Everything about : RH Bill ( Reproductive Health Bill)

[unsay_ngalan_nimo]

watch the debate sa GMA news tv ang debate rh bill

[vipvip68]

Even without reading the bill (don't worry I have read it), from the mere fact the bill is imposing to use cond*ms that has taken me the freedom to pro-create as well us the freedom to decide on my own. Can't the people understand why the govt need to impose it? Cond*ms are sold anywhere, people can use it anytime if they want to.

But because of the (people) govt's greediness they need to impose such law because they will have a percentage or a share from big medical companies when they sell their abortion medicines (when cond*ms just don't work).



-0-

Imposing the use of condoms?

You need to read the bill again becaue you clearly have not understood that it does not impose but instead enables and protects our right to chose with regards to family planning.

[Romeojin]

1. If you want restrictions sa access to medically safe, legal, effective, quality and affordable reproductive health supplies and services for minors, Do you want to put a clause there that they need a parent's consent before they are given access to such? If not, what do you suggest?
I guess you can't ban them from such because everyone undergoes RH development.

2. Why blame corruption for not supporting the bill? Will you ignore a good law just because corruption is currently rampant? Dapat wala nalang ta bala-od kung mao na... kay halos tanan gi korakot naman. Kana gani unnecessary bonuses sa gov't employees linked to corruption man gihapon na.
It is useful when implemented properly. So I don't use corruption as a basis for going against a good bill or law. Unless it is stated there that they are not punishable for it.

1. naa diay parents na musugot himuon consensual ang PMS ? kung anak nimo babae im pretty sure dili gyud ka musugot.

how about limiting it to married couples like what we are doing ever since.

2. corruption was expected. the poster didnt just stop sa corruption. Like me i question how can we implement this! there a large amount of investments needed for hospital, clinics, salaries of workers, contraceptives needed, etc to run this bill. take a look at the juvenile justice law did the government implemented it effectively? prisohan for juveniles di gani mabuild.

the question is the implementation.. and corruption is just one of the factors.

3. S*x Ed for grade 5? hmmm why not? as enumerated there, there are different topics on S*x Ed. Don't assume na inig sugod sa grade 5 ang itudlo kay unsaon pag-tusok nga dili ma buntis si maria. Sexuality develops as early as that age. So understanding their own body isn't a bad idea. Tan-aw ninyo? Kung ganahan mo, ipabutang nato nga dapat naay parent's consent sad kung mag tudlo na sila ug safe s*x? Or ipabutang nato nga dapat invited ang parents sa classroom kung mag discuss na mahitungod safe s*x?
How do you want it to be done?

4. Yes, barangay health workers and officials will be the strongest factor to make the implementation of this bill work. To good to be true? yes at this point. But if we don't start now, then when?
With the problem on insurgency and terrorism on some towns, will you let the majority wait and suffer because some towns are still incapable of doing it? Passing this bill won't make them more terrified. But yes, the gov't should address those problems but not in this bill.

3. lately they made *** ed optional, so you better ask those parents who wants their children to be in a comprehensive *** education class. naa ba gyud considering naa na option ang teens to avail contraceptives for free
i mention comprehensive ha to distinguish it from basic *** ed which had been taught in school since the 1970.

4. the question is really the implementation to the much poorer areas, in the cities guro no problems but the countryside thats a lot of funding and wages needed to implement this and it said that the same amenities will be applied to every area.

5. I stated this on my previous post. RH Bill does NOT give rights to 2 minors or unmarried adults to have s*x. Asa man ka kita ug balaod na gi-bawal na? Kung wala na gibawal, then wala sad gahatag ug right ang RH bill ana. Pasabot, bisan unsa pa tinuhu-an ninyo, gitagaan mo ug freedom nga mu-decide ana nga mga butang. Kung bawal o OK sa relihiyon ninyo, wla nay labot ang State ana. Mao nay separation of state and church. Basta kung naa gyud magkinahanglan sa serbisyo, walay discrimination.

6. Naka define ba sa Philippine laws kung unsa gyud ang abortion? when is it considered an abortion? Kay sa ako nabasa, abortion is punishable by law but as stated diri sa uban, contraceptives causes abortion daw.
Naa man ta regulatory board for legal drugs. So if a drug is classified na for abortion gyud, logically it will be illegal to distribute and use such drug.
Nya mao sad ni problema sa gobyerno kung mag discuss daw sa CBCP kay maabot daw sila sa definition sa abortifacient drugs.

5. way labot lagi pero ngano maghimo man sila ug balaod giving RH rights to teen when parent moral conviction tell them they shouldn't have PMS. Does it send mix message to teens, that legally they have RH rights ?
From the beginning you didnt like giving away contraceptives to teens; then mo deny ka na dili na makapromote sa PMS to teens and now you are saying dili na lang maki-alam kay gobyerno na ni

6. daghay na links nahatag dire about contraceptives with abortifacient effect, paki -explain lang gyud ngano di ka kadawat ana with supporting details ha.

Well i read na condom lang daw i distribute kay gi ban na ning mga contraceptives with abortifacient effect.

[vipvip68]

agree.

even the main author of the bill had said...



RH proponents push for bill’s passage in House plenary | Pnoy sa Palasyo

so all talks of population is crap

You should pay less attention to what politicians say and instead think of the effects of passing the Rhb.

The bill will indirectly result in the decrease of population growth rate due to the result of education and awareness on available family planning alternatives.

Politicians will not admit it but this bill is an attempt by the state to manage its population... Not through directly limiting the number of children a family can have but rather through education and in doing so does not impinge on our freedoms.

[slipstik]

as a general rule, with lower population there is lower rice, water, electricity, consumption.. put ureself in a family, mas gamay mu sibling mas gamay mu magtunga sa pizza.. i talked with an anti RH, priest, ing iyaha they do not argue that with low population better economy, ang ilaha is ni deviate daw ta sa natural law..using natural methods and abstinence.. ang ako lang is that they see the world in the prospective of the party people and the poor spouses during rainy days..

[Romeojin]

Condom, Diaphragm, Spermicide, Cervical Cap, Ligation, Vasectomy.

I merely corrected you when you said that most contraceptives are abortifacients. The methods above are proven already and do not even need a debate.

The big debate here is with regards to the birth control pill as health care professionals have differing views on whether these pills actually are abortifacients.

Would the church then accept the bill if it only allowed contraceptives like (Condom, Diaphragm, Spermicide, Cervical Cap)?

Condom and Diaphragm lang lagi. Spermicide is not that effective, women can still get pregnant using it. Spermicide is often used with other barrier method like condom, diaphragm and cervical cap. Spermicide is not a popular choice cause of its side effects. Cervical caps, yes it does not have abortifacient effect but its not that popular choice as well.
Tubal ligation and vasectomy, that is not generally considered as contraceptives but rather sterilization, but tubal ligation still can caused early abortions as it only prevents the fertilized ovum to travel to the fallopian tubes.

I doubt the Church will accept any contraceptives, Humanae Vitae lagi ila. but personally i have soft condom stand, palusot system.. used and ask forgiveness later lol.

There is a big difference... the RH Bill offers people a CHOICE. It allows people to decide for themselves and educates them of available family planning methods they can use.

Many people also focus too much on the contraceptives issue that they are not able to understand what the bill is actually about which is to improve and provide equal access to reproductive health through education and health services.

Your 1-2 child policy will never reach past the 1st reading in congress. You have to be realistic about what bills you come up with because we hold very dear to our hearts the freedoms that we enjoy here in the Philippines being a democratic republic.

People are starting to use contraceptives, but there are still many who have no concept of family planning, uneducated and poor people who do not have access to or cannot afford birth control. That is why the RHB will make contraceptives available to these people.

You yourself acknowledge that family spacing has been caused by NGO's providing contraceptives. This should be evidence enough for you to realize that making these contraceptives available will lower the average children per family. The state should be helping these NGO's and promote family spacing and the way to do it is to pass the RHB.

see your post above... you already said that "(The) family spacing you see today had been made possible also by contraceptive use"

We are ALREADY spending billions in health centers and schools just trying to cope with the hundreds upon thousands of children born everyday. The cost of a few condoms will more than make up for the cost that child will be to raise + the strain on healthcare, education... this does not include the human cost of that child living a life of poverty, hunger, malnutrition, crime, prostitution etc etc.

Tell me why is there a big difference? when both situations doesnt limit children numbers of each family.

without RH bill = today about 3.5 children per family, its much bigger before but the government had given RH services, given away contraceptives, & establish family planning clinics. That 3.5 average was made possible cause of government / NGO / foreign aid efforts even without RH bill, there is even one of the poster here said that family planning clinics was responsible ngano na spacing ilang family.

with RH bill but no limiting of children number = so you see mas lower pa ang average children per family? whats stopping this pro life families beh to limit ? this will still result to 3-4 children but in the span of 20 years of reproductive age. stil daghan gihapon na.

theres no debate about this RH bill was never a population control, the main author of the bill had said it.

If you want to see the difference you push for 1-2 child policy. Yes, i know its not that popular of a choice but it seems everyone wants to combat overpopulation, then peope should accept this fact.. this is the only way to go unless we kill a percentage of our population

If theres 30 million couples out there and they target 1 kid for every 5 years in a 20 years of reproductive age.

30M * 4 = 120M population

but with 1-2 child policy you will get +30Mpop and 60Mpop respectively.

what demands are you referring to regarding businesses?

Can you state the specific provision / provisions?

So far, I can only gather this with regards to employers

RH demands of their employees = businesses are now being forced to provide contraceptives to their employees; contraceptives cost money. If the state guarantees RH services why do thy have to include business companies, employers responsibility unto this? does our taxes not enough lol.

Your hard earned money is already being spent in health centers, schools and skill training facilities just to keep up with the excessive amount of people that we have to provide for. To put it bluntly, you will actually end up spending less if that child had not been conceived rather than being born and go through a hard life.

RH bill was never meant to control population, families can target as many children as they want the only difference is they may have a good spacing.

Like I said we are spending billions with a questionable results worst we have to deal with the bill's flaws.

[RonIvs]

And you think population control will solve the poverty in the country? Pls explain to me how?

bai, ayaw nalang. grabeha nimo ka bugo oi. i hope your just joking/trolling for your sake. look around you.

[RonIvs]

So you mean, giving contraceptives to the parents will elevate themselves from poverty? Instead of prioritizing EDUCATION and JOB CREATION?

this is a step. overpopulation means more people competing for education scholarships ug job vacancies. di man ni angay mudako. nasobrahan lang ni ka delusional ning mga religious fanatics nato which is the majority.

[bronson]

Kasabot man ko sa imong point na pandemic na gyud ang PMS now the question is. IF we had RH bill now, what stopping us from prohibiting teens not to engage *** when the bill state that no discrimination everyone have RH rights? if contraceptives is readily accessible, PMS will be much more pandemic.

Paki point kuno which part did i said na tudluan ug *** ang mga student with *** ed class ? pareho man mo ni bronson. you putting words on my mouth if you manage to come up with that conclusion ikaw gyud ang T-A-N-G-A.
gun analogy lol ayaw ko ingna tagaan nimo condom/rh services mga teens they will know to control themselves

Good or bad kadugay na ang *** ed noh, the point is why does the RH bill give RH rights to teens, when we are telling them not to engage in *** at the early age. ngano mugamay man ang incident sa PMs when igo na lang sila mangayo ug contraceptives ? please tubaga sad ako kapila na nako ni gibalik2x.

Para mas simple... in the absence of *** education cause it is now considered to make *** education optional (di na compulsory). Why do we have to give RH rights to teens, when we are telling them not to engage in *** ? di ba it will create mix message?

The only way to prevent PMS is to sexually oppressed them / force them to obey the NO PMS rule -- abstinence. If we give them RH rights we will not gonna prevent sexual liberation cause once the RH bill is enacted, theres no stopping it. Like you said and some other here that media play a role on sexual mentality. Teens will learn about *** from the media, porns, from other teen, etc. if they ultimately decide it, the state which guarantee RH rights to all must heed and gave then contraceptives.

Bai wa pa kagamit ug condom? lol you wont get STI if you wont have *** with people who have it, if not sure you buy your own condom

prevention is better lagi, what happen to thailand with 100% condom use program ni result to 1M+ case of HIV compare to what 7000 cases here. condom use also induced riskier *** .

Gi bawal ba ang minors mu-palit ug contraceptives? naa ba bala-od nga gi-bawal ang minor to minor relationship with s*x? kung wala di, wala sad gahatag ang RH bill ug right diba? kay dili man bawal in the first place sa atong balaod. Sige sad ko balik2x ani...
Wala nako gi-usab imo gisulti... nangutana ko nimo kung unsa imo tan-aw sa s*x ed nga magsige ka ingon na maka pa encourage sa studyante to do the act instead of learning from it. Gitubag na ba nimo?

I remember we received free condoms in one event during my high school from Frenzy for their promotions. But we never get excited about having s*x because it was handed out to us. Because we knew better. We were taught topics on s*x ed in school prior to that incident. I don't know where you get your analogy on that "condom possession = getting h*rny".

For abstinence, who will strongly implement that? the gov't? i dont think so...
The church? they should have done that a long time ago even before this bill was drafted.

[RonIvs]

this is why religion should not interfere with the state regardless of their BS self-righteous condescending morals. tanawa lang ninyo ang mga nasud nga progressive. asa maka sabat ang religion nila. sus daghan kaayo ta ug examples nga dapat sundon pero hala sige padayon gihapon ta pa buta buta. pagka pait