The Reproductive Health Bill seeks to institutionalize slavery in the Philippines…
- NOTE: This article was first posted on my old site on Oct. 17, 2009.
THE Philippine Congress has been pushing for the enactment of a very controversial bill that would turn successful employers
into slaves. This evil bill is none other than the Reproductive Health Bill, which seeks to make it mandatory for employers to provide reproductive health services for their employees. The most proper question is not whether this proposition is legal or injurious to the interests of employers; it is whether or not a person has the right to enslave his neighbor on account of his need. Need is not a claim or a license to enslave other people.
I oppose RH Bill not on the grounds of religious argument (that it is anti-Life), but because it is not part of the function of a government to institutionalize slavery, by sacrificing one group to another group. I do not share the sentiments of the religionists and the Catholics that this bill is pro-abortion or against the sanctity of life. I believe this proposition is anti-Life, but I do not agree with the religious position and definition of the term. To me it is anti-Life in the sense that it kills man’s motivation to achieve and the value of man’s achievement. The government seeks to penalize the employers because they are economically stable and successful. It means that anyone who would achieve something in the future would be regarded as fodder for other people’s need. It means that those who love life and achievement would have to fall in line before a sacrificial altar simply on account of their achievement, while those who have not achieved would simply have to collect sacrificial offerings.
Now that Sen. Noynoy Aquino has thrown his hat into the presidential ring, he has to disclose his political platform in order to let the voters know where he stands in various social, economic and political issues that have been plaguing this economically weak country. Just recently Noynoy declared his position in regard to the controversial RH Bill. To the dismay and disappointment of most religionists and Catholics, Noynoy said he will support the bill. This reveals the naivete of the inexperienced Senator. He mentioned the ballooning population of this country as his primary reason to support the bill.
“Palagay ko, meron po tayong problema sa populasyon. Palagay ko meron akong responsibilidad bilang may konsensyang tao na tumulong na yung mga batang dinadala sa mundo ay may pagkakataon na gumanda ang kanilang buhay (I believe we have a population problem. I believe I have a responsibility to help so that our children have the opportunity to live better lives),” he said. This statement simply reflects the dominant mindset of most Filipino politicians these days. They firmly believe that they have the responsibility to look after the welfare of their people. But how are they going to achieve this political yet altruistic agenda– by inflating both the power of the government and the value of our currency? By redistributing people’s wealth? By mandatory taxation? By intervention into the economy in the hope of extracting- or looting- the wealth of those who are able to produce? By bombarding the people with too may laws and edicts which ordinary people can hardly understand? With this kind of political mindset, our country is destined to damnation.
Those who believe that the state has the sanction or right to run its people’s lives and to mandate the kinds of health care services which they should take would be the ones to deliver this country to dictatorship. Universal health care demands and targets the impossible. A state cannot guarantee all the health care needs of its constituents. When a government promises to provide all the health care needs of its people, it has to look for some source of wealth. Where will the government get the money to finance its welfare state projects? Today, a government can only obtain funding from the following sources: taxpayers, foreign creditors and the central bank, which will print money out of thin air. Every time the government spends on welfare state projects, the rate of taxes or the country’s foreign debt increases. Until and unless the Filipino realize that health care is not a right, most people in this country would still support universal health care. They think that universal health care or a single-payer system is for the good of everybody, but they fail to realize the evil consequences of their collective aspiration. They never understand that their growing demands for more government grants, subsidies and interference would lead to a bigger role which the government would have to play in their lives. More public demands eventually leads to more government powers.
It is anti-Life in the sense that it kills man’s motivation to achieve and the value of man’s achievement.
This RH bill is the sum or total of the altruistic mindset of those who are pushing for and supporting its enactment. It is primarily the evil effect of the philosophy of death (of altruism), which most people embrace in this country. Once it is enacted, employers would be obliged under pain of possible imprisonment to provide reproductive services (services which are not supposed to be shouldered by employers) for their employees. This bill seeks to institutionalize slavery in this country.
I have stated the following in my previous blog: “In this predominantly Catholic country, most people regard self-interest as evil. They regard that man’s pursuit of happiness is immoral. In that essay I asked—Why is it that it is good to consider the welfare of others and not yours? The reason for this is the morality of altruism that is heavily entrenched in our religious dogmatism, educational system and traditional values. We have been taught that it is our moral duty to serve the good and welfare of others. But this kind of morality, which is altruism, is not exclusively within the domain of religion.” The Catholics and religionists are against this bill simply because it is against their religious dogma or doctrines– that it is anti-Life or it is tantamount to killing an unborn baby. But this is not the issue here. This bill must be opposed for the reason that it is designed to turn employers into slaves– that they would be forced to serve others or to provide for the needs of their employees against their will.
The Philippine’s statist government seeks to turn employers into slaves simply because they are successful. And because they are successful they have to contribute something to the society. The only premise behind this statist regulation or interference is that evil creed, which states “man is his brother’s keeper.” It is best to state that the RH Bill is the culmination or the ultimate result of the blending or amalgamation of the philosophies and ideologies of the ruling thinkers of this country— Karl Marx, Immanuel Kant, Jesus Christ, and the Catholic Church. The morality of their philosophies is that of altruism—that man has the inherent duty to serve the good and welfare of his neighbors. Marx advocated for the expansion of government authority, and popularized the following altruistic creed: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” Kant distorted the essence and concept of reason, and held that man’s service for others without gaining any form of benefit is man’s duty for duty’s sake. Kant, Marx, Jesus Christ and all religionists hold that it is man’s duty to serve the interests of others, and that self-interest is evil and immoral.
The politicians in Congress believe that it is their duty to promote the common good, but the question is how are they going to achieve their altruistic agenda?
The political mantra behind the politician’s support to the RH Bill is “common good.” The politicians in Congress believe that it is their duty to promote the common good, but the question is how are they going to achieve their altruistic agenda? By turning a group of people into slaves? By sacrificing the most productive members of our society to the poor simply because the already bankrupt government can no longer support its welfare state programs? Also in my previous blog, I stated the following: “The kind of “common good” most politicians promise has no exact meaning at all. Again, the underlying morality of this “common good” is that of altruism. For collectivists (communists, socialists, fascists, Nazis and the like), the concept of “common good” lies in the sacrifice of the strong to the weak, of the competent to the inept, of the mediocre to the esteemed. Every tyrant in history exploited “common good” as a way to turn people into unthinking masses. Napoleon Bonapart relied on summum bonum or the highest good to become one of the worst rulers of France. Adolf Hitler used the same mantra and the concept of racial supremacy to stir the collective spirit of his people in the hope of propelling Nazi Germany to global dominance. Mao Zedong and Lenin brandished their kind of “common good” for the proletariat only to end up burning not merely books but bodies. That’s why Hitler said the following: “What luck for rulers that men do not think.”
Now, the main targets of this sacrificing offering—the employers—have raised their strong opposition to the impending RH Bill. As what the fictional champion of this evil, altruistic bill states— Ellsworth Toohey of The Fountainhead: “Always attack the rich. Everyone will support you—the rich first of all.”
The following is the letter of protest of a group of employers who oppose the RH Bill.
To: Congress of the Philippines
We strongly oppose the passage of the Reproductive Health Bill (HB5043) for the following reasons:
1. AS EMPLOYERS, we do not want to be compelled to provide free reproductive health care services, supplies, devices and surgical procedures (including vasectomy and ligation) to our employees, and be subjected to both imprisonment and/or a fine, for every time that we fail to comply. (Section 17 states that employers shall provide for free delivery of reproductive health care services, supplies and devices to all workers more particularly women workers. (Definition of Reproductive Health and Rights Section 4, paragraph g, Section 21, Paragraph c and Section 22 on Penalties)
2. AS HEALTH CARE SERVICE PROVIDERS, we do not want to be subjected to imprisonment and/or a fine, if we fail to provide reproductive health care services such as giving information on family planning methods and providing services like ligation and vasectomy, regardless of the patient’s civil status, gender, religion or age ( Section 21 on Prohibited Acts, Letter a, Paragraphs 1 to 5 and Section 22 on Penalties)
3. AS SPOUSES, we do not agree that our husband or wife can undergo a ligation or vasectomy without our consent or knowledge. (Section 21 on Prohibited Acts, Letter a, Paragraph 2)
4. AS PARENTS, we do not agree that children from age 10 to 17 should be taught their sexual rights and the means to have a satisfying and “safe” sex life as part of their school curriculum. (Section 12 on Reproductive Health Education and Section 4 Definition of Family Planning and Productive Health, Paragraph b, c and d)
5. AS CITIZENS, we do not want to be subjected to imprisonment and/or pay a fine, for expressing an opinion against any provision of this law, if such expression of opinion is interpreted as constituting “malicious disinformation” ( Section 21 on Prohibited Acts, Paragraph f and Section 22 on Penalties)
6. We also oppose other provisions such as losing our parental authority over a minor child who was raped and found pregnant (Section 21, a, no.3)
7. We also do not agree to the provision which reclassifies contraceptives as essential medicines (Section 10) and appropriating limited government funds to reproductive services instead of basic services (Section 23)
Thus, we urge you to immediately stop deliberations on the bill and stop wasting taxpayers money.