Pro-Life. What does it mean? A quick search in the internet provides us the answer.

Pro Life advocates the legal protection of human embryos and fetuses, especially by favouring the outlawing of abortion on the ground that it is the taking of a human life. But, is that everything we need to know about being Pro-Life? Why dont we dig deeper and see beyond abortion. Life means a conscious and intelligent existence; pro is a noun which means you are in favour of something. Thus, being pro-life goes beyond the favoring the outlawing of abortion. Being Pro Life values the QUALITY of LIFE; it values life that it should advocate the improvement in ones well-being; it values the way how life is lived. The Responsible Parenthood, Reproductive Health and Population and Development Act of 2011 or commonly known as the RH Bill promotes basic human right to reproductive health, womens health, and the welfare and rights of children. The RH Bill calls for the protection and fulfilment of the reproductive health and rights of couples, adult individuals, women, and adolescents. It aims to provide medically safe, legal, accessible, affordable, and effective reproductive health care services. It ensures couples FREEDOM TO CHOOSE the number of children they wish to have, given their consideration to the health of women and resources available to them. Most importantly, the Act recognizes that ABORTION IS ILLEGAL. Those who are opposed to the said bill claims that it subtly promotes abortion, belittle the discipline of the Filipino couple, adult, and adolescents, it denies the right of a couple to marry without first learning about family planning which violates their individual freedom. They are against contraceptives; they pointed out how the bill belittles the discipline of the people. They say they are Pro Life. Yes, because they are against abortion, I think WE ARE ALL AGAINST ABORTION, right? But then again, this isnt just about abortion. This is about LIFE how Filipinos, particularly women and children, would be able to live their life with a choice. Taking a look at the House Bill No 4244 Section 3, the Guiding Principles of the RH Bill clearly states that Freedom of choice, which is central to the exercise of right, must be fully guaranteed by the State; Since human resource is among the principle assets of the country, maternal health, safe delivery of healthy children and their full human development and responsible parenting must be ensured through effective reproductive health care; The State shall promote all effective natural and modern methods of family planning that are medically safe and legal; and while this Act recognizes that abortion is illegal and punishable by law, the government will ensure that all women needing care for post-abortion complications shall be treated and counselled. If this is not enough to think that RH Bill promotes the quality of life, how about we take a look at Sections 6, 8, 14, and 15? Each of the said sections promotes reproductive health care by improving hospitals and services rendered to patients with reproductive health concerns. Isnt this a good way to improve life, we get to help the person who gives birth to take good care of her reproductive system? More so, by educating adolescents about reproductive health and sexuality education will open their mind of the consequences of engaging in sexual activities. How many of you can openly talk about sex with your parents? I bet most of you feel awkward, right? Section 16 of the act do not intervenes with the parents

teaching; rather, it aims to help. Sex education do not encourage sex, rather, it teaches adolescents why they should not engage in sexual relationships. It answers the questions and satisfies the curiosity of the students and hope that with this knowledge, they would do the right thing and opt for a responsible relationship. But when people simply cannot resist the urge, Sections 10 and 11 talk about family planning supplies. We really shouldnt deny that most people have sex, married or not. I know all of you know someone who engages in such activity. There is really nothing we can do about it, why dont we just help them avoid unplanned preganancy? Here are some arguments made by the opponents of RH Bill: We believe that the poor are human persons who are capable of practicing discipline. We protect the real essence of the woman, her uterus, by keeping the dangerous pills from destroying it. The government cannot, on the one hand, guarantee the universal basic human right to reproductive health with its concomitant right to make free and informed decisions, and on the other hand advocate a policy that tells parents especially womenwhat their choices should be. Such an approach is an unjustifiable affront to the dignity and capacity of the poor. Maternal Health requires access to healthcare facilities and reproductive health education, not contraceptives. Economic development is not synonymous with small population size, and that a large population is not only sustainable but an asset to development.

This is what I can say. First, all of us are capable of practicing discipline. The poors capability of having discipline isnt questioned. BUT, tell me this, do they practice it? Capability is different from ACTUALLY doing it. Second, RH Bill protects every woman. That is why this Bill is made on the first place; to secure the health of women particularly its reproductive system. Moreover, only medically safe and legal contraceptives are promoted by the bill. Third, we all have a choice. Women are free to choose what they want which is clearly stated in the guiding principles of the bill. Next, maternal health development is enhanced by developing hospitals and services rendered. It is clearly stated in Sections 6, 8, 14, and 15 how maternal/reproductive health should be improved and to be made accessible and cheaper or free. Contraceptives are a different issue. It should be clear that the RH Bill promotes the welfare of women not just contraceptives. Lastly, economic development may not be synonymous with population size, but development per se is associated with population size. Development isnt just about the economy; it is about education, health and many other issues. We may have a developing economy, but hows development going with regards to the health of the poor children and women? It is rash to say that a large population is an asset to development. Can the country finance the needs of the said asset? I dont think so.

I am born and raised as a Catholic; I know my faith and my beliefs. Supporting the RH Bill does not make me less Catholic. I believe in its purpose. I believe that this Act will promote the quality of life of each people by making it known how we are supposed to take good care of our reproductive system. Think about this, would you rather let the ignorant couple, adult, and adolescent enjoy the an hour of pleasure then suffer for years than support the amendment of the RH Bill who advocates nothing but the welfare of every woman and its child?