PIECES OF ME - RH BIll: What Will You Choose?
Last week, The RH Bill was passed in its second reading. Almost everyone in Twitter (or everyone since everyone is already in Twitter) have been posting or commenting about it, the votes, the reason for the representatives' votes and their opinion. So I'm here to do mine.
When all this RH issue surfaced, I've been quiet. I even told myself not to post, tweet or say anything in the issue. Why? Well, to tell you honestly, I don't where I stand. I don't really know which side I was on. However, these past few days that the bill was being read kinda leads to the inevitable.
The Reproductive Health Bill or Senate Bill No. 2865 is a proposed law that aims to guarantee universal access to methods on contraception, fertility control, sexual education and maternity care. Sound like a good law because it will provide people access to something that they don't have right? But why is the Church against it?
This is only my opinion and the result from what my Theology professor and weekly hearing of mass told me. Access to methods on contraception, fertility control, sexual education. When you first read this phrase, what comes into your mind must be "The Government will give free condoms and encourage us to use birth control" or "They will teach our children about sex." Parents must be having a field day with this. But according to Senator Pia Cayetano's blog, The RH bill gives us freedom of choice. It gives us a choice to use their approved method of contraception and fertility control or not to use it. Now what the Church wants in replace of this is abstinence. Yes. Why would you need methods of contraception or fertility control if you abstain from sex?The Church believes that sex is an expression of love between a married couple. What they are against is that it kinda justifies sex before marriage. You see, people will think, "Oh it's OK to have sex before marriage because their are methods of contraception available." The Church, however, disapproves of that. In one of the Sundays that I have been going to church, our parish priest told us "Mga aso ba tayo na kung pwedeng makipag-talik ay makikipagtalik na lang?"
Another reason why I think the Church is against the RH Bill is the sexual education part of it. Teaching children about sex might be every parents nightmare. Why, it's because it's a sign that their babies are now growing old. Teaching about personal hygiene and caring for your body and stuff might not be such a bad thing. However, it must be done in the appropriate age. According the the RH Bill, sexual education will be done age appropriately. However, children nowadays are more outgoing, curious, and adventurous. Now being outgoing and curious doesn't mean they are maturing faster than children of the past but what would stop them from trying out things that older children are doing? Example, if you teach a 16 year old about sex, what would stop a 12 year old from knowing these things? I think that's what worries them Also, teenagers of today are utterly more stupid (Yes, I am calling teenagers of today stupid). What worries the Church is that these teenagers might try experimenting because they know how to use these things.
Now, I know there are other issues about the RH Bill that the Church is against and that the proponents of the RH Bill wants to clarify but for me this issues are what should be focused on.
I have given both sides of the RH Bill and the Church. Now it's time to give mine.
I am Pro-Choice. Yes. Choice. You have to choose for yourself and I am choosing so. Whether this bill passes or not, It will be up to me. Yes, people would say we are for the RH bill to help other women but it would still be those women's choice if they would accept your help. Really it is. Whatever rally demonstration or protest you join, it would still be the people who will choose. So, I am choosing to decide for myself.
Now having access to methods of contraception and fertility control, for me, is not bad. As I've said, I'm pro-choice. It gives people a choice however, I am choosing abstinence over this. Yes, I believe in having sex after marriage. However, if there comes a time (which I probably know will happen) that I will have sex before I get married, I will make sure that this is with the girl that I love, that I intend to marry and that I want to share my hopes, dreams and life forever. But still, I believe in the abstinence. Sex is a gift from God. It's not something that you do with someone because you're drunk or wasted or what.
With regards to the sexual education, what bothers me more is that this is going to be taught in schools. My children will not learn sexual education from other people. If ever, I want my children to be honest with me, and I will be, so if they asked me questions I will answer it. I know it's a scary thought for most parents but I owe it to my children to teach them these kinds of stuff. And would you rather someone teach your kids than you do? However, if they impose it to the school's curriculum, I have nothing against it. I believe I will teach my children to be smart and intelligent enough to know what is right from wrong and what is good or bad.
Now, these past few days, Priests all over the country have been reading a letter from the CBCP. People have been tweeting about it and saying that they walk out, or they are mad because they wanted to hear mass and stuff. But honestly, I think the Church has the right to voice out their opinion during mass. It's their way of reaching out to the people. Much as Senators have privileged speeches, priests have rights to say what they have to say too. And besides going to mass is not obligatory but rather out of your own or as they say it "bukal sa kalooban."
Also, I would like to point out something Representative Almario said as her reason for her vote. "I want to see more OFWs" Seriously? ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR FREAKING MIND? It is very hard for OFWs and their families to be separated. I know this because my grandfather had worked overseas since my mom was in high school until I was in elementary. He was gone that long just to provide for his family. and this woman wanted more OFWs? Why because of the revenue OFWs bring to the country? A very selfish reason.
So to finish this, what I am saying is that we have a choice. Whether this bill passes or not. It's up to us. And that's what I would be doing. I would be choosing for myself. Not for the poor, the church, or the oppressed but for myself. Now the question is, what will you choose?
If you have any questions, comments or suggestion post them below, tweet or message me and I will be very happy to answer.
When all this RH issue surfaced, I've been quiet. I even told myself not to post, tweet or say anything in the issue. Why? Well, to tell you honestly, I don't where I stand. I don't really know which side I was on. However, these past few days that the bill was being read kinda leads to the inevitable.
The Reproductive Health Bill or Senate Bill No. 2865 is a proposed law that aims to guarantee universal access to methods on contraception, fertility control, sexual education and maternity care. Sound like a good law because it will provide people access to something that they don't have right? But why is the Church against it?
This is only my opinion and the result from what my Theology professor and weekly hearing of mass told me. Access to methods on contraception, fertility control, sexual education. When you first read this phrase, what comes into your mind must be "The Government will give free condoms and encourage us to use birth control" or "They will teach our children about sex." Parents must be having a field day with this. But according to Senator Pia Cayetano's blog, The RH bill gives us freedom of choice. It gives us a choice to use their approved method of contraception and fertility control or not to use it. Now what the Church wants in replace of this is abstinence. Yes. Why would you need methods of contraception or fertility control if you abstain from sex?The Church believes that sex is an expression of love between a married couple. What they are against is that it kinda justifies sex before marriage. You see, people will think, "Oh it's OK to have sex before marriage because their are methods of contraception available." The Church, however, disapproves of that. In one of the Sundays that I have been going to church, our parish priest told us "Mga aso ba tayo na kung pwedeng makipag-talik ay makikipagtalik na lang?"
Another reason why I think the Church is against the RH Bill is the sexual education part of it. Teaching children about sex might be every parents nightmare. Why, it's because it's a sign that their babies are now growing old. Teaching about personal hygiene and caring for your body and stuff might not be such a bad thing. However, it must be done in the appropriate age. According the the RH Bill, sexual education will be done age appropriately. However, children nowadays are more outgoing, curious, and adventurous. Now being outgoing and curious doesn't mean they are maturing faster than children of the past but what would stop them from trying out things that older children are doing? Example, if you teach a 16 year old about sex, what would stop a 12 year old from knowing these things? I think that's what worries them Also, teenagers of today are utterly more stupid (Yes, I am calling teenagers of today stupid). What worries the Church is that these teenagers might try experimenting because they know how to use these things.
Now, I know there are other issues about the RH Bill that the Church is against and that the proponents of the RH Bill wants to clarify but for me this issues are what should be focused on.
I have given both sides of the RH Bill and the Church. Now it's time to give mine.
I am Pro-Choice. Yes. Choice. You have to choose for yourself and I am choosing so. Whether this bill passes or not, It will be up to me. Yes, people would say we are for the RH bill to help other women but it would still be those women's choice if they would accept your help. Really it is. Whatever rally demonstration or protest you join, it would still be the people who will choose. So, I am choosing to decide for myself.
Now having access to methods of contraception and fertility control, for me, is not bad. As I've said, I'm pro-choice. It gives people a choice however, I am choosing abstinence over this. Yes, I believe in having sex after marriage. However, if there comes a time (which I probably know will happen) that I will have sex before I get married, I will make sure that this is with the girl that I love, that I intend to marry and that I want to share my hopes, dreams and life forever. But still, I believe in the abstinence. Sex is a gift from God. It's not something that you do with someone because you're drunk or wasted or what.
With regards to the sexual education, what bothers me more is that this is going to be taught in schools. My children will not learn sexual education from other people. If ever, I want my children to be honest with me, and I will be, so if they asked me questions I will answer it. I know it's a scary thought for most parents but I owe it to my children to teach them these kinds of stuff. And would you rather someone teach your kids than you do? However, if they impose it to the school's curriculum, I have nothing against it. I believe I will teach my children to be smart and intelligent enough to know what is right from wrong and what is good or bad.
Now, these past few days, Priests all over the country have been reading a letter from the CBCP. People have been tweeting about it and saying that they walk out, or they are mad because they wanted to hear mass and stuff. But honestly, I think the Church has the right to voice out their opinion during mass. It's their way of reaching out to the people. Much as Senators have privileged speeches, priests have rights to say what they have to say too. And besides going to mass is not obligatory but rather out of your own or as they say it "bukal sa kalooban."
Also, I would like to point out something Representative Almario said as her reason for her vote. "I want to see more OFWs" Seriously? ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR FREAKING MIND? It is very hard for OFWs and their families to be separated. I know this because my grandfather had worked overseas since my mom was in high school until I was in elementary. He was gone that long just to provide for his family. and this woman wanted more OFWs? Why because of the revenue OFWs bring to the country? A very selfish reason.
So to finish this, what I am saying is that we have a choice. Whether this bill passes or not. It's up to us. And that's what I would be doing. I would be choosing for myself. Not for the poor, the church, or the oppressed but for myself. Now the question is, what will you choose?
If you have any questions, comments or suggestion post them below, tweet or message me and I will be very happy to answer.
Comments
Post a Comment