Everything about : RH Bill ( Reproductive Health Bill)

[markepogi]

---

YES!!!hehehe.....

[jash_ville]

after reading all the posts..... NOSEBLEED KO!!!! hehehehe...

as in! nalipong ko oi... pero i was actually hoping na minimal lang kaayo ang copy-paste ba kay mao juy nakalabad sa akong ulo...

para nko man gud "contraception" is completely different from "termination".

kinsay nakakita ani sa kapuso mo, jessica soho pag saturday? tumpak kaayo oi!
ang uban pan na lang ang gipanghatag sa mga anak kay dili na kapalit ug bugas...what's worse, ipa adopt na lang ang anak kay dili kabuhi.

[tambol111]

maayo ni kay ang mga tw basolon lang permi ang gobyerno nato na na gutom cla tungod sa politica dri sa ako.

[szichri]

dili na kinahanglan e feature sa bisan asang tv station ang kahimtang... gawas lang ka adto ka colon or lakaw ka sa dalan, suroy2x sa mga squatters area... makita gyud nga grabe na kadaghan ang mga bata... sugod na man gani og pamiga ang uban (8, 9, 10, 11 ,12,13 yrs. old) unsay rason kay ang ginikanan dili na kabantay or kaatiman sa ilaha tungod sa kadaghan... dili na kinahanglan pa nang mga studies2x diha nga gikan pa sa uban foreign country... kay some of it is not applicable ang situation diri sa Pilipins...

[mannyamador]

Ah, you're back. I was hoping you'd post. Now the debate can go to a higher -- and more challenging -- level. Let's keep it that way. Many thanks for that, too.

I understand that. Perfect example would be Ireland IMO. Low population of over 6,000,000 people but still relatively poor. That's due to the fact that their government never came out with enough policies to rebound from The Troubles. Like I said, for it to work, it has to be a combination of both sound economic policy, and population control to a certain extent. Mind you, not permanent population control, but rather up to a point until the economy catches up.

I think that still assumes that population is a significant factor. I maintain that it is not, and that numerous studies back me up on that.

However, let us assume for the sake of argument, that population does have a significant effect, in the way that you assert. There is still a problem.

Given that we have limited resources, I think we should concentrate on those measures that are most effective. I contend that instead of wasting resources on doubtful population programs, we should concentrate on attacking the real problems. Let's hit them with all we've got. Let's not take a shotgun approach, but a surgical one that get's the best "bang for the buck", so to speak.

Repealing the debt service law won't cost a whole lot (I do not advocate bribing congressmen to get this done), and it will free up billions of pesos every year. And we don't have to repudiate all debts, just those that are odious. Ending pork barrel will do the same. Eliminating corruption is difficult, but the returns are huge, so we must concentrate resources and effort on this measure. Reforming the property system is also a high-return, low-cost measure. If we pour the resulting benefits form these measures into education, the poor will bring themselves up. And the property reform mentioned earlier will enable them to do this even faster.

You forgot to note that Peru has a low fertility rate. Women have an average of only 2 children as of 2006.

It experienced poverty and progress regardless of fertility rate. That backs up my argument. It was preoper economic policy that helped Peru, not any population program.

Well, I'm a health worker, and maybe you don't get how unethical his methods are. Regardless of the circumstances of those women's abortions, he absolutely had no right to violate their privacy.

I must disagree. You are a health worker in a democratic country. China systematically violates women's rights in the most despicable manner. This has to be reported. I doubt if many of the victims would want this thing to continue being covered up. If we follow your thinking (this is not personal, ok?), then we cannot videotape and report crimes in progress. What will happen to criminal justice?

Condoms are not being pushed over abstinence in Uganda today. It's up to you if you want to deny the evidence. Read these articles and please get your facts straight.

Sam Ruteikara knows what part of the ABC program was emphasized in Uganda more than some reporters as he helped make the ABC program. They de-emphasized condoms, and it worked. Other countries pushed condoms and they failed.

In Thailand, the primarily condom-based policy failed. When behavioral change was introduced, AIDS infections dropped. How can you credit condoms with that success?

Now I can cite just as many (and better researched and credible, in my opinion) articles as you can. I already have posted many. So many, in fact, that others are complaining. Do we just try to rack up more than each other? I think you will agree with me that perhaps we should try a better method?

As I have also pointed out, agenciees like USAID cooperates with African health workers who sadly, in the past, have not been adequately educated on sanitary procedures.

Exactly. No one is doubting that the conditions were bad (they still are) and that other diseases were spread. Of course they were! But I think this situation was disastrously exacerbated by adding population control requirements to an already inadequate health system. The result is that these additional procedures caused more infections (e.g. improper IUD insertions, unsanitary Deo Provera injections, etc.). Had they not wasted time on such unnecessary population control measures, these additional infections would not have occurred. That is my point.

In any case, now that we've come to an impasse on some matters, what if we concentrate on seeing what measures we can AGREE on? I think you will agree with eliminating indiscriminate debt servicing and pork barrel, wouldn't you?

And If we must have some population control, why not try advocating Natural Family Planning (NFP)? Even if you are a skeptic, I think you know quite well it is not as ineffective as its detractors claim. The studies, after all, show a method effectiveness of 99-100%, and a user-effectiveness of 85-99%. That's at least comparable to the condom (aggregate failure rate of 10-12%) and even better than some other artificial methods. And it is certainly free of all side effects and ethical issues.

God bless!

Unfortunately, not all those who post are as reasonable as you. I will attend to some now.

@MRChurchill

That was an error on my part I must admit.

One of many, I might add. For example...

Now your true colors shine. Behind the mask is a childish fag.

Still engaging in name-calling and making accusations with no proof? That's called L-Y-I-N-G. Try reading that s-l-o-w-l-y so you'll get it.

So where's that proof? None, as usual?

[diatabz]

Ah, you're back. I was hoping you'd post. Now the debate can go to a higher -- and more challenging -- level. Let's keep it that way. Many thanks for that, too.

Lol thanks to you too. Haven't had a discussion like this in a while.

Given that we have limited resources, I think we should concentrate on those measures that are most effective. I contend that instead of wasting resources on doubtful population programs, we should concentrate on attacking the real problems. Let's hit them with all we've got. Let's not take a shotgun approach, but a surgical one that get's the best "bang for the buck", so to speak.

Repealing the debt service law won't cost a whole lot (I do not advocate bribing congressmen to get this done), and it will free up billions of pesos every year. And we don't have to repudiate all debts, just those that are odious. Ending pork barrel will do the same. Eliminating corruption is difficult, but the returns are huge, so we must concentrate resources and effort on this measure. Reforming the property system is also a high-return, low-cost measure. If we pour the resulting benefits form these measures into education, the poor will bring themselves up. And the property reform mentioned earlier will enable them to do this even faster.

Completely agree. An excellent way to start things would be to offer easier access to credit. If poor families could invest in even small businesses, that would go a long way. I'm not saying that the government starts giving out condoms right away, but rather that they do things slowly for now. Education! Even an hour of sexual education. I can tell you're Catholic and I don't mean to bash, but our society needs to break the stigma that *** is bad. Even if we started small. Like an hour of *** ed for kids in the high school. Especially the women. Gosh, women need to be educated most of all. They need to be empowered so they make the right choices in the future. Choices that could mean a lifetime of poverty, or a fighting chance of making it in this world.

It experienced poverty and progress regardless of fertility rate. That backs up my argument. It was preoper economic policy that helped Peru, not any population program.

The fact that the birth rate was stable I think bought time for Peru's policy. Same thing happened to Hong Kong. The combination of a capitalist policy and a low fertility rate of one child per mother kept the balance. Hypothetically speaking, if Peru had the same population our country has, they would've had a harder time pulling things off.

I must disagree. You are a health worker in a democratic country. China systematically violates women's rights in the most despicable manner. This has to be reported. I doubt if many of the victims would want this thing to continue being covered up. If we follow your thinking (this is not personal, ok?), then we cannot videotape and report crimes in progress. What will happen to criminal justice?

C'mon, actually showing their faces? Journalists know they should protect their sources. He could've at least blurred their profiles or something.

Now I can cite just as many (and better researched and credible, in my opinion) articles as you can. I already have posted many. So many, in fact, that others are complaining. Do we just try to rack up more than each other? I think you will agree with me that perhaps we should try a better method?

I agree, citing different sources and calling them more reliable is getting us nowhere. We'd end up repeating ourselves over and over again.

In any case, now that we've come to an impasse on some matters, what if we concentrate on seeing what measures we can AGREE on? I think you will agree with eliminating indiscriminate debt servicing and pork barrel, wouldn't you?

And If we must have some population control, why not try advocating Natural Family Planning (NFP)? Even if you are a skeptic, I think you know quite well it is not as ineffective as its detractors claim. The studies, after all, show a method effectiveness of 99-100%, and a user-effectiveness of 85-99%. That's at least comparable to the condom (aggregate failure rate of 10-12%) and even better than some other artificial methods. And it is certainly free of all side effects and ethical issues.

Abstinence is effective, I'll be the first guy to admit. Ohhh, the debates I used to have with my classmates about contraception... Anyway, there's a big catch to NFP, and I mean a BIG catch.

Even if we somehow convinced couples to be faithful to each other, that still leaves out the teens. Do you remember when you were sixteen and hot blooded? lol. When the most important thing in the world was getting laid and having a copy of Playboy elevated you to rockstar status? No one can stop people from having ***. The Church has harped on about chastity and all that jazz for years, but it's not working. There's too much ideology behind their sentiments. We both know that's going to throw some people off. Abstinence is easier said than done. Not everyone has the discipline to do it. Heck I'll be honest, that'd be tough for me.

[wng]

@bcasabee
Wa man gani diay ka kasabot unsay *** education. Rest your case na lang. Wa man gani ka sources sa ana imong gipang yawyaw. Kanang P30M nga imong i-save sa condom, based sa imong computation, gamay ra nang 100,000 new students mogawas ana. Sige, ikaw invest anang P300 per student budget nimo kung unsaon na nimo ug pa eskuwela. Kanang imong federalism, look at Pakistan and Nigeria. Tan-awa didto di ba na corrupt ang ilang federal system. Sus Dong, ayaw na lang ug tuga2 ug makipag debate kung hasta *** education wa diay ka kasabot.

@mannyamador
The Leipzig Declaration was a fabrication. The Inconvenient Truth by Al Gore came out 2006. The Leipzig Declaraion was in 1995. They cannot even locate all those "experts" who signed it in 1995. Some were financed by the oil industry. They are not even able to update this document.

We are putting up sources that there is a world food crisis and a world energy crisis (actually we don't even need the sources, everyone knows from 1st hand experience). And you try to disprove food shortage theories by cutting and pasting the FAO announcements in 1996 with latest data used from 1991? Remember that it's now 2008!

[bcasabee]

@wng...magkita lang unya ta ug balik ani nga thread 6 months after signed into law ni nga Bill. Unya please report kung unsay progress aning tinonto nga Bill. Mura mo ug impulsive buyer of a low quality car bro, naghunahuna ramo sa benefit of owning the car, wala mo maghunahuna sa maintenance ug gasto sa fuel. Sige go, kamoy bahala sa inyong kaugalingon.
Correction bro, dili to 30 million, 300 million a month to sustain to sustain this contraceptive campaign for 1 million couples. I think conservative estimate gani na, I hope nakasabot ka ug unsay conservative estimate kay hapit 100 million ka tawo na raba ta karon bro. Anyway, if you want to prove that this contraceptive campaign is sustainable, why don't you throw us figures? Give us your yearly budget ug target decrease of population growth. Kung dili ka kahatag ana bro, ayaw nalang patugatuga ug sangyaw bro.
Bro, to be clear to you, I am not talking about the MORALITY or the IMMORALITY of using contraceptives. It is very clear from my post that I am talking about the sustainability of this program in terms of funding. Kay sa gikaingon ko na, mura ka ug nagpalit ug kagangkagang nga awto ani, wala ta ga huna huna sa maintenance ug cost sa fuel.
So anhi nalang ko kutob kay nahutdan nako ug explanation.

[mannyamador]

Completely agree. An excellent way to start things would be to offer easier access to credit. If poor families could invest in even small businesses, that would go a long way.

I agree completely. Here's something interesting. One of the "side effects" of reforming the property system, according to De Soto, is the fact that real property then takes on a new value: enabling access to credit. he cites that in the U.S., mortgaging is one of the main sources of credit and capital. Given reasonable interest rates and easy terms, formal property ownership allows for another financial instrument that the poor could use.

When traveling all over Cebu, I notice a lot of poor families with their "own" land. They probably do not have formal titles though, and rely on things like tax declarations or private agreements with former owners. If these arrangements were formalized, then these people would not only have stable ownership, they could also gain important credit facilities and increase their value through improvements to the property.

Education! Even an hour of sexual education. I can tell you're Catholic and I don't mean to bash, but our society needs to break the stigma that *** is bad.

I don't know why people blame the Church for the idea that *** is bad. The Church has NEVER taught that *** is bad or evil. Every single doctrinal document of the Catholic Church declares that *** is so good that it is elevated far above most other earthly goods. it is considered sacred, and participating in the creative power of God Himself. That is why the Church has always tried to protect this sacredness by opposing anything that trivializes it, especially casual ***.

I don't agree with classroom *** education for kids. The best educators in this area are the parents, especially in their lifestyle. We should educate the parents in responsible behavior, especially fidelity, commitment, abstinence, in later years, Natural Family Planning.

Hypothetically speaking, if Peru had the same population our country has, they would've had a harder time pulling things off.

I doubt it. Well, we disagree on this. I think the economic reforms have such a massive good effect that it can overcome any hypothetical hindrance population growth can pose.

C'mon, actually showing their faces? Journalists know they should protect their sources. He could've at least blurred their profiles or something.

That would have qualified as "doctoring" the evidence though. This evidence was presented to the US government, not simply to the press. The Chinese authorities already know who these victims are, and in the West, no one will recognize them. Now maybe Mosher could have done things better (perhaps the "doctoring" of the kind you suggested would still have been acceptable), but that is really a trivial point compared to what was agt stake, and hardly affects the credibility of his evidence. Today's mainline news networks, newspapers, and population control NGOs are guilty of far, far worse. We still believe them. Steven Mosher remains highly respected, and, more importantly, he is still able to expose such crimes and still provide real evidence.

Abstinence is effective, I'll be the first guy to admit. Ohhh, the debates I used to have with my classmates about contraception... Anyway, there's a big catch to NFP, and I mean a BIG catch.

Of course there is. I think ALL such methods have a catch of some kind. None of them are perfect. But some do involve thornier ethical issues than others.

The Church has harped on about chastity and all that jazz for years, but it's not working.

Other countries have been able to promote abstinence and fidelity quite successfully. I think you're seeing something that's somewhat particular to the Church's situation in specific places. The Philippine Church, sad to say, has had three problems that it has yet to settle: 1) Immaturity; 2) Infiltration byt radical elements leading to desacralization and emphasis on earthly politics without proper spiritual grounding; 3) Complacency in the upper hierarchy.

These three combine to make the Philippine Church, in particular, slow to react, and inconsistent at the grassroots level. Many of our indigenous priests are inadequately trained and lack discipline. Did you know that after more than 400 years of Christianity, the Philippines is still considered MISSION territory? Good grief! Other countries with younger local churches are 'exporting" priests. We still have to "import" them. That says a lot about the sorry state of local priesthood. Fortunately, many bishops have realized this, along with many lay groups, and some things are slowly being done. There is much hope now with the dynamic initiatives of Benedict XVI. He's the kind of no-nonsense Pope we Filipino Catholics need at this time.

If you will, let me propose to you what I think will turn out to be a win-win situation.

On the need for population control, we still disagree. OK. But suppose we find a middle ground? If you must insist on some kind of population control, then how about a compromise?

We can have some population control but use a method that is morally acceptable to most, which is Natural Family Planning. I still do not agree that we need population control, but this way you can "have your cake and eat it too". You get at least a moderately-to-highly effective form of population control -- maybe not the most effective in your estimation, but it still works 85-99% of the time -- and we do not enter into the thorny thicket of ethical issues brought about by abortifacients or methods that encourage casual ***.

Look at it this way. To buy the time you say we need, we do not need a 99% effective method. If the government were to engage in a MASSIVE NFP ADVOCACY program, in cooperation with the Church and other NGOs, -- in other words, a broad-based program -- you could reduce population growth to the level you need. NFP has the capability to reduce the growth rate to a dangerously low 1%-1.5%, in my estimation. This would also be cheaper in the long run and would not take away as much resources from addressing the real causes of poverty.

Let me add one thing. Although I disagree that we need population control now, I think that there is also a way to prevent our EVER having to need it in the future. The most effective form of population control is ECONOMIC GROWTH. Julian Simon, and many others, have already noted that prosperity brings with it less pressure for a large family. Poor rural parents see children as an investment, as a way to ensure trheir care in their old age, and as a way top provide necessary labor on farms or other rural business. As people become more prosperous and mechanize their operations or gather in towns and cities, the need for larger families is reduced. In addition, there are other productive and leisure activities available, so fertility ios effectively reduced (as an aggregate for the entire population). That is why I keep on insisting on improving the economy by reducing the real cause so poverty. if we do that, population growth takes care of itself.

I hope you will seriously consider this compromise. I really think it is something we can both live with. We won't be 100% satisfied, but at least we won't be tearing at each other in perpetual disagreement. What do you think?

[mannyamador]

The Leipzig Declaration was a fabrication... They are not even able to update this document.

That doesn't necessarily make it a fabrication although it does affect its credibility. It was updated in 1997 to address some of the criticisms of the 1995 declaration. Global warming was already disputed at that time. But still, if we use your standards, the "consensus" on global warming isn't that much credible either. Some of the names on the IPCC list of 2500 scientists aren't scientists either. Some can't be identified. Same problems, same problems with credibility. Your claims are based on an ideological, near-religious belief in global warming, not good science.

Global warming may or may not happen. There is debate and controversy over this issue. But even more important, there is no conclusive proof that global warming (if it actually exists) is caused by population growth. If it is caused by other things (solar activity, etc.) then nothing we can do will really change it. If it is caused by mismanagement of industrial waste and greed, population control will not help. As always, blaming population is just the easy -- and irrational -- way out; a scapegoat. It keeps people from facing the real causes of problems.

As for global food shortage, that's even sillier. The world produces more food than it can consume. This has been a trend for over a century. Even if that trend were to slow down, we couldn't exhaust current production capability. What you DO have is unequal distribution and unfair economic policies. These include US and Europe's subsidized conversion of food crops in biofuels; corruption which deprives poor farmers of funds to buy seeds and fertilizers; lack of land reform which keeps farmers perpetually poor; chronic war which ravages parts of Africa, and so on.

In other words, any food crisis is caused by the same causes of poverty. Population has nothing to do with it. And population control will not address these root causes either.