Aug 4, 2012


I support the RH bill. 

I used to be just a "passive" supporter. Liking Facebook posts about it and agreeing with others were enough for me. But something pushed me to write about it. This:
YES to saved sex. NO to safe sex. 
First of all, let me say that I'm very disappointed. What you see above is just ignorant and irrational. NO to safe sex? Does it mean that having unsafe or unprotected sex is advised? You don't say?

I'm not fully knowledgeable of the reasons why some people choose to go against it. Most of the people from the "other" side of the argument choose to be mum about it when asked, but they still express their antagonism of the bill. Yes, they say that they are "against" it, but when asked why, they don't deliver, or they do, but not adequately. One of the most famous reasons why they're against it is that, apparently, the RH Bill kills. I don't think that's utterly possible unless somebody has ever been murdered with a condom. The bill supports health care above all else, most specifically for women and for the mothers who need it the most. Being a student nurse, I know how being a mother endangers a woman's health especially during the time of pregnancy and delivery. Pregnancy is not an easy task, and delivery is not any less difficult. It's true that when giving birth, the mother is placed in a limbo between living and dying. In fact, because of the demands of pregnancy, a woman needs at least three years to recover from the stresses of pregnancy before she becomes pregnant again. This is contrary to what we're seeing nowadays. My professor shared a story about a mother who had 13 children. What's more surprising is that this woman lives in the streets with her family. How they managed to do it is still a mystery to us all, but what's obvious is that they wouldn't be able to support those children. Imagine just having a "kariton" as a "house" and having 13 children. Just imagine. Most importantly, the RH bill also addresses UN's 5th Millennium Development Goal which is to improve maternal health. In addition, it also plays a part in supporting the Magna Carta of Women signed in 2009. If caring for women's health is wrong, then I don't know what is right anymore. What angers me the most is that people from the "other" side ALWAYS associate the RH bill with abortion. Nowhere in the bill does it say that abortion is legal or even encouraged. In the bill, abortion is written off as illegal. You read that right. The bill considers it illegal. So those who are equating the bill with abortion must take a few minutes of their time to actually read the bill instead of just going blindly going with the flow and shouting "RH bill is against life". The same goes for those who support it. Read it first. Know the facts and be informed. Do not just take a stand for the sake of being "IN" and appearing socially aware.

Morality is another aspect tackled by the heated arguments between those against it and those supporting it. People from the other side say that it will only lead to promiscuity and to an increased incidence of premarital sex which is a big NO-NO for the religious moralists.  I, myself, don't want to rush things because I know there's a right time for everything. It's my decision not to be sexually involved, and I made it on my own volition. The RH bill does not force us to have sex . It seeks to inform the youth because, believe it or not, most of the youth don't have enough knowledge about it. Being knowledgeable about it won't lead to promiscuity. Instead, it will serve as a guide in making smart decisions. Don't they know that the "morality" they are protecting died a long, long time ago? They're trying to make it appear like we are saints in the state that we are in right now. News flash, it's all just a lie. They refuse to acknowledge the fact that most people now have sex before marriage. In fact, some don't even get married at all.  In this case, safe sex is advocated because of different reasons. One is, of course, to prevent the spread of sexually-transmitted diseases that can be life-threatening, and to prevent unwanted pregnancies. People have sexual drives, and it's normal. What these moralists are failing to consider is our humanity. We're not built to be celibate. Now they are saying that the prevention of conception is murder. Then would they rather have a family of 13 children who cannot even afford a roof over their heads? They care so much about the "unborn" child that they neglect the rights of those who are living. Then I think it would be better if we all crawled back to our mother's uterus. 

"There are more pressing issues that need to be addressed." Why? Just because we're addressing one problem does not mean we're neglecting all the other problems. And isn't our growing population one of the factors why we're having the other problems as well? We're having shortages everywhere because of our burgeoning population. We can't even educate all the children in this country because we don't have enough classrooms and manpower. And isn't that where it all stems out from? We're trying to tackle our problems one at a time. Addressing one problem can never be enough. Our problems are interrelated, as we try to tackle one, we also tackle the others one way or another. There is no such thing as a pressing issue unless there are actually groups of aliens making smoothies out of  and raping the citizens of North Cotabato. Now THAT is an emergent and pressing issue.

I have many things on my mind, but I'd rather discuss  it  personally with whoever cares to listen. I also don't want to lengthen this post even more. More so, I'm waiting for sensible viewpoints from the other side because as of now, all I'm getting is uninformed rants and accusations not to mention stupid slogans. As I mentioned before, people should really understand what the bill really is about before they go around choosing a side and defending it. Seriously. If there's another pressing issue that needs to be addressed, I think it's ignorance and the interference of the church with the running of the state.  

I support the RH bill. 

No comments: