Response to "CBCP's monumental blunder"

Dear Mr. Butch del Castillo,

I write you in response to your 23 August 2012 article entitled "CBCP's monumental blunder". I understand it was meant to tell the Catholic bishops they made a faux pas by threatening to strip AdMU of its Catholic status because of almost 200 of its faculty signed a pro-RH Bill manifesto.

I read your article several times. What particularly caught my attention was your characterization of the position of the Ateneo faculty as being "hard to dispute or refute" which was the following:

"It upholds the constitutional right of couples to found a family in accordance with their religious convictions, honors our commitments to international convenants and conventions, and promotes the reproductive health and reproductive rights of Filipinos, especially of those who are most marginalized on this issue -- our women, poor families and young people."

Indeed, pro-RH Bill Ateneo faculty's declaration of their position appear noble. But I have these questions:

Does this position really reflects the true nature of contraception-laden RH Bill?
Does the use of contraception fulfills these alleged noble goals?
Are these "noble" goals really that noble?

The obvious answer I see is NO!

I will analyze their declaration point-by-point and show you that their declaration does not coincide with the true nature of RH Bill and that they are NOT truly noble.

1. They declared that "RH Bill upholds the constitutional right of couples to found a family in accordance with their religious convictions".

But it has been scientifically proven so many times that most contraceptive methods are abortifacients. And abortion is clearly banned by the Philippine constitution. Moreover, RH Bill heavily favors use of artificial family planning to the detriment of NFP which the Catholic Church encourages faithfuls to use.

2. They also declared that "RH Bill honors our commitments to international convenants and conventions."

The international bodies, where these commitments were incurred, have population control agenda. These agreements were signed with very questionable representatives. These international fora were skewed to favor the birth control agenda. Agreements that are contrary to the Filipino nation's welfare are not binding and loses its compelling power. The first of these was the Cairo Conference of 1994.

3. They also declared that "RH Bill promotes the reproductive health and reproductive rights of Filipino women."

Human reproduction involves also men. Why the focus on women only? It takes a couple, a husband and a wife, to produce an offspring. Why enact a law on reproduction for the benefit of one insufficient reproductive actor? Is that an indication that the bill is not really aiming for reproduction in the first place? Moreover, contraceptive drugs and devices act more as poisons than therapies. Evidence-based medical studies have shown that these cause cancer. Besides, the MOA of these drugs are shown to be inducing abortion or abortifacient.

4. They also declared that "RH Bill promotes the reproductive health and reproductive rights of Filipino poor families."

Every Filipino couple, rich or poor, who has a family or about to form a family has an inviolable right to decide for themselves how big or small the size of their family will be. This is a human right. A bill legalizing contraception could endanger this right and their personal freedom, the same way that the two-child policy of the Chinese government has infringed upon the right of Chinese couples to decide how and how big their families will be. Bureaucrats inspired by certain ideologies could invoke the "law" to decide, in the poor families behalf, and compel it upon them how big or small their families should be.

5. Lastly, they also declared that "RH Bill promotes the reproductive health and reproductive rights of Filipino young people."

Young people are not supposed to be reproducing. They should be preparing to be good mothers and fathers in the future. Sex education should be imparted to them so that they become responsible parents. Emphasis should be given to development of virtues and self-mastery. Instruction on contraception (the likely content of RH Bill's Sex Education), on the contrary, will not lead them to practice temperance but unhealthy curiosity and voyuerism. Bishop Soc Villegas put it very succintly and quite accurately: "Contraception is corruption".

So you see, Mr. Del Castillo, AdMU professors' position is not at all hard to dispute and refute.

FOR FURTHER READING
The Youth and the Birth Control Quarrel