Anti-population bill solons block Lagman speech

Lack of quorum forces deferment

By Lira Dalangin-Fernandez
INQUIRER.net
First Posted 19:02:00 09/16/2008

MANILA, Philippines -- Lawmakers at the House of Representatives opposed to the controversial Reproductive Health (RH) bill succeeded in blocking the delivery of the sponsorship speech by its author that would have formally opened floor debates.

With only 101 of the more than 200 congressmen present after the roll call, the House leadership adjourned the session for lack of a quorum.

The bill's troubles were further compounded when Congresswoman Amelita Villarosa withdrew her signature from House Bill 5043 or An Act Providing for a National Policy on Reproductive Health, Responsible Parenthood and Population Development, bringing down the number of co-authors to 95.

But Albay Representative Edcel Lagman, the bill's main author, was unfazed and expressed confidence that the bill would still hurdle the plenary debates.

Anti-reproductive health bill lawmakers have tried to stop Lagman's sponsorship speech early in the session.

Cebu Representative Pablo Garcia raised a point of order, saying that copies of the bill have yet to be distributed for the members of the House to study.

Quezon City Representative Mary Anne Susano echoed Garcia's view and said the measure was being pushed because of the millions in pesos appropriated for it in the budget.

But Majority Leader Raul del Mar said that there was an agreement among lawmakers that they would allow Lagman to deliver the sponsorship speech and that interpellation would begin next week to give time to the lawmakers to study the bill.

Susano then raised a point of order anew and said that there was no longer a quorum that prompted a suspension of the session.

Before a packed gallery composed of the supporters of the bill from mostly civic organizations on one side and pro-life advocates and religious groups in blue on the other side, Lagman was supposed to deliver his four-page sponsorship speech.

The bill promotes the use of both artificial and natural means of family planning, among others.

"The bill is principally about rights, health, and sustainable human development. The bill is fully transparent. There is no hidden agenda. There are no caveats," Lagman said in a copy of his speech.

"The use of contraceptives for family planning does not make acceptors bad Catholics. But having more children whom parents can ill-afford to feed, educate, medicate, guide and love makes hem irresponsible regardless of their religion," he added.

The Catholic Church, religious groups, and even President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo have expressed opposition to the bill.

"While the bill may not be the panacea to all our ills, it is
definitely not the source of baseless paranoia," Lagman said.

On September 9, the committee on rules approved the plenary hearing of the controversial House Bill 5043 or the "Reproductive Health, Responsible Parenthood and Population Development Act of 2008."

Arroyo, a devout Catholic, is backing the Church's position against artificial contraception as Congress tries to legislate a population management policy.

Lagman, the bill's author, hailed the endorsement of the bill for plenary consideration as a "victory for Reproductive Health advocates who have been waiting for the enactment of this bill for almost a decade and the 96 co-authors of the measure who are unwavering in their support for the bill's eventual enactment."

The bill was first jointly referred to the committee on health and committee on population and family relations which approved it in June.

In August the committee on appropriations approved the appropriation cover of the measure.

source:inquirer.net

Evangelium Vitae #104: "And the dragon stood before the woman ... that he might devour her child when she brought it forth" (Rev 12:4)

"And the dragon stood before the woman ... that he might devour her child when she brought it forth" (Rev 12:4): life menaced by the forces of evil

104. In the Book of Revelation, the "great portent" of the "woman" (12:1) is accompanied by "another portent which appeared in heaven": "a great red dragon" (Rev 12:3), which represents Satan, the personal power of evil, as well as all the powers of evil at work in history and opposing the Church's mission.

Here too Mary sheds light on the Community of Believers. The hostility of the powers of evil is, in fact, an insidious opposition which, before affecting the disciples of Jesus, is directed against his mother. To save the life of her Son from those who fear him as a dangerous threat, Mary has to flee with Joseph and the Child into Egypt (cf. Mt 2:13-15).

Mary thus helps the Church to realize that life is always at the centre of a great struggle between good and evil, between light and darkness. The dragon wishes to devour "the child brought forth" (cf. Rev 12:4), a figure of Christ, whom Mary brought forth "in the fullness of time" (Gal 4:4) and whom the Church must unceasingly offer to people in every age. But in a way that child is also a figure of every person, every child, especially every helpless baby whose life is threatened, because-as the Council reminds us-"by his Incarnation the Son of God has united himself in some fashion with every person".¹⁴⁰ It is precisely in the "flesh" of every person that Christ continues to reveal himself and to enter into fellowship with us, so that rejection of human life, in whatever form that rejection takes, is really a rejection of Christ. This is the fascinating but also demanding truth which Christ reveals to us and which his Church continues untiringly to proclaim: "Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me" (Mt 18:5); "Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me" (Mt 25:40).

Familiaris Consortio #77:Marriage and Communion Between God and People

77. An even more generous, intelligent and prudent pastoral commitment, modelled on the Good Shepherd, is called for in the case of families which, often independently of their own wishes and through pressures of various other kinds, find themselves faced by situations which are objectively difficult.

In this regard it is necessary to call special attention to certain particular groups which are more in need not only of assistance but also of more incisive action upon public opinion and especially upon cultural, economic and juridical structures, in order that the profound causes of their needs may be eliminated as far as possible.

Such for example are the families of migrant workers; the families of those obliged to be away for long periods, such as members of the armed forces, sailors and all kinds of itinerant people; the families of those in prison, of refugees and exiles; the families in big cities living practically speaking as outcasts; families with no home; incomplete or single-parent families; families with children that are handicapped or addicted to drugs; the families of alcoholics; families that have been uprooted from their cultural and social environment or are in danger of losing it; families discriminated against for political or other reasons; families that are ideologically divided; families that are unable to make ready contact with the parish; families experiencing violence or unjust treatment because of their faith; teenage married couples; the elderly, who are often obliged to live alone with inadequate means of subsistence.

The families of migrants, especially in the case of manual workers and farm workers, should be able to find a homeland everywhere in the Church. This is a task stemming from the nature of the Church, as being the sign of unity in diversity. As far as possible these people should be looked after by priests of their own rite, culture and language. It is also the Church's task to appeal to the public conscience and to all those in authority in social, economic and political life, in order that workers may find employment in their own regions and homelands, that they may receive just wages, that their families may be reunited as soon as possible, be respected in their cultural identity and treated on an equal footing with others, and that their children may be given the chance to learn a trade and exercise it, as also the chance to own the land needed for working and living.

A difficult problem is that of the family which is ideologically divided. In these cases particular pastoral care is needed. In the first place it is necessary to maintain tactful personal contact with such families. The believing members must be strengthened in their faith and supported in their Christian lives. Although the party faithful to Catholicism cannot give way, dialogue with the other party must always be kept alive. Love and respect must be freely shown, in the firm hope that unity will be maintained. Much also depends on the relationship between parents and children. Moreover, ideologies which are alien to the faith can stimulate the believing members of the family to grow in faith and in the witness of love.

Other difficult circumstances in which the family needs the help of the ecclesial community and its pastors are: the children's adolescence, which can be disturbed, rebellious and sometimes stormy; the children's marriage, which takes them away from their family; lack of understanding or lack of love on the part of those held most dear; abandonment by one of the spouses, or his or her death, which brings the painful experience of widowhood, or the death of a family member, which breaks up and deeply transforms the original family nucleus.

Similarly, the Church cannot ignore the time of old age, with all its positive and negative aspects. In old age married love, which has been increasingly purified and ennobled by long and unbroken fidelity, can be deepened. There is the opportunity of offering to others, in a new form, the kindness and the wisdom gathered over the years, and what energies remain. But there is also the burden of loneliness, more often psychological and emotional rather than physical, which results from abandonment or neglect on the part of children and relations. There is also suffering caused by ill-health, by the gradual loss of strength, by the humiliation of having to depend on others, by the sorrow of feeling that one is perhaps a burden to one's loved ones, and by the approach of the end of life. These are the circumstances in which, as the Synod Fathers suggested, it is easier to help people understand and live the lofty aspects of the spirituality of marriage and the family, aspects which take their inspiration from the value of Christ's Cross and Resurrection, the source of sanctification and profound happiness in daily life, in the light of the great eschatological realities of eternal life.

In all these different situations let prayer, the source of light and strength and the nourishment of Christian hope, never be neglected.