Filtered By: Topstories
News

Catholic bishops: Our stand on the RH bill is like EDSA 1


On January 30, 2011, the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) released a pastoral letter,"Choosing Life, Rejecting the RH Bill," that compares their fight against the Reproductive Health bill to their historic role in the EDSA Revolution. GMA News Online is publishing the pastoral letter in full, and below it a "woman's response" from Akbayan spokesperson Risa Hontiveros. [Click here to go directly to Risa Hontiveros' "A Woman's Letter to the Bishops."] — GMA News


Choosing Life, Rejecting the RH Bill (A Pastoral Letter of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines)
Our Filipino Brothers and Sisters: The State values the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for human rights (Art. II, Section 11). The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution. It shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception (Art. II, Section 12). Background We begin by citing the Philippine Constitution. We do so because we intend to write you on the basis of the fundamental ideals and aspirations of the Filipino people and not on the basis of specifically Catholic religious teachings. We are at a crossroads as a nation. Before us are several versions of a proposed bill, the Reproductive Health bill or sanitized as a Responsible Parenthood bill. This proposed bill in all its versions calls us to make a moral choice: to choose life or to choose death. At the outset we thank the government for affording us an opportunity to express our views in friendly dialogue. Sadly our dialogue has simply revealed how far apart our respective positions are. Therefore, instead of building false hopes, we wish at the present time to draw up clearly what we object to and what we stand for. Moral Choices at the Crossroads -- at EDSA I and Now Twenty five years ago in 1986, we Catholic Bishops made a prophetic moral judgment on political leadership. With this prophetic declaration we believe that we somehow significantly helped open the door for EDSA I and a window of political integrity. Today we come to a new national crossroads and we now have to make a similar moral choice. Our President rallied the country with the election cry, “Kung walang corrupt walang mahirap." As religious leaders we believe that there is a greater form of corruption, namely, moral corruption which is really the root of all corruption. On the present issue, it would be morally corrupt to disregard the moral implications of the RH bill. This is our unanimous collective moral judgment: We strongly reject the RH bill. Commonly Shared Human and Cultural Values – Two Fundamental Principles Far from being simply a Catholic issue, the RH bill is a major attack on authentic human values and on Filipino cultural values regarding human life that all of us have cherished since time immemorial. Simply stated the RH Bill does not respect moral sense that is central to Filipino cultures. It is the product of the spirit of this world, a secularist, materialistic spirit that considers morality as a set of teachings from which one can choose, according to the spirit of the age. Some it accepts, others it does not accept. Unfortunately, we see the subtle spread of this post-modern spirit in our own Filipino society. Our position stands firmly on two of the core principles commonly shared by all who believe in God: (1) Human life is the most sacred physical gift with which God, the author of life, endows a human being. Placing artificial obstacles to prevent human life from being formed and being born most certainly contradicts this fundamental truth of human life. In the light of the widespread influence of the post-modern spirit in our world, we consider this position as nothing less than prophetic. As religious leaders we must proclaim this truth fearlessly in season and out of season. (2) It is parents, cooperating with God, who bring children into the world. It is also they who have the primary inalienable right and responsibility to nurture them, care for them, and educate them that they might grow as mature persons according to the will of the Creator. What We Specifically Object to in the RH Bill Advocates contend that the RH bill promotes reproductive health. The RH Bill certainly does not. It does not protect the health of the sacred human life that is being formed or born. The very name “contraceptive" already reveals the anti-life nature of the means that the RH bill promotes. These artificial means are fatal to human life, either preventing it from fruition or actually destroying it. Moreover, scientists have known for a long time that contraceptives may cause cancer. Contraceptives are hazardous to a woman’s health. Advocates also say that the RH bill will reduce abortion rates. But many scientific analysts themselves wonder why prevalent contraceptive use sometimes raises the abortion rate. In truth, contraceptives provide a false sense of security that takes away the inhibition to sexual activity. Scientists have noted numerous cases of contraceptive failure. Abortion is resorted to, an act that all religious traditions would judge as sinful. “Safe sex" to diminish abortion rate is false propaganda. Advocates moreover say that the RH bill will prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS. This goes against the grain of many available scientific data. In some countries where condom use is prevalent, HIV/ AIDS continues to spread. Condoms provide a false security that strongly entices individuals towards increased sexual activity, increasing likewise the incidence of HIV/AIDS. “Safe sex" to prevent HIV /AIDS is false propaganda. Advocates also assert that the RH Bill empowers women with ownership of their own bodies. This is in line with the post-modern spirit declaring that women have power over their own bodies without the dictation of any religion. How misguided this so-called “new truth" is! For, indeed, as created by God our bodies are given to us to keep and nourish. We are stewards of our own bodies and we must follow God’s will on this matter according to an informed and right conscience. Such a conscience must certainly be enlightened and guided by religious and moral teachings provided by various religious and cultural traditions regarding the fundamental dignity and worth of human life. Advocates also say that the RH bill is necessary to stop overpopulation and to escape from poverty. Our own government statistical office has concluded that there is no overpopulation in the Philippines but only the over-concentration of population in a number of urban centers. Despite other findings to the contrary, we must also consider the findings of a significant group of renowned economic scholars, including economic Nobel laureates, who have found no direct correlation between population and poverty. In fact, many Filipino scholars have concluded that population is not the cause of our poverty. The causes of our poverty are: flawed philosophies of development, misguided economic policies, greed, corruption, social inequities, lack of access to education, poor economic and social services, poor infrastructures, etc. World organizations estimate that in our country more than P400 billion pesos are lost yearly to corruption. The conclusion is unavoidable: for our country to escape from poverty, we have to address the real causes of poverty and not population. In the light of the above, we express our clear objections: 1. We object to the non-consideration of moral principles, the bedrock of law, in legislative discussions of bills that are intended for the good of individuals and for the common good. 2. We are against the anti-life, anti-natal and contraceptive mentality that is reflected in media and in some proposed legislative bills. 3. We object strongly to efforts at railroading the passage of the RH bill. 4. We denounce the over-all trajectory of the RH bill towards population control. 5. We denounce the use of public funds for contraceptives and sterilization. 6. We condemn compulsory sex education that would effectively let parents abdicate their primary role of educating their own children, especially in an area of life – sexuality – which is a sacred gift of God. What We Stand For On this matter of proposed RH bills, these are our firm convictions: 1. We are deeply concerned about the plight of the many poor, especially of suffering women, who are struggling for a better life and who must seek it outside of our country, or have recourse to a livelihood less than decent. 2. We are pro-life. We must defend human life from the moment of conception or fertilization up to its natural end. 3. We believe in the responsible and natural regulation of births through Natural Family Planning for which character building is necessary which involves sacrifice, discipline and respect for the dignity of the spouse. 4. We believe that we are only stewards of our own bodies. Responsibility over our own bodies must follow the will of God who speaks to us through conscience. 5. We hold that on the choices related to the RH bill, conscience must not only be informed but most of all rightly guided through the teachings of one’s faith. 6. We believe in the freedom of religion and the right of conscientious objection in matters that are contrary to one’s faith. The sanctions and penalties embodied in the proposed RH bill are one more reason for us to denounce it. Our Calls As religious leaders we have deeply and prayerfully reflected on this burning issue. We have unanimously made the moral judgment – to reject the RH agenda and to choose life. 1. We call for a fundamental transformation of our attitudes and behavior towards all human life especially the most defenseless, namely, human life being formed or being conceived. The cheapness with which many seem to consider human life is a great bane to our religious-oriented nation. 2. We call upon our legislators to consider the RH bill in the light of the God-given dignity and worth of human life and, therefore, to shelve it completely as contrary to our ideals and aspirations as a people. We thank our legislators who have filed bills to defend human life from the moment of conception and call upon all other legislators to join their ranks. 3. We thank the great multitude of lay people all over the country, and particularly the dedicated groups who made their presence felt in the halls of Congress, to defend and promote our position. We call upon other lay people and adherents of other religions to join the advocacy to defend and promote our commonly shared ideals and aspirations. 4. We call on our government to address effectively the real causes of poverty such as corruption, lack of social and economic services, lack of access to education and the benefits of development, social inequities. 5. We call for the establishment of more hospitals and clinics in the rural areas, the deployment of more health personnel to provide more access to health services, the building of more schools, the provision of more aid to the poor for education, and the building of more and better infrastructures necessary for development. 6. We echo the challenge we prophetically uttered 25 years ago at EDSA I and call upon all people of good will who share our conviction: “…let us pray together, reason together, decide together, act together, always to the end that the truth prevail" over the many threats to human life and to our shared human and cultural values. We commend our efforts against the RH bill (or the Responsible Parenthood bill – its new name) to the blessing of our almighty and loving God, from whom all life comes and for whom it is destined. For the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines. +NEREO P. ODCHIMAR, D.D. Bishop of Tandag President, CBCP January 30, 2011
A Woman's Letter to the Bishops: Risa Hontiveros' response to the Pastoral Letter of the CBCP on the Reproductive Health Bill 13 February 2011 Dear Bishop Nereo P. Odchimar, Peace! I will not respond to all the points raised in the Pastoral Letter of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines which you sent us, your Filipino brothers and sisters, last 30 January. Most of them are old points that have been raised and clarified repeatedly in so many debates and too few dialogues in the past decade, though it drives me almost to tears that it seems the good Bishops have not been listening intently or understanding with empathy. I would like to respond to just two points. In the section, Moral Choices at the Crossroads – at EDSA I and Now, you wrote that “Twenty five years ago in 1986 we Catholic Bishops made a prophetic and moral judgement on political leadership…. Today we come to a new national crossroads and we now have to make a similar moral choice." As one of the young people then who went in our multitudes to EDSA when Minister Enrile and General Ramos admitted that Marcos had stolen the election from Cory Aquino and when Cardinal Sin rallied us to protect them from Marcos’s forces, I will always remember how our hearts were made even braver and our feet swifter by the CBCP’s Pastoral Letter. Then, you were with us in pulling down the pillars of dictatorship, you were with us in advancing democracy. But your Pastoral Letter of last month cannot be placed on the same plane because it is not of the same prophetic and moral fiber. By misrepresenting the Reproductive Health bill as promotive of abortion and of adolescent promiscuity – with all due respect - you have not only been intellectually dishonest and ignored the good faith of RH advocates, but also failed to proclaim the life-saving and values-formation character of this public health measure, which many of us in your own flock, in conscience, desire to be passed into law. In 1986, you were advancing democracy; now, you are impeding democracy. In the section, What We Specifically Object to in the RH Bill, you wrote that “Advocates also assert that the RH Bill empowers women with ownership of their own bodies… without the dictation of any religion." We do not own our bodies, but our spirits inhabit them, therefore they are our kingdom, and just as we struggle for the self-determination of Inangbayan and the sustainability of Inang Kalikasan, by the same feminine principle, we freely, in an informed manner, responsibly and joyfully, decide about our bodies. No one else can or should do that for us. Whatever gave you the idea that we decide about our bodies or anything else in life without anchoring in our deepest inspirations, whether faith or humanism or the sheer sense of being a woman? I kneel only to God, sometimes with the princes of my church, but always from the innermost voice of conscience which I strive humbly to discern in silence or in the marketplace. As a Conference of men located outside women’s experience, good Bishop, could you not show a little more respect for us? We choose life, we embrace its every cycle, from birth and girlhood to the childbearing years to menopause or climacterium and then death. We want each and every sister to have a chance at that fullness of life. It is a shame that we do not have the Bishops marching beside us this time around. But, without you or even against you, we will win this new revolution, too. Respectfully yours, (sgd.) Risa Hontiveros Spokesperson, Akbayan Party
LOADING CONTENT