<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: noli, loren, manny &amp; the RH bill</title>
	<atom:link href="http://stuartsantiago.com/noli-loren-manny-the-rh-bill/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://stuartsantiago.com/noli-loren-manny-the-rh-bill/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 06:34:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christina</title>
		<link>http://stuartsantiago.com/noli-loren-manny-the-rh-bill/#comment-1003</link>
		<dc:creator>Christina</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Apr 2010 00:51:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stuartsantiago.com/?p=534#comment-1003</guid>
		<description>Saying yes to the RH bill is saying yes to contraception which is letting little babies inside the womb not to &quot;kapit&quot; which is murder.

Clearly this is wrong.  What is wrong is putting money into contraception rather than education, livelihood programs and character formation programs which will further the development of the country.  

Contraception is taking God out of the picture, the author of life and saying that man can take life.  It&#039;s one step towards legalizing abortion and divorce which others may find a &quot;convenient solution&quot; to the country&#039;s woes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Saying yes to the RH bill is saying yes to contraception which is letting little babies inside the womb not to &#8220;kapit&#8221; which is murder.</p>
<p>Clearly this is wrong.  What is wrong is putting money into contraception rather than education, livelihood programs and character formation programs which will further the development of the country.  </p>
<p>Contraception is taking God out of the picture, the author of life and saying that man can take life.  It&#8217;s one step towards legalizing abortion and divorce which others may find a &#8220;convenient solution&#8221; to the country&#8217;s woes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bungangkahoy</title>
		<link>http://stuartsantiago.com/noli-loren-manny-the-rh-bill/#comment-1002</link>
		<dc:creator>Bungangkahoy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Feb 2010 14:04:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stuartsantiago.com/?p=534#comment-1002</guid>
		<description>Proponents of H.B, 5043 &quot;Reproductive Health&quot; bill always cite that that the Philippines is over-populated at 90+ million people to rationalize their support for artificial birth control. But is the country really overpopulated? And the implication is that our country is poor because of that 90+ million figure.

Population figures are meaningless if we don&#039;t take into consideration the area where that figure lives. For example, what does it mean that Japan has 128 million people? Or that the U.S.A. has 300 million?

Let&#039;s take a look at a sample of Wikipedia&#039;s listing of countries according to population DENSITY, or the number of people in every square kilometer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_population_density), Fegruary 7, 2010:

  Rank   Country     People/Sq.Km.
   1     Macau         18,534
   2     Monaco        16,923
   3     Singapore      7,022
   4     Hong Kong      6,348
   ...
   43    Philippines      307
   ...
   129   Ethiopia          71

Compared to the thousands of the top 4 most-densely populated countries, the Philippines at 307 is hardly &quot;over-populated&quot;.

And what about the overpopulation=poverty myth? The top 4 countries are so RICH! Macau is Asia&#039;s playground for billionaires, streets choked with Rolls Royces. Monaco is summer capital to Europe&#039;s kings, princes, dukes and other royalty. No need to say anything about Singapore and Hong Kong.

These top 4 countries are so small and have no natural resources to brag about but yet so rich. So is the Philippines poor because there are &quot;too many&quot; Filipinos and that we have no natural resources? Look at Ethiopia in Africa. If less people means more wealth to be shared, Ethiopia should be at the top of the list, instead of being one of the world&#039;s poorest.

Some people may argue that the top 4 are rich because they are small and easy to manage in spite their large population. So let&#039;s look at huge China with its 1.3 BILLION. It is the fastest growing economy in the world, predicted to overtake the U.S.A. very soon, and even now lends money to the U.S.A.!

Right within our own country, compare the population-to-wealth ratio of Sequijor, Cebu and Manila. Obviously, the more population, the better off the place.

Now guess what is our country&#039;s biggest dollar earner? It&#039;s our Overseas Foreign Workers - human life.

Clearly, life is God&#039;s GIFT and a nation&#039;s WEALTH!

So what is causing our poverty?

RIIIGHT! CORRUPTION! And the guilty ones hide their sins by blaming us the people for having too many children! What if by a miracle, our population is cut in half a year from now, will our country start getting richer if corruption is still there?

Hmmm...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Proponents of H.B, 5043 &#8220;Reproductive Health&#8221; bill always cite that that the Philippines is over-populated at 90+ million people to rationalize their support for artificial birth control. But is the country really overpopulated? And the implication is that our country is poor because of that 90+ million figure.</p>
<p>Population figures are meaningless if we don&#8217;t take into consideration the area where that figure lives. For example, what does it mean that Japan has 128 million people? Or that the U.S.A. has 300 million?</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s take a look at a sample of Wikipedia&#8217;s listing of countries according to population DENSITY, or the number of people in every square kilometer (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_population_density" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_population_density</a>), Fegruary 7, 2010:</p>
<p>  Rank   Country     People/Sq.Km.<br />
   1     Macau         18,534<br />
   2     Monaco        16,923<br />
   3     Singapore      7,022<br />
   4     Hong Kong      6,348<br />
   &#8230;<br />
   43    Philippines      307<br />
   &#8230;<br />
   129   Ethiopia          71</p>
<p>Compared to the thousands of the top 4 most-densely populated countries, the Philippines at 307 is hardly &#8220;over-populated&#8221;.</p>
<p>And what about the overpopulation=poverty myth? The top 4 countries are so RICH! Macau is Asia&#8217;s playground for billionaires, streets choked with Rolls Royces. Monaco is summer capital to Europe&#8217;s kings, princes, dukes and other royalty. No need to say anything about Singapore and Hong Kong.</p>
<p>These top 4 countries are so small and have no natural resources to brag about but yet so rich. So is the Philippines poor because there are &#8220;too many&#8221; Filipinos and that we have no natural resources? Look at Ethiopia in Africa. If less people means more wealth to be shared, Ethiopia should be at the top of the list, instead of being one of the world&#8217;s poorest.</p>
<p>Some people may argue that the top 4 are rich because they are small and easy to manage in spite their large population. So let&#8217;s look at huge China with its 1.3 BILLION. It is the fastest growing economy in the world, predicted to overtake the U.S.A. very soon, and even now lends money to the U.S.A.!</p>
<p>Right within our own country, compare the population-to-wealth ratio of Sequijor, Cebu and Manila. Obviously, the more population, the better off the place.</p>
<p>Now guess what is our country&#8217;s biggest dollar earner? It&#8217;s our Overseas Foreign Workers &#8211; human life.</p>
<p>Clearly, life is God&#8217;s GIFT and a nation&#8217;s WEALTH!</p>
<p>So what is causing our poverty?</p>
<p>RIIIGHT! CORRUPTION! And the guilty ones hide their sins by blaming us the people for having too many children! What if by a miracle, our population is cut in half a year from now, will our country start getting richer if corruption is still there?</p>
<p>Hmmm&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: angela</title>
		<link>http://stuartsantiago.com/noli-loren-manny-the-rh-bill/#comment-1001</link>
		<dc:creator>angela</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2008 03:28:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stuartsantiago.com/?p=534#comment-1001</guid>
		<description>i think the rh bill would have an easier time passing without the sex education aspect ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i think the rh bill would have an easier time passing without the sex education aspect ;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeg</title>
		<link>http://stuartsantiago.com/noli-loren-manny-the-rh-bill/#comment-1000</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2008 02:07:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stuartsantiago.com/?p=534#comment-1000</guid>
		<description>Yeah. The authors probably were irritated by all the disinformation. But disinformation in a free society is countered with information, not threats. This is like a libel law against a bill and it&#039;s absurd. How do you libel a law? And it is a dangerous precedent. For example, how would you like a bill, authored by the Arroyos in Congress, seeking emergency powers for the president, with that malicious disinformation thing tacked on?

As for the breaking down of the bill, I think the RH education aspect would find an easier time passing if it were a separate law.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah. The authors probably were irritated by all the disinformation. But disinformation in a free society is countered with information, not threats. This is like a libel law against a bill and it&#8217;s absurd. How do you libel a law? And it is a dangerous precedent. For example, how would you like a bill, authored by the Arroyos in Congress, seeking emergency powers for the president, with that malicious disinformation thing tacked on?</p>
<p>As for the breaking down of the bill, I think the RH education aspect would find an easier time passing if it were a separate law.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: angela</title>
		<link>http://stuartsantiago.com/noli-loren-manny-the-rh-bill/#comment-999</link>
		<dc:creator>angela</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2008 06:00:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stuartsantiago.com/?p=534#comment-999</guid>
		<description>hay. yeah i&#039;ve heard of this criticism of the bill.  but i dont suppose that breaking it down into 2 or 3 laws would mean easy passage either for each.  as for &quot;malicious disinformation&quot; i suppose that applies for example to the really gross assertions of priests and bishops of all people lying, saying that contraception is equal to abortion.  i don&#039;t know that even if the bill passes, the state would ever ever have the balls to muzzle or imprison church disinformants, but at least it might tone down the lying?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>hay. yeah i&#8217;ve heard of this criticism of the bill.  but i dont suppose that breaking it down into 2 or 3 laws would mean easy passage either for each.  as for &#8220;malicious disinformation&#8221; i suppose that applies for example to the really gross assertions of priests and bishops of all people lying, saying that contraception is equal to abortion.  i don&#8217;t know that even if the bill passes, the state would ever ever have the balls to muzzle or imprison church disinformants, but at least it might tone down the lying?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeg</title>
		<link>http://stuartsantiago.com/noli-loren-manny-the-rh-bill/#comment-998</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2008 05:44:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stuartsantiago.com/?p=534#comment-998</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s a bad bill. Not because it isnt good in substance, which it is. It&#039;s just bad in form. It&#039;s too sweeping, unfocused for a piece of legislation. It could be successfully broken down into 2 or 3 laws.

For example, I find the provision on punishing with imprisonment or fines &#039;malicious disinformation&#039; of the bill (or law, should it pass) highly objectionable. This provision gives the state power to muzzle dissent by giving it the power to interpret what malicious disinformation is. This also opens a precedent in bill-authoring wherein provisions against &#039;malicious disinformation&#039; will be tacked on to future bills. All in all, the RH Bill before Congress gives too much power to the state including the power to fine or imprison conscientious objectors, in effect criminalizing religious beliefs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s a bad bill. Not because it isnt good in substance, which it is. It&#8217;s just bad in form. It&#8217;s too sweeping, unfocused for a piece of legislation. It could be successfully broken down into 2 or 3 laws.</p>
<p>For example, I find the provision on punishing with imprisonment or fines &#8216;malicious disinformation&#8217; of the bill (or law, should it pass) highly objectionable. This provision gives the state power to muzzle dissent by giving it the power to interpret what malicious disinformation is. This also opens a precedent in bill-authoring wherein provisions against &#8216;malicious disinformation&#8217; will be tacked on to future bills. All in all, the RH Bill before Congress gives too much power to the state including the power to fine or imprison conscientious objectors, in effect criminalizing religious beliefs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: angela</title>
		<link>http://stuartsantiago.com/noli-loren-manny-the-rh-bill/#comment-997</link>
		<dc:creator>angela</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 02:52:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stuartsantiago.com/?p=534#comment-997</guid>
		<description>oops. erratum.  according to the sws website  it&#039;s 1 noli, 2 manny, 3 loren. [http://www.sws.org.ph/] yeah arbet, but even if gloria is set to veto, it would be a huge step forward if the bill passes congress man lang. then we know which presidentiables to campaign against in 2010. di ba, EQ?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>oops. erratum.  according to the sws website  it&#8217;s 1 noli, 2 manny, 3 loren. [http://www.sws.org.ph/] yeah arbet, but even if gloria is set to veto, it would be a huge step forward if the bill passes congress man lang. then we know which presidentiables to campaign against in 2010. di ba, EQ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TheEQualizer</title>
		<link>http://stuartsantiago.com/noli-loren-manny-the-rh-bill/#comment-996</link>
		<dc:creator>TheEQualizer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 01:24:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stuartsantiago.com/?p=534#comment-996</guid>
		<description>Sexual and reproductive rights should be internationally recognized as human rights and therefore guaranteed for everyone.
We should encourage individuals, women in particular, to take control of their reproductive lives.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sexual and reproductive rights should be internationally recognized as human rights and therefore guaranteed for everyone.<br />
We should encourage individuals, women in particular, to take control of their reproductive lives.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Arbet</title>
		<link>http://stuartsantiago.com/noli-loren-manny-the-rh-bill/#comment-995</link>
		<dc:creator>Arbet</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 00:38:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stuartsantiago.com/?p=534#comment-995</guid>
		<description>Even if the RH Bill passes, Gloria will just veto it. Then 2/3 vote to overturn the veto will be harder.

And you forget that Cha cha&#039;s on the station, ready to go full speed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Even if the RH Bill passes, Gloria will just veto it. Then 2/3 vote to overturn the veto will be harder.</p>
<p>And you forget that Cha cha&#8217;s on the station, ready to go full speed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

