I Support the RH Bill: A Speech I Would’ve Delivered if I were a Legislator

Reproductive health supporters and volunteers

(NOTE: This is a speech I would’ve delivered if I was a member of the House of Representatives. I just wanted to share what’s on my mind.)

Mr. Speaker,

As a Centrist Democrat, my world view tells me that I should craft legislation to provide people with equal opportunities; opportunities for them to live, work, and be contributors to nation-building. I am obliged by my world view to legislate with the end goal of providing my constituents not only with choices, but with opportunities as a result of their choice, however it may swing. It’s not only my obligation to my belief but to constituency which I serve.

For more than a decade, this Congress has attempted to pass legislation that provides women with choices, and the opportunities that shall bring fullness to their choice. For more than a decade, we have been attempting to pass legislation that shall provide women with choices on how to control family-size based on their physiological and economic contexts; and to support their choice with state-sponsored opportunities to back their choice.

Mr. Speaker, let it not be believed that I am against the divine and natural obligation of birthing children. I believe that children are the hope and the future of our nation. Let it not be believed as well that I am in favor of curtailing the freedom of choice for Filipino families. I am in favor of them; thus, my support for this legislation.

Our constitution has vowed to protect the interests of women by making it a matter of principle to recognize women’s role in nation-building. And true nation-building can only be achieved if a state makes itself a conducive seedbed of free choice and opportunity. The state has an obligation, under a democratic system, to ensure that women are actively involved in affairs of the state; and with that said, I’m sure the Constitution wants our active women to be healthy.

Mr. Speaker, I am one with the anti-RH supporters in the view of their right to life. I share their view that life begins with conception, and that abortion is a crime. I am a Catholic, a believer in the Judeao-Christian concept of life.

In my view, I see no provision on the measure supporting or condoning abortion. In fact, the RH Bill does not only protect one life, but two. The RH Bill protects the life of the child and the mother. Through the assurance of pre-natal and post-natal health services to mothers, the RH Bill is one with our cause and obligation to protect life.

As to the allegations of the bill promoting abortion, I ask this back: since when did free choice lead to abortion, Mr. Speaker? Since when did informed and educated choices lead to death? Since when did empowerment and education led to an immoral decision? Mr. Speaker, our legislative duty to provide alternatives and choices must not be misconstrued to lead a certain type of life or lead towards a certain type of decision. I oppose abortion, Mr. Speaker. But I also support the RH Bill. Who can tell me I cannot support both at once?

The RH Bill presents a medical approach to contraception, which welcomes the aid of artificial contraceptives such as condoms, pills, and injectibles. But the bill does not outlaw the calendar method, to which I personally believe on. The bill provides the people with choices, and opportunities to undertake their choice. The issue of how the family should be controlled is a personal and familial issue. Many may opt to use calendar method, but that does not eliminate our obligation to provide other choices. A democracy values the presence of several alternatives; there is no single way out all the time.

Mr. Speaker, if we ask our conscience to weigh in on the matter of reproductive health legislation, should we not also consult reason and facts? If we were to make choices for our constituents, as I believe we are empowered to make, will we not give our constituents the choice to control the way they put gaps between births in search of a comfortable, decent life? Will we not give our youth the opportunity to learn that sex is a natural phenomenon that entails responsibility? Will we not give the poorest Filipino women a fighting chance to live and rear for their newly-born children? Will we deprive our constituents with the constitutional guarantee of their right to life, their right to living, and their right to choose?

My conscience, my belief, and my object reality is one, Mr. Speaker. I believe in the right to live. And I believe that I am obliged to protect it against any element that will prevent it from its fullness.

I support the RH Bill.


About carlomasajo
I am a 21 year old Fine Arts student from the University of Santo Tomas trying to help this nation become a better one.

4 Responses to I Support the RH Bill: A Speech I Would’ve Delivered if I were a Legislator

  1. I am against RH Bill. But not because of moralistic grounds but on financial grounds. I think what many people forget is that we do not have a balanced budget – we have so much debt. To take on a legislation like this, along with the huge possibility of it not being properly implemented, and the doors for corruption that it opens. is just billions of pesos worth of gamble we cannot take. I wrote a satiric entry about it http://bolderviews.wordpress.com/2012/01/03/why-the-reproductive-health-bill-should-be-passed-in-the-philippines/

  2. God of Entropy says:

    Regarding the post aforementioned… the RH Bill need not be expensive either. We are already implementing some sort of practice to control our population, yes? The Greatest problem really is the narrow-minded thinking and approach of various clergymen – so-called ministers of God – as well as common citizens who don’t know any better. We have been debating over and over the right to “respect the rights of the unborn” and the “rights of the living to prevent the unborn from being a future pain in the neck”. It’s obvious I would go for the latter. However, I also want to point out the very common sense approach to this whole debate. Well, it goes like this. You know what a locust is, right? Locusts are created by God, so to speak, right? If locusts are allowed to multiply at a fast rate, and when they go hungry, you know what happens to your well-maintained crop, right? Same with humans. If you know that a future population will inefficiently eat into the food reserves, wouldn’t you want to control this “threat” to the living? Okay, number two. You know what cancer is right? If you allow cancer to grow in your body, the cancer will overwhelm your system and eventually the body dies, the system dies. So will the cancer. No one wins. Same with humans. If you allow humans to overpopulate at a risky rate, eventually the “extra” humans will not only eat into the food reserves but also increase the demand for more resources to be burned (food, housing, land to live on, Proper urban-rural living, etc.) which is actually bad because humans are at the top of the food chain and we’re too populated that we demand too much from Nature, too much for Her to handle. We already see the pollution around us. This is not a result of technology. It’s the result of overpopulation. (Too many people = too many movement = too many vehicles = too much combustion = too much pollution). Solution? It’s what the RH bill is about… to control the threat which is Ourselves.

  3. I agree that the threat must be addressed but not in the form of government intervention. You cannot simply say that the RH Bill does not need to be expensive then not support ways of how it cannot be inexpensive. We have to be realistic. A legislation as wide as this will be costly. The medical resources will cost billions of pesos – that is why the bill includes appropriations. I am not religious or against the RH Bill because of moralistic reasons. I am simply against it because it is not fair to pass the burden of this to taxpayers. There are better ways to control population that does not involve money. The government cannot be spending money it does not have. Here is an action plan that does not cost us anything to help curb population growth: http://bolderviews.wordpress.com/2012/01/08/how-to-solve-the-population-problem-without-rh-bill/

  4. Pingback: 10 Creative RH Bill Ads | The Creativity Window

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: