jump to navigation

Sticking It to the RH/Abortion Bill December 3, 2009

Posted by Maddog in HB 5043, Politics and Law, Prolife Issues, Religion and Social Issues.
Tags: , , , ,
1 comment so far

Just when things are looking bleak, the Lord sends some light to guide and inspire us.

The past few days have brought good news for those fighting to defend life. I was certainly happy to find these following gems in the news.

First we have the following piece by Roberto de Ocampo entitled Kill ‘Bill’? (http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view/20091127-238839/Kill-Bill):

… one would think that I should be an obvious supporter of the Reproductive Health (RH) bill. I am not. I have serious misgivings about it.

First, I find it unnecessary. If as the supporters have time and again emphasized, the major shortcoming of our current population management program is the need for more widespread education and information, then I submit that the government presently has the breadth and depth of institutional capability to do this with the voluntary cooperation of the private sector, including the Church. If the observation is that the government has not done this well enough, this can be redressed with a good combination of political will and leadership and a better budget allocation, not a bill. True, the Church will promote only natural family planning methods. So be it. That’s the role and position of the Church. The state’s role is to help expand the public’s knowledge of choices, not limit it.

This leads me to my second serious misgiving, namely, the present draft bill contains punitive provisions that are tantamount to an affront to civil liberties and smack of religious persecution. Just read the section mandating private sector employees and private health practitioners to actively promote artificial birth control methods and distribute devices whether or not their conscience and religious convictions agree with the practice. Combine that with the section imposing penalties of imprisonment or fines or both if they don’t follow or are deemed guilty of “perceived violations” and tell me that the bill does not encroach on basic civil rights. Tell me that the bill does not unfairly force a person into a moral dilemma, a State-induced struggle of conscience. This is not education, it’s coercion. This is not choice, it’s threat.

. . .

Finally, I find it truly disingenuous for anyone to proceed on the premise that the poor are to blame for the nation’s poverty. This seems to be one of the bill’s underlying economic philosophies—i.e., we could be such a richer nation if the poor would do something better than just go forth and multiply. Pardon me, but in the context of our income-distribution challenged society, the poor are often the victims, not the problem. And let’s not forget that it’s the poor, not the wealthy, whose acknowledged sacrifices as overseas workers are propping up this struggling economy. If a major concern of the bill is to help reduce poverty, then I cannot believe that the bill’s proponents and supporters are unaware of the many other major factors that are the root causes of poverty (poor governance, corruption, severely unequal distribution of wealth, low productivity, unattractive investment policies, etc.) and, of course, the many other alternatives that can be brought to bear to address them (giving up pork barrel, reforming land reform, raising tax collection efficiency, curtailing dynastic politics, etc.)

I am not the only one impressed by De Ocampo’s courageous stand. John-D Borra praises De Ocampo in his blog post, It Takes Courage to Choose Life (http://johndborra.blogspot.com/2009/12/it-takes-courage-to-choose-life.html).

(more…)