Oh Father!

Oh Father! You sound so tired, exasperated, and almost cynical. You don't want to be flippant but you seem like half-heartedly forced into a dialogue or conversation with someone who isn't up to your level. I sure hope I am sensing it wrong.

You talk about freedom, but it is the RH Bill who is making it mandatory for employers and medical facilities to provide for artificial contraceptives. That is a clear imposition of the pro-artificial contraception to those who do not believe in it (whether it is base on faith, science, logic, economics, superstition). Without the RH Bill, those who believe and not believe in Artificial Contraception will equally have s freedom of choice.

The government is entrusted with the wealth (or debt) of the nation. Certainly, it can use tax money according to its discretion or indiscretion. It can use it to give free cigarettes or San Miguel Beer, but the citizens can air their protest for some may think cigarette smoking is evil and alcohol had been the culprit of many abuses against women and children. Surely, the government can capacitate the vast number of "uninstructed" poor through its subsidy but then, respectable governance must have a good criteria for doing so.

So be it, if it is the will of the government to give as freebies a wide array of artificial contraceptives to the uninstructed poor. Hopefully, Father, they won't be coerced into doing so like before as documented by BBC and PRI. I am sure you will rally behind them and fight for their constitutional right to choose.

I sure hope, father, that those who will be giving it will really inform the receivers of the many studies on it. Hopefully, Juan Tamad will really give the poor the different options and not just push for the one with least effort and least instruction.

Unfortunately, father, I can not believe that free artificial contraception will prevent abortion. Just look around, where there is a proliferation of artificial contraception, abortion proliferates as the ultimate contaception.

Everyone wants responsible parenthood, but that stems from a responsible marriage. The RH Bill would like to provide for contraception without spousal consent. Wouldn't that be isolating spouses from each other? Wouldn't the use of artificial contraception disable a woman or a girl from saying "no" to sexual proposals? Wouldn't there be more extra-marital affairs? Wouldn't a child's paternity become questionable?

And in cases of rape of minors, no parental consent is required for the rape victim to avail of reproductive health care. Wouldn't it be contrary to the responsible parenthood the bill would want to encourage. And at such crucial time.

Oh father, you say the poor are in shackles, and no freedom of choice that will make them responsible parents. What shackles could that be? Is it the shackle of being financially less? Oh father, I'm sure you know that rich or poor can equally be good and responsible parents. Is it the shackle of having to raise 2+ children? Parents who are irresponsible will be irresponsible whether with one child or more.

Could the shackle be... based on the dogma of some "enlightened elite" that it is wrong for the "benighted poor" to have children?

I know it is difficult for those living comfortably to look at the uninstructed poor and with so many children to feed. It is a typical reaction. I, myself, come from a brood of six. Four girls in one room, two boys in another room. Being a fifth child shouting, "Good night to all everybody". Haha. Fond memories. I'm sure it was difficult for my father who was the breadwinner and equally difficult for my mother cooking, teaching, and caring for six kids. But I can assure you they never made us feel unwanted. And they are wonderful and responsible parents.

With the existing laws on maternal care and child protection, I wonder why insist in RH Bill!

I'm sure even with little education, fertility is but natural and not a sickness. I think they have removed artificial contraception as essential medicine in the amended version. It is a natural law of choice and consequence (cause and effect) that having heterosexual relations can lead to pregnancy. Will that be a part of sex education? Or natural law is not the concern, but more on the unnatural contraception. I hope it is not the sexEd module of planned parenthood- "happy, healthy, and hot" that will be used. But then, we want responsible parenthood but we don't want to burden them with educating their childten about sex.

Oh, father, indeed, "thinkers" of many faith-based groups do not believe as the Catholic Church. Surely, they have the choice to be in "one mind" with USAID. The Social Acceptability Project of Family Planning surely was effective in making targetted groups and individuals to be "one mind". I almost thought you are in "one mind" with them because you sounded a bit like them and their training manual.

Oh, father, we sure want to embrace a pluralistic society. Oh, that certainly is difficult for good governance. To be without law is the
most pluralistic way of governance. Everything is licensed. Roads with no lines. Roads with no signposts. Surely, we will annihilate ourselves quick. Population control through no control. Yes, I understand, we all go through that illusion we can make heaven out of earth and pretend there is no enemy. Devil is such a superstitious nonsense anyways.

Oh father, if you were an atheist, I wouldn't bother. But anyone who trruly believes in God can not possibly accept artificial contraception as alright. God is the Creator of human life. It isn't about the intentions of conceiving or not. It is about the sexual act. It is in the sexual act and only in the sexual act of a man and a woman that God creates human life. Any unnatural intervention and degradation of the sexual act is a direct rejection of the Author of human life. I didnot think so in the past but now I am convinced that artificial contraception is evil.

God understands our fears and weaknesses and will still love us. But the law of choice and consequences will still be enforce, no matter how we think we can get away from it.

As for me, I can not be for RH Bill. I would rather look at LIFE as more than a RIGHT, but truly a GIFT. With that, I can live with the reality that this is not heaven, and be happy with the glimpse of it.

Reaction to:
http://opinion.inquirer.net/36410/conversing-with-a-bishop