This is my position paper in the proposed RH bill which is now near approval. I am stating here my objections many of which concerns economics:
1. Population and economic growth has insignificant association. As
early as 1966, the 1971 Nobel Prize winner Simon Kuznets studied 63
developed and developing countries from the early 1950s to 1964 and
concluded that there was little empirical association between growth rates of population and output per capita, especially within the developing country bloc (Kuznets 1967, 1973). Kuznets saw the basic obstacles to economic growth as arising from delays in adjusting social and political institutions, and viewed population growth, though an impediment, as of secondary importance (ibid., p. 39).
2. Even without the RH bill the fertility rate in the country is falling. According to the study of Costello and Casterline, the total fertility rate
of the Philippines has shown a small but steady decline from 1950s to the present. Women are having fewer children; the birthrate
is currently at an average of 3.19, a figure that has held firm for
several years.
3. Economic growth shaped the desired family size without intervention from the government. The study of Orbet and Pernia (1999) conclude that further declines in desired family size may require well-targeted human capital investments along with employment-generating economic growth especially formal sector employment for women. On this premise, if the Philippine economy will offer more opportunity and security we can expect families to desire on average not to have more than two children.
4. People face trade offs. This is the first principle of economics according to Mankiw. The scenario of limiting the population the trade-offs will be that labor cost would become costlier due to increasing the cost of production. There
will be more elders to tend, straining the medical and pension systems.
Japan is a classic example wherein by 2025, it is expected that there will be two dependents for every
three workers. The
dwindling Japanese work force would result in lower purchasing power and
reduced demand for goods and services. The domestic market will shrink,
production will fall, as will the Government’s revenue, forcing it to
manage higher medical and pension expenses with a lower income.
5. Natural law is superior to the law of the land. Today our country is being shaped to be liked the westernized countries whose churches are empty and who has settled for a hedonistic life of maximized pleasure and minimized pain. Once this RH bill becomes a law, the promotion of assisted suicide and euthanasia are not far behind. In the west there are clinics who practice abortions and euthanasia legally. They have perfected the negative attitude about life As person with faith, the writings of Pope Paul VI, in Humanae vitae, stated
that, “If, then, there are serious motives to space out births, which
derive from the physical and psychological conditions of husband and
wife, or from external conditions, the Church teaches that it is then
licit to take into account the rhythms immanent in the generative
functions for the use of marriage in the infecund periods only and, in
this way, to regulate births without offending the moral principles
which had been recalled earlier.”(5) Pius XII (1938-58) taught that
unless some serious circumstances arise, spouses are obliged to have
children. However, he also taught that it is moral for the spouses to
limit their family size, or even to refrain from having children
altogether, if they have sufficiently serious reasons.
JUNK THE RH BILL!
For the love of our country,
ARNEL L. CADELIñA
SOURCES:
http://www.eilatgordinlevitan.com/pinsk/pinsk_pages/pinsk_stories_ss_kuznets.html
http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/completingfertility/RevisedCOSTELLO-CASTERLINEpaper.PDF
http://catholicinsight.com/online/features/article_917.shtml
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/upiansonrhbill/signatures
No comments:
Post a Comment