No mention of RH bill in Sona, says Sotto

A+
A
A-

MANILA, Philippines—President Benigno Aquino III never mentioned the Reproductive Health (RH) Bill in his State of the Nation Address (SONA), Senate Majority Floor Leader Vicente Sotto III said Monday.

“[Aquino] said ‘responsible parenting’ but he did not say ‘bill’. He only said ‘we should practice responsible parenting.’ Correct, we are in favor of that, all of us are in favor of that,” Sotto said in an ambush interview after Aquino’s hour and a half long speech.

“He did not mention anything about contraceptives, abortion, birth control, and population control, nothing about that. That is what is contained in the RH Bill. There’s nothing (in his speech about that),” Sotto said.

Aquino said in his speech that he hoped the now shrinking backlog in education would not become a problem again because of the large number of students. He added, “I think, responsible Pparenthood is the answer,” for which he got the loudest applause from the audience in the gallery.

Sotto said that “even those who are opposed to RH Bill are in favor of responsible parenting.”

“When you want to declare contraceptives, IUDs, injectibles, and condoms as essential medicines, that’s not responsible parenting. When you are consenting to abortion, that is not responsible parenting. When you are going to spend P3 billion to buy contraceptives, that is not responsible parenting. So the President did not say anything about that,” Sotto said.

When asked to rate Aquino’s speech, Sotto said, “I believe this is the best Sona of the president. He covered everything, he was confident, he exuded confidence, he exuded sincerity in what he was saying.”

Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of INQUIRER.net. We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.

  • quirinomayer

    That’s your opinion, Sotto the buffoon and bopol

    Based on previous statements of the President on the issue of responsible parenthood, it can be concluded that his idea of responsible parenting includes contraceptives and controlling the birth rate. 

    Go go go RH Bill!!! Go go go Pnoy!!!

    • JJF724

      I’m about to pin the same point and glad to see that you elaborate it already.  Sad to see that this senator did not reach the same level of understanding…

  • 189COWARDS

    The Puppet made his show, preserved his family fortune… Nothing else is expected.

  • just_anotherperson

    Patay na ang RH Bill.  Dapat ibaon na ito sa limot.

    • http://alasfilipinas.blogspot.com/ Pepe Alas

      Super like! =)

    • w33k3nd3r

      Responsible Parenthood na po siya, FYI.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PJTH3SHQU3B4TCUVRH2UXZCJDY Balahura

    b0b0 ka  Uncle (tito) Sotto he mentions responsible parenthood, ano pa ba iyon? Mahina ang pick up mo, ang tinutukoy ni pnoy ay ang RH bill, di lang siya garapal para di umalboroto ang mga Damaso, eh wala namang mga asawa ang mga pari eh bakit kontra sa RH bill.

  • Fulpol

    NO to RH Bill…

    YES to FOI…

    hahaha
    hahaha
    ahahahah

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/BJQIVVMXUD5AFN4NUGY3EMUML4 george Pon

    Sotto is lying again! spreading misinformation about the RH bill. If you read the bill, there is no mention of population control and RH bill is not about population control.
    “He did not mention anything about contraceptives, abortion, birth control, and population control, nothing about that. That is what is contained in the RH Bill. There’s nothing (in his speech about that),” Sotto said.

  • Ommm

    This government is so frightened of any disapproval from the church it’s  pathetic. God? knows why…they have 6 years and then they are out so nothing to lose…yet they must fear the church is so powerful that 6 years could be cut short??…..

    This country needs heroes, not cowards…and this country needs to realize although every sperm has a life that life is not necessarily an asset.

  • jinx

    If RH bill won’t be passed, poverty will continue to grip this country.  And if that happens, we all know who are to blame—the RCC and their minions in politics. 

    The RCC have been the guiding voice of our politicians who fear them, who lick their a—-s.  That’s why we’re in the mire because of such subservience.  The RH bill could be the hope of our country.  But because it is a threat to its power, the church-through the CBCP- will do all it can to derail it. Regardless if the majority support it.

    But I’m sure the movers  of this country know better.  We know who are to blame…..

  • w33k3nd3r

    Nasabi na itong paulit ulit na parang sirang plaka: ito ang mangyayari pag tayo’y naghalal ng opisyal na artista. Si Dolphy na ho mismo ang nagsabi: “Madaling manalo, ngunit ang problema’y hindi ko alam kung ano’ng gagawin pag ako’y nanalo.”

    Isipin na lang po natin, mga kababayan, Hari na po ng Comedy ang nagsalita ng katotohanang iyon at, ironically, hindi siya biro.

    Heto ang mga tulad ni Sotto, na umaasa sa suporta ng simbahan at hinaharang ang Responsible Parenthood bill; samantalang ni hindi isang beses sa kanyang buhay ng siya’y nanganak o sumilang ng sanggol. Dahil alam niya na ang mga botanteng nag iisip ay hindi boboto sa kanya.

  • Hey_Dudes

    Do not worry Sotto.  You may now procreate with more women willing to sire your blood and flesh.  You are so against the RH bill because you don’t want your women not having your look-a-like products. Shame on you.

  • ApoLapullapu

    Tama si Tito Sotto.  The President mentioned Responsible Parenthood. The RH Bill is another thing. It is called the “Women’s Reproductive Health Bill” – a very different animal.  Humaba ang palakpakan, magkaiba ang dahilan dahil nagkaiba ang pagpakakaintende.  Ang mga prolife pumalakpak dahil akala nila Responsible Parenthood – Natural Method.  Ang iba pumalakpak sapagkat naniniwala silang iindorso na ni P-Noy ang RH Bill.  Magandang pagkasulat, maligaya ang lahat. Pagkatapos, ano kaya?

  • $25214711

    Anti-RH din naman si Tito 
    “When you want to declare contraceptives, IUDs, injectibles, and condoms as essential medicines, that’s not responsible parenting. When you are consenting to abortion, that is not responsible parenting. When you are going to spend P3 billion to buy contraceptives, that is not responsible parenting. So the President did not say anything about that,” Sotto said. 

    Well, that’s your opinion Mr. Senator. Walang libreng condom, IUD etc.. Lahat yan binabayaran at may namumuhunan. Ikaw nga laway lang puhunan mo pero 200 milyon ang pork barrel mo. It’s about choices. Hindi lang puro ikaw ang dapat sundin, dapat may choice. Lahat ng sobra mali. Pag sobra na ang tao sobra narin ang mangangailangan ng kotse at tambak ang polusyon. Dadami ang mangangailangan ng bahay at mauubos ang mga puno pampagawa nito. Maraming mangangailangan at maraming pabrikang kailangan para tugunan ang pangangailangan ng maraming tao. Maraming kabataang hindi nakikinig sa magulang kaya maraming nabubuntis ng maaga. Maraming couples ang hindi nakikinig sa simbahan kaya dumadami ang anak. Maraming mahina ang pamigil ng libog kaya maraming nag p-premarital sex. Hindi mo kailangang maging pinoy henyo para maintindihan ang mga ito. Natural gumastos ang gobyerno kung makakabuti ito sa tao. Iniisip mo kasi yung ibang kikita sa pagbebenta ng condom pero yung kinikita mo ok lang. Natural may kumita dahil may namuhunan. Bantayan mo nalang kaya yung kikita kung may gagawing masama kesa dumakdak ka. 

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/WEBHUWYTBKWJ6W6S2QE75TSOOY Rafael

      QUESTIONABLE PROVISIONS IN THE RH BILL

      Relating to abortion:
      A. Section 3 Guiding Principles (I) While this Act does not amend penal law on abortion, the government shall ensure that all women needing care for post-abortion complications shall be treated and counseled in a humane, non-judgmental and compassionate manner.

      B. SECTION 18. Prohibited Acts. -The following acts are prohibited:

      (A) Any healthcare service provider, whether public or private, who shall

      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 perpetrators as certified to by the Department of Social Welfare (DSWD) and Development, no prior parental consent shall be necessary; and

      Impact of these provisions:
      Women could easily initiate the abortion process and seek relief from post-abortion complications from the health service providers as enunciated in the bill. Hence, abortion is promoted.

      There will be an increase in women initiating the abortion process, since they are assured that healthcare service providers could not validly refuse to continue the abortion as they would be penalized. Furthermore, women will be comfortable undergoing the abortion process since they are protected by Section 3, when it stated that they shall be treated and counseled in a humane, non-judgmental and compassionate manner.

      • $25214711

        Hey what’s wrong with that? Person in legal age is considered adults and can decide what todo with his/her life. No need for parental approval. People need to choose what’s good for them. And how do you define a cell having a life when it’s not even considered living and having a life itself? Who will judge that, the church? There is certain probition regarding abortion. Ang sinulat mo ay hypothetical sa usaping maraming babaeng magpapa-abort. Get real bro. You can tweak your bible all you want but that doesn’t prove you’re right.

    • Jose Ruiz

      SEC. 2. State Policies. – The State recognizes and guarantees the human rights of all persons including their right to equality and non-discrimination of these rights, the right to sustainable human development, the right to health which includes reproductive health, the right to education and information, and the right to choose and make decisions for themselves in accordance with their religious convictions, ethics, cultural beliefs, and the demands of responsible parenthood.
      Comment:
      How about the right of the unborn child? Please be informed that this Bill will deprive the unborn of his right to life.

      The State shall comply with all its international obligations under various human rights instruments relative to reproductive health and women’s empowerment including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

      Comment:
      We are not obliged to follow these international obligations. Our government has the right to sovereignty, meaning we can pass laws without the interference of any other governments or of international obligations

      • $25214711

        Choices para makapag sex at hindi mabuntis. Yung ang issue ko. Wala akong sinabing abortion. Anong masama dun?

      • $25214711

        Sinong mag de-decide kung tao na yung nasa sinapupunan ng ina, simbahan, Si Tito Sotto?Ikaw? RH bills is for the greater good, anong interference o international obligations ang sinasabi mo? Mag trabaho kaman ng todo-todo kung ang anak mo ay sobra-sobra hindi ka palalamunin nyang right na sinasabi mo.

  • tamumd

    Sotto is playing possum and playing naive! Trying hard to play down what the president said in his SONA. lol….If Melvin Castro is hissing in an article at the CBCP website reacting to the same thing…..he must’ve have sensed and understood what the President meant by Responsible Parenthood! lol..So Mr. Sotto take your cue from Melvin Castro!!!!

    • http://twitter.com/kielamos Ezekiel ramos

      Sad to say most of you are ignorant of the bill being passed. The point
      he was mentioning it that where will you get funding for this? 3B wherein fact
      this bill is just a redundancy of the EO’s, Ao’s RA’s etc. approved previously.

      RH bill is a mere duplication of the following laws:
      1. R.A. 9710 or An Act Providing for Magna Carta of Women
      2. PD No. 603 or The Child and Youth Welfare Code
      3. Republic Act No. 9262 or Anti-Violence against Women and Children
      4. Republic Act No. 8504 or Philippine AIDS Prevention and Control Act of 1998
      5. AO 2008-0029 Implementing Health Reforms for Rapid Reduction of Maternal and Neonatal Mortality
      6. Children’s Health Program of the DOH
      7. Family Planning Program of the DOH
      8. Prevention and Management Control of Abortion and its complications (PMAC)
      9. PD No. 965 or A decree requiring applicant for marriage license to receive instructions on family planning and responsible parenthood.

      10. R.A 7883 or the Barangay Health Workers Benefits and Incentives Acts of 1995
      11. R.A. 7160 or The Local Government Code of the Philippines
      12. AO No. 2010-0036- The Aquino Health Agenda: Achieving Universal Health Care for all Filipinos
      13. Women’s Health and Safe Motherhood Project of the DOH
      14. Republic Act No. 8504 or Philippine AIDS Prevention and Control Act of 1998
      15. Republic Act No. 7875 or the National Health Insurance Act of 1995
      16. Republic Act No. 9502 or the Cheaper Medicine Act
      17. Executive Order No. 453 or Directing the Enrollement of 2.5 Million Indigent families pursuant to E.O 276.

      18. AO No. 2010-0010 or the Revised Policy on Micro Nutrient Supplementation to Support Achievement of 2015 MDG Targets to Reduce Underfive and Maternal Deaths and Address Micronutrient needs of other population groups.
      19. Botika ng Barangay Program of the DOH
      20. PD No. 79 Revising the Population Act of Nineteen Hundred and Seventy One
      21. Philhealth Circulars and Policy Guidelines
      22. CCT program of the DSWD
      23. PD No. 79 Revising the Population Act of Nineteen Hundred and Seventy One

      • tamumd

        Would you care to discuss the details of each of those 23 laws you enumerated? Because by just looking at their titles does not tell us alot about them. It’s idiotic for the likes of Senators Santiago or Cayetano or Lagman to come up with a law that merely duplicates the above. These people are smarter than what you give them credit for. So unless you can discuss in detail each of them showing evidence for provisions that spell out contraceptive funding, sex education for our youth, guaranteeing people that they will get contraception if they so desire without prejudice, then I will concede that this bill is really a duplication!

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/WEBHUWYTBKWJ6W6S2QE75TSOOY Rafael

      QUESTIONABLE PROVISIONS IN THE RH BILL

      Relating to abortion:
      A. Section 3 Guiding Principles (I) While this Act does not amend penal law on abortion, the government shall ensure that all women needing care for post-abortion complications shall be treated and counseled in a humane, non-judgmental and compassionate manner.

      B. SECTION 18. Prohibited Acts. -The following acts are prohibited:

      (A) Any healthcare service provider, whether public or private, who shall

      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 perpetrators as certified to by the Department of Social Welfare (DSWD) and Development, no prior parental consent shall be necessary; and

      Impact of these provisions:
      Women could easily initiate the abortion process and seek relief from post-abortion complications from the health service providers as enunciated in the bill. Hence, abortion is promoted.

      There will be an increase in women initiating the abortion process, since they are assured that healthcare service providers could not validly refuse to continue the abortion as they would be penalized. Furthermore, women will be comfortable undergoing the abortion process since they are protected by Section 3, when it stated that they shall be treated and counseled in a humane, non-judgmental and compassionate manner.

      • tamumd

        Nope you’re making a sweeping conclusion based on conjecture and not what is written in the bill. If you look up and as you stated Section 3 on the Guiding Principles says that “this act does not amend the Penal Law on abortion”. Meaning whatever law we already have criminalizing abortion will not be affected by this bill. The procedures mentioned in Section 18 #2 are procedures like tubal ligation and vasectomy or IUD placements. This section merely ensures that those who want to avail these methods are guaranteed to receive them and not be prejudiced or denied from them by people who obviously wants their religious conviction imposed on these people who do not follow them.
        Treating women for post-abortion complications is not encouraging abortion. Heck it is already happening now even without the RH bill. It is the right thing to do..just like a robber shot on the chest while stealing. You take them to the hospital and treat their injuries. Then you dispense justice once they survive their life-threatening ordeal. That is supposed to be the christian way yet you are against it. Again the inconsistencies are beyond me!

    • Jose Ruiz

      SEC. 2. State Policies. – The State recognizes and guarantees the human rights of all persons including their right to equality and non-discrimination of these rights, the right to sustainable human development, the right to health which includes reproductive health, the right to education and information, and the right to choose and make decisions for themselves in accordance with their religious convictions, ethics, cultural beliefs, and the demands of responsible parenthood.
      Comment:
      How about the right of the unborn child? Please be informed that this Bill will deprive the unborn of his right to life.

      The State shall comply with all its international obligations under various human rights instruments relative to reproductive health and women’s empowerment including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

      Comment:
      We are not obliged to follow these international obligations. Our government has the right to sovereignty, meaning we can pass laws without the interference of any other governments or of international obligations

      • tamumd

        First off..what right of the unborn child are you talking about? Contraceptives are meant to prevent contraception in the first place. Condoms, vasectomy and tubal ligation prevent the meeting of the egg and sperm cells. Oral contraceptives regulate the reproductive cycle by preventing ovulation so that no egg cells mature and therefore no fertilization. So NO this bill does not enfringe on the unborn’s right to life. It is the church’s propaganda equating contraceptives to abortion! We don’t want abortion either..and that is why Section 3 on the Guiding Principles say “this act does NOT amend Penal Law on abortion”!!!

        And why are we not obligated to follow international obligations? One if we are signatory to them we should and two we are member of a civilized world community so why not? Do you envoke “sovereignty” about the Vatican’s pronouncements and that you use to justify your arguments? Remember Vatican is a sovereign state too..therefore cannot infringe on our sovereignty if you’re that strict. Those obligations have noble ideals in them guaranteeing right to people and it is absurd that people who wants rights for the unborn does not want to follow those other rights. There’s no consistency and this makes your argument disingenous!

  • bgcorg

    Sen. Sotto is correct: the president never specifically mentioned the Women’s Reproductive Health Bill. The bill is different from “responsible parenting,” whose emphasis is not the passive state of being, as in “responsible parenthood” but of fulfilling responsibility actively as a responsible parent as in “parenting.”  In fact, “responsible parenthood” had been used by anti-life advocates to blur their differences with the Church-approved “Natural Family Planning Method” so that they can give the impression that “parenthood” exercised responsibly includes artificial contraception, condoms, injectables, IUDs, tubal ligation, and other procedures on men and women designed to frustrate the natural order and good natural design of reproduction in men and women.

    Informing, in view of having a choice when to or not to, have children is not discouraged by the Church.  This is a misleading crap used by enemies of the Church to discredit Natural Family Planning Methods.  The fact, however, is that NFPMs are many to choose from and modern science had made it possible that the “calendar method” supplemented by thermal, saliva and cervical mucus observations or tests, and the like, can become even more reliable, cheaper, and more safe for women.  The Creighton Model Fertility Care System, the Billings Ovulation Method, efforts by the J. Carroll Institute in the Philippines and other Church-sponsored NFPM campaigns point to the variety of methods that can be used in a natural way.  The problem is the smear campaign, the lack of funding and dedication among concerned people to embrace choices that require some things to do for a higher purpose.

    Parenting requires dedication to members of the family, especially the children, plannning, understanding, love between the spouses and their children, mutual support, docility and God-centric fellowship.  It is not only “feeding” children or sending them to the best schools without taking a personal hand in the character formation of children.  Parenting brings out the best in men and women in love and marriage and family.  It is not all sex and let artificial contraceptives take care of the rest!

    It is quite clear that the reproductive cycle of the woman has fertile and infertile periods during which no conception is possible.  It is not correct for men and women to unduly practise sex with contraceptive use, as the natural good order and good natural design of God-given sex is abused, such undue meddling only done out of a lack of the will to do some sacrifices for the family, to fuel passion, to serve convenience and lifesytle.  There is temperance and abstinence, fortitude, justice and prudence to guide every couple, not to drive God away from the bedroom (and out of their life!).  It is not fair to Christian discipleship to practise only those things that suit us, our convenience, lifestyle and selective “followership.”  We cannot serve God and mammon or impose our own brand of Christianity.  Some cannot take this and turn to atheism, agnosticism, radical secularism and libertinism.  But, no one can escape God, who like a Hound of Heaven seeks the sinner out, whatever state of soul he is in.  There is the sacrament of reconciliation and penance to bring us back to the path of life and grace.

    “Reproductive Health” is not understood by everybody who mouths it as a human right.  Technically, for those in the know, its proponents understand it to cover: legalization of use of condoms, artificial contraceptives, devices and procedures, abortion, divorce, same sex marriages, indiscriminate and pre-marital sex.  The use of the word may have deceived many, thinking in the short term only: champions of reproductive rights will forever wave their flag until they get all that they want, and more.  The president, in his SONA, I think was more mellowed but correct.  By mentioning the “rh bill” he would have evoked controversies and the reaction to his SONA would be less effective.  The Reproductive Health Bill, as it stands, is not only repeating provisions of the Magna Carta for Women Act and other related laws and issuances, but allocates billions over generations for the procurement of condoms and contraceptives, practices and procedures; robs the government of needed taxes by granting contraceptives the status of “essential medicines”; takes away hard-earned taxpayers money to fund more essential anti-poverty programs like providing opportunities to the less privileged, generating jobs and employment and livelihood, raising the standards and physical status of education especially in far-flung areas of the country, improving primary health care, spending for needed infrastructures (with as less borrowings as possible), investing in renewable energy and in exploration to lessen the country’s dependence on imported oil, technically procuring systems for flood control and disaster prevention, needed housing and settlements, fast tracking our defensive capabilities particularly of naval and air assets as well as upgrading of our antiquated weaponry, and in general, investing in human development so that hope may become stronger for the very poor that they can get out of the shackles of poverty and promote social justice in the land.

    We have to have a blue print of what we would like to become as a people, not as some clone or copied culture from others, that we now gradually know to have failed and have failed miserably to raise the standard of living of their constituents. HOPE and SOCIAL JUSTICE.     

    • TGM_ERICK

      There was a big clap given when our president mentioned about responsible parenthood. Actually what he meant was vague. it is not clear whether the statement is pro or anti.

      Your insight is beautiful and meaningful. I hope many will get to agree with you! :-)

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_JS2L5G6FBKJH6VRAMERMCCJLIY Gagami Tuladyu

    hihihi! NANGAGALAITI na naman sa ASAR ang mga GARAPATA ng rh bill dahil hindi man lang nabanggit ang kanilang pinakamamahal na rh sa SONA at sa halip ang iniindorso RIN ng simbahang katoliko na “RESPONSIBLE PARENTHOOD” na PILIT binabaluktot at pinapalabo ng mga garapatang ito para iugnay sa MAPANLINLANG na rh bil! RoFL! SALAMAT naman at nagigising na “ata” sa katotohanan ang ating presidente, hihihi! ;) for the mean time ASAR talo ang mga GARAPATA lalo na ng magbanggit pa ng pangalan ng isang pari at madre si pnoy na nagga guide daw ng kanyang spiritual life! HALA pano yan mga church HATERS? e di galit na kayo ngayon kay pnoy dahil hindi pala siya atheist??? hihihihi! RH bill is DEAD! SUCK IT HATERS!!! ;)))

    • $25214711

      Sir yung may mga issue against RH bill ang hater dipo ba? Kasi kayo yung galit at ayaw ipapasa yung batas eh. We never hate the bills, you are so sino po yung hater?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_JS2L5G6FBKJH6VRAMERMCCJLIY Gagami Tuladyu

    hihihi, andami rin ditong mga idol kong “clown” na PILIT idina “down” si sen. sotto on the basis na siya ay “ISA LANG” artista at kung makapagsalita eh akala mo sila na ang savior ng pilipinas sa taglay nilang galing at talino! hihihihi! in denial stage ka pa ateng! INGGIT lang yan dahil walang kakwenta-kwenta ang buhay mo samantalang siya ay isang senador na hindi utak condom!!! ikuskos nyo sa pader baka mawala! RoFl! ;)

  • TotoyKalentong

    As they say.. you see what you choose to see.. you hear what you choose to hear.. 

  • NYPinoy

    This Senator is a joke of our Congress.

    • http://twitter.com/kielamos Ezekiel ramos

      Sad to say most of you are ignorant of the bill being passed. The point
      he was mentioning it that where will you get funding for this? 3B wherein fact
      this bill is just a redundancy of the EO’s, Ao’s RA’s etc. approved previously.

      RH bill is a mere duplication of the following laws:
      1. R.A. 9710 or An Act Providing for Magna Carta of Women
      2. PD No. 603 or The Child and Youth Welfare Code
      3. Republic Act No. 9262 or Anti-Violence against Women and Children
      4. Republic Act No. 8504 or Philippine AIDS Prevention and Control Act of 1998
      5. AO 2008-0029 Implementing Health Reforms for Rapid Reduction of Maternal and Neonatal Mortality
      6. Children’s Health Program of the DOH
      7. Family Planning Program of the DOH
      8. Prevention and Management Control of Abortion and its complications (PMAC)
      9. PD No. 965 or A decree requiring applicant for marriage license to receive instructions on family planning and responsible parenthood.

      10. R.A 7883 or the Barangay Health Workers Benefits and Incentives Acts of 1995
      11. R.A. 7160 or The Local Government Code of the Philippines
      12. AO No. 2010-0036- The Aquino Health Agenda: Achieving Universal Health Care for all Filipinos
      13. Women’s Health and Safe Motherhood Project of the DOH
      14. Republic Act No. 8504 or Philippine AIDS Prevention and Control Act of 1998
      15. Republic Act No. 7875 or the National Health Insurance Act of 1995
      16. Republic Act No. 9502 or the Cheaper Medicine Act
      17. Executive Order No. 453 or Directing the Enrollement of 2.5 Million Indigent families pursuant to E.O 276.

      18. AO No. 2010-0010 or the Revised Policy on Micro Nutrient Supplementation to Support Achievement of 2015 MDG Targets to Reduce Underfive and Maternal Deaths and Address Micronutrient needs of other population groups.
      19. Botika ng Barangay Program of the DOH
      20. PD No. 79 Revising the Population Act of Nineteen Hundred and Seventy One
      21. Philhealth Circulars and Policy Guidelines
      22. CCT program of the DSWD
      23. PD No. 79 Revising the Population Act of Nineteen Hundred and Seventy One

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/WEBHUWYTBKWJ6W6S2QE75TSOOY Rafael

      QUESTIONABLE PROVISIONS IN THE RH BILL

      Relating to abortion:
      A. Section 3 Guiding Principles (I) While this Act does not amend penal law on abortion, the government shall ensure that all women needing care for post-abortion complications shall be treated and counseled in a humane, non-judgmental and compassionate manner.

      B. SECTION 18. Prohibited Acts. -The following acts are prohibited:

      (A) Any healthcare service provider, whether public or private, who shall

      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 perpetrators as certified to by the Department of Social Welfare (DSWD) and Development, no prior parental consent shall be necessary; and

      Impact of these provisions:
      Women could easily initiate the abortion process and seek relief from post-abortion complications from the health service providers as enunciated in the bill. Hence, abortion is promoted.

      There will be an increase in women initiating the abortion process, since they are assured that healthcare service providers could not validly refuse to continue the abortion as they would be penalized. Furthermore, women will be comfortable undergoing the abortion process since they are protected by Section 3, when it stated that they shall be treated and counseled in a humane, non-judgmental and compassionate manner.

    • Jose Ruiz

      SEC. 2. State Policies. – The State recognizes and guarantees the human rights of all persons including their right to equality and non-discrimination of these rights, the right to sustainable human development, the right to health which includes reproductive health, the right to education and information, and the right to choose and make decisions for themselves in accordance with their religious convictions, ethics, cultural beliefs, and the demands of responsible parenthood.
      Comment:
      How about the right of the unborn child? Please be informed that this Bill will deprive the unborn of his right to life.

      The State shall comply with all its international obligations under various human rights instruments relative to reproductive health and women’s empowerment including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

      Comment:
      We are not obliged to follow these international obligations. Our government has the right to sovereignty, meaning we can pass laws without the interference of any other governments or of international obligations

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Zahl/1670371040 Steven Zahl

    ITALY, where catolicism started, had their own Universal RH Bill approved in 1970.  The pope did not say a thing. 

    Let’s not be TRYING HARD cathoilics.

    Daming Gutom sa paligid.

To subscribe to the Philippine Daily Inquirer newspaper in the Philippines, call +63 2 896-6000 for Metro Manila and Metro Cebu or email your subscription request here.

Factual errors? Contact the Philippine Daily Inquirer's day desk. Believe this article violates journalistic ethics? Contact the Inquirer's Reader's Advocate. Or write The Readers' Advocate:

c/o Philippine Daily Inquirer Chino Roces Avenue corner Yague and Mascardo Streets, Makati City,Metro Manila, Philippines Or fax nos. +63 2 8974793 to 94