Rh Bill; Its Implication
rh bill itReproductive health bill is a greatly and widely debated topic as of today. Everyone are voicing out his or her sentiments thereto. Some are in favor thereof and some are not. It is a political, constitutional, legal, sociological, scientific and, theological issue. The State, the Church, the ordinary constituent of the republic is involved.
With the advent of this bill, there are questions that have to be answered. First, is it not a superfluity of already existing laws that contained the same provisions incorporated to the aforementioned bill? Second, are the provisions of the rh bill not in conflict with the constitution? Third, does it concern itself with morality, or are the provisions in that law anchored in moral precepts? Fourth, what are the possible implications of rh bill once this has been enacted into a law or does it not attack an individual who has a firm allegiance to his/her religious convictions? Sixth, is it scientifically and empirically verifiable that the use of condoms, pills, or other form of contraceptives not detrimental to the health of the one using it in the sexual act? Lastly, does it respect the human life?
RH bill is obviously a redundancy of the previously enacted laws one example is the Magna Carta for Women’s Rights specifically in section 17 to wit:
Women's Right to Health. - (a) Comprehensive Health Services. - The State shall, at all times, provide for a comprehensive, culture-sensitive, and gender-responsive health services and programs covering all stages of a woman's life cycle and which addresses the major causes of women's mortality and morbidity:Provided, That in the provision for comprehensive health services, due respect shall be accorded to women's religious convictions, the rights of the spouses to found a family in accordance with their religious convictions, and the demands of responsible parenthood, and the right of women to protection from hazardous drugs, devices, interventions, and substances.
With the advent of this bill, there are questions that have to be answered. First, is it not a superfluity of already existing laws that contained the same provisions incorporated to the aforementioned bill? Second, are the provisions of the rh bill not in conflict with the constitution? Third, does it concern itself with morality, or are the provisions in that law anchored in moral precepts? Fourth, what are the possible implications of rh bill once this has been enacted into a law or does it not attack an individual who has a firm allegiance to his/her religious convictions? Sixth, is it scientifically and empirically verifiable that the use of condoms, pills, or other form of contraceptives not detrimental to the health of the one using it in the sexual act? Lastly, does it respect the human life?
RH bill is obviously a redundancy of the previously enacted laws one example is the Magna Carta for Women’s Rights specifically in section 17 to wit:
Women's Right to Health. - (a) Comprehensive Health Services. - The State shall, at all times, provide for a comprehensive, culture-sensitive, and gender-responsive health services and programs covering all stages of a woman's life cycle and which addresses the major causes of women's mortality and morbidity:Provided, That in the provision for comprehensive health services, due respect shall be accorded to women's religious convictions, the rights of the spouses to found a family in accordance with their religious convictions, and the demands of responsible parenthood, and the right of women to protection from hazardous drugs, devices, interventions, and substances.