RH law critics take center stage as SC oral arguments start

It's been a year or so that I was not able to update my post here and  I thought that the issue on the RH bill was over and ready for implementation but I was wrong. Today, I was greeted by the news that there's a renewed debate on RH bill at the Supreme Court.

I was so upset by the remark of one former lawmaker on his television interview
describing RH Bill to be likened to that of a genocide. And I wonder how he was able to make those conclusions by saying those irresponsible remarks. When I seek Google on the meaning of genocide I found out that the word means-'the deliberate killing of a large group of people, esp. those of a particular ethnic group or nation.' I really don't know what goes into the mind of that lawmaker as he compared RH bill to that of a genocide which to me is very far fetched.

In his opening statement, former Senator Francisco Tatad expressed his fear that Republic Act 10354 would"rewrite the mandate of the Constitution by imposing population control to state-mandated contraception." He added that under the RH bill, couples are only given the options of periodic continence and contraception. "They cannot choose not to choose between the two methods. They must practice birth control or suffer the consequences," he further said.

The former lawmaker insisted that the law does not equally protect the lives of mothers and their unborn children. "That is simply putting family, its most intimate and private life, and their liberties under state supervision," he stated.

Read more here...