When the RH Bill was taken from the archives and once more put on the calendar of Congress for deliberation, I distinctly remember how a group of Bible Baptists went on television and shared a stage at the Luneta with the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines to voice their opposition to the RH Bill.

Wearing red shirts, their battle cry then was: “we will stand with our Catholic brethren; we will not support the RH Bill because it is an immoral law.”  They claimed that the RH Bill was an immoral law because it supported abortion. They held hands in prayer with the Catholic bishops and implored heaven for a stop to the passage of the RH Bill.

I have a problem with all that.

First, it isn’t true that the RH Bill supports abortion.  Abortion is defined by our laws as the intentional or unintentional expulsion of an embryo or fetus from the womb.  When a married couple uses contraceptive devices (such as a condom, an IUD, a pill or an injectible), no embryo or fetus is expelled from the womb because no embryo is formed.  The contraceptive device prevents the sperm cells from meeting up with the egg cell so that the egg cell is not fertilized and no embryo or fetus develops.

This is not abortion.  An abortion presumes that sperm has fertilized an egg, the egg has implanted into the womb and the egg has begun rapid cell division so that it has become an embryo and then expelled.  Life begins when the egg is fertilized, not before.  This is the period of conception. When you prevent the process of fertilization; when you prevent conception; that is not abortion: that is contraception.

My children’s teacher on Values Education told my children that the RH Bill legalizes abortion!  I had to do damage control because they have been misinformed.  When we discussed the reproductive process and what makes an embryo, my children understood.  They understood that the idea that preventing conception is the same as abortion is mere rhetoric and not scientific fact.

Second, the RH bill encourages contraception.  The RH Bill does not sanction abortion.  Under the RH Bill pre-teens and teens from fifth grade until fourth year high school will be educated in the reproductive system and the various methods of protecting oneself from unwanted pregnancy and the spread of sexually transmissible diseases through the use of contraception. Under the RH Bill, contraceptives will be distributed for all who need and ask for them at no cost at the barangay health centers.  All pregnant women and lactating mothers who come into the health centers for check-ups or immunization for their children will be lectured on contraception.  There is no abortion in the RH Bill.

Third, the RH bill cannot be strictly called an “immoral law.”  The RH Bill is not moral legislation.  The RH Bill does not set standards of behavior that are acceptable or unacceptable.  Instead, the RH Bill expresses the policy of the state:

• The RH Bill merely states that the reproductive health of women is an interest of the state.  This means that the government thinks that the reproductive health of women is an important issue.
• The RH Bill merely states that overpopulation is a contributing factor in national poverty.  This means that having many mouths to feed is one cause of poverty.
• The RH Bill merely states that the ideal number of children is 2.  There is no punishment for families whose children exceed two.
• The RH Bill merely states that people have a right to be informed of all their options to maintain their reproductive health.  This means that having a lesser number of children may save a woman from dying due to pregnancy complications.
• The RH Bill merely states that the state has the obligation to educate young people about the risks to their reproductive health.
• The RH Bill merely makes it a policy to offer ligation and vasectomy services for free at government hospitals IF the patient so chooses.

Fourth, the Philippines is a democracy.  We are a representative democracy.  In our system of government, we elect representatives who have the power to enact laws.  Ideally, our representatives should enact laws that the majority of their constituents want.  Thus, if a majority of the constituents believe that contraception promotes maternal health, prevents infant death, stems the spread of sexually transmissible diseases, and prevents the rise of extreme poverty, then the RH Bill should be passed because it is what the majority of the people want.

Fifth, the Philippines is a pluralistic society, that is to say, many faiths exist alongside each other.  Not one religious organization or church can dictate to the 91 million Filipinos their definition of contraception as abortion. Just because one religious organization thinks that contraception is the same as abortion does not mean that it can dictate to all 91 million Filipinos its idea of how to live their lives behind the closed doors of their bedroom and in the privacy of their marital bed.

I am not a Catholic so I don’t really care if the Catholic Church shouts itself hoarse in opposition to the RH Bill. That is certainly their right. In our democratic society, they certainly have a right to voice their opinion to anyone who cares to listen.  They can shout that contraception is the same as abortion all they want.

What bothered me so much was that a group of Bible Baptists stood with the Catholics to shout their opposition to the RH Bill.  Those Baptists certainly have every right to voice their opposition to the RH Bill.  What I found so surprising was that they joined the Catholic Church to do so. The leader of that Bible Baptist group called the Catholics their “brethren.”

I am a Bible Baptist and so I care how Bible Baptists behave.

Historically and traditionally, Baptists have practiced Biblical separation.  This means that Baptists use the Word of God as a standard to measure all propositions.  Baptists do not stand with other faiths if those faiths do not uphold the Bible. We do not stand on one stage with others on a moral issue if we cannot stand on the same stage with them on an issue of faith and doctrine.  This has always been the Bible Baptist way.

If we cannot share the same stage with Pentecostals because we do not believe in healing and speaking in tongues as manifestations of salvation, then we must not stand with them on the issue of the RH Bill.

If we cannot share the same stage with the Muslims because they do not believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, then we must not stand with them on the issue of the RH Bill.

If we cannot share the same stage with the Catholics because they pray to idols, then we must not stand with them on the issue of the RH Bill.

If we stand, we stand alone on the basis of Scripture, not morality, not political posturing and certainly not for influence peddling. The Bible Baptist clarion call has always been: “come out from among them and be ye separate.”  This call of the Scriptures has not changed.

If you support the RH Bill, then support it as a Bible Baptist.  If you oppose the RH Bill then oppose it as a Bible Baptist.  Let the Word of God and its doctrinal teachings lead you to the decision on whether or not to support the RH Bill.  Do not support or oppose the RH Bill simply because your pastor tells you to.  Be informed.  Read the RH Bill.

Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.  Let every man be persuaded in his own mind on this issue of Christian liberty.

 

(See also:http://www.bimbiariasjose.com/2012/08/29/positively-medieval-heresy-and-the-rh-bill/)