Skip to content

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

February 22, 2011

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.

Both the new UP president and the RH bill solons promised to deliver the common good. Pascual hopes to bring more public goods to UP while the RH bill lawmakers undertake to bring more welfare to poor people, particularly women.

Both the UP president and the anti-population solons rely on government subsidy and taxpayers’ money. Both parties understand that they need more public funds to realize their welfare statist goals. Pascual aspires to make UP a “great university” by means of more public funding while the RH bill lawmakers want to look so generous and good in the public eye by spending other people’s money.

Both parties believe in the ultimate power of the state or the government to bring about what they call “the common good” or “public welfare.”

Both parties rely on Marxist rhetoric. The pro-population control lawmakers believe that overpopulation and poverty have verifiable link, a rhetoric that is part of the modern-day Marxist gospels in the areas of sociology, political science and liberal arts. Pascual, based on his vision statement entitled “Remaking a Great University: UP in the 21st Century”, believes that there is a need to serve the poor and to support his “great” public education institution by means of some political measures.

Both parties are strong advocates and proponents of the politics of “common good”, which remains an undefined and undefinable concept. In fact, “common good” is an anti-concept because it is a logically impotent term designed to replace and obliterate some legitimate concept. There can be no “common good” when its delivery by the state or by means of some political action logically and necessarily results in the violation of some people’s rights and freedom. This is the case of the RH bill or the Responsible Parenthood bill. The expressed intents of the bill to serve the welfare of the poor and women would logically and necessarily lead to the disregard of the fundamental rights of some groups of individuals, namely, employers, health care providers, people in both the government and the education sector, and even ordinary citizen who may be penalized for an undefined and undefinable crime termed by Rep. Edcel Lagman as “malicious disinformation” of the intent and provision of the bill.

This is also the case of Pascual’s evil, statist vision, as he admits that it requires more taxpayers’ money.

These RH bill idiots think the Catholic priests have the POLITICAL POWER to impose their will on them. These disgusting creatures have the right to do whatever they want. Keep the government OUT OF OUR WAY!

These RH bill idiots think the Catholic priests have the POLITICAL POWER to impose their will on them. These disgusting creatures have the right to do whatever they want. Keep the government OUT OF OUR WAY!

However, the two parties differ in terms of honesty and admission of their respective political agenda.

On the part of Pascual, he openly proposed that his vision for UP requires an increase in the corporate income tax and other taxes. Pascual’s statist vision states“In funding the plan implementation, one possible source that can be explored is the corporate income tax, among others. A certain percentage of this tax may be earmarked.”

How brutally honest.

However, the RH bill lawmakers are still in state of denial despite the fact that many sectors claim that their legislative proposal requires more than three-billion pesos, not more than 700-million pesos as already approved by the Committee on Appropriations. No one has the guts and courage in Congress to admit that their bill would need more taxpayers’ money in the future considering the many RH services and elements and the number of welfare recipients who would be covered by the bill in the future. This is very much expected since the bill seeks to make parents and the people more dependent on government hand-outs and extorted/looted goods from the productive and successful.

However, it is very much alarming that only a few enlightened people (me included) fully understand the unintended consequences of the bill on our rights and freedom. Only a very people have the intellectual ability to grasp the many fascist, statist provisions of the bill. That the bill seeks to violate the following constitutionally guaranteed rights:

  • Equal protection under the law
  • The rights and freedom of employers
  • The rights and freedom of doctors and health care providers
  • The rights and freedom of parents to decide on their own
  • The rights and freedom of the people to say NO to government intrusion into family homes and people’s private lives.
  • The rights and freedom of young students against state-imposed sex education
  • The people’s right to free speech and freedom of expression
  • Everybody’s right to be left alone
  • Everybody’s right against any probable imposition of higher or new taxes
  • The right to freedom of choice, which is being perverted and destroyed by Rep. Edcel Lagman and his stupid ilk

Tell your lawmakers to BACK OFF before it’s too late!

Advertisements
12 Comments leave one →
  1. Mila permalink
    February 22, 2011 3:38

    Have you seen the note by some UP people opposing the RH Bill? http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/upiansonrhbill/

    • February 22, 2011 3:38

      Yes, and I actually commented on it here… https://fvdb.wordpress.com/2010/12/23/rh-bills-fallacy/

      Here’s an excerpt:

      Here’s a very interesting position from the University of the Philippines written by faculty members, students and alumni, although it cannot be confirmed whether it is endorsed by the university administration:

      “Population is not an obstacle to development. The bills assume that a nation’s population hinders its development that is why they push for the promotion of a two-child policy, massive distribution of contraceptives, sex education (to acquaint young people with contraception), and sterilization, all of which make use of taxpayers’ money. However, as early as 1966, Nobel Prize winner Simon Kuznets’ research has shown that there is insignificant empirical association between population growth rates and output per capita (economic growth). Rather, it is the rate at which technology grows and the ability of the population to employ these new technologies efficiently and widely that permit economic progress. Kuznets saw that the basic obstacles to economic growth arise from the limited capabilities of the institutions (political, social, legal, cultural, economic) to adjust. He argued instead that a more rapid population growth, if properly managed, will promote economic development through a positive impact on the society’s state of knowledge. His findings have been confirmed by similar studies by the US National Research Council (1986), the UN Population Fund Consultative Meeting of Economists (1992), Eric Hanushek and Ludger Wößmann (2007), among others.”

      However, I strongly disagree with their contention that the “government has to channel limited funds to job creation and education.” In reality, the government has no ‘economic capability’ to create jobs. A government that creates job is a contradiction in terms because in the first place, the government or the state is not a productive agency. It does not create wealth; it merely relies on the capability of the productive members of our society to create wealth. However, the state has the magical power to create paper money out of thin air, which is a power to destroy the wealth of every individual through inflation, which is in reality, a hidden tax. But the government has an ‘indirect’ capability to create jobs by protecting individual rights and guaranteeing economic freedom and the rule of law in the Philippines. That is, the government can ‘help’ create jobs by protecting property rights and intellectual property rights, and by faithfully enforcing the rule of law.

  2. xyxy permalink
    February 25, 2011 3:38

    Take a look at this:
    http://www.gmanews.tv/story/213863/barangay-ayala-alabang-requires-prescription-to-buy-condoms

    • February 25, 2011 3:38

      I caught this one on tv and it really pissed me off… Both camps want the government make decision for us. Both camps want government intervention.

    • xyxy permalink
      February 25, 2011 3:38

      Here’s a copy of the ordinance:
      http://www.scribd.com/doc/49466222/Ayala-Alabang-Prescription-for-Condoms-Ordinance

      Also known as the “Protection of the Unborn Child Ordinance of 2011”, of which one of the objectives is “…to acknowledge the unborn child as a human being with human personality and to extend the mantle of legal protection to the child from the moment of his orher conception or fertilization”. I know you also heard/read that somewhere else. 😀

      At least people who live there are still permitted to use condoms despite the prescription thing. Imagine if they push it up a notch and ban its use altogether.

      • February 25, 2011 3:38

        An ORDINANCE?!!! That’s so unconstitutionally INSANE! What’s the legal basis of that fuckin’ ordinance? There is no “UNBORN CHILD” to be protected or to talk about if we’re talking about the use of condoms!!! There’s your body which you should protect first from STD or unwanted pregnancy. What’s wrong with these little politicians?!

      • xyxy permalink
        February 25, 2011 3:38

        They love potential people so much, I guess? lol

      • February 25, 2011 3:38

        Oh yes! They want to sacrifice the actual- the LIVING- to the potential…

  3. Melissa permalink
    February 28, 2011 3:38

    Do you have any post about the differences of the Planned Parenthood in U.S and the RH Bill proposed by the Philippine Congress?? 🙂 Please do reply.

    Thanks.

    • February 28, 2011 3:38

      No, I don’t have.

Trackbacks

  1. Philippine Medical Association’s Pro-RH Bill Suicide Note « THE VINCENTON POST
  2. What’s the Difference Between the New UP Prexy and the RH Bill Solons? | VINCENTON

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: