The Culture of Death is coming to invade the Philippines

through a "reproductive health" bill with rather sinister designs all over it. We do need prayers for my former home.

.. Access to contraceptives is already unrestricted in the Philippines. The government family planning service, which has been in place since the 1970s, has an infrastructure of workers all the way down to the grassroots. .. So what is the purpose of House Bill 5043, which is entitled “An Act Providing for a National Policy on Reproductive Health, Responsible Parenthood and Population Development” .. what makes it so objectionable to the church and those legislators and members of the public who are pushing from the other side? The answer is, coercion. The contraceptive-driven fertility decline program of HB 5043 may be the most coercive ever designed outside China. .. it establishes an “ideal” family size, setting the stage for a proposed two-child policy; it imposes a national sex education curriculum at fifth grade level. Couples would be denied a civil marriage license unless they present a “certificate of compliance” from a family planning office certifying that they have been adequately instructed in family planning and “responsible parenthood”. If before, quota-driven programs have led to gross human rights violations, this time around this bill could easily penalize with fines and jail sentences workers who will be unable to meet their quota. Employers who refuse to provide reproductive health care services to their employees will likewise be subject to penalties. Worse, it curtails freedom of speech, since any person who dares to talk against the program will also be subject to jail sentence and fines. This program turns the Philippines into a veritable police state with the government using police powers to interfere in the personal affairs of its citizens. It will surely drive a wedge between couples since a health worker must provide sterilization services even in the absence of spousal permission -- or incur a penalty; and likewise between parents and children, since the latter can have access to reproductive health services without parental consent. In a generation or two, the six years of value-free sex education the bill mandates for school children will surely create sexually active adolescents.

They are all set to turn Filipino society on its head and brings it down the same path of ruin that many western societies now face: millions aborted every year, families broken up by instant gratification, promiscuity and adultery, women objectified, children abandoned in the aftermath of adultery and the pursuit of self-fulfillment with no commitment, etc. Oh what evils these proponents of that bill are toying with.

And if you follow the story in that link, here's a shocker (that isn't so shocking if you've been studying such lobbies worldwide):

In the House, Congressman del Mar revealed departures from the established procedure in the handling of HB 5043. There were actually four reproductive health bills referred to two House committees. A first hearing on three bills took place on April 29 this year. By the second hearing on May 21, however, the committee chairman announced they would now consider “the substitute bill” (replacing all four bills) and, in the blink of an eye, the committees approved it. Usually a technical working group is convened to painstakingly put together the substitute bill. The question is, where did the substitute bill come from? Former Senator Francisco S. Tatad, an incisive commentator, sources HB 5043 to the Philippine Legislative Committee on Population and Development (PLCPD) — an NGO with offices in the same building as the House of Representatives. .. PLCPD is essentially a foreign body. A popular columnist, Jose Sison, reports that PLCPD’s 2008 lobbying fund of two billion pesos comes from the David and Lucille Packard Foundation, IPPF and UNFPA the latter two both well known for their global agenda to legalize abortion.

IPPF -- the International Planned Parenthood Federation. Ring a bell?

Why Embryonic Stem Cell Research?

Perhaps Prof. Alan Trounson knows why, and so he pursues that. But Prof. Colin McGuckin is as puzzled as I am, and so he has given up on U.K. universities where money is poured into ESCR -- and no one is paying attention to adult stem cell research, despite thousands of successful human treatments. I guess actually treating patients is not the goal for these folks?

Lest we be presumptuous

From today's Gospel reading, from St. Luke 13:1-9:

At that time some people who were present there told him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with the blood of their sacrifices. He said to them in reply, "Do you think that because these Galileans suffered in this way they were greater sinners than all other Galileans? By no means! But I tell you, if you do not repent, you will all perish as they did! Or those eighteen people who were killed when the tower at Siloam fell on them --do you think they were more guilty than everyone else who lived in Jerusalem? By no means! But I tell you, if you do not repent, you will all perish as they did!" And he told them this parable: "There once was a person who had a fig tree planted in his orchard, and when he came in search of fruit on it but found none, he said to the gardener, 'For three years now I have come in search of fruit on this fig tree but have found none. (So) cut it down. Why should it exhaust the soil?' He said to him in reply, 'Sir, leave it for this year also, and I shall cultivate the ground around it and fertilize it; it may bear fruit in the future. If not you can cut it down.'"

Judge orders a 12-year old to abort her baby

There is so much that is wrong in this picture that I can't figure out where to begin.

Legislating for the next generation

That is precisely what legislators did when they voted for both the Abortion Law Reform bill (passed in both houses of the Victorian Parliament, only amendments may be possible) and the Assisted Reproduction Treatment bill (passed the lower house). These are votes to repeat the mistakes in other countries. A generation stolen from the womb, or a generation undergoing social experiment.

Update: Here's an argument for the social experiment of redefining parenthood and raising children with any number of parents. Good luck finding data to support that. Oh, that doesn't really matter, does it? That explains why they didn't bother with data.

Beauty in the midst of madness

My past few blogs were rather morose, and the video below is so beautiful that it is almost a shock encountering it here. But perhaps it should be here, not so much to lighten the mood as to remind me of hope.

[Thanks to The American Catholic blog for this gem.]

The Abortion Law Reform bill was passed

This makes abortions legal in Victoria without restrictions up to the 24th week, and legal all the way through to full term if two doctors agree that it is necessary. It's a sad day, and I can understand the anger of those in the gallery, but their outbursts may be misconstrued, hurting the pro-life cause in the process.

What to do now? Amendments are now apparently welcome, but who knows which amendments, exactly?

The battleground now is the Victorian society itself. Regardless of abortion being legal, it remains illicit in the Church and unacceptable in orthodox Christian ethics. It now becomes a matter of educating ourselves and our children. This is where we lost the battle in the first place: mis-education or missed education. How many so-called Christians and Catholics advocated for this bill in Parliament? How many ordinary citizens did? How many actually had or facilitated abortions themselves? This is where we lost the battle one generation ago. The ethical deficiencies are self-inflicted, or inflicted by educators and parents who became relativists, conformists to modernity, who stopped challenging their children to be consecrated -- set apart -- for God. We reap what we sow.

The sanctity of human life should be part of catechism. Christians have often lived under unjust laws, but what matters is that they live in justice themselves, for we answer to the Heavenly authority, not civil ones. And then we become leaven. Only then will the secular society be transformed.

Speaking objectively

I had been rather peckish today about vandals painting over the pro-life posters at the university and scribbling their own messages (some rather crude) instead of putting up their own oppositional posters. I had declared that these people weren't satisfied with counter-arguments and felt the need to conceal pro-life sentiments because the former group can't handle the truth. My friend Philip simply said "I wouldn't presume to know why they did that" (painted over the pro-life posters).

Mea culpa. I will try to speak objectively. Truth to tell, I do not know if the falsehoods circulating the arguments of abortion advocates are deliberate or accidental. I know that their logic, premises and data are indeed incorrect, but I have no mind-reading ability, hence I cannot judge them as liars. I have no right, and I am sorry.

IVF bill for gay and lesbian parents passes the Lower House

Ever get that feeling that we're getting hit from multiple angles? So while many are on the phone and email (among others) to their MPs concerning the Abortion Law Reform bill, this IVF bill has zoomed past. It still has the Upper House to hurdle, however, and I hope those who are concerned can muster the time to voice concerns to the Legislative Council about this one, too. Both bills are fraught with problems, e.g., lack of data, foresight, appreciation for the big picture, etc.

Incredible abortion statistics

As previously posted, much of abortion advocacy is based on lies. I'd like to temper that by saying that advocates are not always nor necessarily lying deliberately. However, they can be typically unwilling to dig deeper into the issues. I came into the university today to find that campus posters paint and scribbles on top of quoted abortion survivors (born alive after an abortion, fortuitously given medical care and now are scarred but competent adults). The quotes were painted over with red. Some angry scribbles were put in.

What sort of truths are out there? Note these statistics which apparently come from the Guttmacher Institute, itself a well known advocate for abortion "rights":

UNITED STATES Number of abortions per year: 1.37 Million (1996) Number of abortions per day: Approximately 3,700 ... Who's having abortions (income)? Women with family incomes less than $15,000 obtain 28.7% of all abortions; Women with family incomes between $15,000 and $29,999 obtain 19.5%; Women with family incomes between $30,000 and $59,999 obtain 38.0%; Women with family incomes over $60,000 obtain 13.8%. Why women have abortions 1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest; 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child, and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient). ...

So let's go back to facts: what is the abortion lobby about, really?

By their fruits indeed

Over the years, one would notice (if research is actually conducted sincerely) that much of the lobbying to legalize and facilitate abortion on demand is based on lies. When NARAL Pro-Choice America in the US was conceived (simply as NARAL), according to one of its founders, they deliberately exaggerated the number of deaths due to backyard abortions:

"How many [maternal] deaths were we talking about when abortion was illegal? In N.A.R.A.L. we generally emphasized the drama of the individual case, not the mass statistics, but when we spoke of the latter it was always '5,000 to 10,000 deaths a year.' I confess that I knew the figures were totally false, and I suppose the others did too if they stopped to think of it. In 1967, the federal government listed only 160 deaths from illegal abortion. In the last year before the Blackmun era began, 1972, the total was only 39 deaths. [T]he actual total was probably closer to 500." [Aborting America, p. 193.] When it comes to lying, NARAL has continued being "tough and persistent, undiscouraged and unbowed."

The same lies are being used today in Mexico:

Citing the number of women who had had abortions legally in the nation's capital since legalization, Velasco claimed, "What the 12 thousand that were served in the Federal District means is that it is probable that two thousand would have died" had legal abortion not been available. However, Mexico City's own health department gives statistics that differ dramatically from Velasco's estimates of deaths due to illegal abortions. In the year before legalization, the health department recorded that only eight women died from miscarriages and induced abortions. The city does not distinguish between miscarriage and illegal abortions in its official statistics, so it is unknown how many of the eight deaths were caused by illegal induced abortions.

That's one problem I have with the abortion agenda: the obfuscation and outright lies. Here in Victoria is another one: hiding the fact that the Abortion Law Reform bill contradicts existing laws and international agreements. Why can't abortion proponents stick to the truth?

And has anyone else found this eerie echo between the so-called "Abortion Law Reform" bill and the "National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws" (the original name of NARAL)? Surely there is no connection -- it isn't as if the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (who earned about $115 million in profits, according to their last annual report) is planning to set up shop here in Australia. Right?