My stand on the RH Bill
By Fr. Joaquin G. Bernas S. J. • Philippine Daily Inquirer
I HAVE been following the debates on the RH Bill not just in the recent House sessions but practically since its start. In the process, because of what I have said and written (where I have not joined the attack dogs against the RH Bill), I have been called a Judas by a high-ranking cleric, I am considered a heretic in a wealthy barangay where some members have urged that I should leave the Church (which is insane), and one of those who regularly hears my Mass in the Ateneo Chapel in Rockwell came to me disturbed by my position. I feel therefore that I owe some explanation to those who listen to me or read my writings.
First, let me start by saying that I adhere to the teaching of the Church on artificial contraception even if I am aware that the teaching on the subject is not considered infallible doctrine by those who know more theology than I do. Moreover, I am still considered a Catholic and Jesuit in good standing by my superiors, critics notwithstanding!
Second (very important for me as a student of the Constitution and of church-state relations), I am very much aware of the fact that we live in a pluralist society where various religious groups have differing beliefs about the morality of artificial contraception. But freedom of religion means more than just the freedom to believe. It also means the freedom to act or not to act according to what one believes. Hence, the state should not prevent people from practicing responsible parenthood according to their religious belief nor may churchmen compel President Aquino, by whatever means, to prevent people from acting according to their religious belief. As the “Compendium on the Social Teaching of the Catholic Church” says, “Because of its historical and cultural ties to a nation, a religious community might be given special recognition on the part of the State. Such recognition must in no way create discrimination within the civil or social order for other religious groups” and “Those responsible for government are required to interpret the common good of their country not only according to the guidelines of the majority but also according to the effective good of all the members of the community, including the minority.”
- Tags:
- Printer-friendly version
- Add new comment
- 1890 reads
Comments
Rey J. Echavez In reply to
Rey J. Echavez
In reply to Fr. Joaquin Bernas article.
I respect Fr. Joaquin Bernas because he is a member of the clergy. I will not gag him. I am surprised of his being mis-informed who is an amicus curiae of Court and was among those who helped draft the... present the Supreme Constitution. He is ignorant when it come to the issue of the RH Bill and the use of modern birth control like contraceptives, contragestives and abortion. In the ABS-CBN News Posted at 06/02/2011 11:34 PM | Updated as of 06/03/2011 12:52 AM. I don’t know if he heard about contragestives.
Fr. Bernas laughed off the claim made by those opposing the reproductive health (RH) bill that using contraceptives is attempted murder. What is murder? Murder is the unlawful killing of another human being with "malice aforethought”. The woman who takes contragestives has the intention or desire to cause harm or pain to somebody (embryo).
Fr. Joaquin Bernas, SJ, JSD, said he found the claim "hilarious." Meaning very funny, laughable, uproarious, riotous, humorous entertaining, comical and amusing. I don’t know if he is entertained if he sees a human being slaughtered by the contragestives.
To quote him: "Whoever said that deserves a medal for I know not what," said Bernas.
Is this unborn being (embryo), growing within the mother, a human life? If you use contragestives you are killing the embryo.
First; "Is this human life?" As we will see, the answer clearly is Yes. That answer is a medical and scientific one, for we cannot impose a religious or philosophic belief in our nations through force of law.
Second;"Should we grant equal protection by law to all living humans in our country?"
The third question is about Choice and Women’s Rights.
I agree with him when he rejected generalizing all contraceptives as abortifacients. He said: "So far I have seen only one drug identified as abortifacient, namely Postinor”. (0.75 levonorgestrel in each tablet. other ingredients : silica colloidal anhydrous, magnesium stearate, pottato starch, talc, maize starch, lactose monohydrate.) He is just showing himself to be badly informed journalist. All hormonal contraceptives, either patch, ring, pills, injectables or implants are contragestives (prevent implantation) meaning abortifacients . World Health Organization will tell you they are not abortifacients because it will destroy their objective of total depopulation of the third world.
“I can say that the family is already at great risk—and not because of contraceptives," said Bernas. Again he is naïve because there are many countries that are now experiencing Demographic Winter. Russia, Italy, Spain, Japan, Singapore and even the United States is beginning to feel the Demographic Winter. It’’s not only the family who is at great risk, it is our country.
“Helping women help themselves and their families”. You are not helping them, you are destroying them. The women will be the guinea pigs of the Pharmaceutical companies. You will make them suffer more of the side effects and complications of abortion. Guide them to a better moral life. Ifd support the RH Bill 4244 you are creating more prostitutes and more human trafficking.
Please reconsider your position. As a clergyman and a constitutionalist you still can help people who are not in the know.
God bless our country and our people.
Dr. Rey J. Echavez
Fr. Bernas position on the RH bill
http://youtu.be/ytmnBh4mBTc
There are moderate voices in the catholic community of the Philippines such as Fr. Bernas.
At
http://youtu.be/ytmnBh4mBTc and http://film-and-television.com
he talks about his support for the RH bill and moral issues surrounding the debate.
We need more tolerant voices in the catholic church such as Fr. Bernas who are not afraid to swim against mainstream opinion.