For the pathetic and apathetic alike [EDITORIAL]

Along with milk teas, Korean dance craze, and foreign endorsers of clothing lines, some things by the names of “sugar-coating,” “shooting the messenger,” and “tsunami-like ignorance” have taken the Philippines by storm. Based on the latest turnout of events, and by the way they were warmly embraced, it seems like these new trends are as “addictive” as the formerly mentioned ones. However, it is certain that they are not as sweet, entertaining, and desirable.

Getting straight to the core, Filipinos are fighting for something for the wrong reasons. And worse, more often than not, they don’t have reasons at all. Worst, they do not even know what they are fighting for. Such identity [and morality] crisis is manifested by how they handle and react to social issues of today, best represented by the never-ending hullabaloo on the anti-life, anti-poor, and anti-values Reproductive Health (RH) bill.

This is not a generalization, but it appears that a significant number of those who [claim to] support the controversial measure have spent too much time reading cheesy, inspirational quotations about following one’s [selfish] bliss. And in this case, their [selfish] hearts tells them that they can find their happiness in the sense of belongingness—fitting in to and being loved by a judgmental majority of a dysfunctional society. In a very competitive world, joining the bandwagon is undoubtedly one of the best defense mechanisms of the apathetic and pathetic alike. In a world where people are very unforgiving, people feel the need to join the national conversation to conceal their ignorance and pretend that they have something to say [or that they care, at the very least].

However, these people cannot be fully blamed for going with the waves. Who wants to be persecuted, anyway? And who “killed” Jesus Christ again? But then again, what happens to a ship who insists to sail amid strong waves and winds? Get swayed, stumble, and shrink. Aside from lacking an “anchor,” a strong foundation, the captain also lacked personal judgment on when to sail or not, good decision-making skills, and convictions.

By the time the RH bill is passed into a law, history will repeat itself—it will be the second death of Christ in each and every hand of the humanity.

On the other hand, it must not be misunderstood that people join the bandwagon solely for belongingness’s sake—yes, others do it just because they want to project an image of a thinking individual, boosting their self-confidence and other egoistic instincts.

In their attempt to upgrade the society’s perception on them, these people have resorted to more effective ways than mere pretending to care—shooting the messenger. All throughout the span of heated arguments, protesters of the bill, particularly the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines, have received an overwhelming amount of unnecessary criticisms. It was such a commendable act, though—exhausting all possible means to gain support from the easily blinded public, attacking the messenger as an alternative to their inability to support their stand on the issue. Senator Sotto’s points on the dangers of contraceptives, putting all plagiarism issues aside, made perfect sense. But unfortunately, the pros took advantage of the recent plagiarism incident to over-emphasize Sotto’s flaw, thus embarrassing him and creating a different public opinion. Accusing the bishops and other sectors and individuals who oppose the measure as “close-minded,” RH supporters defying the Church’s is perceived nowadays as “liberal thinkers.” What must be understood is that the Church is not attacking the bill just because it has to, but because it is a moral issue, more than being an economic one. The Church, therefore, has every right to air its stand against the bill.

“The Catholic Church and those who are similarly minded ask for nothing more than fairness. After all, we have as much right to expose the dangers and ills of the Bill as those who promote it,” a report on the CBCP website read.

“The Church has the perfect right to preach against birth control and attack its proponents, just like birth control proponents have the perfect right to pontificate about its not entirely fictitious benefits and attack the Church. This is a free country. The Church may threaten hell-fire because hell comes only after death. The afterlife is not covered by the constitution,” said Teddy Boy Locsin in one of his editorials. “Indeed, there is no economic justification for birth control but there is a moral one.”

A lesser population is not, and will never be equivalent to economic development. If that is the case, then the some of the world’s biggest economies and most progressive countries, which are obviously more populated than the Philippines, will not be on the state where they are today. Along the way, something went wrong with management, discipline, education, and culture [of poverty]—but definitely not birth control. In fact, several recent studies showed that the Philippines’ population is its number one key in becoming one of Asia’s most progressive economies.

RH backers always argue that the bill is pro-choice, not understanding that wide availability of contraceptives can mean no choice at all. Wide availability [and distribution] is equivalent to wide usage. If their true mission is to educate, then they do not have to go to the extent of pushing their knocking-on-doors technique, personally handing contraceptives to communities via mobile vans.

They say the bill aims to reduce teenage pregnancies and maternal deaths, yet they do not understand that wide usage of contraceptives, which are definitely not a hundred percent safe, can even pave the way for the increase of such cases. In simpler words, RH means more contraceptives, more sex, and more danger.

They say that they are pro-life and against abortion, not understanding that although RH is not directly about abortion, failure of contraceptives will eventually lead to the acceptance of the practice someday.

And let us assume that RH would really decrease case of teenage pregnancies and maternal deaths. What happens to morality, then? Again, RH means more contraceptives, more sex, more danger, and in this case, a degradation of values. Pleasure will prevail over procreation, making the sacred act a cheap commodity.

“Sex without procreation gave way to its corollary: procreation without sex. Sexless procreation is in vogue now: test-tube babies, artificial placentas, surrogate mothers, artificial insemination, etc. Ironically, those countries that aggressively limited the possibility of procreation are now desperately inventing means to procreate even without sex,” said former UST Rector Rolando dela Rosa, O.P. in his opinion piece published in the Manila Bulletin. “Drumbeaters for contraception have recently found another potent way of advertising it: by scaring people with the dangers of AIDS, the doomsday scenario of overpopulation, and linking contraception with women’s reproductive health.”

Filipinos have lost sight of the more important things that they used to believe in, blinded by the sugar-coated beliefs being fed to them and their own craving to fit in a misguided society. Some day, when it is already too late to change the course of things, when the consequences of supporting an anti-life, anti-poor, and anti-values bill are already taking effect, the pathetic and apathetic alike will realize what the Church and other noble men are truly fighting for.