"Ang O.A.naman ng Catholic Church."


That's Carlos Celdran commenting about the church's saying that he too,will be ex-communicated from the church. Well, this is all about the ever-controversial Reproductive Health Bill in the country . .


People all over the country will have contradicting opinions with regards to Celdran's statement. Some will be nodding their heads but many others will be crossing their brows. As of me, I'll be neutral. I'll try to explain my side, I should say.


The Reproductive Health Bill proposes the intervention of the government in promoting the use of contraceptives for population control.The Catholic church condemns the Bill stating that this is sinful. It even threatened (daw) PNOY to be ex-communicated from the church if the president will say hello and welcome to the Bill.


This triggers the O.A. attribution of Celdran to the Catholic Church. Well, in some ways the church is.
With regards to over-reacting, which one should have to be.? Does the Philippine government doesn't have the right to overreact amidst it's alarming, ever-increasing population?


Though we understand that the reaction of the church pertains to our Christian belief of preserving life, it should have to look at both sides. We have to be practically-inclined nowadays. Are we not alarmed and troubled with the scenario we constantly see on tv? . .Couples with 13 children or so, both having no permanent occupations, living underside bridges, saying they haven't had any chance of planning how many children they will have because they don't know any method, or that the contraceptives are just too expensive for them.?


All in all, the choice should be left to the couple themselves - to the audience of the Bill.The church nor the state can't govern people's choices, all that they can do is orient them, they can both freely state their stand. Why, they may say yes to either party but can the party keep on looking after them if they are habitually keeping their promise ?


On that O.A. issue, as what I've said, the church at some point, is . Amidst our ever-increasing population, crime rate, unemployment, illiteracy, etc., who actually look after the people? Well, the government is entirely responsible for such societal problems. Their proposing of the Bill is somehow their preventive measure of their anticipated flourishing of these societal problems.


I'm not saying that the church is not being reasonable.(Somehow, I believe that there were just some misunderstanding in here.) I respect Christianity views but the Bill is not about killing fetus whatsoever. I understand that it's all about saying no because your income is saying so even if your sexual urges keeps on pushing you onward.


I'm suggesting practicality, responsible parenthood, sensitivity and cooperation. We are all subject to expressing our views and beliefs.
For couples, please mind how your business is doing, we are a poor country, don't keep on adding up to it. .