1

Introduction The purpose of this term paper is to identify, articulate and critique House Bill number 4244 known as The Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health and Population and Development Bill of 2011 using the philosophy of St. Augustine. It proceeds by organizing and analyzing the Reproductive Health Bill No. 4244 and the Philosophy of St. Augustine. The importance of this term is to prove that the Bill is promoting erroneous concepts of rationalization by exposing and critiquing it using the thoughts of a medieval philosopher. The researcher is motivated to use the thinking of St. Augustine who is the dominant figure and force in the Western Christianity and continue to be a very powerful influence up to the present.1 His teachings helped Christian faith particularly in combating the errors of time. Though we are way ahead of the time of this thinker, however, his inspiration is very much applicable in this modern day particularly that we are facing this one of a kind challenge in our faith and reason. In a country that is eying for development and growth, its leaders should make moves in order to make such developments be felt by the people. The Philippines is one of those countries who are motivated to alleviate its current economic status. To strengthen ones economy, the government must focus its approaches on the physical and material concerns of its people; access to education, health care programs, jobs, infrastructures, food security, disaster preparedness, etc... In order to carry out such measures there is a need of new legislations to cater the demands of the government and the public as a whole. The proponents of this Bill claimed that there is a need to identify

____________, 2003, New Catholic Encyclopedia Second Edition 10 A- Azt, Washington: Gale Group Inc., 852.

the number of children in a family. In other words, there is a need to lessen the number of children, because the country is overpopulated. The more the population is, the larger the number of mouths to be fed. Parents should be more responsible in their way of being parents. In this way the Reproductive Health Bill enters the scene. However, there are big questions laying on this particular legislation. First, does the name of the bill itself really serves its purpose? Is there really a need of this particular bill to attain development? Is population directly proportional to poverty; the larger our number is the poorer we may be? Are the effects of this bill really save lives or in the other way endanger life itself? Does this bill uphold the true spirit of responsible parenthood, reproductive health and population and development? Above all, is this measure not a violation to the will of God resulting to the abuse of the use of freedom? To answer these questions the researcher will interpret the provisions of the Bill and connect it to the philosophy of St. Augustine.

Historical Background It is noted that before we have this House Bill 4244 there had been several versions of it carrying various names in the previous congresses of the Philippines. It was named House Bill 4110 at the 12th Congress, House Bill 16 at the 13th Congress. The first time the Reproductive Health Bill was proposed in 1998. During the present 15th Congress, the RH Bills filed are those authored by House Minority Leader Edcel Lagman of Albay, HB 96; Iloilo Rep. Dale Bernard Tuddao, HB 101, Akbayan Representatives Kaka Bag-ao and Walden Bello; HB 513, Muntinlupa Representative Rodolfo Biazon,

HB 1160, Iloilo Representative Augusto Syjuco, HB 1520, Gabriela Rep. Luzviminda Ilagan.2

On the RH Bill House Bill 4244 is presented in the title: The Responsible Parenthood, Reproductive Health and Population and Development Act of 2011. There are three main themes of this Bill; responsible parenthood, reproductive health, and population and development. In section 2 presents the declaration of policy that: The State recognizes and guarantees the exercise of the universal basic human right to reproductive health by all persons, particularly of parents, couples and women, consistent with their religious convictions, cultural beliefs and the demands of responsible parenthood. Toward this end, there shall be no discrimination against any person on grounds of sex, age, religion, sexual orientation, disabilities, political affiliation and ethnicity. On the third paragraph of the same section continues: The State likewise guarantees universal access to medically safe, legal, affordable, effective and quality reproductive health care services, methods, devices, supplies and relevant information and education thereon even as it priorities the needs of women and children among other underprivileged sectors. How this Bill explained responsible parenthood? Section 4 of the Bill states that Responsible parenthood refers to the will, ability and commitment of parents to
2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproductive_Health_Bill

adequately respond to the needs and aspirations of the family, children by responsibly and freely exercising their reproductive health rights. The Bill states that to be a responsible parent there is a need of identifying an ideal family size. In section 20 it states: The State shall assist couples, parents and individuals to achieve their desired family size within the context of responsible parenthood for sustainable development and encourage them to have two children as the ideal family size. Attaining the ideal family size is neither mandatory nor compulsory. No punitive action shall be imposed on parents having more than two children. There are provisions of the Bill that state on how to achieve this ideal family size. The Bills section 7, Access to Family Planning, section 10, Family Planning Supplies as Essential Medicines and section 11, Procurement and Distribution of Family Planning Supplies clearly state the ways on how to achieve such family size. Since to be parents entails the generation of children, the bill continues to discuss regarding the reproductive health. In section 4 it defines reproductive health as the state of complete physical, mental and social well- being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity, in all matters relating to the reproductive system and to its functions and processes. Reproductive health not only involves the distribution of contraception and qualified them as essential medicines but also it involves not only the parents but the children as well. In section 16, Mandatory age- appropriate reproductive health and sexuality education, states that grade five pupils shall be taught sex education until fourth year high school. Therefore, this would be added in the curricula of the basic education.

Furthermore, the Bill defines Population and Development as to the program that aims to: (1) help couples and parents achieve their desired family size; (2) improve reproductive health of individuals by addressing reproductive health problems; (3) contribute to decrease maternal and infant mortality rates and early child mortality; (4) reduce incidence of teenage pregnancy; and (5) recognize the linkage between population and sustainable human development. Since this Bill centers on the three main issues; responsible parenthood, reproductive health, and population and development, therefore, the researchers focuses on these themes in the analyzing and critiquing process.

Analysis First, the bill is presenting about responsible parenthood that is grounded on the use of freedom of choice as stipulated in section 3 (a) as one of the guiding principles: freedom of choice, is central to the exercise of right, must be fully guaranteed by the State. That is parents have the freedom to determine their desired number of children and that they are free to use whatever kind of contraceptive methods they want provided by the State. St. Augustine states that free choice or freedom can be used to good purposes or liberty. There are two possibilities on this: that to do evil is a proof of free choice and to be able not do to evil is also a proof of free choice.3 However, being able not to do evil is

Gilson, Etienne, 1955, History of Christian Philosophy in the Middle Ages, New York: Random House, 79.

the highest and supreme form of liberty or freedom. The freedom stated in the RH bill is the wrong use of freedom because it leads to the choice of evil and not the good. The true exercise of free choice in responsible parenthood is the exercise of responsibility towards the children. Responsible parenthood is the responsibility of being a parent; to become parents requires children. Therefore, responsible parenthood is the exercise of responsibility towards children. However, the bill is promoting the measures to go away from the responsibility of being parents by inducing methods that would prevent conception. Consequently, responsible parenthood as stipulated in the bill is not an act of responsibility but of irresponsibility, that is of cowardice. How can one exercise responsible parenthood if they are preventing the existence of beings which are the objects of becoming parents? Is it not that this kind of approach of the proponents of this bill is a big absurdity? Responsibility is the total acceptance of ones state of life; responsibility is the conformity of the law of nature, of the natural order. Moreover, responsible parenthood is the exercise of being responsible towards their children, now if couples have only one or two children could they exercise more responsibility? Responsibility of parents does not come only with the capacity to provide food or education, but rather on the openness of the couple to receive the gift of life which results from their sexual union. There is no free will and responsibility if couples are always escaping the reality of the natural consequence of their love making. This responsibility must be exercised to the children, for St. Augustine, the act of learning has brought to

light a twofold fact, namely that we cannot be taught an idea unless we discover it within ourselves, nor a things unless we are shown it.4 To turn away from our responsibility is not the true manifestation of freedom. True exercise of free choice for St. Augustine should cling to that of immutable and universal good, Truth, in order to find joy in it, it possesses the happy life, which is mans supreme good. 5 To fully exercise free choice one needs to receive grace which from God because grace is to attain the purpose of free choice. Therefore, one can only exercise his true freedom if he is in conformity with God or that one follows the will of God. It is in Gods willing that he created man of both body and soul, that man is a soul that uses a body. This follows that the soul is superior to the body in many cases. It is Gods design as the greatest architect to put into man all the parts of his body and their specific functions. Since man needs to procreate, so his reproductive organs are designed to serve their specific purpose. Moving forward to the next theme of the Bill, Reproductive Heath, there is a need for us to understand that to reproduce by the use of the reproductive system of man is inevitable for it is mans nature to reproduce. In connection, the bill, defines Reproductive Health in section 4 as: the state of complete physical, mental and social well- being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity, in all matters relating to the reproductive system and to its functions and processes. This definition sounds good and appealing to the public since it aims to protect the human body. However, if we analyze it deeply there is a big mistake, if we refer to section 10, it states that: products and supplies for modern family planning
4 5

Gilson, Etienne, 1960, The Christian Philosophy of St. Augustine, New York: Random House, 70. Ibid. 147.

methods shall be part of the National Drug Formulary and the same shall be included in the regular purchase of medicine Therefore, to be free from the infirmities of the reproductive system is to take these so- called contraceptive medicines. Following this argument we can infer that pregnancy or the possibility of conceiving life is a kind of disease or infirmity that needs to be cured. The effect of sexual union which is a new life is principally the disease that needs to be medicated, after all this is a form of abortion. Additionally, the sexual union of both man and woman must always be directed to the conception of life, this has more emphasized on the married couples. St. Augustine states that God created the world out of pure love and for the intellectual creatures (men) which he wanted to associate to his own beatitude.6 God wills every creature to exist and preventing such existence is a way of violating the will of God who is the cause of all things. So, man has no right whatsoever to violate the natural order of nature which God has set. Furthermore, the natural and normal function of mans reproductive system is the capacity to reproduce another offspring, so the incapacity of reproduction is in a way abnormal, worthless or a malfunction. What the bill promoted is the use of contraceptives which antagonize, distort and destroy the normal functions and processes of the reproductive system.7 So, reproductive health as promoted by the Bill is a measure that is detrimental to the humans reproductive system. After all the provisions that promotes the well- being of reproductive health does not erase the errors that it promoted. On the other hand, St. Augustines explanation of creation explains creatures in two ways: those who were fixed in their form in the work of six days and those who were

6 7

Gilson, Etienne, 1955, History of Christian Philosophy in the Middle Ages, New York: Random House, 72. Sambajon, Marvin Julian, Jr., 2012, In the Light of Reason, Albay: Sapientia Publishing, 94.

created only in germ, that had still to develop.8 Men belong to the second order in which the kind of existence they have in the time of creation were made invisibly, potentially, causally, as future things which have not been made are made9 So, men who existed after the creation of the first men and the men that will come after our present time are all created by God as part of his work of creation from the very beginning of this world. St. Augustine calls this kind of existence as the seminal reason, for of these hidden seeds which contain everything future ages are to see causes of beings still to come. This is the reason why man continues to produce another man and that the generation of every species in this world continues to take place. The possible existences of individuals are already part in the blue print of Gods creation. This argument leads us to the next theme which is population and development. The Bill defines Population and Development: as the programs that aims to (1) help couples and parent achieve their desired family size; (2) improve reproductive health of individuals by addressing reproductive health problems; (3) contribute to decreased maternal and infant mortality rates and early child mortality; (4) reduce incidence of teenage pregnancy; and (5) recognizes the linkage between population and sustainable human development. This part embraces the entire goal of the bill: responsible parenthood, reproductive health, incorporation of sex education in the basic education curricula, and population and sustainable human development. This sustainable human development can be attained by population control through the employment of reproductive health care
8

Gilson, Etienne, 1960, The Christian Philosophy of St. Augustine, trans. by L.E.M. Lynch, New York: Random House, 206 9 Ibid.

10

programs. In other words, sustainable human development necessarily proceeds from nothing but population control.10 Sounds very appealing and lucrative, however the researcher argues that such is a big mistake. Population development promoted by this Bill is a deception that stirs the mind of the people. The main issue here rests on the sanctity of life which the Bill never promoted but wants to be destroyed. This is a direct contradiction to the philosophy of St. Augustine, since all men are all parts of the seminal reason it does so mean that all individuals to exist are in the mind of God. If life is hindered and not given a chance to flourish by the introduction of contraceptive, abortifacient and sterilizing method therefore, it is a grave violation to the order of creation. Couples especially married ones are co- operators of creation of a new life, in which their sexual union could possibly bring the full existence of the hidden seed of creation. Furthermore, the researcher argues, that the increase of population is not directly proportional to poverty. The promoters of this bill are making the increase of number of children in a family as the primary culprit of the poverty of the country. This claim is out of tune, it is evident that there are many countries that are economically stable yet they have a large number of populations and Japan is one of those. On the other hand, there are also countries that have less number of people yet they are slowpoke in their economic growth, North Korea is one. Therefore, the large number of population is not the main cause of economic poverty. For St. Augustine, the root of the evil from which men suffer was the root of the evil from which he had suffered so much himself, namely

10

Sambajon, Marvin Julian, Jr., 2012, In the Light of Reason, Albay: Sapientia Publishing, 97.

11

pride.11 This is the pride of mismanagement of the countrys resources and the unequal distribution of opportunities. Only few people benefit the wealth of nature and others are not given the chance to enjoy. It is the pride of the politicians to receive whatever prize at stake for the approval of this Bill from benefactor. After all St. Augustine teaches us that the important things to do in order to achieve happiness and the escape from misery is to be with Christ, that freeing oneself from the desires of flesh through grace and the mind from skepticism through revelation.

Conclusion In relation to the provisions of the RH Bill and the philosophy of St. Augustine, it can be concluded that the Bill is erroneous, illogical and absurd in field of both reason and faith. That the Bill is promoting Responsible parenthood by using ones free will, yet, its supporting provisions and claims are in contradiction to its very essence particularly to the essence of true exercise of free choice. St. Augustine promotes that true free will is the practice of not doing evil, so responsible parenthood is the acceptance of ones responsibility and that is to race children and to be open to every possibility that in every act of marital union life proceeds. That the promotion of reproductive health of the Bill which put emphasize on the use of contraception, abortifacient, and sterilizing methods are direct violation of the

11

Gilson, Etienne, 1960, The Christian Philosophy of St. Augustine, trans. by L.E.M. Lynch, New York: Random House, 234.

12

natural order of nature. Since God is the generator of life, so each one must be in conformity to his plan and that the reproductive health which is promoted by the Bill is principally not serving its essence of taking care of the reproductive health but rather it is detrimental to it. That the methods employed by the Bill in the population and development denies that essence of creation since the introduction of contraception, abortifacient and sterilizing methods to control the number of population in directly opposite to the teaching of St. Augustine regarding the seminal reason, that man are cooperators of the work of creation. So, it is clear and evident that the entire Bill is not a work of logically minded people who attain the highest possible educational formation, but rather a mere piece of scrap marked with a big red letter X that is worthy of a trash.

13

References Gilson, Etienne, 1955, History of Christian Philosophy in the Middle Ages, New York: Random House. Gilson, Etienne, 1960, The Christian Philosophy of St. Augustine, New York: Random House. Sambajon, Marvin Julian, Jr., 2012, In the Light of Reason, Albay: Sapientia Publishing. ____________, 2003,New Catholic Encyclopedia Second Edition 10 A- Azt, Washington: Gale Group Inc., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproductive_Health_Bill