Facts to reproduce

Circulating around is a short ten-point fact sheet on the Reproductive Health bill (Senate Bill 2865) prepared by Senator Pia Cayetano.  The points the Senator raises are succinct, and does a lot to clear the misconceptions floating around (as well as the lies being foisted on the susceptible public by the vociferous oppositionists).  The fact sheet comes with the actual text of the law, so readers can glean for themselves the validity of her arguments.

Considering the importance of the debate, and how thoroughly I agree with her, allow me to just run through her most important points here (and before anyone can accuse me of plagiarizing, yes, everything you read here, except the snide comments, are all hers).

First, she stresses that artificial family planning methods aren’t going to be rammed down the throats (or any other body parts) of our citizens.  If a couple wants to try the rhythm method or the wildly successful (not) withdrawal before climax method, then fine.  That’s their choice, and the State isn’t going to mandate vasectomies or whatever other foolproof methods are available out there, however tempting it may be to castrate certain unsavory individuals.

Second, the bill does not legalize abortion.  That’s still illegal under our penal laws.  But what it does, is it allows women who have had abortions to seek medical care.  They don’t have to hide, they can (and should) expect compassionate and humane medical care from hospitals.

Third, there is no China-like mandatory maximum for children.  Couples can have as few offspring as they want to, or they can ignore family planning totally and propagate as many descendants as they want.  The choice is theirs.  There will be no clamp down on pregnancies.

(No, there is no rule laid down for the scenario where a spouse disagrees with the other spouse on the number of children the couple wants to have.  It would have been fun to see how people would react if the bill had laid down the rule: the one with the ovaries wins.  Or, the one with the smaller number wins.)

Fourth, there is no disrespect of religious beliefs in this bill.  If a certain religious group doesn’t want to avail of the benefits of the bill, then fine.  No one is going to force them.  However, if there are other religious groups to whom this bill is not objectionable, then its members can perfectly enjoy the freedoms enshrined in this bill.  But one religious group cannot dictate to other religious groups what they can or cannot do to protect themselves.

Fifth, children aren’t going to be taught how to use condoms.  Sex education is going to be tailored so that its contents are age-appropriate.  So for worried parents, do not fear.  No one’s going to flash bananas and eggplants in association with Trojan and Durex in front of darling junior.  (My branding may be outdated.  Or erroneous.  Comes from relying too much on free condoms given at sundry gay pride events).

Speaking of free condoms, this bill isn’t supposed to function as a condom-pushing behemoth.  What it does is to provide access to condoms, especially to those in remote areas.  If plush villages like Alabang get all antsy about the availability of condoms in fancy groceries, what more in those areas where priests regularly police the local drugstores and threaten fire and brimstone on “offenders?”

The mobile vehicles the good Senator is contemplating won’t be, as is feared, “contraceptive ice cream trucks”, but will be a lifeline to those without access to family planning services.  As she says, it is a fact that women die every day from giving birth, some due to illegal abortions.  Whether it is 11 women a day, or just one woman a day, or even just one woman a week, isn’t the point.  The point is there is still someone dying unnecessarily.

And it is a fact that this bill will address that.