Belmonte asks SC: Don’t strike down RH law | Inquirer News

Belmonte asks SC: Don’t strike down RH law

/ 05:54 PM February 11, 2014

Speaker Feliciano Belmonte. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO

MANILA, Philippines–Striking down the Reproductive Health law is “a veto against the will of majority of our people.”

This is the view of Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. as he told the Supreme Court in a statement Tuesday to “carefully consider” their decision on the controversial measure which allows couples to use contraception and family-planning options.

Article continues after this advertisement

Belmonte issued the statement after hearing speculations that the RH law, which took more than 13 years to pass, will be struck down by the high court.

FEATURED STORIES

The RH law has received flak from more conservative groups like the Catholic Church for being anti-life and pro-abortion.

“While I fully respect the integrity, impartiality and independence of the Supreme Court, we must also consider that passage of this law took 13 years and about four months,” Belmonte said.

Article continues after this advertisement

Belmonte said the arguments against the RH bill come only from a minority, and that it is time to “respect the desire of the majority which is to exercise their freedom of choice.”

Article continues after this advertisement

“We have 289 House members who are individuals representing a broad spectrum of society. They are representatives directly elected to articulate what majority of their constituents want,” Belmonte said.

Article continues after this advertisement

“Therefore the resulting law is a product of this painstaking process and is a democratic compromise,” he noted.

In the end, Belmonte said he still have “faith that the Supreme Court will take these essential matters into account in coming up with a decision that benefits the vast majority.”

Article continues after this advertisement

“Just as we in Congress have done our role at responding to the majority’s urgent need for this law,” he noted.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

TAGS: News, Supreme Court

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our newsletter!

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

© Copyright 1997-2024 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

This is an information message

We use cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more here.