I am one of those professors from Ateneo that the media branded as defying the Church on the issue of the passage of House Bill 5043 on “Reproductive Health and Population Development.” I’m not really sure if by making the stand we made we were defying the Church, for whom were we defying when we were acting out of Christian love and our informed consciences. And if we were defying the Church, we were doing so in order to respond to the call of love’s conscience. Now that the controversy over the Reproductive Health Bill is raging, I would like to explain my position in lobbying for state support for reproductive health. I don’t want to speak on behalf of my colleagues who so carefully crafted our statement or the signatories who supported our statement with passion and conviction. But I would like to explain why I myself stand so firmly behind our call to pass a law like this.
Let me begin by saying that I do, as a student of philosophy and as a person who has grappled with the mysteries of parenthood and human sexuality for most of my life, understand the position of those members of the Church who look at this bill with fear and disapproval. I agree that the emergence of artificial contraceptives has made it easier for us to engage in careless sexual activity. The fact that there are contraceptives that minimize unwanted pregnancies and the spread of disease has probably made it easier for many of us to be promiscuous and this has certainly had an effect on how we give meaning to and value the sexual act.
It’s also possible that some of the contraceptives that are being sold have an abortive effect. It is possible that the pill or the IUD allow implantation to occur and might actually cause a fertilized egg to die. I don’t deny that this is possible and tragic.
I also can sympathize with their hesitation to allow a law to pass that will potentially interfere with how their schools will handle sex education. I also understand their distrust of the government officials’ capacity to design an effective and appropriate syllabus for sex-education. We in the education business know how government bureaucrats can impose short sighted and ill-designed programs that tend to be ineffective if not outright harmful in the formation of young people. And in such a delicate matter such as human sexuality and love, it takes a great act of faith and hope to imagine that the bureaucracy will not mis-educate our children.
However, those truths and possibilities aside, we are faced with the hard and terrible tragedy of millions of women and children whose lives are put at risk everyday only because they do not know many of the basic facts of human reproduction and are unable to access existing technologies that can prevent unwanted pregnancies. It is painful to witness how the undoing or further undoing of countless lives continues when proper information or the availability of effective methods of contraception are denied them. I need only to think of the countless children who grow up facing the violence of poverty that is compounded by the lack of care and nutrition imposed by the sheer size of their families; of the violence inflicted on the bodies of women by the unabated proliferation of their children due to the lack of knowledge and the lack of access to methods that could help them decide the number of children best for their family’s welfare; of the countless people whose creativity and joy is sapped by the constant pressure to find the resources to nourish themselves and their children in a world that can no longer sustain their numbers—and thinking all this, I asked myself how we could deny people a chance to rise from tragedy. Because this bill gives them that chance. It will ensure that young people understand the nature of human sexuality and reproduction so that they can make intelligent decisions about the risky behavior to which they are prone. It will give poor women access to contraception that will give them a fighting chance to have families the size of which can sustain love and care. It will give oppressed women a chance to say no to the abuse on their body and psyches of having large families. And it will give children a chance to develop with a chance at health care, education, and focused parental love. So you see, I and my colleagues are calling for the passage of this bill, not as an act of defiance but as a call of love. We know these parents, we know their children, we weep in our hearts to see how their chance at a decent human life is eroded by what society has denied them. We aren’t saying that responsible parenthood will solve poverty. It won’t, justice will. But this law will give them a chance to live more human lives as they wait for the reign of the Kingdom of God.
In my heart, I understand what the Church fears when it thinks of contraceptives and birth control—it is thinking that the contraceptive mentality is a symptom of a mindset that is not open to grace. For the Church it signals a kind of heart that has no hope and cannot trust in the good will of a loving God. I can see how that can be true and how the propagation of the culture of contraceptives might lead to the degradation of our capacity to be people of faith. It can also lead to the degradation of human sexuality as it will permit sex to be used as a drug to ease the ennui of modern life. I see how the reduction of unwanted pregnancies can do that. However, we do live already in a sinful world where the truth of sexuality especially between loving couples is an unfathomable mystery. Why does sex have such a power on our will such that it draws people to act beyond reason and good sense? Why is it that people think that sex could resolve their malaise, give them a higher esteem of themselves, make them happy, and give them a sense of completion? I don’t think there are easy answers to these questions and much of human existence is involved in trying to understand this mystery. In the meantime children are being born to impossible circumstances and women are being made to suffer preventable hardships.
In our broken and sinful world people are looking for answers and may be acting beyond their better wisdom in their search. Until we come to our wholeness and holiness perhaps we can provide ourselves the tools of prudence so that our search for intimacy and fullness does not have to end in sorrow and greater tragedy. State support for reproductive health will provide us these tools. And so with love for those like us who are broken, but unlike us are deprived of the means to regulate the effects of their tragic fate, we propose that some such bill be passed. Perhaps the Church will want it passed with revisions—but we should not touch its capacity to help people control reproduction through the access to knowledge and safe means. We should especially not water down its mandate to provide support for mothers who care for their children.
And as the secular state passes its laws for the secular good of all its citizens, perhaps it is only right for the Church to redouble its efforts in the education of its people’s hearts. For only a profound and effective education of the heart will bring her people to their good. No amount of intervention in state law will teach the people love. Only a Church that acts as a beacon of love can ultimately teach us what our intimacy is about. In the meantime, let us leave the state to its means to save its poor.
The problem with artificial contraceptives is that the person is reduced from a person to a thing for pleasure. Women lose out here. In the US 41% of births are to single women. There is no responsibility attached to having sex; no marriage attached to having sex. The family is becoming extinct.
ReplyDeleteIn some countries they curb the sexual drive by castration of men (removal of testicles) and/or circumcision of the clitoris. This is probably a more just solution and also expedient.
Standard machismo view that in sex, it's the woman who's objectified. So 17th century, in which time I presume Mr. Martinez would prefer we all remain.
DeleteLots and lots of married couples practice birth control, precisely out of a sense of responsibility and in full acceptance of their tasks and duties as parents.
You most likely have no idea of what clitoral circumcision is, or you wouldn't equate it with testicular amputation. Their impacts are not the same.
Mr. Martinez, what you are saying is a value judgment. Who says that personhood and pleasure are mutually exclusive? The couple engaged in a consensual act can always choose to impose the meaning of their actions insofar as they do not harm the liberty of other people.
ReplyDeleteIn the event that people come to realize that they end up violating themselves, or have been reduced to the level of fresh meat, that is for them to find out and act upon. For crying out loud, have a tad bit of respect for libertarianism, choice, and availability of options that may not necessarilly sit well with your bigotted and antiquated beliefs which many people keep on imposing.
I do believe that Natural Family Planning (NFP) is the only method that requires the husband to respect the wife’s fertility cycle, the only method where the marital couple communicate about the wife’s ovulation status (changes in the cervix, cervical mucus, body temperature or hormonal level) and, therefore, have responsible and consensual sex. The Catholic Laity need to get educated about NFP and on love and responsibility and spread the word. There aren’t enough priests to spread the word.
ReplyDeleteSex on demand will further reduce the status of women in the bedroom. I can see marital rape increasing as a result.
Christ's peace be with you.
Mr. Martinez what you are saying is that in spite of the truths you know about the way contraceptives work and in spite of the knowledge of the truths of the teaching of the Catholic Church on the matter, coming from a Catholic University, you still believe that your INFORMED conscience tells you to support the bill? Doesn't that go against your informed conscience? Is it not possible that your compassion and your sympathy, good qualities no doubt, are the ones that are dictating over this informed conscience?
ReplyDeleteI encourage you to re-read Humane Vitae and Evangelium Vitae because every single thing that Pope Paul VI said would happen if contraception became widely available did in fact happen! How can we as faithful Catholics deny the wisdom of the Magisterium. It is no mere whim but an inspiration of the Holy Spirit that moves the magisterium to hold on to this teaching... of course that is unless you no longer believe in the infallible Magisterium.
ReplyDeleteNothing is infallible in this world, because the world changes. Otherwise Christians will still be establishing harems.
DeleteI wish the author delved more into the Catholic aspects of this debate. As a Catholic myself, I don't see how I can support this bill because contraception, in itself, is not supported by the Church. At least that was how I understood it.
ReplyDeleteHAVING SAID THAT, I, as a well-meaning citizen of this country, very much support this bill. I am aware that there is disconnect between the two, and to reconcile them is something that seems impossible at this point.
To my mind it is just very convenient to say that our conscience is our final arbiter. It is very easy to say that our reason, informed by our faith, allows us to agree with the bill. I am guilty of doing that, but in the end, saying that we campaign for the bill out of love, or that our conscience is our final moral arbiter is the only way I can "defend" my decision to go for the bill when I am Catholic. That is why I would have loved to read a deeper analysis of just how it is possible to be both Catholic and believe in the bill. I was hoping this article would provide deeper insights.
The article is very much well-written, but perhaps it should not have been entitled "Why this Catholic..." as it presupposes a discussion on why the bill itself is actually pro-life, pro-poor, or pro-women in the context of Catholic teachings.
sir gus,
ReplyDeletemedyo lang hindi po yata patas na balingan lang ang posisyon ng simbahan bilang nagmumula sa takot. may mga nag-iisip pa namang ang hinahanap ay kung ano ang tunay na aktong mapagmahal. at ang nasusumpungan sa ngayon sa katuruang katoliko ay may kalakip na sariling disiplina ang tunay na magtataguyod ng pamilya (sa katotohanan buod ng natural na pagpaplano ng pamilya iyon). pasensiya na po pero naroon pa tayo sa ngayon at baka ito din ang puso ng pagmamahal na pwede nating pag-usapan, iyong may kasamang matinong usapang pangmag-asawa, pagtitimpi at paghihintay?
paumanhin din pero halata rin pong malakas ang kahiligang isipin na pinabababa ng kontraseptibo ang mga hindi nakaplanong pagkabuntis. medyo kaduda-duda yata ang pagpapalagay na ito, may mga pag-aaral sa mga bansang kanluranin na ipinapakitang kahit pa naroon ang mga iyon at malakas ang kampanya nila sa pagsisiwalat ng mga iyon ay hindi pa din nailuluwal ang ninanais na resulta ng pagpapababa ng mga insidente ng mga hindi nakaplanong pagbubuntis.
mas maaari siguro nating pag-usapan ang pagpapalakas ng kalooban at pagpapasya bilang mas makatutulong sa atin. baka hindi po uubra ang madalian at masyadong simple na solusyon sa mga usaping tulad sa karahasan sa tahanan, dami ng taong mahihirap at pampamilyang kalusugan. baka po kasi basahin pang ang sinasabi lang natin sa mahihirap sa tuwing naieendorso ang RH Bill ay "mahirap kayo kaya wala kayong karapatang mag-anak..."
Kaya hindi umaasenso ang bansang ito ay dahil sa ideological miseducation. Kaya nga ipinaglalaban ang RH Bill para i-empower ang mga mahihirap sa pamamagitan ng edukasyon, at bigyan sila ng karapatan na gumawa ng "informed choice" batay sa dagdag nilang kaalaman.
ReplyDeleteAng kapal ng mukha ng simbahan para ipataw ang mga paniniwala nila sa mga tao, lalo na ang mga mahihirap. Kung gagawin nila ito, sana naman ay kaya rin nila ito gawin sa mga miyembro nila sa pamamagitan ng paglantad ng kani-kanilang baho, lalo na't may anak si Fr. Candelaria.
OO TAMA ANG SINABI KO! MAY ANAK SI FR. CANDELARIA!
you are barking at the wrong tree. ur tone is not even logical and then u call yourself a philosopo. pweh...u want to justify ur sensuality..u know wu wei? i think u need to review ur ethical foundation. he he.
ReplyDeleteTo anonymous 8:24 am:
ReplyDeleteKindly substantiate why the previous commenter (or the author of the article?) is barking at the wrong tree. Furthermore, you are being a victim of linguistic imperialism by criticizing the Filipino language as an "illogical" tone in presenting one's point of view; when it actually encapsulates the essence of the Filipino experience, and the kind of deprivation that they have experienced from bigots like you and the Catholic Church. Be aware of your bourgeoisie-eurocentric prejudice.
Yes, I know what wu wei is. What I don't know is how a concept in Chinese philosophy helps in the discussion of the RH Bill, or effective public policy-making in a "democratic" nation such as the Philippines. So tell me, who's barking at the wrong tree now?
The structure of your comment would get an A in a chat conversation. It seems like you're the one who should review your foundations of moral values.
What a pathetic piece of shit you are!
To anonymous 8:24 am:
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that I am justifying my sensuality. So what? At the end of the day, I have the right and moral ascendancy to decide what is good for me. And besides, if my partner gives her consent, whether it be crass in your point of view, is none of your business. If people decide to consensually do things that are anti-thetical to your view, please leave them alone.
You don't want to educate people about alternative lifestyles and options. You are very good at is imposing your views, which is so antiquated (for some people) by the way. If you want to live that way, go ahead. But if I can respect you, please respect me and have the decency to acknowledge alternative lifestyles or practices which some people prefer.
Go fuck yourself.
Ricardo Boncan
ReplyDeletePope Paul VI did allow for natural family planning after husband and wife discerned it was the best course of action. I am not against the Catholic position on NFP; I am AGAINST 5043. 5043 is VERY deceptive. The bill says that "Gender equality and women empowerment are central elements" of the bill. Natural Family Planning (NFP) methods are the only FP methods where husband and wife revere God’s revealed fertility plan. Husband and wife may choose to have sexual relations or sacrifice abstinence within the bounds of the fertility cycle. The spousal sacrifice NFP involves is their expression of reverence for the order of God’s creation. This sacrifice bears the fruit of a deeper understanding of marital love brought about by their mastery of sexual passion. NFP is the only type of family planning that satisfies marital chastity (revering the moral order). By learning to observe his wife’s cervical fluid patterns, waking temperature, hormonal patterns or a combination of these, the husband becomes engaged in his wife’s fertility cycle. This “spousal knowing” would never happen if she had tubal ligation or an intrauterine device insertion or if they practice any other type of artificial family planning. Artificial family planning (AFP) uses the other spouse as a means for sexual gratification on demand. There is no respect or consideration for the fertility cycle of the woman and no recognition of the new life formed when the sperm fertilizes the ovum. How women are empowered by the dehumanization of artificial means of family control, where women are objectified (but were pharmaceutical companies through their lobbyists generate demand for their products), totally escapes me.
Artificial family planning, including contraceptives, are some fruits of the tree of wisdom of good and evil we should have never come near to. Having eaten them, man thinks he is god because he has control over life; but he acts like an animal with passions guiding his actions. Babies, a burden for which “the limited resources of the country cannot be suffered to,” are called unwanted pregnancies. We have so completely lost our sense of moral order that resources have greater value than human life. Resources have dominion over man!
@Gabriel.Martinez
ReplyDeleteStop talking about God. He is so outdated and full of shit for some people. If you believe in Him, good. But please, don't assume that your beliefs are the privileged voice in public policy, where you marginalize the voices of many just because "God said so, this is what the bible says, blah blah bullshit".
If you're going to refute the RH Bill, kindly substantiate your points by using practical and secular arguments, one that is based on solid evidence and derived from thorough research. Go beyond the lousy sacred circle that circumscribes (and stifles) rational inquiry. For crying out loud, the Philippines is not a theocracy.
Be smart enough to play by the rules of the game, and scrape the bottom of the barrel by displaying a tad bit of common sense. You would make perfect sense if you were in an Islamic Republic like Iran.
You should be ashamed of yourself. Maybe it is the clergy men that you "oh so admire" that need a lesson on reproductive health. You can do everyone a favor by giving Fr. Candelaria of Ateneo a condom so that he won't have another child.
Thank you and fuck off.
Anonymous, please identify yourself. You are not the only one posting or reading this blog. The universe does not revolve around you so why impose your vulgar rules on others. Readers may want to read from perspectives other than yours.
ReplyDeleteThe Catholic Church is by no means perfect like you think you are. I do not know who Fr. Candelaria is but I will pray for him. But let anyone who is without fault be the first to throw a stone on him.
@Gabriel.Martinez
ReplyDeleteOf course I am not perfect, but the Catholic Chucrh is applying double standards, a so-called theocratic exceptionalism so to speak. The hyprocrisy of this institution is so evident, so much so that they think that they are more pope-ish than the pope.
Putangina, wag ka nga magquote mula sa scripture. You're taking it out of context. Kapag napatunayan mo na may kasalanan ang isang tao, you can come up with a just conclusion because just information was available. Don't tell me that I have no right to lambaste a fucktard like Candelaria because I am also a "sinner". The notion of sin does not apply to every citizen of the Philippines, for one either embraces a certain kind of faith, or is a non theist. Ang kapal ng mukha mo para sabihin na subservient ang lahat ng mga Pilipino sa maxim na yan.
You should get out because as I said, your reasoning is not based on solid evidence and derived from thorough research. Tingnan mo, even CBCP is spreading misinformation about the Bill.
Stop your scripture bullshit. You can argue like the author in the previous post if you want to be heard.
Prayer won't do you any good, because it is the voice of reason, evidence, and thorough research that will win in the end. You know what the sad part is? You don't have any of that! You know why? Because you're an idiot, and you're faith blinds your capacity to think critically.
You're the one who's imposing your views, because you do not want the marginalized voices to be heard. I told you, if you want to believe in your pathetic God, then go ahead. If your family planning methods are something that is in line with your faith, then it is something to be respected because it is your choice. But here you are stating your vehement opposition to the RH Bill, saying that it is evil and that you are the privileged voice in public policy. By doing that, you are depriving other people a chance to be informed and pursue a lifestyle or method that is in line with their best interests, something that may not necessarily be in line with your beliefs.
To hell with your views that women are being objectified. In the event that they are being treated as a means to an end, it was their choice to begin with. Ano ba ang pakialam mo kung gusto ng mga tao gamitin ang isa't isa ha?
1)For secular arguments against the RH Bill refer to:
ReplyDeletehttp://monkshobbit.wordpress.com/2010/11/29/ang-kapatiran-party-position-paper-on-the-reproductive-health-bill/
2)Going back to the original/first post: Complicity to do a wrong is also a wrong. For instance, if my son decides to rob a bank and I give him a ski mask so the consequences of his actions are avoided; I would also be guilty of a crime.
3)Mr. Anonymous, a heart of stone cannot receive any grace. Whether you were abused or abandoned I do not know. But you do not know love…Peace, I pray you find it.
@Gabriel.Martinez
ReplyDeleteI cannot believe how illogical your point is. Robbing a back is can never be justified and is definitely wrong because other people's savings are involved, and you never had their CONSENT when you did an act in the name of greed.
Don't you dare impose your views on consensual sex. Kung gusto makipaggamitan ng dalawang tao sa kama dahil sa libog, pabayaan mo sila. Putangina ang laki laki mong pakialamero eh.
Excuse me, I know what love is. Your notion of love is so bourgeoisie and self-centered. You focus on what good your stupid God has done to your personal life, and how you think that you are a true "CHRISTian" by living a life based on scripture. If that's what you want to believe, then go ahead, I have no problem with that. But please, don't you dare speculate that I have a heart of stone and that I do not understand love. Ang kapal ng mukha mo putragis.
Love can also find its ultimate expression in the socio-political realm. Activists and intellectuals, who are committed to truth, transparency, and human rights, point out the systemic abuses and deprivation found in various organizations. They expose lies and abuses, and are adamant in holding hypocrites accountable as they bring justice to society's marginalized voices. These are the real heroes who have a real heart, fighting systems of power.
There is no question that the CBCP is spreading misinformation about the Bill. They act as if they are more pope-ish than the pope, who just recently let out a can of worms regarding the use of condoms.
Huwag mong sabihin na complicity to do wrong is also a wrong. This doesn't apply to the RH Bill. 70% of Filipinos approve of the bill, and if people want it, then their voices should be heard. If they want to use each other, WITH CONSENT, pabayaan mo sila. Majujustify lang ang pagnakaw sa bangko kung lahat ng kinuhang pera ay MAY CONSENT mula sa bawat account holder na ninakawan nila. As we know, that is not the case.
If people want to consensually use each other's bodies for their own benefit, leave them alone. They can only be held accountable if they have committed themselves to the priesthood, just like Fr. Candelaria.
Have you given Fr. Candelaria a condom already? I think you should!
:)
If mutual consent is the basis of public policy then sexual relations between and among you and your mother and brother and sister and father are all acceptable if each party consents. Soon you will have incest, polygamy and bestiality. You may accept that social disorder; I do not.
ReplyDeleteIn Japan and many parts of Europe, the population control programs have led to declining populations (success!?) below replacement. As a consequence, the population is aging and the aging work force cannot sustain the retiring population. On the other hand, the Muslim population is growing in Eastern Europe and is seen as a threat. These countries have legislated their extinction. Survival of the fittest has become survival of the fetus.
Peace.
Sorry, I meant Anti-Islam or Islamophobia, not Anti-Islamophobia
ReplyDeleteputa nadelete ung pinost ko. wag na nga
ReplyDeleteMr. Rodriguez, it seems I can boil down your argument this:
ReplyDelete"I know that the social and human repercussions of the RHBIll (Institutionalizing contraceptives), i.e.:"
1. "... has made it easier for us to engage in careless sexual activity. The fact that there are contraceptives that minimize unwanted pregnancies and the spread of disease has probably made it easier for many of us to be promiscuous and this has certainly had an effect on how we give meaning to and value the sexual act."
2. "...potentially interfere with how their schools will handle sex education."..."short sighted and ill-designed programs that tend to be ineffective if not outright harmful in the formation of young people. And in such a delicate matter such as human sexuality and love, it takes a great act of faith and hope to imagine that the bureaucracy will not mis-educate our children."
3. ..."It’s also possible that some of the contraceptives that are being sold have an abortive effect. It is possible that the pill or the IUD allow implantation to occur and might actually cause a fertilized egg to die. I don’t deny that this is possible and tragic."
"BUT in light of these, I think it is okay because I think this will solve other social ills."
Now considering your above statements of sympathy I could not help but notice that you refer to a human zygote merely as a fertilized egg. That devaluation of status is significant because that is essentially the core argument of why OC's and the like are against Catholic teaching... because it is a potential abortifacient of human life. As a Catholic, you should not have to grapple with the fact that any act that terminates a human life from conception, is an evil act and therefore can never be condoned. We can debate the social issues of sex-ed and promiscuity but never on the issue of human life being intentionally terminated.
Poverty is a social ill that has to be addressed but to tackle them by means that are evil is unacceptable especially for a practicing Catholic. One character of being a Catholic is after all a submission to the moral and theological teachings of the magisterium because she has Christ's voice. Having said that, our poverty problem is so broadly multifaceted that to reduce it to the issue of population is simplistic. Graft and corruption, neglected rural development, oligarchy power rule, lack of education and unhampered exploitation of natural resources by a few are much bigger contributors to this problem because what would a small population do if none of these are addressed and I think it is more the task of government to address these issues than to delve into those that affect sexual morality.
Sir Gus, I publicly support your stand for the provision of reproductive health services to the country.
ReplyDeleteThe Millenium Development Goals, goals decided upon by a consensus of nations, have put the responsibility of improving maternal health and reducing child mortality on countries and its people. We were asked to reduce the maternal mortality ratio to half of what it was. This year, the Philippines has reported an increase in MMR from 162 to 221. 221 mothers die for every 100,000 live births. It is a greater likelihood that this figure an underestimation of actual figures. Why? This does not count the mothers who give birth without seeing a trained professional. This number does not count the mothers who are giving birth and possibly dying at home - in unsterile environments.
It is estimated that every year, 2 million babies are born in the country, consequently amounting to over 4000 mothers dying every year. Mothers who are, more often than not, the head of households, determining the allocation of already-scarce resources and looking after their children. Mothers that are also daughters, sisters, wives, and friends to their communities. I question, what does your stand say about these mothers whose realities exist far beyond what our common notions of family and its dynamics.
Here in the internet sphere, the voices come from the more privileged. I do not doubt that natural family planning is morally acceptable. I also believe it is relatively effective. But this is not enough. Marital/Partner rape is not uncommon for the poor. How many women are raped by their spouses or partners after a night of drinking? What is our intervention for this? Where is our stand against this? Is it not our moral responsibility to also say, "hey, this isn't right" and furthermore, "we need to provide structural support to our women" There are extra-ordinary factors that are at work which we have to include in our decision. Are we also saying that the provision of condoms actually encourage a rise in marital rape or in promiscuity? How many rapists use a condom when they force themselves on their victims? That type of assertion also requires some more thought.
I've only tackled the issue on maternal health. I have yet to raise the concerns on the rise in teenage pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases. I ask that you consider this in your decision-making.
In any field, it is clear that there is no one size that fits as a solution to our problems. Why do we argue that the issue on reproductive health is any different? Natural family planning may not be applicable in all situations. For the outliers then, we must also make available other easily utilized interventions.