Church opposes Reproductive Health Care Act in Philippines
2 September 2008 by Stardust
The Catholic church knows of the problems with population growth and poverty, yet they still want people to take no measures (except natural ones) to prevent pregnancies. If they think it is okay to use natural ways of avoiding pregnancy, then that is still interfering with their “God’s plan” by preventing a baby from being conceived, isn’t it? The Church wants to tell poor people to keep having babies that they cannot feed while never proposing a plan as to how to feed and house them. They do not have a plan for overcoming poverty. They never open the Vatican doors to allow the poor to take advantage of the niceties that the Pope and Church officials have there. They just want the people to keep “multiplying” because of the superstitions they believe in.
Philippines’ first family planning programme faces church hurdles
MANILA (AFP) – In a country where three babies are born each minute and the Catholic Church exerts heavy influence, the long battle for a family planning programme could finally be reaching its climax.
Philippine congressman Edcel Lagman, who has introduced a Reproductive Health Care Act that appears to be gaining widespread support, believes the time has come for the Philippines to take family planning seriously.
“Despite what the church is saying Filipino people, especially the poor, want family planning,” he told AFP in an interview.
“They want to have control over what methods they use and they want the ability to choose without fearing a backlash from the church,” he said.
National surveys by pollsters Pulse Asia and the Social Weather Station have repeatedly shown that more than 80 percent of Filipinos want to have control over their fertility.
The Catholic Church, however, is campaigning against the bill — which must receive the support of the majority of congress and senate members before being presented to the president for her signature.
Some church leaders are threatening to excommunicate legislators who support it, with some saying they might refuse to preside over marriages or administer Holy Communion to anyone associated with the bill.
The Roman Catholic Church is traditionally opposed to any form of birth control, a position reaffirmed by Pope Benedict XVI.
Then there is this nonsense which implies that following the Church’s sanctioned sex that somehow makes one a better citizen and better parent:
“Couples who have the discipline to practice the church-sanctioned natural family planning methods are in possession of true values of life and tend to pass it on to their children. They also tend to be good citizens.
“If there is discipline in the marital bed, then there is discipline in the streets, there is discipline in schools, there is discipline in the government,” he said
An Irish-Catholic family lives behind us. The parents are about my age and they have six children and then their daughter who they must have passed on “Catholic values” to has been pregnant by three different boys, and has three children and all live there in the same house. The father is far from the ideal dad. I have seen him punch his teenage son in the stomach, he is drunk and disorderly much of the time, and he is an all-around jerk who verbally abuses his wife, kids and grandkids. But they have those babies God wants them to have so they are A-Okay in the Church’s eyes.
Then we hear in the news yesterday about Palin’s family problems. While promoting Christian morals and family values, turns out that Palin’s teenage daughter is pregnant. Many conservatives are whining that children of politicians should be off-limits to public scrutiny. However, the actions of the children of evangelical politicians can illustrate that despite their painting themselves as having some sort of superior values than everyone else, they do not.
What irks me about Palin is that she has opposed sex education programs:
Palin herself said she opposes funding sexual-education programs in Alaska.
“The explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support,” she wrote in a 2006 questionnaire distributed among gubernatorial candidates.
And what are McCain’s views?
McCain’s position on contraceptives and teen pregnancy issues has been difficult to judge on the campaign trail, as he appears uncomfortable discussing such topics. Reporters asked the presumptive GOP presidential nominee in November 2007 whether he supported grants for sex education in the United States, whether such programs should include directions for using contraceptives and whether he supports President Bush’s policy of promoting abstinence.
“Ahhh, I think I support the president’s policy,” McCain said.
2 September 2008, on 10:45 am
Here’s hoping the Philippine Legislators have the huevos to buck the RCC and pass this Health Care Act. If the RCC wants people to keep popping out babies as the lawd wishes, then the RCC better follow behind the lawd with child support once all those babies are born. And when the Vatican has sold off its last gold chalice and auctioned its palace and put the Pope out on the street in rags, we’ll see if they sing the same song.
2 September 2008, on 11:19 am
It’s beyond me why anyone would listen to a bunch of evil, rich, selfish freaks with a taste for little boy flesh about anything.
They don’t want people to use birth control because keeping people poor, desperate and open to their brand of cult superstition is part of the plan. It’s hard to sell the childish notion of a magic happy place that only exists for the “good” guys after a life time of bending over for nothing when they’ve got little to nothing else to hope for.
People given adequate food, water and education tend not to turn to superstitious gobbledygook and are harder if not impossible to control with the “our magic invisible sky daddy is gonna get you someday” threats.
I’ve seen the crapolik form of “charity”. They’ve got the cash and influence to make the lives of a large group of people better but that would involve giving up all those magnificent dresses and the private cars and personal servants and you know how god frowns on that. What’s the point of being porn king of the vatican if you don’t get the perks?
As for the palin disaster, I get a huge belly laugh out of the fact that they’re touting the unwed pregnant 16 year old as having “chosen life”. She’s 16. Her mother is governor and she lives in a small town in alaska. What choice did she have exactly? The choice to smile and pretend she’s happy about being forced to give birth and get married by her mother?
Might as well cover her with a burka and be done.
2 September 2008, on 11:37 am
Her mother is governor and she lives in a small town in alaska. What choice did she have exactly?
She is doing as she is told. And it’s easier to do as one is told if Mommy is going to hire a nanny for her like she does her own children. It’s easier to have the child if you live in luxury, have money for medical bills, etc. I don’t understand the getting married at 17 though. They can have the child without the marriage at such a young age. I wonder how long that marriage will last or how happy it will be. For some in this situation, the marriage does work, but very few.
2 September 2008, on 12:02 pm
Stardust, didn’t you know the lawd would smite her and and family for choosing life OUTSIDE OF MARRIAGE. It seems really funny and ironic to me…this whole “choose life” issue never really seems like much of a choice at all, but rather, the only option that doesn’t entail the wrath and anger of militant fucktards with massive superstitions and miniscule brains.
Are you fucking kidding me?!? Excommunication?! IN 2008?!? No wonder it’s taken the Filipino people this long to figure out condoms will prevent spawning offspring…
2 September 2008, on 1:05 pm
Stardust, didn’t you know the lawd would smite her and and family for choosing life OUTSIDE OF MARRIAGE.
Yeah, cuz, marriage fixes everything. Especially teenage marriage. Of course, in Biblical terms, at 17, Bristol’s a little on the ripe side. She should have 3-4 kids underfoot by now, really.
I’m only surprised they didn’t claim an immaculate conception, even though they aren’t cat-licks.
As for choices, I think OurLadyof PM is spot on: Might as well cover her with a burka and be done.
I’m betting the wedding’s shotgun style. Whether the gun’s pointed at one, the other, or both teens is my question.
2 September 2008, on 1:14 pm
As for the GOP’s would be VP, Sarah Whatsherface, it gives me such joy that a woman who promotes capital punishment and keeping our troops in Iraq for as long as it takes to secure “victory”, has been described repeatedly as being “pro life” just because she opposes abortion.
I wish that the goddam media would look past all the PR issues of the fact that she is a soccer mom and focus on what the woman stands for and what she would do as our VP. For example, in addition to being opposed to sex education, she has stated repeatedly that she would have no problem supporting the teaching of creationism alongside evolution in our science classrooms.
Amnio results showed that her fifth child had Downs Syndrome, but she elected to continue the pregnancy to term. I give her a lot of credt because I know, from first hand experience, how difficult a decision like that can be. But, in the end, she looses the credit because she would IMPOSE that same decision on everyone.
The prospect of a McBush Administration is scary enough but I shudder to think what would happen to this country if McBush died in office and this theocratic nazi became our commander in chief. The notion of the sorts of people she would appoint to the Supreme Court is enough to render me sleepless. My wife and I are already looking at employment opportunities abroad should the democrats loose in November.
2 September 2008, on 1:43 pm
I am worried that this means she’s going to get even more votes, since this is the face of so many families anyway. Too many kids, a teenage pregnancy or two… this will realy strike a chord in some sectors of the voting populace.
“…what would happen to this country if McBush died in office…”
Maybe Cheney would come back? That’s who’s really running the country now. :\
2 September 2008, on 2:14 pm
Karen, definetly shotgun wedding. My mom told me that back in the 50’s, girls would intentionally get pregnant just to force marriage on the father. Could this be what little Bristol has up her sleeve? Anyway, fuck the RCC in the Philippines. It seems that the third world is the only place left that the RCC has any real control left. Perhaps their progressive leaders will change that in our lifetime. I’m going to see if I can write to this Lagman fellow. He probably needs support about now. Hope he doesn’t back down and allow the RCC to trump the wishes and desperate needs of his people.
Suck it poop!
2 September 2008, on 2:26 pm
It REALLY scares me to think about what this place will be like if they got elected. But I have a feeling that despite her fundy tendencies, she wouldn’t really be able to accomplish anything should McBush kick the bucket. She’s just too inexperienced, and I doubt anyone would listen to her in Washington. But then again, despite declaring jesus day in TX, snorting pounds of coke, executing inmates like a cafeteria line, and taking random vacations from the National Guard, the shrub wasn’t really experience in anything (productive), either…
2 September 2008, on 2:28 pm
Then there is this article in the religion section of Yahoo news:
Evangelicals: Palin’s Daughter Not an Issue
But if it was an “evil liberal”’s daughter you can bet that it would be a huge deal. But the evangelicals are going to turn this into some sort of noble thing…”daughter gets pregnant and chooses life.”
Of course they do, but it’s the conservatives who oppose education to help prevent “these things” from happening. And it is the conservatives who are claiming the moral upper hand.
And neither do liberals and pro-choice. But accidents happen. Ooops. the conservatives believe the great puppetmaster intends for children to bear children.
No, they are two-issue voters…pro-life and anti-gay.
2 September 2008, on 2:36 pm
More news of the dire situation in the Philippines:
I don’t see any bishops lining up to care for these people. If only there were a virus that could render all bishops/ cardinals/ poops etc as helpless as their victims. What a laugh we all would get.
About sweet Bristol, someone on NGB made a prediction and I’d like to expand on it. Soon we’ll all hear about the devastating miscarriage Bristol will suffer from, and then we’ll all be able to understand why she has taken to the baby with Down’s (Trig?), and can’t even set him down for photo ops. Easier to explain it that way than to tell us all THAT IT’S REALLY BRISTOL’S BABY.
Poor poor Bristol and that empty womb thang.
2 September 2008, on 2:54 pm
The ‘pubs think Palin is hot. I guess that’s all we need to know.
2 September 2008, on 3:06 pm
I just sent Mr. Lagman the following note:
I hope it helps him to keep his chin up. Wish I could do more.
2 September 2008, on 3:42 pm
Brooklyn Boy, I’m sorry but you just did a big pet peeve of mine. The opposite of win is NOT loose, it is lose. One “o”.
The Democrats will not loose anything in November, they may LOSE in November though.
And cry4turtles, I agree with you completely. It’s a good bet she’ll have a gawd abortion at some point in order to get sympathy and stop all the sudden flood of negative press Palin is getting.
I wonder if that family was calm when Bristol broke the news, or if she got the old “How could you do this to me?!” from her mother.
2 September 2008, on 3:50 pm
I’m telling y’all, a third-world “paradise” like the Philippines is what the forced-birthers want the US to become. The more poor and the more desperately poor they are, the less employers will have to offer and pay them, and the larger a pool of would-be workers willing to work for pennies they’ll have.
Damn, you guys are all right on the money with Palin; my first thought upon hearing all her views listed was “lovely, another would-be tinpot dictator.” It’s OK for her to have the choice of carrying her pregnancy to term or not, but it’s not OK for other women to have the same choice. No, instead she would force us all to do it her way, even though very few of us have the same privilege and power that she does.
Besides, as a self-avowed fundy, she’s a *yawn* hypocrite (yeah, like we didn’t see that coming). Just by being in public office she’s violating 1 Timothy 2:11-12 – “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence” – and by wearing pants she’s violating Deuteronomy 22:5 – “The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God” (KJV).
I mean, really; how dumb do the Repuglicans think we women are?!
2 September 2008, on 3:59 pm
Eve, that’s why I always wanted to go to a Republican debate that had open floor questions and ask why, if they are all such Bible thumpers, they weren’t screaming about Hilary defying gawd’s orders.
2 September 2008, on 4:13 pm
AUM, Hillary ^^ has two l’s.
It’s easy to make mistakes here in comment threads (ex. BB’s lose and loose) because many are at work squeezing in a minute or two at a time whenever they can and are rushed. So, we can cut some slack in the comment threads. Posts are a different thing and should be proofread, which we try to do.
As for the Bible thumpers, they only pick and choose what they want to follow in their mythology book. Whatever suits their own fancy. (That Timothy quote is a nice find, Eve. I am going to use that often.)
2 September 2008, on 4:56 pm
Atheist Under Mask,
Thanks for the correction – but my typing deteriorates when I get PISSED OFF!!!
2 September 2008, on 5:42 pm
AUM, Star, it’s a good one to wield against the fundy women who claim to take the babble word for word as doG’s literal truth – doesn’t really work against catholics, though (but then they’re No True Xians (TM), anyway).
2 September 2008, on 8:12 pm
Great topic.
I did some prelimanary research on Palin. She was voted into office by a 48% vote. She did not get into office by an overwhelming margin. A total of 237,000 votes and only 114697 for her. Stats are here:.http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2006_general/reg.pdf
Here in California I know we have at least 10 mayors who have more voters vote FOR them than voted in the Alaska elections.
Her daughters pregnancy is a good example that abstinance does not work. Much like the RCC would have their followers believe. Not to mention the hypocracy involved in defending a woman forced to have children who will starve or worse be forced into poverty. The solution has been found and it is family planning. Including contraception as the least of the means. This IS the 21st century and we still have primitive superstitious people dictating political agendas and laws. Sheesh.
2 September 2008, on 8:49 pm
Also amusing (appalling?) about Palin is she was a member of the Alaska Independence Party for a few years in the 90s and since then has attended at least one of their convetions. The AIP advocates secession of Alaska from the USA and is affiliated with the far-right crackpot Constitution Party.
It just gets crazier and crazier….
2 September 2008, on 9:05 pm
Good commentary from Americans United:
Pregnant Pause: The Real Issue Worth Talking About Behind The Palin Story
2 September 2008, on 10:25 pm
Statist5ics on teen births and total teen pregnancies here: http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/2006/09/12/USTPstats.pdf
The funny thing about Palin is that she sent her kid to a school that teaches abstinence only before marriage. Funny thing is that as VP she will not be able to defer responsibility. Any mother who can not teach her own daughter the basics of sex and all that goes with it should not be allowed near a voting booth let alone be electable.
Personally I can’t be-fucking-lieve that this is taking place in my country.
2 September 2008, on 10:27 pm
Personally I can’t be-fucking-lieve that this is taking place in my country.
And IMO the whole election on both sides is quite bizarre to say the least. Obama’s choice of VP is surprising, so much excessive pandering to the fundies on both sides. Unfuckingbelievable is right!
2 September 2008, on 10:31 pm
I just read an opinion that Palin just let this pregnant daughter news out to the media now to distract from the fact that she has little experience. Media goes for the juicy gossip crap and not for the important information that everyone should be concerned about. I was reading on another site where all these conservatives are cheering on their MILF and talking about how hot she is, etc. Something good to look at for the next four years, is what they were saying. Sickening.
2 September 2008, on 10:32 pm
Great comments, everybody; not much to add to what’s been said, SO well, already.
Again, I’m reminded of Hitchens’:
“Religion poisons everything!”
Too bad nobody in the media pays any attention to us atheists; at least I’ve never heard anyone, even someone like Keith Olbermann, ever ADMIT to reading the atheist Blogs.
In my opinion, they’re ALL either:
1) terminally delusional
2) Chicken-shit no-brainers
3) absolutely clueless money grubbers
4) Ball-less (Numb-nuts?)…(I won’t touch the pussy version?)…or maybe just…
chutzpah challenged?
5) All of the above
Forget the Politicians; at least for the most part…their level of bullshit would instantly turn blue eyes brown!
“Aaagh…Der shmell of it!”
2 September 2008, on 11:08 pm
BB, you’re right. I understand being pissed off and typing things out as fast as you can because if you don’t you’ll forget or go back and retype the thing over and over and over. Just for the record, I misspelled over as I typed this. I had to go correct it. But it’s not just mistakes in typing on the Internet, I’ve actually seen the word loose used instead of lose on a TV ad!
Anyway, Hilary, Hillary, I don’t really care. An authoritarian by any other name…
Milukfrog, she won the election running on an AIP ticket and she threw those voters a big middle finger as soon as she got elected. If she’s willing to do that to a small party in Alaska, what’s she willing to do the voters of the entire country? It’s just a blatant example of how she can’t be trusted. If I were a fundie right winger I’d be a little worried.
And don’t even get me started on the so-called “constitution” party. More like xian nation party.
2 September 2008, on 11:47 pm
Sarah Palin opposes EXPLICIT sex education programs. I do too, schools don’t need to waste time showing kids how to screw.
3 September 2008, on 12:57 am
I think I’m beginning to see the evil genius in McSame’s desperate ploy. My immediate reaction was that he was doing the obvious republican play; Put a woman on the ticket so as to deceive moderates into thinking that
McCain or any other corporate whores and christofascists actually care about women’s rights or equality!
Up the ante on Obama, or at least get in the game.
Then I read about her in more depth, and realized that for all the “hockey mom” bullshit, she could very well be a stealth dominionist. Granted, there’s not much to go by, but I don’t think she’ll have any problem putting lots of honest, psychotic end-times christianity in her potential role of vp.
Only now have I comprehended the gross magnificence of this horror. She has a pregnant daughter named after one of the most popular Nascar tracks! I think that just cost Obama the votes of a few million supposedly “moderate” and “intelligent” christians!
oh well, the “Bakersfields” of the nation were already for McSame, no matter what. I don’t think it will add up to too much.
3 September 2008, on 10:48 am
Sarah Palin opposes EXPLICIT sex education programs. I do too, schools don’t need to waste time showing kids how to screw.
Sam, are you saying that sex education classes are teaching kids PORN??? I don’t think so! (That’s the church’s department.)
Do you think that sex with your wife or girlfriend/boyfriend is pornography? Sex is natural and teenagers are going to be horny whether you educate them about safe sex or not. And statistics show that when teenagers are given education in how to prevent pregnancies and STDs the number of these outcomes decrease. If a parent isn’t going to teach their children about responsible sex, then who is?
Sex education classes are not teaching kids how to screw, they are teaching them about various RESPONSIBLE choices they have to keep themselves safe.
3 September 2008, on 12:41 pm
As someone who has Filipino relatives (via my wife) and has been to the Philippines twice, I can attest to the strong hold that Catholicism has on Filipino culture. Then again, if the Spanish had not taken over the Philippines, the people there would probably all be Muslims today.
Of course the Catholic Church is going to oppose birth control. The more babies that are born, the more baptisms and communion ceremonies they get to perform. Reduce the birth rate, and priests will be like actors dressed up but with no one to perform in front of.
Regarding teenage pregnancy, the problem is that the “intelligent” designer who allegedly created us designed girls so that they can get pregnant as young as age 12. Not only that, but teen pregnancies cause a greater risk for both the mother and the child. If girls were really designed intelligently, they would be biologically incapable of bearing children until the age of 19.
Then again, females can give birth as young as 12 because 100,000 years ago most people probably didn’t live past 30 or 40. Now we live in a time where girls are expected to become educated and defer pregnancy until later in life, but their child bearing cycle is a carryover from a time when humans lived as small bands of hunter gatherers and life was nasty and short.
Shorter Sam: Passengers on boats shouldn’t be taught how to use the life vests because they might just start jumping off the boat on impulse.
3 September 2008, on 3:30 pm
Howdy, milukfrog! Long time no read…
What does the Native Alaskan community think of Palin? Is there a cohesive Native Alaskan community? I would think that the Inuit among other groups would have a big problem with her wildlife policies, such as aerial hunting and so on.
3 September 2008, on 4:59 pm
“The Catholic church knows of the problems with population growth and poverty, yet they still want people to take no measures (except natural ones) to prevent pregnancies.”
Self-contradicting statement. The Church proposes the most effective method of family planning. NOt only that but encourages the people to be responsible. Humanae Vitae states “Responsible Parenthood.
Married love, therefore, requires of husband and wife the full awareness of their obligations in the matter of responsible parenthood, which today, rightly enough, is much insisted upon, but which at the same time should be rightly understood.”
“If they think it is okay to use natural ways of avoiding pregnancy, then that is still interfering with their “God’s plan” by preventing a baby from being conceived, isn’t it?”
Think about the difference between an abortion and a miscarriage. They both result to the same end but a big difference in the moral aspect.
“They never open the Vatican doors to allow the poor to …” The Catholic Church operates the largest soup kitchen, hospitals, shelters, etc… feeding the most number of hungry, clothing the most numbers of naked, housing the most number of homeless, consoling the most number of the destitute, etc… on earth.
3 September 2008, on 5:37 pm
No, because “natural methods” are basically no methods. Natural methods are not very reliable. Therefore, the Catholic church knows of the problems with population growth yet want people not to use reliable birth control methods.
You mean like aving sex with little boys? Sarcasm aside, are you talking about abstinence? Abstinence never works when we are talking about natural urges and hormones. What the church proposes is most un-natural. Telling people not to have sex is not realistic. God botherers are the most sexually active people, and the evangelicals and Catholics have the highest rate of teenage pregnancies.
Sometimes it doesn’t work out to your “ideals” of marriage or parenthood. A responsible parent doesn’t necessarily require a spouse. And married love does not always mean that the husband and wife will have full awareness of their obligations in the matter of responsible parenting. Religion does not guarantee responsible parents. Some of the worst parents are members of evangelical and catholic congregations. (Like my Irish-Catholic neighbor who has a bunch of kids he likes to abuse.)
God believers feel that their god has a right to kill the unborn if he so chooses. So, how is that any more “moral” than the women who choose to terminate their pregnancies? How does it make this god any more “moral” than they are? The god of the Bible is the one of the most immoral characters in literature and mythology.
Ahh, but there are religious strings attached. If the Catholics were truly helping they would respect other cultures and not have the price of listening to their religious missionary bullcrap in exchange for food, clothing, housing, etc. Christians don’t do anything for free. If they were truly concerned, they would help while respecting the culture, traditions and beliefs of those people they are helping.
And why is there not such an outcry against pedophile pastors and priests? Why do we not hear as loud of crying about the sick, poor, homeless and abused as we hear from god botherers about what a woman does with her body or with whom someone chooses to love and spend his or her life with? Seems the church folks appoint themselves judges and juries of how the entire population on this planet is supposed to live.
3 September 2008, on 6:38 pm
Thats pretty fucked up about the Philipines. Unbelievable that there have been executive orders that swept the health centers clean of pills and such… good thing the missionaries went there!
Isn’t is suppossed to be the morality obsessed fundamentalist mythology lovers who call teenage pregnancy wrong? I think it fuckin sucks that the media has been so disrespectful to Bristol. Of course she should be able to have an abortion if she wants and be taught as much as possible about safe sex, but it is perfectly natural for a teenager to have a child. Who would we be to judge a young woman for her decision. Plenty of young women from upbringings where birth control and abortion are promoted still chose to have an unplanned child in their teens. I am in no way shape or form pro life, but I’m not gunna play their game and judge. The only newsworthy part of this to me is it highlights Palin’s views on abortion, which couldnt be much worse.
I think that sex is natural and great, and see nothing wrong with the fact that bristol was having sex. There is no avoiding the obvious – sex can lead to pregnancies. The governor could never have kept constant watch over her daughter…
It makes Palin’s family not fit into a perfect christian (jewish, etc) ideal as much. Like someone mentioned above, this child will be no big financial strain. It’s not like they’re as wealthy as Al Gore or Dick Cheney, but they’ll be able to send it to school… So many christians are so shameful about things, this could be seen as a lil break from that. Rich or poor, people ought to just stay out of eachothers’ pregnancy choices.
3 September 2008, on 6:53 pm
Of course she should be able to have an abortion if she wants and be taught as much as possible about safe sex, but it is perfectly natural for a teenager to have a child. Who would we be to judge a young woman for her decision.
We don’t know if it was Bristol’s decision or her mother’s and the church’s persuasion. It really isn’t our business if Bristol got pregnant and has a child except for the fact that Palin and the religious right claim to have the monopoly on morals and believe their morals to be the “true” way to live…then when their child they have raised does something that goes against those morals, then they say it’s okay and no one has any business to judge…all-the-while they continue to judge those who make a different decision about their pregnancies and make moral judgments about who is allowed to love and marry who. They want everything their way, totally. I think this whole Bristol thing was brought out to promote the pro-life stance…”see, our daughter is young, got pregnant and is doing the right thing by keeping her child and getting MARRIED.” I do hope it works out for her because most people when they feel they are forced to get married, the marriage fails eventually.
3 September 2008, on 8:19 pm
Star, odds are good that that marriage would fail anyway. She has pretty much a 40% chance of it working out, if I recall my stats correctly.
3 September 2008, on 10:03 pm
AUM, yep your stats are about right. At 17 she is just a kid herself. But, in Bristol’s situation I am sure she is going to get all the hired help her mother can afford. My mother was 17 when I was born, and she and my father have been married for 54 years. So it can work out, but the odds are against it. My father was a lot older than my mom (9 years older) and that makes a lot of difference, also. He had a trade and a good job at the time.
3 September 2008, on 10:48 pm
That still doesn’t mean they’d hit the top 40. The fact is they’re only getting married because she’s pregnant. That’s like the number one thing NOT to do if you want a happy and successful relationship.
Of course weird things happen, which is why 40% of people remain married and I’m in the bottom 60.
Of course, my mom isn’t “just an average hockey mom” yuk yuk yuk.
4 September 2008, on 2:34 am
Younger women have healthier babies statistically… 17 yer old just isnt a child
4 September 2008, on 8:28 am
That still doesn’t mean they’d hit the top 40. The fact is they’re only getting married because she’s pregnant. That’s like the number one thing NOT to do if you want a happy and successful relationship.
AUM – This is absolutely true. The odds are against a rushed marriage, especially when getting married just to “give the baby a name”. But they don’t care about divorce, as long as the baby’s parents were married at some point before it was born. Like it’s some kind of magic. Whether one has money or not (as we have seen from even celebrities like Brittney Spears), even though they have money, the odds are still against them. Money will take some of the pressure off, but they are still young, and still children themselves. Who knows what will happen when they grow up and then realize they really don’t love each other. Sad.
Jimmy dean — The 17-year-olds today…most of them are children and are quite immature compared to even the 1950s. Most 20-somethings today are ill-equipped emotionally to take care of a child. Physically, 12-year-olds can have healthy children, but it doesn’t make them a woman just because they can get pregnant. Put a bunch of high school seniors in a room and see just how childlike they behave…giggly, talking about boy crushes on celebrity singers and stars, and their love of Paris Hilton and reality shows. They are basically children…on the brink of adulthood and definitely not ready for children…most anyway. A very few might be.
4 September 2008, on 11:38 am
Stardust?…RE your, above, spot-on response to Reynor…
“The god of the Bible is the one of the most immortal characters in literature and mythology.”
I think you probably meant:
“The god of the Bible is one of the most IMMORAL characters in (all of) literature and mythology.”
[As famously pointed out so well by Richard Dawkins in "The God Delusion" and his documentary film:
"Root of All Evil".]
4 September 2008, on 11:52 am
oops Chuck, thanks…will change that! Must proofread better!
4 September 2008, on 5:16 pm
So should we tell 35 year old women that they shouldn’t have babies because the risk of down’s and other complications is so much higher than for teenage pregnancies? Try and fight the laws of nature… There are so many crappy parents/ guardians of all ages… It is too bad that someone as “mature” as Barack Obama dramatically raised the probability of his daughters going on to get addicted to nicotine because of his example as a smoking parent. Younger parents might even realte to children better… My main point is that I dont advocate shaming women of any age or situation for making whatever choice they make regarding pregnancy. Seems to me that all the criticism of teenage pregnancies just puts more shame on the women. Obviously we need far more education and accessability to contraceptives. Not more shame though, thats for the god-freaks.
4 September 2008, on 5:19 pm
Children grow up so fast sometimes… though sometimes people never mature.
4 September 2008, on 5:41 pm
So should we tell 35 year old women that they shouldn’t have babies because the risk of down’s and other complications is so much higher than for teenage pregnancies?
35-year olds are done with school and mature enough to handle the problems that come along with caring for a Down’s syndrome child. 17 year olds are barely able to take care of themselves. Just look how they go wild when they go off to college. It takes another four years after high school for most kids in today’s world to mature enough to be responsible parents. Usually when a teenager girl gets pregnant, the grandparents end up helping to raise the child.
The point here is that fundies are dictating what a woman should and should not do with their own bodies, and also telling everyone what better “moral values” that Christians have. They obviously aren’t any better than the rest of us, so they should just shut the fuck up about having moral superiority and better family values.
14 September 2008, on 10:52 am
Hey, I’m from the Philippines, and I’m a Catholic. I am for the bill which has been proposed, even if my religion is against it. The people living below the poverty line here, they just keep making babies because they don’t have anything else to do. Some of the wives get beaten up by their husbands if they refuse to have sex. It’s a very sad condition. And they don’t even know that there are things such as contraceptives like the condom and pills that can help them.
The bill is still currently in process. Today in the Inquirer(newspaper) there was a backing out of 2 House reps. They withdrew their support because of the influence of the church. The Catholic religion is very influential here, because most or almost all citizens are followers of this religion.
Anyway, I’m writing a paper for my philosophy class about the policy “The RHCA should be adopted by the state.” and I just happened to click on this link.
30 September 2008, on 4:32 pm
I grew up in the Philippines Laura and I have seen poverty as how you have seen it. The RH Bill is not the solution to the moral degradation of the society that causes poverty. The sterilization of the citizens will not solve the economic problems of the Philippines.
The Catholic Church through the encyclical Humanae Vitae warns us on the consequences of such bills:
Responsible men can become more deeply convinced of the truth of the doctrine laid down by the Church on this issue if they reflect on the consequences of methods and plans for artificial birth control. Let them first consider how easily this course of action could open wide the way for marital infidelity and a general lowering of moral standards. Not much experience is needed to be fully aware of human weakness and to understand that human beings—and especially the young, who are so exposed to temptation—need incentives to keep the moral law, and it is an evil thing to make it easy for them to break that law. Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection.
Finally, careful consideration should be given to the danger of this power passing into the hands of those public authorities who care little for the precepts of the moral law. Who will blame a government which in its attempt to resolve the problems affecting an entire country resorts to the same measures as are regarded as lawful by married people in the solution of a particular family difficulty? Who will prevent public authorities from favoring those contraceptive methods which they consider more effective? Should they regard this as necessary, they may even impose their use on everyone. It could well happen, therefore, that when people, either individually or in family or social life, experience the inherent difficulties of the divine law and are determined to avoid them, they may give into the hands of public authorities the power to intervene in the most personal and intimate responsibility of husband and wife.
30 September 2008, on 4:41 pm
Let them first consider how easily this course of action could open wide the way for marital infidelity and a general lowering of moral standards.
This is a bogus argument. I know, as many people do, that the Church does not hold the monopoly on morality, nor does being a Catholic or any sort of god believer ensure marital fidelity. Most of the people who cheat on their spouses, having lustful affairs while married, premarital sex, etc. are god believers. How many priests have been accused and convicted of sexually abusing children?
The Church should not have such power over the birth control rights of free people. Citizens should be able to make that choice for themselves. People should have options concerning birth control and the number of children one wishes to have. If a god had anything to do with it, there would be plenty for those who have his babies, but this god does not provide, therefore human beings must take action to protect themselves. Sex is part of being human.
The sterilization of the citizens will not solve the economic problems of the Philippines.
And using a condom is not sterilization, and if a woman or man chooses to be sterilized it is none of the church’s damn business. Lots of men and women in western nations use various types of birth control from condoms, to sterilization procedures. It is the responsible thing to do instead of continuously popping out hungry children in poverty conditions because of some ancient superstitious beliefs.
All the Catholic church is about is power…and this is a threat to their power and control over the masses.