Wednesday, October 15, 2008

Riposte: With Respect

I have taken time to understand Congressman Ruffy Biazon's thoughtful and well-articulated article in support of the RH Bill, parts of which (and here I would like to apologize in advance to my former editor-in-chief Bob Guerrero for lifting this link from his wonderful site) I am reprinting below:

Some might say that instead of supporting the proposed measure, we should just allocate enough resources to other services such as education, housing and the eradication of corruption. There is no doubt to that. We should do those things. We are trying to do those things. But at the present situation, even if we are able to provide the right number of classrooms, the right number of teachers and all the books that the students need, the ability of poor families to send their children to school is hampered by their absolute lack of resources to provide for the cost of sending the kids to school ----- transportation, snack, uniforms, other miscellaneous requirements, etc.

Statistics show that of 10 children who enter elementary school, only 6 go on to high school, and only 2 finish high school. And based on actual experience in my district, it is not due to the lack of classrooms or teachers. It is the day to day difficulty of surviving through life with the severely limited resources of poor families. Bottomline is, how can a child who does not finish studies lead the ideal productive life?

The intention is not to prescribe a limit on the number of children but to enable couples to decide their family size based on correct information and according to their desired number of children and capability to provide support.

Those who oppose the bill cite various statistics and studies all done abroad. I’m taking a position that is based on what I see with my own eyes as I perform my duties. I see the living conditions of my constituents on a daily basis, especially many of them come to my office to seek assistance for various reasons---health, education, livelihood, etc. On the other hand, I also see what government is trying to do with the little it has to serve the needs of the people.

It is unfair to those who support the bill to be labeled “anti-life”, “anti-family”, “pro-abortion” and many other monickers on the basis of a pre-conceived notions. If there is anyone who desires the best for the Filipino family, that would be the one who is most familiar to the daily struggles of the poor families. The question should not only be whether you are pro-life or not (because there is absolutely no one who is anti-life), but also if the people deserve quality of life.


As opposed to making "comments", which can easily be misconstrued as "criticisms", I would like to open the following "doors" for further discussion:

Door No. 1. Congressman Ruffy Biazon contends that "the ability of poor families to send their children to school is hampered by their absolute lack of resources to provide for the cost of sending the kids to school ----- transportation, snack, uniforms, other miscellaneous requirements, etc." While I agree that the lack of resources is a major stumbling block to providing for a child's education, I would like to ask for clarification regarding what Congressman Biazon means by an "absolute lack of resources". I would like to suggest, respectfully, that the human being's capacity for transcendence (which is not an exclusively Christian concept, but one which is acknowledged in other contexts) seems absent from this analysis.

Door No. 2. It was mentioned above that parties "who oppose the bill cite various statistics and studies done abroad". Perhaps it would interest Congressman Biazon that the latest comprehensive quantitative and qualitative study on character education was in fact done in the Philippines. The study "Adolescent Mindset on Relationships, Love, and Sexuality", a study conducted for the 2nd International Congress on Education in Love, Sex, and Life, was conducted from May to September, 2007. I would gladly furnish him a copy, and if need be, access to people who can put the findings in context.

Door No. 3. I agree with Congressman Biazon when he laments that "It is unfair to those who support the bill to be labeled “anti-life”, “anti-family”, “pro-abortion” and many other monickers on the basis of pre-conceived notions". I nod my head in assent even more vehemently when he observes, quite rightly, that "The question should not only be whether you are pro-life or not (because there is absolutely no one who is anti-life), but also if the people deserve quality of life." Inasmuch as it is important to consider the daily living conditions and immediate prospects of less fortunate Filipino families, I believe that we will be doing these same families a great disservice if we do not explore alternatives to what reproductive health measures should contain. Perhaps we could explore programs that are more or less preventive in nature that educates Filipinos to decide responsibly in terms of cultivating a healthy family life. There are such programs, and I would like to humbly submit these for consideration as alternatives to the idea of reproductive health measures as currently constituted in the RH bill should the need, or interest arise.

I know for some people the idea of considering what seems to be an unrelated issue to the very urgent need to understand the RH bill might seem like computing for the airspeed velocity of unladen swallows, but when there is so much at stake, we shouldn't stop at considering alternatives, whether African or European.

(And yes, that makes TWO references to a SINGLE scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail in a week, but I really don't care. It's hilarious.)

16 comments:

sunnyday said...

Hi John-D!

Let me for now dwell on the cuteness of your sons. What a refreshing sight amid all the "heavy discussions"!

Have a good weekend :-)

John-D Borra said...

Sigh. It's always the case: my thoughts are no match for the cuteness of the boys. ;-)

Alexis said...

Sigh. It's always the case: my thoughts are no match for the cuteness of the boys. ;-)

Add to that the coming pictures of cuteness-overload that is your new daughter and you might as well spend the next few months just posting pictures alone. You could type in nursery rhymes and we'd still read them just to see the pictures. :P



Once again, congratulations on the arrival of Lucia!

WillyJ said...

Very good take John, glad I dropped by here.
Hey, I have a 3yr 8 mo/o son, seems the same age as yours. Has a fascination with toy cars too. He is so much of *everything* all at the same time, whew. What a wonderful blessing, these children.

John-D Borra said...

WillyJ,

Thanks for dropping by. Yes, children are such wonderful blessings, aren't they? Please continue writing. I look forward to your insights on the RH bill. :-)

Mong: A Voice Within Himself said...

Hi congrats on luisa consuelo!i am an avid reader of chuvaness and i was smitten by your new daughter's cuteness!please relay my congrats to mrs. borra.rock on!-sam lucas (AB Hum 2008) :)

sunnyday said...

Saw Lucia's photo, too, at Chuvaness. Beautiful baby!!

Congratulations to your family for the new addition :-)

petrufied said...

Hello John-d!!! I agree, the boys steal the show ;) also saw your little Lucia Consuelo in chuvaness! Congrats to you, Tina, Juan and Manuel!

I'm glad also for your points on the Biazon essay. now i have more ways to look at it :)

John-D Borra said...

Thanks Diana and Nicole! Hmm, funny how everyone seems to find out from chuvaness. Must talk to her about stealing my thunder on the blogosphere. ;-)

Ruffy Biazon said...

Hello!

I hope you don't mind me posting my contribution to the discussions ushered by your open doors.

It's fortunate that I came across your blog since some of the questions raised in your discussion points are answerable by yours truly.

Based on the link you provided, it appears that you came across my blog entry via another person's site where she re-posted my blog.

I would like to refer you to a direct link to my site, where you will find Part 1 and Part 2 of my blog entries about the Reproductive Health Bill including comments from readers.

Perhaps a complete reading of my entries will give more insight on my thoughts about the bill.

Having pointed that out, please allow me to discuss the open doors:

On Door No. 1 - a clarification is sought on what I meant about "absolute lack of resources". When I write, I do it in a straightforward manner. When I wrote that families had an absolute lack of resources, it simply meant they don't have sufficient money to fund the needs of a student who goes to school everyday. As stated in my blog entry, it referred to everyday needs such as transportation fare, snacks, even uniforms.

I speak from practical experience--what I personally encounter during my community work as congressman of the district of Muntinlupa City. So when I wrote that families have an absolute lack of resources, I refer to families whom I have personally related with and have seen first hand their struggle to meet daily needs.

With regard to "the human being's capacity for transcendence" which for you seems to be "absent" from my analysis of their daily needs, I would need further clarification on that since my limited philosophical view of their situation is obscured by the practical realities that they face.

On Door No. 2 - I am glad that there is such a thing as "Adolescent Mindset on Relationships, Love, and Sexuality", a study conducted for the 2nd International Congress on Education in Love, Sex, and Life, was conducted from May to September, 2007 in th Philippines.

I was not aware of that study because that is not the study being quoted by opponents of the bill. I refer to citations they made on studies which show that in the United States, pregnancies out of wedlock increased when contraceptives were introduced.

But it was a study done in a country with a culture, society and even a legal system quite different from the Philippines.

If you can provide a copy of the study you mentioned, I would appreciate it very much, since I particularly mentioned in my blog that I would prefer a study conducted in the Philippines.

On Door No. 3- Looking for alternative solutions to the country's problems is precisely the driving force behind the RH Bill. Instead of limiting ourselves to the Natural Family PLanning method (which is what some sectors are saying), we are looking at other effective, safe and acceptable alternatives that couples may choose from after being properly informed and educated.

Having said that, it should also be understood that the proponents of the bill are not saying that it will be the ultimate solution to the country's woes. Definitely, other strategies must be employed, such as exploring "programs that are more or less preventive in nature that educates Filipinos to decide responsibly in terms of cultivating a healthy family life".

Such alternatives are welcome and any suggestion, proposal may be submitted anytime and will be received with eagerness and pleasure.

Thank you very much!

John-D Borra said...

Congressman Biazon, thank you for passing by this discussion on the RH bill.

Thank you for honesty and straightforwardness. Your directness and clarity in expression speaks very highly of your introspection and good intentions.

I apologize for quoting from incomplete sources. My apologies. I used to teach at undergraduate and postgraduate level before I decided to temporarily postpone my academic career and concentrate on my growing family. I would have censured any of my students had they committed the same oversight I have.

I was one of the only Filipino speakers during the 2nd International Congress on Education in Love, Sex, and Life. We would love to share these results with you. As most of us (including the organizers) are involved in youth work in one way or the other, it will take some time to gather the key people. I hope you don't mind if I contact you again through your blog when everyone's in town again.

It was a pleasure discussing these issues with you sir. I look forward to reading your insights on the discussion of the RH bill.

WillyJ said...

John,
Very good discussion.
I did ask Congressman Biazon about his take on the prohibitive and punitive provisions of the bill,
and he has responded graciously as well. Check out our exchange in his post here

John-D Borra said...

WillyJ,

You raised some very good points regarding the nature of the RH education that the government seeks to enact in public schools.

It is interesting to note that Congressman Biazon himself prefers a more values-based approach to RH education as opposed to a murky "age-appropriate" approach which, in my opinion, would be a nightmare to define and implement.

I, for one, prefer "character education" as opposed to "sex education". This isn't about using condoms. This should be about the kind of life we want our children to aspire for.

Again, it was a pleasure reading your insights. Congressman Biazon has been a keen and thought-provoking participant in our discussions. He seems to be a decent sort: principled and well-meaning. I look forward to further discussions with you both.

Thanks for dropping by the blog!

sunnyday said...

This is a wonderful and edifying development indeed. Discussion, when carried out this way, can be very fruitful.

I hope for more fruits! And will do my part from where I am, of course.

sunnyday said...

Funny .. that comment about chuvaness stealing your thunder, tee-hee!

WillyJ said...

My take on the 14 Ateneo professors' statement