Monday, April 04, 2011

Gross default in the RH Bill

SEX. METHODS. NUMBER. This is the shameful tripod of the infamous RH Bill that continues to divide Filipinos—irrespective of their beliefs or religious affiliations. Whether the division is in effect the Machiavellian intention behind the Bill in order to weaken the progressive popular dissatisfaction against the Malacañang occupant—this is another question, another story. But the fact stands that for its incompetence, insensitivity and confusion, the national leadership is slowly but surely losing more and more of its once faithful followers.

The gross default of the RH Bill is the marked absence of the human person in its long litany of envisioned big benefits to Philippine society. It is good to ask: In the last analysis, without the human person justly considered and rightfully attended to in any social venture, what is there really worthwhile bothering about—in truth and in fact? And this is exactly the reality behind the RH Bill when denuded of its pretentious concern for the good and welfare of the People of the Philippines.

Sex divorced from the human person becomes but a piece of meat. It is then made to stand as but the carnal means to enjoy and delight on—without relevance to the dignity of the human person and to the fundamental Ethics that governs human acts. Withdrawn from its human premise, sex becomes but an instrument of instinctive satisfaction proper of irrational beings devoid of responsibility and beyond accountability.

Methods on how to enjoy and delight in sexual acts without its inherent significance and import—this is the central concern and main preoccupation of the Bill. What to wear and to drink as well as what will be subjected to surgical intervention—these are the main means forwarded by the Bill in order to separate the right to copulate from the obligation appended to copulation in terms of possible conception.

Number specifically resorted to in the sense that less is definitely better than more, that less people is infallibly better than more people, and that less people automatically means the disappearance of poverty and the emergence of social development and economic prosperity as a matter of course—this is core content of the thesis of the Bill. Never mind the root cause of poverty and misery in the country. Simply make the number of people less and less, and there will be more and more prosperity—ipso facto.

The nature and dignity of the human person, the ethical norms that regulate his or her conduct or behavior for responsible actions, plus the moral parameters that rule his or her actuations for principled living—these are irrelevant to the RH BILL.

4 April 2011