Posting here an article written by Bernardo Villegas, country's premiere economist, Presidential adviser to various Philippine Presidents and member of the 1986 Constitutional Commission under President Corazon Aquino.
By Bernardo Villegas, PhD Economics
August 2, 2012
[The RH Bill] is based on the assumption of the desirability of birth
or population control per se.
[It]...is pure economic nonsense when all the kudos and praises being
heaped on the Philippine economy by international organizations – both
governmental and private – are citing the advantages of a growing and
A recent report from Bloomberg (one of the leading business news
agencies) was just headlined “Philippines Leads in Demographic
Dividend of Supply of Young Workers.”
The very bullish article about the Philippines – just echoing many
others that have come out since the beginning of the current year –
pointed out that the so-called demographic dividend from a rising
supply of young workers is one reason Japan’s second-largest
shipbuilder [has come to] the Philippines, where workers are on
average half the age of its Japanese employees.
Chua Hak Bin, a Singaporean economist at Bank of America’s Merrill
Lynch division agrees: “The Philippines is a ‘standout’ among
countries set to benefit from a bigger labor pool, with its rate of
economic expansion likely to rise as much as 1.5 percentage points
higher during the next decade.”
Passing the RH Bill would be killing the goose that lays the golden
eggs. Already China and Thailand – still with relatively large
populations – are suffering from labor shortages because of the rapid
aging of their populations over the last decade or so.
Such a negative demographic trend can be traced to very aggressive
birth control programs that were based on artificial contraceptives
and, in the case of China, on coercion and abortion.
China and Thailand may be the first countries in the history of
humanity to grow old before becoming rich.
They clearly illustrate the folly of a population management program
that always leads to the unintended effect of cutting fertility rates
to abnormally low levels which have very [drastic] effects on the
The Philippines does not need any population management program
because its fertility rate is already rapidly falling.
Within a generation, the fertility rate of the Philippines will be at
the below-replacement level of 2.1 babies per fertile woman.
Today, thanks to a large population, the Philippines is one of the few
countries whose GDP still growing at 6 percent or more since its
businesses can sell to a lucrative domestic market even as exports
suffer a dramatic slowdown.
In contrast, territories with small populations like Singapore,
Taiwan, and Hong Kong will suffer from very slow or no economic growth
this year because of their heavy dependence on exports.
If Congress passes the RH Bill, they will plant the seed of a
contraceptive mentality among married couples, as has happened in all
the Northeast Asian countries who are now suffering from a severe
We must find some ways of eradicating poverty [like] improving our
educational system and reducing maternal and child mortality [instead
of] nurturing a very counterproductive contraceptive culture in
Besides economic science, there are other sciences that can
demonstrate that the RH Bill, if passed, will do more harm than good.
Certain types of contraceptive pills (not all) can kill babies.
Because medical science has demonstrated that human life begins at
fertilization, certain pills kill human life because they act on the
human embryo after fertilization.
The American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology pronounced that the
IUD (intrauterine device) brings about the destruction of the early
embryo (187: 1699-1708). Furthermore, the International Agency for
Research on Cancer reported in 2007 that the contraceptive pill causes
cancer, giving it the highest level of carcinogenicity, the same as
cigarettes and asbestos.
According to a publication of the American Heart Association (33:
1202--1208), pills also cause stroke, and significantly increase the
risk of heart attacks.
In the social sciences, there are findings that the contraceptive
lifestyle destroys the very foundation of society, the family.
According to Nobel Prize winner George Akerlof, who combines the study
of economics and psychology, contraceptives tend to degrade marriage
and lead to more extramarital sex, more fatherless children, more
single mothers, and more psychologically troubled adolescents.
His findings are purely empirical in nature and have no moral
undertones. Also, contrary to the claims of the proponents of the RH
Bill, condoms promote the spread of AIDS.
Harvard Director of AIDS Prevention, Edward C. Green, once wrote that
according to the best evidence available, condoms give a false sense
of security and prompt people to be more reckless in assuming sexual
risks, thus worsening the spread of the sexually transmitted diseases.
Thailand, that has the highest incidence of AIDS-HIV in East Asia,
could be cited as a testimony to this.
Obviously, the best thing that can happen on August 7 is for the
majority of the members of the House of Representatives to vote for
discussing the bill further.
As the ongoing global crisis unfolds, there are more and more
arguments that can be mustered against the proponents of the RH Bill.
These up-to-date findings deserve to be aired in the floor debates.
There is an estimated 80 members of the House of Representatives who
have not made up their minds about the pros and cons of the RH Bill.
They still need to be enlightened.
If the majority of the House should decide that it is time to put to
vote this contentious and controversial bill--that is unnecessarily
dividing the country during a crucial moment of our national
life--then let everyone who is really thinking of the common good of
Philippine society please vote
NO TO THE RH BILL.
For comments, my email address is email@example.com