BCR2-1 Argues

Today, May 16, 2011, six days before the public debate about Reproductive Health (RH) Bill will be set on national television. This controversial bill has divided the nation- those who were pro and anti have already presented their sides: Iglesia Ni Cristo has come out with its decision in support of the RH Bill. Government officials (e.g. Duterte), celebrities (e.g. Dingdong Dantes and Lea Salonga), academic professors (e.g. UP and Ateneo), ex- Cabinet members, and P-Noy, himself, was also in favour of the said bill. While the Catholic Church and other Christian sectors stood firm against it. Upon reading blogs, news and other sources of information about RH bill, I have come out a position paper- to go against it. I have realised that this has many loopholes and lawmakers must be very careful in pursuing for its passage. That any supporter must also look the other side of the coin and think the many possibilities that will happen if this bill will become a law. But before I make hasty generalisation about my arguments for ten reasons why this should be killed; let us first take a glimpse of the RH bill- its history and contents. The bill entitled AN ACT PROVIDING FOR A COMPREHENSIVE POLICY ON RESPONSIBLE PARENTHOOD, REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH, AND POPULATION AND DEVELOPMENT, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES is a consolidation bill of House Minority Leader Edcel Lagman, Iloilo Representative Janette Garin, Muntinlupa City Representative Rodolfo Biazon, Iloilo Representative Augusto Syjuco Jr., Akbayan Party list Representatives Arlene Bag-o and Walden Bello, and Gabriela Party list Representatives Luzviminda Ilagan and Emerenciana De Jesus. 1. It violates our Constitutional rights; 1.1. If we read Section 28 (e) of this bill, that says, Any person who maliciously engages in disinformation about the intent or provisions of this Act as included as a prohibited act, it shows clear violation of our FREEDOM OF SPEECH (Bill of Rights, Article III, Section 4 of 1987 Constitution). Isnt harsh to have any one who will express objections to this bill be subjected to penalties? Silencing its critics is a violation of our Constitution. We are in a democratic country with already the existence of laws against libel and defamation, so why need for the provision of this kind of bill? 1.2. Section 21 that states below, forces employers to provide the reproductive health care services to their employees. This is again a violation of the Constitution since employers have not given any choice whether the distribution of these contraceptives may be against their conscience or religion. SEC. 21. Employers Responsibilities. The Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) shall ensure that employers respect the reproductive rights of workers. Consistent with the intent of Article 134 of the Labor Code, employers with more than 200 employees shall provide reproductive health services to ALL employees in their own respective health facilities. Those with less than 200 workers shall enter into partnerships with hospitals, health facilities, and/or health professionals in their areas for the delivery of reproductive health services. Employers shall furnish in writing the following information to all employees and applicants: (a) The medical and health benefits which workers are entitled to, including maternity and paternity leave benefits and the availability of family planning services; (b) The reproductive health hazards associated with work, including hazards that may affect their reproductive functions especially pregnant women; and (c) The availability of health facilities for workers.

Employers are obliged to monitor pregnant working employees among their workforce and ensure that they are provided paid half-day prenatal medical leaves for each month of the pregnancy period that the pregnant employee is employed in their company or organization. These paid pre-natal medical leaves shall be reimbursable from the Social Security System (SSS) or the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS), as the case may be. 1.3. Section 28 that states below, eliminates any choice for conscientious objectors and makes no room for their legitimate concerns. This means, doctors and health workers are forced to dispense contraceptives and other contraceptive devices and methods; if they refuse, they must refer another person who will dispense such things. If people will not cooperate as what is stated in the given provisions, they will be imprisoned for one to six months and will pay for a fine amounting to P10,000.00 to P50,000.00! SEC. 28. Prohibited Acts. The following acts are prohibited: (a) Any healthcare service provider, whether public or private, who shall: (1) Knowingly withhold information or restrict the dissemination thereof, and/or intentionally provide incorrect information regarding programs and services on reproductive health, including the right to informed choice and access to a full range of legal, medically-safe and effective family planning methods; (2) Refuse to perform legal and medically-safe reproductive health procedures on any person of legal age on the ground of lack of third party consent or authorization. In case of married persons, the mutual consent of the spouses shall be preferred. However in case of disagreement, the decision of the one undergoing the procedure shall prevail. In the case of abused minors where parents and/or other family members are the respondent, accused or convicted perpetrators as certified by the proper prosecutorial office or court, no prior parental consent shall be necessary; and (3) Refuse to extend health care services and information on account of the persons marital status, gender, sexual orientation, age, religion, personal circumstances, or nature of work; Provided, That, the conscientious objection of a healthcare service provider based on his/her ethical or religious beliefs shall be respected; however, the conscientious objector shall immediately refer the person seeking such care and services to another healthcare service provider within the same facility or one which is conveniently accessible who is willing to provide the requisite information and services; Provided, further, That the person is not in an emergency condition or serious case as defined in RA 8344 penalizing the refusal of hospitals and medical clinics to administer appropriate initial medical treatment and support in emergency and serious cases. (b) Any public official who, personally or through a subordinate, prohibits or restricts the delivery of legal and medicallysafe reproductive health care services, including family planning; or forces, coerces or induces any person to use such services. (c) Any employer or his representative who shall require an employee or applicant, as a condition for employment or continued employment, to undergo sterilization or use or not use any family planning method; neither shall pregnancy be a ground for non-hiring or termination of employment. (d) Any person who shall falsify a certificate of compliance as required in Section 15 of this Act; and (e) Any person who maliciously engages in disinformation about the intent or provisions of this Act.

SEC. 29. Penalties. Any violation of this Act or commission of the foregoing prohibited acts shall be penalized by imprisonment ranging from one (1) month to six (6) months or a fine of Ten Thousand (P 10,000.00) to Fifty Thousand

Pesos (P 50,000.00) or both such fine and imprisonment at the discretion of the competent court; Provided That, if the offender is a public official or employee, he or she shall suffer the accessory penalty of dismissal from the government service and forfeiture of retirement benefits. If the offender is a juridical person, the penalty shall be imposed upon the president or any responsible officer. An offender who is an alien shall, after service of sentence, be deported immediately without further proceedings by the Bureau of Immigration. 1.4. The distribution of contraceptives violates Article II, Section 12 of the Constitution that says, Section 12. 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. The natural and primary right and duty of parents in the rearing of the youth for civic efficiency and the development of moral character shall receive the support of the Government. Our fundamental law recognizes that human life must be protected from the moment of conception, therefore, contraceptives that causes early chemical abortion is clearly unconstitutional. 2. The Law of Void for Vagueness Doctrine applies; If we search for this doctrine, we will find that it is about a law principle that says a given statute is void and unenforceable if it is too vague for the average citizen to understand (e.g. cannot generally determine what are regulated, what conduct is prohibited, or what punishment may be imposed.) SEC. 20. Ideal Family Size. The State shall assist couples, parents and individuals to achieve their desired family size within the context of responsible parenthood for sustainable development and encourage them to have two children as the ideal family size. Attaining the ideal family size is neither mandatory nor compulsory. No punitive action shall be imposed on parents having more than two children. Health care is not a right! Were not born with a right to a ride in Enchanted Kingdom. We are not born with a right to enslave other people by coercing them to contribute something for the benefit of the majority. We dont liveand were so lucky that we dont!in a statist or socialist society, where a so-called presidium has the monopoly on all social, economic and political powers, including the authority to allegedly provide all the needs of all its communal members, be it health care, education, housing and other basic necessities. I do believe that this man-is-his-brotherskeeper scheme is impractical and evil at best. No, we cannot contradict reality. This bill is just the beginning of the statist plan of some politicians in Congress. It is the creepy, evil face of the socialist tendencies of our politicians not only in the legislature, but also in other parts of public governance. One of the greatest fallacies ever invented to corrupt mans mind is the distortion of the concept of right! That which you passionately call or claim as right means the right by, for, and of the socialists or the communists. Theres a big difference between a right and a privilege. A right is one that is incumbent upon an individual since birth. You have the right to exist, but you dont have the right to command your neighbor to feed you. You have the right to education, but you cannot demand that you be spared from school fees to obtain a degree. You have the right to medical services, but you cant tell the doctor, who spent a lot of money and years of his/her life studying medicine, to treat you for free. The proper concept of right means the right of every individual to choose and to reject self-destruction. Such a right cannot extend to enslave your neighbor. It simply means a right to choose or not to choose.