The Brouhaha that is RH Bill : A Draft

The Reproductive Health bill is taking the spotlight again in the Philippines today. Unlike before, the pandemonium that is said to be brought about by the impending passage of the bill is about to cross a critical section as the Catholic Church, lead by its Bishops, threatened for a civil disobedience once this bill becomes a law. Today, the major protagonist (and antagonist) of this stage play have revealed their roles and showed their faces, much more their true colors which ultimately exposes their ultimate motives. There are two powerful parties actively involve in this explosive social issue each grabbing the protagonist role from the other, the church and the well-funded development NGO sectors with the backing of government technocrats.

So what is this Reproductive Health (RH) Bill all about? This is part of the Reproductive Health and Population Development Act of 2008 filed in the House of Representatives by Representative Edcel Lagman. In his statement published by the Philippine Daily Inquire, Lagman stressed that the reproductive health (RH) bill intends to promote information on and access to both natural and modern family planning methods, which are medically safe and legally permissible. It assures an enabling environment where women and couples have the freedom of informed choice on the mode of family planning they want to adopt based on their needs, personal convictions and religious beliefs.

In a separate document published by the Philippine Senate’s Economic Planning Office, it stated that the Reproductive Health and Population Development Bill (House Bill No. 5043/ Senate Bill No. 3122) popularly known as the RH bill, stemmed from the legislature’s attempt to come up with a defined national population policy framework. The national population policy framework will then be designed to cope up and attain the Millennium Development Goals set to be achieved by 2015. In the introduction part of the Senate Report, it emphasized the need for an effective RH Program to address the issues of pregnancy and childbirth wherein 1,500 women die every year due to various complications and the 10,000 babies more who die daily within the first months of life. It’s worthy to note that these deaths occur in developing countries like the Philippines and most of these deaths are avoidable.

Reckless and irresponsible. This was the short, sweet and simple collective response of the sector opposing the passage of the bill. The Pro-Life and Pro-Family stance of the Legislators were contradicted by highlighted Article II, Section 12 of the constitutions which states that “xxx the State shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception xxx.” The very Institution tasked to protect and uphold the laws of the land are making a mockery of the Institution. On top of that, they also presented medical records of high degree of infections to a women’s uterus and pelvic using IUD. They took excerpts of the Mayo Foundation report that says oral contraceptives are associated with an increase risk of breast cancer.

Former senator Francisco Tatad, a staunch detractor of the bill says that the Reproductive Health Bill is being presented as a health bill and an antipoverty bill at the same time. It is neither. It is not what its authors say it is; it is everything they say it is not. It is an ideological attack on human life, the family, and our social and cultural values. He further added that the bill rests on a flawed premise; it is unnecessary, unconstitutional, oppressive of religious belief and destructive of public morals and family values. Its enactment into law will only deepen the already frightening ignorance about the real issues. It should be rejected.

With all the legal, cultural and moral issues surrounding the passage of this bill, the entire country is left in quandary as to who among these two opposing sectors is right. While the debate to or not to pass the bill into a law continues, the daily struggle of ordinary Filipinos to make both ends meet remains. The call to act and voice our personal preference and concerns amidst the biases of religion and political affiliations remains weak. Tried to ask someone I caught up in the street days ago how they feel about the fracas going around for the passage of the bill, they simply told me they don’t know much less they don’t care.

I got four things in mind that may end this impasse and sensibly leading to a better judgment whether we really need the RH bill or not at all.

FIRST. The scenarios above being the glaring reality, arguments of whether the bill should be passed into a law or remain forever in the hallows of the legislative building is immaterial. Approved as a law or not, this can never serve its intended purpose without the basic understanding and appreciation of the people it intends to serve. Our population growth rate will forever remain in full speed if Juan dela Cruz do not understand the very premise from which this bill was created for. Therefore, the first key to winning the battle of good and evil is to distinguish the right from the wrong. This can only be done through proper EDUCATION.

SECOND. Walk the talk. Why do common people find RH bill, its components, coverage and the arguments of those who oppose it a very complicated issue? It’s because their main proponents and those that are actively campaigning against it cannot distinguish themselves from what they stand for and reconcile their affiliations with their sincerity. Case in point, why do I doubt Representative Lagman, a brilliant lawyer from Bicol, even if his intentions now may be rational, suitable, timely and true? It’s because he was never consistent with his other legislative standpoints that requires rationality, suitability, timeliness and truth. Recall how he defended Gloria Macapagal Arroyo in the House of Representatives and you’ll see.

Walking the talk also entails knowing what you are saying. Sex as an issue is not certainly an expertise for the Bishops and the priests. Why dwell on matters you have, should I say, limited knowledge of? Have you tried raising a family too? There are things and proceeding better left in the powers of the state to decide on.

THIRD. The answer is clearly written in our Constitution. Check the Bill of Rights. “A “right” is a moral principle defining and sanctioning a man’s freedom of action in a social context. There is only one fundamental right (all the others are its consequences or corollaries): a man’s right to his own life. Life is a process of self-sustaining and self-generated action; the right to life means the right to engage in self-sustaining and self-generated action—which means: the freedom to take all the actions required by the nature of a rational being for the support, the furtherance, the fulfillment and the enjoyment of his own life. (Such is the meaning of the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.)

“The concept of a “right” pertains only to action—specifically, to freedom of action. It means freedom from physical compulsion, coercion or interference by other men.

“Thus, for every individual, a right is the moral sanction of a positive—of his freedom to act on his own judgment, for his own goals, by his own voluntary, uncoerced choice. As to his neighbors, his rights impose no obligations on them except of a negative kind: to abstain from violating his rights.”

A right is absolute in the sense that you are entitled to such right as a human being and as an individual in a free society. No one has the right to deprive you of your rights, not even the government. But what kind of right is absolute? These are the rights enumerated under Article I (bill of rights) of our 1987 constitution. Article III, Section 1 is the paramount of all rights, to wit: “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.”

FOURTH. Given the framework of the Philippine Constitution and the rights each citizens are entitled too, is there really a need for an RH Bill to dictate and set the standards for Reproductive Health and Population Development? My choice is my right and I am entitled to exercise that right no matter how inverted the Catholic Church would define them in their religious context. A genuine Reproductive Health and Population Development Bill should emanate from the conviction of each Filipino that while our rights are safeguarded in the Constitution, each of us has an equal responsibility in the way we exercise these rights. Our rights are absolute so are our accountability.

The end that is being guaranteed in the Reproductive Health and Population Development Bill will define our individual existence. With our without the bill, we need to view things in a whole new perspective. There is no room for closed-conventional teachings in a world driven by change technology and information. While Catholic teachings may contradict portions of the RH bill, it’s time that the church looks at the new bigger picture and supports the RH bill in good conscience. If Jesus Christ were alive today, He would have amended portions of the Old Catholic teachings himself and introduce rational, logical and sensible philosophies. The way to the Kingdom of Heaven can be reached either by using the old dusty interstate road or take the super highway. It’s our choice and it’s our right.