"Kill Bill: The Saga"

       The battle for the RH bill is yet to meet its final conclusion. From Carlos Celdran's picketing at the Manila Cathedral to the Church's alleged threat of ex-communication against P-Noy, the public is left wondering what the next chapter will be for this seemingly endless saga of the year, aptly coined by others as the "Kill Bill" controversy. But as massive media attention continue to pour on the issue now, concerned citizens like me demands more resolutions than debates. The continuous clash of opinions between the pro-RH bill legislators and the Church is becoming more and more exhausting to watch, prompting me to wonder if all the fuss about this law really deserves the magnification made to it by the mass media. As far as its scope is concerned, I know that this law will concern Filipinos from all walks of life, but having our President ex-communicated for an issue that involves condoms and informed choices means that there is something left untouched. As I have discovered lately, the crucial issue now is not on whether we are a pro- or an anti-, but if our understanding of the arguments from the two parties concerned is enough for us to make a logical and reasonable conclusion. On my own vantage point, each side of the card reveals its own gray areas and corresponding strengths. All we need to do is to dig deeper on the issue to fully grasp what RH bill is all about and make a compromise for the conflicts that has been arising between the two opposing forces.

A woman holds a placard protesting Church opposition to the promotion of artificial birth control during a rally at the CBCP office in Manila yesterday. Courtesy of EDD GUMBAN

 

Pro-life vs. Pro-abortion?

Much of the clamour made by the bishops against the bill is largely based on the sanctity of life; they are adamant regarding their stand that the newly revised RH bill might promote abortion by intervening in the natural process of procreation. But what is the real thing about abortion? I think the problem here is our lack of concrete definition of 'abortion', which is basically the termination of life within the first 12 weeks of gestation. When does life really starts? Is it as early as conception like what the Church believes or during implantation like what majority of the medical profession are accustomed to? Obviously, there's no point about opposing the RH bill on the basis of morality if it's not clear to everybody whether it is a law for the legalization of abortion or not. Church's involvement on this matter is clearly understandable due to the moral dimensions that the bill contains. However, will it be more "pro-life" if the Church or the government just focus on the existing issues of malnutrition, homelessness, joblessness, and environmental degradation rather than searching for an elusive answer for a long-standing question?

‘Sex for Procreation’ vs. ‘Sex for Recreation’?

What bothers me the most is the fact that the two parties are arguing regarding the legalization of contraceptive use when in the first place, we already know that condoms are part of a modern man’s sex life and no one gets to jail by using it nowadays. It is completely 'legal' if you are to look at it in the context of our present society. Yes, sex is for procreation and that is how God wants it to be, but as long as people have the freedom of choice, sex for recreation will always be an option regardless if the RH bill will be passed or not. I'm not into premarital or extramarital sex but the point is, people don't need a law that will dictate them on what kind of sexual lifestyle they are supposed to have. Killing the RH bill will not promote "sex for procreation" in the same way that passing it will not promote "sex for recreation" due to the simple reason that we are humans, not puppets, entitled to have the freedom to choose what we want in our lives.

Informed choice, Population control, Gender equality: Are these for real?

RH bill is becoming more of an issue of the "right to choose" than the "right to life". According to Davao City Rep. Karlo Nograles, we don't have to legislate population management when in fact, even without it, our people have always been free to do what they think is best for their family. RH bill, as what its proponents define it, is all about giving people informed choices about the family planning methods, be it natural or artificial, that they can use to determine their desired number of children and in the long run, to control the nation's population. Consequently, the Church has been protesting against the bill’s information dissemination aspect, which they fear might impose threat to our society’s suffering morality. Again, the Church seems unaware that health teaching is already one of health professionals' integral roles long before RH bill has started to receive massive media attention and that informed choice is already being received by couples when the need arises.

When it comes to the issue of RH bill being used as a population control, its proponents seem to be missing some points. Cutting down the national population is not the "cure-for-all" solution; eradicating corruption and appropriate allocation of our national budget could be a better strategy.

What about the so-called gender equality that RH bill promises to provide, especially to women? Well, at first it may sound good but if women will have greater control over their reproductive power, then they can choose when to have a child and men can copulate with them as often as they want without fear of being pregnant. Moreover, if women are provided new roles aside from being a mother and child-bearer due to the employment opportunities that not having a child provides, it also means less hard work and stress for their husbands who have been the sole breadwinner ever since. Now, do you think RH bill will really promote gender equality in the long run?

With the issue of RH bill continuously escalating to the national consciousness, some of us are still bewildered about the real importance and relevance of this issue in our own lives. We are all concerned about the children who are going to receive the sex education and the possible changes that might happen in our culture once the bill has been passed. But we have to listen to both sides in order for us to have a clearer picture of the story. This is a national concern and it involves virtually all of us. The Church and the RH bill supporters have their own say of the issue but it doesn't mean that one should always end up being better and more influential than the other. We have a president and P-Noy is a leader for all Filipinos, not just for the Church or Catholics but also to those who have different religious ideologies. The RH bill issue reminds us all that our spirituality and morality should always take part in every major decision that we make for ourselves and our country. But as Jim Paredes underscored in one of his blog entries, the "Kill Bill" controversy makes one thing clear: there is great wisdom in the principle of the separation of Church and State.