Showing posts with label INC and the RH Bill. Show all posts
Showing posts with label INC and the RH Bill. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 21, 2012

A CRITIQUE OF IGLESIA NI CRISTO EXECUTIVE MINISTER EDUARDO V. MANALO’S STATEMENT ON THE RH BILL PART IV by Atty. Marwil N. Llasos, OP

Friday, August 10, 2012

Iglesia ni Cristo Executive Minister Eduardo V. Manalo supports the RH Bill which promotes abortifacients 
(photos of Mr. Manalo are from the Pasugo)

A CRITIQUE OF IGLESIA NI CRISTO EXECUTIVE MINISTER EDUARDO V. MANALO’S STATEMENT ON THE RH BILL
PART IV
[This is the fourth part of my critique of Iglesia ni Cristo Executive Minister Eduardo V. Manalo’s position on the RH Bill. The words of Mr. Manalo are in green while my comments are in black.]
Abortion and the use of abortifacients involve the taking of life, which God explicitly forbids (Exod. 20:13).
Earlier, Mr. Eduardo V. Manalo makes this statement: “We support their [modern methods of contraception] use as long as these methods are empirically not abortifacient.”
That statement is neither here nor there. He is supporting the RH Bill on one hand yet qualifies that support by stating that only those modern artificial methods of contraception that are “empirically not abortifacient” are the ones he support. Excuse me, but has Mr. Manalo really read and understood the RH Bill?
The RH Bill, which Mr. Eduardo V. Manalo and his church strongly support, actually promotes abortifacients. What is an abortifacient? Abortifacient means “causing abortion,” “an agent that induces abortion,” “an instrument or material capable of terminating a pregnancy.”[1]

Mr. Eduardo V. Manalo is neither here nor there
For Mr. Manalo to fully understand how an abortifacient works, he has first to learn when human life begins. Unfortunately for Mr. Manalo (and the Filipino people), the RH Bill (House Bill 4244) does not deliberately define when human life begins. But as we discussed in another article, the 1987 Philippine Constitution holds that human life begins at conception which means fertilization.[2] Medically, what happens at fertilization? The answer is obvious – the beginning of human life:

“If and when a sperm does penetrate the shell of the ovum, it sheds its tail, and will proceed slowly into the center of the ovum. Its 23 chromosomes will line up next to the ovum's 23 chromosomes, thus constituting a new cell, a fertilized ovum of 46 chromosomes. From the entrance of the sperm until the first cell division is a period of about 24 hours.

What is present at fertilization is an entire new human body, even though it is yet a single cell. This is the most complicated cell in the universe, for it contains within itself all of the information that is needed for this human to develop into a mature adult.

The embryo then floats freely down through the mother's tube. During this first week, the one cell divides until this new being constitutes millions of cells. When this new human is one-week-old, he or she plants within the lining of the mother's uterus, burrows into the spongy, nutritive wall of her womb, contacts the mother's blood stream and sends a chemical, hormonal message. This message goes to a gland at the base of her brain and tells the mother's body that there is a new occupant. Accordingly, this gland sends hormones into the woman's body that prevent her from menstruating.”[3]

Mr. Eduardo V. Manalo was once like these

To belabor the obvious, at fertilization, haploid gametes combine together to form a diploid zygote, a genetically different individual from the parents. This zygote now has 46 chromosomes – a new life! Textbooks on embryology attest to that scientific fact, thus:

“The male and the female sex cell or gametes … unite at fertilization to initiate the embryonic development of a new individual.”[4]

Zygote: this cell results from the union of an oocyte(egg) and a sperm. A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo)...

Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm ... unites with a female gamete or oocyte (egg) ... to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent (multi-potential) cell marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.”[5]

More textbooks and manuals on embryology can be cited but the above references are enough for Mr. Manalo to get the point. At any rate, the Philippine Medical Association affirms that life begins at fertilization.

Fertilization: Life starts here
Where do abortifacients come in? The RH Bill which the Executive Minister of the Iglesia ni Cristo supports defines “reproductive health care” as referring “to the access to a full range of methods, facilities, services and supplies that contribute to reproductive health and well-being by preventing and solving reproductive health-related problems” (Sec. 4, H.B. 4244). Moreover, the RH Bill, once enacted into law, mandates that “[a]ll accredited health facilities shall provide a full range of modern family planning methods(Sec. 7).[6]
What are included in the “full range of modern family planning methods” which INC religious leader Eduardo V. Manalo supports? Answer: ABORTIFACIENTS. That’s why Mr. Manalo’s statement that “[w]e support their [modern methods of contraception] use as long as these methods are empirically not abortifacientdoes not make sense because the RH Bill which Mr. Manalo supports actually includes abortifacients! And the RH Bill makes these products and supplies for “modern family planning methods” as “essential medicines”[7] to be regularly purchased by national and local hospitals and other government health units (Sec. 10).
What are these abortifacients included in the “full range of modern family planning methods” in the RH Bill and categorized as “essential medicines”? These are mainly the intrauterine devices (IUDs), pills and injectables which have post-fertilization effects; hence, abortifacients.

"We support their use as long as these methods are empirically not abortifacient," according to Mr. Eduardo V. Manalo
1.    Intrauterine device (IUD)

The IUD or intrauterine device is available in two different types in America. The hormonal IUD called Mirena, and the copper IUD called Paragard. Mirena releases levonorgestrel, which is a progestogen. Its primary function is to prevent implantation by the tiny developing human (embryo).

Preventing ovulation appears to function as a distant second. A study of women, one year after inserting the IUD, showed about one-half (45%) of women were still ovulating. After four years, 75% of women were ovulating. Obviously, the greater the number of women ovulating means the higher the chance for fertilization to occur. Other mechanisms of Mirena include thickening the mucus of the cervix, thus not allowing sperm to enter the uterus, or affecting the mobility or survival of sperm.

If fertilization occurs, most likely the tiny unborn child will be prevented from attaching to the lining of the womb and he or she will die. This is a very early abortion.

The copper IUD's effectiveness comes from a continuous release of copper into the uterine cavity; however, they aren't sure why this works. The general consensus is that this is accomplished by preventing implantation of the human embryo.

With both forms of IUD, if the woman becomes pregnant, she has a greater chance of having an ectopic or tubal pregnancy. This is when the tiny developing baby attaches to the lining of the fallopian tube and may threaten the woman's life.

The IUD is not considered safe for women if they have not first given birth to at least one child, have a history of or had breast cancer, or have multiple sexual partners.”[8]

Health risk to women: CT Scan showing translocated IUD that perforated the rectum 

2. Oral contraceptive pills –

The first effect of oral contraceptive pills is to stop ovulation although this doesn’t happen all the time. The second effect is the prevention of sperm from migrating to the fallopian tube. The first and second effects are not yet abortifacient. But the third effect is. The third effect of pills is that they prevent implantation of fertilized egg when breakthrough ovulation occurs considering that prevention of ovulation is not 100% effective. The third effect makes the pills abortifacient. More so with emergency contraceptive pills (like Plan B) which prevents implantation or rejection of an implanted embryo; hence, chemical abortion happens. The following are examples of oral contraceptive pills:

“The Birth Control Pill is the most popular and widely used method of hormonal contraception. It involves taking a month-long series of pills—three weeks of pills containing hormones, and one without. This allows the woman to have a menstrual period. The Pill contains two synthetic hormones, progestin and ethinyl estradiol and has three mechanisms: 1) it prevents ovulation, 2) thickens the cervical mucus, which makes it harder for sperm to enter the uterus and 3) affects the endometrium or lining of the womb to make it more hostile to implantation. This means the tiny developing baby (embryo) cannot attach to the uterine lining and dies, which is a very early abortion. Even so, they define this as "preventing pregnancy."

The pill kills! The third effect of the pill is that it prevents the fertilized egg from implantation

Plan B or Emergency Contraception is designed for emergency use and not recommended to be used as a regular method of birth control. Plan B One Step is a single pill containing a high dose of progestin, and is available to women without prescription if they are 17 or older. It claims that if taken within 72 hours of "unprotected" sex, it will prevent ovulation, but it also prevents the already conceived embryo from implanting in the endometrium, causing an early abortion.

According to the pro-abortion blog site, Reproductive Health Reality Check, Plan B isn't as effective as first touted, which has caused financial backers to put funding on hold. In addition, the blog site acknowledged that women are "abusing" Plan B by repeatedly using it instead of other birth control methods.

Yaz and Yasmin are not the same thing; however, they are very similar. Both are classified as a fourth-generation birth control pill that contains two synthetic hormones: progestin and ethinyl estradiol. There is only a slight difference in dosage of the two drugs. Yasmin has a slightly higher level of ethinyl estradiol than Yaz. Both Yasmin and Yaz function identically. They prevent ovulation, thicken the mucus of the cervix and make the endometrium more hostile to implantation. This medication is also used to treat the symptoms of premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD).

Yaz and Yasmin have proven to be even more controversial than NuvaRing. Consumer advocates have called on the FDA to recall the drugs. The FDA has accused Yazmin of misrepresenting their products and downplaying adverse side effects in their advertising. A class action lawsuit has been filed against Yaz products on behalf of 74 women who have developed severe health problems from these drugs.

Yasmin under fire for its scary side effects

The Minipill is similar to the regular birth control pill, except that it contains only progestin. As a result, this pill must be taken every day of the month, compared to the regular birth control Pill that requires only three weeks. The Minipill still operates using the three common mechanisms of hormonal contraception: preventing ovulation, thickening the mucus of the cervix and making the endometrium more hostile to implantation, which is a very early abortion. It is considered less effective than the combined progestin and estrogen pill.

The progestin-only pill is considered to be Continuous Birth Control. This usually results in stopping the woman's menstrual period (a selling point of the drug). Types of birth control pills that are considered Continuous Birth Control are Seasonale, Seasonique and Yaz.”[9]

3. Injectables –

Depo-Provera is like the Minipill, a progestin-only drug, but it is injected every three months into the woman's arm muscle or buttocks. Since it is progestin only, it functions in the same way the Minipill does, including the prevention of implantation.”[10]

Look at how they market Depo-Provera!

Let us now hold Mr. Eduardo V. Manalo to his own word: “Abortion and the use of abortifacients involve the taking of life, which God explicitly forbids (Exod. 20:13).” As already demonstrated, the RH Bill which Mr. Manalo supports includes abortifacients as among the full range of modern family planning methods. If indeed Mr. Manalo is sincere in what he says, and if he truly obeys the commandment of God, Mr. Manalo has no other recourse but to emphatically reject the RH Bill and enjoin the members of the Iglesia ni Cristo to do the same. Unfortunately, Mr. Manalo continues to support the RH Bill which promotes what God explicitly forbids (Exo. 20:13). What does that make of Eduardo V. Manalo? An enemy of God.

Enemy of God: Mr. Eduardo V. Manalo, Executive Minister of the Iglesia ni Cristo supports the RH Bill which promotes what God explicitly forbids 


[4] W.J. Larsen, Essentials of Human Embryology (New York: Churchill Livinstone, 1998) pp. 1-17.
[5] K. Moore  and T.V.N. Persaud, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology (Philadelphia, W.B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia, 1998 [6th Ed.]) pp. 2-18.
[7] It may be asked Mr. Eduardo V. Manalo: “Why are contraceptives included as essential medicines? What do they cure? Pregnancy? Does Mr. Manalo support the idea that pregnancy is a disease?”
[10] Ibid.

"Let me live": The unborn pleads to be born. Is Mr. Manalo listening?

A CRITIQUE OF IGLESIA NI CRISTO EXECUTIVE MINISTER EDUARDO V. MANALO’S STATEMENT ON THE RH BILL PART I by Atty. Marwil N. Llasos, OP

Monday, August 6, 2012


 
INC Executive Minister Eduardo V. Manalo (from the Pasugo)

A CRITIQUE OF IGLESIA NI CRISTO EXECUTIVE MINISTER EDUARDO V. MANALO’S STATEMENT ON THE RH BILL

PART I 
In a letter dated 12 October 2010,[1] Iglesia ni Cristo Executive Minister EDUARDO V. MANALO expressed the religious group’s position on the Reproductive Health Bill (H.B. 4244) to Rep. Rogelio J. Espina, Chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Population and Family Relations.
As expected, the Iglesia ni Cristo (INC), through its Executive Minister, took a position that is diametrically opposed to the Catholic Church. In effect, the INC is saying “we are not for what the Catholic Church is for.”

The Manalo dynastic succession in the the Iglesia ni Cristo 

This article, and series of articles hereafter, I shall critique the official stand of the INC. I will refer to Mr. Eduardo V. Manalo as the responsible party as the author and signatory of the letter dated 12 October 2010. The words of Mr. Manalo are in green while my comments are in black.

A birthday greeting to Mr. Eduardo V. Manalo  
(torch-of-salvation.blogspot.com)
We would like to thank the Committee on Population and Family Relations for requesting our position concerning the Bills of Reproductive Health.
It is expected that the Committee on Population and Family Relations (CPFR) of the House of Representatives will request the position of Mr. Eduardo V. Manalo’s Iglesia ni Cristo because it is one of the biggest religious sectors in the country. The INC is known to deliver command vote on election day because of its practice of voting as a bloc. Normally, politicians kowtow to the INC to get its endorsement during elections. This is a reality of Philippine politics. But of course, as a large segment of the population, the INC has the right to be heard on the burning issue of the RH Bill and the CPFR is expected to request its position. Not to mention that Rep. Rogelio J. Espina, CPFR Chairman, is pro-RH Bill; hence, it is but normal for politicians like him to solicit the positions of groups that support his stand.

One of the ubiquitous posters from politicians who greet Eduardo Manalo on his birthday (picture is from the website of Vice Mayor Atoy Sicat)
We are all well aware of the dire situation of our country caused by overpopulation.
Mr. Eduardo V. Manalo’s awareness is limited and his perspective on population reflects the Malthusian way of thinking. For Mr. Manalo, as it was for Malthus, too many people cause poverty. The Malthusian theory adhered to by Mr. Manalo has long been a discredited theory – debunked by Nobel laureate for economics Simin Kuznets. No clear connection between economic growth and population growth has ever been established.

There is no correlation between population and poverty in the Philippines (source: National Statistical Coordination Board)

Mr. Eduardo V. Manalo is also not aware that globally, overpopulation is a myth. On a worldwide scale, there is no overpopulation to speak of. In fact, other countries are experiencing “demographic winter.”

Full movie on Demographic Winter
Mr. Manalo’s research team in the Iglesia ni Cristo failed him. What they failed to realize is that population must be viewed in terms of population density, population growth rate, and total fertility rate. The Philippines, with a population of 100, is ranked 12th in the world. But, our population density (number of people per square kilometer) is 307, and we are ranked 45th in the world. The most densely populated countries are Macau (18,357), Monaco (16,923), Singapore (7,148) and Hongkong (6,349). These are among the economically well-off countries in the world.

Philippine population growth rate is going down, down, down
What Mr. Manalo did not reckon with is the downtrend of the population growth rate of the Philippines, from 3.01 in 1960 to a mere 1.94 in 2010 (1960-2020 Population Growth Rates, 2000-2010 NSCB Estimate). Population growth rate of 1.94 is below the replacement rate of 2.0. Add to this fact the downward trend in the total fertility rate.

Total fertility rate is also going down in the Philippines
If Mr. Manalo goes around the country, he would see that the countryside are far from densely populated. Urban centers like Metro Manila, where Mr. Manalo sees the slums and the street children, are the ones densely populated. Hence, the problem is not overpopulation in the Philippines but over-concentration of population in urban areas.

 
The Iglesia ni Cristo at 75 (now at 98): Where are your projects that show your concern for the poor, the street children, the aged, the drug addicts and the prisoners among our people? (Pasugo)

Many of society’s worsening ills—from homeless families starving in miserable conditions and children not in school but instead begging day and night in nearly every major street to the rapidly spreading problems with drug abuse and rising crime rates—can be traced to families growing so large that an increasing number of parents cannot provide the most basic human needs to their families.
Mr. Eduardo V. Manalo shed crocodile tears for street children who beg day and night in major thoroughfares. I wonder what his church has done so far to alleviate this problem. Unlike the Catholic Church which operates orphanages and other charitable institutions, I don’t know of any INC counterpart. Mr. Manalo can be more credible in his concern for the street children if he has done something to assuage their plight. The INC, as far I know, is so closed in on itself that it hardly responds to social problems the way the Catholic Church does. The INC has no orphanages, homes for the aged, rehabilitation centers and organized prison ministry for the general population. The INC’s contribution in these areas of social work is nil.

The Iglesia ni Cristo under the present leadership of Mr. Eduardo V. Manalo can build grandiose projects like this arena but not projects for social work to help the masses of our people
(iglesianicristo100years.weebly.com)
We consider it commendable that our lawmakers care enough for our fellow Filipinos that they are doing what they can do to alleviate the hardships so many of our countrymen are facing.
Mr. Eduardo V. Manalo’s perspective is myopic. If lawmakers indeed care enough for our countrymen, then they will allocate bigger budget on education, agriculture, agrarian reform and livelihood training. These are the fool-proof solutions to the hardships of our people and not condoms and pills. For Mr. Manalo, government subsidy for the sexual needs of people is “commendable” and can “alleviate the hardships” of so many of our countrymen.


Iglesia ni Cristo can buy a town in South Dakota but not condoms and pills for its members. It supports the RH Bill which will make the government subsidize the reproductive health needs of its members from predominantly Catholic taxpayers