Necessity V.S. Morality
By: Angelica Ilustre SR-D
Every single one of us has his or her own stand on President Aquino's passing of the Reproductive Health Bill. But is it truly something that would affect our society wholly in a negative or positive way?
The Church strongly condemns this bill because it goes against its laws. The Church has a very good point in going against this bill. Where will our
morality go? What purpose will the church have if the state influences its people to go against it? For me, the Church has a right to protest against this act. Although, at the same time, the state has a right to deny their protest.
Taking into consideration the current state of our nation (particularly with regards to overpopulation), we are in desperate need of immediate action that can help create development that is can create for us a more stable economy and society. The effects of the RH Bill, if it will be passed and established, must have the right substantial effect for society, or else, the Church along with its followers will further protest against it and see no reason on why it should be continued. The Bill, if established, must prove to be of actual benefit to society. That is the only way the Church will be satisfied.
Our country's population is increasing. If we look at it both ways, it is an issue of Necessity V.S. Morality. Where do we turn in the midst of these problems?
Enrile feared the possibility that upon implementing the RH Bill, women would resort to abortion. This is both against the law of the Church and the state.
The Church and the State both clearly show its stand on preserving a person's life and respecting a human's right to live. This is where they find common ground. I think that given this, it is indeed possible for the Church and the State to compromise. The State, for me, should reconsider this Bill and begin first with other overpopulation concerned projects and alternatives and make the RH bill their last resort as a means of dealing with the increasing population in the Philippines. Meanwhile, the Church must also take into consideration the importance of the state of our country. If the country falls further into poverty because of overpopulation, how will the Church plan to deal with that? The proposal or threat of excommunication of President Aquino is too much. It will only aggravate and will not settle the dispute. Both sides must consider the need and want of the other. They must try to understand the opposing side and find a way to compromise.
Not everyone will ever be pleased, but in the end, the State must make a decision that will benefit the country more.
Personally, I am not in favor of the RH Bill. There are so many other ways to aid in the overpopulation dillemma. The State should think out-of-the-box, create more innovative and informative projects that could be established instead of The RH bill. Furthermore, if they stop the passing of this bill, the Church will be silenced and further diputes could be evaded.
Where do we go from here? Controversies such as this will not totally cease to exist. What we can do, both being paet of the State and the Church, is to create a better sense of awareness to our neighbors, so they could have know which is the better decision. New insight and knowledge may help contribute in making a decision. Though morality is at risk, if we do not forget our values and its importance, the RH bill will not pave way to wrong judgement. We just have to remain open-minded to all possibilities but then soon steadfast with our choice. With this, we could possibly find a solution to this controversy. This maybe difficult, but not impossible. There's always hope for a resolution because there always is one.
No comments:
Post a Comment