OZAMIZ City, Jan. 5, 2011â€”Ozamiz Archbishop Jesus A. Dosado, CM has urged the lawmakers of first and second districts of Misamis Occidental not to vote the controversial Reproductive Health Bill in the Congress.
In an open letter to first district Congressman Jorge Almonte, Sr. and second district Congressman Loreto Leo Ocampos, Dosado has appealed to the solons not to vote the controversial RH bill even as he encouraged to support the House Bill filed by Representative Roilo Golez.
“I request you, our dear representatives, not to vote the consolidated bill resulting from the different present RH Bills.” The prelate stressed.
The local ordinary said if, after having known these things, the lawmakers of the province still support the bill, the prelate urged them, for the good of their soul, to have the sensitivity to refrain from Communion until this matter will have a salvific resolution.
The same applies to the Provincial, City, Town, and Barangay Officials, who are tasked to make and implement ordinances in their respective levels.
“On the other hand, if you are really interested in the health of our mothers-to-be and their children-to-be when they cooperate with God s action to create another person from nothing in the exercise of their marriage covenant, I urge you to support a bill which, I believe, is currently being introduced by Representative Roilo Golez for that purpose,” he said.
Dosado said he received an urgent message from CBCP Headquarters urging him to talk to the congressmen of the province not to support the RH Bill.
“In accordance with that, I thought of addressing this open letter to you, the honorable representatives of the Province of Misamis Occidental, because this will also serve to clarify matters to our Catholic faithful, especially those in the Provincial, City, Town, and Barangay Offices, who are tasked to make and implement ordinances in their respective levels.”
Dosado added, lest he might be misinterpreted, he has the highest esteem for the Legislators in general and in particular for the government officials in the national and the local levels tasked to implement the laws they enact. But, using the words of Pope Benedict XVI, he said: “The concerns for non-violence, sustainable development, justice and peace, and care for our environment are of vital importance for humanity. They cannot, however, be understood apart from a profound reflection upon the innate dignity of every human life from conception to natural death: a dignity conferred by God himself and thus inviolable.”
There are now many so-called Reproductive Health Bills recycled again and again because they failed to pass. They are neither about Reproduction which is proper to animals nor about health because in the process a nascent human being would not come to be or would die.
Until December 15, 2010, there are four recycled versions, all bearing the same title: The Reproductive Health and Population and Development Act of 2010. These are House Bill No. 96, introduced by the Hon. Edcel C. Lagman; House Bill No. 101, introduced by the Hon. Janette L. Garin, M.D.; House Bill No. 513, introduced by the Hon. Kaka Bag-ao and the Hon. Walden Bello; and House Bill No. 1160, introduced by the Hon. Rodolfo G. Biazon.
As evidenced by the extent of the matters dealt with in these Bills, Reproductive Health is now seen by its promoters as including the control of population, the provision of abortion, the promotion of contraception (including agents and methods known to be abortifacient), promotion of a particular form of sexuality education, and the broad promotion of a particular ethic with regard to sexuality.
This notion of Reproductive Health is being exported by rich Western nations, in which a high level of contraceptive promotion and use is accompanied by high abortion rates, teenage pregnancy, promiscuity, sexually transmitted diseases and family breakdown.
Moreover, this view of Reproductive Health has increasingly been accompanied by less tolerance towards those who disagree with aspects of this approach, resulting in attempts to restrict the freedom of health professionals with regard to matters of conscience.
For some reason, the Rules Committee referred the bills to the Population Committee for a hearing on November 24th, 2010, which is most unusual. They should have been referred to the Committees on Health or Women. It is an open admission that the Reproductive Health Bills are population control bills all along.
On December 15th, 2010, according to sources, Congress decided to stop hearings on Reproductive Health Bills. It will convene a technical working group to draft a consolidated bill that will be the basis for the final bill. The proponents plan to present this in the Congress Plenary for voting by late January. (Wendell Talibong)