SIMILARITIES

RIZAL LAW and RH BILL

- writers defending heresy or schism, or tending  in any way to undermine the very
foundations of religion;
- attack on clergy
- aims to ridicule the Catholic faith
- there are expurgated consequences and facts behind the law
- defines terrorism vaguely but has clear and specific dangers. Some of the things/ view point
written in the RH bill are too vague, thus the ordinary citizen needs to know
-
Even other religious groups are questioning what they say are vague provisions on the
use of pills, sex education among the youth, as well as gender which, they say, may lead
to same sex marriage.
-  life and works, as shown in section 1. This Republic Act calls for an increased sense of
nationalism from the Filipinos during a time of a dwindling Filipino identity.
- RH bill because of “Rizal’s heritage of promoting education, knowledge and progress … the
same values being promoted by the proposed RH Bill.”
- THEY add that they intend to draw a parallelism with the equally fevered battle to pass the
Rizal Law in the 1950s. The law, which mandated that all educational institutions in the
country offer courses about Rizal and his works, was vehemently opposed by the Catholic
hierarchy when it was proposed in 1955. In a line now echoed by anti-RH legislators,
opponents of the Rizal Law argued that the legislation violated the “freedom of conscience
and religion” of Filipino Catholics. This was because Rizal’s writings, specifically his novels
“Noli Me Tangere” and “El Filibusterismo” were strongly anti-clerical and lampooned and
lambasted the hypocrisy of the Spanish clergy in the Philippines.
-  “Damaso,” was a character in “Noli” and through the decades he
came to symbolize all the frailty and venality of priests and
bishops, instantly conjuring images of portly friars living off the
fat of the land while preaching humility and servility to the indios.
- . The world as we know it, or even the faith of young Catholic men and women, did not come
crumbling to ruination with the teaching of Rizal’s life and writings. And neither would the
Filipino family or family values with the passage of the RH bill.
- Because young children have rights to sexual satisfaction, the RH Law effectivelylegitimizes 1)
child prostitution, 2) pedophilia and 3) fornication among the young;c) Also because young
children have rights to sexual satisfaction, parents, guardians,relatives or any persons who
hinder these sexual rights of children out of concern fortheir moral well being may be
penalized with imprisonment and/or fines for violatingthe newfound sexual rights of children,
as now experienced by parents in countrieswhere RH Laws exist
-

DIFFERENCES
 RIZAL LAW
“For what does it profit a man, if he gains the
whole world, but suffer the loss of his own
soul?”
- we read or see or hear works of art that are
critical of Christianity.
- Desiring  your health which is also ours, and
seeking the  best means of  restoring it,  I shall
do with you what the ancients did with their
sick;  they brought them to the steps of the
temple that all who came to invoke the god
might stop to  suggest  a remedy…   I  shall  lift
a portion of the bandage which  hides  the 
disease,  sacrificing all to the truth, even my
personal pride,  for us a son of yours I am not
exempt from your defects and weaknesses.1
- exposed the conditions of Spanish colonial
rule without sparing the widespread friar
abuses it wrought.
RH BILL
Human life is precious because it is a gift from
God whose love is infinite; and when God.
-“The RH bill is against life (and) so much
young blood (would be) shed. May our
leaders not give the Divine Child the same
Herodian gift of 2,000 years ago: death of the
innocents
When does life begin?
-attempt to create a moral counter
culture.
-. The RH bill is being gift wrapped to look
like a gift for maternal health care. It is not so.
It will lead to greater crimes against women
-The government has no right to fund the purchase of
bibles, crucifixes, copies of the Koran etc. because
these are [personal] preferences. In the same way, the
government has no right to fund the purchase of
contraceptives
-Why give the poor what they are capable of
buying?