Teh interesting (non-PHL-related) news stub thread

[Twin-Skies]

Here's an information page on the bill(s)
http://www.ncrfw.gov.ph/inside_pages/leg..._bill.html

Please tell me what you think of this statement:

"I think that the church has valid reason to be concerned, because proper sex education applied to uneducated people will result in lust and too much sex, which will affect the morality and productivity of their constituents."

...And no, it's not like that in the States. We only sleep with people who deserve to be slept with.

As I've state before, this statement implies that people will suddenly become voluptuous if they're exposed to proper sex education. If we followed the chuch's logic, then it also means that if we read about firearms, that would make us trigger-happy, or that reading about serial killers will want us to commit murder. Plenty of us have read Cather in the Rye by this point I assume; Have any of us ever ended up thinking of killing anybody after that?

"I think that the church has valid reason to be concerned, because proper sex education applied to uneducated people will result in lust and too much sex, which will affect the morality and productivity of their constituents."

This argument defeats itself - the "proper sex education" clause implies that the program in mind is comprehensive and is geared specifically so that it's easily understood by the"uneducated." Key word: proper

The reason why so many unwanted births are happening here is exactly because of lack of sex education - the people involved in the act are often horribly misinformed of their consequences. You know it's bad when segments of the masa think pregnancies or even the passing of AIDS occur because of simple physical contact.

I come from a high school that did have a proper sex ed class mind you, and it involved a thorough explanation of how the human reproductive system works. Sure, the class turned out a few giggles here and there, but in the end, it did give us a very clear idea of what may happen given certain "choices" of actions.

We also ended up doing basic theology in college, which delved once again into the sacredness of matrimony and the sacrament of vocation. Guess what? The class required reading into scientific sex ed to give us a better appreciation of the doctrines.

From my experience, you cannot show genuine respect and veneration for the opposite sex unless you have a proper understanding of how they work. Ergo - a proper mix of science and religion.

This is why I think that the CBCP does NOT speak for me, or other more level-headed Catholics. I come from a Catholic school whose policies seem to fly in the face of their critiques of proper reproductive rights.

As for the CBCP's insistence that the bill is pro-abortion (quoting the bill):

Provides the framework for implementing the ten elements of a comprehensive reproductive health program as follows: (1) maternal, infant and child health and nutrition, including the promotion of breastfeeding; (2) family planning and information services; (3) adolescent and youth health; (4) prevention of abortion and management of post-abortion complications; (5) prevention and management of reproductive tract infections, HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmittable infections; (6) elimination of violence against women; (7) education and counseling on sexuality and sexual health; (8) treatment of breast and reproductive tract cancers and other gynecological conditions; (9) male involvement and participation in reproductive health; and (10) prevention and treatment of infertility and sexual dysfunction;

My question to the bishops: Where does it state that abortion is an accepted means of promoting reproductive health?

(4) prevention of abortion and management of post-abortion complications;