The RH Bill is pro-contraception. Contraception is pro-population control. Population control is pro-depopulation. And the depopulation is a movement that has markedly dubious motives of long standing – all of which are unethical and immoral, none of which is either edifying or ennobling. There are seven more known and salient motives – affiliated and complementary with the other – behind the depopulation movement:
One: The apprehension that the “breeding habits” of the lower class of society is not only despicable but also dangerous in terms of progressively more needs of public welfare thereby requiring more public funds. This is the class-approach to society, with open discrimination against the poor.
Two: The conviction and pursuant stance that religious practices as well as traditional governments are a “hindrance” to human progress. Freedom from religions as well as from governments that affirm and promote culture and tradition of long standing, are a hindrance to social development.
Three: The principle, acceptance, and observance of “survival of the fittest” that guarantees the elimination of the weak and the unfit, thus promoting the concerns and interests of the able and capable. This process should not only be defended but also promoted.
Four: The “competitive process” among the unable and disabled VS the capable and capacitated should not only be upheld but also affirmed. Thus it is that as time passes by, society will have more and more useful and profitable members.
Five: The progressive improvement of the qualities of the human species is a reality which should not only be accepted but also enhanced in favor of humanity as a whole. This is particularly achieved by observing “positive eugenics” that eliminates individuals with inherited undesirable traits.
Six: The process of “weeding out” members of society with little or meager worth for social progress should be practiced. Such a program for the elimination of non-valuable individuals should be readily and effectively realized through their “sterilization”.
Seven: The more children from the “fit” and less from the “unfit” mean the amelioration of the human race. This requires the identification, the “segregation” and “sterilization” of the unfit spell for a better society, a healthier humanity.
It is quite evident that Malacanang – through the RH Bill – either directly or indirectly subscribes to all the above cited motives of population control. With such an anti-natalist mentality and consonant activity, the question comes to fore: Where goest thou, Philippines, my Philippines?