Sex Bill 4244 - Archbishop Oscar V. Cruz

Sex Bill 4244

PUBLISHED ON MAY 20, 2011 

‘The end products of this bill are promiscuity, insensibility, amorality’

ARCHBISHOP OSCAR V. CRUZ

There are times when the sad truth has to be said. There are occasions when dire reality must be pointed out. And this is that instance when one has to call a spade nothing else than a spade.

Now why call the hotly debated issue “Sex Bill 4244”?

To call it “Reproductive Health Bill” is a big distortion. Reason: the Bill is not “reproductive” simply because it is against reproduction. Neither may the bill be about health precisely because the chemicals in the contraceptive pills can be anything but healthy.

To title it “Responsible Parenthood Bill” is a gross falsity. Why? It is specifically against parenthood.  And it particularly promotes irresponsibility by promoting the unlimited enjoyment of copulative right yet deliberately separating the parental obligation that could come from it.

Hence, the right and proper title is “Sex Bill 4244.” Take away the dear trimmings and endearing niceties from the Bill and this is its fundamental tripod: Sex. Safe Sex. Sexual Methods. The conclusion is then elementary: It is the “Sex Bill 4244” in plain and elementary language.

Sex is treated as something separate from the human person with its inherent dignity, rights and obligations. Thus looked upon, sex becomes but a piece of meat.  Safe sex is distinct preoccupation.  What is honorable and noble has now become dangerous. Hence, people should be protected from it. Sexual Methods freeing human sexuality from personal accountability—this is the fundamental rationale behind the drive for contraceptives unlimited. Withdrawal. Rubber. IUD. Pills.  Injectibles. Vasectomy.  Tubal ligation.  And others still in the making.

End products of Sex Bill 4244:  Promiscuity.  Insensibility. Amorality.

The Bill promotes promiscuity. It guarantees copulative delight without fear or worry.   No attention to their consequences.  No concern for human dignity.  It invites sexual consummate actions with others not his or her spouse.  It induces “lovers” to premarital relationships.  It draws young people to sexual acts.  Reason: No problem.  No conception. No dispute.

The Bill encourages insensibility. Simply enjoy sex with anybody at anytime, in any way and at any place.  The good manners and right conduct about human sexuality are irrelevant.  The good or evil of sexual acts is nonsense.  The propriety or inequity of sexual encounters is immaterial.  The supreme law of life is sexual delight.  Sexual deviates are likewise a non-issue.

The Bill inspires amorality. Just enjoy sex.  Simply ensure safe sex.  Try any and all sex methods that give the greatest sexual pleasure. Ethics?  What is that?  Morals? So what?  Sexual amorality promotes addiction to sex. And sexual addiction is a real family malediction, a special empirical social curse.

The concern for children welfare and material care is admirable.  These however are debased when proclaimed under the cover-up of a Sex Bill.  The pursuit of human socio-economic development is admirable. Nevertheless, it becomes questionable when it makes the human being its adversary.

Pitiful Pilipino People (PPP)!  They are the enemy of the government.  They are the cause of poverty.  They are the liability of the country.  Then “Kung walang corrupt,  walang mahirap!” Now:  “Kung walang ipapanganak, walang mahirap!Then:  “Ang daang matuid!” Now:  “Ang daang masikip!” Then:  “Kayo ang boss ko!” Now:  “Ako ang boss ninyo!”

One thing is certain: When those already born do not want others to be born like them, there must be something very wrong about this.

 

(A retired archbishop, the author is former president of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines. He is at present the judicial vicar of the CBCP national tribunal of appeals, which handles appeals for the dissolution of marriages.)

Newsbreak’s coverage of the RH Bill debate is in partnership with the Friedrich Naumann Stiftun