It is such a shame that I only began to sink my teeth into this issue a few days before its fated day (tomorrow) in the senate. For quite some time, I was sitting on the fence mainly due to ignorance of the nitty gritty of the bill. Nevertheless I am glad to have come across this blog, where discussions are from people who have obviously been keen and perceptive as to the various issues surrounding this very controversial (understatement) proposal. My stand has been strengthened and I am grateful for all the astute ideas I gathered here. =)
What, exactly, is the RH Bill intended to accomplish, and how does it improve on the existing conditions of the country? Disagreement with the RH Bill takes two basic forms. The first and most obvious is the moral objection of the Catholic Church. The second is an objection on practical grounds, that the RH Bill, despite its good intentions, is poorly-conceived: it fails to clearly define a problem to be solved and then offer effective solutions to that problem.
Making a judgment about any real or perceived moral hazard from the point of view of the Catholic or any other church is beyond my purview, but I will offer this observation: the RH Bill’s advocates have fallen into a fairly well-designed trap set for them by the Church leadership, and as a consequence are at serious risk of losing the debate in a moral context, if they haven’t already.
View original post 2,741 more words