Showing posts with label pro-life. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pro-life. Show all posts

14 May 2017

Proclaiming the Way, the Truth, and the Life Today




Christ is the Way. There are many ways to take but none of them leads to the Father, except Jesus. When we live by our own rules for a time we may feel happy, but eventually we will find out that our self-centeredness will only lead us astray. Proverbs 19,3 says: “Their own folly leads people astray, yet in their hearts they blame the Lord.”

One of the raging issues of the day is the bill to reinstate the death penalty. Studies after studies conclude that it doesn’t deter crime, but strict and consistent law enforcement does. Also certain investment opportunities and development aid are pegged upon our country’s upholding of international treaties against the death penalty. If it doesn’t deter crime and will only result to lesser economic benefits to our country, why insist on the death penalty? The one thing it satisfies is a limited and retributive form of justice, expressed in the desire for vengeance – an eye for an eye, a life for a life. But is it the way of Christ?

The way of Christ is the way of the cross, which is the radical expression of the way of love. In His time on earth Jesus has shown His love for the poor, the outcasts, and public sinners. He prevented the summary execution of a woman caught in adultery. He promised paradise to the dying criminal who was crucified with Him at Golgotha. He sacrificed His life on the cross for our sake.

People who feel nothing but contempt whenever their pastors speak about giving second chances to criminals, or against the rampant killings happening around, do not follow the way of Christ. They must be following a different messiah.

Christ is the Truth. He is more than just a teacher of sensible ideas or a dispenser of inspirational quotes. He offers nothing less than the very truth of Himself: that He and the Father are one. Whoever knows Him, knows the Father. He is the fullness of the revelation of God. He says in John 8,3: “you will know the truth and the truth shall set you free”.

If Christ’s truth sets us free, then those who twist God’s word for their own ends, those who knowingly spread fake news, those who contribute to a culture of post-truth and alternative facts, deceive people to enslave them. Today we see a strategy that exploits people’s fears and frustrations by pointing them first to a common enemy as object of hate, often a minority or a disadvantaged class; and then to a worldly savior, a false messiah who offers simplistic solutions to complex problems and, in exchange, only asks for their blind trust and loyalty.

It is important that we know who we believe. For Christ Himself says: “whoever believes in me will do the works I do” (John 14,12). We know we have fully believed in Christ when we have become more and more like Him. For the purpose of discipleship is that we become who we follow. Imagine if we are deceived into following a false messiah.

Christ is the Life. Christ, the source of life, want us to live life to the full. In John 10,10, He says: “A thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I came so that they might have life and have it more abundantly.”

In a society where the culture of death pervades, fullness of life is still celebrated but only for a few. The culture of death is not just about the ubiquity of killings. It starts with the thinking that people, whose lives fall below the moral standards of honest law-abiding citizens, don’t deserve the full protection of the law. Human rights and due process are wasted on them. Some of them may not be even humans anymore. When we fall into this trap, we become purveyors of the culture of death. We become desensitized to the cry of victims and their families. News of yet another victim of summary execution, would mean one less threat to our family’s safety eliminated.

Christ as life reminds us that every life is sacred because it comes from God. And He wants everyone to be saved, not just the law-abiding. In fact, He comes to call sinners, which means He comes to call all of us to conversion and renewal. So unless we choose life for everyone, we are on the side of sin and death. The self-righteous will not have a place in His Kingdom.

In a time of war, post-truth, and the culture of death, it becomes even more important to proclaim Christ as the Way, the Truth, and the Life. For when we are lost, Christ is our way. When we are confused, He is our truth. When we are down and broken, He is our life.




HOMILY for the Fifth Sunday of Easter

17 July 2016

And many who profess faith




And many who profess faith in God find it
Just to despise one evil and cheer another, so we
Pray for the time when the few who cry for life
Become many, and mass murders, a thing of the past.


This War on Drugs will Fail


This war on drugs will fail because it is founded on the wrong principles.

Human life is expendable.
H
uman rights are only for the law-abiding.
The ends justify the means.
Due process is a technicality that can be flouted.
F
ear is a rightful tool for law enforcement.
S
everity of punishment deters crime.
T
he rule of law is binding only when it serves prevailing doctrine.
T
hose who oppose the war are to be counted as enemies.
E
thics and faith are irrelevant to the issues at hand.
T
he death of innocents is acceptable collateral damage.

24 March 2012

Prayer for the Day of the Unborn

 
In 2004, Pres. Arroyo issued Proclamation # 586 declaring every March 25 as "Day of the Unborn" in the Philippines. It is urged that churches will have a special recognition of pregnant mothers and special prayers and blessings to them on this day.
.......


RITE OF BLESSING FOR THE DAY OF THE UNBORN


Psalm 145:13-21

The Lord is faithful in all His words
and holy in all His works.
The Lord lifts up all who are falling
and raises up all who are bowed down.

The eyes of all look hopefully to You,
and You give them their food in due season;
You open Your Hand
and satisfy the desire of every living thing.

The Lord is just in all His ways
and holy in all His works.
The Lord is near to all who call upon Him,
to all who call upon Him in truth.

He fulfills the desire of those who fear Him,
He hears their cry and saves them.
The Lord keeps all who love Him,
but the wicked He will destroy. 
May my mouth speak the praise of the Lord,
and may all flesh bless His Holy Name forever and ever. 


Prayer for Unborn Children

God, our Creator, by Your love the world is filled with life,
through Your generosity one generation gives life to another,
and so are Your wonders told and Your praises sung.
We look to You in our love and in our need:
may it be Your will that we bear (adopt) a child to share our home and faith.

Loving God, be close to us as we pray to love and do Your will.
You are our God, nourishing us forever and ever. Amen.

Dear St. Gerard Majella, Saint Raymond Nonnatus,
patrons for pregnant women
and St. Catherine of Sienna,
patron against miscarriages,
please intercede for us.


Prayer and Blessing of Pregnant Mothers

All make the sign of the cross. The leader begins:
Let us bless the Lord Jesus,
who in the womb of the Virgin Mary became one of us.
Blessed be God forever.

All respond:
Blessed be God forever.

The leader may use these or similar words to introduce the blessing:
Join now in listening to the Scripture and in blessing this mother-to-be
that she may cherish the child in her womb
and await birth with great hope and faith.

Then Scripture is read:
Listen to the words of the Holy Gospel according to Luke 1:39-45:

During those days, Mary set out and traveled to the hill country in haste to a town of Judah, where she entered the house of Zechariah and greeted Elizabeth. When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the infant leapt in her womb, and Elizabeth, filled with the Holy Spirit, cried out in a loud voice and said, "Most blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb. And how does this happen to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For at the moment the sound of your greeting reached my ears,
the infant in my womb leapt for joy. Blessed are you who believed that what was spoken to you by the Lord would be fulfilled."

The Gospel of the Lord.

All respond:
Praise to You, Lord Jesus Christ.

After a time of silence, all join in prayers of intercession. The Hail Mary, the Memorare, or other prayers asking for the protection of Mary may be appropriate. After the Lord's Prayer, the leader may invite all to extend their hands toward the mothers or to place their hands on them in blessing. Use either Prayer A or Prayer B next.

Prayer A:
Gracious Father, Your Word, spoken in love,
created the human family
and Your Son, conceived in love,
restored it to Your friendship.
Hear the prayers of (mother's name),
who awaits the birth of her child.
Calm her fears when she is anxious.
Watch over and support her
and bring her child into this world
safely and in good health,
so that as members of Your family
she may praise You and glorify You through Your Son,
Our Lord Jesus Christ, now and forever.
Amen.

Prayer B:
God has brought gladness and light to the world
through the Virgin Mary's delivery of her child.
May Christ fill your heart with His holy joy
and keep you and your baby safe from harm.
We ask this in His Name, who is Lord, forever and ever.
Amen.

All make the sign of the cross. The leader concludes:
May God, Who chose to make known
and to send the blessings of eternal salvation
through the motherhood of the Blessed Virgin Mary,
bless us and keep us in His care, now and forever.
Amen.

Holy Water is then sprinkled to the pregnant mothers followed by clapping of hands by the churchgoers.

16 February 2011

UP faculty, students and alumni position on the RH Bill

from a http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/upiansonrhbill/ this position paper coming from secular UP responds to assumptions by proRH advocates with straight facts and reputable studies.


POSITION PAPER ON THE RH BILL
by individual faculty, students and alumni of the University of the Philippines*


As faculty members, students and alumni of the University of the Philippines, we state here the bases of our objection to the consolidated Reproductive Health bill that is pending in Congress.

Given the secular background of UP education, we put forward arguments from reason, to wit:

1. Population is not an obstacle to development. The bills assume that a nation’s population hinders its development that is why they push for the promotion of a two-child policy, massive distribution of contraceptives, sex education (to acquaint young people with contraception), and sterilization, all of which make use of taxpayers’ money. However, as early as 1966, Nobel Prize winner Simon Kuznets’ research has shown that there is insignificant empirical association between population growth rates and output per capita (economic growth). Rather, it is the rate at which technology grows and the ability of the population to employ these new technologies efficiently and widely that permit economic progress. Kuznets saw that the basic obstacles to economic growth arise from the limited capabilities of the institutions (political, social, legal, cultural, economic) to adjust. He argued instead that a more rapid population growth, if properly managed, will promote economic development through a positive impact on the society's state of knowledge. His findings have been confirmed by similar studies by the US National Research Council (1986), the UN Population Fund Consultative Meeting of Economists (1992), Eric Hanushek and Ludger Wößmann (2007), among others.

27 November 2010

Litany for Life




































Lord, have mercy - Lord, have mercy
Christ, have mercy - Christ, have mercy
Lord, have mercy - Lord, have mercy
Christ hear us - Christ, graciously hear us

12 October 2010

Talking Points on the Reproductive Health Bill

At long last, a saner, more nuanced approach to the RH bill issue. To be clear, its position is not a middleground between pro-life and pro-RH/death/quality of life camps. Rather, it provides talking points, identifying both the good intentions of the bill and its contentious provisions. It is a position that is decidedly pro-life and Catholic -- and Jesuit.

05 October 2010

Standing by the Catholic Church

Finally, an article that speaks my sentiments on the issue. Except perhaps on the facts surounding the supposed excommunication threat on President Aquino. Recently released transcript of that interview with CBCP President Bishop Odchimar has him saying: "excommunication is not a proximate possibility". There has been no intention to threaten P-Noy with excommunication, as previously written, but still is being bandied about in many media outlets and the net.

I won't also be surprised if pro-RH groups won't be too happy with his dialogue issue # 5: "working together to build prosperous, just and sustainable communities so that it does not matter even if our population, as expected sometime in the next five years, exceeds 100 million people..."

03 August 2010

The move to legalize abortion is on

 
















Now they're getting bold and brazen about it. Even attempting an emotional blackmail on the rest of us.

Let me just re-phrase what I have just read from this Inquirer article.
1. These pro-choice groups are proposing that abortion be legalized.
2. They are arguing that abortion is a human right.
3. They are blaming the government for the death of women who are "forced" to undergo illegal abortions.

05 July 2009

What does it mean to be a prophet?



HOMILY
14th Sunday in Ordinary Time

Readings: Ez 2:2-5; Ps 123:1-2, 2, 3-4; 2 Cor 12:7-10; Mk 6:1-6


In the Gospel story today, Jesus went back to his hometown after attaining relative fame as a teacher and miracle-worker. But instead of warm acceptance, he was rejected by his town mates, prompting him to quote a probably well-known saying during his time: "A prophet is not without honor except in his native place and among his own kin and in his own house" (Mark 6,4). In the First Reading, the Prophet Ezekiel wrote about how he was called by God and sent to the “rebellious house” of Israel.

So what does it mean to be a prophet?

1. To be a prophet is to speak the word of God.

2 Peter 1,20-21: “Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God.”

To be a prophet is…
to be seized by the power of God;
to be sent on a mission;
to speak the Word of God.

The word of God is never a matter of personal ruminations or philosophical conclusions or private opinions. Speaking the word of God always comes from the prompting of the Spirit of God.

2. To be a prophet is to take sacrifices… knowing that God will make them all worth it.

2 Chronicles 24,19: “Prophets were sent to them to convert them to the LORD, though the people would not listen to their warnings.”

To be a prophet is…
to risk disappointment and unpopularity... but assured of victory;
to risk pain and suffering... but assured of consolation;
to risk even one’s life... but assured of living life fully.

Mother Teresa of Calcutta: “God calls us not to be successful, but to be faithful. Leave the long term success to God, but do what you are called to do.”

Here is an increasingly common case: A mother would come to me confessing how it pains her to see her son/daughter living-in with a partner, or just civilly married. She has been trying so hard to convince them, to no avail. After offering words of comfort and assurance, I would then ask: “What about the other family members?” The common answer: “They don’t care.”

To be a prophet is to care if sins are being committed.
To be a prophet is to mind if people are going the wrong way.
To be a prophet is to be concerned if injustice is being done.

And so, you will hear the Church speaking prophetically against abuses of power, destruction of the environment, extrajudicial killings, cheating in the elections, etc. You will find the Church promoting land reform, good governance, better education, etc.

A case in point: the Church’s pro-life stand. Many people suggest that the Church should soften its stand; that the Church should not interfere with the State in controlling population.

It’s not about regulating what married couples should do in the privacy of their bedrooms. It is about encouraging relationships that are faithful, loving and life-affirming.

It’s not about keeping kids ignorant about sex. It’s about teaching them what is right and wrong, the consequences of actions, the responsibilities that freedom brings, and that things are wrong not because society or the Church define them as wrong but because they are, in the first place, bad and harmful to persons.

It’s not about curtailing choice. It's about teaching respect for life in all its stages.

We believe that life begins at conception. Yet we also know of so many who do not pause to think whether the pills they’re taking or the operation done to them kills the life already formed at conception. Even among good church-going Catholics there is a culture of silence to ignore, to not bother or be bothered about this grave sin against life.

The Church cannot lower its standards nor point to less than the ideal. For it is not for the Church to replace God’s will because many finds it inconvenient. When the Church teaches about Christian perfection, she cannot be like business and government which occasionally adjust standards and targets to project good efficiency and success rates. One should aspire for things that are beyond one’s reach. Otherwise what is heaven for?

To be a prophet is to be pro-life. So, how pro-life are you?

3. To be a prophet is every Christian’s task.

Here is a story I learned in grade school. It is about four people: Everybody, Somebody, Anybody, and Nobody.

“There was an important job to be done and Everybody was asked to do it. Everybody was sure Somebody would do it. Anybody could have done it, but Nobody did it. Somebody got angry about that because it was Everybody's job. Everybody thought Anybody could do it, but Nobody realized that Everybody wouldn't do it. It ended up that Everybody blamed Somebody when actually Nobody asked Anybody.”

The tasked of being a prophet is Everybody’s task. When we became Christians, we also assumed to follow Christ’s role of priest, prophet and king.

How is your being a prophet so far?

Here are some ways by which we can exercise fully our being prophets:

1. Listen to God speaking – in the scriptures, in the teachings of the Church, in prayer.
2. Be a prophet first to oneself: Do I live what I believe? Do I practice what I preach?
3. Challenge others with love, out of love. Fortiter in re, suaviter in modo. Be firm on principles but gentle in admonition.
4. Witness to hope – that things will change for the better. By doing so, we also witness to the power of God at work in things.
5. Always turn to Jesus, especially when disappointment sets in, and most especially when success sets in. He is our model, exemplar and guide.

Fellow prophets, let us pray for each other, encourage each other, and, if need be, challenge each other so we may fulfill our duty of following Christ faithfully as priest, king and prophet.

02 June 2009

Oratio Imperata for the Promotion of the Culture of Life

Dear People of God:

Peace in the Risen Lord!

We have received urgent and reliable news that Congress will most likely vote on the Reproductive Health (RH) Bill very soon. Further, there are still other bills pending that threaten the sanctity of life, especially in its most vulnerable stages, the integrity of the family and the values of our nation, especially the young. Thus, we need more prayers and expressions of opposition to these anti-life bills.

In this connection, I am requesting our parishes and communities to include in all the Masses the recitation of the “Oratio Imperata for the Promotion of the Culture of Life”...


+ LUCILO B. QUIAMBAO
Bishop Administrator of Legazpi
Diocesan Circular no. 13, s. 2009
28 May 2009



















ORATIO IMPERATA FOR THE PROMOTION OF THE CULTURE OF LIFE

Loving Father, creator and protector of life,
we implore Your aid at these trying times
when in our Congress there are bills that threaten
the sanctity of life, especially, in the womb,
the integrity of the family, and
the morals of Your people, especially, the youth.

We beg You to send your Spirit of truth
to enlighten those concerned to choose
the culture of life over the culture of death,
resist the influence of the contraceptive mentality, and
inspire and strengthen us in our struggle to promote life.

We ask this through Jesus Christ, our Lord, Your Son,
through the intercession of the Blessed Mother,
Nuestra Señora de Salvacion. Amen.



ORATIO IMPERATA PARA SA PROMOCION KAN KULTURA NIN BUHAY

Mamomoton na Ama, kaglalang asin parasurog nin buhay,
minahagad kami nin tabang sa dificil na panahon na ini
na kadakul sa Congreso an mga kaisipan na nagtatao nin peligro
sa kabanalan nin buhay, lalo na kan ipapangidam
asin sa buhay na ipinangidam na,
sa integridad nin pamilya, asin
sa moralidad nin Saimong banwaan, lalo na nin mga jovenes.

Nakikimaherak kami na ipadara Mo an Saimong Espiritu nin katotoohan
nganing paliwanagan an mga nanonongdan
na piliion an buhay ki sa kagadanan,
labanan an kaisipan na kontra sa buhay,
asin pakusugon kami sa laban sa pagsurog sa buhay.

Ini hinahagad mi sa ngaran ni JesuCristo, samong Kagurangnan,
sa pag-ampon kan samong Mahal na Ina, Nuestra Señora de Salvacion. Amen.

27 February 2009

On being Pro-life and a Personal Sharing

by JC de los Reyes
Pro-life Convention
Quezon City
20 February 2009, Mon 10:32am


JC de los Reyes is a Councilor of Olongapo City, and member of Ang Kapatiran Party.


Good morning. Allow me to greet all those who work in the vineyard of the Lord. The pro-life / pro-choice controversy is jam-packed with issues but since I was tasked to speak on the issues confronting the pro-life movement I will begin with a background and history of the Philippine Population issue vis-à-vis my own experience which are drawn from these perspectives;

1. As a son of Sonny de los Reyes, former Executive Director of the Commission on Population.
2. As a graduate of theology from the Franciscan University of Steubenville
3. As a member of the Ang Kapatiran National Political Party which has an explicit party platform to defend and uphold a consistent ethic of life I was in my pre teens when my father was appointed Executive Director of POPCOM in November of 1981. I remember how the family threw a party to celebrate his appointment. I remember the new car, his big office in Mandaluyong, his friends in government. Little did I know then that his stint at POPCOM would change our lives forever.

As a backgrounder, it was pursuant to the 1973 Constitution that depopulation policies started to gain momentum in our country. No less than the preamble of the 1973 constitution provided the fundamental principle which was "to manage population levels and growth rates" in our country. It was when Marcos signed Presidential Decree #79 that the Population Commission was created. It would be government's lead agency to spearhead an aggressive national population control program.

It is interesting that in the early days of POPCOM, even the Catholic Church was represented on its Board, until the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines decided to distance itself from the Government's gradual involvement in population control by withdrawing representation on the Board of Trustees.

POPCOM was to be the office for the flow of funds from three principal funding agencies: the World Bank, the United Nations Fund for Population Activities and the United States Agency for International Development. The Asian Development Bank subsequently became a significant player.

All these funding was pursuant to the infamous National Security Study Memorandum No. 200 by Henry Kissinger who authored it in 1965 – by now a classic in geopolitical engineering—mandatin g the creation and funding of massive population control programs in 13 countries identified as having high population levels and growth rates. The Philippines was one of these 13 countries.

A National Family Planning Office was created in the Department of Health. Two major private institutions were also created to support the government program: the University Of The Philippines ' Population Institute and the Population Center Foundation, which augmented the program with research utilization capability. As the program moved along, bilateral funding from Japan, Australia, Canada and a few European countries, and project funding from private agencies supplemented the population war chest.

POPCOM evolved to be a powerful mini-Cabinet formed among Trustees representing major government players in population control, namely, Health, Labor, Local Governments, Finance, Social Welfare and Economic Development.

What was its objective? To reduce the growth rate and level of population to what it believed to be manageable, conducive to "sustainable development. " This level and rate were determined by external agencies like the Population Council based in New York..

This is a prelude to set the stage for the present population controversy the personalities of which will be the Filipino people as a church and the government backed up by International Development/ Funding Agencies. With this stand off, there was no other way to achieve this in a country whose population was significantly Roman Catholic except to aggressively promote modern family planning methods.

On the promotion of modern family planning methods, there is a crescendoing debate probably now on its peak on whether or not such is safe to the health and wellbeing of the Filipino people.

Many of those who are critical of our advocacy would almost always automatically try to destroy our argument by stating the fact that the principle of no abortion is constitutionally guaranteed. This is one of two principles they argue to purposefully kill the debate, the other is the principle of no-coercion.

Simply put - information and availability of Modern Artificial Contraception is what they want and that an individual should rise above his or her religious convictions to be able to make an informed choice which is the rationale of no-coercion. These are the 2 cornerstone principles pro choice advocates argue to get their message across.

To elaborate, while the Philippine Constitution has never legalized the termination of the life of a living infant, a serious debate has centered on the question: At what moment does the fertilized egg become a viable fetus? When does contraception degenerate to abortion? This issue is a critical one which for a pro-choice advocate would be critical to answer because most family planning methods have been identified as abortifacient.

The principle of no-coercion is made the basis for the definition of reproductive rights and reproductive health care. This could be explained better in the context of a typical barangay health center where they offer the entire range of contraceptive methods and devices to the potential "acceptor," cafeteria approach. With ample information on the pros and cons of each family planning method, the
objective is to elicit an informed choice.

The Problem is field realities like unmotivated bureaucrats in the barangay health centers, the lack of resources to effectively reach the people as the Philippine Health system does not reach more than 40% of the total population, limitations on public utilities and infrastructure, unavailability of trained medical personnel, and often sheer incompetence, all are factors to conclude that this principle
does not work.

For practical reasons, contraceptive pills and intra-uterine devices are most frequently endorsed despite the fact that most contraceptive pills have abortifacient side effects, and that the IUD is a proven abortifacient.

Male vasectomy and female tubal ligation in the Philippine population program has capitalized on the vulnerability of people in poverty-stricken barangays. Declared legal by the Supreme Court during the martial law regime, sterilization has become a major program strategy for population control. It is `encouraged' by the RH Code.

It is culturally shocking that this permanent and irreversible surgical procedure was hardly resisted by Filipinos, considering that it was a major form of genocide in Europe and the Middle East, and the major cause of riots in India as a violation of their religious beliefs. The VSS is considered to be the most cost-effective method but the dangers, such as peritonitis and psychological depression, were hardly mentioned, and usually ignored when they arose.

We must be aghast that this is promoted as a minor and painless surgery when the ideal administration of surgical sterilization is of course, as in any surgery, in a well-equipped hospital with sanitized facilities.

What is more alarming is the manner in which the surgery is conducted. As many as 100together in any nearby clinic they would queue for their turn on makeshift surgical beds lined up side by side 10 to 15. Indonesians called this a "safari." A doctor and nurse would then conduct the mass surgery and finish them in a weekend. But besides the doctor's fees of about Php 500 per patient subsidized by the program, what they pay the patient as incentives are really bribes to undergo the procedure. The sterilization patients were granted an average of 5-days of no-work compensation (even if they were unemployed), free antibiotics for the convalescing period, and transportation allowances.

Finally, the "cafeteria approach" does not include all the methods of fertility regulation. It was only in (1995) when the population control program included a specific natural family planning process (NFP), as it tried to appease the Catholic Church - the Billings Ovulation, which is taught within the context of a matrimonial relationship and not merely as training on physiological manipulation.

These are the realities that expose the dirty tactics of the population control program. The thrust of these policies has expanded to address issues such as AIDS Education, Adolescent Fertility, Sex Education, Reproductive Health—all in the agenda proposed by the 1994 World Population Conference in Cairo and the 1995 World Conference on Women in Beijing. Population control propaganda is directed at surrounding the acceptor with messages and institutions that reshape their values, limit their freedom of choice and lead their preferences toward the more effective methods, particularly abortion.

Terminologies and statements contained in the two U.N. World Conferences have then been incorporated into new and recurrent legislation, RH Code, CSR Ordinance, GADA, Women's Code all these invoke words contained in the World Conference Statements, so that definitions and interpretations of these statements will be forced upon our interpretations of the law.

The object is to slowly desensitize by starting at it softly like the legalization of abortion for specific causes, the advocacy of divorce and same sex marriage. These moves in legislation are supported by Philippine Legislators Committee on Population and Development (PLCPD).

In regard to sex education, the Adolescent Health and Youth Development Programme adopted by the Department of Education, Culture and Sports seeks to develop a new breed of youth. The program was launched in 1995, and integrates a value-free approach to sex education in schools. Subtly it is to desensitize the youth to the intimacy and sacredness of sex. The program tends to reduce the youth's appreciation of sex: from an expression of love within the context of marriage, to merely a practical understanding of it as a function of the body that can be manipulated and used to achieve pleasure and to forego inner discipline.

With the election of President Obama, expect that the population control program will grow more visible and vocal in media, e.g., advertising of condoms, third sex celebrities, sexually explicit bill boards, available pornography – and it will still get worse.

The materialist and individualistic world view today which stems from human arrogance and materialistic greed will continue to negate and marginalize marriage and family where society sees pregnancy as a disease, childbirth as an aberration, and children as parasites. It is a pedophobia of the intense kind or a fear for children the world has never seen. The young men and women of today are being taught to be selfish hedonists rather than to be men and women for others. They are brainwashed to own and manipulate their world rather than steward it and share it such that all God's children especially His poor beloved could have the fullness of life, here and now.

On a more personal note, my father once had that world view; in fact he was once, one of those who zealously propagated it once upon a time. He was enslaved and blind to the ways of such deadly antinatalist ideology.

As I mentioned in the beginning of my talk, his short stint at POPCOM changed our life. I could vividly remember how the guest rooms in our house at Makati would serve as warehouses for Tahiti Brand condoms, thousands of them, as well as contraceptive pills which looked like m&m candies. I, my brother and sisters would casually play with these as if there was nothing wrong with them. Perhaps, in our innocence, they were simply toys and we would fill the condoms with water and throw it at each other.

Hindsight makes me tremble at the thought that papa opened the doors of our house to these inventions of man to engineer and manipulate life at any cost. He allowed his own children exposed to things that symbolized man's desire to disobey God and to choose modern day idols that debased the sacredness of the sexual act. No doubt it invoked some destructive force as it was the culture of death that my father was promoting.

In March of 1982, under severe pressure from international funding agencies, he led POPCOM to issue the call to "Stop at 3." This was cheered by the more than 50,000 full-time population workers and volunteers deployed in over 70 Philippine provinces and funded by USAID.

My father, in his later public confession had a sense of discomfort... He was leading a government program chanting Stop at 3! Stop at 3! But we were…4. How could he ask the nation's families to call for a family size of 3 when he were 4.

The terrible answer came swiftly; a month later, April of 1982, as she was visiting my mother-in-law for summer, my 10-year old sister Maricris was murdered. A man high on drugs had broken into our lola's house in Olongapo to rape Maricris' yaya who slept with her. My sister woke up; and to silence her, the man hit her on the head with a lead pipe.

During later years, my father reflecting on Maricris' death confessed publicly that just as Christ died for us in the cross for sins he did not commit, Maricris or Christine, her real name was his `little Christ,' the one who bore his sins, who suffered the pain that he deserved because of his hardheartedness. It was the spiritual force of his sins that got her killed.

His quest for worldly glory and his intellectual arrogance failed him in seeing simple truths…that human life transcends statistics or economics, human life cannot stagnate at the material level, it transcends this too. He saw that it was only when you grasp to some extent the nature of the giver of life that you will gain a human
appreciation of life….And he is God, the instrumental and mediative cause of creation …he is the author and usher of all life…life which is the first and fundamental good, without which no other good is possible.

My father's life and conversion from population czar to pro-life champion is itself a victory of life. Grace always overcomes sin and like the conversion of Saul, my father metamorphosed into one of the most aggressive defenders of life in the country. For even in the most violent poverty of spirit or of situation, it is not beyond the hope of being transformed, where there is life, it is always said…there is hope. Conversely, where there is no life, there is no hope. These are to me the firmest foundation of all that we do for pro-life.

Yes, there is hope that this movement will prevail…that this country will prevail. As long as there are willing vessels, saying yes to the Lord, there will be defenders of life in congress, in local governments, in our schools, in our parishes….in our nation. The garden of vocations still for pro-life work is a pro-life family as the garden of vocations for future political leaders who will work for
pro-life is a pro life political party.

To end let me declare that life is purposeful and let me quote God in Genesis 9:5 `From man, in regard to his fellow man, I will demand an accounting for human life.'

22 February 2009

The Story behind CBCP's Senate Walk-out

Today's PDI headline: Bishops quit RH bill talks. The Inquirer made a banner story of the walk-out of three CBCP representatives (there was no bishop among them, by the way) from the technical working group hearing of the senate's committee on health. The reporter/s took pains to repeatedly insinuate it was because of the Church's stand against artificial contraception.

The fact is many times more enlightening than the spin. The discussions have yet to reach the issue of artificial contraception. What the CBCP reps were trying to inject was a more nuanced and clarified stand of the senate bill on two basic matters: following the constitution and the anti-abortion provision of the bill, something which the bill's proponents have repeatedly used to claim pro-life groups got them wrong. But this never merited even a passing mention in the news report. The CBCP reps complained of not being heard, the report says. But what was it that the TWG refused to hear from them? The reason for the walk-out was lost in the reporting.

To add a semblance of fairness, Sen. Biazon extended an almost hollow offer of continuous invitation to the next hearings. At least, Cong. Lagman was consistent in his Church-bashing: "The Catholic Church will be isolated, sooner or later." On the matter of defending the constitution and upholding RH bill's much-publicized anti-abortion stand? Come on!

The email below is most likely from Atty. Jo Imbong, CBCP's Legal Counsel. I got it from the ECFL Luzon egroup.


.......

[ECFL_LUZON] Thoughts before the walk-out (Senate Hearing)
Fr. Ric Eguia

- On Fri, 2/20/09, fides vera wrote:
From: fides vera
Subject: [buhayatpamilya] Thoughts before the walk-out
To: buhayatpamilya@ yahoogroups. com
Date: Friday, February 20, 2009, 11:43 PM


Hi everyone,

The Senate Subcommittee on Population invited the CBCP to a Technical Working Group to do a line-by-line study of the RH substitute bill last February 19. CBCP had registered three representatives: Fr. Melvin Castro, Exec. Sec. of ECFL, Atty. Jo Imbong of the Legal Office, and Dr. Zenaida Rotea, Exec. Sec. of the Office on Women. Ms. Marita Wasan of Prolife Philippines, and Atty. Dindo Garciano, President of ALFI and former Mayor, were both there, having also received an invitation.

Arrayed against us were at least ten (10) pro-RH advocates, the likes of which we have confronted during the hearings on 4110, 3773, 17, and 5043. That count includes about 3 from government line agencies.

And so CBCP pushed for amendments based on purely legal grounds.

I invite each of you to ponder how it went:

#1. To Section 2 (b) which speaks of "protection of women's human rights", CBCP proposed modifying the phrase by inserting , "in acordance with Philippine law" so that any such rights of women will not be against our Constitution. Can anything be more reasonable than that? If adopted, the entire sentence would then read as follows:

The advancement and protection of women's human rights in accordance with Philippine law shall be central to the efforts of the State to address reproductive health care.

After all, the Philippines is a sovereign nation. And the Constitution is the highest law of the land, and this highest law protects life, parenting, family, children. Right?

Wrong! They objected to that phrase. They said that the Philippines is bound to obey the terms of CEDAW in everything, including the funny definition of "reproductive health" that we have repeatedly challenged.

Question: Isn't national sovereignty the paramount consideration in our foreign policy decisions? Isn't national interest another paramount consideration? (See Article II, Section 7, Constitution) .

What is it then in the pro-RH agenda that disowns these constitutional principles; what lurking RH agenda would be endangered if the phrase is inserted in Section 2? What women's 'right' would be hindered by our Constitution? That should be easy to figure out, friends.

#2. Since Section 2 already speaks of reproductive health care, CBCP proposed that the group tackle Section 4 on the definition of reproductive health. From hereon, the discussions became contentious. The RH agenda was adamant in insisting on the present definition, which is lifted from ICPD.

CBCP maintained that health as written in the Constitution by those who drafted it in 1986 simply meant, well . . . health! And reproductive health was not among their noble intentions at all Hence, RH as it is defined in ICPD is alien to our legal system. I don't seriously think that ICPD amended our Constitution

But the RH proponents stuck to their position that since the Philippines is a signatory to ICPD, any reference to the Constitution will be powerless to overturn the ICPD "commitment" . Really now. Any student of public governance knows otherwise.

The group took a brief lunchbreak, a 'timely' excuse welcomed by everyone, more to defuse the tension that was slowly building up.

But as the working committee resumed, CBCP figured out that majority of the participants of the TWG were bent on finishing their task that afternoon along the language of the substitute bill.

At this point, CBCP asked to read its Statement, placing on record its refusal to have any further part in the deliberations and disclaiming any hand on the part of CBCP in the group's final output which would contain provisions that assault inherent and inviolable human rights—of the unborn, of parents and of families. Then we walked out.

#3 Even as we did, Jo had made sure earlier that another amendment be introduced by an ally who remained at the meeting. . What was that amendment?

Remember that phrase in the House version to the effect that "nothing in this Act changes the law on abortion" ? You will recall, this sentence is their shield against a charge that the bill prepares the way for abortion.

The proposed amendment is a test of the sincerity of that disclaimer. It goes this way:

"Nothing in this Act changes the law on abortion. Abortifacient devices and substances shall not be a part of reproductive health services."

Anyone will see that the above amendment naturally flows and follows from the disclaimer on abortion and that therefore it is a logical consequence of it.

The amendment was outvoted. The defeat of that proposal affirms our long held suspicions. Go figure the implications.

Finally, #4. Hear this, good Fr. Joe- According to a witness, as the discussion approached the part on "Prohibited Acts", a proposal was heard to penalize any priest or religious who speaks against everything on reproductive health in the bill. The crime of "malicious disinformation" punished in the House version does not appear in the Senate version.

Luckily, another lawyer ally in the meeting mercifully reminded the proponent that there is still such a thing as freedom of speech and expression, and freedom of religious belief in this country.

Folks, as of this writing, we are awaiting a copy of the final output of the February 19 TWG meeting. I have the feeling you will not surprised when you read it.

By the way, before our group left earlier, the Chair of the meeting asked CBCP to submit its point-by-point position on the substitute bill. I said we will.
Allow me to acknowledge all your prayerful intentions and vigils. We all must continue because to tell you the truth . . . it all works!

Have faith,

- JO

06 February 2009

Obama as Pro-Life poster boy



Unfortunately this was rejected by NBC for its Super Bowl broadcast. An NBC exec explained it was because they "didn't want to run political or advocacy ads".

Here's the text of the spot. The visual backdrop is of an unborn child in his mother's womb. With violins playing in the background, the following text appears on the screen:

"The child's future is a broken home.
"He will be abandoned by his father.
"His single mother will struggle to raise him.
"Despite the hardships he will endure,
"This child will become
"The first African American President."
The tag line is, "Life: Imagine the Potential."

Fortunately, the logic of the people Obama hangs with and supports six days a week and twice on Sunday, was not applied to him.

To read more on this commentary, click here.

27 January 2009

Morality of Means

by Bishop Teodoro Bacani Jr.
Manila Standard Today
Saturday-Sunday, September 27-28, 2008


Many of our people, I believe, labor from many misconceptions about the Church’s stand regarding numerous matters connected with the population question. For example, there are those who believe that the Church does not acknowledge the existence of a population problem. The fact is that the Church has often acknowledged the existence and the complexity of the population problem, not only in some parts of the world, but specifically in the Philippines. I have documented this in my book, “The Church and Birth Control.”

Related to this, there are also those who think that the Church is against any effort of government to slow down our population growth rate. But the truth is that the Church acknowledges the right of the state to orient the demography of the population. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, par.2372). The decision to accelerate, maintain or decelerate the population growth rate must be based on economic and social realities. All three options (acceleration, maintenance, deceleration) are all possible moral options according to circumstances.

The Church is not against the control of the population growth rate. It accepts population management through self-control. Further, the Church holds that the decision regarding the number of a couple’s children belongs only to the couple concerned and not to the government, the Church or any other entity. In any effort to decelerate or maintain the population growth rate, the Church is also against any coercion (like dictating the number of children a couple can have, and coercing people to be sterilized), while it bats for the necessity of providing full information to couples regarding the means used.

Another misconception is that the Church is against responsible parenthood and family planning, and wants people to multiply without any restraint. The truth is, the Church advocates responsible parenthood. The Church also advocates family planning as an exercise of responsible parenthood. The Church indeed teaches that parents should strive to generously bring children into the world, but also that they should strive to bring into the world only those children whom they can raise up in a human way. According to the Church’s view, it would be irresponsible for couples to beget children without any thought on whether they can educate them.

Again, many people think that the Church is against sex education. In reality, the Church wants sex education for her children. But the Church wants sex education to be given in an appropriate way, reserving to parents the first right to give sex education to their children. The Church also wants sex education to be given according to the appropriate age of the children and with a corresponding education in values.

One thing many people find hard to understand is the Church’s insistence that couples should use only natural family planning. The Church’s stand is based on two convictions: 1) that in the matter of birth control, what is important is not only the purpose but the means used to attain the purpose. There must be not only a morality of purpose but of means; 2) natural family planning, is the only moral means of birth control.

I will discuss in another essay the justification for the Church’s insistence that only the natural method is the only morally allowable method of birth control. What I will explain here is the necessity to consider not only the efficiency but the morality of the means used for birth control. I will try to answer the objection of some people that the other modern means must be allowed because they are easier to use and are more effective and efficient.

In the matter of birth control, the issue of morality is even more important than efficiency. If efficiency is what matters most, then why not use outright abortion or infanticide? Or, better still, why not line up against the wall those who say that we should not be concerned about the morality of means, and then shoot them all to death? That would be a quick way of diminishing the population growth rate. But I am sure that all of the advocates of efficiency of means only would object and would say that that would be immoral. In saying that, however, they would be admitting that it is important to consider the morality of means and not only their efficiency.

Thus, the Catholic bishops are obliged to militate against the provision of House Bill 5043 that “the full range of family planning methods, both natural and modern shall be promoted” (sec. 11), such modern methods being understood to include “hormonal contraceptives, intra-uterine devices, injectables and other allied reproductive health products” (sec. 10). We know that IUDs, pills, the morning after pill, Norplant and Depo-Provera are not only contraceptives but also abortifacients, since they not only prevent fertilization but the implantation of the fertilized ovum. The prevention of the implantation of the fertilized ovum is already a form of abortion, according to prevailing Catholic teaching.

The insistence of the bishops and of the Catholic Church on the morality of means is only an insistence that we safeguard our humanity in what we do, and especially in the matter of family planning. It will not matter much that we become more economically prosperous if in the process we devalue ourselves as human beings.

For us, pagpapakatao (growth in humanity) should come first, and should not be sacrificed especially in the matter of pagdadalang-tao (bearing children).

Facts and fallacies in the population debate


By John J. Carroll, S.J.
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 01:36:00 09/05/2008


Perhaps former senator Francisco Tatad should check his facts before rushing into print. In an article criticizing a paper signed by 26 economists of the University of the Philippines (UP) in support of the Reproductive Health Bill, President Ferdinand Marcos’ former minister of public information wrote: “… [T]he economists reportedly claim that 57 percent of Filipino families have nine children or more. The statistic reads like one of those manufactured electoral counts in one of our notoriously crooked elections. It smells.”

The UP paper actually claims no such thing, only that poverty incidence “rises steadily with the number of children to 57 percent for a family of nine children or more.”

Such loose argumentation does not advance the cause of truth, the good of the Filipino people, or the credibility of the Church for which the author seems to be speaking. It may be useful therefore to list down some facts which I believe to be well established and which tend to be obscured in the dust of the ideological battle surrounding the Reproductive Health Bill.

• The Philippine population is hardly “booming” or “runaway.” The birth rate and the natural increase rate (birth rate-death rate) have both been coming down, though not as rapidly as some economists and others would like. The surge in population, which multiplied 10 times over in the 20th century, was not due to a significant increase in the birth rate but to a drop in the death rate made possible by public health measures such as malaria control, clean drinking water and immunization of children.

• Rapid population growth can be either good or bad for an economy. In the United States of the 19th century, a vast continent of immense natural resources benefited immensely from the immigration of Irish and German immigrants who built the railroads, dug the canals and mined the coal to fuel rapid economic development. In the Philippines, on the other hand, and despite what textbooks may say of “vast natural resources,” the forests are gone, the coral reefs are in bad shape, the rivers are dead or dying and millions of tons of precious topsoil have been washed into the sea. To make matters worse, our human resources are underdeveloped due to a disastrously poor public school system. In these circumstances, rapid population growth imposes an additional burden on the economy.

• Rapid population growth alone cannot explain poverty; the latter has many other causes including corruption, oligarchic control of the economy, concentration of income and poor economic policy. But large families among the poor make it more difficult for them to rise out of poverty since expenditures per child on health and education drop radically and systematically as the number of children in a family increases.

• A lower population growth rate would not be a quick fix, however, for the economy. If all Filipinos were to stop having children today, the impact on the school system would not be felt for another seven years or so—when the children not born today would not be starting to go to school!—and the impact on the job market for 15 or 20 years.

• The current decline in the birth rate should not be a reason for complacency among those who oppose contraception, since much of the decline is due precisely to contraception. It might better be seen as a challenge to provide a genuine option especially to the poor, in the form of natural family planning.

• Nor does it mean that the “population problem” will soon be a thing of the past. Even though the average number of children born per woman is decreasing, the large percentage of women in their childbearing years will ensure population growth for generations to come.

• Contraception and abortion: Is there a link and if so what is it? On the one hand, one would intuitively expect that easy availability of contraception especially among the poor would provide an alternative to abortion. On the other hand, there are cases such as the United States in which the use of contraceptives and the rate of abortions have increased together. Here the pro-life people have their hands on an important point: It is a question of values and priorities, of another child or another car, of respect for life and the whole sacred process by which a man and a woman cooperate with the Creator in bringing a new life, a new human person, into being.

• Hence the importance of value formation such as that which is ideally given in courses on natural family planning (NFP). Without that, even NFP can become simply another technique, less expensive than contraception, with no side effects, and effective if used properly.

• Effective usage of NFP is not as simple as popping a pill or having oneself ligated. The “user failure rate” can be high, depending mainly on the motivation of the couple to be faithful to the method. Yet the user failure rate of various contraceptives, including pills, can also be high. And even with a relatively high user failure rate, if the 50 percent of Philippine couples not practicing any form of family planning were to turn to NFP, it would impact significantly on the birth rate. Moreover, NFP has its intrinsic rewards in terms of woman’s empowerment, discipline and family solidarity.

Which reminds us that, behind all of the statistics and arguments, what we are talking about here is, ultimately, life and love.