Some Questions I Wish RH Fans Could Answer

Barely a few days into the new year and the Pro RH camp has fired the first shot into this battle for lives. This time it came in the form of a simple PR from the Population Commission, which said that we will hit 100 million this year. Once again, mainstream and social media are abuzz with people clamoring that we need the RH law, which is now in Supreme Court Limbo following the SC's status quo ante order.

This is by no means an accident or a coincidence. The RH machinery makes sure that from time to time the media will report something about the RH law. Haven't you noticed? Last time around, it was the rising incidence of HIV cases. This time it's the population 'ballooning' to a hundred million. Next time I bet it will be about the rise in unwanted pregnancies. This well-oiled, and well-funded RH machinery will make sure that society will be saturated with news proclaiming the RH Gospel.

For the longest time the pro-life side has been touted by the anti-life side as religious fanatics whose faith rules over the intellect. In short: they think we're the stupid ones. Next time they remind you that you're stupid because you take the side of life, ask them to take time to answer these simple questions.

1. Exactly how many Filipinos does it take to say that we are really overpopulated? No one has been able to give me an exact number yet. Can you?

2. Would God create you if He knew there would not be enough food and resources to keep you alive? There's plenty for everyone's need, but not for everyone's greed. The poor remain poor and the rich remain rich because of greed. Lowering the population does nothing to address this problem of greed.

by Jess Abrera

3. Why are we trying to lower our population when the rest of the world is desperate to raise theirs?  A case of gaya-gaya, puto-maya? Countries like Japan, China, Singapore, France, Italy, and Russia are desperate to jack up their birth rates. Why are we imitating their folly? The demographic and economic implications are the same. If they're losing workforce because of too few babies born and too many old people around, it will happen to us too, if we put the breaks on our population.

4. If you're against PDAF, why aren't you against RH? So you went to Luneta and protested the unscrupulous spending of billions of taxpayer's money in things that did nothing to help the poor and advance us into progress. Tell me again how funding RH will give the poor access to basic things such as food, shelter, education, job opportunities, and skills training?

by Jess Abrera

5. Can you look at this, say out loud "we need 13.9 billion pesos to implement the RH law", and be at peace with yourself? 

That is a picture of the bunkhouses they're building as temporary shelters for Yolanda victims in Tacloban. Architect Jun Palafox said in an interview with Inquirer Radio:

“I can confirm they (bunkhouses) were substandard and undersized,”

International standards, he said, require bunkhouses to be at least 20 square meters and should have two bedrooms.

“Daughters should not be sleeping with their fathers or brothers, it’s a basic human requirement,” he explained.

“What I saw there was so inhumane.”

Palafox, who has worked with 38 other countries in rebuilding disaster-stricken areas, compared the bunkhouses that they built in Sri Lanka and Malaysia to the ones being built in Leyte.

“I’m reminded of the saying, `We build monuments for the dead but we can’t even provide decent housing for the living’,’’ he said by phone when interviewed by the Inquirer.

He added that the bunkhouses in Leyte have violated various laws in terms of building construction, saying that the spaces for the families are cramped and the materials used were fire hazards.

“Various international organizations confirmed that they (bunkhouses) are cramped and are fire hazards; there is no privacy; it violates the building code… I would not put my family there,” Palafox said. “How can you put a family of five into a six to nine square-meter room while the materials used were one-fourth plywood.”

Palafox also said that the roofing, which were made with  “dos aguas” galvanized iron sheets (two slopes) were the same materials that were blown away during the onslaught of “Yolanda.”

They used the same materials that were blown away in the storm, and they just repeated what was there in the first place,” Palafox said. “You don’t have to be an engineer or an architect to see it, it is a no brainer, maybe a first year Architecture student can tell you this is substandard,” he said.

This is how the government treats us. This is how the government treats the poor. No wonder the President and his cohorts have no shame in passing the RH law. Their idea of eradicating poverty is making poor people have less children, so they don't have to do the difficult work of finding real, long-term solutions to poverty and corruption. 

Pro RH friends, wake up!