From the provisions of the bill, we find that the following are the changes that would happen, if the bill becomes law without any amendments:

Tubal ligation, vasectomy, intrauterine device insertion and other family planning methods will be available at all government hospitals;

Hormonal contraceptives, intrauterine devices, injectibles and other allied reproductive health products and supplies shall be classified as "essential medicines" and will be available at all government clinics and hospitals;

Reproductive health education in age-appropriate manner shall be taught by adequately trained teachers starting from Grade 5 up to 4th year high school.

To be able to acquire a marriage license, the couple must show the Local Civil Registrar Certificate of Compliance that they received adequate instructions and information on family planning, responsible parenthood, breastfeeding and infant nutrition.

It’s good to keep these practical advocacies in mind because in the heated argumentation the proponents will be portrayed as "abortionists," "magnanakaw," "murderers," "monsters," and other epithets that are even more awful.

The Catholic Church says that HB 5043 will open the doors to promiscuity and adultery among married people. That argument seems to preclude the fact that there is in our present society today, even without HB 5043, pretty rampant promiscuity; errant husbands and wives. To deny this would be to negate the fact of teen-age pregnancies and the thousands of children born to single unwed mothers year on year.

Besides, there are many Catholic countries that have state-sponsored population control programs which also offer the same things that HB 5043 would offer to our people. These same things in other Catholic countries do not seem to promote promiscuity and other evils in such Catholic places as parts of the United States of America, Mexico, Italy, France, Ireland, Spain and Portugal. So why should our bishops say, about the Pinoy, that this will lead us to promiscuity? Do our bishops regard us Filipino Catholics to be of weaker DNA than Italian, Spanish, Mexican, Irish and Portuguese Catholics? Is this a race thing?

If what the bishops fear will happen to us did not happen in these Catholic countries, why should the Philippines be any different except only if the bishops regard us Pinoys are of weaker character, more brain-deficient and of weaker genes than Catholics in other countries?

If this is how they regard us, perhaps they ought to go back to thinking that people with whiter skin and fairer hair have been designated by God to rule us brown, skinny and morally depraved Pinoys, just as the colonials thought us to be.

***

"Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth." If God wanted us Pinoys to have a birth rate higher than any other country. this quote from the Bible ought to read as "Be fruitful and multiply, multiply, multiply. . ."

This would mean that he wants the Pinoy to wallow in poverty and live haphazard lives that lead to nowhere. Having an effective population program will give mothers longer lives, children quality time with their parents and not force families into separate lives with the mother working elsewhere and the children and father living lives ruled by their extreme poverty.

In fact, if the Catholic Church were to take a more responsible attitude for the children who are born that can no longer be fed by their penniless parents, perhaps, the bishops would become more credible. Why, for instance. can’t the Church use the money it saves from being totally tax-free to feed the hungry and care for unwanted children instead of building temples and air-conditioned residences for parish priests and bishops?

If the Church truly believes that no pregnancy should be unwanted and all sexual acts should lead to procreation, why not take the burden away from those who do not want the children that they produce? The Church ought to take all these children into Her bosom and feed and clothe and educate them. Then, maybe, we may actually have a more Christian society where the Church is into caring for her faithful instead of aspiring to become the political primate that controls the State.

***

Congressman Edcel Lagman, the principal author of HB 5043 says: "There is no rhyme and reason in the contention that contraception will lead to the legalization of abortion. Regular use of contraceptives effectively forecloses unplanned, mistimed, and unwanted pregnancies so much so that women do not have to resort to abortion and there is no need for the State to legalize abortion."

After all, the World Health Organization, United Nations Population Fund, United Nations Children’s Fund, and the University of the Philippines School of Economics, among others, support family planning. Are these, then, the "abortionists"?

Congressmen who will argue that HB 5043 regards pregnancy as a "disease" and babies a "burden" instead of "God’s gifts," cannot possibly be given a serious hearing. It is obvious that they are trying to be more popish than the Pope.

One such congressman argues in this wise: "By mandating government and health service providers to provide post-abortion services we are then saying that it is okay for women to abort–as there will be medical personnel to assist them if something goes wrong in the process. Aren’t we encouraging abortion?"

When someone tries to commit suicide and injures himself, do we not give him medical assistance? Does this mean that we encourage his attempts at suicide? Do we encourage speeding and drunk driving in the case of drivers who have accidents who are also given medical treatment? Should a woman who (in her despair) attempts an abortion on herself be punished with neglect and a virtual death penalty? Is that being Christian?

What we have in this country is a Catholic Church that is into politics. On the issue of population control, it is clear that what is best for the country is a population whose growth is controlled to the point that the country can grow economically instead of being burdened by having too high a birth rate.

Those who advocate policies that produce a higher birth rate than is ideal for this country ought to put their money where their mouth is and support orphanages and invest in factories and other enterprises where people can find work. Sadly, most of these who call those who do not agree with them "abortionists" will not lift a finger when confronted with the results of their ruinous advocacy.

To promote what the Church promotes without the Church accepting responsibility for the resulting higher birth rate is to be totally irresponsible.

***

Tomorrow: Alan F. Paguia’s suggested cross-examination on HB 5043. I give you both sides of the debate.