Yesterday the Department of Health (DOH), the institution that is supposed to be raising the standards of health for Filipinos, caved in to an institution that is very adamant on lowering the standards of health for Filipinos: the CBCP. It seems that when the bishops say “jump,” the DOH asks “how high?”, instead of doing their job for the Filipino people:
Here’s something that some Catholic bishops will be happy about with respect to the DOH on Valentine’s Day.
Health Secretary Enrique Ona on Monday said the DOH will not be distributing free condoms on Tuesday as couples nationwide mark Valentine’s Day with dinner dates, lavish gifts and other gestures of affection.
While DOH Secretary Ricky Ona pays lip service to Catholics who use contraceptives despite the Church, he seems to miss the point that the DOH is supposed to be concerned about the health of the Filipino people and not their holiness:
“Responsible sex means you engage in sexual practices that are acceptable to you and your religious beliefs,” he added. “But still the use of condoms and other artificial contraceptives, which the Catholic Church rejects, was still upon the discretion among couples,” said Ona.
“If they want to use it, then they should buy it themselves,” he added.
The lack of reproductive health education in the Philippines makes the DOH’s condom distribution not just about giving away condoms. The DOH’s condom distribution is a way for the DOH to educate couples who might not know about safe sex. The taboo of sex (thanks, Catholic church!) could also make couples less likely to buy contraception out of the needless guilt the Church inspires. The poor also might not be able to afford contraception. That secretary Ricky Ona would tell people to buy condoms makes it seem like he doesn’t know the DOH’s mission:
So, DOH. What does the H in your name stand for? Is your mission to serve the health needs of the Filipino people? Or are you here to enforce the “holiness” imposed by the Catholic church?
If you’re angry after reading about the capitulation of the DOH to the Catholic bishops who could really care less about the health of the Filipino people, do something with your rage. Call the DOH, email them. Let them know that they serve the Filipino people. Remind them about their mission. Tell them to work for our health, not the conception of holiness held by the CBCP.
Here are their contact details. If you’re able to call them at (+632) 651-7800, do it. If you can’t, write them an email. Just give them a Valentine’s Day that would remind them that they work for the Filipino people. Not the CBCP.
Image from Instructables
It's your uterus.
It's your fetus.
It's your vagina.
It's your life.
It's your choice.
And by the way…..
I'm a man!
//The idea of government taking care of everyone's needs, from cradle to grave, is pure economic catastrophe.//
If you're so against this, then why are you against DoH in helping people from preventing more unwanted pregnancies, which the gov't may end up having to care of, from the cradle to the grave?
//However, when we ask the government to overtake and intercede in what supposed to be a personal choice, then we have just asked the government to redistribute wealth from the taxpayer's coffers (government never has money of its own) to pay for the personal choices of other people, in which they alone enjoy the capital consumed for their choice. There lies a huge moral hazard for the government, and for the society as a whole.//
And what's the alternative?
As Likhaan will tell you, every child born into the Philippines into a desperately poor family will end up being dependent on government welfare. Now tell us, which will drain your tax money more: Education and contraceptives, or paying for a child's food, medicine, and education for most of his life?
the issue with RH bill has always seems to revolving around Church vs the State… i think it is dumbing down the real issue, the issue of economics and the issue of inalienable natural rights. I am for personal choice, meaning each person can pursue what he wants with his life as long as it doesn’t violate the rights of other people. He wants to use contraceptives, fine, it’s his choice and let no one block his access to his choice. However, when we ask the government to overtake and intercede in what supposed to be a personal choice, then we have just asked the government to redistribute wealth from the taxpayer’s coffers (government never has money of its own) to pay for the personal choices of other people, in which they alone enjoy the capital consumed for their choice. There lies a huge moral hazard for the government, and for the society as a whole.
Reproductive Health is not a right, in the sense that it elicits an obligation from someone to pay for that right to be exercised.It’s like forcing your neighbor to pay for your TV set. It differs from the 3 natural rights of life, liberty, and property, as these are negative rights, they do not impose an obligation from others to be fulfilled rather they imply that no one else, other than the person himself, can violate his natural rights.
The idea of government taking care of everyone’s needs, from cradle to grave, is pure economic catastrophe. No welfare can be dispensed without eternally taxing the taxpayers, inflating and robbing savers of their wealth, and perpetual changing of the rules of business in the country.
I beg to argue that the push for the passage of the RH bill is a step closer towards Socialism. Collectivists, well meaning but lacking understanding, will degrade the human worth of an individual for the “general welfare (doesn’t exist!).” Programs aimed at GENERAL WELFARE and the COMMON GOOD have done more harm than good. Their DESIRED GOALS are noble, sincere, and praise-worthy, but it is in the implementation that would tell us the real effect of these programs.
I respect the natural rights of an individual, not the society’s since society is just the sum total of the individual that comprises it. There is no such thing as common good for society since every individual that comprises it have different opinions, ambitions, ideas, behaviors, etc… that to impose one common goal for all can only be done by disrespecting an individual’s right to liberty and pursuit of his own happiness…
"However, when we ask the government to overtake and intercede in what supposed to be a personal choice"
What personal choice is there for those left behind by society? The RH Bill is not for the middle class who can afford to be informed and have access to contraceptives.
"then we have just asked the government to redistribute wealth from the taxpayer's coffers (government never has money of its own) to pay for the personal choices of other people, in which they alone enjoy the capital consumed for their choice"
This is the same problem for EVERYTHING the government does. If you don't like the government using your money, then you shouldn't want a government at all.
"Reproductive Health is not a right, in the sense that it elicits an obligation from someone to pay for that right to be exercised.It's like forcing your neighbor to pay for your TV set"
Right to reproductive health is a corollary of right to life. What good is life if it is in abject misery? Our society has deemed it good to provide for the health care needs of our fellow citizens (among other public goods).
The problem with people who decry social welfare is that they are under the delusion that all that they have are the result of the sweat of their brow, as if society has never provided the means for them to achieve their goals and provide for them the opportunities to flourish. They leave the less fortunate by the wayside, while forgetting that their own lot in life is just that, fortune/luck.
//I beg to argue that the push for the passage of the RH bill is a step closer towards Socialism. //
Road maintenance, free public education, law enforcement, emergency response services (Firefighters, EMTs, disaster relief, etc), are all "Socialist" constructs too. Why aren't you slamming them?
//There is no such thing as common good for society since every individual that comprises it have different opinions, ambitions, ideas, behaviors, etc… that to impose one common goal for all can only be done by disrespecting an individual's right to liberty and pursuit of his own happiness… //
I would argue on a philosophical level, that a man cannot be truly free unless he knows the full gravity of the choices he makes. In the context of reproductive health, you cannot expect couples to exercise their freedom responsibly unless they know the particular risks and benefits they have with regard to their sexual practices or their birth control of choice.
The DOH has this the other way around: They're supposed to provide health services to people REGARDLESS of their religious belief.
“Responsible sex means you engage in sexual practices that are acceptable to you and your religious beliefs”
YOUR religious beliefs, not the CBCP's.
Department of Holiness!