Skip to content

Protecting “Unborn Children” or Sacrificing Actual Human Beings?

February 25, 2011

There is no “unborn child” to be protected yet when we’re talking about the use of condoms. To protect a non-existing entity is to disregard the existence of those who exist. There is the actual, living, breathing human body to be protected FIRST against sexually transmitted diseases or even unwanted pregnancy.

Here’s one reason why I don’t mingle with some anti-RH bill religious people. They believe that a non-existing entity- an “unborn child”- has superior rights to the living. They believe that an “unborn child” must be protected against contraception or some artificial family planning method without realizing that the rights (to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness) of the living are at stake.

I’m talking about the anti-freedom, anti-rights ordinance passed by the barangay council of Ayala Alabang that requires its constituents to secure prescription first before buying condoms. Yes, this is now the reality in the Philippines. We’re not in a theocratic regime yet.

Let me re-state here why I strongly oppose the Reproductive Health Bill, otherwise known as the Responsible Parenthood bill. This anti-population bill must be rejected because it is against our rights and freedom. It is anti-business and anti-economic freedom, as it seeks to sacrifice employers to what its proponents call “the public good” or “public welfare”. It is a fascist legislative proposal because it seeks to control the entire industry, including the medical profession and the education sector.

However, let me re-state as well that I am in favor of family planning or the use of contraceptive methods. In fact, I am in favor of abortion and against that provision in our Constitution that crudely defines the beginning of life. That provision states that life starts from conception.

Now this provision, which is one of the things that we dropped from the American Constitution, is what motivates some anti-abortion groups in this country. This is, in fact, the basis of those who passed the ordinance in Barangay Ayala Alabang.

Section 2 of the ordinance states:

DECLARATION OF BARANGAY POLICIES

A. BARANGAY AYALA ALABANG (hereafter, the BARANGAY) upholds (a) the State’s recognition of the sanctity of family life and its obligation to protect and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution (Article II, Section 12 of the Constitution); (b) the duty of the State “to equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn child from conception” (Ibid.) since the unborn is the family’s most vulnerable member, and, (c) the State’s identification of the Filipino family including the unborn child as “the foundation of the nation” and its pledge to “strengthen the family’s solidarity and actively promote its total development” [Article XV, Section 3 (1)];

The phrase “to equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn child from conception” smacks of utter hypocrisy! There is no “unborn child” to be protected yet when we’re talking about the use of condoms. To protect a non-existing entity is to disregard the existence of those who exist. There is the actual, living, breathing human body to be protected FIRST against sexually transmitted diseases or even unwanted pregnancy.

What those who drafted and passed this highly idiotic ordinance failed or refused to realize or understand is that their measure seeks to sacrifice the actual human being to a potential or to a thing that does not exist yet.

I was right when I said before that the RH bill revives the old war between the mystic of muscle (the political altruists) and the mystic of spirit (the religionists).

The metaphysical or paranormal contention of the devout followers of the mystics of spirit is that the RH Bill is anti-Life, it promotes abortion, and that it is immoral because it makes it mandatory for young people and even young couple to undergo sex or parental education. On the other hand, the collectivist-altruist evil argument consists in a ludicrous dogma that this bill seeks to promote the common good. These conscious or unconscious supporters of collectivism and dictatorship call for the adoption of socialized medicine or socialized health care system in this country. They, in effect, support the legislative implementation of slavery, by sacrificing the responsible and successful to the poor or underprivileged merely on account of the latter’s need. They, in effect, demand the government to expand its powers in order to rule and govern everybody’s life. They believe that it is the role of the government to provide everything the less fortunate need in order to survive and have a decent life. The bill’s proponent, Rep. Edcel Lagman, believes the bill “simply recognizes the verifiable link between a huge population and poverty. Unbridled population growth stunts socio-economic development and aggravates poverty.” But can the Congress legislate “unbriddled population growth?” If there’s a way to legislate it, how? By subsequently inserting or proposing additional legislation that would set a two-child policy or legalize sterilization in this country? Besides, we should not forget that there are existing government agencies which can deliver the avowed promises of this bill.

In this blog entitled The Clash Between Two Evils: Anti-contraception theocrats vs. Anti-rights Fascists, I wrote:

Today, we have religious conservatives who push for anti-contraception campaigns because of their mystical beliefs. However, their loudest opponents- the leftists and the Filipino Freefarters- cannot be trusted in this regard because of their big government and welfare state agenda.

In effect, there are two evil camps that try to rob us of our freedom and rights:

  1. The religious conservatives who push for their anti-family planning and anti-contraception campaigns. These people sacrifice individual rights and freedom of choice to mystical beliefs and revelations.
  2. The communists and the Filipino Freefarters and their mindless cohorts who oppose these religious conservatives and who champion a statist, neo-fascist brand of ‘secularism’. In fact, they are worse than the religious conservatives because their political agenda completely contravenes individual rights and freedom. Their concept of “freedom of choice” is utterly distorted and perverted, as they believe that the state must provide perhaps almost everything the people need.

The true concept of freedom of choice is that every individual is entitled to act and to choose his actions according to his rational self-interest so long as he abstains from violating the rights of others. There can be no ‘freedom of choice’ when the government takes the property or money of other people in order to serve the welfare of the poor or the have-nots. There can be no ‘freedom of choice’ when the government resorts to force and compulsion. I believe there should be no conflict of interests among rational men.

Both the RH bill supporters and the anti-abortion group are statists or fascists. They are willing to use the coercive powers of the state in order to achieve their anti-reason, anti-freedom objectives. Those who push for the passage of the RH bill are pro-government control of our lives while the anti-abortion people who try to ban the use of condoms and artificial family planning methods are not pro-life– they are in fact pro-death! Thus, the ordinance must cease to exist in order to protect those who are still willing to think and to exist! There is no such thing as “unborn children.” An “unborn child” is not even a potential, but a ridiculous illusion.

Here’s the full text of controversial barangay ordinance:

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

CITY OF MUNTINLUPA

SANGGUNIAN BARANGAY OF AYALA ALABANG

BARANGAY ORDINANCE NO. 01

SERIES OF 2011

AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE SAFETY AND PROTECTION OF THE UNBORN CHILD WITHIN THE TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF BARANGAY AYALA ALABANG; FIXING PENALTIES FOR ITS VIOLATIONS, AND, FOR OTHER PURPOSES

Be it enacted by the Sangguniang Barangay of Ayala Alabang, Muntinlupa City:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE

This Ordinance shall be known as the Protection of the Unborn Child Ordinance of 2011.

SECTION 2. DECLARATION OF BARANGAY POLICIES

A. BARANGAY AYALA ALABANG (hereafter, the BARANGAY) upholds (a) the State’s recognition of the sanctity of family life and its obligation to protect and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution (Article II, Section 12 of the Constitution); (b) the duty of the State “to equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn child from conception” (Ibid.) since the unborn is the family’s most vulnerable member, and, (c) the State’s identification of the Filipino family including the unborn child as “the foundation of the nation” and its pledge to “strengthen the family’s solidarity and actively promote its total development” [Article XV, Section 3 (1)];

B. The BARANGAY also adheres to (a) the State’s declared policy of “full respect for human rights” (Article II, Section 11), the most basic of which is the right to life for without it all other rights become meaningless; (b) the implicit Constitutional principle that the people’s right to life (Article III, Section 1) like that of the unborn child is an absolute value and norm that cannot be repealed by ordinary legislation;

C. The BARANGAY likewise supports the State’s recognition of (a) the right of children to proper care and nutrition, protection from all forms of neglect, abuse, cruelty, exploitation and other conditions prejudicial to their development [Article XV, Section 3 (2)]; (b) the vital role of the youth in nation building, and (c) its commitment to promote and protect their physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual and social well-being, and, (d) the role of women in nation-building, and, its pledge to ensure the fundamental equality before the law of women and men (Article II, Sections 13 & 14);

D. The BARANGAY as well (a) endorses the view that contraceptive pills and hormonal contraceptives and the IUD may kill children and injure the health of women who use them; (b) condemns the irresponsible and indiscriminate use of contraceptives as they undermine the solidarity of families by promoting premarital sex, giving rise to more fatherless children, more single mothers, more poverty, and more abortions when the contraceptives fail to prevent conception, and by causing a decline of legitimate marriages, and, (c) denounces the use of condoms as far as they promote and sanction immoral sexual congresses among the unmarried and especially among the young, thereby contradicting the Constitutional injunction that the State “shall promote and protect … the physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual and social well-being” of the youth;

E. The BARANGAY (a) acknowledges that the unborn possesses and enjoys all human rights like other persons by nature and by law and that he or she shall be entitled first and foremost to the right of life, safety and protection even as he or she may still be in his or her mother’s womb; (b) follows the mandate of the Constitution that the unborn child shall be protected from the moment of conception from all outside interventions, interferences or intrusions, including, but not limited to, intentional acts that may be medically considered as abortive whether through the use of chemicals, surgical or abdominal massage during the natural process of growth of the fertilized ovum, and (c) backs up the principle that the right of the parents over their minor daughters with unborn children is superior to that of the State in instances involving the safety, protection and welfare of the said unborn children and their mothers of minor age; and,

F. The BARANGAY lastly deduces from pertinent Constitutional tenets that since life begins at conception there is no place for the so-called “free choice” argument to justify compulsory sex education in the schools within its territorial jurisdiction that, among other things, disregards “the right of families or family associations to participate in the planning and implementation of policies and programs that affect them” [(Article XV, Section 3 (2)] or that insidiously allows the State to take over “the natural and primary right and duty of parents” to rear their children “for civic efficiency and the development of (their) moral character” (Article II, Section 12 last sentence).

SECTION 3. OBJECTIVES

The ordinance has the following objectives:

(a) to promote the safety, protection, and, welfare of the unborn child from the moment of conception or fertilization and during all stages of development while inside the mother’s womb;

(b) 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 or her conception or fertilization;

(c) to mandate that the delivery of health services to the mother during pregnancy shall be done without prejudice to the unborn child;

(d) to ensure the continued well-being and good health of the mother by protecting her from any act or threat that may adversely affect the viability of the unborn child in all stages of the mother’s pregnancy and even after the child’s delivery;

(e) to encourage the legal, moral and healthy sexual relationships among those entitled thereto under the laws of the country and pursuant to the religious convictions of the couples concerned as mandated by the Constitution; and

(f) to support the Constitutional precept that the total development of the child is a primordial duty of both the parents and the State and its agencies, including the BARANGAY.

(g) to promote and provide effective and scientifically proven Natural Family Planning (NFP) services to married couples and those engaged to be married, because NFP, unlike contraceptives, strengthens rather than weakens the marriage bond between husband and wife, which is the foundation stone of the family, the foundation of the nation.

SECTION 4. DEFINITION OF TERMS

For purposes of the Ordinance, the following terms are defined as follows:

Unborn – refers to a child at any stage of his or her existence and development beginning from the union of the sperm and the egg until the birth stage;

Conception or Fertilization – refers to the time that the sperm fertilizes the egg, which starts a new life that has a distinct existence and genetic make-up of its own;

Implantation – refers to that stage of development of the fetal life which takes place around five days after fertilization when the fertilized egg is implanted in the ovum.

Fetal development – refers to the development process of human life from the union of the sperm and egg until the birth of the child.

Abortion – any act or practice whether done intentionally or unintentionally to endanger, cause or bring about the death, injury, damage, expulsion or interference in the natural development of the fetus or the unborn child such as through “hilot” (abdominal massage), administration of certain medicines or herbal concoctions, suction, hysterectomy, saline injection, hormonal contraceptives, intra-uterine devices (IUD’s) or other similar means or devices like vacuum aspirators or abortifacient substances whether used singly or in combination with other substances.

Abortive acts – abortion practiced by the woman herself or by her parents or guardians, physicians or midwives or pharmacists who dispense abortives in violation of the provisions of the Revised Penal Code (Articles 256-259).

Contraceptive – any device or drug that is intended or has the purpose or effect of preventing conception as a consequence of sexual intercourse.

Abortifacient – is any device, medicine, substance or practice which may damage, injure, interfere with the natural development, endanger or cause the expulsion or death of an unborn child; except for such devices, medicines, substances or practices which are standard medical treatments for medical conditions which threaten the life or physical health of a pregnant woman or an unborn child, when used to treat such medical conditions, and neither the primary effect nor purpose of such device, medicine, substance, or practice is to cause the termination of a pregnancy or prevent conception. Abortifacients include Intrauterine Devices (IUD’s), and hormonal contraceptives, as well as any and all other devices, medicines, substances or practices which fall within the foregoing definition, including but not limited to the list hereto attached as Annex A entitled as List of Hormonal Contraceptives. This list shall be updated from time to time as the need arises.

Human personality – refers to the status that is gained and attaches to an unborn child from the moment of conception.

Parental Right – refers to the right of parents to give or withhold consent when minors are involved in any decision or disposition relating to unborn children at any stage of their development in the wombs of their minor mothers.

SECTION 5. HEALTH SERVICE DELIVERY

All health services performed within the territorial jurisdiction of the BARANGAY including any other institution or person, whether natural or juridical, the Barangay Health Centers and any domestic health care institution, which is duly licensed and accredited and devoted primarily to the maintenance and operation of facilities for health promotion, prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and care of individuals suffering from illness, disease, injury, disability or deformity, or in need of obstetrical or other medical and nursing care shall use only safe, ethical, effective, legal and non-abortifacient medicines or drugs or machines, devices or methods of treatment that do not cause abortion intentionally or unintentionally.

For the protection of the unborn and the institutions of marriage and family, no abortifacients shall be prescribed by health care providers within the territorial jurisdiction of the BARANGAY.

All funds which are budgeted or disbursed by the BARANGAY for programs to support responsible parenthood shall be used exclusively to promote and provide effective and scientifically proven Natural Family Planning (NFP) services to married couples and those engaged to be married.

The BARANGAY shall encourage, and where possible support, financially and otherwise, the establishment of one or more crisis pregnancy centers within the Barangay, to provide assistance in the form of counseling, and, if possible, medical and material support to women who are experiencing a crisis pregnancy.

SECTION 6. PROHIBITED ACTS

It is hereby declared illegal and unlawful for:

1. Any natural or juridical person to advertise within the territorial jurisdiction of the BARANGAY by billboards, brochures, leaflets, flyers or similar means or in any manner or form, sell, offer for free or endorse, promote, prescribe or distribute abortifacients as defined in Section 4. Definition of Terms.

2. Any person to subject an unborn child or his or her mother to acts that may endanger or expose the unborn child or mother to injury or death.

3. Any person to hold, conduct or teach compulsory sex education without prior consultation with, and written permission of, the parents or guardians of minor students in any school, public or private within the territorial jurisdiction of the BARANGAY;

4. Any funds of the BARANGAY to be used for the purchase or provision of contraceptives as defined in Section 4. Definition of Terms; and,

5. Either the BARANGAY or its employees or its agencies to solicit, accept or dispense contraceptives as defined in Section 4. Definition of Terms.

SECTION 7. REGULATED ACTS

The pertinent provisions of Republic Act No. 5921 entitled AN ACT REGULATING THE PRACTICE OF PHARMACY AND SETTING STANDARDS OF PHARMACEUTICAL EDUCATION IN THE PHILIPPINES AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES enacted into law June 21, 1969 are hereby incorporated into the Ordinance as an integral part thereof and are reproduced as follows:

“Section 37. Provisions relative to dispensing of anti-conceptional substances and devices. No drug or chemical product or device capable of provoking abortion or preventing conception as classified by the Food and Drug Administration shall be delivered or sold to any person without a proper prescription by a duly licensed physician.

The pharmacist in charge of a drug store or pharmacy after filling a prescription containing abortive or anti-conceptional substance or devices shall record in a separate register book for abortives and anti-conceptionals, the following data;

(a) Number and date of the prescription;

(b) Name and address of the physician;

(c) Name, quantity and manufacturer of the drug;

(d) Name and address of the purchaser;

(e) Date of filling the prescription; and

(f) Signature of the pharmacist filling the prescription.

“Section. 41. Other penalties. Any pharmacist who shall violate any of the provisions of Sections twenty-eight, thirty, thirty-one, thirty-two, thirty-three, thirty-four, thirty-five, thirty-seven and thirty-eight of this Act or any pharmacist after his certificate of registration has been lawfully suspended or revoked, who continues to engage in the practice of pharmacy, shall, upon conviction thereof, be sentenced to a fine of not less than one hundred pesos but shall not exceed five hundred pesos or to an imprisonment of not less than thirty days but not more than four months, in the discretion of the court.

Any person other than citizens of the Philippines having been found guilty of any violation as provided for in this and the preceding section shall, after having paid the fine or having served his sentence or both when so required be also subject to deportation.”

In addition to the above provisions of Republic Act No. 5921, classifications of drugs or chemical products or devices that are abortifacients as defined in Section 4. Definition of Terms shall also fall under the regulatory provision of this Section.

SECTION 8. PENALTIES

(a) Any person found guilty for the first time of violating any provision of Section 6 of the Ordinance shall be fined in an amount not less than P1,000 but not exceeding P5,000; for the second offense, he or she shall be fined in the amount of not less than P5,000 and be imprisoned for not less than one month but not exceeding six months; and for the third and succeeding offenses, he or she shall be sentenced to an imprisonment for not less than six months but not exceeding one year. Violators of the Ordinance shall also be held civilly liable to the offended party.

(b) If the person violating any provision of the Ordinance is an employee of the BARANGAY, he or she shall also be dismissed from his or her office and shall thereafter be barred from holding any public office.

(c) If the person violating any provision of the Ordinance is a business enterprise, firm, company or corporation or an educational institution, its president, chief executive officer or any other person responsible for the management and/or operation of the enterprise in the BARANGAY, shall suffer the penalties provided for in Section 7. In addition, the BARANGAY permit to engage in business of the said business enterprise, firm, company or corporation or to operate a private educational institution in the Barangay shall be declared null and void.

SECTION 9. EXCLUSIONARY PROVISION

Acts already proscribed by the revised penal code or by any special law are excluded from the purview of the ordinance and shall be penalized pursuant to the provisions of the code or the applicable special law.

SECTION 10. SEPARABILITY CLAUSE

If any provision of this Ordinance or part thereof is declared invalid or unconstitutional, the remaining provisions shall remain valid and subsisting.

SECTION 11. EFFECTIVITY

Within three (3) days from the enactment of this Ordinance, the Sangguniang Barangay shall furnish copies thereof to the Sangguniang Panlungsod of the City of Muntinlupa for review. If the Sangguniang Panlungsod fails to take appropriate action on the Ordinance within thirty (30) days from receipt hereof, the same shall be deemed approved. The Ordinance shall take effect upon the approval by the Sangguniang Panlungsod or as herein provided and after its posting at two conspicuous places, one at the entrance of the Barangay Hall of Ayala Alabang and another at a visible place accessible to the public in the BARANGAY for three (3) consecutive weeks and its publication in a newspaper of general circulation for one (1) week.

PASSED AND APPROVED, JANUARY 3, 2011.

SIGNED

ALFRED A. XEREZ-BURGOS, JR.

Punong Barangay

SIGNED

JOANNA CALUGCUG

Barangay Kagawad

ALICE A. BACANI

Barangay Kagawad

SIGNED

MARIA CARMEN G. REYES

MA. SOLEDAD M. TUGADE

Barangay Kagawad

SIGNEDMARIANO S.MANAS, JR.

APOLINARIO R. DE LOS SANTOS III

Barangay Kagawad

SIGNED

GIANCARLO A. NAZARIO

Barangay Kagawad

JUAN ENRICO A. PARFAN

SK Chairman

Attested by:

SIGNED

SANTOS A. RANCUDO

Barangay Secretary

16 Comments leave one →
  1. xyxy permalink
    February 25, 2011 3:38

    That was fast. Good job!

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

    Greetings 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

  3. xyxy permalink
    March 7, 2011 3:38

    Ms. Josie, do you really have to post that everywhere?

  4. WillyJ permalink
    March 11, 2011 3:38

    Excuse me. Just where in the ordinance does it state that it “requires its constituents to secure prescription first before buying condoms.”?. Section 7 of the ordinance merely echoes- exactly – what is in RA 5921 Sec 37:

    “Section 37. Provisions relative to dispensing of anti-conceptional substances and devices. No drug or chemical product or device capable of provoking abortion or preventing conception as classified by the Food and Drug Administration shall be delivered or sold to any person without a proper prescription by a duly licensed physician.

    Whereas, I don’t see anything in there that states buying condoms is restricted. Is there? Read again: Section 4. DEFINITION OF TERMS states “Conception or Fertilization – refers to the time that the sperm fertilizes the egg, which starts a new life that has a distinct existence and genetic make-up of its own;”. If you are worried that section 37 includes condoms in the phrase “preventing conception”, then it seems that your worry is misplaced. Read Section 37 of RA 5921 again, this time, carefully. It says “as classified by the Food and Drug Administration”, which means you should question the definition of FDA and intent of RA 5921, not this ordinance which only seeks (legitimately by the way) to enforce an existing law.

    • March 11, 2011 3:38

      You just quoted it.

      • WillyJ permalink
        March 11, 2011 3:38

        Are you protesting RA 5921?

  5. xyxy permalink
    March 11, 2011 3:38

    Did the FDA provide a list of contraceptive devices?

    • WillyJ permalink
      March 11, 2011 3:38

      FDA is supposed to approve contraceptives in line with the Consumer Protection Act. Apparently, condoms it does not restrict otherwise you would not see it sold openly without restrictions. Check out the Watson stores for example and see for yourself.

      However, FDA will disapprove of contraceptives if it has an abortifacient effect. This has a precedent with FDA and DOH banning the Postinor drug in 2001.

      Ayala Alabang was merely enforcing the law.

      • March 11, 2011 3:38

        When the news broke out, no one from barangay Ayala Alabang corrected or DENY the claim that the unconstitutional ordinance seeks to require barangay constituents to secure prescription first before buying condoms and other drugs or “chemical product or device capable of provoking abortion or preventing conception.”

        I find it very hilarious that you’re coming out to speak in behalf of those who drafted and approved the ordinance. However, it appears that you don’t know what you’re talking about.

        The ordinance is unconstitutional not only for being violative of individual rights but due to its vague, ambiguous provisions as well. This kind of regulation can be classified as one good example of a preventive law or edict.

        The ordinance states:

        “No drug or chemical product or device capable of provoking abortion or preventing conception as classified by the Food and Drug Administration shall be delivered or sold to any person without a proper prescription by a duly licensed physician.”

        Xyxy asked the right question. Did the FDA provide a list of contraceptive devices?

        It appears that the answer is in the negative. Your answer, if you understand what you’re talking about, should be “YES, the FDA provided a list of drugs or chemical products or devices capable of provoking abortion or preventing conception.” This one provision makes the ordinance very vague and violative of everybody’s rights to freedom of choice (I’m not talking about Lagman’s freedom of choice, but that freedom that is innate to our nature as human beings.)

        Let’s dissect that very vague and sweeping provision. What are these products, drugs or devices, which require a proper prescription?

        1. Any drug capable of provoking abortion OR preventing conception.

        2. Any chemical product capable of provoking abortion OR preventing conception.

        3. Any device capable of provoking abortion OR preventing conception.

        Here, condom is classified as a device capable of preventing conception.

        The ordinance speaks of drugs, chemical product, or device capable of provoking abortion or PREVENTING CONCEPTION.

        If you really read the bill, you would discover the following provision under Section 2, D(c), which states, that the Barangay-

        denounces the use of condoms as far as they promote and sanction immoral sexual congresses among the unmarried and especially among the young, thereby contradicting the Constitutional injunction that the State “shall promote and protect … the physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual and social well-being” of the youth.”

        Also, the ordinance defines Contraceptive as “any device or drug that is intended or has the purpose or effect of preventing conception as a consequence of sexual intercourse.” The word device here clearly refers to condom, etc.

        It takes an intelligent man to understand the intents and provisions of this ordinance, Willy. You cannot simply quote one provision and then distort its meaning according to your personal, capricious understanding.

  6. WillyJ permalink
    March 11, 2011 3:38

    froivinber,

    Do not get me wrong please. RA 5921 also specifically states “preventing conception”. Section 37. Read it again. If I read you right then you should oppose it too. What I am saying is that you should question RA 5921, and NOT, repeat NOT the ordinance which only seeks to enforce it.

    If the ordinance is vague, then RA 5921 is vague too. If the ordinance echoes RA 5921, then the guiding principle on whether condoms are included in the ordinance should be clarified through RA 5921. Isn’t that ‘intelligent’ enough for you?

    Let me clarify that I am against contraceptives in general, condoms included. However, I would be among those who would be very indignant if condoms indeed would be required prescriptions based on a Barangay ordinance alone. However, the charge appears to be a canard.

    • March 11, 2011 3:38

      OK. I am not in favor of any of these regulations that are all violative of individual rights.

  7. remedios permalink
    March 22, 2011 3:38

    People who are involved with abortion, contraceptives even just the opinion and belief is violating the 10 commandments “Thou shalt not kill” A lady who had same ideas like you who can not even kill an ant, a typical Christian thought she had a good virtuous life and when she was struck by lightning and fighting for her life, she was given a chance to review her life. She complained why she was in the dark area place and said she was a good Christian.After seeing her life like a movie , she realized her involvement to even just an advice or opinion to abortion and contraceptives is a violation.It is a serious crime up there and you are damned. She said that everytime a baby is aborted,hell breaks loose on earth and spirits are eager to hurt and tempt us. See gloriapolo.com for this amazing true death to life experience. Remember we are mortals and here on earth ,our beliefs and experiences we encounter set our final destination after we die. So prepare for that day when we are alone on death bed and pray for unsudden death so you have time to examine your conscience and hopefully choose to humble ourselves to God.Remember, there are demons surounding you at his time and who always welcome humans to their abode as a revenge to God for their fate but God is so good He always give us a chance to say sorry. Even at the last breath His mercy is great…Divine Mercy is bountiful even to the last .Between God and Satan we are the bait—choose God always.The Archangel Michael is always there for peace and protection in case you can’t humble yourself yet and need some kind of a protection He doe not judge our worthiness but hasten to opur safety and peace.Try it and dont delay to invoke his name and eventually you will be seeking Gods kingdom. A lot of people experience his intercession.See his true stories on line,also a non denominical belief. Its a fast relief from sadness,loneliness,fear,anxiety,confusion,abuse,vice,addiction,injustice,helplessness,accidents and for anything. God bless you all

  8. Tito Mrina permalink
    March 24, 2012 3:38

    I want to know how is the provision help to protect the life of unborn child.

Trackbacks

  1. Philippines: Village Ordinance Requires Prescriptions for Condoms · Global Voices
  2. Buddy Cunanan’s Cosmic Display of Ignorance « THE VINCENTON POST
  3. Protecting “Unborn Children” or Sacrificing Actual Human Beings? | 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: