Church's anti Reproductive Health Bill stance persists
"Should the issue on reproductive health be more objectively and properly called instead "unreproductive health?"
And to the solon-advocates including Iloilo First District Representative Janette Loreto-Garin -
"Would they neither not have been reproduced at all? Do they find life so futile in having so inutile in living that they simply do not like others like them to be born at all? Would they rather have themselves instead 'unreproduced' at all?"
"Are those advocating for zero reproduction certain that they themselves have not in any way reproduced someone--like a bubbling son or a cute daughter?"
Such were the latest questions raised anew by the Catholic Church on the highly-controversial Reproductive Health Bill.
With talks resumed in Congress, the subject once again is major headline news of the Catholic Bishops Conference in the Philippines (CBCP).
Expectedly, with the CBCP in the forefront of anti-Reproductive Health Bill campaign and denunciation, Garin as proponent was among the few solons singled out in the news article.
A doctor by profession, Garin caused the continuance of the bill's fate in the 14th Congress then earlier pushed by Albay Representative Edgel Lagman.
"Inimical to health" said Lingayen-Dagupan Archbishop Oscar V. Cruz of Garin's move albeit supported by years of responsible parenthood and pro-choice government drive..
"The premature stir of the Congress to push for the reproductive health bills brings to mind some practical questions that proponents of this unnecessary legislation should answer," Archbishop Cruz stressed. "The Reproductive Health issue has already drawn many people to say so many things. Various sectors of the society have taken diverse positions in proposing or opposing a supposed national mandate that, proponents claim, will alleviate poverty as it manages the population—as if this is possible."
Other solons singled out in the news story were Representatives Lagman, Narciso Santiago III and Ana Theresa Hontiveros-Baraquiel, "among others."
"The Church is opposing the Bill as many of proposed tenets go against the teaching of the Church on moral grounds.
The Catholic Church deems artificial contraceptives anti-life and immoral. According to the teachings of the Church, married couples should practice only natural family planning methods, which require sexual abstinence when the woman is ovulating.
The essence of thesis and the consequent phrase adopted in terms of "Reproductive Health" is to promote health by making this physical attribute precisely unproductive. For this reason, reproduction is thereby seen as inimical to health, the archbishop stressed," the article continued. "Reproduction should be avoided for reasons of health whereas it militates against such a physical well-being—particularly on the part of women."
Such as Archbishop Cruz went further to ask "Is health good if this is deliberately rendered unfruitful, intentionally made unproductive or unreproductive?"
"Stagnancy, inertness and non-life giving when apparently considered expressions of health are beyond rhyme or reason. While recourse to euphemism is every now and then understandable, to claim that women's health equals their non-generative state is unreasonable and wherefore unacceptable," Cruz said.
And to further its point, the Archbishop added, "How can they decide that their children returned to nothingness? To dislike if not to hate others who love to reproduce themselves is neither right nor fair."
The Church stance has since been debunked by Garin and advocates of responsible parenthood and pro-choice here.
"Pure misinformation, distortion of truth," was the reaction similarly expressed by the solons pushing for Reproductive Health Bill. "Who said we want to stop creation? What we want to see stopped is irresponsible parenthood and unwanted pregnancies, " Garin has since stressed as a point of clarification.