| US Jesuits agree $166 million abuse payout—lawyers |
| By Laura Onstot / Agence France-Presse /Posted date: March 26, 2011 Read Article ... |
Sunday, March 27, 2011
US Jesuits abuse payout
Statement on RH Bill 4244
Statement on Reproductive Health Bill 4244
date posted: 2011-03-25 06:35:37
24 March 2011MEMO TO : THE UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY
FROM : THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT : STATEMENT ON REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH BILL 4244
Read Memo ...
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Clarification of Atty. Jo Imbong
Wait a minute. I feel it is time for clarification based on what I saw and heard at the proceedings last night
The ALERT says:
The Lagman amendments have been approved
If the ALERT refers to the provisions on PROHIBITED ACTS, IDEAL FAMILY SIZE, opting out of parents from MANDATORY SEX EDUC, and the OBLIGATION OF EMPLOYERS, proposals to delete these provisions from 4244 and discussions thereon took place LONG BEFORE at the hearing of the bill in the Appropriations Committee where Cong. Nograles and Cong. Bagatsing took made the initiatives for removal of these provisions. The latter also brought up the additional burden of MOBILE HEALTH SERVICES being charged against congressmen/s PDAF. This led also to the idea not to charge MHS to PDAF. These were the "amendments" taken up in that Committee.
Strictly speaking, for our purposes of tracking the bill, it would be more apt to refer to these changes as, well, CHANGES. Or PROPOSALS FOR AMENDMENTS to the bill which amendments can only be taken up during the period of amendments in the plenary, which comes much much later . The process of Interpellation has in fact been agreed to start in May. After Lagman and co. are interpellated, the opponents of the bill will have their time to speak in the Turno en Contra. Another interpellation follows, this time, by the proponents of the bill. The period of amendments follows.
Yesterday's spiel of Tinio and Lagman was, strictly speaking, not an Interpellation in the real sense and in the context of the regular plenary process. It was more of a clarification/presentation of what CHANGES were taken up in the Appro Committee. The "script" of the interchange between Tinio and Lagman was like so (in essence):
Tinio: Is it correct, Mr. Speaker that the provision on prohibited acts in HB 4244 has been take out from the bill?
Lagman: That is correct, Mr Speaker, hence, oppositors to the bill have nothing to fear.
And so on, and so forth, in that pattern.
The exchange was obviously meant to "sell" the bill to their colleagues who were still weighing their options vis-a-vis the bill and win them over with the illusion that the bill has shed off the "objectionable" provisions.
According to the ALERT:
Lagman pulled out the RH bill and
requested for a discussion. This approval did
not require a vote.
Before Cong. Tinio and Lagman went into this exchange, .
they had asked our allies to be allowed two speakers, in fact. Our allies let them have only one, and so Tinio took the floor. As to why this was allowed, in light of the "gentleman's agreement" not to take up the bill until May--I leave that to our allies who know what they are doing--at that moment-- and have been in huddles all along in the floor.
Our allies had also prepared for every possible (even grim) scenarios for last night's session, having met in two caucuses within the day--one after the Cathedral mass, and another, I was informed, in Congress prior to the afternoon session.
There was no approval of amendments on floor, as there cannot be approvals. There were no votes called on the floor on those "AMENDMENTS."
In fact, after the Tinio-Lagman exchange, Lagman's closing statement was roughly, wala nag dapat ikabahala and mga tumututol sa panukalang batas na ito.
A motion followed by the Majority Leader, Garin, not to approve the "amendments" but a motion to suspend deliberations on 4244. There were no objections to that motion.
And so what followed was that deliberations on third reading started on several local bills and some other in the business of the day for second reading.
The session ended with a Statement from Speaker Belmonte reciting the sessions' overall accomplishments in the last 8 months.
WHAT SHOULD BE OUR NEXT STEP DURING THE RECESS?
You will have to inform the public that the bill has remained malevolent, in fact, MORE malevolent in its present modified form, shorn of those contentious provisions.
For a start, look at how the Conditional Cash Transfer is now connected to family planning.
This is a departure from what Sec. Soliman said in the "Dialogue" that ther is no effort to suggest a smaller family size in the CCT's reference to beneficiary families up to the third child.
Then look at the inclusion of the MISP in the bill. MISP is a lethal package of many kits used in disaster areas like they did in my city of Marikina after Ondoy. It is supposed to contain emergency contraception and condoms--in disaster areas! Not water, nourishment, medicines--but condoms among others-- and considering the mention in the bill of "the whole range of services and devices", it will also contain the dreaded Manual Vacuum Aspirator - MVA- as the foreign aid agencies brought in Bosnia. (Ask Joseph Meaney who monitored this, or Dra. Acosta who will tell you the different kinds of MISP kits. You can also google this.)
Then you may want to look closer at the poverty household "surveys" to be conducted as added in the bill. Poverty surveys? This is reminiscent of the door-to-door surveys of Ligtas Buntis.
You also have the centralized procurement of "essential medicines".
AND MANY MORE.
AND OF COURSE, "universal access" is still there; "the full range of devices . . " is still there. Even if parents can opt out their children, the schools will still be teaching what is mandatory to be taught.
This continuing and worsening malevolence is what we should be ALERTING our allies in Congress about.
LET US TURN ON THE LIGHT.
- Atty Jo
The ALERT says:
The Lagman amendments have been approved
after an orchestrated interpellation from Cong.
Tinio.
Tinio.
If the ALERT refers to the provisions on PROHIBITED ACTS, IDEAL FAMILY SIZE, opting out of parents from MANDATORY SEX EDUC, and the OBLIGATION OF EMPLOYERS, proposals to delete these provisions from 4244 and discussions thereon took place LONG BEFORE at the hearing of the bill in the Appropriations Committee where Cong. Nograles and Cong. Bagatsing took made the initiatives for removal of these provisions. The latter also brought up the additional burden of MOBILE HEALTH SERVICES being charged against congressmen/s PDAF. This led also to the idea not to charge MHS to PDAF. These were the "amendments" taken up in that Committee.
Strictly speaking, for our purposes of tracking the bill, it would be more apt to refer to these changes as, well, CHANGES. Or PROPOSALS FOR AMENDMENTS to the bill which amendments can only be taken up during the period of amendments in the plenary, which comes much much later . The process of Interpellation has in fact been agreed to start in May. After Lagman and co. are interpellated, the opponents of the bill will have their time to speak in the Turno en Contra. Another interpellation follows, this time, by the proponents of the bill. The period of amendments follows.
Yesterday's spiel of Tinio and Lagman was, strictly speaking, not an Interpellation in the real sense and in the context of the regular plenary process. It was more of a clarification/presentation of what CHANGES were taken up in the Appro Committee. The "script" of the interchange between Tinio and Lagman was like so (in essence):
Tinio: Is it correct, Mr. Speaker that the provision on prohibited acts in HB 4244 has been take out from the bill?
Lagman: That is correct, Mr Speaker, hence, oppositors to the bill have nothing to fear.
And so on, and so forth, in that pattern.
The exchange was obviously meant to "sell" the bill to their colleagues who were still weighing their options vis-a-vis the bill and win them over with the illusion that the bill has shed off the "objectionable" provisions.
According to the ALERT:
Lagman pulled out the RH bill and
requested for a discussion. This approval did
not require a vote.
they had asked our allies to be allowed two speakers, in fact. Our allies let them have only one, and so Tinio took the floor. As to why this was allowed, in light of the "gentleman's agreement" not to take up the bill until May--I leave that to our allies who know what they are doing--at that moment-- and have been in huddles all along in the floor.
Our allies had also prepared for every possible (even grim) scenarios for last night's session, having met in two caucuses within the day--one after the Cathedral mass, and another, I was informed, in Congress prior to the afternoon session.
There was no approval of amendments on floor, as there cannot be approvals. There were no votes called on the floor on those "AMENDMENTS."
In fact, after the Tinio-Lagman exchange, Lagman's closing statement was roughly, wala nag dapat ikabahala and mga tumututol sa panukalang batas na ito.
A motion followed by the Majority Leader, Garin, not to approve the "amendments" but a motion to suspend deliberations on 4244. There were no objections to that motion.
And so what followed was that deliberations on third reading started on several local bills and some other in the business of the day for second reading.
The session ended with a Statement from Speaker Belmonte reciting the sessions' overall accomplishments in the last 8 months.
WHAT SHOULD BE OUR NEXT STEP DURING THE RECESS?
You will have to inform the public that the bill has remained malevolent, in fact, MORE malevolent in its present modified form, shorn of those contentious provisions.
For a start, look at how the Conditional Cash Transfer is now connected to family planning.
This is a departure from what Sec. Soliman said in the "Dialogue" that ther is no effort to suggest a smaller family size in the CCT's reference to beneficiary families up to the third child.
Then look at the inclusion of the MISP in the bill. MISP is a lethal package of many kits used in disaster areas like they did in my city of Marikina after Ondoy. It is supposed to contain emergency contraception and condoms--in disaster areas! Not water, nourishment, medicines--but condoms among others-- and considering the mention in the bill of "the whole range of services and devices", it will also contain the dreaded Manual Vacuum Aspirator - MVA- as the foreign aid agencies brought in Bosnia. (Ask Joseph Meaney who monitored this, or Dra. Acosta who will tell you the different kinds of MISP kits. You can also google this.)
Then you may want to look closer at the poverty household "surveys" to be conducted as added in the bill. Poverty surveys? This is reminiscent of the door-to-door surveys of Ligtas Buntis.
You also have the centralized procurement of "essential medicines".
AND MANY MORE.
AND OF COURSE, "universal access" is still there; "the full range of devices . . " is still there. Even if parents can opt out their children, the schools will still be teaching what is mandatory to be taught.
This continuing and worsening malevolence is what we should be ALERTING our allies in Congress about.
LET US TURN ON THE LIGHT.
- Atty Jo
Latest from the Congress on RH Bill
RED ALERT
Congress just put one over us!
The Lagman amendments have been approved
after an orchestrated interpellation from Cong.
Tinio. Though the RH bill was not scheduled
Congress had finished the order of business for
the day and Lagman pulled out the RH bill and
requested for a discussion. This approval did
not require a vote.
Interpellation is suspended.
Here is my analysis:
1. Congress has just suceeded in removing the fangs off most our major objections to the bill.
This means that our pro-life congressmen have to shift gears and focus their interpellation on some
over issues.
2. Our pro-life friends have to review their issues and make sure that they focus on the other things.
3. We all have to go back to the congressmen we were talking to and make sure that they vote NO in spite of the amendments.
4. We have to rise up to this very important moment in our country.!
Linda Valenzona
Congress just put one over us!
The Lagman amendments have been approved
after an orchestrated interpellation from Cong.
Tinio. Though the RH bill was not scheduled
Congress had finished the order of business for
the day and Lagman pulled out the RH bill and
requested for a discussion. This approval did
not require a vote.
Interpellation is suspended.
Here is my analysis:
1. Congress has just suceeded in removing the fangs off most our major objections to the bill.
This means that our pro-life congressmen have to shift gears and focus their interpellation on some
over issues.
2. Our pro-life friends have to review their issues and make sure that they focus on the other things.
3. We all have to go back to the congressmen we were talking to and make sure that they vote NO in spite of the amendments.
4. We have to rise up to this very important moment in our country.!
Linda Valenzona
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
NEWS ALERT!
MIDDAY NEWS ALERT
During the plenary session at the Batasan yesterday, Tuesday 22-Mar-2011, Cong. Janette Garin approached members of the Pro-Life Coalition and requested that a period of amendments on HB 4244 be allowed today, Wednesday 23 March 2011 at 4:00 pm.
The amendments are probably those cited in the article in the Philippine Star yesterday.
Read Philstar article ...
Late last night, Majority Floor Leader Cong. Neptali Gonzales II
text blasted all congressmen to be present in today's session.
FYI and mobilization. Let us support our pro-life Congressmen.
Z
PS: Please validate this from your sources at the Batasan.
During the plenary session at the Batasan yesterday, Tuesday 22-Mar-2011, Cong. Janette Garin approached members of the Pro-Life Coalition and requested that a period of amendments on HB 4244 be allowed today, Wednesday 23 March 2011 at 4:00 pm.
The amendments are probably those cited in the article in the Philippine Star yesterday.
Read Philstar article ...
Late last night, Majority Floor Leader Cong. Neptali Gonzales II
text blasted all congressmen to be present in today's session.
FYI and mobilization. Let us support our pro-life Congressmen.
Z
PS: Please validate this from your sources at the Batasan.
Monday, March 21, 2011
Watering down of RH Bill
Lagman and company have been watering down the language and removing some objectionable provisions of the RH Bill, hoping to gain the favor of more undecided Congressmen. Below are the intended amendments. My comments embedded in red.
Sec. 13, lines 9-14, p. 12 : the final line to read "help implement the Act" rather than "give priority to family planning work".
This watered down language does not remove the obligation to implement the Act. The Bill still obliges implementation.
NO DEAL!
NO DEAL!
Sec. 15 on Mobile Health Care Service, p. 12, lines 20-25 and page 13, lines 1-6 should be amended to read:
"Each Congressional District may be provided... appropriate to coastal or mountainous areas, THE PROCUREMENT AND OPERATION OF WHICH SHALL BE FUNDED BY THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT" rather than original "may be funded from the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) of each congressional district".
This watered down language does not remove the obligation to fund the Mobile Health Care Service. "Mobile Health Care" really means the mobile FPA clinics first popularized in the UK by the Marie Stopes Society. The revision aims to assure the Congressmen that the RH Law will not diminish their respective pork barrels.
NO DEAL!
NO DEAL!
Section 16. Mandatory Age-Appropriate Reproductive Health and Sexuality Education.
p. 13, lines 7-25 and p. 14, lines 1-13.
Amended to end with final paragraph to read: "PARENTS SHALL EXERCISE THE OPTION OF NOT ALLOWING THEIR MINOR CHILDREN TO ATTEND CLASSES PERTAINING TO REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH AND SEXUALITY EDUCATION".
This watered down language does not prohibit, but rather still mandates the DepEd to conduct immoral and deformative UNFPA-UNESCO sex education programs. Such programs are still unconstitutional. The program is optional only to "minor" children, when the children reach high school, the infernal program will still be mandatory. In any case, the DepEd/UNFPA sex education program is still ongoing nationwide.
NO DEAL!
NO DEAL!
Section 20. Ideal Family Size. Amended ... deleted in its entirety.
This watered down language does not mean that the government cannot set population targets or engage in cultural re-engineering activities to reduce family size. Such programs are in fact already being implemented by the DOH and other departments of Government.
NO DEAL!
NO DEAL!
Section 21. Employers' Responsibility. p. 15, lines 10-15 and p. 16, lines 1-4. Amended by completed being deleted as it is just a restatement and amplification of the existing Article 134 of the Labor Code.
The deletion of this provision means nothing in actuality and adds nothing to the acceptability of the RH Bill. If anything, it merely confirms how laws can coerce employers to apply inhumane and anti-life policies on their employees.
NO DEAL!
NO DEAL!
Section 28 (e) on Prohibited Acts , p. 21, lines 24-25 which reads "Any person who maliciously engages in disinformation about the intent and provisions of this Act" SHOULD BE DELETED IN ITS ENTIRETY "in order to afford widest latitude to freedom of expression within the limits of existing penal statutes."
The deletion of this provision does not diminish the imposition on moral consciences of the Filipino people. The very existence of an RH Law is an oppressive imposition on freedom of conscience. The activities the RH Bill contemplates will jeopardize the practice of civic and personal virtues among citizens. The RH Bill itself should be DELETED IN ITS ENTIRETY. The masterminds of the RH Bill have already found other ways to penalize objectors.
NO DEAL!
NO DEAL!
Lagman and the Philippine Left are mourning the diminishing size of their Reproductive Health paycheck, which they mean, no doubt, to spend on obtaining political supremacy.
STOP THE RH BILL!
Please take note that as of the moment these changes have not yet been introduced. They will be introduced at the appropriate moment according to Lagman's letter. Hence there is no amended version of the bill. Usually this is will be done after the interpellation and period of amendments is over.
Small talk, big issue
+ Astend that’s the truth
By Teresa R. Tunay, OCDS
By Teresa R. Tunay, OCDS
Small talk, big issue
A smiley sticker the size of a saucer in the back of my car proclaims: I AM PRO-LIFE. I AM ANTI-RH BILL.
I don’t allow unnecessary stickers on my car—not even religious ones—but this one is an exception. I even applied it myself and only much later did I realize I had broken my own no-sticker rule. It was an act-now-think-later thing but the reason that surfaced later was as clear as a newborn baby’s eyes.
I wanted it to be a voice for the voiceless—the voiceless unborn that the clanging of the RH bill supporters’ cymbals is programmed to annihilate. A colleague gave me that sticker at the Filipinos United for Life Interfaith Rally held at the PICC grounds in Manila last February 13—the only rally I have ever attended in my whole life. Since I can’t attend pro-life rallies as much as I’d want to, I take to the streets everyday with this sticker as my megaphone. Instead of marching in the streets for life with a placard, I drive around fighting death with a smile(y).
I was happy when one morning, at a filling station along E. Rodriguez Ave. in Quezon City, , a gasoline boy asked me, “Ma’am, ano ba yang RH bill?” He was appreciating the sticker, preparing to inflate my tires. I replied, “Ay naku, mapang-api sa mahihirap yan,” and then proceeded to tell him why I think it should not become a law. I said the bill sees a human being as just another mouth to feed, which is contrary to the Filipinos’ belief that children are the wealth of the family.
It usurps parents’ right to educate and look after their own children when it comes to sex, I explained in Tagalog. If that bill is passed, I told him, parents can be jailed for trying to stop their daughter from having an abortion. They can’t even object when their grade-school kids are taught how to use a condom! “Biruin mo, magulang ka, hindi ka na puwedeng magturo ng tama at mali sa anak mo, dahil pakikialam daw yon?!” (It’s no joke that you’re a parent but you’re not allowed to tell your child what’s right or wrong, because that would be taken as meddling!)
Anyone speaking against it will also automatically be judged as malicious and can be thrown into jail, I continued. “Imadyin mo, pag nagsalita ka ng nasasa loob mo, ikukulong ka, tama ba yon?” (Imagine you could be imprisoned for speaking your mind out—is that right?) The gasoline boy quipped, “Patay! Sino na mag-aalalay sa mga anak natin, gobyerno?” (Shucks! Who will guide our kids then, the government?)
That’s what’s so sad about it, I told him, the institution that’s supposed to protect our life seems hell-bent on endangering it. “Mukhang desidido gobyerno eh. Hindi pa nga batas yan ipinatutupad na nila nang patago eh” (The government seems determined; even now they’re clandestinely implementing parts of the bill), I said and recalled for him a story told by a friend whose labandera gave birth at a government facility. Because she’s enlisted as an indigent patient, she was apparently entitled to a maternity benefit of some 3,000 pesos, but she was told she could avail of it only if she would agree to undergo tubal ligation. “Kung hindi siya magpapatali, hindi niya makukuha ang pera. O, ganon ba ang paggalang sa karapatan ng tao? Hindi ba pangbabastos yung iniipit nila yung mahirap?”
We ended at that. How much could one say, after all, in the time it takes to inflate four little car tires? But the incident made me grateful because one gasoline boy noticed my message, and asked about it. I hope I satisfied his curiosity; I pray he heard more than what I said. Small talk on a big issue, totally unplanned, absolutely unexpected. Truly, God never sleeps. And that’s the truth.
END
TRT/March 15, 2011
Fighting 'Contraceptive Mentality' is essential for the Culture of Life - Card. Burke
FIGHTING 'CONTRACEPTIVE MENTALITY' IS ESSENTIAL FOR THE CULTURE OF LIFE - CARDINAL BURKE:
Lifesitenews, March 18, 2011
Read article ...
Lifesitenews, March 18, 2011
Read article ...
Friday, March 18, 2011
Website Document on Abortion by Pro-RH group, Likhaan
Subject: likhaan.org's website document on "mga ligtas na paraan ng pagpapalaglag"
Dear Ms. Risa Hontiveros-Baraquel,
Kindly view this link (if you have not seen it yet). We are concerned that this pro RH group, Likhaan, is promoting abortion contrary to what you have been saying that the pro RH groups are not for it. Kindly let us know what you think of this in relation to your position on the RH Bill or Population Control measure. I look forward to your response soon. I have no doubt that, as a Filipino, you too are after what will raise the quality of life of our countrymen. Maraming salamat po.
God bless you,
Bro. Ed J. T.Tirona / Laiko
http://www.likhaan.org/fil/content/ligtas-na-paraan-pagpapalaglag
Dear Ms. Risa Hontiveros-Baraquel,
Kindly view this link (if you have not seen it yet). We are concerned that this pro RH group, Likhaan, is promoting abortion contrary to what you have been saying that the pro RH groups are not for it. Kindly let us know what you think of this in relation to your position on the RH Bill or Population Control measure. I look forward to your response soon. I have no doubt that, as a Filipino, you too are after what will raise the quality of life of our countrymen. Maraming salamat po.
God bless you,
Bro. Ed J. T.Tirona / Laiko
http://www.likhaan.org/fil/content/ligtas-na-paraan-pagpapalaglag
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)