By Sonny Coloma
In the fifties and up to the time martial rule was imposed by a dictatorial President, the
communist bogey was the favorite justification for witch-hunting against advocates of
progressive thought who were accused of "destabilizing" the government and "threatening
our democratic way of life." Today, the communist bogey has been replaced by a new
scapegoat: the population bogey.
House Bill 5043, otherwise known as the Population and Reproductive Health Bill, is now
being debated. Even if the bill has not been passed it has been reported that about P2 billion has been appropriated to fund the purchase and provision of contraceptives that will be distributed in health centers nationwide.
I first became aware of the population bogey when, as a freshman in UP, I read the winning piece for the Philippine Collegian editorship written by Antonio Tagamolila. (Government soldiers in the coutnryside killed Tony Tagamolila in the early seventies, not long after his stint as Collegian editor.) His lead sentence was quite memorable: “The ghost of the Parson Malthus once more stalks the land.”
Thomas Malthus was a Protestant minister who warned about the potentially catastrophic
consequences of “geometric” (or “exponential”) population growth far outstripping “arithmetic” growth in food production. This view found resonance in the Club of Rome’s
exposition on the Limits to Growth in the mid-seventies.
But such gloom-and-doom scenarios have not materialized. Advances in technology have greatly enhanced human productivity. The market economy has created such an abundance of wealth that, even if not equitably distributed, has forestalled the dire predictions on the supposed detrimental effects of the law of diminishing marginal returns.
Poverty cannot be totally blamed on the poor themselves: it is more clearly the outcome of
human greed and bad governance. In the Real Wealth of Nations, Riane Eisler points out that it is dominator economic systems that “artificially create and perpetuate scarcity – and with this, pain and fear.” Such systems have spawned “heavy investment in armaments, lack of
investment in meeting human needs, ruthless exploitation of nature, and waste of natural and human resources from wars and other forms of violence.”
In our country, the Catholic Church has often been blamed by politicians for the continuing high population growth rate. I recall that during the Ramos regime, Cardinal Sin mobilized a huge rally in Luneta to counteract the high-profile birth control program of the Department of Health that was then headed by flamboyant Secretary (later Senator) Juan Flavier.
During my two stints in government, I have realized why every secretary of health is bound
to support the use of contraceptives in population control programs. Almost the entire DOH
budget (up to 80%) is allocated for personnel salaries and administrative expenses. Only
official development assistance from such sources as the US Agency for International
Development (USAID) makes it possible for the DOH to pursue meaningful pubic health
programs.
I am opposed to HB 5043 even if I favor planned parenthood through natural methods. My
opposition stems from the fact that, historically, the open tolerance of the use of
contraceptives has produced more harmful effects than the good that its advocates have
vowed to promote.
A culture of contraception is, essentially, an anti-life – not a pro-choice — culture. It is also
anti-family.
Contrary to expectations, the percentage of out-of wedlock births has increased dramatically since oral contraceptives, or birth control pills, were approved for sale in 1960. In the US out-of-wedlock births have increased from 6% to about 35%. In Europe, about half of the children in Denmark, Sweden, and Norway are born to unmarried mothers.
These figures give rise to the query: since birth control pills prevent pregnancy, shouldn’t
the out-of-wedlock pregnancy rates have gone down? Not so, because of the operation of the law of unintended consequences. Since contraception has become legitimate, then child-bearing can take place outside marriage. Hence, there has been a big increase in the out-of-wedlock pregnancies – and births – and of abortions as well. With few exceptions, abortions always happen outside of marriage.
Another consequence of the onset of the culture of contraception is the spiral in the incidence of divorce and a corresponding decline of marriage as an institution.
Let the authors of the House Bill explain and justify to the people the rationale in terms of the foregoing challenges: the likely increase in unwanted pregnancies and criminal abortions,
out-of-wedlock births, and the decline of marriage. Let them file a divorce law to complete
their menu for the new Filipino lifestyle.
But let the silent majority of those who are opposed to abortion and the decline of the family
as an institution also speak up.
Not surprisingly, none of the presidential wannabees for 2010 has spoken in favor of HB
5043, which still needs a Senate counterpart measure that is yet to be reported out and
debated on the floor.
Catholics should come out in the open and ask their senators, congressmen, and political
leaders to declare where they stand on this issue.
No comments:
Post a Comment