Wikipedia on RH Bill: after reading it, what is your stand?

[Dark-Knight]

---

Ok man ang purpose sa RH bill but need lang gyud klaruhon ang scope ani like sa pag-gamit sa Hormonal contraception which the opposition said its killing a five-day old infant. But the rest of the purpose is favorable for me like Maternal and infant health & nutrition; Counselling on sexuallity; prevention of abortion and mgt of post-abortion complications; RH education for the youth; Prevention of STDs, HIV, AIDS.. etc..

[emow]

Say what? Lol

So it's not freedom of choice since it disregards the right of people not to choose which method of family planning they want to use?

Coercive... wow...

Logic sad intawn.... the right of non-choice is not a choice neither is it a right.. disregarding non-choice is essentially giving people the opportunity to choose.... asa ba ang coercive ana oi... anu ba,.


In short.. pahawa-on ang squatters and give them opportunities sa provinces... sounds good.. pero what if Dili sila ganahan? Dili ba ni COERCIVE? lol


Were already doing this (building schools and TESDA) pero still kulang gihapon ang budget and the # of schools is not enough to meet the # of children and limited ra ang budget so we can't just spend like crazy on education alone.


You mean subsidize private sector firms... and where do you suppose we get the money for that? This will entail budget cuts which will adversely affect the ability of our government to deliver social services...


Ikaw ra ni ingon... COERCIVE... mas grabe pa ni imohang solution. Unsa ning 2 years service... wala ni salary? dili kaha ni slavery? If sweldohan nimo, where will you get the money? Also if sweldohan nimo, these graduates will be taking away jobs you could have given to those who can't afford school or need the jobs more.



Definitely not ur area of expertise... sayon kaayo hunahuna-on pero ang problema is pag execute ani given the real world scenario.

Also, Studies have shown that there is no correlation between reproductive health education and increased sexual activity.



The theory that *** education leads to increased *** activity is inconclusive at best... anyone who tells you otherwise does not have the scientific data to back it up.

The bill penalizes people who don't share the same idea... its like penalizing a muslim for not eating pork, if ever pork is mandated to be consumed....something ing ana ba...

Look, i have only given ideas... i don't intend to pretend to be an expert so i can't give very detailed answers...lol i didn't know only expert people can air out their thoughts in here...lol

relax, i know you are so ready to shoot down anyone who doesn't share your opinion....

a. Decongest, meaning developing rural areas to attract unemployed people to try their lives in there... this needs to have a systematized program... and of course, propaganda.... By giving businesses incentives, not necessarily subsidized, pwede man delay tax payment for a certain period, reduced tax to a specific percent, and etc... many will build in the rural areas....this will foster urbanization...more cities, more jobs, more revenues...

b. I know how limited the funds of the government is, most of them have deep pockets baya...lol the answer to these problems is volunteerism... Private sector must do its share.... Like what Efren Penaflorida did....we need more people who can contribute something for free to the poor...and this something must be education based, empowering the underprivileged to something greater.... idealistic? i say no....some people are doing it...the problem is, gamay ra...

c. Mandatory 2 years service for state university graduates.... the country has funded their education, it is only right for them to return something back to the people... Sa south korea, all their citizens are mandated to serve military for 2 years since naa sila war sa north korea....sa atoa, we have war against poverty.... they get free education for their career, it is just right many people can benefit from their service... in return for their service, the government can make recommendations for them...like ana sa AMA school to employment na system ba....something ing ana...

d. People who are poor usually have many kids...why? because they have no work, nothing to keep them busy and they could not afford for the leisure, the kind you and i enjoy... Give them something to be productively busy, and they will spend less time making kids... There are a lot more factors than population that affects poverty.... I just cannot accept that the only solution is to violate the rights of the unborn....

[vipvip68]

The bill penalizes people who don't share the same idea... its like penalizing a muslim for not eating pork, if ever pork is mandated to be consumed....something ing ana ba...

Please state which part of the bill penalizes people who don't share the same idea...

Your example on Muslims is flawed because the bill doesn't force contraceptives down your throat (figuratively).. it merely gives you the option to use it or not (sans any religious affiliation). Bill doesnt mandate the use of contraceptives. It only makes it available to people who want it.

a. Decongest, meaning developing rural areas to attract unemployed people to try their lives in there... this needs to have a systematized program... and of course, propaganda.... By giving businesses incentives, not necessarily subsidized, pwede man delay tax payment for a certain period, reduced tax to a specific percent, and etc... many will build in the rural areas....this will foster urbanization...more cities, more jobs, more revenues...

b. I know how limited the funds of the government is, most of them have deep pockets baya...lol the answer to these problems is volunteerism... Private sector must do its share.... Like what Efren Penaflorida did....we need more people who can contribute something for free to the poor...and this something must be education based, empowering the underprivileged to something greater.... idealistic? i say no....some people are doing it...the problem is, gamay ra...

c. Mandatory 2 years service for state university graduates.... the country has funded their education, it is only right for them to return something back to the people... Sa south korea, all their citizens are mandated to serve military for 2 years since naa sila war sa north korea....sa atoa, we have war against poverty.... they get free education for their career, it is just right many people can benefit from their service... in return for their service, the government can make recommendations for them...like ana sa AMA school to employment na system ba....something ing ana...

d. People who are poor usually have many kids...why? because they have no work, nothing to keep them busy and they could not afford for the leisure, the kind you and i enjoy... Give them something to be productively busy, and they will spend less time making kids... There are a lot more factors than population that affects poverty.... I just cannot accept that the only solution is to violate the rights of the unborn....

For me noh.. simple ra kaayo ang solution.... here goes...

1. Decrease average number of children per family from 3.23 children per woman to 2.0
2. Improve current unemployment rate of 7.5% to around 2%
3. Focus on increasing GDP per capita (were currently around 110+ in the world) Countries like Singapore are ranked #4

Short term plan (1-6 yrs):

1. Pass RHB, which will educate people on responsible parenthood
2. Get all sectors involved in responsible parenthood (including church)
3. Look for foreign investments to lower unemployment rate
4. Improve technical skills education to increase competency
5. Focus on social services thru DSWD to cater to the poorest of the poor and get them to be productive members of society
6. Invest in agriculture and achieve food sufficiency (Philippines is worlds biggest rice importer)

Long term plan (7 yrs +)
1. Focus on increasing GDP per capita by improving basic education (focus on quality instead of quantity)
2. Do the same with healthcare facilities (quality vs. quantity)
3. With proper economic management, the rest of the economic growth will follow at this point...


The key is to keep the population at a constant rate such that health and education will be able to catch up in capacity. When we are able to care and educate all our people, we then focus on improving quality of education and increasing their skillsets for higher income opportunities here in the country.

Many of the problems (lack of schools, healthcare and unemployment) are actually symptoms of the problem... we cannot solve it unless we first have an effective means of controlling population growth.... for me that's where we should start.

Effective Population Management.... thats what we need.

[emow]

Please state which part of the bill penalizes people who don't share the same idea...

Your example on Muslims is flawed because the bill doesn't force contraceptives down your throat (figuratively).. it merely gives you the option to use it or not (sans any religious affiliation). Bill doesnt mandate the use of contraceptives. It only makes it available to people who want it.

One of the strongest criticism against the bill, even from its supporters, centers on the penal provisions, which have been called "coercive," and a violation of free choice and conscience. There is "mandatory" *** education starting grade 5, and malicious "disinformation" is penalized. Health care service providers may be imprisoned or fined if they fail to provide reproductive health care services such as providing services like ligation and vasectomy. The same may happen to employers who do not provide free services to employees. Imprisonment ranges from (1) month to six (6) months or a fine ranging from Ten Thousand Pesos (P10,000.00) to Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00). Former Finance Secretary, Roberto de Ocampo, stated that these punitive provisions "are tantamount to an affront to civil liberties and smack of religious persecution." - from the article posted by TS

[KlaytoN]

One of the strongest criticism against the bill, even from its supporters, centers on the penal provisions, which have been called "coercive," and a violation of free choice and conscience. There is "mandatory" *** education starting grade 5, and malicious "disinformation" is penalized. Health care service providers may be imprisoned or fined if they fail to provide reproductive health care services such as providing services like ligation and vasectomy. The same may happen to employers who do not provide free services to employees. Imprisonment ranges from (1) month to six (6) months or a fine ranging from Ten Thousand Pesos (P10,000.00) to Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00). Former Finance Secretary, Roberto de Ocampo, stated that these punitive provisions "are tantamount to an affront to civil liberties and smack of religious persecution." - from the article posted by TS

Sir emow, i think you misinterpreted the said "penalties." Please read it again and again. What i understand, the penalties only apply to those authorities or institutions providing services related to the RH bill. It does not cover nor target the whole population. Therefore your analogy about "muslim penalized for not eating pork" is somewhat erroneous.

[mannyamador]

So it's not freedom of choice since it disregards the right of people not to choose which method of family planning they want to use?

The RH/Abortion does NOT give people more choices. Filipinos ALREADY can chooose to use artificial (although proven to be ineffectve and counterproductive) birth control methods.

In fact, Cong. Lagman's HB 96 (formerly HB 5043) is unduly coercive and violates freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and freedom of religion.

Section 22 (e) of the proposed bill HB 96, for example, lists the following as a prohibited act: “Any person who maliciously engages in disinformation about the intent or provisions of this Act.” This provision is overly broad and “disinformation” could (and most probably will) be construed as prohibiting the expression of objections to the Bill, such as what we are presently doing. This provision is is obviously going to be used to suppress dissent, and is an undue restriction of freedom of speech. It has no place in any of the laws of a democratic nation.

Section 22, number 3, requires doctors and health workers to provide “health care services,” but since the bill classifies abortifacient contraceptives and other artificial contraceptive devices and methods as essential medicines, these are presumably included. If they refuse to do so on religious grounds, they must still refer those who want to use such devices or methods to another person who will dispense them. Conscientious objectors are thereby required to cooperate in such acts, and if they refuse, they are slapped penalties ranging from one to six months imprisonment and a fine of P10,000-P50,000, as specified in Section 23 of the proposed bill. HB 96 eliminates any choice for conscientious objectors and makes no room for their legitimate concerns.

Section 18, on the other hand, mandates that employers must provide family planning services (or information on where to obtain these), presumably including abortifacient contraceptives, to their employees. Employers, therefore, are not given any choice despite the fact that distribution of these abortifacients and contraceptives may be against their conscience.


By the way, many studies have shown that so-called comprehensive *** education programs that involves training in the use of contraceptives are ineffective in reducing unplanned pregnancies or irresponsible sexual behavior. In fact, such programs often increase the incidence of both.

In 2009, Meg Wiggins et al., published research evaluating the effectiveness of the U.K.'s Young People’s Development Programme (YPDP) in reducing teenage pregnancy, substance use, and other outcomes. The program involved giving teenagers s3x education and advice about contraception. Of those in the program, 16 percent became pregnant, compared with just 6 percent in a comparison group. The study concluded that:

No evidence was found that the intervention was effective in delaying heterosexual experience or reducing pregnancies, drunkenness, or cannabis use. Some results suggested an adverse effect. Although methodological limitations may at least partly explain these findings, any further implementation of such interventions in the UK should be only within randomised trials.

To be sure, the bills that have been filed at the Philippine Congress also include values formation, sexual abstinence, and proscription and hazards of abortion, but studies indicate that if these topics are taught along with contraceptive use and other value-neutral topics, they become ineffective presumably because of the conflicting and confusing value messages that such education transmits to young students.

John B. Jemmott III et al., for example, compared the effectiveness of abstinence-only, safer-s3x only, comprehensive s3x education, to evaluate the efficacy of an abstinence-only intervention in preventing sexual involvement in young adolescents. The study, involving 682 African-American students in grades 6 and 7, found that students in the abstinence-only intervention had lower sexual activity even over time than those in the control group. The study concluded that, “Theory-based abstinence-only interventions may have an important role in preventing adolescent sexual involvement.”

Other studies support this conclusion. For example, Stan Weed et al., examined seventh graders in northern Virginia, and found that students who received abstinence education were half as likely as non-participants to initiate sexual activity one year after the program.

The evidence is clear. The RH//Abortion bill violates our civil rights and will lead to riskier sexual behavior and more unplanned pregnancies.

Let's take a stand based on the facts instead of false population control ideology,

[crossramz]

i don't support this RH bill.... it does not really address the problems of poverty and it is coercive...

I guess everyone here is entitled for our own POV.. but at least be more considerate of the highest possible solution that will save economic and social problems.. though ill say its not correct solution but though at least it minimize the current ones we have..

[Xilcher]

wow.. finally somebody posted a great information..

Quote:

"Medical experts such as The Southeast Asian Center for Bioethics, Philippine Nurses Association, Catholic Physicians’ Guild of the Philippines stated that “the antiabortion stance of the bill is contradicted by the promotion of contraceptive agents (IUD and hormonal contraceptives) which actually act after fertilization and are potentially abortifacient agents.”[13]

Lagman argues that research by the Guttmacher Institute, involved in advancing international reproductive health, reveals that the use of contraceptives can reduce abortion rates by 85%. The bill, said Clara Padilla of EnGender Rights Inc, will "help reduce the number of abortions by providing increased access to information and services on modern contraceptive methods, that in turn will reduce the number of unwanted --and often aborted-- pregnancies.[14]

Opponents argue that new data thwarts the "myth" that contraception lowers abortions,[15] and state that the contraceptive mentality of not wanting children leads to more abortion when an unwanted human being is conceived."



Experts agree...who the hell are lawmakers to defy science...F#$%k Them all!
Now... I'm vindicated...almost...


The Truth Will Set Us All Free!
Defend Life!

[crossramz]

oh man reading your information remind me of my school days on political science subject.. the notes were too long but the message were too shorts.. ehhehe

[vipvip68]

The RH/Abortion does NOT give people more choices. Filipinos ALREADY can chooose to use artificial (although proven to be ineffectve and counterproductive) birth control methods.

To give people REAL choice, the contraceptives need to be available to them. This is the main difference with the passage of this bill. It is not only a choice, but the availability of that choice for all.

In fact, Cong. Lagman's HB 96 (formerly HB 5043) is unduly coercive and violates freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and freedom of religion.

Section 22 (e) of the proposed bill HB 96, for example, lists the following as a prohibited act: “Any person who maliciously engages in disinformation about the intent or provisions of this Act.” This provision is overly broad and “disinformation” could (and most probably will) be construed as prohibiting the expression of objections to the Bill, such as what we are presently doing. This provision is is obviously going to be used to suppress dissent, and is an undue restriction of freedom of speech. It has no place in any of the laws of a democratic nation.

Section 22, number 3, requires doctors and health workers to provide “health care services,” but since the bill classifies abortifacient contraceptives and other artificial contraceptive devices and methods as essential medicines, these are presumably included. If they refuse to do so on religious grounds, they must still refer those who want to use such devices or methods to another person who will dispense them. Conscientious objectors are thereby required to cooperate in such acts, and if they refuse, they are slapped penalties ranging from one to six months imprisonment and a fine of P10,000-P50,000, as specified in Section 23 of the proposed bill. HB 96 eliminates any choice for conscientious objectors and makes no room for their legitimate concerns.

Sec 22 and 23 basically talk about giving people an informed choice. Withholding information based on religious or moral biases is not the duty of the health worker. They are professionally required to present all the information and leave the choice to the person. Health workers need to be professional and not include their personal biases in their work.

Section 18, on the other hand, mandates that employers must provide family planning services (or information on where to obtain these), presumably including abortifacient contraceptives, to their employees. Employers, therefore, are not given any choice despite the fact that distribution of these abortifacients and contraceptives may be against their conscience.

.... the intent of section 18 is for employers to allow their employees access to health facilities and services. Again, it is up to the person to decide and the important thing here is to provide people with an informed choice devoid of religious or moral biases which are not consisten across all religious beliefs.

By the way, many studies have shown that so-called comprehensive *** education programs that involves training in the use of contraceptives are ineffective in reducing unplanned pregnancies or irresponsible sexual behavior. In fact, such programs often increase the incidence of both.

In 2009, Meg Wiggins et al., published research evaluating the effectiveness of the U.K.'s Young People’s Development Programme (YPDP) in reducing teenage pregnancy, substance use, and other outcomes. The program involved giving teenagers s3x education and advice about contraception. Of those in the program, 16 percent became pregnant, compared with just 6 percent in a comparison group. The study concluded that:

No evidence was found that the intervention was effective in delaying heterosexual experience or reducing pregnancies, drunkenness, or cannabis use. Some results suggested an adverse effect. Although methodological limitations may at least partly explain these findings, any further implementation of such interventions in the UK should be only within randomised trials.

Like I said, these studies are inconclusive at best and other studies have shown otherwise as I have stated above. Point is, there's no correlation between teaching *** education and increased sexual activity.

To be sure, the bills that have been filed at the Philippine Congress also include values formation, sexual abstinence, and proscription and hazards of abortion, but studies indicate that if these topics are taught along with contraceptive use and other value-neutral topics, they become ineffective presumably because of the conflicting and confusing value messages that such education transmits to young students.

That's merely an assumption and does not take into account the curriculum of reproductive health education which paces itself depending on the intellectual maturity of the students across grade levels.

John B. Jemmott III et al., for example, compared the effectiveness of abstinence-only, safer-s3x only, comprehensive s3x education, to evaluate the efficacy of an abstinence-only intervention in preventing sexual involvement in young adolescents. The study, involving 682 African-American students in grades 6 and 7, found that students in the abstinence-only intervention had lower sexual activity even over time than those in the control group. The study concluded that, “Theory-based abstinence-only interventions may have an important role in preventing adolescent sexual involvement.”

***
Ms. Brown (National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy) noted that the abstinence-only classes in the Jemmott study centered on people with an average age of 12 and that unlike the federally supported abstinence programs now in use, did not advocate abstinence until marriage.

The classes also did not portray *** negatively or suggest that condoms are ineffective, and contained only medically accurate information. Dr. Jemmott’s abstinence-only course was designed for the research, and is not in current use in schools.

Other studies support this conclusion. For example, Stan Weed et al., examined seventh graders in northern Virginia, and found that students who received abstinence education were half as likely as non-participants to initiate sexual activity one year after the program.

Here's your Stan Weed being grilled in congress..
YouTube - Chris Shays grills Stan Weed on abstinence-only

Bottom line is... its our duty to provide students with information... someone here loves the saying "education is the key".. and he's partly right. It is our duty to give them the right kind of information rather than only teach them part of the info and have them get the wrong info from another source. In teaching them everything, we also tell them the consequences of their actions and ultimately leave it to them to make an INFORMED CHOICE about what they want to do with their lives.

The evidence is clear. The RH//Abortion bill violates our civil rights and will lead to riskier sexual behavior and more unplanned pregnancies.

The RHB is not an abortion bill.. (Sec 3.m.) and instead of violating your civil rights, on the contrary, it affords an INFORMED CHOICE to each person. It is free from religious and moral biases and penalizes health workers who distort the INFORMED CHOICE by injecting their own religious or moral bias. There is no clear study of it leading to increased sexual behavior and pregnancies as there are conflicting studies but the importance is educating the youth and women / families and equipping them with complete info so that they can make an INFORMED CHOICE...