leads to poverty. I’ll assume for a minute that you have yet to encounter an argument like this. Wait.. maybe you really haven’t, since you’re obviously retarded. But please, go on.”

    Kantian’s previous stupid replies show he tried to evade this issue by GOING BERSERK. Well, that’s because he’s a MORON. That’s what all morons do.

    Here’s my letter to MORONIC Kantian who’s hiding behind a false nick because he’s got no guts and courage to be publicly humiliated under his true identity.

    Now if you understand whatever you said about overpopulation, let me first know the context of your overpopulation. Is it local (in some areas of the Philippines only? National (the whole country is overpopulated)? Or Global (there’s a global overpopulation?

    Second, you have to get the country’s updated population, fertility rate, and density. Since you’re a moron, I don’t think you understand the connection of these variables.

    Third, do you absolutely believe in your stupid statement: “the popular intuition that over-population in a place with limited resources leads to poverty”?

    If this is the case, you have to answer the following:

    a. How will the RH bill solve overpopulation?

    b. Is there any connection between overpopulation and poverty?

    c. If you believe in the absoluteness of that statement, how about Japan, a country with big population and scarce resources?

    Here are some of the most populous countries on earth, MORON. Educate yourself.

    China – 1,341,335,000
    India – 1,224,614,000
    United States – 310,384,000
    Indonesia – 239,781,000
    Brazil – 194,946,000

    I know you can’t answer these issues because you’re a moron, Kantian…

    • May 14, 2011 3:38

      This is the most STUPID, MORONIC statement I’ve encountered on this thread: “– For argument’s sake, let me go with the popular intuition that over-population in a place with limited resources leads to poverty. I’ll assume for a minute that you have yet to encounter an argument like this. Wait.. maybe you really haven’t, since you’re obviously retarded. But please, go on.”

      That’s from moronic Kantian who knows nothing about any issue… Lol!

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        The worst thing about you MORONIC Kantian is that you’re trying to attribute all the stupid things you said like overpopulation, etc. to the PEOPLE…

        So what’s the hell is your original, personal argument against the blogger?

        Well, according to your pathetic arguments, it’s all about the people’s views. Nothing of what you said is your own.

        That’s the badge of an authentic MORON…

      • Kantian permalink
        May 14, 2011 3:38

        @aristogeek

        “you’re trying to attribute all the stupid things you said like overpopulation, etc. to the PEOPLE…”

        — You’re really dumb. I don’t have to attribute that. That’s what the RH Bill proponents believe. Hence they want population-control, genius. You didn’t know this? Go suck your mommy’s tit. What the hell are you in here rambling about the RH Bill if you didn’t know this, you ball-sac.

        “So what’s the hell is your original, personal argument against the blogger?”

        — Stop referring to yourself in the third person, you dumb retard. You’ve already admitted that you were one and the same. Didn’t you just point me to your “answer”, which was a post written by froivinber? You disingenuous ass-lice.

        “Well, according to your pathetic arguments, it’s all about the people’s views. Nothing of what you said is your own.”

        — So what? How fucking controversial. WooooooOOoo. Stupid..

        “That’s the badge of an authentic MORON…”

        — Riiight. Keep telling yourself that. If it helps you think you’re succeeding in mitigating the embarrassment you’ve just been handed. Whatever floats your boat.

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        You moron said: “That’s what the RH Bill proponents believe.”

        You’re not here to say “that’s what the RH Bill proponents believe.”

        Your statement is very clear.

        You said: “For argument’s sake, let me go with the popular intuition that over-population in a place with limited resources leads to poverty.”

        You’re really a deluded moron. Lol!

        You moron said: “Stop referring to yourself in the third person, you dumb retard. You’ve already admitted that you were one and the same.”

        Where’s the admission, MORON? Any proof? Just because you can’t answer my questions on overpopulation? Lol! MORONIC MORON LOLOLOL!

        I repeat… Well, according to your pathetic arguments, it’s all about the people’s views. Nothing of what you said is your own.

  32. Kantian permalink
    May 14, 2011 3:38

    @aristogeek

    Nice that you deleted my other post because it embarrassed the hell out of you.
    LOL.

    • May 14, 2011 3:38

      Well, I believe the blogger is online because he’s posted a link on this FB group an hour ago. FYI, I’m a member of that group.

      Again…

      As to my personal information, I’ll give you a link to my Facebook account if you also post yours!

      This is my reply… http://fvdb.wordpress.com/no-to-rh-bill/#comment-10386

    • May 14, 2011 3:38

      Well, I believe the blogger is online because he’s posted a link on this FB group an hour ago. FYI, I’m a member of that group. http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_173863488808&ap=1

      Again…

      As to my personal information, I’ll give you a link to my Facebook account if you also post yours!

      This is my reply… http://fvdb.wordpress.com/no-to-rh-bill/#comment-10386

      • Kantian permalink
        May 14, 2011 3:38

        @aristogeek

        “As to my personal information, I’ll give you a link to my Facebook account if you also post yours!”

        — What makes you think I give a flying fuck about your personal information? Why should I give you mine? So you can write a blog post about me, misrepresent what happened, and tell yourself and your handful of followers how you’ve given me an ass-whipping in this debate? LOL.

        Dream on, asshole.

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        Well, that means you’re a cowardly moron. And that proves your point whether the blogger and I are the same…

        Here’s my letter to you moron… http://fvdb.wordpress.com/no-to-rh-bill/#comment-10386

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        You moron said: ” You are one and the same. Own up to your previous mistakenly posted comment.”

        Well, that’s what a moron who runs out of illogical arguments would say… But the fact remains you’re a moron, a liar and a deluded, hallucinating moron.

        It’s easy to make an asserting without proof. That’s what most morons like you do…

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        You moron said: “So you can write a blog post about me, misrepresent what happened, and tell yourself and your handful of followers how you’ve given me an ass-whipping in this debate? LOL.”

        See? You’re laughing at your own stupidity. You’re afraid to be exposed publicly because you know it for yourself that you’re a moron… lol!

        Like I said, you can always make a baseless, unfounded assertion. That’s what most morons do. But I enjoy such an assertion… ;-)

  33. May 14, 2011 3:38

    To MORONIC Kantian:

    Here’s what you moron said: “For argument’s sake, let me go with the popular intuition that over-population in a place with limited resources leads to poverty.”

    Then you said: “Stop quoting people out of context you self-aggrandizing, delusional ball sac.”

    When you couldn’t answer my questions about overpopulation you had this alibi: “I made that statement to show you what people believed. And that it wasn’t about welfare-statism, but pure self-interest. Not that I share this belief –which I’ve kept saying, yet you failed to comprehend. But it shows that your Randian arguments do not address the real reason why it is being supported by the majority.”

    You went on to rationalize that statement with this reply: “If you will still FAIL to understand this, then I’m done with you. You’re STUPID. And no matter how you’d like to proclaim you’re an intellectual, anybody can read this exchange and see how galactically DUMB you are.”

    MY REPLY:

    I don’t care about what the “people believed. ” I care about what you believe, MORON!

    I am not debating with the people here. I am debating with a MORON.

    But wait!

    Did you not just say, “let me go with the popular intuition that over-population in a place with limited resources leads to poverty.”

    Are you here to represent what “the people believed”? Now you’re not just a moron, but a deluded, hallucinating moron.

    Apart from what the people believed, what do you PERSONALLY BELIEVE then in connection with the RH bill issue?

    As to my personal information, I’ll give you a link to my Facebook account if you also post yours! ;-)

    • Kantian permalink
      May 14, 2011 3:38

      @aristogeek

      Again, I will not address the rest of your stupid post, except for this:

      “Did you not just say, “let me go with the popular intuition that over-population in a place with limited resources leads to poverty.””

      — Yes, I said that. Because I was giving you a reason WHY people are advocating the RH Bill. I was giving you a reason that stems from self-interest. You still don’t get it? You are a chimp.

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        This explains your utter IDIOCY, MORON…

        You said: “Yes, I said that.”

        Of course because you can never deny a prima facie evidence to your idiocy.

        Then you said: “I was giving you a reason WHY people are advocating the RH Bill.”

        LMAO!!! An epic fail… A reason which includes you.

        We’re not here to ask you the reason why people advocate the RH bill. We already know that. That proves you’re a moron.

        You’re here to define your disagreement.

        Lay down your position so that we’d be able to make proper rebuttal. The problem is you keep on saying that’s what the people believed. FYI moron, we already know those things and we don’t need you to tell us what the people “believed.” We want to know your personal stand. Is that clear, moron?

        You said: “I was giving you a reason that stems from self-interest.”

        What is that then? Kindly explain? You’re trying to introduce new issues here again and then you’re going to tell us, “that’s what the people believed.” Nice shots, moron.

      • May 14, 2011 3:38

        I agree, Jake. I believe this Kantian is a moron and deluded.

  34. anonymous permalink
    May 20, 2011 3:38

    “The RH bill would cause much higher prices of commodities and health care products in the Philippines because of the fact that businesses and hospitals would be compelled to offset the RH care expenses that they are going to pay for their workers.”

    Care to back this up with empirical evidence or is your piece of shit blog all just a steaming pile of apriori cow dung?

    • May 20, 2011 3:38

      The answer: “The RH bill would cause much higher prices of commodities and health care products in the Philippines because of the fact that businesses and hospitals would be compelled to offset the RH care expenses that they are going to pay for their workers.”

  35. Jah permalink
    July 29, 2011 3:38

    Funny how basic health care is compared to a theme park visit. Apples and oranges, my friend. I don’t know any families that lost a parent and breadwinner because they couldn’t go ride a roller coaster.

    When speaking of rights, perhaps we should consider a more basic one — the right to life, of which many mothers and children are deprived daily. How? Through poor pre, peri, and postnatal education and care, among many other things addressed by the RH Bill.

    The fear of the almighty hammer and sickle is a little overwrought. It is highly unlikely that the country will sink to the depths of an oppressed and poor majority, controlled by corrupt and powerful individuals who hold most of the country’s wealth… hmm… maybe this socialism/capitalism thing is just a matter of semantics in our country’s situation. On a more basic level… is a government not meant to preserve and improve the lives of its citizens?

    I challenge anyone to point out any aspect of the bill that will make any individual citizen’s life worse, as a direct result of it coming into effect.

    I do thank you for posting non-BS religious reasons for opposing the bill. At the very least, it allows for a more level-headed discussion. I understand your points, but respectfully disagree.

  36. Jester Cahayag permalink
    August 1, 2011 3:38

    I agree with all your points except for the part where you said that overpopulation is a myth and our resources are not limited. We must accept that our resources ARE limited. I just need to ask you if you have noticed your environment is changing lately (the storms and all), because it seems that you don’t. Do you know why price of electricity rises or why there are frequent power shortages in the country? It is because the demand exceeds the supply. Simple, right? I am glad to see an optimist with regards to new technology, finding a new way to produce energy, however, I am realistic, so I have to say that it is naive for you to suggest that. Yes, it is possible, if the oil cartel would not stop innovations in renewable energy (blame the big three, and also BP), however, because we DON’T have this innovations yet, it is best to have an effective population control policy. Yes, everything you said is true, RH bill would prove detrimental to our rights, however, we should think over if we would stay hostile to this bill. The world does not belong to us, we are only it’s steward. If we stay on status quo, we would continue to deplete our natural resources an exponential rate, leaving nothing for our future children. Yes, we need freedom, however, we would not survive with this alone. Freedom without order is chaos.

    • August 1, 2011 3:38

      “I agree with all your points except for the part where you said that overpopulation is a myth and our resources are not limited. We must accept that our resources ARE limited.”

      Jester Cahayag,

      But I’d like to know your context of “overpopulation”. Is it global, domestic or local? And do you know the population density in the country? Thanks!

      • Jester Cahayag permalink
        August 2, 2011 3:38

        Global? Domestic? You’re asking me for my “context” of overpopulation? Sorry, but I think you are misinformed with regards to how the population of the human race affect use the resources of the planet. This is an issue to all levels, from your own home to the global community, resources will always be scarce. The most obvious example would be the fossil fuels. These things take millions of years to develop in the crust, yet it only took us decades to dry up some oil wells. Do you realize the gravity of the effect of our disregard of the limit of nature? I’m no environmentalist, but as a cautious person, I am threatened by the potential complete depletion of our resources.

      • August 2, 2011 3:38

        “Sorry, but I think you are misinformed with regards to how the population of the human race affect use the resources of the planet.”

        — Lol! Read my previous blogs to further educate yourself. What’s the population density in the country and what’s your context of overpopulation? Is it global, local or domestic? How would you propose to legislate population? You cannot legislate population with mere wishful thinking…

        Like I said in a facebook group: “The government cannot legislate responsible parenthood and population unless it employs the use of state force just like the methods they used/use in Sweden and China. The best way to curb population and to encourage responsible parenthood is to guarantee economic freedom. Let’s revise the charter so to open our economy to foreign investors, repeal regulations, lower taxes and guarantee economic freedom. This is the only way to encourage investments, which are the only source of jobs and nation’s wealth.If people have jobs they would have less time to have SEX and to procreate. And if people have jobs, they could then afford to buy laptops/computers and be FACEBOOK ADDICTS like us. More extra-curricular activities, LESS TIME TO HAVE SEX.”

        I also stated the following in a previous post:

        “Capitalism involves, thus, an automatic system of birth control, a fact that the general population hasn’t considered yet but which adds a great deal to reduce the dangers involved in birth delivery for women. People who perceive a better future in their life are less interested in producing children as “sustenance security” for their old age and, besides, they are keen in providing their offsprings with a better education than they themselves ever had. Further on, less children free a female from the so-called “kitchen chores”. Now they can earn their own money, which increases the amount of money to be saved and so adds to life’s enjoyment. In addition they can now delight in their own body and sexual relations that are in themselves a tool of happiness and no longer the terror of unavoidable pregnancies that may mean their own deaths, quite separately from the possible death of the babies (all this beside the added security of the higher standards of hygiene and the increased amount of medicines invented). Wherever even traces of Capitalism are applied, a decrease of sexual practice as mere generators of more human beings and an increase of all kinds of sexual activity for personal satisfaction can be seen. The scholars of Capitalism already foresaw this fact, but it’s almost surprising that it appears on such an early implementation of some parts of the system, as we are facing nowadays. The only possible rational social system – Capitalism – solves, thus, the essential problems of both nature and the human being in a peaceful, self-respecting, productive way.”

        In short, the government is NEVER the solution. To claim that the government is the solution to population and poverty is hilarious and pathetic.

        Poverty is an economic issue, comrade. And since it is an economic issue only proper economic system and principles can solve poverty.

        No society can ever sustain inventiveness and the potential resource of the people except socialist societies.

        The best thing a society can do is guarantee ECONOMIC FREEDOM. What do I mean by this? Economic freedom allows every individual to pursue his ambitions, goals, and aspirations.

        The only way to sustain inventiveness and innovation is to guarantee the following institutions of economic freedom:

        1. Individual rights: because no brilliant, gifted men could ever survive or exist in a self-sacrificing society. Brain drain is the only result of welfare state. Look at Sweden. Brain drain in Sweden is alarming.

        2. Property rights/ IP rights. Guarantee inventors’, businessmen’s, developers’ and artists’ rights to their own creations/inventions. This made America the greatest nation on earth. Why did most inventors in the past 100 years flocked in the US? Nikola Tesla, Einstein and other inventors from Europe migrated to America because it’s the only nation that time that guaranteed inventors’ right to their creations. Proof: Nikola Tesla sued Marconi over patent rights to radio.

        3. Rule of law. Look at some African countries? Most Africa countries are rich in natural resource, but investors are afraid to invest in those societies due to lack of rule of law.

        4. Limited government.

  37. JASVEE permalink
    September 6, 2011 3:38

    For me, i rather be neutral about this topic because all things has its all advantage and disavantages. And i think, we should respect what other people say about this. And also, we should think twice and be sure of what we will say before we post it…

    well, that’s all i could say. :)

  38. Macky Pizarro permalink
    September 9, 2011 3:38

    Assume that we follow your ideals, wouldn’t it be anarchic that it’s all individual and nobody would care for the rest of the population?

  39. rosalinde permalink
    September 18, 2011 3:38

    abstinence is what the catholic church preaches. The catholic church in the Philippines is spending a lot of money to pass this bill, they even imported an American lay preacher to preach abstinence to the young. Yet this same preacher is seen everyday in a massage parlor along Sumulong Highway….. & has even had affairs with a couple of the young girls “masseuse”. mind you this same preacher-man has a wife & 2 kids in L.A.
    Abstinence indeed…… Can’t the Catholic Church do anything right? or at least check out who you want to speak for you?

    • September 18, 2011 3:38

      Rose, Rosalinde and Jose,

      You’ve posted the same comment using different nicks.

      You said: “abstinence is what the catholic church preaches.”

      What’s your point? I am an atheist and I oppose the RH bill or any form of population control. I don’t base my arguments on religious grounds… Better read this —>> http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2011/03/28/im-an-atheist-and-i-oppose-the-fascist-rh-bill/

  40. Mae permalink
    October 13, 2011 3:38

    Ableist little shits.
    Fuck you, author.
    I’m working on a paper on fallacies. About 50% of this whole article is gonna get quoted, I kid you not.

  41. RioRio permalink
    December 6, 2011 3:38

    This Blog is life awakening it …
    i really like it so much…..
    -bliss

  42. Pro permalink
    December 10, 2011 3:38

    Why would you use that Fox News video when it is clearly a right-winged network made up of Republicans who do not care about us democrats? It is the duty of the government to protect the rights of the people to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” If the government cannot make sure that we poor meet our needs then how could we meet the right of having life…happiness, which is what the republicans do not understand. They do not know the hardships of the poor people who stay down below because they hog all the money for themselves, eg. the capitalists, who do not want to pay more tax to help the country. In the first place, this country’s economy has gotten worse because 75% of the US American taxpayers’ money go to the military because of the on-going war between Afghanistan and America which started because of the 9/11 terrorist bombing which happened during Bush’s term. Bush got a warning from the terrorist months ago but shoved it off his shoulder while he continued to play golf in Maine. That is the republican’s president. They do not care, I repeat, do not care about the poor people. So you using the Fox News video to support your case is so far off because the issues of the Philippines regarding the RH Bill is so different from what is happening between the selfish republicans and the poor democrats. Use something that is of your own context.

    • December 11, 2011 3:38

      Pro,

      “Why would you use that Fox News video when it is clearly a right-winged network made up of Republicans who do not care about us democrats?”

      Would you care to point out what’s wrong with that Fox news video by Judge Napolitano except your claim that it’s a right-wing network? Are you saying that the left-wing networks like CNN, MSNBC, etc. are the credible networks in USA? Why not specifically point out what wrong with the video. Argue properly. That’s how the STUPID LEFTISTS think. They thought they’re not being brainwashed by the lefist media.

  43. Princess permalink
    February 15, 2012 3:38

    unless you’re “sarado-Katoliko”, you know that contraception won’t be mandatory if this bill becomes a law. there is no single solution to poverty. those pro-lifers who honestly believe that education is the only solution are so uneducated. how do you teach a couple from the squatters area with 5 kids (and counting) stuff that won’t register in their heads like The Rhythm Method? even the well-to-do dickheads with no regard for their partner’s (or partnerS if he’s a DOM) menstrual cycle won’t change their sexual habits. the only difference that the latter has a better chance of supporting children.

    that’s why we NEED this RH Bill because AT LEAST, Filipinos can better understand the responsibility of raising children by having the right to choose if they’ll be born or not. i really don’t give a rats *** about the scientific **** that these Catholic priests twist. sex is good because it promotes intimacy for relationships and marriage, but if the woman becomes pregnant… there’s already that responsibility of being a parent… and if the parents are in no way capable of providing food, shelter, clothing… they’ll just add to the already-growing problem of poverty and overpopulation in the country.
    if it pains you less to see a family of 9 living in a 30-square meter shanty than a 14-year old pervert getting free condoms… you’re either a virgin or an idiot. ditto with the Top Contributor in Mathematics who probably hasn’t heard of China’s One-Child Policy or knows how China’s economy works.

  44. Enzo permalink
    July 29, 2012 3:38

    I just don’t get what you find so wrong about giving these free condoms to the people who can’t afford it. The fact that you call people idiots just because they are for the idea that the middle class should have to make some sacrifices for the welfare of the poor just shows closed minded you really are. It seems as if you find people either evil OR idiotic as long as they don’t have the same opinions as you when it comes to these issues. No matter how much you speak of the CONS of the RH bill, the PROS still stand ( the main one being that the poor get more of their freedom to choose and their freedom to healthcare ). Some people may think that the PROS truly justify the CONS while some others may think that the CONS are too much to be justified by the means, but none of the above will be the objectively correct. It all comes down to subjective morals. Just speaking what I think. Not trying to offend anyone or anything.

    • July 29, 2012 3:38

      Just one answer: stop being a freeloader or a social parasite. Stop depending on government freebies. The more you ask from the government, the more the government acquires more power and is justified to use force against people who produce.

      As former US Pres. Gerald Ford once said: “A government big enough to give you everything you need, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have….”

  45. Random dude permalink
    August 5, 2012 3:38

    Get a life, you virgins.

  46. August 6, 2012 3:38

    pro-rh bill are devil

  47. thinkitup permalink
    August 8, 2012 3:38

    I understand your argument about state support as I too have read almost all of Ayn Rand’s works countless times. Though some of your arguments are sound, remember that it takes a society that lives by the credo that each man conceives of himself as a “heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute.”

    As long as the society you live in does not abide by this 100%, state support to some extent must exist.

    As a tax payer, I am also frustrated every time I think about where my hard-earned money goes. I have to admit though that should it go to the welfare of the poor in an effort to improve their circumstances and hopefully enable them to support themselves, I wouldn’t mind as much. This is not out of altruism, but because as long as my country is deemed poor, I as a citizen, will also carry this stigma no matter how well-off I personally may be.

    For this reason, I support the RH Bill. If giving contraceptives to the poor will result in less children, less people on welfare, less children in bloated schools, a stronger possibility for these kids to have access to higher education and lowering the poverty incidence, then I’m all for it.

    If our country actually becomes developed, I might get to go to the US without having to pay over 5,000 pesos for a bloody visa.

    • August 8, 2012 3:38

      You should rethink your position up. Also, you took Rand OUT OF CONTEXT.

      You said: ” If giving contraceptives to the poor will result in less children, less people on welfare, less children in bloated schools, a stronger possibility for these kids to have access to higher education and lowering the poverty incidence, then I’m all for it.”

      — How many times did I say that charity should be VOLUNTARY and a PRIVATE MATTER. If you care about the poor, then, help them yourself. I am not against charity. I am against altruism. I am against the idea that the state has to legislate morality and charity. Also, I don’t think you read any of my blogs.

      There are now a lot of non-government organization that try to help the poor. Giving contraceptives to the poor won’t make them rich. The poor need jobs. You want to give contraceptives to the poor at what cost? At the cost of putting the entire medical industry under state control? At the cost of prohibiting anyone who failed to secure a Cert. of Compliance from getting married? At the cost of justifying the imposition of higher tax rates and levying of more taxes in the near future? At the cost of destroying ‘freedom of religion and other inalienable rights’? At the cost of giving more intrusive powers to our highly intrusive government? Did you read the bill?

      I gave the same response to Miriam Defensor Santiago (I posted it here http://www.facebook.com/groups/173863488808/):

      “Giving ‘an indigent married woman the freedom of informed choice concerning her reproductive rights’? Are you insane, Miriam? Since when did the idea of ‘informed choice’ become a concern of the state? Why should informed choice be funded by the state? Do freedoms and rights require state budget? But that is NOT just the bill is all about! You must be either insane or dishonest!”

      — Read this! http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2012/08/06/filipino-people-need-jobs-not-rh/

  48. Helen permalink
    August 9, 2012 3:38

    I believe that everyone deserves access to education, health care and social services. Yes it is a basic RIGHT that should be provided for EVERYONE. Regardless whether you are rich or poor. In order for people to excel, they need help with the necessities. My country is not perfect but we are better off than most because people receive the help at the most basic level.

    I also think that there are people who abuse the system but the benefits of providing basic social services that benefit everyone deters the sad poverty/situations that is seen in many places. I am so grateful that I grew up in a country where health care is free, education is highly subsidized, the crime rate is low, employment insurance and social assistance is provided when needed, abortion is legalized and sexual education was taught at an early age. Yes our taxes are high and there are poor people in my country. But our streets are clean and you won’t see children begging for food in the highway or families who don’t have the means have children that they can’t afford over and over again.

    I guess my point is if you provide the basic necessities, your population will be better off. I’d rather live in Sweden than in the US. Not to offend any Americans but they have the “poorest” social system (—i.e. you’re lucky if you’re rich, the US is your oyster but if you’re middle class – poor, good luck paying for your college education and if you get sick you are screwed) out of all the first world countries.

    You can argue your tails off over the pros and cons of this bill but at the very basic level, I think that the pros outweigh the perceived/potential negative impact.

    I hope that this bill will pass.

    P.S. Someone made a comment about how people will have less time for sex if they have jobs and therefore be less prone to procreating.

    Umm hello? I have a job, I always have time for lot’s of sex. But I am not popping babies left right and centre because I learned about sexual education and have access to affordable birth control options.

    You can give people jobs, they will still have time to have sex but if they know nothing about family planning and how babies are made they will still be popping them like rabbits.

    That’s all…

    • anti-RH permalink
      August 9, 2012 3:38

      “I believe that everyone deserves access to education, health care and social services. Yes it is a basic RIGHT that should be provided for EVERYONE. Regardless whether you are rich or poor. In order for people to excel, they need help with the necessities. My country is not perfect but we are better off than most because people receive the help at the most basic level.”

      — This is one of the scariest comments I’ve ever read here. Madam, what you want is socialism. Go to socialist countries. There they provide almost everything you need. What you want is a palamunin policy to be implemented by the state. Read this blog —– http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2012/08/08/sen-miriam-defensor-santiagos-rh-bill-illogic/

      • Helen permalink
        August 9, 2012 3:38

        How is this scary? That my country provides for its people? I think that the current situation in the Philippines is the scary one.

        It broke my heart to see a mother with 13 kids living in a shack and she had no idea how she ended up with so many children. Those poor kids…The mother was 26 years old with the mental maturity of a 14 year old. If there was a system in place that helped to educate/support this woman she would not be in her current situation. I am not saying that she should be on gov’t welfare forever but if basic welfare was provided she would have had some help in getting a better life for herself. You can’t save everyone but there must be some things in place to help people out. I know a few women who were in bad situations (abusive households, young pregnancies) but because of the social system they are better off. Yes they received help from the gov’t but now they are tax paying citizens who are contributing to the economy. I think that the long-term benefits of basic support makes for a better society.

        I will read your link. Thanks.

      • anti-RH permalink
        August 9, 2012 3:38

        I know it is hard to explain to you what’s wrong with your comment. You have to have proper understanding of economics and politics to grasp what’s scary about your comment.

        How will the government finance all the things everyone need in the country? Do you know why we have high public and foreign debt? Why we have high budget deficit? Why we have high inflation rate? Why we have unemployment rate? It’s because of all the unsustainable welfare programs implemented by the government for decades. We have high unemployment rate because welfare programs creates destructive regulations and CORRUPTION that discourage both local and foreign investors.

        Do you know what happened before the end of the Korean war? The people were asked to choose between North and South. The people who wanted FREE GOVERNMENT SERVICES chose North Korea. They wanted to be palamunins. The people in China fought for communism because they wanted free goods to be provided by the government. The people in Venezuela voted for a socialist constitution because they wanted FREE government services like healthcare and education. But they’re not free at all because the government is NOT a productive agency. It gets the money from the people or taxpayers.

      • Helen permalink
        August 9, 2012 3:38

        Ok so walk me through this…

        What are some of the unsustainable welfare programs out there and how much are they spending on these programs?

        I am not well-versed in politics and economics in the Philippines but I believe in that if everyone pitches in to help those who are in the bottom of the barrel the long-term effects will be worth it.

        Corruption and inefficient gov’t are issues but I think that socialism is not completely a bad thing. I support the free markets but I also believe in regulation and the gov’t taking care of the basic necessities. A mixed market, I guess is what it’s called? I say tax the rich :-P

      • anti-RH permalink
        August 9, 2012 3:38

        You know it’s nice to say that the government must provide things like education, healthcare, housing, etc. without understanding how the government gets the money to provide for these services. The government relies on taxation and regulations to make these services possible. Why are there now a lot of taxes. Last year, the Aquino admin said pension and health contributions would be subject to tax. http://business.inquirer.net/30621/bir-pension-health-contributions-subject-to-tax

        Socialism is not just bad; it is evil. You know what socialism means? It means that property rights will be abrogated. Everything under a socialist regime is owned by the state. If that’s not completely a bad thing to you, then, I suggest that you rethink or redefine your political stand.

      • anti-RH permalink
        August 9, 2012 3:38

        This is what great philosopher Cicero said before the fall of Rome due to high inflation (creating fiat money rather than gold) and other factors:

        “The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed, lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance.” – Cicero, 55 BC

      • Helen permalink
        August 9, 2012 3:38

        Can you tell me what you think the difference between communism vs socialism? I think that the word is used so interchangeably that people confuse the two.

        I very strongly believe that every society should have social services that will act as a safety net. I am advocating for a mixed system. Regulation, taxation within a capitalist economy.

        The proof is in the pudding. My country is better off than most because the people are taken care off at the very basic level.

      • anti-RH permalink
        August 9, 2012 3:38

        Hi Helen! I agree with your that the two terms – socialism and communism- are usually used interchangeably even by those who subscribe to both ideals. Well, it’s because they simply try to confuse themselves. In theory, socialism mainly refers to an economic system that seeks to achieve equality among social members, while communism, is both economic and political system that seeks equality among members of society and advocates a classless and stateless society. Communism is regarded as more extreme than socialism.

        But for people who understand basic principles and politics, both socialism and communism are totalitarian, collectivist, statist ideologies. They only differ in terms of degree. They both demand state control. Both reject the concept of individual rights and freedom. It’s all about state control and collective power. And both reject capitalism.

        “I very strongly believe that every society should have social services that will act as a safety net.”

        You mean social services to be funded by the government? Greece tried that a few years ago. Now they’re bankrupt. If you read the news, employees in government hospitals were forced to work without pay because the Grecian government can no longer fund those services. In short, Greece’s welfare state bankrupted their economy. A few years ago when the socialists came to power in Greece, the people rejoiced because they were promised “free” social services like education and health care. Now they’re protesting… Protesting what? They’re protesting that their BANKRUPT government should give more. But the Greek government is already bankrupt.

        The same thing happened to Italy when socialist Zapareto came to power. The Italians rejoiced, as they were promised “free” government services. Now Italy is bankrupt and the people suffer.

        Would you like to BANKRUPT your future and the future of your children for so-called free government services of the present moment? That’s what we’re doing today, comrade. ;-)

      • Helen permalink
        August 9, 2012 3:38

        I don’t think that socialism rejects capitalism, it was designed work in a capitalist society. Some gov’t intervention is good.

        Part of the reason for the crisis in Greece is the huge “under the table” market. If you’re making 100k a year and you’re only claiming 30k as your salary and pocketing the difference tax free, it is inevitable that the gov’t will go bankrupt. And to be able to retire in your 50’s and receive 90% of their previous yearly income as part of their pension? It’s no wonder they are in trouble.

        The Gov’t needs money to provide basic services (health care, education, employment assistance etc.) and they have to get this through taxes. I am not saying that the gov’t should be taking care of every single thing but at the most basic level assistance should be provided.

        The bill might not be perfect but for the betterment of society, I think that everyone should chip in and help those at the very bottom.

        I am grateful that myself and everyone around me has access to “free” gov’t services. Well technically, they’re not free because we are all contributing to it. I hope that the future generations will continue to have these free services. If the gov’t is managed decently and people continue to pay their fair share of taxes then I don’t think that bankruptcy will be an issue and my country and its people will be in a much better place.

        At least a solution is being presented through the RH bill because whatever is being done right now aint working. The reality is you have uneducated people who are producing children that they cannot afford who in turn will produce more uneducated children. I think that is an even scarier future. They need help. Something needs to be done. Even kids who are educated are having kids early because there is a lack of comprehensive sex education. The bill won’t be a solution for everything but it is a small step. Educate the population and give them birth control options. A FREE CONDOM COST SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN AN UNWANTED CHILD.

        Take care of the people first and everything else will fall into place. It sounds wishy washy but my country is doing better than your country because my people have access to basic services. Society will be better off. A lot of people use the states as the peg for a capitalist society but look at the quality of life for the majority of people. That country may be the richest but look at the inequality between the rich and the poor. On the other hand, I think that it has a lot to do with perception but that is a whole different topic. Truthfully, despite the current situation in Greece. I’d rather live there than in the Philippines.

        Ok back to work for a little while! I think your views are too draconian for
        me. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and should be respected. I enjoyed the discourse and I’ll be reading more things from your blog :-)

      • August 9, 2012 3:38

        //I don’t think that socialism rejects capitalism, it was designed work in a capitalist society.//

        Wow! I don’t know what to say… You need to have proper grasp of the two concepts- of capitalism and socialism- to understand what’s wrong with that statement. Good luck with that!

        The rest of the comment is not worth replying…

      • August 9, 2012 3:38

        “A FREE CONDOM COST SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN AN UNWANTED CHILD.”

        Kabobohan yan! May pang-load ang mga mahihirap wala silang pambili ng condom? May pan-yosi ka wala kang pang-condom? Kundi ka ba naman isang malaking palamunin. Kagaguhan yan. Puro kayo PALAMUNIN! PWE!!!

        Mas matindi pa kayo sa linta. Mga BOBO na, mga kung sino pa kung mag-argue. Wala namang kwenta ang pinagdadakdak.

  49. Marxistang Tunay permalink
    August 9, 2012 3:38

    This article is so idiotic, impertinent, and irrelevant. All of those who agree to this article are nothing but a great pestilence to the society. I am a Nazi and Fascist. Long live socialism! you must all be annihilated.

  50. Maria Janifer Serenio permalink
    August 14, 2012 3:38

    Well, as a student, I can say that I agree with the RH Bill. It is because for me “poverty” in the Philippines is due to the big population in our country. So, I think with the RH Bill, the population of our country will decrease. Thus, the parents with less number of children will be able to send all their children in school. Their children, therefore, will have the higher chance to pursue their college education. So, if all Filipinos are having this high quality of education and are well-equipped with the sufficient knowledge and skills as citizens of our country, then a more progressive Philippines will be attained.

    • August 14, 2012 3:38

      @Maria,

      ” It is because for me “poverty” in the Philippines is due to the big population in our country.”

      That’s simply not true. Read these…

      http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2012/08/13/understanding-the-presidents-economic-czar/

      http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2012/08/09/up-economists-rh-paper-emotionalism-plus-anti-intellectualism/

      http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2012/08/06/pnoys-malthusianmarxist-economist-ph-must-manage-its-population-and-decrease-its-dependency-rates/

    • WIN permalink
      September 12, 2012 3:38

      I am an economist and I really don’t think that population is the real problem here. And if you think that the population is the problem, then I don’t think that the RH bill is the MAIN solution for the problem.

      • September 12, 2012 3:38

        @WIN,

        You said: “I am an economist and I really don’t think that population is the real problem here.”

        The problem is, THAT IS NOT WHAT I THINK. That is what many supporters of the bill, particularly the UP economists and PNOY’s chief economist Arsenio Balisacan, THINK…

        You should read these blogs:

        NDEA chief Arsenio Balisacan:

        http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2012/08/29/to-neda-chief-balisacan-demographic-transition-follows-economic-growth-not-the-other-way-around/

        http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2012/08/06/pnoys-malthusianmarxist-economist-ph-must-manage-its-population-and-decrease-its-dependency-rates/

        UP economists:

        http://fvdb.wordpress.com/2012/08/09/up-economists-rh-paper-emotionalism-plus-anti-intellectualism/

      • TheOtherSide permalink
        October 26, 2012 3:38

        The population is the problem if most of them do not have jobs or businesses. This is what exactly happening to our country. We need more businesses here to provide job and the only way to do this is to create a conducive environment for businesses.

  51. kaynee permalink
    August 15, 2012 3:38

    sana may tagalog na version, kasi hindi ko lahat maintindihan. I want to know more kaso limited lang talaga alam ko. If possible, para mas maintindihan din ng mga young people. Hindi ung kokontra-o -a-agree na lang bigla bigla. Lahat ng Bill na ipapasa dapat malaman at maintindihan.

    • August 20, 2012 3:38

      To all: There’s nothing to argue with..ang mga bagay na ito(rh bill)..ay lumutang lang sa mundo..in fact..dati paman kung iisipin nating mabuti..maganda na ang takbo ng buhay ng tao sa mundo…alam nyo kung ano ang nagpapagulo?..iyan mismo kagaya ng mga bagay bagay na alam naman nating di naman dapat kailangan, e binibigyan ng atensyon…sa panahon ngayon..alam ko alam mo and alam nating lahat that the most powerful key or answer to this present time..is UNITY..bakit di tayo magkaisa? kung tutuusin kaya naman natin…sabihin man nating may pagkakaiba nga ang bawat isa sa atin..but does it helps kung ganon ang iisipin or itatatak natin sa ating mga isipan??why not make our individual differences an opportunity for us to be united???? and siguradong may mas malaki mabisa at karapat dapat na paraan tayong maiisip kapag nagawa natin to…wag tayong mag focus sa isang bagay..wag nating hayaan na mablock ang ating isipan..na alam nman nating may beyond pa tayong makikita…pag magkaisa tayo at magtulong tulong ,for sure makikita natin yun…..

  52. August 22, 2012 3:38

    RH- Bill is a part of the solution but it is not the solution itself :D

  53. Lian permalink
    August 30, 2012 3:38

    I just hope that those people who subscribed and believed in the article do not accepts any social services from the government. Otherwise, you are all bunch of hypocrites.

    • August 30, 2012 3:38

      That’s a very hilarious, pathetic gibberish. Who pay for all those government services? The point is, we don’t have to be dependent on the government because it is not a productive agency. It is the worst parasite on earth. And if that’s your line of thinking, then, are you saying that the government’s welfare power is UNLIMITED? Can you also use the same argument in the following very possible cases/scenarios:

      1. When lawmakers propose to make housing affordable or even ‘free’?

      2. When lawmakers propose to make food affordable or even ‘free’?

      3. When some lawmakers propose to turn this nation to a socialistic one to achieve equality, help the poor and eradicate corporate and individual greed?

      In any of those situations, would you also say: “I just hope that those people who oppose these egalitarian ideals do not accepts any social services from the government…”

      • Lian permalink
        August 30, 2012 3:38

        “That’s a very hilarious, pathetic gibberish.”

        Whatever. Hypocrisy is a simple truth in your anti-altruism rhetoric.

        “Who pay for all those government services?”

        Do you?

        “1. When lawmakers propose to make housing affordable or even ‘free’?

        2. When lawmakers propose to make food affordable or even ‘free’?

        3. When some lawmakers propose to turn this nation to a socialistic one to achieve equality, help the poor and eradicate corporate and individual greed?”

        How i wish…live on your little own world of individualism, vincent.

      • August 30, 2012 3:38

        We all pay for it. What’s EVAT for? Working people pay income tax. And other taxes.

        “How i wish…live on your little own world of individualism, vincent.”

        — LOL! You don’t even know what individualism means. Do you know what collectivism means, too?

        Are you saying you can apply the same gibberish to those cases? Are you saying the sky is the limit when it comes to government’s welfare power?

  54. WIN permalink
    September 12, 2012 3:38

    This is actually the one I am looking for. I do not support the bill because of religious arguments but because of the facts. I am kind of annoyed when most anti-RH bill arguments are based on Catholic views. There are a numerous non-catholics in this country and I think the best argument to fight the RH bill are YES, secular views.

    Thank you for your post.

  55. September 15, 2012 3:38

    I am pro-RH Bill for a number of reasons and I can be a moron at times but hardly think it’s only because I support the RH Bill. There are anti-RH Bill morons, too, but it has nothing to do with their stand on the RH Bill. In any case, I’m sure you’re only venting and not trying to influence. If you are, you need to try again, my friend. Antagonizing dissenters is not the way to do it.

    The thing that struck me about your blog entry is the fact that some big pharmaceutical company might have to find its profits elsewhere because providing for free healthcare will seriously jeopardize its business. I don’t yet subscribe to this although it’s worth taking a look at.

    Lastly (and this isn’t just a rhetorical or goading question), if healthcare (and it appears implied that other benefits as well) isn’t a right but tax-paying is mandatory, what in an ideal world are we parting with our hard-earned money for?

  56. Team Anti-RH permalink
    September 18, 2012 3:38

    http://letter-for-life.tumblr.com/

    Food for thought :)

  57. Red Horse permalink
    September 30, 2012 3:38

    Say what you want, I still support RH-bill.

    • September 30, 2012 3:38

      Read my blogs to know what I want… That’s your choice.

  58. Red Horse permalink
    September 30, 2012 3:38

    Do you support anything Government?

    • September 30, 2012 3:38

      I said many times before that the only proper role of government is to protect individual rights. Thus, we need a strong military to protect us against invasion or rebellion. We need a strong police force to protect us against criminals and erring government officials. We need independent and impartial courts to protect contracts and to settle legal disputes. I do not believe that the role of government is to redistribute wealth. I discussed these things in my previous blogs…

  59. October 6, 2012 3:38

    http://www.johnythegame78r2.com

  60. December 3, 2012 3:38

    RH Bill lack moral essence… It only encourages the younger generation to engage in premarital sex… after all, there’s condom and pills. Here’s my complete response against it: http://thedisciplers.com/philippine-reproductive-health-rh-bill-should-we-say-yes-or-no/

  61. December 3, 2012 3:38

    I have posted this comment on the other topic by this blogger. Anyway, here it goes.

    I would like to ask the pro-RH freaks out there the following:

    It has been mentioned in the position paper by UP professors that this RH bill is not a population control measure.

    Isn’t it a big fat lie? or the proponents of the bill are lying? or the ignorant pro-RH people are lying?

    Haha.

    I have seen pro-RH freaks who claim that RH bill aims to control or manage our population growth rate.

    I have heard pro-RH lawmakers who would like to curb the unbridled population growth rate.

    If their goal is not population control, then I don’t know what is.

    Of course, there are people who would just say that it is just management of population, not control… yeah, yeah, as if we were born yesterday.

    Granted that this is not a population control measure, how could you possibly curb the unbridled population growth rate (which I have already shown as a myth), if the only goal of this bill is to offer choices to people?

    Huh?

    You offer choices to people, then BOOM, the population growth rate will start to decrease?
    As if every pro-RH freak is certain that every Juan and Juana will opt to use contraceptives. yeah, yeah. As if they were not old enough to have developed certain stimulus during sex. And I know a lot of guys who don’t enjoy sex using condoms.

    Laughable!

    Just because you offer choices to people, it doesn’t mean that people will use them.
    What will the government do if the people do not use contraceptives then? Remember, the state cannot force people to use contraceptives. Haha.

    So the pro-RH freaks are back to square one, this RH bill is not a population control measure. It just offers choice.

    Do we really need to legislate these choices?

    Do we really need to allot certain portion of 14B pesos for contraceptives which the state cannot force people to use?

    Damned pro-RH freaks.

    Quota na ako sa ad hominems. Haha

  62. January 16, 2013 3:38

    thanks for the idea.,.,i chose the above essay as my project in pagsasalin or translation,..,starting from HEALTH until the last statement of the whole paragraph(It simly means a right to choose or not to choose.),.,

  63. April 18, 2013 3:38

    Some truly great information, Sword lily I found this. “The world is the sum-total of our vital possibilities.” by
    Jose Ortega y Gasset.

  64. April 28, 2013 3:38

    Nice post. I used to be checking constantly this blog and I am impressed!
    Very useful info particularly the last section :) I handle such info much.
    I used to be seeking this certain info for a long time.
    Thanks and best of luck.

  65. April 30, 2013 3:38

    I’m astounded at how easy you make this topic look thanks to your articles, though I must confess I still don’t quite understand it.
    The entire matter just goes over my head because of how intricate and broad
    it all is.. I am anticipating your future publishings, I will try to get the gist
    of it.

  66. May 26, 2013 3:38

    excellent put up, very informative. I wonder why the other specialists
    of this sector don’t notice this. You must proceed your writing. I am confident, you have a great readers’ base already!

  67. May 28, 2013 3:38

    I get pleasure from, result in I found just what I was having a look for.
    You’ve ended my 4 day long hunt! God Bless you man. Have a great day. Bye

  68. June 8, 2013 3:38

    You need to be a part of a contest for one of the finest
    sites on the internet. I’m going to highly recommend this website!

  69. June 10, 2013 3:38

    I am really impressed together with your writing skills and also with the layout for your
    weblog. Is that this a paid theme or did you customize
    it yourself? Anyway keep up the excellent quality writing, it’s rare to peer a great blog like this one these days..

  70. June 11, 2013 3:38

    And it is obvious that vitamin E intoned abs, and so we have aphrodisiac abs to go beyond the regular core physical exertions.

  71. June 12, 2013 3:38

    Greate post. Keep posting such kind of information on your page.

    Im really impressed by your blog.
    Hello there, You’ve done a fantastic job. I will certainly digg it and for my part suggest to my friends. I’m sure
    they will be benefited from this website.

  72. June 20, 2013 3:38

    Hi there! Quick question that’s completely off topic. Do you know how to make your site mobile friendly? My blog looks weird when browsing from my apple iphone. I’m trying to
    find a theme or plugin that might be able to fix this issue.
    If you have any recommendations, please share. Thanks!

  73. June 22, 2013 3:38

    Good day I am so thrilled I found your webpage, I really found you by accident, while I was researching on Bing for something else, Anyhow I
    am here now and would just like to say kudos for a marvelous post and a all round interesting blog (I also love the theme/design), I
    don’t have time to browse it all at the moment but I have saved it and also included your RSS feeds,
    so when I have time I will be back to read much more, Please
    do keep up the great work.

  74. June 24, 2013 3:38

    I do not even understand how I finished up right here, however I assumed this put up was great.
    I do not understand who you are but definitely you are
    going to a famous blogger in case you are not already.
    Cheers!

  75. June 24, 2013 3:38

    With havin so much content and articles do you ever run into any problems of plagorism or
    copyright infringement? My site has a lot of exclusive content
    I’ve either created myself or outsourced but it looks like a lot of it is popping it up all over the internet without my authorization. Do you know any methods to help stop content from being ripped off? I’d truly appreciate it.

  76. Jerome permalink
    December 12, 2013 3:38

    Oh and one more thing. Please stop linking people to your own damn posts and telling them as if your opinions are postulates. Try to get factual data from external sources and stop being so self centered. Your opinion matters, but it’s not more important than what other people think. And please don’t assume that everyone would automatically have the same opinion on an article after reading the entire law or all articles related to it.
    And again, sorry for the double necropost.

    • Jerome permalink
      December 12, 2013 3:38

      oh and apparently my comment was too long and had to undergo moderation. here it is http://pastebin.com/AX3stVbj

  77. February 26, 2014 3:38

    Pro RH BIll

    With the rise of human population all over our archipelago, I believe it is high time that the act should be seen as a guide, especially for those who seem to be unable to sustain the basic needs of their families. Besides, it emphasizes on “responsible parenthood, informed choice, birth spacing and respect for life.” I also do not see the reason why the Catholic Church is reacting negatively towards this bill. I think it is very necessary for people to ponder on this bill because I do not see that it is trying to intrude into some people’s personal lives, as others see it.

    I AM A CATHOLIC… With my age, I have basic knowledge about the reproductive health care and at the same time, I consider family planning methods and techniques as helpful especially when we put our children’s future as our main concern and priority. While it is true that the Bible said: “Go and multiply,” I see no reason that we should let our children suffer from poverty, see them unable to eat three meals a day, and worst is, if we cannot even send them to schools for their education. Anyway, the bill says that it has no bias towards either the modern or natural methods of family planning.

    As a filipino youth the need to educate young students about contraceptives is not as awkward as others might perceive it to be. What more, if we are open about these topics, we will be empowered as we go through our adolescent stage and adulthood. I was taken aback when I heard of somebody saying that the RH Bill is encouraging premarital and extramarital sex as long as people use contraceptives. I think this is totally wrong. To campaign for and publicize the proper use of contraceptives is totally different from further promoting immoral acts.

    Ignorance of the law does not excuse us from being punished. This is one way of saying that if we did not use the contraceptives properly, let us not blame anyone for the ill condition that we experience. Let us not accuse others if we experience miscarriage because of improper health care. So when people decide to use contraceptives, they should initiate to be appropriately educated about such.

    Using contraceptives is not the same as aborting an innocent child inside a woman’s womb. Family planning should never be equated with abortion. Maybe it should be made clear to everybody that contraceptives intend to prevent pregnancy but not to disrupt pregnancy.

    We all need guidance no matter how young or old we are. We are not perfect individuals in this earth. I find the RH Bill helpful considering the current problems and issues that we are now facing in our modern society. We have abortion among teen-agers, thefts here and there, blocked canals because of excessive plastic trashes, extreme poverty, and the like because we refuse to be educated. We refuse to listen and be guided. We reject empowerment. We are insensitive to the needs and feelings of humankind. And why are all these problems both magnified literally and philosophically? It is because of the tremendous population growth that we are going through. So why hate the RH Bill???

    • March 11, 2014 3:38

      HAVE FOUND A SPELL CASTER WHO HELPED ME WITH A FERTILITY SPELL AND HELPED ME HAVE MY OWN BABY. IT ALL HAPPENED WHEN MY HUSBAND SENT ME PACKING FOR NOT ABLE TO GIVE HIM A BABY AFTER 4YEARS OF OUR MARRIAGE.I ATE DIFFERENT PILLS AND NOTHING HAPPENED UNTIL A FRIEND INTRODUCED PRIEST HALLIFAT TO ME WHO ALSO HELP HIM GET A CHILD. HE CAST A SPELL FOR ME AND I GOT PREGNANT FEW WEEKS LATER, IF YOU NEED HIM ASSISTANCE, HIS EMAIL: LIFECENTRE@LIVE.COM

  78. June 5, 2014 3:38

    I know this if off topic but I’m looking into starting my
    own blog and was curious what all is needed to get setup? I’m
    assuming having a blog like yours would cost a pretty penny?
    I’m not very web savvy so I’m not 100% sure. Any
    suggestions or advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you

  79. June 10, 2014 3:38

    This design is incredible! You obviously know how to keep a reader entertained.

    Between your wit and your videos, I was almost moved to start my own blog (well, almost…HaHa!) Wonderful job.
    I really enjoyed what you had to say, and more than that,
    how you presented it. Too cool!

Trackbacks

  1. The Tyranny of the Anti-Population Bill « VINCENTON POST
  2. Why the New Atheists Love Universal Health Care? « THE VINCENTON POST
  3. A Comment on Population Control and Abortion « THE VINCENTON POST
  4. The Fight Against RH Bill Continues: KILL THE BILL! « THE VINCENTON POST
  5. Don’t Vote for these pro-RH Bill Trapos! « THE VINCENTON POST
  6. Debunking the ‘Guiding Principles’ of the Fascist RH Bill « THE VINCENTON POST
  7. In Defense of the Troublesome, Meddslesome Catholic Church « THE VINCENTON POST
  8. Deconstructing the Neo-Nazi Propaganda and Agenda of the Filipino Freefarters and the Socialists « THE VINCENTON POST
  9. Further Arguments on Commie-Farters Versus Anti-RH bill Catholics Issue « THE VINCENTON POST
  10. The Clash of Two Evils: Anti-contraception theocrats vs. Anti-rights Fascists « THE VINCENTON POST
  11. RH Bill Supporters’ Strawman Attacks « THE VINCENTON POST
  12. Responsible Parenthood Bill: A Fascist Legislation by Another Name « THE VINCENTON POST
  13. Buddy Cunanan’s Cosmic Display of Ignorance « THE VINCENTON POST
  14. A Facebook Debate with an Altruistic RH Bill Supporter « THE VINCENTON POST
  15. Oversensitive Sotto is Dangerous to Our Rights and Freedom! « THE VINCENTON POST
  16. When YELLOW is the New RED: Filipinos Protest Versus Aquino Regime’s E-Martial Law « THE VINCENTON POST
  17. PNoy Signs RH Bill Into Law: A Destructive Victory for Little Tyrants « THE VINCENTON POST
  18. PNoy Signs RH Bill Into Law: A Faux Victory for Little Tyrants « THE VINCENTON POST
  19. What About Leave No Poor Filipino Behind, Miriam? « THE VINCENTON POST

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 246 other followers

%d bloggers like this: