What's wrong with HB 3773? A LOT!!! (New Online Petitions added!)

[mannyamador]

---

Petition against HB 3773
http://www.gopetition.com/online/7499.html
Petition against HB 3773 and other anti-life bills
http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/Prolife
_________________________________________________
What's wrong with HB 3773? A LOT!
(http://www.phnix.net/hb3773-objections.txt)

1. The Bill Allows Abortifacient Contraceptives.

While HB 3773 explicitly excludes abortion, it does not prohibit the use of artificial contraceptives, including abortifacient contraceptives. In fact, it encourages their use.

An abortifacient contraceptive does more than simply prevent conception. When they fail to prevent conception, these abortifacents are designed to prevent the fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus, resulting in an early chemical abortion. But the Philippine Constitution and the Catholic Church (as well as many other Christian churches) recognize that the fertilized egg already IS a human life. Yet the bill allows these as part of the "full range of legal, medically-safe and effective family planning methods" that must be provided.

Thus the Catholic bishops were correct when they pointed out that increased contraceptive use results in more abortions. The contraceptives themselves are ABORTIFACIENT!

2. The Bill is Coercive

HB 3773 is NOT about free choice. It imposes, through its provisions, an antifamily mindset and morality, and punishes thoose who oppose it.

HB 3773 discriminates against large families though Sec. 12, which gives preference in educational grants to children from families with only two children. This is unfair and coercive. It denies help to those who need it most.

HB 3773 also compels persons who are against the use of abortifacients or other immoral contraceptive methods to act against their conscience. Sec. 16, paragraph A prohibits health workers from the refusing to provide information on, or refusing to perform, "a full range of legal, medically-safe and effective family planning methods" which presumably includes sterilization, ligation, and artificial and abortifacient contraceptives.

The bill even forces a conscientious objector who manages to refuse to perform such immoral acts to refer the public to others within the same hospital or health center who will perform the immoral act. He is, therefore, compelled to assist in the procurement of acts that are against his conscience. This is still coercive.

3. The Bill is Unconstitutional

HB 3773 seeks to promote all forms of contraception, including abortifacient contraceptives. But the Philippine Constitution recognizes that human life begins at conception and clearly states that such life must be protected. Thus the bill itself may therefore be deemed
unconstitutional.

4. It is based on wrong assumptions

HB3773 merely assumes that it is a large population that makes government allocations and economic growth inadequate. This ignores the numerous studies both here and abroad that point out the real causes of shortages and poverty: massive government corruption, greed, war, injustice, and economic mismanagment.

A nation's economic status depends most of all on the kind of governance it has, NOT on the size of its population. If we truly wish sustainable development and economic prosperity, we must attack the real causes of the problem and not waste time and resources on the false problem of "overpopulation."

Thus, even the bill's idea of an "ideal family size" of two children is likewise erroneous and misleading.

Given these, we must, as a people, reject this wasteful, misguided, and unjust attmept by foreign interests to impose an immoral population policy on Filipinos.

_________________________________________________
Alternative Information and Opinion at: www.phnix.net

[Visual C#]

mannyamador: please continue discussion here.

[gareb]

i got permission from Visual C# to unlock this topic to facilitate the discussion of this rather controversial House Bill.

though it is apparent that the moves to impede the passage of HB3773 (Responsible Parenthood And Population Management Act of 2005) is backed by the Catholic Church, as well as previous House and Senate Bills aimed at addressing the population issue, and thus would be more appropriately discussed on the thread that Visual C# recommended, i feel however that HB3773, though a related topic, should be delegated with its own thread.

the full text on HB 3773 is in here and here.

i advice people posting in this thread to discuss the bill, and other closely related matters that may crop up. however i encourage the posters to use the thread specified on the role of religious institutions in this campaign, if they need to discuss matters concerning specifically that.

[darkwing]

I'm just scanning through the bill, I do not read anything about allowing abortion?

[darkwing]

following this up: section 3 j says :

j. While the full range of family planning methods, techniques and devices
shall be made available to couples and adults of reproductive age, abortion
shall remain to be penalized under the Revised Penal Code and relevant
jurisprudence

[gareb]

i feel i need to clear things up with all these paranoia.

1. The Bill Allows Abortifacient Contraceptives.

lie. the mere fact that such "contraceptives" cause "abortion" in a sense that it prevents the implantation of the fertilized ovum into the uterus makes its usage as well as dispensation illegal according to the anti-abortion laws (The Revised Penal Code, Act No. 3815, Article 256-259) this is why the "morning-after pill" is not legal here in the philippines.

the catholic bishops might have confused the meaning of "contraceptives" from those that prevent the union of the sperm and the ovum, from those that kill the fertilized egg cell. but of course, it does not really matter to them. they are against both.

2. The Bill is Coercive

lie. section 12, though might be in need of a better phrasing is used as an affirmative action and incentive to those who wants to have 2 children. when one reads the whole section, one should be careful to read everything.

SEC. 12. Ideal Family Size. - In order to attain the desired population growth rate, the State shall encourage two (2) children as the ideal family size. However, this provision shall not be mandatory or compulsory and no punitive action may be imposed on couples having more than two children. Children from these families shall have preference in the grant of scholarships at the tertiary level taking into consideration the financial need and academic aptitude of the grantees.

HB 3773 also compels persons who are against the use of abortifacients or other immoral contraceptive methods to act against their conscience. Sec. 16, paragraph A prohibits health workers from the refusing to provide information on, or refusing to perform, "a full range of legal, medically-safe and effective family planning methods" which presumably includes sterilization, ligation, and artificial and abortifacient contraceptives.

wrong. what is compelled here is the right information about family planning and contraceptives. sterilization, ligation and artificial contraceptives are safe, medically speaking. abortifacient drugs are out of the question. it is not allowed.

there is nothing wrong with wanting to have the right information about these things. or perhaps those who are against the use of condoms and hormone pills are just afraid that their days of twisting facts are over.

if we really want to talk about coercion, how about the Church's campaign to 'excommunicate' health workers regarding the Ligtas Buntis program?

3. The Bill is Unconstitutional

wrong. refer to no.1

4. It is based on wrong assumptions

another mistake. probably the biggest.

the counter-assumption that people who are against family planning is pointing out is that the "real causes" of poverty are merely those enumerated above, when in fact those are in themselves symptoms of a bigger, more entrenched problem. their push for an alternative view of the problem vis-a-vis those which they perceive that the government supports (over-population = poverty) falls into the same trap of attribution error; merely seeing a part of a self-perpetuating cycle.

admittedly, to address the issue of population alone would be short-sighted in itself, as it offers a solution to the overpopulation problem. but sadly, it is not the solution to poverty; it addresses the symptom and not the cause. but to see this as a mere symptom is not a license to neglect the problem, as it too may have ramifications towards the whole problem of poverty.

Thus, even the bill's idea of an "ideal family size" of two children is likewise erroneous and misleading.

though we can tweak with the Malthusian model of population and say that we can stretch the limits of how much nature can sustain us, there is a breaking point. some say we have breached it, some would say we are yet to. but all agree that human domination of the planet has already caused marked and irreversible and irreparable changes. a little bit more strain might end it all. we cannot afford that.

Given these, we must, as a people, reject this wasteful, misguided, and unjust attmept by foreign interests to impose an immoral population policy on Filipinos.

rather than reject this, how about if we see better on the causes of poverty, which is social inequality and stratification, seeing on how a poverty-breeding society perpetuates itself and red herrings on the causes of poverty into conventional issues as "corruption", "mismanagement" and "overpopulation"? only then can we see that the causes that we perceive are actually mere products of a larger problem.

[mannyamador]

gareb wrote:

>the catholic bishops might have confused the meaning of "contraceptives" from those that
> prevent the union of the sperm and the ovum, from those that kill the fertilized egg cell.

There is no confusion. They know what the DOH is dispensing. The DOH and many other private health centers dispense IUDs, the Pill, and injectables. All of these are abortifacients and should be illegal. But they are not. No one is stopping the distribution of such abortifacients. HB3773 makes absolutely no mention of curtailuing abortifacients at all. In fact, the background papers and discussions involved in this bill and its predecessors (HB4110, etc.) show that the authors (the bills were partly crafted by the PLCPD and not just the congressmen) show favor for some form of "access to abortion."

If HB3773 really was against abortion, it should explicitly BAN the IUD, the Pill, Depo-Provera, and other Progesteone-only-pills and other oral contraceptives. Buit it DOESN'T. In fact, it happily mandates the continued distri\bution of "modern contraceptive methods", which makes it pretty obvious the authors really don't care (or are stupidkly ignorant) about abortifacients.

So the bill is still UNCONSTITUTIONAL Your argument is invalid.

Now read section 12. There is lip service to those "in need", but the bottom line is that there is preference for those with 2 children or less. Given that resources for educational grants is limited, those with more children will be discriminated against. It is disingenious and dishonest to pretend to be ignorant of the reality on the ground.

The bill also clearly forces prolife health workers to act against their conscience. If they can somehow get away from dispensing abortifacients, they must sitll refer patients to those who will dispense abortifacinets. That is COERCION. No amount ofd deodorizing will change that.

> the counter-assumption that people who are against family planning is pointing out is that the "real
> causes" of poverty are merely those enumerated above, when in fact those are in themselves symptoms
> of a bigger, more entrenched problem

Another error. There is no assumption that the problems I stated are the ONLY causes, but the fact remains that there is no positive evidence whatosever that "overpopulation" CAUSES poverty. Many demographers, economists, and historians have already poiinted this out. Most of them are quite in agreement that poverty is more likely caused by some form of poor governance or man-made disturbance. But nowhere is there proof that "overpopulation" really exists or that population density is the cause of national poverty

> But all agree that human domination of the planet has already caused marked and
> irreversible and irreparable changes. a little bit more strain might end it all. we cannot
> afford that.

Frantic doomsaying will not erase the fact that the "damage" you refer to is NOT caused by "overpopulation" but by the other factors I've mentioned. And if you really think a "little morte" will push the earth over the edge. you're really pushing the limits of reason. Tweaking the Malthusian concept is tweaking a dead horse. The assumptioins are fundamentally flawed.

The real causes of poverty can be complex, but greed, mismanageement, and corruption are not simplistic issues either as you like to paint them. There a reinterlocking mechanisms and structures that breed poverty. But "overpopulation" isn't one of them.

[darkwing]

There is no confusion. They know what the DOH is dispensing. The DOH and many other private health centers dispense IUDs, the Pill, and injectables. All of these are abortifacients and should be illegal. But they are not. No one is stopping the distribution of such abortifacients.

Now I am confused I thought abortion refers to the following: (quoted from
www.m-w.com)

Main Entry: abor·tion
Pronunciation: &-'bor-sh&n
Function: noun
1 : the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus: as a : spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus during the first 12 weeks of gestation -- compare MISCARRIAGE b : induced expulsion of a human fetus c : expulsion of a fetus by a domestic animal often due to infection at any time before completion of pregnancy -- compare CONTAGIOUS ABORTION
2 : MONSTROSITY
3 : arrest of development (as of a part or process) resulting in imperfection; also : a
result of such arrest

IUDs, pills, condoms and the like are abortifacients??

[darkwing]

also please research first for example, you mention Depo-Provera as abortifacient, and looking at it at a medical site it says:

Depo-Provera inhibits the production of another hormone,
gonadotropin, which, in turn, prevents ovulation.

what it does is to prevent ovulation, preventing the meeting of the sperm and the egg, not causing the fertilized egg to be aborted(again, see the meaning of abortion)

[mannyamador]

Darkwing wrote:

IUDs, pills, condoms and the like are abortifacients??

No. Condoms are NOT abrotifacient. But pills and IUDs are.

One of the stated mechanisms of the Pill is "the rendering of the endometrium unreceptive to implantation." (ABPI Data Sheet Compendium, Datapharm Publications Ltd., 1996-1997, Femodene p. 1007). This means that the newly concieved embryo cannot implant in the uterus, resulting in its eventuall destruction. This results in what is essentially as an early chemical abortion. The IUD has the same end effect. They are therefore abortifacient.

what it does is to prevent ovulation, preventing the meeting of the sperm and the egg, not causing the fertilized egg to be aborted(again, see the meaning of abortion)

You seem to think that;'s ALL it does. That is not true. As I have pointed out, most contraceptivs have a backup function in the event that they fail to prevent ovulation. This is because they can never be 100% effective at preventing ovulation. So they also create what is known as a "hostile endometrium", which is usually in the form of a thickening of the uterine wall. This prevents the fertilized egg from implanting. Now since the Philippine Constitution recognizes that human life begins at conception and mandates that such life is to be protected, any method that causes the fertlized egg to be destroyed or expelled is an abortifacient and is prohibited by the Constitution.