RH Bill again!

I’m afraid this is an old dog that refuses to die. For all its pretensions of goodness, practicality, realism, etc., The RH Bill just cannot stand on its own if its morals are to be considered. Because of that, it has lost all its claims for validity. It simply swells with toxic ethos.

I’m happy the bishops have roundly repudiated it in a recent statement, and are planning some street action all over the country to convey a loud and strong message to our public officials who seem to be playing deaf and dumb.

It’s correct that where questions of faith and morals are put to the test, especially in the ridiculous way these are played out in our local political arena, the Church hierarchy should be in the forefront to clarify and to put things in order. All of these should be based on prayers and sacrifice, and the transmission of the relevant doctrine.

They have to do everything, in spite of their limited resources, to do this. Pain and suffering, the cross of Christ that can come in many forms, actually do not hinder things. They actually serve to guarantee the success of a divine mission. So they should not be afraid of the amount of blood, sweat and tears involved.

Of course, together with them should be the laity who share the responsibility of defending these truths of faith and morals. In fact, given the nature of their status in the Church, they should be more prominent in the streets and other forums where these matters are discussed. They don’t play a secondary role. Theirs is as important as that of the clergy.

So it’s a welcome development for me to hear groups of concerned citizens who are actively organizing and promoting various protest actions against this notorious bill, even without direct prodding from the clergy. This is a sign of Christian maturity. I hope this trend continues.

For a long period of time, this bill has been talked about, dissected, analyzed, etc., etc. A lot of dialogue has taken place. And everytime it’s done, the proponents always cannot defend their position in the moral aspect without redefining morality itself.

They can ooze with a plethora of practical reasons. And their strongest point seems to be, “what do we do with the poor that are growing in number?” Well, if they are truly consistent with their position, I suppose they will end up proposing that we kill the poor, the weak, the old, and other “useless” citizenry.

The most likely reason why they stop short of that radical, extreme measure is that many of the RH Bill proponents are there mainly for the money. In fact, that view has been expressed a number of times in several encounters with politicians and officials. 

There’s a powerful bloc behind all this move, and it seems to gather unlikely partners from both the political right and left who coincide in addressing this so-called problem by practical means that ignore the indispensable moral requirement.

While we should give everyone the benefit of the doubt and accord respect to all, we neither can be naïve to the reality that more than human, as in devious, forces can be at work here. We have to be extra wary of this possibility. Pieces of evidence seem to be emerging.

They have developed a powerful and attractive ideology, again catering to the more practical and shallow aspects of the issues. They have organized themselves quite well, growing in leaps and bounds in many parts of the world, and have generated a massive warchest.

They have established a formidable network of leaders and workers, and continue to proselytize among the prominent sectors of society. They have even won over some religious leaders. They have employed tremendous means like polls and surveys, knowing that while these can give them favorable results, these cannot make what is inherently immoral moral.

 So, what’s wrong with the RH Bill? In plain language, it promotes a contraceptive lifestyle that destroys the family and debases the true nature and meaning of human sexuality.

The world’s leading scientific experts have also claimed that artificial contraceptives kill children since many of them do not prevent fertilization. They simply prevent implantation. They also injure women’s health since the pill, for example, causes cancer, as well as stroke, and increases the risk of heart attacks.

Condoms have been found to promote, not stop, the spread of AIDS. Economists also claim the RH Bill is based on wrong economics. We need to expose the myths.

* * *

Email: [email protected]