The Philippines Under Fire

As I write, there is a battle royal underway in the Philippine Congress. On the one side are the Planned Parenthood types, backed by well-funded international organizations, who are attempting to ram through legislation that would cripple the Filipino birth rate. On the other side stand those who believe that the most precious resource of the Philippines is its people, and who object to the use of what some call “human pesticides” to control the Filipino population.

As you might suspect, the U.S. foreign aid establishment, emboldened by the anti-people mentality of the Obama administration, is on the wrong side of this crucial battle for Life.

The legislation in question is called ”The Responsible Parenthood, Reproductive Health And Population And Development Act Of 2011”—a title which manages the remarkable feat of encapsulating three lies of the abortion/population control movement in the short span of a dozen words.

  • “Responsible Parenthood’ is shorthand for the wrongheaded notion that couples are somehow doing the world a favor by having few or no children. In fact, the opposite is true: Children are the only future a nation has. Those who are willing to provide for the future in the most fundamental way—by providing the future generation—are a national treasure. They should be praised and encouraged, not condemned and sterilized.

  • “Reproductive Health,” another favorite of the anti-life movement, is equally misleading. Such programs are not intended to produce health at all, but sterility. Lest you think I exaggerate, consider how the “reproductive health” of a population is defined: It is the percentage of women of childbearing age who have been sterilized or who are using so-called “modern methods of contraception.” The higher this percentage (of women who have been chemically or surgically sterilized), the greater the supposed “reproductive health” of the population is said to be. This leads to the absolutely bizarre conclusion that a population enjoying perfect “reproductive health” would not be able to reproduce at all! Why? Because every last female reproductive system would have been disabled. We should not be surprised that the same people who define pregnancy as a disease, define “reproductive health” as sterility.

  • Finally, the implication of “Population and Development” is that population growth constitutes an intolerable burden on the economy. But while it is true that growing populations do produce temporary scarcities of goods and services, in a free market entrepreneurs respond by innovating; they devise more efficient means of production, for example, or they find substitutes for scarce materials. At the end of the day a larger population not only produces more goods and services, they do so at a lower price. Economists have a name for this: It’s called economies of scale.

The language of the Philippine Reproductive Health Bill, as it is called for short, is just as dangerous as its name suggests. Section 20, which fixes the “ideal” family size at two children, undermines the God-given right of couples to decide for themselves the number and spacing of their children. It will give further impetus to social engineering projects, already underway in the Philippine Department of Health and other government departments, to reduce family size. In our experience at PRI, any time a government sets population targets of any kind, it leads to human rights abuses.

But this is only the beginning of the mischief. Consider Section 13, which imposes on local government officials the obligation to enforce the provisions of the Act and “give priority to family planning work”. To this China hand, this sounds an awful lot like the PRC, where local officials are under constant pressure to reduce the birth rate, and do so by resorting to forced sterilizations, forced contraceptions and, all too often, forced abortions.

Another provision which could have been taken from Beijing’s playbook is Section 15, which sets up a so-called “Mobile Health Care Service,” and details how it will operate around the country. Apparently, as is the case in China, mobile sterilization teams will be brought in to do the dirty work of population control that local physicians, nearly all Catholic, find morally objectionable.

Incredibly, the proposed law even attempts to stifle dissent by Catholics and others by prohibiting the dissemination of “malicious disinformation about the intent and provisions of this Act.” The “malicious disinformation” that the framers of the bill had in mind would presumably include—aside from my criticisms above—pointing out the simple truth that life begins at conception.

Now I know that you may find this hard to believe, but the “reproductive health” enthusiasts who support the bill deny that a woman who has conceived a child is actually pregnant. It is not until five to seven days after conception, when the developing embryo implants in the lining of the uterus, that they are finally willing to admit its existence.

In claiming that human life does not begin at conception, but at implantation, they violate not only science but common sense. But it is important to understand that they are not fools. They do not engage in this obvious subterfuge lightly, but because they believe that the very success of their population control agenda demands it.

You see, if they admit that life truly does begin at conception, then they would also have to admit that every last one of their hormonal concoctions—from pills and hormonally laced IUDs to implants and injectables—cause early-term abortions. All hormonal contraception works, at least part of the time, by preventing an already conceived baby from implanting in the uterus.

The backers of the Reproductive Health Bill lie about this, too, of course, because they know that few women would take a supposed “contraceptive” knowing that it would actually cause them to abort.

This second lie is especially important to their efforts in the Philippines, where the Constitution, in Article II Section 12, provides that “the State shall equally protect the life of … the unborn from conception.” The Philippine Congress, wanting to leave no doubt about its intentions and no room for misinterpretation, defined the word conception in medical terms, as the fertilization of the ovum. Implantation goes unmentioned

This puts the Reproductive Health Bill, which indiscriminately promotes all types of abortifacient contraceptive devices and services, on a collision course with the Philippine Constitution.

The bill’s backers, supported by foreign “experts” and driven by their anti-people agenda, hotly deny that contraceptives are human pesticides, and that their massive distribution in the Philippines will exterminate large numbers of innocent Filipino babies. But there is little doubt that, if the bill passes, and “reproductive health” becomes the order of the day in the archipelago, that millions will die.

So far, the Philippines has resisted the population control juggernaut that has crushed the populations of other Asian countries like China and Indonesia. Zoe Vidal, a Philippine bioethicist, rightly observes that in this sense the Philippines is “the last country standing.”

Let us pray, for the sake of generations of Filipino babies as yet unborn, that they shall stand fast.

Share this


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Thank you!

Thank you for writing this very informative article. Just a few years back, I too believed the overpopulation and "reproductive health" lies until I realized what "reproductive health" truly is. Hope you and Randy Alcorn can come to my country to enlighten more and more Filipinos about RH. God bless! :D

2 is ideal

First off, I'm 50:50 on the RH Bill.

2 kids is an ideal size. What's the fuss about that? The bill states that it is ideal, but it didn't say you'll get jail time for being a baby producer. It's a bit unfair that you skew the information to make the bill appear too much like the much-dreaded population policies of the PRC. However, that's how you're supposed to write -- present a strong point and support it with your arguments. At least your line of arguments here do not border on fanatical emo-rhetoric.

In my mind, God didn't specifically say that you should have more babies than you can afford to possibly raise. That's why He gave us a brain and free will. He also made us in His image. Which means you should exercise your thoughts carefully. You can be the next Ramon Revilla or Dolphy -- the Philippines' super studs and proven sires. That's your right. Just be sure you can handle the responsibility.

I want to share a few more thoughts before I go.

I don't know if this is a possible trend or if there are studies about this. Aren't delayed marriages and the decision for late child bearing also factors in population growth decline? It's like this: As the female gets older, the viability for child birth also goes down. Now, when females decide to have babies later in life, which is I think more common in more economically advanced dual-income areas, their viability to have children becomes automatically lower. It's harder to make babies when you're older -- biological fact.

If what I said above is possible, then the enemy of population growth are economic progress and progressive females. Being anti-responsible parenthood is also relegating the female to just becoming baby factories.

I guess if we're in the business of producing slaves of the world, a healthy number of people is really desirable. More babies, more people, better for the world. That's just something a man would say. After all, it isn't us guys who bear the burden for 9 months. However, your findings do make another opportunity for the Philippines possible -- world domination. When there's no one else left, the Filipino will rule the Earth. Kidding.

I'm just curious. Since you're just primarily against abortion agents, are you in favor of providing care for the females who encounter abortion complications? Or will you just let them suffer?

I completely agree with your

I completely agree with your view that families should be allowed to have as many children as they want, PROVIDED, they can be responsible for feeding, clothing and educating them which is every parent's responsibility, not the State's. And this is precisely the Church's stand anyway. So why do we need anyone to tell us that the "ideal" no. of children is 2? Just because some foreign power tells us there are way too many of us already populating the earth (too many for THEIR comfort?)?

You're also completely right when you say that higher education levels and the trend towards late marriages are NATURALLY occurring means for controlling population. All we need to do is look to the experience of advanced economies like the US, Europe, Japan, Singapore, where the average educational level hovers at postgraduate and more and more women settling down in their mid-30s. That trend is already taking place in the Phils as well, which is why we've seen our “total fertility rate (TFR) has declined by more than 50% in less than 50 years: from an average rate of 7 in 1960 to an average rate of 3.1 in 2008. Our TFR is expected to reach the replacement level of 2.1 (the level at which we are just replacing the dying) in 2025 without massive government intervention like the passing of a population control or RH bill.” (taken from a position paper prepared by 198 UP Faculty, Students and Alumni, which cited the Asian Development Bank in its 2010 report titled Key Indicators for Asia and the Pacific.) SO, WHY DO WE NEED TO SPEND P3B OF OUR ALREADY VERY LIMITED FUNDS TO DISTRIBUTE CONTRACEPTIVES IF OUR POPULATION IS ALREADY DECLINING?

Lastly, though you said it in jest, there's a lot of truth as well when you say that the more Filipinos there are in the world, the better. We can win over the rest of the world with our natural hospitality, charm, our great singing voices, our talent for creativity, and our family-centered values that place great importance on the family and relationships, PROVIDED, bills like the RH Bill don't succeed in turning us into selfish individuals who care only about satisfying their base instincts for pleasure without regard for the consequences and at the expense of those who can't defend themselves (the unborn), under the guise of "the right to choose".

My two-cents worth.

Abortion is murder, but

Abortion is murder, but contraception isn´t. it a baby isn´t formed, then no crime is commited
it that law passes, NOBODY would die.

contraception leads to abortion

pills is 98% effective. 2% is the chance to get pregnant. What if this slim chance takes place? Is it not an abortion?killing the life with pills?

Thank you

Thank you for sharing your thoughts on te RH Bill. I am Filipino and I agree that on issues of marriage and family life, there should be no compromise. A number of people claim that the bill "only has 3 small issues but has 8000 positive things worth considering." I believe that if we compromise a little here and there, we Filipinos may well be opening up Pandora's Box of broken families, broken hearts, broken lives ---- similar to other "more progressive" countries which have adopted the contraceptive mentality.


I believe the solution is not more legislation or enforcing more bills. The answer is education and prevention. Educating young adults to be more responsible and accountable for their actions. Having more children without spending meaningful time with them and providing them with the basic necessities of life such as food is a form of insidious and subtle child abuse. The children here become the victims of all these.

Nice Articles

I have stumbled upon your articles and i congratulate you for your very informative posts about these topics. I am a pro-life, i oppose all forms of artificial contraceptives. There are so many strong points in your articles that i can use in debates against pro abortion and pro RH people. Maybe pro-rh advocates with good consciences with right minds might get enlightened about this be converted to pro-life stands but those close minded and with selfish interests might just get angry and confused with the arguments you presented. More power to PRI. God Bless