RH Bill: A Marxist, Politically Correct Policy Vs. Free Speech, Freedom
I posted the following on Facebook:
The RH bill is no doubt a Marxist policy. Many decades ago in Germany, the Frankfurt School, a term informally used to describe Marxist thinkers affiliated with the Frankfurt Institute for Social Research, worked to conceive and popularize new theories and concepts designed to cripple people’s, particularly young people’s, minds. Some of these anti-reason concepts include POLITICAL CORRECTNESS, CRITICAL THEORY, and SEXUAL EDUCATION.
Unknown to many, the RH bill has a very powerful weapon, and this is the reason why the pro-RH camp is winning: POLITICAL CORRECTNESS. Political correctness is that evil idea that the state or society must correct social and historical injustices in matters such as race, class, gender, and sexual orientation. This is why we hear emotional appeal to support the passage of the RH bill because it seeks to help women and poor people. This is why we hear politically correct arguments in support of gender equality and women empowerment. And these are the reason why many people support the RH bill. They think that by supporting the bill, they’re simply trying to fix or correct social or economic injustices in the country. What they don’t know is that economic ills in the Philippines were caused, and aggravated, by the government itself. We cannot legislate poverty and morality. Too bad logic is NOT on the side of the pro-RH bill folks.
Remember that the bill’s proponents in Congress decided to retain two of the most contentious provisions of the anti-population measure. One is the provision that compels, forces employers to deliver the RH services of their workers/employers, while the other is the provision that criminalizes “malicious disinformation”.
With respect to the concept of political correctness and the Marxist principles behind the RH bill, I stated in a previous blog:
Unknown to many, the 1987 Constitution was shaped by the following anti-ideologies that are now delivering the Filipino nation to complete collectivism and dictatorship: political correctness, progressiveness, and egalitarianism. The logical effect of these three enemies of reason and individualism is this dominant culture in this country— the culture of mediocrity.
Political correctness is the very idea that led to the insertion of statist, anti-individualist provisions in the Constitution, such as the multi-party system, the partylist system, the so-called protection of “indigenous cultural communities that legalizes racism,” protection of women, the youth, the minorities, the underprivileged, among others. This social cancer of political correctness is now eating at the core of our society. It exalts the weak, protects the underprivileged, and empowers those who are poor in both body and spirit; while it kills the hero in man and that it sacrifices the men of ability, the productive and the successful.
Progressiveness is an evil idea that is bringing the country toward complete collectivism and dictatorship. It demands not equality of rights and opportunities, but equality of economic outcome or results. This is the very idea that is empowering labor over production. It demands that those who produce be sacrificed in the name of ‘common good’, that those who earn more be compelled by law to give more, and that those who create wealth be treated as mere slaves. Observe that it is the progressive laws and edicts, such the anti-employer labor laws, pro-poor welfare state programs, anti-capitalist legal shackles like the EPIRA law (Electric Power Industry Reform Act of 2001) and other directives that establish monopoly and cronies. It is the progressives who advocated and continue to advocate for a wide array of political, economic, social, and moral reforms that are now destroying our remaining freedom. A very good example of a progressive legislative proposal is the socialist Reproductive Health bill and the proposal of administration presidential candidate Gilbert “Gibo” Teodoro to implement a universal health care system should he be elected president on May 10, 2010.
Egalitarianism, on the other hand, is the belief in the equality of all men. It is the altruists in this country who distorted the meaning of equality. To the altruists, equality refers to metaphysical (reality)- not political- equality. The altruist proponents of this anti-concept (egalitarianism) are out to distort reality in the name of equality. They want everybody to be rich, productive, and endowed with positive physical traits through the employment of government force. The ultimate results of this evil idea are the pro-poor agrarian reform programs, the anti-capitalist labor laws, and the edicts intended to redistribute wealth. In a free society, equality, in a human context, is a political term, which means equality before the law and equality of rights.
The dogged determination of Rep. Edcel Lagman and his pro-RH bill ilk to retain the provision on “malicious disinformation” designed to cripple, destroy free speech in the country clearly exposes the politically correct nature of the measure. If passed, the population control measure would be worse than the defunct Anti-Subversion law implemented during the reign of late dictator Ferdinand Marcos. As I stated in aprevious blog:
For merely engaging in disinformation regarding the intent of this bill, any person may be held liable. What constitutes “malicious disinformation” and why is it punishable by this would-be special law? “Malicious disinformation” is clearly a by-product of political correctness. This proposed crime under the RH bill is akin to politically correct crimes, such as “hate crime”, “racism”, “discrimination”, etc. What is the definition of “malicious disinformation”? This new legal crime under this fascist bill is unconstitutional for being vague, broad and non-objective. “Malicious disinformation” is open to many interpretations that can be abused by the state by trampling upon the right of the people to free speech. Would I be held liable for calling this law (if ever enacted) a fascist law? Would I be held responsible for saying that it seeks to control and regulate the entire business industry, medical profession, and the education sector?
If there’s one great malicious disinformation ever made/asserted throughout the life of the utterly divisive RH bill debate, it’s the assertion that Filipino women are deprived of their rights to RH services. It’s the so dishonest, ignorant a lie or fallacy that overpopulation causes poverty. Also, it’s the lie or myth that RH is a right. RH is not a right; it’s a commodity!
Obviously, that anti-free speech provision, which is utterly non-objective, ambiguous and vague, was designed to curb and criminalize politically incorrect statements, assertions, and speeches against the whims and caprices of the measure’s proponents. In the minds of Lagman and his ilk, their proposed legislation is so important, e.g., because it seeks to uphold alleged ‘women’s rights’ and ‘poor people’s rights’ to RH and similar services, that it needs to be protected against any form of “malicious disinformation”. For how can one criticize, or even engage in ‘malicious disinformation’, if the measure simply aims to deliver the greater good? How can a ‘selfish’ individual criticize a pro-poor, pro-women measure?
Benjamin Franklin once said: “Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” Without a doubt, the RH bill seeks to sacrifice the Filipino people’s remaining liberty for temporary safety or security from ‘poverty’. Indeed, the RH bill serves as a litmus paper exposing the intellectual bankruptcy and arrogance of President Noynoy Aquino, Edcel Lagman, Miriam Defensor-Santiago, and the rest of the statist politicians.