RH Bill Rally – Memorial March for Mothers

We’d like to invite you all to the biggest meetup yet.

This Sunday, Feb 27, the Freethinkers along with more than 1,000 men and women will be walking our ethical talk.

In our numbers we will march straight up to the CBCP compound in Manila, in support of the Reproductive Health Bill.

This will be by far the largest mass mobilization to descend upon the CBCP compound in history.

When: Sunday, February 27
Time: 4PM (Don’t be late or they’ll march without us!)
Assembly: Cory and Ninoy monument, Bonifacio Drive corner Padre Burgos Street (across Manila Hotel)
Google Map:http://j.mp/rh_march_map
Attire: White shirts
RSVP on Facebook

Likhaan (RH Action Network) Press Release

Though we have good reason to be angry with them, this will be a silent, peaceful protest. We do this in the name of the dying mothers, 11 of whom die needlessly while these virgin Fathers and their minions do everything in their considerable power to stop the RH Bill.

With the Consolidated RH Bill finally scheduled for both House and Senate Plenary hearings on March 1, there has never been a more crucial time to show the Filipino people that the bishops of the CBCP hold no monopoly on morality and that we will no longer tolerate the bishop’s interference in our nation’s governance.

The CBCP fear us. They know their presumed moral supremacy is merely an illusion that rests on their assumed superiority and infallibility as embodied in the serenity of their bishop’s palace. Out of that fear, they have even threatened several pro-RH NGOs with withdrawal of support should they dare mobilize on their CBCP palace.

This is the kind of petty intimidation that we intend to stand against this Sunday.

Now is our chance to show the CBCP that their lies have consequences, and that we will not sit idly by while they try to take control of our nation and its government. Our silent rage will ring loud round the nation as a call to action: democracy and freedom!

17 comments

    • That fake UP petition is taking a while to die down. It only goes to show how many gullible people there are on the other side.

      WYA news article: yes, it's full of fallacies alright. its just repetitive to refute the same bull over and over. please come up with something new and credible.

      Science Facts on the RH Bill was written by Dr. Raul Nidoy, a Doctor of Theology and advocate of single-sex instead of coed schools. He pretends to be on the forefront of science and reason on behalf of the Pro-Life movement. Intelligent Design kuno, yet it doesn't hold water in a real rational debate.

      What I will remember before I go is I'll proudly be part of a culture war against people who DON'T KNOW HOW TO THINK and therefore have no place dictating what we should believe, epecially when lives are on the line.

    • Hunt, the World Youth Alliance link referenced the Population Research Institute as a source. Said group is a well known think tank within the Right Wing and religious conservatives.
      http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/right/population-rehttp://www.planetwire.org/files.fcgi/3750_StevenM

      So why exactly should we take their word seriously, and by connection, any document that's stupid enough to assume they're a reliable source of information?

      As for your third link, argument # 3 starts with this:

      [Contraceptives bring about the downgrading of marriage, more extramarital sex, more fatherless children, more single mothers, according to the studies of Nobel prize winner, George Akerlof.]

      The study in question analyzes the relation between the rising availability of contraception and abortion to the decline in SHOTGUN marriages, also known as forced marriages.

      I'm not sure if this is your intent, but your article insinuates that it would rather force two people to marry against their free will, which I'd hardly call a recipe for a loving family for the expected child. From the study's abstract:

      [Several models illustrate the analogy between women who do not adopt either birth control or abortion and the hand-loom weavers, both victims of changing technology. Mechanisms causing female immiseration are modeled and historically described. This technology-shock hypothesis is an alternative to welfare and job-shortage theories of the feminization of poverty. ]

      What one can take away from this is the more pressing need for an education program that enables women to make an informed decision for themselves – denying this would just make them more susceptible to the technology-shock that Akerloff describes, and to poverty and abuse if you force them to carry a child they're unprepared for, or into a shotgun marriage.

      As for argument #2, the National Cancer Institute has already released research that categorically debunks the point on cancer:
      http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/prevention/ovahttp://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk

      Hunt, I'll say what Jei and Wes have already said – cut the bullshit.

  1. Tom, you are right. We should rally against the American embassy who have been fooling us all these years: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_St

    US policy gives "paramount importance" to population control measures and the promotion of contraception among 13 populous countries, to control rapid population growth which the US deems inimical to the national interests of the United States, since the "U.S. economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad", and these countries can produce destabilizing opposition forces against the United States. It recommends the US leadership to "influence national leaders" and that "improved world-wide support for population-related efforts should be sought through increased emphasis on mass media and other population education and motivation programs by the U.N., USIA, and USAID."

    • Tom Major / Women's rights : please refrain from having conversations with yourself. Next time you want to pretend that someone is actually agreeing with you, don't volunteer yourself. Sockpuppeting is not only unethical, it also makes one look desperate and dishonest.

      This is your 1st warning. Your IP 58.69.90.234 will now be placed under watch-list.

    • The complete NSSM 200 document can be found here: http://www.nixonlibrary.gov/virtuallibrary/docume

      My questions to Tom are these:

      1. While the document exists do you have any evidence that is has indeed been implemented? Based on what I'm following, it was the RCC itself that roadblocked its implementation:
      http://www.population-security.org/index.html

      So if the threat is gone, what the bloody hell are you doing waving it around like a boogeyman to scare feeble minds?

      2. Assuming that the document is real, it does not have any recommendations in helping curb the maternal deaths and other complications that follow in unwanted pregnancies and the spreading of STDs.

      Regardless of what NSSM 200 says, there is a pressing need to address the needs of our people, or are you too stuck in your Tom Clancy/Metal Gear Solid conspiracy fantasies to stick your head out into Payatas to see the reality most of our people live in?

  2. Please take note that the death toll PER100,000 women in the Philippines is PER DAY is:
    (1) Heart diseases – 80;
    (2) Vascular diseases – 63;
    (3) Cancer – 51;
    (4) Pneumonia – 45;
    (5) Tuberculosis – 23;
    (6) Diabetes – 22;
    (7) Lower chronic respiratory diseases – 16

    Let's help these women by not transferring limited funds to condoms when in fact the 11 maternal deaths can be solved by birthing centers (says the UNFPA)

    • Well, clearly we have to stop treating all women unless they are sick with heart disease. Excellent use of false dichotomy, Tom Major. We read you loud and clear.

    • Birthing centers are in the RH bill too. Those who want to get pregnant need safe birthing services and emergence care when needed (also in the RH bill). Those who do not want to get pregnant need contraceptives. All these services and supplies can coexist.

    • Why invoke a strawman fallacy over RH funding being deducted from our other medical services, when a perfectly valid target is available?
      http://www.manilastandardtoday.com/insideOpinion….

      There's also the possibility of axing the RCC's tax-free status. Those guys have a lot of money to burn anyway – I mean they didn't seem to think it was a big deal to spend 2 Billion Dollars to defend their sex offenders.
      http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopi

    • Tom, did it ever occur to you that giving women access to sex education and contraceptives would drastically decrease their chances of getting into unwanted pregnancies – and the resulting maternal deaths and other nasty complications that follow – in the first place?

Leave a reply

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here