Ateneo de Davao University School of Business and Governance E.

Jacinto Street, Davao City

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements in Theology 141 - Christian Commitment and Solidarity

Is It High Time For House Bill 4244 To Be Passed?

Submitted to: Mr. Noriel Rogon Theology 141 Professor Submitted by: Andrew D. Macarayo BSA 4B

INTRODUCTION

A conservative, traditional, and a primarily Christian country in the Southeast Asian region, the Philippines, is now in a dilemma whether it should pass or junk out the current house bill pertaining to the countrys population development policy which is House Bill No. 4244 also known as The Responsible Parenthood, Reproductive Health and Population and Development Act of 2011. The said house bill is a product of the consolidation of six house bills namely, HB 96, HB 101, HB 513, HB 1160, HB 1520, and HB 3387. From the very face and title of the house bill, it clearly wants to address the problem on the reproductive health of the citizens of the country as well as its problem in population growth while aiming for a responsible parenthood. According to the recent data from the National Statistics Office, the Philippines had population of 92,340,000 during May 2010 and based on the same press release dated April 4, 2012, the population of the country grew by 1.90% annually which means that there were two persons added per year for every 100 persons in the population. Furthermore, the Central Intelligence Agency of the United States of America estimates that the population will grow up to 103,775,002 by July 2012, which, from the date of this research might be the figures to talk about. The question really is, why is the country talking about this reproductive health bill? The answer is very simple, it is because it basically wants to address the problems associated with rapid growth of the population of the country but at the same time it is also interpreted to be morally and religiously incorrect by some religious groups while aiming for its approval. The bill itself wants to implement some ways to mitigate or resolve the problem in our population but the means the bill wants to propose are contrary to what most of the religious groups believe to be the solution to the problem. The problem on the countrys population is seen as so pervasive. The problem does not only dwell on population per se but the problem in the countrys rapid population growth also affects the people, the society, and the economy at large. The problem has been seen to be the one of the biggest roots of the problem of poverty, crime, and corruption and one of the states shining solution is the passage of the Reproductive Health bill which seeks to begin at the factory of the problem, our reproductive health and then seeks to provide a better population development later on. But again and again the means by which the policy wants to provide is basically not in line with what our religious groups think. And now, in this research study the

sole proponent would wish to establish some fair points of arguments and clarifications with regards to the entire issue of the reproductive health.

CONTENTS A.)Major Components The major components of the bill are summarized as follows:

Mandates the Department of Health (DOH) to spearhead the efficient

procurement, distribution to LGUS and the usage monitoring of medically safe, legal, accessible, affordable and effective reproductive health care services and supplies nationwide

Provides for the creation of an enabling environment for the poor and

vulnerable in which all can enjoy long, healthy, and productive lives that will promote their rights and protects the life opportunities of future generations (Sec 4. (cc))

Provides for a maternal death review in the LGUs, the national and local

government hospitals and other public health units to decrease the incidence of maternal deaths (Sec. 9)

Provides Mandatory Age-appropriate Reproductive Health and Sexuality

Education starting from Grade Five to Fourth Year High School to develop the youth into responsible adults (Sec. 16)

Provides for a Mobile Health Care Service in every Congressional district

to deliver health care supplies and services to be used to disseminate knowledge and information on reproductive health particularly to the poor and needy (Sec. 15)

Considers products and supplies for modern family planning methods

under the category of essential medicines and supplies to form part of the National Drug Formulary and to be included in the regular purchase of essential medicines and supplies of all national and local hospitals and other government health units (Sec. 10)

Mandates the inclusion of the topics on family planning, responsible

parenthood, breastfeeding and infant nutrition as essential part of the free

instruction and information to be given by the Local Population Officer of every city or municipality to all applicants for marriage license (Sec. 17)

Mandates no less than 10% increase in honoraria for Barangay Health Penalizes the violator of this Act by imprisonment ranging from one (1)

Workers, upon successful completion of training (Sec. 19)

month to six (6) months or a fine of Ten Thousand (P10,000.00) to Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) or both such fine and imprisonment at the discretion of the Court (Sec. 29)

Tasks the DOH, the Department of Education (DepEd), the Department

of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA), the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), the Commission on Higher Education (CHEd), and the Philippine Commission on Women (PCW), in consultation with government, women's, people's, and civil society organizations to jointly promulgate the rules and regulations of this Act (Sec. 31)

Appropriates current annual General Appropriations Act (GAA) for Family

Health and Responsible Parenting under the DOH and POPCOM in the initial implementation of this Act and thereafter, such additional sums necessary shall be included in the subsequent GAA (Sec. 30) (
For further readings on the exact words of the bill, please refer to the appendixes at the end of this research paper. )

B.)Major Arguments The following are the affirmative and negative arguments pertaining to the widely-debated Reproductive Health Bill: B.1) Affirmative Arguments 1. The policy will form part of the solutions of the government in battling overpopulation as one of the root cause of poverty in the country. The state concedes that the policy (RH Bill) which they are eagerly trying pass does not really solve all the various problems in the

society but it wants to convey the message that though the policy does not solve all the problems, the policy will try to solve one of the roots instead. One of the roots of the problems in the country is overpopulation and in order to understand clearly the policy on where it is coming from, we should be able to define first what overpopulation really is. Overpopulation, as both of the houses of this argumentation would concede, is the condition wherein the number of inhabitants cannot be accommodated anymore by the available resources in the environment in order for it to survive or in order for it to have a decent living. Now, if the available resources in the country cannot anymore accommodate the current population of the country, then, there is clearly a problem in the society which would become a precedent to a bigger problem which is crime, and corruption in the society. Yes, a countrys population might be one of its best assets but those who are in favor of the bill believes that something in excess is already not good. A lot of babies are being born each second but their birth does not guarantee their future contribution in solving the problem of the economy nor will they surely form part of the labor force especially when they are born poor. For in most cases, those who have no jobs nowadays are those people who were not able to finish school because they cannot basically afford the incidental expenses in going to school because they were financially poor and this scenario will continue until it reaches the end of the finite regression of these things. Now, how would the bill be really of help to the problem associated with the rapid growth of the countrys population? Through various birth control methods which the bill wants to promote, the rapid growth of the population will also be mitigated or lessened, thereby, allowing more people to receive greater benefits from the government because the lesser denominator there will be compared to the already crumbling resources of the country, the more benefits each person will receive. Now, if people are able to control the number of children they will bear through various birth control methods, their burden in life wouldnt go into a greater degree, thus, they can now

focus on developing their lives because they wouldnt be bothered to a greater extent anymore on how are they going to feed and support their children since the number of children they have is number which they wanted and have deemed to be enough. 2. It promotes the protection of the health and lives of women and its offspring. The title of the policy speaks of reproductive health but what do we really mean when we speak of reproductive health? It is a matter of clarification on the minds of the people who wants to understand what the policy intends to say that the sole proponent of this research would wish to present based on how the World Health Organization has defined it. According to the aforementioned international organization, reproductive health is a state of physical, mental, and social well-being in all matters relating to the reproductive system at all stages of life which also implies that people are able to have a responsible, satisfying and safe sex life and that they have the capability to reproduce and the freedom to decide if, when and how often to do so, and that it is not against the law according to what the policy has defined the term. Since no arguments or rebuttals pertaining to the definition were found by the proponent of this case, it is but safe to assume that the same definition is being adhered by those who oppose the passage of the bill. Under the status quo, women and their families, especially those who are poor, are experiencing reproductive health problems due to the following reasons: a. genetic causes; b. fetal environment; c. hormonal dysfunction; d. body weight and fitness; e. sexually infections; f. violence against women; g. induced abortion; and transmitted and reproductive tract

h. other causes which harms the reproductive health. Now, in order to avoid, in case the enumerated causes has not occurred, and in order to help the citizens, in case they are experiencing the effects of the abovementioned causes to their reproductive health, the state wants to implement the RH Bill because it believes that the benefits and services the bill will bring can solve the problem. According to Sec. 4(t), the bill seeks to provide access to a full range of methods, facilities, services and supplies that contribute to reproductive health and well-being by preventing and solving reproductive health-related problems. It also includes sexual health, the purpose of which is the enhancement of life and personal relations. The elements of reproductive health care include: (1) family planning information and services; (2) maternal, infant and child health and nutrition, including breastfeeding; (3) proscription of abortion and management of abortion complications; (4) adolescent and youth reproductive health; (5) prevention and management of reproductive tract infections sexually transmittable (RTIs), HIV and AIDS and other infections (STIs); (6) elimination of violence against women; (7) education and counseling on sexuality and reproductive health; (8) treatment of breast and reproductive tract cancers and other gynecological conditions and disorders; (9) male responsibility and participation in reproductive health; (10) prevention and treatment of infertility and sexual dysfunction; (11) reproductive health education for the adolescents; and

(12) mental health aspects of RH care; A lot of people dont know what are the health hazards they are going to encounter when they will have sex, and through the first argument, the government is going to address that. Now, the problem is, when they already have the problem with them due to the lack of information or that these diseases were caused by some of the items enumerated in the previous enumeration, most of the people do not know where to get the appropriate medication needed, thus, through this bill the said problem will now be solved. It is of a fact, that though there already government agencies which provide health care, these agencies do not really provide the numerous health care specifically demanded by the bill and now the state wishes to afford these health care functions to its citizens because it cannot forgo the fact that its citizens need it. 3. It promotes awareness and education among the citizens as a basic step in forming an informed citizen for a well-founded society. One of the key provisions of the bill is providing mandatory age-appropriate reproductive health and sexuality education starting from grade five to fourth year high school to develop the youth into responsible adults. Under the status quo, a lot of women are getting pregnant and a lot are getting sexually-transmitted diseases because they dont basically know what the effects of having sex specifically unprotected ones. The Church and other groups and individuals who oppose the bill cannot deny the fact that this is happening in reality. People arent well informed regarding the proper care of their reproductive health and the hazards of unsafe sex; thus, they commit frail choices in life which then affects not only their present life but also their future not only the mothers future but also her offspring and her partner. So, with this mandatory, therefor it clearly suggests that its not optional, age-appropriate reproductive health and sexuality education starting from grade five to fourth-year high school, people will become well informed of the functions of their body and how to take care of it. It

wants to hone responsible people with regards to their reproductive health so that in the future they will not be able to commit unhealthy choices which will affect themselves, the unborn child, and their partners. B.2) Negative Arguments 1. It is too costly and the budget that should have been used for the implementation of the policy could be used in addressing the more pressing issues and problems of the country. Much of those who oppose the passage of the house bill mainly argue that the bill is too costly to implement and that the budget that would be appropriated for its implementation should instead be allocated to increase the budget for the education of its citizens which at the status quo isnt enough. Furthermore, the budget of the government isnt primarily focused on education in which according to the 1987 Philippine constitution under Article XIV, Sec. 5(5), the State shall assign the highest budgetary priority to education. Now, under section 30 of the bill which speaks regarding the needed appropriation, it shall have its budget for its initial implementation from the amounts appropriated in the current annual General Appropriations Act (GAA) for Family Health and Responsible Parenting under the Department of Health (DOH) and Commission on Population (POPCOM) and other concerned agencies which sums to Php 2,279,573,000. If the government, instead, would just spend the budget intended for the implementation of the said policy to construct classrooms and provide more than enough school facilities, then the problem on education specifically on the problem of the insufficient number of classrooms and teachers would be solved. In the next three years, we would be spending enough amount of money to bolster the education in the countrys state universities and colleges. At the end of the day, it is the education that the citizens of the country will get which will help them rise from the currently experienced poverty and which will help them create an informed choice. Furthermore, the state must

give priority to education, science and technology, arts, culture, and sports to foster patriotism and nationalism, accelerate social progress, and promote total human liberation and development as stated in section 17 of the Declaration of Principles and State Policies. Still, it is in the firm belief of those who oppose the bill that though the bill is a necessity, in response to the signs of the times, it is still the education of the citizens which weighs far heavier and left insufficiently addressed. 2. Overpopulation is not the problem why poverty exists in the country; it is primarily due to the corrupt practices of various officials in position. Much of the driving force which lead to the formulation of the bill was due to the fact that the country is getting overpopulated at an alarming rate, and it gets even worse when using the world view on the rate of overpopulation. What those who oppose the passage of the house bill want to clarify is that overpopulation is not the problem why, still, a lot of Filipinos are suffering from poverty. Instead of overpopulation, they want to stress that it is the activities described as graft and corruption which slacks the countrys speedy progress. It is also due to a lack of opportunities and arable lands in some places of the country. Furthermore, Simon Smith Kuznets, an American Russian Economist, said that economic growth is fastest during the time that the population growth was highest. This claim, bolstered by Sheldon Richman of the Cato Institute said that the wealthiest nations are among those with the highest population which clearly tells us that overpopulation nor its unprecedented rate is not the problem why a countrys citizens is experiencing poverty. According to Kuro-kuro.org, and the researcher of this paper quotes: The natural and expected result in the equation however did not happen in the Philippines, because purchasing power was removed from the

population that grew. People could not buy because they had no money; and they had no money because they had no jobs or income earnings. The earnings that could easily have gone on to the people through industry were siphoned off by payments to a ballooning international and domestic debt, by tremendous tax cuts and tax holidays being given to foreign investments prejudicial to the internal economic growth of the country and most of all by the shameful and rampant corruption in the government. Instead of the people earning, it is the government official and a select few who were making all the money and can afford to have a $20,000 dinner while the country is hungry. And so what the government should do now instead is straighten itself by eradicating corruption step by step and religiously provide the people with opportunities to rise from poverty through jobs, financial subsidies in their small business plans, provide long-term contract which could help people earn money in a span of time and provide jobs to their fellow Filipinos. Instead of trying to strictly control the rate of population growth to make it lower, the state should utilize efficiently and effectively the human resource it has, again, through better policies and planning that guarantees a more equitable distribution of resources and greater social justice, which at the status quo are hindered by mediocre and corrupt practices of officials whether public or private. Furthermore, the state should also implement a stricter paternalistic rule on its subordinates in order to ensure that the resources and benefits that should accrue to its citizens are really received by the citizens. The state cannot justify its passage of the bill by telling the citizens that it is the rapid and unprecedented population growth which causes poverty among its citizens, where in fact it is otherwise. At the end of the day, it is when corrupt practices and unfavorable acts are eliminated when the resources of the country are distributed fairly and equitably which in turn satisfies its citizens to a greater extent.

3. The methods of birth control as prescribed by the bill are considering methods which contains abortifacients, thus, it is contrary to the existing law against abortion. The most controversial part of the bill is its adherence to modern methods of birth control while still adhering to any traditional methods. Furthermore, the bill promotes the use of contraceptives in which according to the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Santo Tomas, the Philippine Nurses Association, the Bioethics Society of the Philippines, and the Catholic Physicians Guild of the Philippines is a clear contradiction to the stance of the state against abortion because these contraceptive agents, according to the mentioned institutions, actually acts after fertilization and are potentially abortifacients agents. The said institutions also point to the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (2005), which concluded that the IUD brings about the "destruction of the early embryo, thus is deemed to kill five-day old babies. According Wikipedia, an online resource material, the position of the Philippine Medical Association (PMA) "is founded strongly on the principle that 'life or conception begins at fertilization' at that moment where there is fusion or union of the sperm and the egg and thus a human person or human being already does exist at the moment of fertilization." The PMA condemns abortifacients that "destroys the fertilized egg or the embryo" and "abhors any procedure ... or medication that will interrupt any stage of fertilization and prevents its normal, physiological, uninterrupted growth to adulthood". If we place the claim of all those who oppose the bill that the contraceptive agents acts after the fertilization which according to medical institutions is already the beginning of life, then, the bill is already unconstitutional. Based on the 1987 Philippine constitution under Article II Section 12, the State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution. It shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception. Therefore, if the policy is implemented it will most likely defeat the very purpose for which the

last sentence of Section 12 of the declaration of principles and state policies was established. From a study by a scientific journal, Contraception, subtitled an international reproductive health journal and conducted through a 10year period, on the link between contraception and abortion, from 1997 to 2007, the overall use of contraceptive methods increased from 49.1 percent to 79.9 percent. The elective abortion rate increased from 5.52 to 11.49 per 1,000 women. Furthermore, Dr. Walter Larimore, who for decades prescribed the pill, tried to disprove the claim that the pill is [an] abortifacients, only to find 94 scientific studies proving that post fertilization effects are operative to prevent clinically recognized pregnancy. And from then on after publishing his findings in a scientific journal, he stopped prescribing the pill. THEOLOGICAL REFLECTION A.)Bible There are lot things which the bible tells us with regards to the reproductive health bill. The following are some passages from the bible: In Ex. 1:16-17 and he said, When you do the duties of a midwife for the Hebrew women, and see them on the birthstools, if it is a son, then you shall kill him; but if it is a daughter, then she shall live. But the midwives feared God, and did not do as the king of Egypt commanded them, but saved the male children alive. In the previous passage, it can be inferred that our fear of God as one of the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit should drive us away in taking away the life which has begun inside the womb regardless of its gender. Furthermore, there are also bible passages which tells that life begins from the womb and that it should be protected. In Psalm 106:38, bad things happened in Canaan after they shed the innocent life or the innocent blood, the land became polluted with blood. In respect to the standpoint of the Church, in their belief that contraceptives does abortion, in Exodus 20:13, God commands us not to kill, therefor we must respect even the life of the unborn. But we also consider some passages about those who govern the land. According to Romans 13:1

2, every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves. But still if we continue to read the passage, something good must still be done. At the end of the day, according to Denny Burk, the right of the state is always to be exercised to punish evil, never to attack the innocent as contemplated in Romans 13:4. B.)Church The Catholic Church is currently having strong refusal to accept the passage of the bill and though there is such thing as separation of the church and the state, the church still believes that its responsibility towards its members which consists primarily the entire population of the Philippines outweighs and justifies its explicit stance against the passage of the bill and state plans together with it. It claims that what the bill intends to allow as a means of solving the problem associated with overpopulation and some other additional feature is basically contrary to the churchs teachings. One of the Papal encyclical by Pope Paul VI, entitled Huminae Vitae, talks about faithfulness to Gods design and unlawful birth control methods. According to the encyclical in its message about faithfulness to Gods design, a conjugal act imposed on one's partner without regard to his or her condition or personal and reasonable wishes in the matter, is no true act of love, and therefore offends the moral order in its particular application to the intimate relationship of husband and wife. Furthermore, they must also recognize that an act of mutual love which impairs the capacity to transmit life which God the Creator, through specific laws, has built into it, frustrates His design which constitutes the norm of marriage, and contradicts the will of the Author of life. On to its message about unlawful birth control methods, it explicitly declares that the direct interruption of the generative process already begun and, above all, all direct abortion, even for therapeutic reasons, are to be

absolutely excluded as lawful means of regulating the number of children. Similarly excluded is any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreationwhether as an end or as a means. What the Church allows is the use of therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, even if a foreseeable impediment to procreation should result there fromprovided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever. In this case, the Church recognizes the need and intention of the parties adhering to therapeutic means. In the same encyclical, the Church recommends instead selfdiscipline, chastity and to implore the help of God. By the same Pope, in his encyclical entitled Populorum Progressio, the Church, through the pope, tell us that the accelerated rate of population growth brings many added difficulties to the problems of development where the size of the population grows more rapidly than the quantity of available resources and that There is no doubt that public authorities can intervene in this matter, within the bounds of their competence. But according to Pope Paul VI, their means must be in conformity with the dictates of the moral law and the rightful freedom of married couples is preserved completely intact because when the inalienable right of marriage and of procreation is taken away, so is human dignity. Furthermore, it rests the responsibility of the population growth to the parents who must take a thorough look at the matter and decide upon the number of their children in which it is an obligation they take upon themselves, before their children already born, and before the community to which they belongfollowing the dictates of their own consciences informed by God's law authentically interpreted, and bolstered by their trust in Him.

CONCLUSION After considering some issues found in the arguments presented, the researcher of this paper thinks that it would be better off for the country to allow the passage of house bill no. 4244 entitled The Responsible Parenthood, Reproductive Health and
Population and Development Act of 2011. but with some qualifications. The proponent of this

study thinks that the bills intention in trying to solve the problem of poverty in the country is very much commendable but the there were some things that the bill wants to execute in trying to fulfill its plans which were not supported very well and that there were also rebuttals and counter points of arguments against it which could lead to its downfall. What the researcher would wish to qualify is the portion in the bill which states that it shall sell and distribute contraceptives to places where reproductive health services are provided. There were already arguments stating that contraceptives, indeed, help in the process of abortion which is seriously contrary not only to what the Church teaches us but also to the 1987 Philippine constitution. It would be very hard for us to comprehend the acts of government in trying to control the population

by implicitly driving its citizens towards abortion while claiming that it seeks to protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn child. Though the bill explicitly says that it abhors any acts of abortion and for so many times it keeps using the word legal in describing the methods it prescribes but it has not strongly rebutted with clear logic how contraceptives cannot really contribute in the acts of abortion. What the state also has failed to do is that it failed to tell us, and it kept silent, on the issue of where does the life of the unborn really begins? According to those who oppose the bill and its use of contraception, life or conception begins at fertilization and using the concept of Biology, fertilization is the stage of sexual reproduction in which a male reproductive cell, or sperm, fuses with a female reproductive cell, or egg, resulting in the mixing of genetic information carried in the parent cells. Furthermore, in plants or animals initiates the development of embryo and begins the events in the development of the adult individual. The researcher thinks that the reason why the state and those who crafted the bill kept silent on the issue on where does life begins, its because the idea and how the word fertilization has been defined could detriment the entire bill. And though some of the bills supporters are arguing that there are researches which tells that life begins not on the meeting of the sperm and egg cell, instead, it begins when brain waves already exists or when there is already a heart that pumps blood, but what we adhere as a universal point where life begins is at the point where fertilization happens. The researches and journals presented in some cases by those who support the bill are still not widely accepted and so we must still remain to what we widely believe and proven. It is also worthy of taking note, according to Raul Nidoy in his published letter to the editors of The Philippine Daily Inquirer, that the basis of Rep. Edcel Lagmans claim of an 85-percent reduction in abortion rate due to contraception is a report of the Guttmacher Institute, which started as a division of Planned Parenthood, the largest provider of abortion services in the United States. And now from this point, a question of credibility of his other sources will arise which could lead to the further disapproval of the citizens towards the bill. Yes, the burden of proof may be on those who oppose the passage of the bill but it is also the responsibility of the state to disprove the claims of those who oppose. Now on why the researcher of this study has stated that it would be better off for the country to pass the house bill into, law it is because much of what the bill

intends to do are not really controversial and are of serious help to the country bolstering the efforts of the health department of the country. The bills goal to provide an enabling environment for the poor and vulnerable in which all can enjoy long, healthy, and productive lives that will promote their rights and protects the life opportunities of future generations, a maternal death review in the LGUs, the national and local government hospitals and other public health units to decrease the incidence of maternal deaths, Mandatory Age-appropriate Reproductive Health and Sexuality Education starting from grade five to fourth year high school to develop the youth into responsible adults, Mobile Health Care Service in every Congressional district to deliver health care supplies and services to be used to disseminate knowledge and information on reproductive health particularly to the poor and needy, and the inclusion of the topics on family planning, responsible parenthood, breastfeeding and infant nutrition as essential part of the free instruction and information to be given by the local population officer of every city or municipality to all applicants for marriage license are all basically necessary in trying to push for a true population development and informed choice by the citizens through responsible parenthood. We cannot afford to banish an entire bill which essentially seeks to promote the common good for the citizens just because of a single clause. If those who oppose the bill believes in the age-old dictum Salus populi suprema lex (The welfare of the people is the supreme law), to which I also believe, it cannot continue to play blind to the overwhelming merits of the RH bill just because of a single clause which just forms part of a bigger solution to the problem of the country. According to Mr. Ernesto M. Pernia, Ph.D. of the University of the Philippines School of Economics, the passage or non-passage of the bill will significantly affect peoples lives one way or the other. And so together with the Mr. Pernia, the researcher of this paper suggests that the country should at least pass the bill into a law but still after some amendments to it to remove clauses which are unconstitutional, and continue to implement whats not contrary to law, morals, public order and public policy.

REFERENCES Aguilar-Sartori, A. Myths behind the Overpopulation Theory. Gratis Books. Retrieved August 21, 2012, from http://www.gratisbooks.com/pchapdet.php?chapter_id=32818 Burk, D. (2007). A Bible Study on Protecting the Unborn. Retrieved August 25, 2012 from unborn/ http://www.dennyburk.com/a-bible-study-on-protecting-the-

Central Intelligence Agency. The World Factbook. Retrieved August 21, from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-worldfactbook/geos/rp.html Department of Budget and Management. (2012). General Appropriations Act. Retrieved August page_id=775 Fact Sheet: House Bill 4244 on Reproductive Health. Rappler.com. Retrieved August 21, 2012, house-bill-4244 Gonzales, J. (2011). A Guide to the Arguments For and Against the RH Bill. Retrieved August 21, 2012, from http://jboygonzalessj.wordpress.com/2011/07/15/a-guide-to-thearguments-for-and-against-the-rh-bill/ House Bill 4244 (15th Congress). (2011). Retrieved August 21, 2012 from Legal Wiki: %2815th_Congress%29 Jho. (2011). 10 Reasons Why We Should Kill RH Bill. Retrieved August 21, 2012, from http://joanneconstantino.wordpress.com/2011/05/16/10rh-bill/ Danburry, CT: Grolier Incorporated Philippine Population At 92.34 Million (Report No. 2012-27). from Lorimer, L.T. (1995). Fertilization. In Grolier Encyclopedia of Knowledge (Vol. 7, p. 247). Reveals The National Statistics Office. (2012). The 2010 Census Of Population And Housing Retrieved August 19, 2012, reasons-why-we-should-killhttp://wiki.lawcenter.ph/index.php?title=House_Bill_4244_ from http://www.rappler.com/nation/9827-full-text21, 2012, from http://www.dbm.gov.ph/?

http://www.census.gov.ph/data/pressrelease/2012/pr1227tx.html Nidoy, R. (2011, June 9). Breaking infatuation for RH bill. The Philippine Daily Inquirer. Retrieved August 21, 2012, from rh-bill http://opinion.inquirer.net/5987/breathtaking-infatuation-forAugust 21, 2012, from

Paul VI. Encyclical Letter. Populorum Progressio. March 26, 1967. Retrieved http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_pvi_enc_26031967_populorum_en.html Paul VI. Encyclical Letter. Huminae Vitae. July 25, 1968. Retrieved August 20, 2012, from

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_pvi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html Perez, A. The RH Bill and the Overpopulation Myth. Retrieved August 21, 2012, from Philippine Star. http://kuro-kuro.org/archives/2916 Pernia, E. (2011, September 22). Arguments contra and pro RH bill. The Retrieved August 21, 2012, from

http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx? articleId=729553&publicationSubCategoryId=75 Reproductive Health Bill. Retrieved August 21, 2012, from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproductive_Health_Bill Sy, D. (2010, October 3). The Reproductive Health Bill and what The Bible Says. Message posted bill-and-what-the-bible-says/ Wegner, C. What Are the Cause of Reproductive Health Problems?. eHow. Retrieved August 21, problems_.html 2012, from http://www.ehow.com/facts_5779209_causes-reproductive-healthto http://www.dennissy.com/the-reproductive-health-