Legalize Abortion?

[giddyboy]

---

Your deceptive propaganda isn;'t fooling anyone intelligent. People have already begun to realize that the RH/Abortion Bill promotes abortifacient contraceptives. In other words, the Bill is sneaking in a form of silent abortion -- in total disregard of our pro-life Constitution!

well, sorry but more people are getting to realize that you can never equate the RH Bill as an abortion bill, to which you have been vehemently propagating here.

More and more people have realized that even the poll question you concocted above is very misleading. "Legalize abortion thru the RH Bill?" is very misleading. To add, putting the RH Bill issue into this "legalize abortion" thread is also misleading. All intended to inject the thought that the RH Bill is an abortion bill.

Sorry, but more and more people already know that the RH Bill explicitly treats abortion as a crime.The RH Bill is not only about contraceptives. It is principally about rights, health, and sustainable development.

But I guess the mere mention of "rights", or "women's rights", makes your blood boil isn't it? op kors ky kontra man ninyo sa politika. Women's rights group have gained more foothold compared to your church-babied Pro-life group.

if not for these women's groups, we would not have made the Magna Carta for Women into law to which your group has been opposing since time immemorial. and since you cannot stop it from passing into law, all you can tell to the media is that you are "worried" about the Magna Carta.

what's next for you to oppose? GAY and LESBIAN RIGHTS?

besides, it is the BFAD that approves or disapproves contraceptives to be made available in the Phils., and not the RH Bill. If a certain contraceptive is disapproved for use by BFAD, the RH Bill (if made into law) will just follow suit.

so your scare tactic that using contraceptives where medically safe and legally permissible is a sin is just what it is, A SCARE TACTIC better left for the church pulpit and not in Congress or Senate.

Give what is due for God and give what is due for Caesar...

You ought to tell that to your fanatical pro-RH allies. They continue to pretend that the Bill will address "overpopulation", and use that excuse as one of their primary arguments in support of this deadly Bill..

Looks like you have more educating to do within your own ranks! Harhar!

As I said again, overpopulation is a myth and nowhere is basis for the RH Bill. It is tackling about about population momentum and family size instead.

If "some" people in support of the RH Bill wrongly regard the bill to address the overpopulation myth, they have more to gain if they be educated on the benefits of the bill rather than your anti-RH propaganda.

and i dunno who will have the last laugh but surely it won't be you...

FVR supports the RH Bill.
Gibo supports the RH Bill.
Lea Salonga supports the RH Bill.
Loren Legarda (i think) supports the RH Bill.
Noynoy Aquino supports the RH Bill.
Chiz Escudero supports the RH Bill.
Pia Cayetano supports the RH Bill.
Hontiveros-Baraquel supports the RH Bill.
Gabriela supports the RH Bill.
ALU-TUCP supports the RH BIll.
The EU supports the RH Bill.
The UN supports the RH Bill.
Tado supports the RH Bill.
6 out of 10 Pinoys support the RH Bill (accdg to Pulse Asia)

Yes, this is not a popularity contest, but they are no fanatics nor they are stupid...they don't have tunnel vision either. It's plain and simple: these guys have valid concerns for the welfare of the people (especially the poor) why they support the RH Bill.

They know very well of the old proverb that "Give what is due for God and give what is due for Caesar"...separation of church and state.

NO to Abortion!
YES to the RH Bill!

[aguanta]

sakto ka. kaning debati aning RH nasaktan man gud ug inamaw ... confine pa lang unta to (1) the health of the mother (2) the social question of family care (3) economics ... ok ra unta.... pero sagulan na gani ug panguros ... nayabag dayun

[cebulifer]

If the RH Bill proponents put a section there stating: ABORTION IS STILL A CRIME. Will that be okay for the Church?

[cebulifer]

Ateneo Professors Position Paper on the RH Bill

Totally agree. Its a long read though.

[cebulifer]

Overwhelming support for RH Bill

Kinda old kay 3rd Quarter of 2008 pa man! But I don't think naay dramatic change sa survey results.

[mannyamador]

If the RH Bill proponents put a section there stating: ABORTION IS STILL A CRIME. Will that be okay for the Church?

Of course not. Abortion is a crime right now without the RH/Abortion Bill. What they should remove from the Bill (among other things) is the promotion and funding of ABORTIFACIENT CONTRACEPTIVES.

It's plain and simple: these guys have valid concerns for the welfare of the people (especially the poor) why they support the RH Bill.

Oh, you mean like Erap? So he can steal more money? Erap supports the Bill too you know. Hehehe... Citing celebrity support is NOT a logical argument. In fact, it only shows that you DON'T have any.

Those who oppose the RH/Abortion Bill have put forth very convincing, logical arguments against the Bill which none of the Bill's supporters have been able to refute. So the pro-RH fanatics just resort to popularity contests (argumentum ad populorum), attacking the Church (argumentum ad hominem), and other illogical and deceptive means. You can see that right here in this thread.

Kinda old kay 3rd Quarter of 2008 pa man! But I don't think naay dramatic change sa survey results.

This is the survey where they used questions designed to introduce bias. This has already been oiointed out so many times, it's amazing that anyone is still gullible enough to be fooled by these so-called "surveys".

here's some more factual and locial reading:

A Primer on the proposed Reproductive Health, Responsible Parenthood, and Population Development Consolidated Bill
Dr. Roberto de Vera
http://www.scribd.com/doc/21622530/D...nce-vs-RH-Bill

... we find that available statistics and scientific studies do not support the claim that "too many people" means "more poor people." Bad governance and bad economic policies, not a large, fast-growing population, are the real causes of poverty. Thus we recommend that more efforts be placed on improving governance and implementing good economic policies.

PROTECT YOUR RIGHTS AND THOSE OF THE UNBORN.
REJECT THE COERCIVE RH/ABORTION BILL (HB 5043)
Please sign the online petition AGAINST the RH/Abortion Bill (HB5043)
http://www.petitiononline.com/xxhb5043/

[mannyamador]

it's amusing how these anti-abortion advocates are so passionate that some of them would go as far as killing abortionists for "murdering babies".

Get your facts right. Pro-life groups condemned -- and continue to condemn -- violence against abortionists. In stark contrast, pro-aboprtion groups are strangely SILENT when pro-abortion fanatics murder pro-lifers, like in the example below:

Well-Known Local Pro-Life Activist Gunned Down in Michigan
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/sep/09091101.html

An elderly pro-life activist was shot multiple times and killed this morning in front of Owosso High School in Michigan while he was peacefully protesting abortion with a sign depicting a baby and the word "Life," according to local police cited in the Flint Journal newspaper.

[mannyamador]

Here are some responses to the heretical paper by the 14 Ateneo professors.

• An International Open Letter in Response to the 14 Signatories of the Ateneo Statement
  http://monkshobbit.wordpress.com/200...neo-statement/
  
  
• Position Paper: Catholic Alumni United for Life
  http://mamador.wordpress.com/2008/12/06/a-position-paper-against-hb-5043/
  
  
• Ateneo De Manila Statement on RH Bill 5043
  http://fightrhbill.blogspot.com/sear...ila University
  
  
• Catholics Cannot Support the RH Bill in Good Conscience
  http://fightrhbill.blogspot.com/2009...h-bill-in.html

On another related topic, here's an interesting article:

Kris-Crossing Mindanao
Conversations with Noynoy
By Antonio J. Montalvan II
Philippine Daily Inquirer
http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquirer...ns-with-Noynoy

INCREDIBLE as it may seem for a son of Cory Aquino, has Noynoy Aquino seems to have made double-faced pronouncements on his stand on reproductive health? That question must be asked, much to the consternation, I know, of anti-life/pro-choice advocates. But on two separate occasions of recent knowledge, Noynoy has been heard to have said entirely contradictory positions on reproductive health.

One making the rounds of the short messaging world has since been disowned by Aquino’s Manila headquarters as “inaccurate,” but it has not denied that the conversation had indeed taken place. But for the sake of intellectual argument, let’s have the reprise of the conversation that Noynoy had supposedly made in Tagbilaran City after visiting the Bishop’s House there last October 16. The “excerpts” run this way:

MM (name of a Bohol Catholic monsignor): Is it true that you are for the reproductive health bill?

Noynoy: Yes, monsignor, it is the key to the ills in our country, especially overpopulation. I always remember the poor couples in Payatas with 11 children; they got to be helped with contraceptives that should be made available to them.

MM: You believe in overpopulation and contraception?

Noynoy: Yes, monsignor, it is what you see around us. Contraception per se is not bad, as what my Jesuit priest friends told me in the Ateneo.

MM: That’s the idea of the Jesuits. They are not the magisterium, they don’t represent the Pope.

Noynoy: But that’s what my conscience tells me.

MM: Are you sure? Consciences need to be formed under the teachings of the Church. If you insist on your pro-RH stand, I will assure you the entire clergy will campaign against you.

Noynoy: Thank you for the conversation, monsignor.

Now contrast that with a conversation Noynoy had with a family friend, a religious nun whose identity we shall not divulge, but whose connection with Cory’s family, beginning in 1986, remains intimate. The venue of the conversation alone tells you the close ties of the good sister with the Aquino family: on Cory’s grave side during the family gathering for the 40th day of the late president’s death.

The nun relates to me that conversation by summing up what Noynoy had said on the same issue of reproductive health: that he is against abortion, that he is against the legislation of artificial contraception and that couples cannot be coerced into contradicting their faith.

One thing in private, another thing in public. That about sums up Noynoy’s position on reproductive health. That is not just an enigma. That spells danger for the Filipino electorate who now count, as the survey demographics say, by probably the millions who now look up to the young senator as this country’s next president. We are hitching the future of this country to a man who, as the two conversations suggest, has seemed to have learned the crafty world of traditional politicians and their proclivity for double talk.

How now to explain that enigma? Search us please, but we do know that political statements are measured to please a myriad of interests. Perhaps he is only playing lip service to the “popularity” of artificial contraception as computed by survey numbers, as if to say that faith and morality are dictated by a count of heads. It is like saying that if more heads say abortion is okay, then it is truly okay and so it becomes the norm. The wisdom of Church magisterium is made of less fickle stuff.

What we do know, however, is that Noynoy Aquino, since his days as Tarlac congressman, is a member of PLCPD. That stands for Philippine Legislators’ Committee on Population and Development which is the main lobby for the legislation of artificial contraception in Congress. Noynoy is surrounded in his provincial sorties by PLCPD stalwarts, some of whom are the most militant advocates of reproductive health. Politics is more addition and less subtraction, and Noynoy is playing that game like a pro.

Last week, a blogger who is a regular in a talk show on national television made a plea to bishops and cardinals not to mobilize people to not vote for candidates who espouse reproductive health. Needless to say, that was said to the wrong people. Bishops and cardinals are not the only ones who constitute the Church. It is the right of lay people, who too want to see the Cory phenomenon sustained, to express contrary opinions to Noynoy Aquino the candidate.

There are three conditions for membership in the Church: baptism, communion of faith, communion with the Pope. Communion of faith means believing every truth the Church teaches. Anything less than those three conditions do not make one a Catholic. At best, one is only a nominal Catholic, but that is really a misnomer for one can only be a Catholic or not, no matter if you are a Jesuit priest, albeit a wayward one.

Having said that, we should not fear bishops and cardinals who do not “endorse” Noynoy Aquino. What we should fear instead are leaders who disperse our people into believing myths and fallacies that destroy the natural dignity of the human being. That is the real threat to the moral fabric of this already decadent country of ours that lives on lies.

I would rather see Noynoy go down in defeat than compromise his faith.

DEFEND YOUR RIGHTS AND THE LIVES OF THE UNBORN!
NO TO THE COERCIVE, TOTALITARIAN RH/ABORTION BILL (HB 5043)!
Please sign the petition AGAINST the RH/Abortion Bill (HB5043)
http://www.petitiononline.com/xxhb5043/

[Psalter Spectre]

That is why the Catholic Church is in doubt of endorsing him for presidency ... if he is pro-abortion, i better call him an abortionist or better for the Abominable Father of Abortion in the Philippines.

Our country must be lead by a man of virtues someone who doesn't forsake the values of life set by our forefathers, someone who doesn't compromise life for the sake of practicality ...

[mannyamador]

Our country must be lead by a man of virtues someone who doesn't forsake the values of life set by our forefathers, someone who doesn't compromise life for the sake of practicality

Very true! We need persons of integrity who will uphold our rights, especially the right to life -- Including the rights of the unborn.

On a related topic: not only are certain contraceptives abortifacient, they are also not as safe some would pretend they are. This is the kind of important truths that the pro-RH fanatics want to suppress.


Plaintiffs Lawyers Target Bayer Over Popular Birth Control Pill
Law.com - Plaintiffs Lawyers Target Bayer Over Popular Birth Control Pill

A Newark, Calif., woman and her husband sued drugmaker Bayer in federal court in San Francisco on Monday, saying she suffered a debilitating stroke after taking the company's popular birth control pill Yaz for a month.

Her lawyer, Michael Danko, says he and co-counsel firm Girard Gibbs filed a similar suit last week and are preparing to file more. Hundreds of such suits filed around the country by Danko and other lawyers in the past month or so are just "the tip of the iceberg," triggered by the publication of two recent studies published in the BMJ, a British medical journal, added Danko, of The Danko Law Firm in San Mateo, Calif.

Susan Galinis, 39, had a stroke in June 2008, which she and her husband blame on Yaz that she took for a month after her doctor prescribed it to ease her premenstrual cramps. Their complaint (.pdf) argues that the drug company aggressively promoted Yaz and misled customers about the risks associated with a new version of drospirenone, a synthetic form of the hormone progestin that Yaz and the older drug Yasmin use.

"Bayer reaffirms and stands behind the safety of its drospirenone-containing oral contraceptives," a spokeswoman for Bayer HealthCare said in an e-mailed statement Monday, adding that the complaints the company has reviewed so far "pertain to side effects that are warned about in our approved product labeling."

Bayer had been served with 129 lawsuits related to Yaz and Yasmin as of Oct. 8, the spokeswoman said. The two drugs are the company's best-selling pharmaceutical products, according to Bayer's most recent annual report. Total sales of the Yaz and Yasmin drugs were about $1.8 billion in 2008, the report said.

Danko said it appears that suits filed in state courts are largely being removed the same day and sent to federal court in the Southern District of Illinois, after Bayer files removal petitions. "The plaintiffs are certainly satisfied with the federal court system," he said.

Other plaintiffs are suing San Francisco-based McKesson Corp., the distributor of the drugs, in state court, Danko said.

Danko plans to seek a leadership position, along with Girard Gibbs, in the multidistrict litigation.

"There are no benefits to this drug, and there are greater risks," Danko said. "The reason they're using a synthetic hormone is because they can patent it."

Some plaintiffs attorneys are waiting for the results of other studies before filing what Danko expects will be thousands of suits, he said, so it's difficult to tell who has the cases and where they're being filed.

"I feel we know what the studies are going to say," Danko added. "The studies that we have now are certainly sufficient to proceed with litigation."

NO TO ABORTION. NO TO THE ABORTIFACIENT-PROMOTING RH/ABORTION BILL (HB 5043)
Please sign the petition AGAINST the Reproductive Health/Abortion Bill (HB5043)
http://www.petitiononline.com/xxhb5043/