Everything about : RH Bill ( Reproductive Health Bill)

[cottonmouth]

---

[QUOTE=mannyamador;3285259]
@mannyamador: I don't think you get the idea, do you?? The point why I am showing the statistics between the ageing population of Japan and the young population of the Philippines, is to illustrate the problem. When the biggest part of your population is a recepient of social services and only a small percentage are provider it will create strain to the government coffers. (Read the sentence twice). In Japan they are already experiencing the problem, which is also the same in the Philippines. In Japan their population is dwindling, in the Philippines it is out-of control (simple as that). Now, because the Philippines doesn't have more income than Japan the problem is more exaggerated. Your fear that we will have the same fate like what Japan is experiencing now, that will not happen until in the next 60years or more but by that time we have already better ways of averting that problem.

In our country opportunities is just starting to sprout outside imperial Manila, that is why if your statistics are true emigration is happening in that city. But that doesn't remove the fact that they are still part of the population statistics so taking Manila's case doesn't make sense.

Over-population is just one of the problem together with the obvious corruption and many more. So you cannot just blame corruption while turning blind to the fact that our population outgrow our production. So while everybody knows that corruption is a problem, it is now time to accept that our out-of-control population is doing more harm than good. Open your eyes. You always pressed the problem of bad governance. Look at the statistics 34% underage and 4.2% are retirees, even the best government cannot work properly with that figure. Our un-employment is only 7% which is not that bad at all. The problem is in all countries out of its adult population only 60% will really be the workforce and that leaves the Philippines with roughly 30% workforce...that is negative production. SO, if you analyze the numbers, where do you think is the problem?...34% underage!

Still, if a father is in the workforce, earn good money say 25K (good by Cebu standard), but got 10 children, do you think the family will have a good life...NO! I earn that same money in Cebu and I swear I live a modest life so it is enough for me but I bet it won't be if I have 10 children.

That is where this BILL will come in, to educate the masses about family planning and give them access to it. So what is evil with that?


Very OT: It is now irritating to hear Filipinos claim that the our government is the most corrupt. I assumed that this comments always came from anti-government orgs or from somebody less informed. I have lived and worked a good part of my life (and still living now) in four different countries: Japan, UAE, China, Philippines. Mind you those countries have good records but that doesn't mean they are less corrupt than the Philippines. They have their own way of corruption and I saw that and experienced it first hand. Yes, Philippines is still in its growing pains but the reason why you hear corruption here and there it is because our media is more open and critical than those countries I have mentioned.

Super OT: So lesson is, if you have not look at the Philippines from outside and experienced how other countries are doing their way, do not add insult to the injury by always claiming that our government is the most corrupt.

By the way, Filipinos have a good fertility record so you dont have to worry if we are going to start population explosion again.

[mannyamador]

[QUOTE=cottonmouth;3289378]

When the biggest part of your population is a recepient of social services and only a small percentage are provider it will create strain to the government coffers.

I understand that quite well. In fact, that is the point I have been trying ot make for years about population ageing. Read my posts over the last two years.

In Japan their population is dwindling, in the Philippines it is out-of control (simple as that).

Our population is NOT out of control. Our population growth rate and our total fertility rate have been dropping quite fast. In fact, these are dropping so fast that we may actually begin to experience the beginning of population ageing in a generation. In two generations the problem will definitely be there.

There is no objective metric that you can cite which shows that our population growth is "out of control". If anything, the rapid drop shows that it is very much in control. Both our population growth rate and total fertility rate still continue to drop

Over-population is just one of the problem together with the obvious corruption and many more.

The evidence does not bear this out. There is simply no proof whatsoever that population causes or even contributes in any significant way to poverty or low productivity. In fact, history has shown that population growth fuels productivity. If you want to read a more detailed analysis of the logic, I have one at: http://mamador.wordpress.com/2007/05...rbate-poverty/.

Let me also quote Richard Sheldon in his Testimony On The International Population Stabilization and Reproductive Health Act:

No Obstacle to Development

The catastrophists' cliche' that a growing population is an obstacle to development is especially barren. Studies show a strong correlation between affluence and longevity; as the late Aaron Wildavsky liked to say, wealthier is healthier. The lengthening life expectancy in the developing world is evidence that population growth cannot be increasing poverty.

History makes the same point. The West grew rich precisely when its population was increasing at an unprecedented rate. Between 1776 and 1975, while the world's population increased sixfold, real gross world product rose about 80-fold.

In our own century we have seen a replay of the Industrial Revolution. After World War II the population of Hong Kong grew more quickly than that of 19th-century England or 20th-century India--at the same time that resource-poor island-colony was growing rich.

The increases in population and wealth have not been merely coincidental. They are causes and effects of each other. Today, with few exceptions, the most densely populated countries are the richest. Any mystery in that is dispelled by the realization that people are the source of ideas. The addition of people geometrically increases the potential for combining ideas into newer, better ideas. As the Nobel laureate and economist Simon Kuznets wrote, "More population means more creators and producers, both of goods along established production patterns and of new knowledge and inventions." A growing population also allows for a more elaborate division of labor, which raises incomes. Those who wish to stifle population growth would condemn hundreds of millions of people in the developing world to the abject deprivation that characterized the West before the Industrial Revolution.

The initially plausible claim that more people deplete resources faster has no more foundation than the catastrophists' other arguments. Price is the best indication of relative scarcity. For centuries, resources of every kind, including energy, have been getting cheaper. In 1990 energy on average was 46 percent cheaper that it was in 1950; minerals were 48 percent cheaper, lumber 41 percent cheaper, food 74 percent cheaper. As Carroll Ann Hodges, of the U.S. Geological Survey, wrote in the June 2, 1995, issue of Science (pp. 1305-1312), "Yet, despite the specter of scarcity that has prevailed throughout much of this century, no sustained mineral shortages have occurred. . . .Minerals essential to industrial economies are not now in short supply, nor are they likely to be for the next several generations." (The only thing getting more expensive is labor, an indication of the scarcity of people.) Technology enables us to find more resources and to use them more efficiently. Doubling the efficiency of our use of oil would be equivalent to doubling the available supply of oil. Natural resources, in other words, do not exist in fixed supplies.

Many people simply ASSUME that population causes or contributes to poverty, but you have to remember that once you are able to show that other factors can cause poverty, the case for blaming overpopulation is logically diminished. And many studies have shown that by far governance is the single most important determining factor for poverty. Population control does NOTHING to address bad governance.

Bad governance also affects productivity and wage. If you think you cannot afford to care for a decent-sized family (the average fertility rate today is just 3.5 children), then the question to ask is what factors are inhibiting your productivity and earning capacity. You will find that if you simply reduce the massive corruption and debt servicing, economic and and skills-enhancement opportunities will rise. But population control will do NOTHING to address these problems.

That is where this BILL will come in, to educate the masses about family planning and give them access to it. So what is evil with that?

Even if we assume that overpopulation is a problem (and study after study has shown that it is NOT), the Bill contains many objectionable provisions, some of which I have pointed out earlier in this thread by posting one of my blog articles which you can find at: http://mamador.wordpress.com/2008/05...deadly-agenda/.

Let me summarize two objections (these are not the only ones though):

• The Bill promotes abortifacients. This is undeniable and is a central part of the Bill's programs. As such, it really does promote abortion despite all of Lagman's propaganda claiming otherwise.
  
• The Bill is also coercive since it forces doctors and health workers who object to dispensing abortifacients to refer patients to others who will do the dirty deed. There is no proper alternative for conscientious objectors.

It is now irritating to hear Filipinos claim that the our government is the most corrupt. I assumed that this comments always came from anti-government orgs or from somebody less informed.

I'm afraid your assumption is wrong. These assessments come from independent, international bodies that have objective measures of corruption. One example is Transparency International's 2007 Corruption Perceptions Index (http://www.infoplease.com/world/stat...rceptions.html). Studies such as these are inherently far more accurate than your personal, subjective observations. And these bodies are more likely to be far better informed on this issue than you ever will be (no offense intended).

[bcasabee]

Sorry for butting in bro. I think your arguments are full of loop holes.
True, but if only all the people have jobs, then this problem shouldn't be an issue. In japan, people don't work because they are old. In the Philippines, people doesn't have work because there are no work to do in the first place. But this bill instead of allocating resources for livelihood and economic development, resources will be allocated for useless contraceptives. Face it bro, we don't have enough money to do both. Contraceptive campaign is a daunting task and takes a lot of resources and with no guarantee of success. So its either use our resources for livelihood and economic development, or use our resources for subsidizing contraceptives.

@mannyamador: I don't think you get the idea, do you?? The point why I am showing the statistics between the ageing population of Japan and the young population of the Philippines, is to illustrate the problem. When the biggest part of your population is a recepient of social services and only a small percentage are provider it will create strain to the government coffers.

.
Population is out of control is a fallacy.

In Japan they are already experiencing the problem, which is also the same in the Philippines. In Japan their population is dwindling, in the Philippines it is out-of control (simple as that).

Yeah, that is true that the Philippine income is less than that of Japan, but it doesn't necessarily mean that our income isn't enough if only its use wisely. I bet, we have more than enough if only our resources are being used wisely. 60 years of subsidizing contraceptives will surely make us poorer without any decrease in population.

Now, because the Philippines doesn't have more income than Japan the problem is more exaggerated. Your fear that we will have the same fate like what Japan is experiencing now, that will not happen until in the next 60years or more but by that time we have already better ways of averting that problem.

Bro, we don't need just eyes to see the real problem. There is no such thing as out-of-control population. Your statistical data is even messy. 7% unemployed rate and 30% workforce doesn't balance.

Over-population is just one of the problem together with the obvious corruption and many more. So you cannot just blame corruption while turning blind to the fact that our population outgrow our production. So while everybody knows that corruption is a problem, it is now time to accept that our out-of-control population is doing more harm than good. Open your eyes. You always pressed the problem of bad governance. Look at the statistics 34% underage and 4.2% are retirees, even the best government cannot work properly with that figure. Our un-employment is only 7% which is not that bad at all. The problem is in all countries out of its adult population only 60% will really be the workforce and that leaves the Philippines with roughly 30% workforce...that is negative production. SO, if you analyze the numbers, where do you think is the problem?...34% underage!

The evil in that is that its a deception. Family Planning and better life is just the bait. Once we are caught on this trap, we will all gonna be deep fried by our own lard.

That is where this BILL will come in, to educate the masses about family planning and give them access to it. So what is evil with that?

Yeah, we can even blame the media for spreading bad news including out of control population which isn't even true.

Very OT: It is now irritating to hear Filipinos claim that the our government is the most corrupt. I assumed that this comments always came from anti-government orgs or from somebody less informed. I have lived and worked a good part of my life (and still living now) in four different countries: Japan, UAE, China, Philippines. Mind you those countries have good records but that doesn't mean they are less corrupt than the Philippines. They have their own way of corruption and I saw that and experienced it first hand. Yes, Philippines is still in its growing pains but the reason why you hear corruption here and there it is because our media is more open and critical than those countries I have mentioned.

[bcasabee]

Opinion
Find out if you’re for or against the RH Bill
SHOOTING STRAIGHT By Valeriano Avila
Thursday, September 25, 2008

Last Monday, the debates on that dangerous Reproductive Health Bill began in Congress. It seems that this issue continues to confuse our people, especially Catholics. The Catholic Church opposed many of its salient provisions while the proponents of the bill try to pit the Protestant Churches or the Iglesia ni Kristo against the Catholic Church as a way of their “Dividing and Ruling” those who are opposed to this bill. Let’s go straight to the most objectionable parts of this proposal. Even an ordinary journalist would cringe if they read this very offensive provision.

I salute the charismatic group Couples for Christ for taking out half-page ads in the nation’s largest newspapers yesterday giving out a 5-point questionnaire, “Should you support Reproductive Health Bill No. 5043?” This is one quick questionnaire that everyone ought to look into, which would make a person decide whether he is for supporting the Reproductive Health bill or not. The five questions are:

1. As employers, do you agree to be compelled to provide free reproductive health care, services, supplies, devices and surgical procedures (including vasectomy and ligation) to your employees, and be subjected to both imprisonment and/or find, for every time that you fail to comply? Section 17 states that employers shall provide for the free delivery of reproductive health care services, supplies and devices to all workers more particularly women workers (read the Definition of Reproductive Health and Rights Section 4, paragraph G.)

2. As health care service providers, do you agree that you should be subjected to imprisonment and/or a fine, if you fail to provide reproductive health care services such as giving information on family planning methods and providing services like ligation and vasectomy, regardless of the patient’s civil status, religion or age? (Read section 21 on Prohibited Acts. Letter A, Paragraph 1 to 5 and Section 22 on Penalties.)

3. As a spouse, do you agree that your husband or wife can undergo a ligation or vasectomy without your consent or knowledge? (Read section 21 on Prohibited Acts, letter A Paragraph 2).

4. As parents, you do you agree that children from age 10 to 17 should be taught their sexual rights and the means to have a satisfying and “safe” *** life as part of their school curriculum? (Reproductive Health education will be mandatory from Grade 5 to the end of High School (See section 12 on Reproductive Health Education and Section 4 Definition of Family Planning and Reproductive Health, Paragraph b, c, and d).

5. Do you agree that you should be subjected to imprisonment and/or pay a fine, for expressing an opinion against any provision of this law, if such expression of opinion is interpreted as constituting “malicious disinformation”? (see section 21 on Prohibited Acts, Paragraph F and Section 22 on Penalties.)

At the end of each question is a yes or no box. I thoroughly examined each of them and I checked only the “no” box. Cebu media is celebrating the 14th Press Freedom Week and I’ll bet you that very few journalists have read the proposed Reproductive Health Bill. How much more for students, teachers and businessmen?

For us journalists, the fifth question on penalizing anyone for expressing an opinion against the Reproductive Health Bill (if God forbid, this becomes the law of the land) could end up with us paying a fine or imprisonment for the crime of “Malicious Disinformation”. My God! I would like to ask Rep. Nerissa Soon-Ruiz where they got this word. Are they telling us that if we columnist wrote something that they find offensive against this law, we could all be penalized?

The Cebu Chamber of Commerce and Industry (CCCI) under its President Dr. Edward Gaisano should also consult his members whether they agree with question number one asked by the Couples for Christ. Many employers would never agree to this provision, where it would be the responsibility of a company to provide condoms or other artificial contraceptives to its employees.

What about you parents out there? Would you allow *** Education to start in Grade Five? I don’t think so. So before this bill passes into law, I suggest you get out of your chairs and sign your opposition to this bill that is being done by your parish. As the old saying goes, “For evil to triumph, it is enough for good men to do nothing!” We should not allow evil to triumph over us. Go out and make your voices known about the evils of this RH Bill!

[colossus]

Let our legislators do their part of the job. They have the discretion to make laws, so long as it is not in conflict with the Constitution.

If they really want to solve the problem on overpopulation, then they should address the matter properly. They could not just neglect the fact that they can do something to resolve the problem.

The Church, in its regard to procreation, should limit their influence to their individual members. They should not exert their influence if only to stop the passage of this bill because they are in effect depriving the people of their right to have an appropriate law for them.

[cottonmouth]

Opinion
Find out if you’re for or against the RH Bill
SHOOTING STRAIGHT By Valeriano Avila
Thursday, September 25, 2008

I have found out long time ago that I am not against the bill.　I don't know where Valeriano Avila get his version of the bill. But for you @bcasabee I have posted some parts of Section 21 of the bill I copied from this link

>>>>>Full text of House Bill No. 5043 (Reproductive Health and Population Development Act of 200 at Philippine e-Legal Forum

You decide now who is lying because I cannot see anything wrong on Section 21 as what Mr. Avila has been claiming. Who is lying now?


SECTIONS 17 to 21 of RH Bill 5043


SEC. 17. Employers’ Responsibilities. - Employers shall respect the reproductive health rights of all their workers. Women shall not be discriminated against in the matter of hiring, regularization of employment status or selection for retrenchment.

All Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBAs) shall provide for the free delivery by the employer of reasonable quantity of reproductive health care services, supplies and devices to all workers, more particularly women workers. In establishments or enterprises where there are no CBAs or where the employees are unorganized, the employer shall have the same obligation.

SEC. 18. Support of Private and Non-government Health Care Service Providers. - Pursuant to Section 5(b) hereof, private reproductive health care service providers, including but not limited to gynecologists and obstetricians, are encouraged to join their colleagues in non-government organizations in rendering such services free of charge or at reduced professional fee rates to indigent and low income patients.

SEC. 19. Multi-Media Campaign. - POPCOM shall initiate and sustain an intensified nationwide multi-media campaign to raise the level of public awareness on the urgent need to protect and promote reproductive health and rights.

SEC. 20. Reporting Requirements. - Before the end of April of each year,the DOH shall submit an annual report to the President of the Philippines, the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives on a definitive and comprehensive assessment of the implementation of this Act and shall make the necessary recommendations for executive and legislative action. The report shall be posted in the website of DOH and printed copies shall be made available to all stakeholders.

SEC. 21. Prohibited Acts. - The following acts are prohibited:

a) Any health care service provider, whether public or private, who shall:

1. Knowingly withhold information or impede the dissemination thereof, and/or intentionally provide incorrect information regarding programs and services on reproductive health including the right to informed choice and access to a full range of legal, medically-safe and effective family planning methods;

2. Refuse to perform voluntary ligation and vasectomy and other legal and medically-safe reproductive health care services on any person of legal age on the ground of lack of spousal consent or authorization.

3. Refuse to provide reproductive health care services to an abused minor, whose abused condition is certified by the proper official or personnel of the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) or to duly DSWD-certified abused pregnant minor on whose case no parental consent is necessary.

4. Fail to provide, either deliberately or through gross or inexcusable negligence, reproductive health care services as mandated under this Act, the Local Government Code of 1991, the Labor Code, and Presidential Decree 79, as amended; and

5. Refuse to extend reproductive health care services and information on account of the patient’s civil status, gender or sexual orientation, age, religion, personal circumstances, and nature of work; Provided, That all conscientious objections of health care service providers based on religious grounds shall be respected: Provided, further, That the conscientious objector shall immediately refer the person seeking such care and services to another health care service provider within the same facility or one which is conveniently accessible: Provided, finally, That the patient is not in an emergency or serious case as defined in RA 8344 penalizing the refusal of hospitals and medical clinics to administer appropriate initial medical treatment and support in emergency and serious cases.

b) Any public official who prohibits or restricts personally or through a subordinate the delivery of legal and medically-safe reproductive health care services, including family planning;

c) Any employer who shall fail to comply with his obligation under Section 17 of this Act or an employer who requires a female applicant or employee, as a condition for employment or continued employment, to involuntarily undergo sterilization, tubal ligation or any other form of contraceptive method;

d) Any person who shall falsify a certificate of compliance as required in Section 14 of this Act; and

e) Any person who maliciously en ges in disinformation about the intent or provisions of this Act.

[cottonmouth]

Opinion
What about you parents out there? Would you allow *** Education to start in Grade Five? I don’t think so. So before this bill passes into law, I suggest you get out of your chairs and sign your opposition to this bill that is being done by your parish. As the old saying goes, “For evil to triumph, it is enough for good men to do nothing!” We should not allow evil to triumph over us. Go out and make your voices known about the evils of this RH Bill!

Have you really read the bill in full as you claimed? Or, are you reading the bill that is now discussed in congress and not those given by you priests? Because I really doubt you have read it yourself...at least before you make you silly comment.

Section 12 clearly states that "REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH" should be taught in age appropriate manner. For Christ sake they are NOT talking PORNO here! Can't you understand english? It clearly recognize that your 5 year old will not understand what mom & dad was doing last night. The bill instead will make it sure that they will have age-appropriate education to prepare them. Wake up dude! highschools are ****ing they way up to college, so when do you think is the right time to prepare.

Read again SEC. 12 and stop spreading malicious lies. If this bill will pass, people like are in trouble...see the penalties for voluntary mis-information.



SEC. 12. Mandatory Age-Appropriate Reproductive Health Education. - Recognizing the importance of reproductive health rights in empowering the youth and developing them into responsible adults, Reproductive Health Education in an age-appropriate manner shall be taught by adequately trained teachers starting from Grade 5 up to Fourth Year High School. In order to assure the prior training of teachers on reproductive health, the implementation of Reproductive Health Education shall commence at the start of the school year one year following the effectivity of this Act. The POPCOM, in coordination with the Department of Education, shall formulate the Reproductive Health Education curriculum, which shall be common to both public and private schools and shall include related population and development concepts in addition to the following subjects and standards:

a. Reproductive health and sexual rights;

b. Reproductive health care and services;

c. Attitudes, beliefs and values on sexual development, sexual behavior and sexual health;

d. Proscription and hazards of abortion and management of post-abortion complications;

e. Responsible parenthood.

f. Use and application of natural and modern family planning methods to promote reproductive health, achieve desired family size and prevent unwanted, unplanned and mistimed pregnancies;

g. Abstinence before marriage;

h. Prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS and other, STIs/STDs, prostate cancer, breast cancer, cervical cancer and other gynecological disorders;

i. Responsible sexuality; and

j. Maternal, peri-natal and post-natal education, care and services.

In support of the natural, and primary right of parents in the rearing of the youth, the POPCOM shall provide concerned parents with adequate and relevant scientific materials on the age-appropriate topics and manner of teaching reproductive health education to their children.

In the elementary level, reproductive health education shall focus, among others, on values formation.

Non-formal education programs shall likewise include the abovementioned reproductive Health Education.

[bcasabee]

First and foremost. I didn't claim that I had read the entire bill. I was about to read the whole thing actually, but I stopped at the section which talks about appropriating budget ("we already got this insertion scandal going on at the senate") for this law (if this succeeds) which in my opinion is just a huge waste of resources. So that settles the issue for me and had lost the appetite to read till the end. BTW, sorry, that article is not mine, its from the freeman newspaper. Here is the link.
The Freeman - Articles - -

Well, since you've posted section 12. Please tell me, which of those topics are we going to teach to the grade 5 PUPILS. That's another icing on a rotten cake this section is describing. Also, I hope they fix those substandard textbooks first, before handling out manuals to students on how to use a condom properly.

SEC. 12. Mandatory Age-Appropriate Reproductive Health Education. - Recognizing the importance of reproductive health rights in empowering the youth and developing them into responsible adults, Reproductive Health Education in an age-appropriate manner shall be taught by adequately trained teachers starting from Grade 5 up to Fourth Year High School. In order to assure the prior training of teachers on reproductive health, the implementation of Reproductive Health Education shall commence at the start of the school year one year following the effectivity of this Act. The POPCOM, in coordination with the Department of Education, shall formulate the Reproductive Health Education curriculum, which shall be common to both public and private schools and shall include related population and development concepts in addition to the following subjects and standards:

a. Reproductive health and sexual rights;

b. Reproductive health care and services;

c. Attitudes, beliefs and values on sexual development, sexual behavior and sexual health;

d. Proscription and hazards of abortion and management of post-abortion complications;

e. Responsible parenthood.

f. Use and application of natural and modern family planning methods to promote reproductive health, achieve desired family size and prevent unwanted, unplanned and mistimed pregnancies;

g. Abstinence before marriage;

h. Prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS and other, STIs/STDs, prostate cancer, breast cancer, cervical cancer and other gynecological disorders;

i. Responsible sexuality; and

j. Maternal, peri-natal and post-natal education, care and services.

In support of the natural, and primary right of parents in the rearing of the youth, the POPCOM shall provide concerned parents with adequate and relevant scientific materials on the age-appropriate topics and manner of teaching reproductive health education to their children.

In the elementary level, reproductive health education shall focus, among others, on values formation.

Non-formal education programs shall likewise include the abovementioned reproductive Health Education.

[wakkanakka]

5. Refuse to extend reproductive health care services and information on account of the patient’s civil status, gender or sexual orientation, age, religion, personal circumstances, and nature of work; Provided, That all conscientious objections of health care service providers based on religious grounds shall be respected: Provided, further, That the conscientious objector shall immediately refer the person seeking such care and services to another health care service provider within the same facility or one which is conveniently accessible: Provided, finally, That the patient is not in an emergency or serious case as defined in RA 8344 penalizing the refusal of hospitals and medical clinics to administer appropriate initial medical treatment and support in emergency and serious cases.

This is FORCING people to act against their conscience! If you don't want to distribute abortafacient, you have to show them someone else who will. Eh, so you are assisting in the same thing. Grabe! No freedom, no cfonscinece. Just goverrnment forcing people to do distirbution of contraceptive against their beliefs. Stupid.

[mannyamador]

You decide now who is lying because I cannot see anything wrong on Section 21 as what Mr. Avila has been claiming. Who is lying now?

Thanks for showing that Mr. Avila WAS TELLING THE TRUTH. In his article, he asked:

"3. As a spouse, do you agree that your husband or wife can undergo a ligation or vasectomy without your consent or knowledge?"

Well, that is EXACTLY what the Bill says: that a spouse cannot be refused any such procedure even if it is without consent or knowledge of his/her partner. That is precisely what Mr. Avila was complaining about.

Here's Section 21, part a, paragraph 1 and 2:

SEC. 21. Prohibited Acts. - The following acts are prohibited:

a) Any health care service provider, whether public or private, who shall:

1. Knowingly withhold information or impede the dissemination thereof, and/or intentionally provide incorrect information regarding programs and services on reproductive health including the right to informed choice and access to a full range of legal, medically-safe and effective family planning methods;

2. Refuse to perform voluntary ligation and vasectomy and other legal and medically-safe reproductive health care services on any person of legal age on the ground of lack of spousal consent or authorization.

It's pretty obvious that YOU either haven't read the Bill; or cannot understand what it actually says; or are simply lying (which is what you hypocritically accuse Mr Avila of doing).

If this bill will pass, people like are in trouble...see the penalties for voluntary mis-information.

In other words, the Bill effectively mandates that only the anti-life side should be heard! That's typical of intolerant trapos like Lagman and his supporters. They use the law to silence the truth about their shenanigans. They want to curtail free speech when it exposes their lies. What tyrants!

On another point: Tell me, who's going to decide what is age-appropriate for children? Since when did the government, or Lagman, or the radical anti-life lobby have any monopoly or even competence to decide such a matter? The very fact that they promote abortifacients says a lot about the rotten values they intend to impart in their "age-appropriate" *** education.

@wakkanakka

You're quite right. The unjust and coercive provisions of the Bill are still there. That alone is reason enough to scrap it and give Lagman a swift kick in the rear-end.