US study proves Church point vs RH bill – CBCP official

MANILA, Sept. 5, 2011— Pro-reproductive health (RH) bill lawmakers should rethink their position on the measure if only to address maternal deaths in the country, a Catholic Church official said.

Fr. Melvin Castro of the Commission on Family and Life of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines recent study in the US only shows that RH bill is not the answer to maternal mortality.

“Sana e makita ito ng ating leaders sa pamahalaan na sana huwag nang ipagpilitan ang bagong batas na gagastusan pa ng buwis ng mamamayan,” said Castro.

Over the weekend, reports came out saying researchers from the University of Washington in Seattle studying maternal deaths in 181 countries showed that the maternal mortality rate in the Philippines has dropped by 81 percent from 1980 to 2008.

Separately, the 2010 report “Trends in Maternal Mortality: 1990 to 2008” by the World Health Organization, the United Nations Children’s Fund, the UN Population Fund, and the World Bank, placed the Philippines’ maternal mortality ratio or MMR at 94 per 100,000 live births in 2008, which is equivalent to 4.6 deaths a day.

This is way lower than the 2004 report placing maternal deaths in the country during the year 2000 at 4,100, or equal to 11.2 a day.

The improvements come while RH bill, which seeks to promote the use of contraceptives in family planning, is pending in Congress and abortion remains illegal in the country.

The study, Castro said, only shows that the problem can be resolved if only the government dedicates its service in serving women, especially pregnant mothers.

“Kung talagang ang pamahalaan ay seryoso na tulungan ang ating mga kababaihan na maging malusog at mapayapa at secure ang pagbubuntis at panganganak ay magagawa yun e kahit walang batas sapagkat iyan e natural na dapat ginagawa ng pamahalaan,” he said.

“Mapapakita talaga dito sa study na ang kailangan ay hindi panibagong batas kundi ang mahalaga ay ang pamahalaan at pribadong sector ay tutukan ito,” Castro added.

To note, RH bill proponents and supporters have been claiming the need to address maternal deaths in the country as a reason to immediately pass the measure. [CBCPNews]

ATTY. MARWIL LLASOS AND FILIPINOS 4 LIFE CONTINUE DRIVE AGAINST RH BILL

MANILA, August 30, 2011–As news reports on inconsistencies in statistical numbers and in the agenda of the Reproductive Health (RH) bill and its proponents continue to come out, hundreds of parishioners in Paranaque City got the lowdown on the controversial bill through informative talks delivered by members of Filipinos for Life (F4L).

Following a multi-media presentation on pro-life issues, Anthony James Perez, Anna Cosio and Atty. Marwil Llasos tackled different aspects of House Bill 4244 at an afternoon activity organized by Mary, Mother of Good Counsel Parish and attended by some 300 parishioners, most of them students.

Perez, F4L founder, discussed the reasons for the group’s opposition to the bill, explaining why the legislative measure was not the solution to the country’s problems.

Citing incontestable statistics, Perez debunked the overpopulation myth on which population control advocates have based their claims.

Nurse instructor Cosio tackled the medical and health-related issues surrounding the bill. Armed with science-based research and findings, she proved that human life starts at fertilization–or the meeting of the egg and sperm cells.

As part of the RH bill is the taxpayer-funded procurement and distribution of artificial contraceptives, Cosio also went into a discussion of the harmful–and sometimes fatal–effects of birth control drugs and devices on women.

Tackling the moral, constitutional and legal aspects was Llasos, who declared that the bill was anti-God, anti-human and anti-Filipino. Included in the lawyer’s presentation were explanations as to the constitutional infirmities of portions of the bill.

As the talks concluded, a woman among the participants brought up the situation of an unmarried friend who had considered getting rid of her unborn baby, given that the child’s father refused to acknowledge his responsibility to the mother and child.

Llasos’ advice to the woman was to tell her friend to inform her parents about the situation. Abortion is not an option, he added, and there are government, private and religious institutions that can help women in such situations.

The lawyer also offered F4L’s help in facilitating adoption placement for the baby.

Meanwhile, members of the Speakers’ Bureau of the Vicariate of Real Infanta and General Nakar, Prelature of Infanta, Quezon province boosted their understanding of the issues pertaining to the culture of life through a recent seminar about the RH bill.

As part of the family and life ministry’s series of trainors’ training seminars, Buhay Partylist pro-life advocacy staff Jose Descallar delivered a day-long talk on issues pertaining to the legislative measure to 45 participants–including school principals, teachers and city councilors–upon the invitation of the prelature’s Vicar-General Fr. Mario Establecida.

According to Descallar, the open forum was quite interesting due to questions about the “fine-tuned” version of the bill, supposedly an initiative of Malacanang.

“Hindi pa din okey sa inyo ‘yung amendments na ginagawa dun sabill?” queried one of the participants.

Descallar explained that such amendments changed nothing because “it’s the bill’s framework that’s the problem. Even if you amend it and all that’s left are four sections–declaration of policy, guiding principles, appropriations, and the penal provisions–hindi pa din okey ‘yan. It is still within the same framework.”

H.B. 4244, authored by Albay Representative Edcel Lagman, continues to face a growing opposition due to its mandate of taxpayer-funded procurement and distribution of a “full range” of birth control drugs and devices including abortifacients, six-year sex education program from Grade 5 to 4th year high school in all schools as well as among out-of-school youth, provision of birth control drugs, devices and services by employers to their employees, and punitive measures for those who speak out against the bill. (CBCP for Life)

Multiple studies show declining number of maternal deaths; ‘11 a day’ an outdated statistic

MANILA, August 30, 2011–Indeed, maternal deaths are a problem requiring a real solution. But is it true that 11 women die each day due to childbirth? Based on hard statistics from the Philippine government, international agencies, and experts abroad, the answer is no.

In fact, data from the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB) show that the real figure ranges from just 4.8 to 8.3 based on 2008 figures, the latest available. That year, the maternal mortality ratio was estimated at 99-169 per 100,000 live births.

A total of 1,784,316 live births were recorded in the country in 2008.

The NSCB defines maternal mortality ratio or MMR as the “ratio between the number of women who died (for reasons of pregnancy, childbirth and puerperium) to the number of reported live births in a given year, expressed as the number of maternal deaths per 100,000 live births.”

The period 1990 to 2010 showed a marked decline in maternal mortality, government data showed. MMR declined by 21% from 121 in 1990, to just 95 in 2010, even in the absence of a “reproductive health” (RH) law.

What other studies show

For those who prefer not to rely solely on government statistics, two separate studies released in 2010 provide even lower estimates of MMR for the Philippines.

“Trends in Maternal Mortality: 1990 to 2008,” with estimates developed by the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), and the World Bank, estimated the Philippines’ MMR at 94 per 100,000 live births in 2008, equivalent to 4.6 a day.

The same report estimated maternal deaths at 2,100 in 2008, and based on this figure, there were 5.75 deaths a day.

The Philippines is in fact “making progress” in reducing maternal mortality, with the estimated MMR plunging by 48% – nearly half – from 1990 to 2008, the report by five international agencies showed.

The Philippines also did a better job of reducing maternal deaths – in terms of the percentage drop in MMR – than Russia, Malaysia, Hungary, Israel, and even Germany, the report indicated.

Maternal death is defined by the WHO as the “death of a woman while pregnant or within 42 days of termination of pregnancy, irrespective of the duration and site of the pregnancy, from any cause related to or aggravated by the pregnancy or its management but not from accidental or incidental causes.”

Meanwhile the study “Maternal mortality for 181 countries, 1980–2008: a systematic analysis of progress towards Millennium Development Goal 5,” published in the respected journal The Lancet and funded by Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, placed the Philippines’ maternal mortality ratio at just 84 per 100,000 live births.

This is equivalent to 4.1 deaths per day – a far cry from the 11 a day that RH lobbyists are using in their bid to push for the controversial and divisive RH bill.

The Lancet article was written by Margaret Hogan, Kyle Foreman, Mohsen Naghavi, Stephanie Ahn, Mengru Wang, Susanna Makela, Alan Lopez, Rafael Lozano, and Christopher J. L. Murray. Most of the researchers came from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation of the University of Washington in Seattle.

Based on their data, the Philippines, even without an RH law, reduced its MMR by 81% between 1980 and 2008, and 52% between 1990 and 2008.

“Our analysis of all available data for maternal mortality from 1980 to 2008 for 181 countries has shown a substantial decline in maternal death,” the researchers concluded.

“Compared with previous assessments of maternal mortality, we have narrowed the uncertainty around global and national estimates of the MMR. This improved accuracy is a result of an extensive database and the use of analytical methods with increased explanatory power and improved out-of-sample predictive validity,” they added.

The source of ‘11 maternal deaths a day’

Now, where did the “11 a day” figure come from? It is from the outdated report “Maternal Mortality in 2000: Estimates developed by WHO, UNICEF and UNFPA.”

It estimated the Philippines’ MMR at 200 in the year 2000, equivalent to 9.8 a day. It placed the number of maternal deaths that year at 4,100, or 11.2 a day.

The report, however, is seven years old, published way back in 2004.

The outdated report carried an important caveat: “The 2000 estimates cannot be used to analyze trends because of the wide margins of uncertainty associated with the estimates.”

“The margins of uncertainty associated with the estimated MMRs are very large, and the estimates should not, therefore, be used to monitor trends in the short term. In addition, cross country comparisons should be treated with considerable circumspection because different strategies have been used to derive the estimates for different countries, making it difficult to draw comparisons,” the 2004 report said.

The same international agencies, in their 2010 report, pointed out that the latest (2008) estimates are more reliable.

“[I]t should be noted that the data and methods have improved over time. The 2008 estimates should not be compared with those from the previous exercises to assess changes in time. Trends in maternal mortality calculated using the same improved methodology and presented for years 1990, 1995, 2000, 2005, and 2008 in this report show the changes over time.” (Dominic Francisco)

Pro-life group hits Akbayan for malicious tirade vs. Sotto

MANILA, August 24, 2011–A pro-life organization on Wednesday criticized a partylist group for waging a vicious social networking demolition job on Sen. Vicente “Tito” Sotto III, saying its claims were “narrow-minded” and “out of context.”

In a statement on the group’s website, Filipinos For Life (F4L)said, “Sotto was merely questioning the basis of the oft-repeated statistic of 11 maternal deaths a day, in the context of a legislative debate on a bill that seeks to establish a wide-ranging national policy.”

“It is therefore fair to examine the basis of this bill. There is nothing to apologize for,” the F4L statement said.

“In the first place, there was no derogatory statement on women, and the sarcasm, if at all, is directed at pro-RH lobby groups, some of them pro-abortion, that routinely peddle this statistic. The supposed offense is in the creative, nay, malicious imagination of Akbayan’s propagandists,” the group said.

It also criticized former Akbayan Rep. Risa Hontiveros-Baraquel for maligning Sotto.

“May we remind former Rep. Risa Hontiveros-Baraquel to elevate the level of the debate on RH. Her repeated references in social networks to an incident decades ago involving a dead movie starlet are uncalled for and below the belt,” it said.

F4L said that based on its own estimates, the correct figure is 4.8 maternal deaths a day, based on 2008 data from the National Statistics Office and the National Statistical Coordination Board.

“This assumes a maternal mortality ratio (MMR) of 99 per 100,000 live births and 1.784 million live births in 2008. Assuming a high MMR of 169 per 100,000 live births, the figure is 8.3,” the group said.

F4L clarified that it does not downplay the problem of maternal deaths, stating that “it is a problem that needs concrete solutions, like more birthing centers and midwives. But we should guard against the excessive emotional use of the outdated statistic to influence Philippine government policy.”

The group chided Akbayan for covering up the dangerous side effects of contraceptives.

“If Akbayan is really pro-women, it should tell its women constituents that contraceptive pills that would be distributed for free under the RH bill are considered by a WHO agency as a Level 1 carcinogen. Pills, according to reputable literature produced by entities such as the US National Cancer Institute and the Mayo Clinic increase the risk of breast and other cancers.”

“If Akbayan really is pro-women, it should tell mothers that the pills it wants them to ingest daily could expel a fertilized ovum, which is already a human being. It should inform women that pills don’t always prevent ovulation,” it continued. “In case the pills do not prevent ovulation and fertilization occurs, the pills have been proven to create an environment that is hostile to the beginning of life. Akbayan’s lawmakers should be reminded of what the Constitution says about the protection of the unborn.” (CBCP for Life)

10 laws have the same provisions as RH bill - Senator Vicente Sotto

10 laws have the same provisions as RH bill - Sotto

By Marvin Sy (The Philippine Star) Updated August 30, 2011 12:00 AM

MANILA, Philippines - In going all out against the proposed Reproductive Health (RH) bill, Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III showed that there were at least 10 laws and executive issuances that already contained all the objectives envisioned by the measure.

For two straight days, Sotto took on the sponsors of the RH bill in the Senate, Pia Cayetano and Miriam Defensor Santiago, both lawyers and strong advocates of women’s rights and welfare.

While the initial arguments centered on the issue of contraceptives and their supposed use as abortifacients, which the sponsors claimed was practically an issue of religious beliefs, Sotto’s interpellation focused on his claim that the bill merely repeats provisions already found in existing laws.

Sotto has been arguing that the Department of Health (DOH) is already implementing various programs on reproductive health and has the funding necessary to fulfill this mandate, so coming up with yet another law to do the same thing would be unnecessary.

He took up the six objectives of the RH bill and showed that there were several laws that were enacted in the past to fulfill them.

The RH bill has the following objectives: to save the lives of mothers and the unborn; provide Filipinos with information on reproductive health so they can make informed and intelligent decisions; provide access to health care facilities and skilled health professionals before, during and after delivery; address HIV and other sexually-transmitted diseases; provide access to different family planning methods; and institutionalize age and development appropriate reproductive health education.

According to Sotto, there are laws that go back to the Marcos administration and some authored by the current sponsors that are meant to address all those objectives of the RH bill.

The most prominent of these laws is Republic Act No. 9710 or the Magna Carta of Women, which Sotto noted already addresses all six objectives of the RH bill.

He also cited R.A. 8504 or the Philippine AIDS Prevention and Control Act of 1998, R.A. 9262 or the Anti-Violence Against Women and Children Act, R.A. 7875 or the National Health Insurance Act of 1995 and R.A. 9501 or the Cheaper Medicines Act as containing various provisions related to the objectives of the RH bill.

Presidential Decrees 603 or the Child and Youth Welfare Code and 965 which requires applicants for marriage licenses to receive instructions on family planning and responsible parenthood were laws that have been around since the Marcos administration.

Administrative Order 2008-0029 of the DOH provides the strategy to rapidly reduce maternal and neonatal mortality and remains in place to this day.

The current administration has continued its support for these objectives by approving the appropriations in the national budget and through the issuance of executive orders to ensure these are achieved.

Sotto noted that the 2011 General Appropriations Act contains P153.978 million for health promotion, another P232.919 million for health human resource development and P7.116 billion for the health facilities enhancement program.

This is on top of the conditional cash transfer program of the Department of Social Welfare and Development which requires its recipients to get prenatal care, assisted childbirth by skilled or professionals, attendance in family planning sessions and regular preventive health check ups and vaccines for children zero to five years of age.

President Aquino, who has thrown in his support behind the RH bill, has also issued Administrative Orders 2010-0010 or the revised policy on micronutrient supplementation to support achievement of 2015 Millennium Development Goal targets to reduce under-five and maternal deaths and address micronutrient needs of other population groups; and 2010-0036 also known as the Aquino health agenda, achieving universal health care for all Filipinos.

Sotto added that there are other programs that exist for the purpose of reproductive health such as the women’s health and safe motherhood project and the family planning program of the DOH.

He said that even the Local Government Code contains a provision for local government units to provide their own basic services and facilities, including primary health care and maternal and child care.

The Labor Code provides incentives for family planning while R.A. 7883 or the Barangay Health Workers Benefits and Incentives Act of 1995 provides health education, training of barangay health workers, community building and organizing.

Sotto admitted that there is much to be desired as far as the enhancement of health facilities are concerned but the government is getting there already.

“The DOH is the best argument against RH bill because they are practically doing everything that the RH bill wants to do. This is already in place, no debates, no problems, no additional funding needed because it’s all there,” Sotto said.

“There is no need for the RH bill. Health Secretary (Enrique) Ona said it clearly, with or without the bill, they are doing it (reproductive health programs),” he added.

Santiago argued that there is no law prohibiting the repeat of what an existing law already states.

“There is no prohibition against redundant provisions in different bills. Plus, it could be possible that one bill is general in nature while the RH bill is specific in nature, and the rule of statutory construction is when one bill is general in nature and another is specific in nature, the courts will uphold the law that is specific in nature,” Santiago said.

“So, in effect, even if there were similar or identical provisions, that is simply an insurance that when the bill is brought to court, the Supreme Court will be persuaded by the position because the bills succeeding each other are repetitions of each other, meaning to say the lawmakers have very strong opinions about a certain provisions in the bill,” she added.

CBCP sec-gen puzzled by P-noy’s sudden RH prioritization, enjoins faithful to act

CBCP sec-gen puzzled by P-noy’s sudden RH prioritization, enjoins faithful to act

MANILA, August 18, 2011–After the president’s noted silence on the Reproductive Health (RH) bill during the July 25 State of the Nation Address (SONA), and the measure’s absence from this year’s first Legislative-Executive Development Advisory Council (LEDAC) meeting agenda, President Benigno S. Aquino III’s directive to include the bill among 13 priority measures has elicited more questions than assertions from another Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) official.

When asked to comment on the president’s recent endorsement of the RH bill, CBCP Secretary-General Msgr. Juanito Figura replied with questions instead.

“No mention of the bill was made in his SONA–was it or was it not a priority when he was preparing his SONA? Why is it a priority now all of a sudden?” he asked, noting that it had been over three weeks since the SONA and the president remained quiet about the matter until yesterday’s LEDAC meeting.

“I am a bit worried about possible reactions which may range from confusion, dismay, mistrust,” Figura added.

The secretary-general said he is praying very hard as he anticipates “more serious discussions and study on this ‘fine-tuned’ version of the bill. Does it still carry the characteristic contraceptive pro-abortion agenda? Will it still advance a new rendering of ‘conscience,’ ‘freedom,’ ‘rights,’ ‘responsible parenthood’ and ‘family’?”

“Will it still use a lot of taxpayers’ money? And very importantly, has the penalty clause on violations been truly omitted?” Figura continued.

Citing Cebu Archbishop Jose Palma’s statements following the recent development, the secretary-general said that he “sympathizes with Archbishop Palma’s dismay over the prioritization that P-noy has given to the RH bill, now being called RP bill.”

The CBCP official ended by sounding off a call to the lay people to stand up to protect and preserve the culture of life.

“I enjoin the lay people especially the youth to initiate actions, to reach out to everyone who believes in the sanctity of human life and family, to use your skills. We are in coordination with a number of lay groups that are working along this line and would be willing to help those who would like to start getting involved,” Figura said. (Diana Uichanco)

Franz Lugena vs Darl Chinchilla

Franz Lugena vs Darl Chinchilla

[The following is the full text of one of my earlier debates on RH Bill posted in the Harapan Page in Face Book. I tried to find the link but it seems like the page no longer exists. Fortunately, I managed to save the text. Enjoy!!]

Adrian Alcaraz

‎"Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's and unto God the things which be God's." (Luke 20:25)

7:48 PM ng Huwebes · Gustuhin

Darl Chinchilla

Then God will be rendered nothing :)

11:36 PM ng Huwebes · Gustuhin

Franz Luigi Lugena

A growing population is a king’s glory; a dwindling nation is his doom. [Proverbs14:28]

11:36 PM ng Huwebes · Gustuhin

Darl Chinchilla

Yes it would be a king's doom, but luckily we have grown past the age of kings, where politics was nil, and might was right.

Kahapon sa ganap na 12:07 AM · Gustuhin

Franz Luigi Lugena

Kings, presidents, etc. these are just titles of rulers. Noon, hari. Ngayon, presidente. The point is, a growing population gives glory. While a dwindling nation causes doom.

Kahapon sa ganap na 12:21 AM · Gustuhin

Darl Chinchilla

Not when resources are too scarce to support the population. The key to a successful kingdom is balance, as I have said before, humans are programmable.

Kahapon sa ganap na 12:38 AM · Gustuhin

Franz Luigi Lugena

I don't buy the idea that the resources are scarce. We have enough for the need of everyone. The problem is in distribution of resources and the greed of those in power. Gandhi said it best: "There is enough for everyone's need but not for everyone's greed." If a person gets far more than he needs, he is in effect robbing his neighbors. The solution is to remove greed thru values formation and fix the unjust distribution of resources thru implementation of just economic policies. Even if you managed to reduce our current population of 90million by half, there is no guarantee that there will be no poverty. As long as greedy people are in power and unfair economic policies are in effect, there will always be poor people in our country.

Kahapon sa ganap na 1:06 AM · Gustuhin · 2 katao

Darl Chinchilla

Tut tut, you are thinking within your lifetime. Do you seriously think that the Philippines would have enough resources to last for, say, 300 years. The fact is, that 90 million of yours isn't a static number, without family planning, condoms and such it'd be a burden that increases in weight and rate expansion with each generation.If you don't trust the government then at least trust the scientists who come up with these statistics.

Kahapon sa ganap na 1:26 AM · Gustuhin

Darl Chinchilla

I'll visualize it for you, if for example you where carrying a basin that can carry a finite volume of sand, and if for example I one day decided that I'd drop a grain of sand into the basin, the look of grief on your face brought so much pleasure to me that I then decided that for every grain of sand in the basin I'd drop two once a year for an infinite amount of years. But, if so ever that you let go of the basin or if the basin fills and the sand spills on to the floor, I'll kill you then and there.

Now substitute you for the Philippines, the sand for the human population, the basin for the volume of inhabitable land, and your all set.

Kahapon sa ganap na 1:38 AM · Gustuhin

Franz Luigi Lugena

Teaching people not to become greedy and implementing just economic policies are sustainable solutions to our growing problems. When I say sustainable, they are not just applicable for today. They can be done for years to come. Actually, they will be "must" in the future. So you are clearly mistaken accusing me of thinking only about this lifetime. Just like what I said earlier, even if you managed to cut down our population of 90million by half, there is no guarantee that there will be no poverty. As long as you turn a blind eye to ongoing unfair economic policies and we keep electing corrupt leaders, there will always be poor people in the philippines. Also, 90million filipinos are not a burden if and only if, instead of minding their own betterment alone, they start sharing and caring with one another. That's the values formation that I'm talking about that this country badly needs if it wants to move forward. What can condoms, pills, and IUD do to poor people? Can it cure hunger? Man can live without sex but not without food. The problem is economic. So the solution should be economic as well. But there is no economic development without values transformation first. That's why I proposed the two solutions earlier.

Kahapon sa ganap na 1:59 AM · Gustuhin · 1 tao

Franz Luigi Lugena

Let me elucidate my point further. if we managed to transform the values of the people and we implement just economic policies [policies provide opportunities for all while striking critical balance between socio economic development and environmental protection], Philippines will still have resources to support its population for the next 300 years and further. There seems to be scarcity issues right now because of rampant greed of many people in power and ongoing unjust economic policies that enrich the few at a greater environmental cost. Remove this two and you have no problem. Condoms, pills, and IUD are not the solutions.

Kahapon sa ganap na 2:13 AM · Gustuhin

Franz Luigi Lugena

The problem with your example is that population is vulnerable to other external factors like diseases, calamities, and culture as compared to the grains of sand that are assumed to continue flowing to the basin eternally undisturbed. Since population is vulnerable to other factors, there can be periods of time wherein in population will not grow as one expects it to be. You are assuming that the growth rate will be constant forever. That is wrong. Growth rate varies from year to year, decade to decade, etc. Your example is flawed.

Kahapon sa ganap na 2:28 AM · Gustuhin

Darl Chinchilla

Man cannot live without sex, it's as natural and instinctive as taking a dump. And as I have said in a post before, corruption is an essential part in a democracy, that is it's Achilles' heel as well as it's greatest asset. I might have said in an earlier post that humans are programmable but they're not that programmable. Teaching humans to not be greedy and to override their programming to 'vote for whoever their family and friends are voting' and 'vote for who ever looks the best in their infomercials' would take too much effort and would span a generation or two(so you may be right when you said that your not just thinking withing your lifetime). Besides, greed is an essential part of success. I mean Bill Gates is greedy, and so are most of th most influential people of this time. And lastly,please define "economic" we might have differing definitions.

Kahapon sa ganap na 2:43 AM · Gustuhin

Darl Chinchilla

And so, to summarize my incredibly long post: yours is just a pipe dream. Just economic policies would be difficult to implement because we have differing definitions of what is just, all human's do, unless it's a borrowed ideal of course. I'll end this with a quote that I'll hope you'll understand the meaning of. Who will watch the watchmen?(I know it doesn't refer directly to what we're talking about but just apply it in a different manner, k?)

Kahapon sa ganap na 2:49 AM · Gustuhin

Franz Luigi Lugena

Of course not. Man can live without sex, don’t you know that? If you can't live without sex, well, not all men are like you. Comparing sex with taking a dump is downright pathetic. Man will die if he fails to defecate for 1 month, but I assure you that taking out sex from your lifestyle for a month will not kill you. Also, I don't buy the idea that corruption is part of democracy. Corruption is illegal in a democratic country. If you doubt this, I dare you to embezzle public funds in the open, let’s see if the government will give you honors instead. If for you, corruption is a norm, then you have a problem: you are part of the existing problem. So why blame the unborn for the problems of which you are a part of?

Also, what is wrong in teaching people not to become greedy? At least it is better than teaching people to tolerate and participate in corrupt practices and similar acts. If it takes a lifetime teaching people not to become greedy and on how to elect right leaders, so what? The benefits of these are enormous and unprecedented so all trouble of doing it will surely be worth it. Doing this is the least that we can do in making this world a better place to live in for the next generation.

Actually, it is you who is the one thinking only within your lifetime. You are asking for instant solutions to deeply-seated and complex problems that even your IUDs, condoms and pills can’t even give. You ignored the fact that the problems we have right now didn’t occur overnight. They are products of years and generations of indifference and selfishness. We are just reaping what we sown. Understandably, the process of satisfaction or reparation requires the same amount of time. You have not proven that values transformation and implementing just economic policies are not solutions to our problems. The bible however, is very clear:

“ANG MATUWID NA PAMUMUHAY NG MGA MAMAMAYAN AY MAGPAPADAKILA NG KANILANG BAYAN NGUNIT ANG PAMUMUHAY NA MAKASALANAN, SA BAYAN AY MAGDUDULOT NG KAHIHIYAN”. [Kawikaan 14:34]

It’s righteousness that will propel our country to progress. Not greediness which is a sin.

Regarding your statement that greed is an essential part of success, FYI, not all successful people are greedy. Your fallacious statement is an insult to every successful people. Working for gain is not greediness, particularly if you do it to contribute not only for your own welfare but also to the society as a whole. The “success” you are referring is individualistic in nature, not holistic in the context of a community or nation. So your assumption is flawed. Actually, that is one of the many reasons why this country of ours is poor. We have handful of rich men who are so greedy to share their bounty to the poor & since greed knows no boundaries, these greedy men continue to enrich themselves by abusing the national patrimony while leaving the rest of the Filipinos poor and suffering from negative externalities of their businesses.

The point is, greedy people will not make a prosperous nation because they will be busy biting and consuming each other. The bible warns that such degree of greed results to annihilation:

Nguni't kung kayo-kayo rin ang nangagkakagatan at nangagsasakmalan, magsipagingat kayo na baka kayo'y mangaglipulan sa isa't isa. [Gal5:15]

You have asked me to define the term “economic” and yet fail to show your card? I will not succumb to your requirement because I think it is just a desperate effort to divert the issue. Prove to me first that values transformation and implementing just economic policies are not solutions to our problems right now but condom, IUD, and pills.

Kahapon sa ganap na 9:40 PM · Gustuhin

Franz Luigi Lugena

Values transformation and implementing just economic policies are not pipe dreams. To say so will mean that man is inherently corrupt, greedy, irredeemable, and hopeless. If man is irredeemable and hopeless, why all the trouble to pass RH Bill? Why offer RH Bill as a solution? It will be useless anyway since man is already doomed from the start. It will not make any difference.

As to your opinion, we don’t have to spend all our time debating on what is the right and proper meaning of the term JUST in order to implement just economic policies. So long as the policy provides opportunity to those who are willing to work, providing incentives commensurate to the amount and quality of effort done, without jeopardizing the integrity of local environment to continually sustain the needs of the society and without undermining the inherent rights of the people, it is just. Other countries were able to implement just economic policies, why can’t we?

Kahapon sa ganap na 10:00 PM · Gustuhin

John Paul Paquibot

DOOM it... let it DOOM itself..

Kahapon sa ganap na 11:11 PM · Gustuhin

Franz Luigi Lugena RH Bill should be doomed.

10 oras na ang nakalipas · Gustuhin

The University of Asia and the Pacific (UA&P) Affirms Pro-Life Stand

The University of Asia and the Pacific (UA&P) Affirms Pro-Life Stand

MANILA, August 2, 2011–The University of Asia and the Pacific (UA&P) management and student council have released separate statements opposing bills that “trample on the right to conscientious objection” and “promote the use of abortifacients” and the “anti-life lifestyle.”

In a recent press briefing, UA&P President Jose Maria Mariano read the university’s statement, “prompted by the current debate on the reproductive health [RH] bills.”

“We…strongly reject any attempt at legislation that promotes the use of abortifacients, including those disguised as [contraceptives] that in fact kill the newly conceived human person by preventing its being implanted in the womb,” Mariano read.

A non-sectarian university that upholds Catholic social teachings, UA&P asserted that “the right to life must be respected and protected from conception to natural death.”

The school adheres to the “scientific conclusion” that life begins at fertilization, “the union of male and female reproductive cells.”

Students ‘stand up for life’

Supporting management were more than a thousand UA&P students (about 63 percent of the total student population) who signed a different statement written by the university’s College of Arts and Sciences Student Executive Board.

Entitled “Stand Up for Life,” the statement “[upholds] that conception is fertilization,” and that “the fertilized ovum is a whole, separate, unique, living, human being.”

The students’ statement, read by political economy student Ramon Cabrera, also touches on the bill’s provision on sex education among children.

“We believe that a child’s education in human sexuality is primarily the right and duty of the parents who are by nature the first educators of their children,” Cabrera stated.

“We believe that relegating sex education to and mandating it in the classroom threaten the family by undermining this natural right of parents.”

During the open forum, Cabrera questioned the assumption that the State is the best agent of correct sex education, when it is not even “competent” in teaching basic subjects such as math and English in public schools.

UA&P professor Antonio Torralba added that what UA&P advocates is a “character-based sexuality education,” which promotes a chaste lifestyle among the youth.

Understanding sexuality, freedom of conscience

The UA&P statement also asserts that conjugal love is shown through “the honorable use of [the couple’s] sexual faculties in an exclusive and lasting relationship that is open to life.”

According to the statement, responsible parenthood should not mean “negating parenthood by fostering contraceptive practices, or negating responsibility by fostering sexual activity without self-mastery and discipline.”

On the other hand, the students’ statement says: “We…believe that a utilitarian and impersonal education in human sexuality…which merely considers the biological aspects of sex and is unmindful of the whole person, creates a mindset that trivializes the dignity of sex and the human being.”

The UA&P statement also says that “the State should protect the freedom of consciences and may not make legal pressure bear on practices contrary to the explicit religious or moral convictions of any of its citizens.”

As an academic institution, UA&P affirmed its “freedom to adhere to [its] corporate credo, and [its]moral and religious values, as long as they do not prejudice the authentic common good.”

UA&P referred to House Bill 4244’s provision that penalizes business firms which refuse to provide birth control supplies and services to their employees.

HB 4244 is the RH bill pending in the Lower House of Congress

Population and poverty
At a recent press briefing, Harvard-trained economist and UA&P co-founder Dr. Bernardo M. Villegas insisted that “population growth does not lead to poverty” as some pundits would say. Author of Positive Dimensions of Population Growth, Villegas said he had studied population and economics in the past 50 years, and his conclusions on the subject remain consistent.

Asked for comment regarding studies that say a growing population hinders progress, he said such research works are the “minority…with samples that are too few” and with a research period that is “so short.”

Meanwhile, the UA&P statement says that “it is by sound economic policy, especially investments in rural infrastructure and quality education for all, coupled with good governance, including morality and honesty in the private lives of government officials, that Government contributes to poverty alleviation.”

Abortion and contraception

Also part of the panel at the briefing, UA&P legal counsel and pro-life advocate Atty. Jo Aurea Imbong stressed that “as people go to contraception, there will be a rise–not a fall–in abortion.”

Villegas supported Imbong’s claim saying that “In the US, there are contraceptives available in vending machines, and yet 2 million babies are being aborted every year.” (Daryl Zamora)

Source: http://thesplendorofthechurch.blogspot.com/

Teodoro L. Locsin, Jr.: Damn the bishops for taking it lying down

15-Jul-11, 10:58 AM | Teodoro L. Locsin, Jr

The issue of the bishops’ "Pajeros" was from the start an obvious demolition job directed at the Catholic Church so as to weaken its resistance to the birth control bill which is immorally premised on the hope and proposition that only the select few (who can afford it) deserve to be born into the next generation.

The bill has only the slimmest relevance to reproductive health and women’s empowerment. Nobel laureate Amartya Sen proved that educating women better empowers them to say “no” to more children than their mates can pay to maintain.

The real and only purpose of the misleadingly labeled “reproductive health bill” is to enforce artificial birth control on a rampantly randy, colored race through the free distribution of expensive contraceptives (not covered by the Cheaper Medicine Act) to be sold by the giant pharmaceutical firms that are bankrolling the RH Bill. There is no birth control program anywhere in the white world.

To start with, the amount involved in the bishops’ Pajero scandal was picayune: P6 million. Moreover, the vehicles purchased by the bishops with PCSO money were not Pajeros after all but second- even third-hand utility vehicles for social work. None of the vehicles could be described—as the PCSO and government spokesmen repeatedly lied—as luxury or even remotely mid-range.

The government’s aim in exposing the donations was to make the bishops look like crooks, the Catholic Church like a den of thieves, and President Aquino like Jesus driving the moneychangers from the Temple.

Not surprisingly, the main attack made by administration and its senatorial allies against the Catholic Church involved the separation of church and state.

The Church has argued that that principle prevents the state from imposing a birth control program that violates a genuine Catholic conscience, which is shaped not by superficial opinion fed by a superficial press but by Catholic instruction. Some may not believe this but Catholics must. It is the same with the Iglesia ni Cristo which none dare defame because its bishops are made of sterner stuff than their Catholic counterparts.

The Aquino administration has argued that the same principle forbids the Catholic Church from asserting politically its most cherished belief—in the priceless sanctity of life—against the secular conviction that life is only for those who can afford it and not for those who cannot.

The Aquino administration accused the Catholic Church of violating the separation of church and state principle, as much by accepting the PCSO’s money to purchase utility vehicles for social work, as by politically asserting its most cherished belief in the priceless sanctity of human life against the Aquino administration’s opposed view that life is only as good as its economic contribution and drops in value when supply outstrips demand. The Aquino administration believes that religious belief can only find private expression and never political action—a view that would have denied Cory Aquino the faith-based political power to liberate her people.

In this battle of beliefs (neither one nor the other has hard science to back it) between an old religion and a new secular faith, the government has fired lies, insults and paid crowds, led by a harlot and a Chinese clown in a cardboard miter with a papier mache Pajero around his waist. The government-sponsored Bantay Bishops rallied around the Calvary of the Senate where it was hoped that the bishops, after the scourging at the pillar of the press, would be crucified.

The bishops’ accusers and their senatorial backers were crucified instead by Miriam Defensor Santiago, defensor fidei. She gave a piece of her mind to those who don’t have any.

With machinegun staccato of alliterative and penetrating invectives, Miriam mowed down the moral pretensions of her senate colleagues who each take home, no questions asked, P200 million a year just in salaries and allowances paid only nominally to non-existent staff, plus hundreds of millions in kickbacks from billions in pork barrel. Miriam accused the accuser, the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes of smothering the bishops in ordure to cover up its odious practices like privately placing billions in PCSO funds in private banks for a margin of the interest.

Miriam did what the pathetic bishops had failed to do for themselves, for their Church, and for her dismayed children. She defamed but with utter accuracy the defamers of the Catholic religion and exposed them as what the Church was too afraid to call them: enemies of the Catholic faith. She left the Commission on Audit in shambles for wasting the time of the Senate on constitutional issues it had no authority to raise. The COA may question whether appropriated sums were spent or stolen but not whether, after being properly accounted for, it was constitutionally dispensed as well. New minted COA commissioner Heidi Mendoza looks more fetching in office than she did out of it. Power may be an aphrodisiac, as Henry Kissinger said, but public office will definitely give you a makeover.

But the Aquino administration, though its credibility is now shattered, did succeed in arousing Catholic contempt for the Catholic Church, especially among its stoutest defenders.

All right-thinking and right-feeling Catholics now despise the Church for allowing our religion to be insulted, traduced, shamed and dragged in the mud with no more resistance than a Jew in a ghetto in a pogrom. Christ counseled humility but not shame; forgiveness but not submission.

The history of the Catholic Church is one of proud assertion and militancy born of the conviction of its infallibility. The timidity of the Filipino Catholic Church strongly suggests that its bishops no longer believe in the truth of the Church or in its imperishability despite Christ’s promise that he had built her on unyielding rock and not on the rolling pebbles of public opinion.

The Church survived the Roman Empire, converted its conquerors, captured Jerusalem, beat back Islam from the Christian heartland, purged Spain of impurity, stopped the Reformation from spilling out of its Germanic birthplace, and beat the pagans wherever she took the faith—in New England or in New Guinea. If Catholic charities, Catholic schools and Catholic hospitals closed down, Alvin Capino has said, the US would collapse in crisis in all three dimensions.

Yet before alcoholics who can neither hold their drink nor keep from sliding from the sofa to the floor of the Peninsula lobby, it has succumbed as though before Caesars with whom it would be absurd to compare them. Nero had musical talent; it takes none to raise a bottle to your lips or drive a new car into a ditch.

Shame then on the Catholic Church, which abjectly apologized to crooks, as Miriam showed them to be. Rather than apologize, it should have excommunicated its detractors for traducing the Church. Had not one of its brightest lights, the Jesuit scholar Joaquin Bernas, already showed there is nothing illegal or unconstitutional in faith-based initiatives like government grants to churches for secular purposes? Then would Aquino have gone on his knees and crawled to Canosa, as did Henry to beg forgiveness of the Church he defamed.

This shame cannot be wiped away until the Church pays back the government in the same coin it was dealt at the Senate. If it doesn’t go on the attack in every pulpit in the land, then should all true Catholics turn their backs on this ridiculous, faithless and timid religion.

Christ said, “You cannot serve God and Mammon” yet these were not even Pajeros. Christ said, “What does it profit a man if he gain the whole world but lose his soul”—but for ten-year old utility vans to ferry the poor from sickbed to dying bed in ill-provisioned, germ-infested, decrepit public hospitals?

God damn the bishops for their timidity and abjectness; God damn them for hesitating even a minute to return their “Pajeros”; may they all go to hell for shaming our religion. In this scandal of lies, the government knocked the crown of glory from the head of the Church; if our bishops will stoop only to bow to their traducers rather than retrieve it, then every right thinking Catholic should pick it up from the gutter and shove it down the throat of the government.

The SWS surveys may be right that most Catholics do not care much for their religion or its basic belief in life over death and eternity over extinction. If the surveys are right but Catholicism is true in its promises and its threats (as was drilled into us in school) then that is all for the good. There will be more room in heaven for the few who believe every word of the Credo and hotter and more crowded in hell for the rest.

There is a misguided view that the Church depends for its vitality on multiplying the multitude of the faithful, on quantity over quality. Where does it say that in scripture or Church teaching? One woman kneeling in a pew whispering the rosary fills a cathedral. Christ came and died to give mankind one more chance at redemption—but only one. Salvation is for the select.

True the faithful may turn out to be just a few but a happy few; a band of brothers and sisters. The fewer, another Catholic king said, the greater each his or her share of glory and the certainty of redemption. I often miss mass but I know it is a sin when I fail to do so. There are no excuses. It is the privilege of a Catholic to be filled with remorse when he fails in the Faith, and with rage at those who defame it.

quoted from: http://www.interaksyon.com/article/8537/teodoro-l-locsin-jr-damn-the-bishops-for-taking-it-lying-down