My take and my turn to speak out.
As an avid blogger, I was originally doing a research on the education system of the Philippines when I stumbled upon the news of the Reproductive Health bill still under debate, which eventually led me to a blog, AlterNation 101 in blogspot, where I read his take on the issue:

"I cannot fathom how promoting parental responsibility and financing everyone's freedom to have sex irresponsibly could mix together. Surely, the proposed law spreads around nice words such as responsibility, healthcare, freedom, choice, development, rights, equality, couples, etc. Yet it is nothing but an attempt to remove God from our government and society."

I cannot help but ponder on this fallacious statement and had me thinking about my stand on RH bill. The statement generally stands on an illusion that one is not a Catholic if you dare support this bill. First of all, the bill does not, as the blogger Sef Dudeo distastefully puts it, "finance everyone's freedom to have sex irresponsibly." And if we're reading the same bill at all, it actually does the complete opposite. Second, one can support family planning that implements parental responsibility and still be a good Catholic.

I cannot interpret the RH bill as "anti-life." My definition of anti-life would be to completely deprive of the people of access to such knowledge. The Church claims that it is the parents' responsibility to educate their children on these delicate issues. If one would allow that claim is based on the assumption that every parent in the country is already educated, well-informed and updated, as well as emotionally and mentally prepared to discuss such information to their children, I think critics should bite their tongues and take into consideration the great number of citizens, especially those in poverty lines, who did not have the opportunity to learn , much less discuss, anything about sexual health.The opportunity to be educated about nutrition, family planning, parental responsibility and Health care in full, honest and appropriate disclosure is hindered because the Church has been hysterically opposing it as unacceptable and un-Catholic to do so.

Un-Catholic, is it, to inform the youth, couples and families about their sexual Health? I think people have the right to know and be completely aware of their reproductive biology, the odds of infertility, the responsibility and possible complications of pregnancy/child-rearing, their capability to prevent STDs and HIV/AIDS, or the understanding what unwanted pregnancy and abortion could lead to? How is it un-Catholic, exactly, to show people how to properly manage their sexual well-being?

I am a Roman Catholic, but I think it is completely ridiculous when the Church are scared off their wits just hearing the terms "abortion", "sex education" or "contraceptives" like parents suddenly get uptight when a kissing scene comes up on the TV screen and command their sixteen-year-old to close his eyes until it's over. The Church is screaming bloody murder, saying the bill would lead to the legalization of abortion. The RH bill "expressively provides that abortion remains a crime and prevention of abortion is essential to implement" the program. How do we prevent abortion? By not mindlessly engaging early in sexual activities that would lead to unwanted pregnancies. The best way to delay these early initiations to sexual relations is to instill correct sexual values along with the knowledge.

Ironic, isn't it, that the Philippines is the most Catholic-dominant country in Asia yet it manages to have one of the highest abortion rates around? Of course, I'm not saying that it's the Church's fault that abortion is at large, but I strongly suggest that they let go of the narrow concept of sexuality education being unacceptable simply because they do not understand how this knowledge would significantly reduce, if not eliminate, the number of abortions in the country. I do not want our future generation to suffer from their irrationality, suspicion and overall mistrust to their own country health  .

Another criticism to this bill would be that sexuality education will "spawn a culture of promiscuity." The message they're relaying is that: this bill will teach the youth to have sex. If they're taught to have sex accompanied with the use of artificial contraceptives, we will spawn a generation of sex maniacs.

This is a very disappointing, black-and-white view of how the Church sees the youth today. Keep the youth ignorant so that they won't engage in sexual activities? What they don't know won't hurt them? I think people who are opposing on this bill flew off the handle when they read that the RH education program would discuss these "delicate issues" to Grade 5 elementary students up to 4th year high school students and neglected the key word "age-appropriate" written with it. The bill does not promote the youth "to have sex." It simply seeks to quench their curiousity with appropriate information and proper guidance before they turn to incompetent sources for answers to what's happening to their bodies.

Tell me what does promote a culture of promiscuity- ignorance or honesty?

More than 50 percent of Filipinos favored a "population policy, including family planning." So I'm wondering if the Church has the best interests of their people at heart, or they're simply voicing out their idealistic views for the sake of voicing it.

Just yesterday, the headline in the Philippine Inquirer was "Bishops quit RH bill talks." The CBCP (Catholic Bishop's Conference of the Phils.) representatives have walked out of Senate discussions on the reproductive health bill, saying that their views are "only duly noted" and that lawmakers "invited us just for the sake of consulting us." Congressman Lagman poignantly reminds, commenting on the remarks of one of the representatives, that "you are not invited here to get what you want, but to give your views. If your views would not be consistent with what legislators think should be the national policy, you have to defer to the legislators."

Tasked to sponsor the bill on the Senate floor, Senator Biazon defended the government's right to pass this bill, responding that (this is my fave portion of the news article): "this is an affair of the State. The State must respond to the needs of the people. If the teachings of the Church are against the use of modern artificial contraception, the Church should touch base with their flock. They should go to the pulpit, and teach. I hope they're fair when they do this."

Frankly, the CBCP wouldn't probably understand a thing or two about family planning until each of them are raising children of their own.