Skip to content

Reproductive Health Care is NOT a Right!

October 26, 2009

I do believe that this “man-is-his-brother’s-keeper” system is impractical and evil at best.

History tells us, that the road to socialism is always paved with good intentions... You don't have to be a college graduate to understand the lies being fed on you!

History tells us, that the road to socialism is always paved with good intentions... You don't have to be a college graduate to understand the lies being fed on you!

A nameless commenter asked me the following question: “What is simply asked of you is to drop your ideologies for the meantime and prove to us, through numbers, that overpopulation has nothing to do with poverty here in the Philippines. You may use percentages, graphs, equations, or whatever formulation is easy for you. Please use the year when the population boom is believed to have started up to the present, and cite your source/s. We know nothing of this kind so we are now giving you the chance to enlighten us about this matter. There are already several international bodies who have conducted researches and surveys, and they were able to demonstrate the correlation between overpopulation and poverty. They were able to show this objectively, and without adherence to any religious dogma or political ideology, because the sole purpose is to expose facts. If you can’t come up with your own proof, then find one. Different ideologies will always just clash so it is pointless to pit our camp’s mentalities.”

Here’s my response:

Notwithstanding the fact that you’re nameless and that it is part of my blog protocol not to respond to anonymous commenters, let this answer of mine be a guide to my future questioners.

What do you mean by dropping my ideology? That I should be guided by a blind premise and that I should base my views on the whim of the moment? Your demand is impossible. What you mean to say is that I should suspend my mind and be guided by my emotions. You don’t want me to think; your only desire is for me to comply. Now, you should understand that every argument that we make is tied to a certain premise. For the religionists, they oppose RH bill on religious grounds (their premise). For those who support it, their premise is linked to altruistic agenda, like common good, the need to solve overpopulation, and the provision of free health care services.

A proposal to legislate population can only achieve its overarching purpose through the use of FORCE...

A proposal to legislate population can only achieve its overarching purpose through the use of FORCE... How can you entrust so much power in the hands of a semi-republican government?

If the RH bill is so good, why criminalize those who want to opt-out?

RH bill versus individual rights

The reason why I oppose this bill—and I think I stated it clearly—is because I don’t believe that it is the role of the government, most particularly the employers, to provide the reproductive health care services of the people. My fundamental premise is hinged on the concept of individual rights: I don’t believe the government has the right to coerce anyone under the concept of common good or social welfare to provide 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. This is temporary because if presidential bet Noynoy Aquino wins, there’s a high possibility that this law would be enacted.

For those who read the bill, it is important to note that there are provisions under Sections 21 to 22, which state that failure by employers to provide RH services for their employees would constitute an offense punishable by fine or imprisonment or both. It is clear that this proposal seeks to make it mandatory for employers and other individuals to provide RH services to the people. I beg to disagree that this bill is well-intentioned and moral. Health care is not a right! We’re not born with a right to a ride in Enchanted Kingdom. We’re 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. If the RH bill is so good, why criminalize those who want to opt-out? Why impose penalty on the employers who don’t want to be reduced to mere slaves? Why do the Leftist politicians who proposed this bill have to force some people to contribute to what they call the “common good” if their proposition is for the good of everybody?

This RH Bill is a proposal to breach reality and that concept of equality under the law or the Constitution.

The true concept of “right” and “privilege”

This bill is just the beginning of the statist plan of some politicians in Congress. It is the creepy, evil face of the socialist

The big LIE that poisoned peoples mind two decades ago...

The big LIE that poisoned people's mind two decades ago... and even TODAY!

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.

A “right” is a moral principle elucidating and warranting a man’s freedom of action in a social context. The categories of rights above show that rights are only limited to man’s rights to his LIFE, LIBERTY, PROPERTY, and his PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS. The concept of rights excludes and rejects man’s right of force and compulsion.

On the other hand, “privilege” is the means to further exercise that right. It is an advantage which you earned and not merely given or extended to you without any reason or cause at all. We all have to work in order to earn for a living—in order to survive. One has to work in order to earn money for his/her plastic surgery or for the treatment of his/her serious illness. This is the basic reason why the Constitution recognizes individual rights—that we all have the right to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness. If this bill seeks to coerce employers to provide the health care needs of their employees, then it is tantamount to the deprivation of the property of the former. The state has no power or right to deprive someone of any portion of his earnings or property only to fulfill the happiness of other people. This is the natural meaning of the noble concept of “equality under the law.”

But there are some people who coldly asked: “But what’s wrong with socialism.” My answer would be: “What’s wrong with committing suicide?”

RH bill is unconstitutional and a breach of reality

This RH Bill is a proposal to breach reality and that moral concept of equality under the law or the Constitution. In a society claiming to be semi-free, this bill is a mockery of people’s freedom and happiness. A welfare legislation that conspires to diminish our rights and freedom has no room in a free society. This collectivist proposition is only possible in a statist or socialist society, where the mode of production and the goods and products created and produced by the people are all owned by the state. Under this system, everybody is enslaved to everybody. Under a statist regime, there’s no such thing as individual rights. Every individual in a socialist or communist society must work for the benefit of his country. Such a system is doomed to failure. Mao Tse Tung perfected this same ideological scam during his experimental “Great Leap Forward” wholeheartedly supported by the Chinese in the hope of propelling China to success and even exceeding the steel-making output of America and Great Britain. In less than a decade, in a country where education, health care and almost all basic needs were provided by the statist government, more than 20 million Chinese died in famine and starvation. Now this is our only direction if we continue to embrace this altruist-collectivist trend.

Meanwhile, the bill covers the following: (1) Information and access to natural and modern family planning (2) Maternal, infant and child health and nutrition (3) Promotion of breast feeding (4) Prevention of abortion and management of post-abortion complications (5) Adolescent and youth health (6) Prevention and management of reproductive tract infections, HIV/AIDS and STDs (7) Elimination of violence against women (8) Counseling on sexuality and sexual and reproductive health (9) Treatment of breast and reproductive tract cancers (10) Male involvement and participation in RH; (11) Prevention and treatment of infertility and (12) RH education for the youth.

A proposal to legislate population is an attempt to invade every household in this country.

By looking closely at these welfare state promises, these are all available and provided for under the present setup, and that there are existing and open government agencies that can deliver these services. For instance, departments and agencies under Section 4(n) like the Department of Health, Department of Education, including public clinics, and other specialized government health centers like the Lung Center of the Philippines, Health Center of the Philippines and government hospitals, can be given additional or even special functions only to comply with the supposed social welfare mandate of this bill. All of the alleged welfare state boons are guaranteed under our present set up. In other words, there is no need to enact this so absurd legislative proposal. However, it is important to note that this bill includes a “pass-on provision.” It’s proponents seek to shift the burden of paying for the RH services to employers. By virtue of their success and economic status, employers are being offered to a sacrificial altar to satisfy the reproductive health care needs of a particular group of people. This trend simply means that need now is a claim on slavery.

Overpopulation cannot be legislated

In regard to the assertion of the fear-mongering proponents and supporters of this bill, overpopulation is not the sole domain of politics. Overpopulation is, indeed, a problem but it cannot be legislated. This attempt to legislate population is tantamount to reducing it to mere statistical problems, which can be solved by orchestrated government actions and social edicts. Population is not synonymous to goods, which are determinable by statistics. In a capitalist society, a regime can only increase the domestic production output by letting the capitalists perform their job. But population is a different matter. A proposal to legislate population is an attempt to invade every household in this country. There’s only way to solve population without the use of government’s arbitrary powers, and this is through voluntary education. Like I said, there are government agencies that can perform this function, and I’m certain that there are also private organizations and non-profit institutions willing to help the government fulfill its goal. History tells us that most socialist states that attempted to legislate their population resorted to force and even mass killing. Socialist countries like Sweden used sterilization or eugenics programs to control the growth of its population. This only means that if you allow your government to rule your lives, the use of arbitrary powers and force is inevitable. But there are some people who coldly ask: “But what’s wrong with socialism.” My answer would be: “What’s wrong with committing suicide?”

If a dictator attempts to alter or distort reality, the only inevitable result is his own destruction—and that of his loyal people.

Overpopulation is not the main problem

According to its proponent, Rep. Edcel Lagman, this bill “simply recognizes the verifiable link between a huge population and poverty. Unbridled population growth stunts socio-economic development and aggravates poverty.” Again, can the Congress legislate “unbriddled population growth?” This reminds me of the famous Simon-Ehrlich Wager in 1980. Economist and Libertarian Julian Simon and the so-called population expert Paul Ehrlich who authored “The Population Bomb” bet on five commercially important and highly scarce metals—copper, chromium, nickel, tin, and tungsten—over the decade leading up to 1990. Simon bet that their prices would go down, while Ehrlich bet they would go up. It is important to understand that during that period—1980 and 1990—the global population ballooned by over 800 million, the biggest jump in a decade in all of history. Ultimately, Ehrlich the “doomsayer” lost the wager. This only means that as the world population increased, mankind found some ways to survive. Today, we have found potential alternatives to oil and metals. Before, a computer was as big as a single-storey house, but due to man’s ingenuity and intransigent passion to discover new things we now have personal computers and notebooks. For the creators’ love of life and willingness to survive, they were able to find new alternatives better and more efficient than the ones which they replaced.

If spared by the doomsayers, man will be able to discover new things to survive...

If spared by the "doomsayers" and"fearmongering," man would be able to discover new things to survive...

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 the unfounded 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. Almost all crises that took place in this country were caused by excessive state interference. Population must not be used as a scapegoat to correct an evil with another evil. We can’t solve poverty by expanding the powers of the government. Only Capitalism can save this country from poverty, and I have clearly and explicitly stated the reason why in my previous blogs. Population is not the culprit. It cannot be controlled with the use of political edicts. It can only be managed through proper education—by giving every family the right to choice and proper information. Like I said, these functions are part of our existing governmental system, thus there’s no need to pass this evil bill—more so, there’s no need to let this country shift to statism or socialism. It is not moral to coerce employers to extend reproductive health care services to their workers against their will. It is the free-market competition that can only make this dream of the socialists happen without passing the bill. For example, call center companies, mostly foreign-owned, competing for competent and skilled workers now offer competitive health care packages to their employees. This proves that even without the coercive power of the government, competent employers would be compelled by the free-market system to offer not only high compensation package but also good health care services for their workers.

UN versus nations’ sovereignty

It may be true that the United Nations came up with a series studies regarding the effects of the world’s ever-increasing population, but this international body only has the power to suggest and of course, to influence our domestic affairs. However, the UN is currently working on sweeping international rules, which would diminish countries’ sovereignty.  The UN is also the brainchild of the global warming farce that swept the consciousness of most people on earth today. By simply forming an absurd global collective of so-called scientists, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the UN has successfully sold the man-made concept of global warming to almost all countries in the world. Thus, I must say that population is not subject to or an element of our consciousness; it is part and parcel of reality. If a dictator attempts to alter or distort reality, the only inevitable result is his own destruction—and that of his loyal people.

For decades, we have been poisoned by an absurd notion that the government has the responsibility to provide us  with our needs, that it is our right to command the government to clothe us, to shelter us, to provide us our medicine and other basic necessities. Most of you have been lulled by the altruistic belief that you must serve the common good and public welfare, and that society is regarded as the standard of value and not the individual. But there is no such thing as society- it’s all of us. Margaret Thatcher, former Prime Minister of Great Britain, once said:

“I think we have gone through a period when too many children and people have been given to understand “I have a problem, it is the Government’s job to cope with it!” or “I have a problem, I will go and get a grant to cope with it!” “I am homeless, the Government must house me!” and so they are casting their problems on society and who is society? There is no such thing! There are individual men and women and there are families and no government can do anything except through people and people look to themselves first. It is our duty to look after ourselves and then also to help look after our neighbour and life is a reciprocal business and people have got the entitlements too much in mind without the obligations…”

Related Links:

Advocacy: CAPITALISM

Statism: A Love Story

RELATED VIDEO: Is Health Care A Right Or A Privilege?

35 Comments leave one →
  1. Joshua Lipana permalink
    October 27, 2009 3:38

    Brilliant article as always.

  2. henry loyola permalink
    November 2, 2009 3:38

    What i see in our country needs, is Financial Family Planning .Majority of our population
    are financialy corrupt. Not only we are populating our country, but we are cluttering it.
    I believe many of us are not blind to see the reality.”GOD”said be Multiply,but be “Respo
    nsible”. Faith with out action is Dead.Im not saying you cannot have more kids. if you
    can take care the responsibility, Then do it. if not, still have the freedom to mess up the
    future of your family, and many of us will suffer. because crime rate, prostitution, and
    corruption will prevail.Ithink evil exist, just like “JESUS” said dont try to figure me out
    with your own understanding, depart from me your worse enemy live inside you. do you
    think the religeous righteous, the political power,and the people power will save the
    the world.”GOD” said I AM THE WAY THE TRUTH AND LIFE, History is My Story.
    By My Grace You Are Save.not of your own good work,or your own goodness.Pride, Ego,
    popularity,Self- Righteousness, is the Greatest Sin in the Bible. If 90 percent of our
    population dont have”GODLY” Moral Principle, then 90 percent will be corrupt.
    Be aware with False Prophet, because many will be decieve, and many will suffer.
    They appear so beautiful outward, but inside they are full of Dead Mens bone. sometimes
    Faith can be decieving because satan is tricky. Thank you for letting me share my ides.
    “GOD” Bless Our Nation.

  3. henry loyola permalink
    November 2, 2009 3:38

    What i see in our country needs, is Financial Family Planning .Majority of our population
    are financialy corrupt. Not only we are populating our country, but we are cluttering it.
    I believe many of us are not blind to see the reality.”GOD”said be Multiply,but be “Respo
    nsible”. Faith with out action is Dead.Im not saying you cannot have more kids. if you
    can take care the responsibility, Then do it. if not, still have the freedom to mess up the
    future of your family, and many of us will suffer. because crime rate, prostitution, and
    corruption will prevail.Ithink evil exist, just like “JESUS” said dont try to figure me out
    with your own understanding, depart from me your worse enemy live inside you. do you
    think the religeous righteous, the political power,and the people power will save the
    the world.”GOD” said I AM THE WAY THE TRUTH AND LIFE, History is My Story.
    By My Grace You Are Save.not of your own good work,or your own goodness.Pride, Ego,
    popularity,Self- Righteousness, is the Greatest Sin in the Bible. If 90 percent of our
    population dont have”GODLY” Moral Principle, then 90 percent will be corrupt.
    Be aware with False Prophet, because many will be decieve, and many will suffer.
    They appear so beautiful outward, but inside they are full of Dead Mens bone. sometimes
    Faith can be decieving because satan is tricky. Thank you for letting me share my though
    “GOD” Bless Our Nation.

    • Carlo permalink
      November 4, 2009 3:38

      Sorry bud, the magical sky wizard you call God isn’t actually there. Try and prove me wrong.

      • pomum permalink
        October 6, 2010 3:38

        isn’t YOUR LIFE already a proof of a living God?

  4. Smikeve Angelo Jaucian-Pascual permalink
    January 30, 2010 3:38

    You may want to consider reading my arguments in support of the Reproductive Health Bill. I laid down facts, figures, evidences and my views as an RN and as a private citizen against the intervention of the Church to the affairs of the State.

    http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=103173344186&topic=12671

    This thread also addressed other components of the Reproductive Health Bill such as the reproductive health benefits, educational backbone and freedom of informed choice for Filipinos aside from the issue of Population Management.

    It is basically a constructive discussion between those who support and oppose the Reproductive Health Bill.

    Thank you.

  5. L.Y.C. permalink
    October 1, 2010 3:38

    My understanding of RH Bill is that the poor, less educated people be informed, enlightened, educated and teach them proper family planning and childcare, healthcare. For these to be more available to the poor. I don’t believe it to be borderlining communism because ultimately it’s the individual’s choice.

    I’ve been trying to look for the part where you said the bill passes the RH burden to the employer. But when I read and re-read section 17. My understanding is that it protects the women from being discriminated from employment due to pregnancy. And I think it’s horrific! inhumane for an employer to require sterilization or tubal ligation on its employee! And get away with it?? What sort of freedom are we fighting for here?

    My company has 200 employees, 70% women, 50% age btn 18-25 that’s why I was curious on your mention of passing the burden to the employer. Of course I’m concerned. If I’m so blind and missed it, please point it out to me. Thanks.

    • October 1, 2010 3:38

      Hi LYC.
      You said: “My understanding of RH Bill is that the poor, less educated people be informed, enlightened, educated and teach them proper family planning and childcare, healthcare.”

      That’s just the lighter side of it to make it more acceptable to the “unthinking” people. There’s only one argument against this evil bill: it is against man’s rights and freedom. I reject the religionist view that this proposal is anti-Life and against the will of God.

      Read the bill. It states there that health care providers and businessmen would be force to serve the so-called good and welfare of the poor and women. Anybody who spreads rumors against RH would also be penalized by either fine, imprisonment, or both. I have stated here the legal loopholes of the bill passed by socialist Rep. Edcel Lagman… https://fvdb.wordpress.com/2010/02/09/the-tyranny-of-the-anti-population-bill/

      In this blog, I argued why RHB is not good for the country. Here’s an excerpt: “verybody is talking about the plight of women and the poor, but nobody is giving any attention to the interest of employers and health care providers without whom nobody would have survived. A law that forces doctors to work against their will would definitely trigger medical brain drain in the country.” https://fvdb.wordpress.com/2010/04/20/dont-vote-for-these-pro-rh-bill-trapos/

      Here, I tackled the psycho-epistemological, moral and philosophical basis of the RHB supporters and anti-population advocates. https://fvdb.wordpress.com/2009/12/23/the-psychology-of-the-anti-population-cult/

      Here I discussed why Reproductive health care or even health care is NOT a right… https://fvdb.wordpress.com/2009/10/26/reproductive-health-care-is-not-a-right/

      Here I argued why the religionist view against the RHB must fail… https://fvdb.wordpress.com/2009/10/20/reproductive-health-bill-revives-old-war-between-two-mystics/

      • October 1, 2010 3:38

        As to this statement: “My company has 200 employees, 70% women, 50% age btn 18-25 that’s why I was curious on your mention of passing the burden to the employer. Of course I’m concerned. If I’m so blind and missed it, please point it out to me.”

        I suggest that you read the bill, although there are several versions passed by other other lawmakers, they all offer a single objective: to sacrifice health care providers, businessmen, taxpayers and other people for the sake of what they call ‘common good’.

        Here I quote in part:

        The Constitution speaks of “common good,” “public welfare,” and “social justice,” but all of these pertain mainly to distribution of wealth and not production. What do I mean by this? The above-quoted provision is a good example. It talks about the promotion of “responsible parenthood, informed choice, etc., as well as a guarantee to have a “universal access to medically-safe, legal, affordable, and quality productive health care services,” etc. This is clearly a political provision that aims to serve the “public good” by means of redistributing wealth. But the question is, “where will the government get the wealth or money to serve women and poor people?” Where is the “economic factor” of this provision? We have to understand that “distribution” and “production” pertains to economics. Now who will produce wealth to guarantee the goals of this bill? The authors of this legislation do not specify.

        But wait, there must be some ways for the government to evade responsibility and shift the burden to some social sectors. Yes, the bill targets four particular persons who must be “sacrificed” in the name of “common good.” Section 21 of the bill enumerates these four persons who are the following:

        1. Public and private health care providers;
        2. Employers;
        3. Any person who shall engage in falsification of compliance under Section 14 of the Act;
        4. Any person who shall maliciously engage in disinformation about the intent or provision of this act.

        Section 22 of the Act states that any person “who is found guilty shall be sentenced to an imprisonment ranging from one (1) month to six (6) months or a fine ranging from Ten Thousand Pesos (P10,000.00) to Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) or both such fine and imprisonment at the discretion of the court.” No, we’re not yet a socialist country. Not yet!

        Letter (a) clearly covers both public and private health care providers. They can be penalized for personally prohibiting or restricting or through a subordinate “the delivery of legal and medically-safe reproductive health care services, including family planning.”

        Letter (b) covers any employer who shall fail to comply with his obligation, which is to provide the RH care services of his/her employees, or “an employer who requires a female applicant or employee, as a condition for employment or continued employment, to involuntarily undergo sterilization, tubal ligation or any other form of contraceptive method.” Now what right does the government have to force and coerce employers to provide the RH care needs of their employees against their will? Common good?

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

        There’s only one way to help women and poor people, the government must embrace free-market capitalism. The free-market system will solve poverty and population problem in this country.

  6. Rico permalink
    October 1, 2010 3:38

    Mr. Writer,

    You are comparing RH BILL to Communism and Dictatorship. Take note: This bill is not mandatory to couples or individual like what communism and dictatorship principles but rather an education to enlighten them about safe sex and family planning. What will be the future of your kids. Take a look at those poor couples in Metro Manila with more than 5 kids. Lets say 8. Their mother is “labandera” while their father is a pedicab driver and their combined income is about 300 (appx. $6) pesos per day. 10 mouth to feed by that income, how about their school expenses? how about their health care? Reality check! their children can’t even finished college or high school because their parents are not able to support them. What happen next? It’s child labor. Then it cycles again after 20 years where their children will settle down with no proper knowledge of family planning. Same situation. How can we move on towards progress if this cycle cannot be stopped?

    You have your own rights to oppose this bill but 68% Filipinos already spoken and supported this bill not because they are supporting pre-marital sex but they are thinking of of what will be the future of those children whom cannot be supported by their parents.

    Lets face it! It is reality.

    • October 1, 2010 3:38

      Read the bill again.

      • kat permalink
        October 2, 2010 3:38

        Certainly this is one of the more intelligent arguments I’ve read opposing the bill. it’s a relief to find that you reject the religionist position.

        but don’t you think it’s a big leap from “the government legislating universal access to RH medicines and services” to “the government wants to control every aspect of your life/this is the start of socialism/this is where the citizens unwittingly allowed their government to meddle in their private affairs”?

        A country such as the Philippines will never allow for true socialism to overtake itself. communism will never flourish in this country especially with the sitting president. and I know this legislation if passed will go over the Aquino term but even then, I dare say the scenario you warn against happening won’t take root. I give you as proof Edsa 1 2 and 3. we change presidents with the conceit of a citizenry confident in street power. no, we’re not in danger. our own paranoia and immaturity as a country is our safeguard.

        I understand your position on the difference between right and privilege. I just don’t agree with it in this context. I’m curious what would be in your approved list of basic services the people have a right to expect its government to provide. because in the end, that is the line where I digress from yours.

        yes, enacting this bill passes the burden on all of us; and though the bill isn’t yet specific on where it intends to get the funding for the meds and services it guarantees the people, it doesn’t take a genius to figure that these meds and services will come ultimately from our own pockets through the taxes we pay. I’m okay with that. that’s a debate to be had in another forum because if you’re against the provision of free health care to citizens then that covers a broader range of free government services beyond reproductive health.

        providing access to free services like health care and education doesn’t set back a civilization. I think it just speaks to the heart of a nation’s morality that religion has nothing to do with.

        a capitalist society by definition will always have a divide between the wealthy and the not wealthy. the laws of capitalism–or nature itself, operating in a truly free society will never allow for complete status equality. and that’s fine. I’m all for free competition and let the fittest thrive and survive.

        but there should be a line the collective populace draws in the sand of providing care for the least fortunate of its members. education is imperative. health is imperative. for then the individual can move to freely choose how to live his life. a discussion on the vicious cycle of poverty is in itself a vicious cycle and I’m sure you know it. I don’t get why you (and the republicans actually) can’t get on board the idea of a state becoming more involved in alleviating it. it’s hardly the start of totalitarianism if a pregnant woman living below the poverty line can get free medicines in a state-run hospital.
        State-sanctioned basic care is just the nation exercising basic humanity. freedoms of a capitalist country cannot thrive if its people are not well. it’s just help plain and simple. it’s just a nation acting as a nation. I trust it and the population to be its own check and balance. and this bill is not excessive. in the least.
        I do agree with you on a point. the government can’t be allowed to force employers to provide health care for its employees. with the exception of paid maternity leave. or actually it should define what basic care is, at least for the private sector. but there isn’t a specific wording on that in the bill anyway, though it implies it.

    • October 17, 2010 3:38

      Yes there is a cycle, but don’t you think it’s better to give them better jobs instead of contraceptives? Yayaman ba sila sa contraceptives?

  7. PTK permalink
    October 2, 2010 3:38

    Research shows that young people are becoming more sexually active in their early teens, or even earlier often with little understanding of the dangers involved. Another article stated that unwanted pregnancy is not just a teenage problem. Many married couples also face unplanned pregnancies. And while a child should always be a source of joy, how can something that was never even desired bring happiness. Dr. Charles A. Hall, a systems ecologist stated that overpopulation is the world’s top environmental issue. Thus, contraception these days are beneficial not only to the young adults and married couples, to the nation but to the environment as well. The grounds of contraception to be practiced DOES NOT advocate for premarital sexual intercourse, nor does it attempt to invade every household in this country, rather, it addresses the emergent crisis the Filipino nation is facing.

    Contraception is essential for “procreative liberty”. According to Fletcher as cited in the book of Timbreza, parenthood and birth are matters of moral responsibility and intelligent choice. If people are not allowed a choice over whether or not to have children their autonomy and freedom to control their lives are seriously restricted. Parenthood as a matter of moral responsibility aims a happy and good life.

    • It enables women whose health would be at risk if they conceived, to continue to have sex without the fear of getting pregnant because unrestricted procreation is detrimental to the health of the mother when she makes the ritual of giving birth an annual affair.
    • The use of condoms helps prevent sexually transmitted diseases and HIV. Contraception checks the transmission of recessive disorder or genetically-linked diseases. Procreation should be a responsible human activity. This idea of responsible parenthood. Has taken on added significance in these years of biomedical science and technology. Through genetic testing (by means of biochemical studies or chromosomal analysis), modern medical science can now detect an increasing number of hereditary disorders. The fact that hereditary disorders are genetically transmitted from one generation to the next mandates all “carriers” of recessive disorders or genetically-related diseases to practice contraception.
    • It prevents the conception of children that a family cannot support. One should be able to decide how many children on is able to bear and support. The sexual union must take into consideration the future child’s inherent right to a dignified existence. It enables people to avoid having more children than they want. For a poor family, bringing up too many children is a drain on the budget, and providing for the basic necessities of living – such as food, clothing and education – becomes difficult as a result of apportioning out the meager income of the family to seven or ten children.
    • It improves marriage because it enables couples to enjoy the unitive function of sexual activity without being anxious about conceiving a child, it enables couples to have fewer children and thus spend more time together and with the children they do have, it reduces the cost of marriage (children are expensive).
    • It promotes gender equality and the autonomy of women:
     pregnancy and child-rearing affect women much more than men
     women should have the right to choose or avoid these activities
     any restriction of birth control is therefore sexual discrimination
     it enables women to enjoy sexual activity on the same basis as men
     any restriction of birth control is therefore a denial of women’s right to sexual autonomy. Without contraception a woman may find herself having regular pregnancies.
    • It enables world population to be controlled and thus protects the environment and reduces poverty.

    Fletcher argued in his Situation ethics that making babies is just as good as making love, and married couple CAN AND SHOULD make love without the intent of making babies. Babies ought to be wanted and intended, not born by chance or accident which would justify giving birth as an intelligent choice.

    The Utilitarian approach stated that it brings happiness to the greatest number of people. In this case, it is argued that humans will have sex no matter what, and hence, contraceptives must be made available to avoid seriously damaging consequences such as the spread of disease.

    Contraceptive technology makes men and women persons of will and decision, and not merely inert and powerless bodies subject to church proscriptions or the divine will. A couple will bear the consequences of their own moral decisions; nobody else, not even the church authorities, will carry the responsibility of burden for them. They have to live their own lives, support their own children and give them the care and education that is worthy of every human being. The Church cannot and will not do this for one’s children. Why then should the Church make the moral decisions for oneself, nay – for one’s family?

    • Love permalink
      October 10, 2010 3:38

      uhAy, Exactly why the RH Bill is so despicable and shouldn’t be passed, because of such above devious arguments, in the guise of “proper information/education” . wolf in sheep’s clothing.

      OMG=), chopping research facts to make your RH Bill conclusion.

      Propaganda and Bills such as these, that do not have good clear ethical points nor even acknowledge and instead defile and already step on any Moral Family alignment, actually adds to the numbers and age of young people becoming more sexually active(fact with a whole file of multimillion scientific finding like the cigarette warning ads that aim to prevent but actually entice the smoker), and is actually stealing them of their innocence and adding not just to teenage pregnancy but all adolescent problems even though it says it is not advocating premarital sex and presenting to preventing it.

      Of course a serpent would not say to its prey, you will destroy yourself as you agree to do this, but convinces the prey of another argument claiming to give benefit for the prey of its “sugar coated” trap.

      the serpent convinced the first man and woman of disobedience to God by the same lie.

      Implying by its question that an unplanned baby is something that is “NEVER” even desired specially by a married couple is clearly a lie and is already abortion of life in the idea of such words, they couldn’t have married then because of their love in life. Using a pretty cover will not hide the deception there. An unplanned date wouldn’t mean i’m not happy to meet another person, unless of course the other person is Intentionally posing as someone good to corrupt and destroy me then that is exactly another point why the RH Bill will never be allowed.

      Sex education, pills, condom or other arguments for contraception does not in any case, in any world you live in, address the crisis that corrupts all man in all grounds, which is actually the irrational insatiable want to consume, disregarding moral essence that poses the issues which we have resulted to have made on our environment and on ourselves today as human beings.

      RH Bill especially, does not even come close to having a relative solution for the corruption or the resulting poverty crisis Filipino’s are facing. It is appalling that the RH Bill, deviously advocating on Reproductive Health and contraceptives for married couples insist on having to cheat the Filipino youth out of their innocence as a mandate of sex education for the unprepared understanding of a young mind and on their Morally aligned Proper education from their morally aligned Families and then community which it has already caused to invalidate in its deceitful argument.

      See again how the emphasis is distorted to restriction of choice=).

      EVERYONE IS ALREADY FREE TO HIS OWN CHOICE, and if you do make a FREE WRONG CHOICE, that is exactly where the consequence of the wrong choice will bite you. These arguments insist instead to being SERIOUSLY DECEIVED by the RH Bill, even with careful counsel against its implication for moral corruption and misconstrue responsibility for a wrongly taken action. In this case Parenthood as a matter of moral responsibility and the aim to a happy and good life is actually already killed. So where is the Moral argument in the RH Bill claim?

      RH Bill even has the wrong argument on Reproductive health because Facts show that these diseases rose up side by side to the rising of production of such biomedical technology on contraception, and actually renders it as a contribution to the problem=).

      A woman getting pregnant is not a problem, because that is the essence of a woman, but the problem is the Maniac who makes her pregnant yearly without any loving regard, and is also having another unclean relationship with someone else. God gave the woman, and the woman already knows safer natural ways where she can have sex, as freely as she wants (naturally, with who she’s supposed to have sex with=), and without sex having to result to conception on as many occassion that will arise in her lifetime=). It is in fact the unclean maniac who should get some proper counselling (maybe even medication=) to avoid such unclean outbreaks.

      As it has clearly eliminated any topic to point out the absence of chastity results to all these unclean problems, it just implies through its question that the Church makes the choices you make which is totally not true=) that’s why it’s yours, and actually injects and insist on deceiving you on arguments to support something that is vile and corrupt morally.

      You know, Parents actually would like, nay love, that their children be as Honourably expensive on the pedestal as they come=). And we would want as Many Honourable children as God graces us to have=). (RH Bill presenting itself is actually the one limiting our rights out of its deceptive arguments, knock, knock,knock big bad wolf=). Would you like your Love to be CHEAP. A True dignified Love cannot possibly be cheap, it strives and works no matter how difficult a challenge it is to the bone and always has a smile on the face about the children, who are Gods gifts, giving the best education no matter the monetary expense, most importantly the best care and Moral Values no matter what the stature or status, which is why this is Actually a call to Share love and right care for your neighbour, with moral values that they will hold as GEMS inside each morally responsible person they become. DO NOT LET THE RH BILL DECEIVE YOU out of your free rights=). God Bless. Peace and happiness will reign.

    • October 17, 2010 3:38

      Research shows that young people are becoming more sexually active in their early teens, or even earlier often with little understanding of the dangers involved. Another article stated that unwanted pregnancy is not just a teenage problem. >>> What research? And what dangers? Pregnancy is a danger? Ask sexually-active teens everywhere, and you will know they are already using contraceptives. Your opening is moot.

      Many married couples also face unplanned pregnancies. >>> How many? Don’t you think they are also using contraceptives themselves, too?

      And while a child should always be a source of joy, how can something that was never even desired bring happiness. >>> I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS STATEMENT, AND ANOTHER ONE BELOW (SEE ALL CAPS COMMENT), BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE SOMETHING THAT WOULD COME FROM NAZIS. Children who are unplanned, as you say, can and does bring happiness. Have you talked to parents who have mentally-deformed or handicapped children? Parents did not desire them and yet they bring joy to the family. SEE MORE COMMENTS ABOUT THIS BELOW.

      Dr. Charles A. Hall, a systems ecologist stated that overpopulation is the world’s top environmental issue. Thus, contraception these days are beneficial not only to the young adults and married couples, to the nation but to the environment as well. >>> Who is Charles Hall and why should we quote him? You cannot quote anyone. If you quote someone, you should at least post why he/she is quotable. Is he the top systems ecologist? What is a system’s ecologist anyway? And where did he say the quote?

      The grounds of contraception to be practiced DOES NOT advocate for premarital sexual intercourse, nor does it attempt to invade every household in this country, rather, it addresses the emergent crisis the Filipino nation is facing. >>> What crisis? Can giving out contraceptives abate the widening gap between the rich and the poor?

      Contraception is essential for “procreative liberty”. According to Fletcher as cited in the book of Timbreza, parenthood and birth are matters of moral responsibility and intelligent choice. >>> Who is Fletcher, and who is Timbreza? You might be correct with your contraception but there, but why bring it up?

      If people are not allowed a choice over whether or not to have children their autonomy and freedom to control their lives are seriously restricted. Parenthood as a matter of moral responsibility aims a happy and good life. >>> So couples today do not have the autonomy to decide whether to have children or not? Who’s controlling them?

      • It enables women whose health would be at risk if they conceived, to continue to have sex without the fear of getting pregnant because unrestricted procreation is detrimental to the health of the mother when she makes the ritual of giving birth an annual affair. >>> Seems like you have a low regard for the poor with the statement “makes the ritual of giving birth an annual affair”. Showing your true colors this early? Besides, if she does not want to become pregnant, she has a choice not to have sex, right?

      • The use of condoms helps prevent sexually transmitted diseases and HIV. Contraception checks the transmission of recessive disorder or genetically-linked diseases. Procreation should be a responsible human activity. This idea of responsible parenthood. Has taken on added significance in these years of biomedical science and technology. Through genetic testing (by means of biochemical studies or chromosomal analysis), modern medical science can now detect an increasing number of hereditary disorders. The fact that hereditary disorders are genetically transmitted from one generation to the next mandates all “carriers” of recessive disorders or genetically-related diseases to practice contraception. >>> THIS CONTINUES MY COMMENT THAT YOU ARE SIDING WITH NEO-NAZIS. ESSENTIALLY, YOU WANT TO SAY PEOPLE WITH “HEREDITARY DISORDERS” SHOULD NOT HAVE SEX, OR IF THEY DO, THEY SHOULD USE CONTRACEPTIVES SO TO PREVENT THEIR “RECESSIVE DISORDERS” TO PASS ON TO “ONE GENERATION TO THE NEXT”. IT’S INCONSISTENT FOR YOU TO SAY THAT BECAUSE YOU ARE PROMOTING THE “SEX AUTONOMY” OF “NORMAL” PEOPLE BUT THEN YOU WOULD WANT TO RESTRICT THOSE OF THE “ABNORMAL”?

      • It prevents the conception of children that a family cannot support. One should be able to decide how many children on is able to bear and support. The sexual union must take into consideration the future child’s inherent right to a dignified existence. It enables people to avoid having more children than they want. For a poor family, bringing up too many children is a drain on the budget, and providing for the basic necessities of living – such as food, clothing and education – becomes difficult as a result of apportioning out the meager income of the family to seven or ten children. >>> Tell us who are these entities restricting couples from deciding how many children they would like to have. Read the bill? Its section 16 mandates the state to “assist” and “encourage” couples to only have two children. See that contradiction between your statement here and your support for the bill? Why are you supporting this bill again?

      • It improves marriage because it enables couples to enjoy the unitive function of sexual activity without being anxious about conceiving a child, it enables couples to have fewer children and thus spend more time together and with the children they do have, it reduces the cost of marriage (children are expensive). >>> So you think couples who do not want to have children are not using contraceptives yet?

      • It promotes gender equality and the autonomy of women:
       pregnancy and child-rearing affect women much more than men >>> Of course.
       women should have the right to choose or avoid these activities >>> So women do not have this already?
       any restriction of birth control is therefore sexual discrimination >>> Again, tell us who are the entities doing the restricting.
       it enables women to enjoy sexual activity on the same basis as men >>> How?
       any restriction of birth control is therefore a denial of women’s right to sexual autonomy. Without contraception a woman may find herself having regular pregnancies. >>> Drill this into your head: NO ONE IS RESTRICTING WOMEN TO USE CONTRACEPTION.
      • It enables world population to be controlled and thus protects the environment and reduces poverty. >>> Funny how you bring the world in this conversation. Heard about the aging population in aging countries that have State-mandated contraception? I heard these countries are having a crisis, too. You should visit them sometime.

      Fletcher argued in his Situation ethics that making babies is just as good as making love, and married couple CAN AND SHOULD make love without the intent of making babies. Babies ought to be wanted and intended, not born by chance or accident which would justify giving birth as an intelligent choice. >>> Who is Fletcher? And again, drill this into your head: NO ONE IS RESTRICTING COUPLES TO DECIDE WHETHER THEY WANT BABIES OR NOT.

      The Utilitarian approach stated that it brings happiness to the greatest number of people. In this case, it is argued that humans will have sex no matter what, and hence, contraceptives must be made available to avoid seriously damaging consequences such as the spread of disease. >>> Oh, so we change approaches at whim? And hey, I just saw condoms at my local 7-11. Where do you live?

      Contraceptive technology makes men and women persons of will and decision, and not merely inert and powerless bodies subject to church proscriptions or the divine will. >>> AGAIN, DRILL THIS INTO YOUR HEAD: NO ONE, NOT EVEN THE CHURCH, IS RESTRICTING ANYONE FROM USING CONTRACEPTIVES.

      A couple will bear the consequences of their own moral decisions; nobody else, not even the church authorities, will carry the responsibility of burden for them. They have to live their own lives, support their own children and give them the care and education that is worthy of every human being. The Church cannot and will not do this for one’s children. >>> Of course not.

      Why then should the Church make the moral decisions for oneself, nay – for one’s family? >>> Yeah, tell us why. As far as I know, the Church is only saying what it believes is morally-upright. As far as I know, there has never been a case when the Church was able to control anybody’s free will. The Church will say whatever it wants to say, and the decision still rests on the shoulders of those who hear it. Maybe you should read the Catechism of the Church, because you can’t argue against an institution you do not know anything about. If you argue against the Philippine government, for instance, you should know how it works, right? You can’t base arguments on flimsy hearsays and make-believe assumptions about this or that institution.

      • October 17, 2010 3:38

        You talk too much without understanding my premise. I am in favor of contraception. Like I said, I don’t agree with the Catholic view or the religionist view against the RH bill. I am in favor of family planning, birth control methods and even abortion (it’s very unfortunate our Constitution seeks to protect an unborn child since “conception.”

        But I strongly disapprove of the following:

        1. That you, stupid pro-RH people, are asking the government to legislate population. Population CANNOT be legislated.

        2. That you, pro-RH morons, are asking the government to SPEND OUR WAY OUT of the so-called overpopulation myth and poverty!

        3. That you’re trying to give the government more powers to rule our lives.

        4. That you’re giving the government more political powers to control certain sectors of our society, such as the medical industry, the education sector and the business community. READ THE BILL!

        5. That you’re trying to turn the Philippines into a welfare state or a country of DEPENDENCY!

        READ MY OTHER POSTS ON THE BILL!!!

  8. November 22, 2010 3:38

    I was looking for new directions and came to your website by using google. You continue being a new source of information.

  9. February 9, 2011 3:38

    You have made good points sir, however continually calling people that are expressing and fighting for their beliefs as “idiots” or “morons” have reduced your seemingly objective views to pompous outbursts. I, myself, do not believe in sugarcoating situations or mollycoddling people but I also believe that you can get your point across without insulting anyone with sweeping statements.

    You have written strong remarks against socialism. To be fair to that type of government system, it has helped most people in European countries stay afloat in the current economic crises. My significant other lives in a democratic socialist based country and has been out of work recently but because he resides in a country with such type of government, he has been able to get continuous financial assistance and work on his Level 3 qualifications at the Open University for free to get a better job and be of better use in the community. Without such doles from the taxes he has paid through his previous work, he’ll probably be nowhere right now.

    I’d also like to point out that Socialism in its simplest definition is sharing between people. It has a lot of benefits ideally, however it has been tainted by nations that haven’t used it properly degrading it to communism and making most people believe that it wouldn’t work or that it is “evil”. I think the problem is not in the type of government system but how it is being exercised by those seated in “power”. We shouldn’t totally negate it but perhaps be open-minded to what its best philosophical ideas have to offer. We should also centralise our discussions to what will best serve all of us as individuals and members of the society. It is something that virtues of a capitalist system doesn’t seem to address.

    I don’t think you need to worry about Socialism happening in the Philippines though… a lot of people there are quite power hungry and seem to have trouble with the word “share” in its purest form😉

    However, I don’t see anything wrong in providing our fellowmen with proper healthcare and education. I believe in the idea of a greater good for mankind. Regulated healthcare and education systems like those in advanced countries will benefit not just those who couldn’t afford it but those who can as well. As Winston Churchill once said, the best investment a nation can make is to put milk into babies, and he’s right. A country constituted with able-bodied and well-informed citizens will bring more productivity and might just lessen the occurrences of predicaments such as this pro and anti RH bill debacle.

    Just my two pence.

    • February 9, 2011 3:38

      You said: “You have written strong remarks against socialism. To be fair to that type of government system, it has helped most people in European countries stay afloat in the current economic crises.”

      LOL! I’m sorry but only IDIOTS would say that.

  10. March 11, 2011 3:38

    Here’s some hard data that shows there is no relationship between Poverty and Overpopulation

    Let’s look at hard data and see if the RH bill’s argument that overpopulation causes poverty is spot on.

    Indonesia
    * has a population of 240 million
    * Land Area: 1,811,569 sq km
    * GDP – per capita (ppp): $4,300 (2010 est.)

    Philippines
    * has 90 million population-
    * land area: 298,170 sq km
    * GDP per capita – $3,500 (2010 est.)

    Japan
    * 120 million population;
    * land area – 364,485 sq km –
    * GDP – per capita (ppp): $34,200 (2010 est.)

    North Korea
    * has 24.5 million population;
    * land area – 120,538 sq km –
    * GDP – per capita (ppp): $1,800 (2010 est.)

    The argument that overpopulation is a cause of poverty is negated because for such a principle to hold true then Japan, too should have the same GDP per capita as the Philippines and Indonesia. Obviously – the numbers don’t add up.

    There is so much wealth in the world today that can provide food, clothing, water, and shelter – however access to it such wealth or the lack of it is a function of economic policy – regardless of whether you have no child, one child, or five children. In an environment where economic policy is skewed in favor of vested interests – you can have small family sizes – and people with very low purchasing power. For example, North Korea has 1.9 births per woman and GDP per capita of $1,800. If one were to buy the argument that lesser population size equals prosperity, North Korea should be roaring over the Philippines GDP per capita income right now. Obviously that’s not the case.

    *****

    Based on the above we can state the following:

    1. Population growth rate decreased from 3.0% to 1.8%, for the period from 1960 to 2009.

    2. Birth rate decreased from 26.3% to 25.68%, for the period from 2003 to 2010.

    3. Death rate went down from 5.6% to 5.06%, for the period from 2003 to 2010.

    4. Fertility rate went down from 7% to 3.1%, for the period from 1960 to 2008.

    5. Life Expectancy at Birth increased for the period from 2003 to 2010.

    6. Populous countries that have liberal economic policies don’t have widespread poverty like populous countries that have protectionist economic policies.

    The data shows that the population KPIs are consistently trending down – and not going up as previously claimed. All these happened via fund realignment and without increased funding for health.

    Poverty in the Philippines cannot be attributed to upward population pressure given the downward trends shown by empirical population data.

    The justification for increased funding of procurement and distribution by the DOH is not supported by the empirical evidence.

    • March 11, 2011 3:38

      Good analysis.

      I discussed the relation between the degree of freedom and poverty here… https://fvdb.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/rh-bill/

      Academic reports and world organizations confirm the relation between the degree of economic freedom/proper implementation of the rule of law and the degree of a country’s economic condition.

  11. Irmee permalink
    May 11, 2011 3:38

    I am a nurse and I have read the entirety of the RH Bill which I think focuses on education and provision of healthcare to women and children. But, I do understand why you are reacting as such – as a businessman why you need to be imposed to provide such services to your employees…

    • May 11, 2011 3:38

      I can’t understand your English. I’m sorry. If you’re saying, why it is that my blog states that employers would be forced to provide the RC care needs of their employees, then you have to re-read the bill and understand its provisions. Read my other anti-RH bill blogs too.

Trackbacks

  1. Reproductive Health Bill Revives Old War Between Two Mystics « IDEOLOGICAL SOUP
  2. On Intellectual Dishonesty, Relativism, and Subjectivism « VINCENTON POST
  3. The Psychology of the Anti-Population Cult « VINCENTON POST
  4. The Tyranny of the Anti-Population Bill « VINCENTON POST
  5. Debunking the ‘Guiding Principles’ of the Fascist RH Bill « THE VINCENTON POST
  6. Prof. Monsod Versus Free-Market Capitalism and Freedom « THE VINCENTON POST
  7. RH Bill’s Fallacy of Overpopulation-Poverty Dichotomy « THE VINCENTON POST
  8. RH Bill Supporters’ Strawman Attacks « THE VINCENTON POST
  9. Philippine Medical Association’s Pro-RH Bill Suicide Note « THE VINCENTON POST
  10. Reproductive Health Care is NOT a Right! | VINCENTON
  11. ‘Bad Economist’ Winnie Monsod Versus Free-Market Capitalism and Freedom | VINCENTON BLOGVINCENTON BLOG

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

%d bloggers like this: