The RH Debate

Watched the RH Bill debate last night. And I was reminded of why I distanced myself from the Catholic Church in the first place.

I understand why every religion would want to institutionalize their belief systems as well as their recruitment policies. Hey, it’s survival of the fittest even in spiritual matters. But the way the anti-RH “faithful” have been acting lately, one would think that we’re back in the era of the Inquisition. Whatever happened to Vatican II and ecumenism?

Worse, some of the anti-RH-ers act so arrogant and so closed-minded, one is convinced that no amount of reasonable debate will make them change their minds. Not only that, they do not seem open to agree to disagree; it’s either their way or no way. What gets my goat is that they seem hell-bent on ramming their beliefs down other people’s throats. Whatever happened to democracy?

Of all the things that the anti-RH people said during the debate, the one point that struck me was the one raised by one of the panelists: As a Catholic, she didn’t want part of her taxes to fund something which she believed is immoral (condoms and their use). I thought it was an interesting point, though Fr. Joaquin Bernas, in his sober opinion article, has an answer to that: Public money is neither Catholic, nor Protestant, nor Muslim or what have you and may be appropriated by Congress for the public good without violating the Constitution.

After watching the debate last night, I felt that the time for healthy debate and discussion is long past. People on both sides have made up their minds, and it’s just a matter of getting the numbers to have the bill passed--or delayed for as long as possible.

From where I stand, it looks like the Church, through the anti-RH movement, just wants to flex its power and bully the people into towing their own line. Well excuse me, but I hate being bullied.

As a friend of mine tweeted, the anti-RH people should act less Church-like and more Christ-like.