Aquino’s Binuclear Presidency
PerryScope / By Perry Diaz
President Benigno “P-Noy” Aquino III seems to believe in the adage, “Two heads are better than one,” when he fills up positions in his administration. He divided the former Office of the Press Secretary into two groups: the Presidential Communications Operations Office and the Presidential Communications Development and Strategic Planning Office (PCDSPO). Then he filled up his cabinet with people from the warring “Balay” and “Samar” factions.
Rico E. Puno
The provenance of the “Balay” and “Samar” factions was the presidential campaign of P-Noy. The “Balay” faction (Visayan word for “house”) consisted mainly of Liberal Party stalwarts and former appointees – the “Hyatt 10” — of ex-president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo who supported the “Noy-Mar” tandem of P-Noy and his running mate Sen. Mar Roxas. The “Samar” faction (named after Samar Avenue where P-Noy’s campaign headquarters was located) consisted of P-Noy’s relatives, friends, and some media personalities who supported the “Noy-Bi” tandem of P-Noy and vice presidential candidate Jejomar “Jojo” Binay. Another faction that is very influential but staying below the media radar consists of a few classmates of P-Noy who are often referred to as “Kabarkada.”
“Divided house”
The infighting started right after P-Noy’s landslide victory. Members from the different factions started jockeying for positions. P-Noy tried to please all and ended up with a binuclear presidency with the two dominant factions — Samar and Balay – splitting the cabinet posts and other important positions among their members.
P-Noy dissolved the Office of the Press Secretary and put in place two communications offices, one in charge of developing the “message” and the other in charge of “selling” the message. The problem is that PCVDSPO Secretary Ricky Carandang, the “message” maker, belongs to the “Balay” faction while Communications Operations Secretary Herminio “Sonny” Coloma, the “message” seller, belongs to the “Samar” faction.
P-Noy’s inner sanctum is also divided. Executive Secretary Paquito “Jojo” Ochoa Jr. was the dominant figure in the “Samar” faction during the campaign. So it did not come as a surprise that P-Noy appointed him as the “Little President,” arguably the most powerful alter ego of P-Noy.
Occupying another powerful position within P-Noy’s inner sanctum is Presidential Chief of Staff Julia Abad-Parker, daughter of Budget Secretary Florencio “Butch” Abad. Father and daughter belong to the “Balay” faction.
One of the most controversial appointments of P-Noy was his designation of two “heads” to run the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG). First, he appointed his longtime friend and “shooting buddy” Rico E. Puno, upon his request, to the post of Undersecretary of DILG with sole authority and responsibility over security matters and as “presidential liaison” for the Philippine National Police (PNP). In that capacity, Puno reported directly to P-Noy. It’s interesting to note that Puno was at one time a supplier of guns and ammunition to security forces including the PNP.
A few days after Puno’s appointment, P-Noy appointed Jesse Robredo as Secretary of DILG but limiting his authority over “Local Government” only. Nobody screamed about it until all hell broke loose!
Luneta bloodbath
On August 23, 2010, an 11-hour hostage-taking incident ended in the death of eight Chinese tourists from Hong Kong in a tourist bus in front of the Quirino Grandstand in Luneta. The hostage-taker, dismissed Manila Police senior inspector Rolando Mendoza, was subsequently killed by police sniper fire.
Nowhere during the incident were Puno and his subordinate, PNP Chief Jesus Verzosa. Puno simply vanished and didn’t reappear until the crisis was over. And Verzosa — in the midst of the crisis — flew to Cagayan de Oro to attend a “function.” P-Noy was also “missing in action.” When P-Noy finally appeared in public, the crisis was over. So, for the 11 hours that the hostage-taking crisis was in progress, the “line of authority” from P-Noy all the way down to Puno and Verzosa was totally detached from the ground operations.
In the aftermath of the bloodbath, P-Noy ordered Justice Secretary Leila de Lima to conduct an investigation. He vowed that “heads will roll”! De Lima empanelled the Incident Investigation and Review Committee (IIRC) and after two weeks of marathon hearings, the IIRC submitted its report to P-Noy recommending that 13 persons be charged administratively, criminally or both. Amongst those recommended for disciplinary actions were Puno, Verzosa, and Manila Mayor Alfredo Lim.
According to an article written by Malou Mangahas of the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism, upon reading part of the 82-page report, P-Noy blurted out: “Napatapang ‘ata masyado ah. Bakit kasama pa sila Puno, Lim, at Verzosa?” (It’s too strongly worded. Why are we implicating Puno, Lim and Verzosa?). Evidently, P-Noy didn’t expect – or want — the IIRC to implicate his three political allies. It became apparent that P-Noy wanted to save Puno, Verzosa, and Lim. He then decided to refer the IIRC report to Ochoa and Presidential Legal Counsel Eduardo de Mesa for review and revision.
Indispensible and untouchable
What is disturbing is Puno’s comment during an interview with the media the day before the IIRC report was released to the public. The news report says, “It will take more than a ‘jueteng’ scandal or a hostage fiasco to sink Rico E. Puno. The ties that bind the controversial interior undersecretary with President Benigno Aquino III apparently run deep and go way back that, by his own account, would make any boss think twice before letting him go.” Puno bragged about his indispensability and closeness to P-Noy, saying that he doesn’t belong to either the “Balay” or “Samar” faction. He boasted that he belongs to the “Times” group, in reference to P-Noy’s house on Times Street in Quezon City.
Last October 11, P-Noy released the modified IIRC report, which cleared Puno and Verzosa of complicity in the botched rescue operation. Instantly, P-Noy’s decision to clear Puno and Verzosa ignited a firestorm of criticism.
“Raspunotin”
Many people ask what’s Puno’s hold on P-Noy that makes him untouchable. Their mentor-mentee relationship is sometimes juxtaposed with the strong influence that Rasputin had over Czar Nicolas II in the years prior to the Russian revolution.
The recent downslide in P-Noy’s popularity – his trust rating dropped from 88% to 71% and his net rating plummeted from 84% to 60% – could be a harbinger of things to come if he doesn’t change his leadership style now.
In trying to please everyone, P-Noy could end up displeasing everybody. His uncle-in-law Len Oreta once told him: “You don’t owe your presidency to anyone but your own parents, Ninoy and Cory.” Yes, indeed.
It’s time for P-Noy to assert his leadership and demonstrate that he has the political will to make the changes he promised.
Nobody is indispensible. A good manager follows the dictum: “Get rid of the indispensible.” If Puno thinks that he is indispensible, then P-Noy ought to prove him wrong.
(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
News from ABS-CBN - Oct. 19
Groups face-off on RH bill
By Caroline J. Howard, ABS-CBN News Channel
Posted at 10/19/2010 3:11 AM | Updated as of 10/19/2010 3:11 AM
MANILA, Philippines - Pro-life and pro-choice advocates faced-off on the Reproductive Health (RH) Bill as the Senate Committee on Health and Demography held discussions on the controversial issue on Monday.
Health Undersecretary Alex Padilla says the purpose of the bill is to raise the quality of family life by encouraging proper birth spacing and providing relevant information to couples.
"The central issue is not on the number of children a family can have but the quality of life given to children, and this is a decision of the couple, not one of the spouses unilaterally. Couples must be equipped with information on available options for family planning and responsible parenthood, the informed and responsible choice of the couples with respect to their religious and social norms and human rights," he says.
"We are dedicated to pursue our international commitment to achieve MDGs [Millennium Development Goals] 4 and 5 by 2015, which aim to significantly cut maternal and child deaths and make universal health services accessible to our people. To ensure these are achieved, the DOH [Department of Health] must make sure information and services targeted towards men woman and children are integrated into the mainstream of public health services," Padilla says.
In attempts to contain and put order to the discussions and tame potentially contentious debates, Senate committee chair Senator Pia Cayetano wanted to focus on how the measure could be taken in connection with meeting Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).
Still, Senate discussions took a life of their own as contentious debates turned to determining when conception actually begins.
Contentions on conception
Former Senator Joey Lina, who admits to studying literature on contraceptives, says it was clear that one mechanism of such tools was to prevent the implantation of a fertilized ovum on the uterine wall.
"Our position is human life begins at conception. The DOH position is against the very concept abhorred by the Constitution, but in fact, the bill allows it and in fact promotes the dispensing of intra-uterine devices and contraceptive pills. Studies show all these have a mechanism, including preventing implantation of fertilized ovum to the uterine wall," Lina says.
"Senator Lina speaks of contraceptives as if they were abortifacients, but as I explained in the House of Representatives, pills are given to prevent ovulation, so there's nothing for sperms to fertilize," clarifies Dr. Santiago Del Rosario, Chairman of the Committee on Ethics and Medical Practice.
Inherently abortifacient?
Citing sections 7, 9 and 10 of the bill, which promote what he calls the use of "inherently abortifacient" pills and devices, Lina says, the measures runs in conflict with the Constitution.
"Even as the State takes care of the health of the people and defends the right of the couple to raise a family, the State cannot but comply with the constitutional requirement to protect the life of both the mother and the unborn. Unfortunately Sections 7, 10 and 9 of this bill, which promote use of pills and devices which are inherently abortifacient, run in conflict with this constitutional provision," Lina says. "Drafters of 1987 Constitution were clear on it and banned any substance what could impede the natural flow of the fertilized ovum."
Unconstitutional provisions
Former Senator Francisco Tatad, a pro-life advocate, agrees.
"There are many provisions of the bill that are very good, that can be implemented even without legislation, but the kernel of the bill is unconstitutional. The real issue here is not the freedom of the woman to use contraceptives but to expand the power of the State into areas of human life where it has no business at all whatsoever," Tatad says.
Tatad notes how international treaties, including those of the World Health Organization, identified access to abortion among the components of reproductive health, adding America appeared determined to remove all barriers to that access.
He also lamented how President Aquino had supposedly articulated his personal position on family planning, even before the matter could be taken up by legislators.
"In spite of our agreement that the bill does not include abortion, how do we ward off the international lobby which is spending oodles of dollars to push abortion acts in developing countries," Tatad says. "Not the least of my concerns is, before we could start hearing this bill, the president said he was ready to start distributing condoms."
Getting to the bottom of the issue
But after emotions were set aside, both sides got down to the real issues, like maternal mortality and the country's poverty situation.
"Maternal mortality should be broken down into regions to see where the problem lies. And in attaining Millennium Development Goals and promoting health among people in relation to pregnancy, the State cannot but follow Constitution," Lina says.
Former Health Secretary Alberto Romualdez says the current government may very well learn from the lessons of the past.
"Nine years ago, a government that favored reproductive health services was replaced by a government that did not support such provisions, and the figures with respect to population growth rate and mortality and morbidity rates showed reproductive health deteriorated than when the national government did not support reproductive health," he says.
Today, Romualdez says, a reproductive health bill may yet allow the country to attain some of the goals it is currently hard-pressed to meet, given current policies on reproductive health and population.
By Caroline J. Howard, ABS-CBN News Channel
Posted at 10/19/2010 3:11 AM | Updated as of 10/19/2010 3:11 AM
MANILA, Philippines - Pro-life and pro-choice advocates faced-off on the Reproductive Health (RH) Bill as the Senate Committee on Health and Demography held discussions on the controversial issue on Monday.
Health Undersecretary Alex Padilla says the purpose of the bill is to raise the quality of family life by encouraging proper birth spacing and providing relevant information to couples.
"The central issue is not on the number of children a family can have but the quality of life given to children, and this is a decision of the couple, not one of the spouses unilaterally. Couples must be equipped with information on available options for family planning and responsible parenthood, the informed and responsible choice of the couples with respect to their religious and social norms and human rights," he says.
"We are dedicated to pursue our international commitment to achieve MDGs [Millennium Development Goals] 4 and 5 by 2015, which aim to significantly cut maternal and child deaths and make universal health services accessible to our people. To ensure these are achieved, the DOH [Department of Health] must make sure information and services targeted towards men woman and children are integrated into the mainstream of public health services," Padilla says.
In attempts to contain and put order to the discussions and tame potentially contentious debates, Senate committee chair Senator Pia Cayetano wanted to focus on how the measure could be taken in connection with meeting Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).
Still, Senate discussions took a life of their own as contentious debates turned to determining when conception actually begins.
Contentions on conception
Former Senator Joey Lina, who admits to studying literature on contraceptives, says it was clear that one mechanism of such tools was to prevent the implantation of a fertilized ovum on the uterine wall.
"Our position is human life begins at conception. The DOH position is against the very concept abhorred by the Constitution, but in fact, the bill allows it and in fact promotes the dispensing of intra-uterine devices and contraceptive pills. Studies show all these have a mechanism, including preventing implantation of fertilized ovum to the uterine wall," Lina says.
"Senator Lina speaks of contraceptives as if they were abortifacients, but as I explained in the House of Representatives, pills are given to prevent ovulation, so there's nothing for sperms to fertilize," clarifies Dr. Santiago Del Rosario, Chairman of the Committee on Ethics and Medical Practice.
Inherently abortifacient?
Citing sections 7, 9 and 10 of the bill, which promote what he calls the use of "inherently abortifacient" pills and devices, Lina says, the measures runs in conflict with the Constitution.
"Even as the State takes care of the health of the people and defends the right of the couple to raise a family, the State cannot but comply with the constitutional requirement to protect the life of both the mother and the unborn. Unfortunately Sections 7, 10 and 9 of this bill, which promote use of pills and devices which are inherently abortifacient, run in conflict with this constitutional provision," Lina says. "Drafters of 1987 Constitution were clear on it and banned any substance what could impede the natural flow of the fertilized ovum."
Unconstitutional provisions
Former Senator Francisco Tatad, a pro-life advocate, agrees.
"There are many provisions of the bill that are very good, that can be implemented even without legislation, but the kernel of the bill is unconstitutional. The real issue here is not the freedom of the woman to use contraceptives but to expand the power of the State into areas of human life where it has no business at all whatsoever," Tatad says.
Tatad notes how international treaties, including those of the World Health Organization, identified access to abortion among the components of reproductive health, adding America appeared determined to remove all barriers to that access.
He also lamented how President Aquino had supposedly articulated his personal position on family planning, even before the matter could be taken up by legislators.
"In spite of our agreement that the bill does not include abortion, how do we ward off the international lobby which is spending oodles of dollars to push abortion acts in developing countries," Tatad says. "Not the least of my concerns is, before we could start hearing this bill, the president said he was ready to start distributing condoms."
Getting to the bottom of the issue
But after emotions were set aside, both sides got down to the real issues, like maternal mortality and the country's poverty situation.
"Maternal mortality should be broken down into regions to see where the problem lies. And in attaining Millennium Development Goals and promoting health among people in relation to pregnancy, the State cannot but follow Constitution," Lina says.
Former Health Secretary Alberto Romualdez says the current government may very well learn from the lessons of the past.
"Nine years ago, a government that favored reproductive health services was replaced by a government that did not support such provisions, and the figures with respect to population growth rate and mortality and morbidity rates showed reproductive health deteriorated than when the national government did not support reproductive health," he says.
Today, Romualdez says, a reproductive health bill may yet allow the country to attain some of the goals it is currently hard-pressed to meet, given current policies on reproductive health and population.
News from ABS-CBN - Oct. 18
RH bill being rushed just to meet MDGs?'
by Ryan Chua, ABS-CBN News
Posted at 10/18/2010 5:47 PM | Updated as of 10/19/2010 1:55 AM
MANILA, Philippines - Is the Philippines rushing to pass the controversial Reproductive Health (RH) bill just to meet the UN Millennium Development Goals (MDG)?
Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile posed this question during Monday's health and demography committee hearing on Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago's bill, SB 2378, which provides for a national policy on reproductive health and population development.
Held together with the Senate committee on women and family relations as well as the committee on finance, the hearing also tackled how the country has been doing in meeting the MDGs, specifically in reducing child mortality, improving maternal health and eradicating HIV/AIDS and other diseases.
The MDGs are 8 international development goals that UN member-countries and 23 international organizations have committed to achieve by 2015.
"Am I to understand that this bill is now being presented under pressure because of these MDGs?" Enrile asked.
Sylvia Claudio of the University of the Philippines Center for Women's Studies explained that even without the MDGs, the RH bill must still be enacted into law.
"For health reasons alone, we need this bill so we can reduce the unnecessary deaths of women by providing the comprehensive sets of services that are illustrated in this bill," she said.
Claudio added that the measure also has economic benefits. Poor families with few children, she said, can allocate their resources better.
Seemingly unconvinced, Enrile asked the question again: "Is there pressure on us to adopt this bill?"
Murmurs filled the conference room, with some in the audience saying, "Yes."
Enrile had earlier said he has not made his stand on the RH bill, which, among others, mandates government to make contraceptives accessible to people.
At the hearing, those against the RH bill called it unconstitutional.
Former senator and pro-life advocate Francisco Tatad said the bill is an "attempt to expand the power of the state in areas of human life where it has no business whatsoever."
Tatad lauded certain provisions of Santiago's bill, such as those providing for free healthcare services, but said those do not need new legislation in order to be implemented.
Joey Lina, also a former senator, pointed out that most contraceptives induce abortion. Thus, he said, providing contraceptives violates the Constitutional protection for the unborn child.
"Human life begins at conception," he said. "Any device introduced by the state to block the natural growth of the fertilized ovum is violating the Constitution."
Dr. Santiago del Rosario of the Philippine Obstetrics and Gynecological Society argued, however, that contraceptives pills are not meant to block the growth of the ovum.
"The contraceptive pills are given to patients to prevent ovulation," Del Rosario said. "There is nothing to fertilize. There is no abortifacient action."
Former Health Secretary Alberto Romualdez also expressed support for the bill, claiming a rise in the country's population and higher maternal mortality rates among the poor because of the previous administration's refusal to adopt a reproductive healtrh policy.
Romualdez said the bill will not only help the Philippines meet the MDGs, but also help the people, "particularly those groups in our population who are poor."
Most of the non-government organizations invited to the hearing also supported the bill.
by Ryan Chua, ABS-CBN News
Posted at 10/18/2010 5:47 PM | Updated as of 10/19/2010 1:55 AM
MANILA, Philippines - Is the Philippines rushing to pass the controversial Reproductive Health (RH) bill just to meet the UN Millennium Development Goals (MDG)?
Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile posed this question during Monday's health and demography committee hearing on Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago's bill, SB 2378, which provides for a national policy on reproductive health and population development.
Held together with the Senate committee on women and family relations as well as the committee on finance, the hearing also tackled how the country has been doing in meeting the MDGs, specifically in reducing child mortality, improving maternal health and eradicating HIV/AIDS and other diseases.
The MDGs are 8 international development goals that UN member-countries and 23 international organizations have committed to achieve by 2015.
"Am I to understand that this bill is now being presented under pressure because of these MDGs?" Enrile asked.
Sylvia Claudio of the University of the Philippines Center for Women's Studies explained that even without the MDGs, the RH bill must still be enacted into law.
"For health reasons alone, we need this bill so we can reduce the unnecessary deaths of women by providing the comprehensive sets of services that are illustrated in this bill," she said.
Claudio added that the measure also has economic benefits. Poor families with few children, she said, can allocate their resources better.
Seemingly unconvinced, Enrile asked the question again: "Is there pressure on us to adopt this bill?"
Murmurs filled the conference room, with some in the audience saying, "Yes."
Enrile had earlier said he has not made his stand on the RH bill, which, among others, mandates government to make contraceptives accessible to people.
At the hearing, those against the RH bill called it unconstitutional.
Former senator and pro-life advocate Francisco Tatad said the bill is an "attempt to expand the power of the state in areas of human life where it has no business whatsoever."
Tatad lauded certain provisions of Santiago's bill, such as those providing for free healthcare services, but said those do not need new legislation in order to be implemented.
Joey Lina, also a former senator, pointed out that most contraceptives induce abortion. Thus, he said, providing contraceptives violates the Constitutional protection for the unborn child.
"Human life begins at conception," he said. "Any device introduced by the state to block the natural growth of the fertilized ovum is violating the Constitution."
Dr. Santiago del Rosario of the Philippine Obstetrics and Gynecological Society argued, however, that contraceptives pills are not meant to block the growth of the ovum.
"The contraceptive pills are given to patients to prevent ovulation," Del Rosario said. "There is nothing to fertilize. There is no abortifacient action."
Former Health Secretary Alberto Romualdez also expressed support for the bill, claiming a rise in the country's population and higher maternal mortality rates among the poor because of the previous administration's refusal to adopt a reproductive healtrh policy.
Romualdez said the bill will not only help the Philippines meet the MDGs, but also help the people, "particularly those groups in our population who are poor."
Most of the non-government organizations invited to the hearing also supported the bill.
News from CBCP
Catholics ‘apathy’ saddens prelate
MANILA, Oct. 18, 2010— Retired Archbishop Oscar Cruz expressed sadness over the seeming apathy from Catholic believers amid direct and strong attacks against their religion.
Cruz is particularly referring to the attitude of the faithful in defending the church over calls for it to stop meddling over the birth control issue.
“Truth to say, in this particular case, the silence of these well spread Catholic organizations was deafening. They were almost all so peaceful and at ease during such a shameful episode in their church,” he said.
He said it is ironic that many believers don’t seem to mind these direct attacks against their church, considering that they have been fulfilling their Sunday obligations and in other church-related activities.
“Oh yes, churches are full on Sundays. People frequent novenas and processions in honor of their favorite Saints. But their faith appears both eclectic and superficial while their morals remain juvenile,” said Cruz.
The former president of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines said this silence is nothing compared to the force shown by those who want to silence the church on the issue.
He also noted how “well-concerted efforts” were made as follow up to the act of tourist guide and reproductive health (RH) bill advocate Carlos Celdran three weeks ago.
“It is definitely amazing how such a notably well-concerted effort could be staged – fast and effective – saying but one and only substantive and loud shout, viz: Shut up CBCP! Step aside Church! Shame on you Churchmen! Angry texts and bitter calls suddenly invaded the tri-media,” said Cruz.
“There were even lighting rallies made here and there – all denouncing the supposedly Church doctrine thus perceived, shouting the shameful sins of the clergy, and most of all, cursing the CBCP for its alleged dictatorial nature and pursuant stance.”
To recall, Celdran disrupted an ecumenical service at the Manila Cathedral last Sept. 30 when he criticized the Catholic hierarchy for “meddling” in state’s affairs.
Walking at the center aisle in front of several bishops, he hoisted a placard bearing the word “Damaso” while repeatedly shouting for the bishops to “Stop involving yourselves in politics”. (CBCPNews)
MANILA, Oct. 18, 2010— Retired Archbishop Oscar Cruz expressed sadness over the seeming apathy from Catholic believers amid direct and strong attacks against their religion.
Cruz is particularly referring to the attitude of the faithful in defending the church over calls for it to stop meddling over the birth control issue.
“Truth to say, in this particular case, the silence of these well spread Catholic organizations was deafening. They were almost all so peaceful and at ease during such a shameful episode in their church,” he said.
He said it is ironic that many believers don’t seem to mind these direct attacks against their church, considering that they have been fulfilling their Sunday obligations and in other church-related activities.
“Oh yes, churches are full on Sundays. People frequent novenas and processions in honor of their favorite Saints. But their faith appears both eclectic and superficial while their morals remain juvenile,” said Cruz.
The former president of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines said this silence is nothing compared to the force shown by those who want to silence the church on the issue.
He also noted how “well-concerted efforts” were made as follow up to the act of tourist guide and reproductive health (RH) bill advocate Carlos Celdran three weeks ago.
“It is definitely amazing how such a notably well-concerted effort could be staged – fast and effective – saying but one and only substantive and loud shout, viz: Shut up CBCP! Step aside Church! Shame on you Churchmen! Angry texts and bitter calls suddenly invaded the tri-media,” said Cruz.
“There were even lighting rallies made here and there – all denouncing the supposedly Church doctrine thus perceived, shouting the shameful sins of the clergy, and most of all, cursing the CBCP for its alleged dictatorial nature and pursuant stance.”
To recall, Celdran disrupted an ecumenical service at the Manila Cathedral last Sept. 30 when he criticized the Catholic hierarchy for “meddling” in state’s affairs.
Walking at the center aisle in front of several bishops, he hoisted a placard bearing the word “Damaso” while repeatedly shouting for the bishops to “Stop involving yourselves in politics”. (CBCPNews)
Sunday, October 17, 2010
News from C-FAM
Volume 13, Number 44
October 14, 2010
Catholics Protest Pending Population Control Legislation in Philippines
By Seana Cranston, J.D.
MANILA, October 14 (C-FAM) Protests loom in the Philippines as Catholic leaders and lay groups monitor bills that would enact national population control measures.
Two measures pending in the Philippines promote “reproductive health.” They mandate dispensing artificial birth control, including potential abortifacients. Both bills contain substantially similar language.
The bills require the state to guarantee universal access to reproductive health care services, methods, devices, and supplies -- not only for adults but also for adolescents and children. Both bills promote “modern” methods of family planning, including birth control pills, intra-uterine devices (IUDs), injectables, and condoms.
In a country where medicines and services for ministering to serious diseases prove too expensive for many, the bills categorize “family planning supplies” as “essential medicines.”
The bills subject Filipino children in all schools to mandatory “age-appropriate reproductive health and sexuality education.” This would include children in Catholic schools.
The Senate bill claims it does not dictate any form of population control, saying it instead helps parents to “exercise their right to freely and responsibly plan the number and spacing of their children.” Yet the House version has a section entitled “ideal family size,” which says that two children per family is the ideal, and that the State should encourage this concept.
The Senate version cites various international treaties and international commitments by the Philippines in its support, stating that they protect the right to health, including sexual and reproductive freedom.
In response, Catholic leaders in the Philippines say they may engage in civil disobedience. The bishops support protests by Philippine citizens against the bills, according to a public statement by the Philippine Bishops’ Conference.
During a recent visit to the United States, the President of the Philippines, Benigno Aquino III, reportedly said he personally supports the distribution of artificial contraceptives for regulating population. This led the head of the Bishops’ Commission on Family and Life to declare that the U.S. government influenced President Aquino’s decision to support population control.
Many of the reproductive health and population control measures in the bills have long been part of government policy. Government funding and grants from foreign private and institutional donors have supported them, even without “reproductive health” legislation in place, said Jo Imbong, an attorney with the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines.
The Philippines recently received a $1.2 million grant from the UN Population Fund for reproductive health projects in rural areas. In September, President Aquino and U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton signed a compact in New York during the UN summit that directs $434 million in development funds to the Philippines. A press release says the money will fund poverty reduction, including community development projects.
Previous efforts to pass population control and reproductive health bills, some of which included a proposed two-child policy, have failed in the Philippines. The country has also suffered relentless external pressure to decriminalize its laws on abortion, Ms. Imbong said. The 1987 Philippine Constitution protects the unborn from conception, and provides no exception.
October 14, 2010
Catholics Protest Pending Population Control Legislation in Philippines
By Seana Cranston, J.D.
MANILA, October 14 (C-FAM) Protests loom in the Philippines as Catholic leaders and lay groups monitor bills that would enact national population control measures.
Two measures pending in the Philippines promote “reproductive health.” They mandate dispensing artificial birth control, including potential abortifacients. Both bills contain substantially similar language.
The bills require the state to guarantee universal access to reproductive health care services, methods, devices, and supplies -- not only for adults but also for adolescents and children. Both bills promote “modern” methods of family planning, including birth control pills, intra-uterine devices (IUDs), injectables, and condoms.
In a country where medicines and services for ministering to serious diseases prove too expensive for many, the bills categorize “family planning supplies” as “essential medicines.”
The bills subject Filipino children in all schools to mandatory “age-appropriate reproductive health and sexuality education.” This would include children in Catholic schools.
The Senate bill claims it does not dictate any form of population control, saying it instead helps parents to “exercise their right to freely and responsibly plan the number and spacing of their children.” Yet the House version has a section entitled “ideal family size,” which says that two children per family is the ideal, and that the State should encourage this concept.
The Senate version cites various international treaties and international commitments by the Philippines in its support, stating that they protect the right to health, including sexual and reproductive freedom.
In response, Catholic leaders in the Philippines say they may engage in civil disobedience. The bishops support protests by Philippine citizens against the bills, according to a public statement by the Philippine Bishops’ Conference.
During a recent visit to the United States, the President of the Philippines, Benigno Aquino III, reportedly said he personally supports the distribution of artificial contraceptives for regulating population. This led the head of the Bishops’ Commission on Family and Life to declare that the U.S. government influenced President Aquino’s decision to support population control.
Many of the reproductive health and population control measures in the bills have long been part of government policy. Government funding and grants from foreign private and institutional donors have supported them, even without “reproductive health” legislation in place, said Jo Imbong, an attorney with the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines.
The Philippines recently received a $1.2 million grant from the UN Population Fund for reproductive health projects in rural areas. In September, President Aquino and U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton signed a compact in New York during the UN summit that directs $434 million in development funds to the Philippines. A press release says the money will fund poverty reduction, including community development projects.
Previous efforts to pass population control and reproductive health bills, some of which included a proposed two-child policy, have failed in the Philippines. The country has also suffered relentless external pressure to decriminalize its laws on abortion, Ms. Imbong said. The 1987 Philippine Constitution protects the unborn from conception, and provides no exception.
News from Life Site News
De-population and De-Christianization Leading to Cultural Islamic Jihad: Catholic Apologist
By Hilary White
ROME, October 12, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The de-Christianization of Europe, the “removal of Christian principles and institutions from the daily life of a country,” has created a religious and social vacuum that is being filled by Islam, a prominent U.S. Catholic speaker said on Thursday. Raymond de Souza, the Program Director for Portuguese-speaking countries for Human Life International told an audience of the world’s pro-life and pro-family leaders that “Europe … is being culturally Islamized.”
“The world in general, and the West in particular, is undergoing a tragic process of de-Christianization. Christian principles, values and institutions have been extirpated from our social, economic, political, legal, educational structures. Sometimes publicly, sometimes stealthily, the process has wrought havoc in Europe and the countries that descended from them.”
De Souza is the founder and director of Saint Gabriel Communications, an international Catholic apologetics organization and a popular program host on EWTN. He said that the failure of Christianity in Europe, has led to “the greatest Jihad ever carried out by Islam,” which takes the form not of physical battles, but as a “silent Jihad” through demographic take-over.
The cause underlying this “silent Jihad,” he said, is the “most crucial aspect” of Europe’s de-Christianization - de-population. “Europeans do not even replace their countries populations.”
“As one Moslem mullah said to an Anglican priest in London, ‘By the end of this century, all great English Cathedrals will be mosques. Why? Because we have children, and you don’t’.
“Contraception promised a freedom without responsibility, abortion promises the right to do one’s own thing with one’s own body, homosexual marriage promises respect for different orientations … result: the end of civilization as we knew it.”
De-Christianization, he said, is not a new phenomenon, but had its start “centuries ago” with the social, economic and philosophical upheavals that resulted in the Protestant Reformation.
De Souza, a professional Catholic apologist, said bluntly that the solution is the “reunification of all baptized Christians under ‘one Lord, one faith, one baptism’ in the one Church of God, the pillar and mainstay of the truth.”
“Why re-unify? Because as long as our separated brethren-in-baptism remain fragmented into thousands of denominations with a wide variety of creeds and moral codes, all claiming to derive their interpretations from the Bible, Christianity will not stand a chance against Islam. It is already sorely weakened by the influence of secularism and the Culture of Death.”
The cultural revolution, he said, is reaching a “climax, in which governments from virtually all countries in the world declare war against human nature, exemplified in the family.”
“The Culture of Death … today reigns supreme. Its weapons are Contraception, IVF, abortion, euthanasia, experimentation with human embryos, homosexual marriage.”
He called for “prayer, study and action” aimed at opposing the “dictatorship of relativism” in society as a whole and in the churches, and the promotion of “true ecumenism” to “bring all peoples together into one faith, not all faiths together into one people.”
By Hilary White
ROME, October 12, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The de-Christianization of Europe, the “removal of Christian principles and institutions from the daily life of a country,” has created a religious and social vacuum that is being filled by Islam, a prominent U.S. Catholic speaker said on Thursday. Raymond de Souza, the Program Director for Portuguese-speaking countries for Human Life International told an audience of the world’s pro-life and pro-family leaders that “Europe … is being culturally Islamized.”
“The world in general, and the West in particular, is undergoing a tragic process of de-Christianization. Christian principles, values and institutions have been extirpated from our social, economic, political, legal, educational structures. Sometimes publicly, sometimes stealthily, the process has wrought havoc in Europe and the countries that descended from them.”
De Souza is the founder and director of Saint Gabriel Communications, an international Catholic apologetics organization and a popular program host on EWTN. He said that the failure of Christianity in Europe, has led to “the greatest Jihad ever carried out by Islam,” which takes the form not of physical battles, but as a “silent Jihad” through demographic take-over.
The cause underlying this “silent Jihad,” he said, is the “most crucial aspect” of Europe’s de-Christianization - de-population. “Europeans do not even replace their countries populations.”
“As one Moslem mullah said to an Anglican priest in London, ‘By the end of this century, all great English Cathedrals will be mosques. Why? Because we have children, and you don’t’.
“Contraception promised a freedom without responsibility, abortion promises the right to do one’s own thing with one’s own body, homosexual marriage promises respect for different orientations … result: the end of civilization as we knew it.”
De-Christianization, he said, is not a new phenomenon, but had its start “centuries ago” with the social, economic and philosophical upheavals that resulted in the Protestant Reformation.
De Souza, a professional Catholic apologist, said bluntly that the solution is the “reunification of all baptized Christians under ‘one Lord, one faith, one baptism’ in the one Church of God, the pillar and mainstay of the truth.”
“Why re-unify? Because as long as our separated brethren-in-baptism remain fragmented into thousands of denominations with a wide variety of creeds and moral codes, all claiming to derive their interpretations from the Bible, Christianity will not stand a chance against Islam. It is already sorely weakened by the influence of secularism and the Culture of Death.”
The cultural revolution, he said, is reaching a “climax, in which governments from virtually all countries in the world declare war against human nature, exemplified in the family.”
“The Culture of Death … today reigns supreme. Its weapons are Contraception, IVF, abortion, euthanasia, experimentation with human embryos, homosexual marriage.”
He called for “prayer, study and action” aimed at opposing the “dictatorship of relativism” in society as a whole and in the churches, and the promotion of “true ecumenism” to “bring all peoples together into one faith, not all faiths together into one people.”
News from Business World
Palace, Church set further meetings on reproductive health
PRESIDENT BENIGNO C. Aquino III has met with leaders of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) to discuss reproductive health, with both parties looking at holding another meeting, a Palace official said Friday.
AFPReproductive Health advocates step up their campaign. -- AFP
Edwin Lacierda, presidential spokesman, yesterday said Catholic Church leaders did not assert their position on family planning during the meeting, describing the dialogue as "pleasant" and having opened the lines of communication between the two sides.
The Church has opposed the Reproductive Health Bill (RHB), a measure that has been revived from the previous Congress, and the distribution of contraceptives.
Mr. Aquino, on the other hand, has said the choice of family planning method is better left to parents, with the state ready to assist those who prefer artificial ways but has no means to avail of these.
"There was a clarification from the Church leaders that there was really no plan to excommunicate the President, [while] the President explained, at least personally, to the bishops his stand on responsible parenthood," Mr. Lacierda said in a briefing.
Present with Mr. Aquino at Monday’s meeting in Bahay Pangarap, the presidential residence, were Health Secretary Enrique T. Ona, Presidential Management Staff chief Julia R. Abad and Social Welfare Secretary Corazon J. Soliman, while Cebu Archbishop Ricardo J. Cardinal Vidal, CBCP President and Tandag Bishop Nereo P. Odchimar, Imus Bishop Luis Antonio G. Tagle and Cagayan de Oro Archbishop Antonio J. Ledesma represented the Catholic Church.
Mr. Odchimar and Ms. Abad were designated point persons for the CBCP and the government, respectively, to coordinate another dialogue which will involve additional participants, Mr. Lacierda said.
"Both sides realized that it would be better for them to communicate directly with each other," Mr. Lacierda said.
While the Church has isolated discussions to the use of contraceptives, the RHB has other salient features such as strengthening the Population Commission, provision of skilled midwives in every city and municipality to achieve a minimum ratio of one midwife for every 150 deliveries per year, emergency obstetric care for each province and city, maternal death review based on guidelines to be issued by the Department of Health in consultation with the Population Commission, hospital-based family planning, mobile health care service per congressional district, and age-appropriate RH education.
Also provided for are certificate of compliance from the family planning office that couple has received adequate instruction and information on family planning, responsible parenthood, breast-feeding and infant nutrition before the local civil registrar issues a marriage license; capability building of community-based volunteer workers on delivery of RH services; attaining a non-mandatory, non-compulsory ideal family size; nondiscrimination on hiring, regularization and employment of women or selection for retrenchment; support of private and nongovernmental health care service provider; and sustained public awareness campaign on RH. -- Ana Mae G. Roa
Letter to the Editor
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
and those who are for RH Bill are saying.
As far as I know, when a man and a woman truly loves each other, they
would see sexual act as sacred and therefore enters the Sacrament of
Matrimony to be blessed by God because a mature couple sees the sexual
act towards an end, that is, procreation and education of their
children.
Those who lacks maturity, who at most times, not a fault of their own
enters prematurely into an intimate relationship usually lacks a good
foundation with their own family since its from our parents that we
learn maturity in relationships especially self-control and the scopes
of its responsibilities; and from our relationship with our siblings
that we learn what we children truly needs.
Responsible parents are aware that in every sexual union has a child
as a fruit. Why engage in it if you do not want the fruit? It’s like
saying, baking a cake and you do not want the look and taste of the
cake. In RH Bill, encouraging sexual acts without thinking of its
consequences? And to think that all there is in life is sexual. It’s
the reason why, today, Freud is already considered outdated.
Maria Charina Rodriguez
mccr68@gmail.com
A Letter to the Editor
Dear Editor:
Today's editorial calling for the repeal of the law penalizing offending religious feelings ("The Philippine Star", October 2, 2010, p. 14) is highly misinformed.
First of all, it is inaccurate to portray Carlos Celdran as a martyr for his free speech rights. He is not being charged for simply expressing his views; hence your fear that "80 percent of the population who through surveys have expressed support for birth control" could be imprisoned for offending religious feelings is unfounded. He is being charged for having scoffed at church authority during the mass and inside a church. Please take the trouble of researching what Article 133 of the Revised Penal Code actually penalizes. The constitution protects Carlos Celdran's right to express his views, no matter how unconventional they may be, but the constitution likewise protects the rights of everyone to worship according to their religious beliefs in peace. While he has the right to express dissenting opinions, he has no right to infringe on other people's right to worship in peace.
Second, the provision penalizing offending religious feelings applies to all religions alike. To repeal the law against offending religious feelings would be to expose all religions -- and not just the Catholic religion -- to contempt. The repeal would mean anyone can burn the Koran inside a mosque during an Islamic service, or make a heated attack on Manalo inside an Iglesia ni Cristo building during their Thursday pagsamba. These scenarios hardly promote mutual understanding among religions. The above mentioned examples are offensive to modern sensibilities; a similar affront on the Catholic religion is no less offensive.
For quite some time, I have been disappointed with your newspaper which, while printing inspirational quotes about God on its footer and daily biblical commentaries, prints a lot of articles and editorials supporting the RH bill. I have tolerated your publication of these articles even if I don't agree with them. But your approval of Carlos Celdran's offensive behavior is no longer a healthy exercise of free speech; it is an affront to what the majority of the population holds sacred. Please consider my subscription to your newspaper cancelled.
Sincerely,
Atty. Cristina A. Montes
Today's editorial calling for the repeal of the law penalizing offending religious feelings ("The Philippine Star", October 2, 2010, p. 14) is highly misinformed.
First of all, it is inaccurate to portray Carlos Celdran as a martyr for his free speech rights. He is not being charged for simply expressing his views; hence your fear that "80 percent of the population who through surveys have expressed support for birth control" could be imprisoned for offending religious feelings is unfounded. He is being charged for having scoffed at church authority during the mass and inside a church. Please take the trouble of researching what Article 133 of the Revised Penal Code actually penalizes. The constitution protects Carlos Celdran's right to express his views, no matter how unconventional they may be, but the constitution likewise protects the rights of everyone to worship according to their religious beliefs in peace. While he has the right to express dissenting opinions, he has no right to infringe on other people's right to worship in peace.
Second, the provision penalizing offending religious feelings applies to all religions alike. To repeal the law against offending religious feelings would be to expose all religions -- and not just the Catholic religion -- to contempt. The repeal would mean anyone can burn the Koran inside a mosque during an Islamic service, or make a heated attack on Manalo inside an Iglesia ni Cristo building during their Thursday pagsamba. These scenarios hardly promote mutual understanding among religions. The above mentioned examples are offensive to modern sensibilities; a similar affront on the Catholic religion is no less offensive.
For quite some time, I have been disappointed with your newspaper which, while printing inspirational quotes about God on its footer and daily biblical commentaries, prints a lot of articles and editorials supporting the RH bill. I have tolerated your publication of these articles even if I don't agree with them. But your approval of Carlos Celdran's offensive behavior is no longer a healthy exercise of free speech; it is an affront to what the majority of the population holds sacred. Please consider my subscription to your newspaper cancelled.
Sincerely,
Atty. Cristina A. Montes
News from CBCP News
Church slams US ‘meddling’ in Aquino birth control stance
MANILA, Sept. 28, 2010—The Catholic Church has accused the United States of meddling in the Philippines after President Benigno Aquino III revealed his plan to promote contraception.
An official of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) branded the US government as a “dictator” for their own political gains and interests.
“I’m certain that the US government had a hand over Aquino’s abrupt decision to support population control,” said Fr. Melvin Castro, executive secretary of the bishops’ Commission on Family and Life.
The church official said it’s no secret that the US and other foreign nations have tried to pressure the Philippine government for a more aggressive birth control program.
One example, he said, is the granting of huge foreign funding for the government’s development projects, but it all comes with a price.
On Monday, Aquino, in town-hall-style meeting in the US, said his government would provide contraceptives such condoms and pills to poor couples, to curb the Philippines’ high birth rate.
“This is clearly a form of colonization of morality. They are imposing their morals on us, disrespecting our own principles and morality,” Castro said.
He said if the Obama administration is sincere in helping the Filipinos, it should give aid with “no strings attached” and pre-conditions.
“The assistance should be selfless and have no strings attached,” the CBCP official said.
President Aquino arrived in Manila early Tuesday after his week-long working visit to the US where he met with President Barack Obama and attended the UN General Assembly.
The bishops have previously condemned the US-AID, the United Nations Population Fund and other international aid agencies for allegedly meddling in Philippine government’s affairs.
The funding, Castro said, goes to the maternal health and population management program, a multi-lateral program in several decades after the government suspended it due to strong Church’s pressure.
Foreign funding institutions claimed they are concerned with the fast growth rate of the Philippine population.
With this scenario, they believe that it will be difficult for the government to address poverty and achieve sustainable economic growth unless an effective population management measure is implemented.
Castro said these agencies are also key players in pressuring the lawmakers to pass the controversial reproductive health (RH) bill while linking increased aid to its passage.
With Aquino’s support for artificial contraception, the CBCP official admitted being “afraid” over possible passage of RH bill.
“On our side, that’s how we look at the situation now,” he said.
Castro noted that Aquino was a strong advocate of the measure but kept relatively quiet on the matter during the campaign period.
RH bill, which has long been pending in Congress, proposes, among others, mandatory sex education in primary and secondary public schools and the purchase of contraceptives by state hospitals as part of its essential medicines and supplies. (Roy Lagarde/CBCPNews)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)