Monday, November 3, 2008

12 Reasons Why We at ALLIANCE for the FAMILY Foundation ( ALFI) Oppose Reproductive Health Bill 5043 1.HB 5043 is based on a flawed data on populatio

12 Reasons Why We at
ALLIANCE for the FAMILY Foundation ( ALFI)
Oppose Reproductive Health Bill 5043

1.HB 5043 is based on a flawed data on population growth rates and fertility levels. It ignores the negative impact on the economy and society of an ageing population, as experienced in many developed countries. If we spend out scare resources towards birth control, we would be promoting the undesirable outcome of depopulation.

RP’s Population Growth Rate has declined since the Year 2000 Census of 2.36%. The correct PGR is lower. UN states it at 1.8%, whilst the NCSO reports 1.94% for its 2005-2010 projection. RP’s Total Fertility Rate is not 3.5. It is 2.6 ( based on UN) or 3.2 ( based on NSO). In a few decades, fertility rate will be at replacement level of 2.1, and may even continue its downward slope, leading to race extinction.

2.HB 5043 places an overwhelming emphasis on contraception at the expense of all other values, including medical care for the sick and the dying. Top 10 causes of Morbidity/Death in the Philippines lists Pneumonia, Bronchitis, Diarrhea, Influenza and Hypertension as the highest ranking causes of death among women. There is a distortion of human values if we prioritize the prevention of procreation over saving lives.

The WHO has also concluded that HORMONAL CONTRACEPTIVES CAUSE CANCER, Warning Level1, according to the International Alliance for Research in Cancer.

3.HB 5043 promotes abortion. These HORMONAL CONTRACEPTIVES ACT AS ABORTIFACIENTS. They do not prevent ovulation 100%of the time and thus, fertilization can still occur. When the fertilized ovum is prevented from implanting in the uterus because of the effect of the pill, this ovum is expelled. This is plain and simple abortion. ( Note: Research shows that ovulation still occurs during pill use in 6 out of 210 menstrual cycles, hence, there remains a grave risk of the abortion of undetected pregnancies that may still be occurring,)

4.It is not true that widespread use of contraceptives will reduce illegal abortions. In every single country where contraceptives became widely available, abortions increased because of the contraceptive mindset being promoted in society. This bill, in effect, promotes abortion.

5.HB 5043, with its 2-child ideal ( Section 12) and “free ligation” ( Section 6.g), will result in social stigma and discrimination against large families. The ideal family size is what parents responsibly decide. This is not to be mandated nor encouraged by the State.

6.HB 5043 legislates “reproductive health and sexuality education” or mandatory sex education of the youth ( Section 12). There is no evidence of success in responsible sexual behavior as a result of sex education in classrooms. . In the US, teenage pregnancies and cases of STDs continues to climb yearly despite sex education in classrooms. Teaching youth about abstinence and, at the same time, discussion birth control as an acceptable option, is a mixed message with serious consequences

7.HB 5043 forces all health care service providers, including private doctors, nurses, clinics and hospitals, to make referrals for the provision of abortifacient drugs and devices ( Section 16.a.4.). Refusal will be punished by fine and/or imprisonment. This is a violation of a person’s freedom of conscience.

8.HB5043 forces every employer to provide abortifacient contraceptives ( Section 13), even if this will result in the deaths of Filipino children not yet born. It infringes on the individual’s freedom of conscience and religion.

9.HB 5043 provides that any person who publicly or even privately disagrees with its premises, conclusion or implementation is subject to fine or imprisonment ( Section 16.d.). This would include any future campaign to repeal it. As written, this also applies to parents instructing their children. NO exception is made for ethical or religious reasons.

10.HB 5043 has as one of its Guiding Principles that unmarried couples, including children of reproductive age ( Sections 3.1, and Section 3.j.) will receive contraception education ( Section 3.d) and a full range of contraceptive drugs and devices ( Section 3.j.). No provision is made for parental consent, or even notification, in the case of children.

11. HB 5043 violates the Constitutional safeguards for life and family ( Article II, Sections 12 & 13, Article XV, Sections 1 & 13.) It allows anyone to avail of RH services like vasectomy or ligation without the consent of the spouse, thereby creating artificial conflicts between spouses. Similarly, an abused minor( e.g. raped victim) may also avail of some of these contraceptives, i.e. “morning-after-Pill” without the consent of parents..

12.Poverty is not caused nor aggravated by overpopulation, but by the wrong economic policies, poor governance and systemic corruption. Numerous economic studies have shown that there is no correlation between population and poverty.



Monday, October 20, 2008

Husband and wife discovers why contraception is wrong

Scott Hahn and his wife Kimberly are converts to the Catholic Church. You can watch Scott regularly on cable EWTN “The Journey Home.”
--
“When God made man, male and female, the first command he gave them was to be fruitful and multiply. This was to image God-Father, Son and Holy Spirit, three in one, the Divine Family. So when “the two become one” in the covenant of marriage, the “one” they become is so real that nine months later they might have to give it a name! The child embodies their covenant oneness.
I began to see that every time Kimberly and I performed the marital act we were doing something sacred. And every time we thwarted the life-giving power of love through contraception, we were doing something profane. (Treating something sacred in a merely common way profanes it, by definition).
I was impressed, but I was very quiet about being impressed. Kimberly asked me what I though of the book; I said it was interesting. Then I began to watch her pick off my friends, one at a time- some of the best and the brightest changed their minds!
Then I discovered how all the reformers- Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Knox, and all the rest-held the same position as the Catholic Church on this issue.
I grew disturbed. The Roman Catholic Church stood along as the only “denomination” in all the world with the courage and integrity to teach this most unpopular truth. I did not know what to make of it. So I resorted to an old family saying: “Even a blind hog can find an acorn.” I mean, after two thousand years, the Catholic Church was bound to get something right.
Catholic or not, it was true. So we threw out the contraceptives we were using and began trusting the Lord in a new way with our family plans. First, we used Natural Family Planning for a number of months. Then we decided to be open to new life whenever God saw fit to bless us.” Scott and Kimberly Hahn
“Rome Sweet Home- Our Journey to Catholicism”
pp. 28-29 Ignatius Press San Francisco

Wednesday, October 8, 2008

Parents: The Most Important Educators on Sexuality

The task of forming healthy sexual attitudes and understanding in children is one of the most important role of parents. In providing an education on love and sexuality to their children, parents must begin by refuting the propaganda that outside "experts" can do the job better than they can.

It is imperative for parents today to investigate what is being taught in the name of sex education. Parents have a right to examine curricular materials and textbooks. They can and must talk to the teachers and principals about what they hope to communicate. And to look carefully for a hidden agenda such as pro-homosexual and lesbian behavior, the safe sex distortion, the belief that premarital sex is a freedom of choice, and any suggestions that pits teenagers against their parents.

In a recently held conference on family life, parent-speakers stressed on the following points on why the home is the best place to convey sex information to children.

Parents know their children better than anyone else, they know their maturity level as well as what language they understand. Also, parents are more likely to inject the moral aspects of sexuality that are so important to the development of a wholesome view of sex. This does not been that information about sex should not be taught at church and at school. But sex education at church an d school should be complementary to what the child receives at home, not given in place of it.

School sex education classes ignore individual differences among children and break down the natural modesty of boys and girls. When children are taught academics, such as Math and Reading, they are given materials suitable to their level of readiness for these subjects. Yet, when it comes to the extremely sensitive area of sexuality, all children in the same grade level are given the same material, even if some are not yet physically or psychologically ready for the material. This is insensitive and harmful. Forcing boys and girls to listen to, view and openly discuss the sexual functioning of the opposite sex's anatomy while in their presence is embarrassing and contributes to the breakdown of the modesty that is natural and appropriate in human beings.

What is taught and how it is taught -- in sex education classes are not immediately known in detail by parents. This means that there is absolutely no way parents can control, or even find out what their children are being taught about sex unless they sit in the classroom or when their teenage child asks them to buy condom or IUD to be brought to class as part of their homework.

School sex education has never been shown to reduce the growing problem of teen pregnancy or abortion. In fact, in the United States, data shows the opposite: as federal funding for sex education programs increases, so do the rates of teen pregnancies and abortions. This proves that the contraceptive mentality encourages the youth to become promiscuous.

Children do not need Sex Education, they need Chastity Education. Kids need to learn how to say no and why saying no is in their best interest -- physically, emotionally and spiritually. Sexuality involves more than birth control pills. The school sends the wrong message to students when their sex education courses are mere "how to do it and how not to get caught" lessons. If schools spend more time on chastity education, the number of chaste teens would rise dramatically.

There is no such thing as" value-free" sex ed. When anything more than the biology is taught, someone's values are going to be presented. Telling students to "make up your own mind" tells them there are no standards to go by. Telling students it's "best to say 'no,' but if you're going to be sexually active, be protected" send them the message that the teacher doesn't really expect them to control themselves. Presenting birth control without saying it's wrong for them to use it tells the students the teacher doesn't think it's wrong.

The best lesson in sex parents can provide their children is the love and respect they show for each other. Parents convey attitudes and values about life and sexuality as they interact with their children each day. They are always available to their children for support, questions and direction and have much wisdom to share that comes from the faithful living out of their commitment as husband and wife and as parents.

Monday, October 6, 2008

11 Steps to Legal Adoption

Who may adopt?

Any person who has passed a thorough home study process to determine his/her suitability for adoptive parenthood—married couples, single, unmarried persons; Filipino citizens and foreign nationals who have lived in the Philippines for at least three years immediately prior to application.

1. Submit a written application with a child placement agency licensed by the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD). Preferences in age and gender can be indicated.

2. The agency assigns a social worker to conduct a home study consisting of—
a. series of interviews
b. home visits
c. orientation forum with referrals to support groups of the Adoptive Families Foundation (c/o Kaisahang Buhay Foundation, tel. 9121159; 4211223, Email: affphil@yahoo.com)

3. The child eligible for adoption must be declared legally abandoned by the court if, after publication in the newspaper and after three to six months, no one has claimed the child or if he/she had been surrendered by the mother for adoption with written consent.

4. Matching stage. Factors considered: prospective parents who can meet the needs of the child; age and gender preferences; physical features

5. The DSWD grants Pre-Adoptive Placement Authority to bring the child home for a six-month trial period, which consists of:
a. regular home visits by social worker
b. participation in support group activities

6. Get a lawyer to file a petition to adopt in court

7. Publish a notice of your petition in a local newspaper, once a week for three consecutive weeks

8. Court hearing: parent petitioners and social worker

9. Court issues adoption decree

10. Go to local civil registrar and apply for an amended birth certificate -- new surname for the child and one that identifies you as parents

11. Post-legal adoption counseling

Where to apply?

Child Placement Center
DSWD NCR
399 San Rafael St. cor Legarda St.
San Miguel, Manila
Tel. 7348651,734-4249,7348646
E-mail: regionaldir_ncr@yahoo.com
www.dswd.gov.ph/adoption

Kaisahang Buhay Foundation (KBF)
56 10th Ave. Cubao, QC
Tel 9121159, 4211223

Other Child Caring Agencies:
Hospicio de San Jose
Ayala Bridge, Quiapo, Manila
Tel: 734-2367,734-2368
Telfax: 734-2366
Website:hospicio.htm www.rcam.org/ministry/socialservices/ hospicio.htm

CRIBS Foundation Inc.
Major Dizon St., Industrial Valley Complex
Marikina City 1802
Tel: (632) 681-5921
(632) 681-8078
Fax: (632) 647-1329
E-mail: cribsnet@info.com.ph
Website: www.cribsfoundation.org

Heart of Mary Villa
394-M.H. del Pilar St., Malabon, MM
Telfax: 277-1473, 446-7341
Website: www.rcam.org/ministry/socialservices/heartofmaryvilla.htm

Source: Culled from the Q & A from “24 Stories of Adoption,” copyright 2000 by Adoptive Families Foundation Inc. Published by Tawid Publications

WHAT’S WRONG WITH THE REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH BILL?


By Francisco S. Tatad

Amid the domestic fallout of skyrocketing food and oil prices world-wide and a tottering international financial system, some lawmakers have embarked on a high-profile campaign to ram through a population control-driven bill that threatens the sanctity of human life, family life and marriage, without regard to their honored place in our Constitution and our Christian culture.

The population has many problems. But population is not itself the problem. Assuming there are problems associated with population growth, the reproductive health bill does not provide any answers. I hope the following will help put this bill to rest and allow the nation to devote its time, energy and resources to its real and more pressing problems.

1. THE BILL IS BASED ON A FLAWED PREMISE.

There is no “population explosion” and the country is not overpopulated.

The population growth rate and the total fertility rate (TFR) have declined. The National Statistics Office puts the growth rate at 2.04 %, the TFR at 3.02. However, the CIA World Factbook (2008), for one, puts the growth rate at 1.728%, the TFR at 3.00. Whatever the real numbers are, at least one million Filipinos leave the country for foreign jobs every year. There are at least 12 million Filipinos now living and working abroad.

The country has a population density of 277 Filipinos per square km, with a GDP per capita (purchasing power parity) of $,3400. The Central African Republic has a population density of 6.5 and a GDP per capita (PPP) of $700. At least 50 countries have a much lower population density than that of the Philippines, yet their GDP per capita is also much lower.

Fact: the few are not always richer.

On the other hand, at least 36 countries have a much higher population density than that of the Philippines, yet their GDP per capita is also much higher. Macau has 18,428 people per square km and a GDP per capita of $28,400; Monaco has 16,754 people per square km, with a per capita income of $30,000; Hong Kong has 6,407 per square km, and a per capita income of $42,000; and Singapore has 6,489 per square km., and a per capita income of $49,700.

Fact: the many are not always poorer.

The most critical statistic has to do with the age structure of the population. Worldwide, the median age is 27.4 years. In the Philippines, it is 23 years. In at least 139 countries it is higher than 23; in 73 others, lower. All the developed countries are on the high side. Monaco has the highest (45.5 years), followed by Japan (43.8), Germany (43.4), Italy (42.9), Sweden (41.3), Spain (40.7), Switzerland (40.7), Holland (40), United Kingdom (39.9), France (39.2), Singapore (38.4), Russia (38.3), United States (36.7), South Korea (36.4). In China, the world’s fastest growing economy, it is 33.6.

This means a Filipino has more years to be productive than his counterpart in the developed world, where the population is graying and dying, without adequate replacement because of negative birth rates. Those who understand this well will tend to be more confident of the future; they will see the need to invest more extensively in the development of this resource.

2. THE BILL IS TOTALLY UNNECESSARY

Except for the purported objective of treating fertility and preventing abortion, which (if government is serious) may be immediately addressed by secondary health policy, the things the bill wants to do are already being done, whether legally or not.

Officially-sponsored contraception and sterilization are ongoing with foreign and local funding, even without a legal mandate. Punishable abortions go unpunished. Certain things that are lawful and necessary (like promotion of breast-feeding, infant and child health and nutrition) can be done easily without legislation. Some truly repugnant things (like mandatory sex education for young children, inclusion of contraceptives and abortifacients in the National Drug Formulary as essential medicines, and making a family planning compliance certificate from the civil registrar a requirement for marriage) should not be legislated at all.

There is free access to information on contraception. No law bars anyone from using contraceptives of their choice, it is a free market. You don’t need the government for it. Consumers however must pay for their own, as they pay for everything else. The Philippines is not a welfare state, nobody gets a free lunch. If the government has the money, it should spend it to save women from killer-diseases, not on trying to cure pregnancy, which is not a disease.

At least 80 women are said to die from heart diseases everyday; 63 from vascular diseases; 51 from cancer; 45 from pneumonia; 23 from tuberculosis; 22 from diabetes; 16 from lower chronic respiratory diseases. This is where the State should provide, if it could, free medicine and medical services.

Now, out of every 100,000 live births, some 107 women are said to die from complications during childbirth. This is 107 too many. But the local executives of Gattaran, Cagayan and Sorsogon City have shown that maternal death during childbirth could be brought down to zero simply by providing women with adequate basic and emergency obstetric care facilities and skilled medical services. Not contraceptives.

On July 29, 2005, the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization (WHO) announced that after a thorough review of the published scientific literature, it was concluded that oral contraceptives are carcinogenic to humans ---they cause breast, liver and cervical cancer. In light of that, the government should probably ban the carcinogens or at least label them as “cancer-causing,” or “dangerous to women’s health.” But some legislators, some of them doctors too, still want to distribute them as “essential medicines” to our women. Why?

3. THE BILL ASSUMES THAT THE STATE IS OMNIPOTENT. IT SEEKS TO CONFER UPON THE STATE A RIGHT AND AUTHORITY IT DOES NOT, AND CAN NEVER, POSSESS.

No one questions the right of the State to levy taxes, to expropriate private property for public use, to conscript able-bodied young men for its defense. But the State may not enter the family bedroom and tell married couples how to practice marital love.

For while it is a citizen who casts his vote, pays his taxes and fights for his flag, it is a man who embraces his wife and fathers her child. There are certain areas, certain activities of man as man where every individual is accountable only to God, and completely autonomous from the State. These are sacred and inviolate areas where the State may not intrude.

Allow the State to invade our innermost private lives, and it will just be a matter of time before we are told we can no longer breathe unless the State allows it.

4. THE BILL IS PATENTLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

a) Article II, Section 12 of the Constitution provides: “The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution. It shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception. The natural and primary right and duty of parents in the rearing of the youth for civic efficiency and the development of moral character shall receive the support of the Government.”

“Sanctity”---the state of being holy---is an attribute of God. God is not outside our lives; the very first words of the Constitution proclaim it: “We, the sovereign Filipino People, imploring the aid of Almighty God…” Obedience to God’s laws, therefore, is not only a solemn teaching of the Church, but also an express constitutional mandate.

The government cannot be party to a program that seeks to prevent one married woman from conceiving, without making a mockery of that mandate. That is the necessary implication of the State’s duty to “equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception.”

b). Article XV recognizes “marriage as an inviolable social institution,” and “the foundation of the family.” Which, in turn, the State recognizes as “the foundation of the nation.” Section 3 (1) of the same Article binds the State to defend “the right of spouses to found a family in accordance with their religious convictions and the demands of responsible parenthood.”

Clearly, this does not allow the State to tell members of any faith ---in this case the Catholic faith---not to listen to what their Church teaches on faith and morals, or responsible parenthood, but to listen to the politicians and the population controllers instead.

But this is precisely what the bill seeks to do.

5. THE BILL IS DESTRUCTIVE OF PUBLIC MORALS AND FAMILY VALUES.

It seeks to legislate a hedonistic sex-oriented lifestyle whose aim is to assure couples and everybody else of “a safe and satisfying sex life” (the other term for contraceptive sex), instead of a mutually fulfilling conjugal life, and ultimately change time-honored Filipino values about human life, family life, marriage, in favor of the most destructive counter-values that are wreaking havoc on the morals of many consumerist societies.

6. THE BILL IS PARTICULARLY UNJUST TO CATHOLIC TAXPAYERS, WHO CONSTITUTE THE MAJORITY, AND WHO WILL BE MADE TO BEAR THE COST OF THE PROGRAM THAT WILL ULTIMATELY ATTACK A CONSTANTLY HELD DOCTRINE OF THEIR FAITH.

The same objection would hold even if the affected party were a religious minority. In fact, it should be interesting to find out whether any legislator will dare propose any legislation that is doctrinally and morally offensive to Islam or to any politically active local religious group.

7. THE BILL IS NOT WHAT ITS AUTHORS SAY IT IS. IT IS EVERYTHING THEY SAY IT IS NOT.

Not only is it hedonistic, it is above all eugenicist. It seeks to eliminate the poor and the “socially unfit” while paying lip service to their cause. While it neither mandates a two-child family nor legalizes abortion, it prepares the ground for both.

Its declared objective of population reduction conforms to the global population policy launched by U.S. National Security Study Memorandum (NSSM) 200 in 1974, under the title IMPLICATIONS OF WORLDWIDE POPULATION GROWTH FOR U.S. SECURITY AND OVERSEAS INTERESTS. It targeted the Philippines, along with India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nigeria, Mexico, Indonesia, Brazil, Thailand, Egypt, Turkey, Ethiopia and Columbia.

NSSM 200, also known as The Kissinger Report, called for a two-child family worldwide by the year 2000, using universal contraception and abortion. “No country has reduced its population growth without resorting to abortion,” the Report said. In 1974, NSSM 200 estimated thirty million abortions worldwide. The annual rate has doubled since.

8. ENACTMENT OF THE BILL WILL ONLY DEEPEN THE IGNORANCE ABOUT THE ISSUES INVOLVED.

Some defenders of the bill claim that nine out of ten women (who must be Catholic) want to contracept, regardless of what the Church teaches about it. Sad, but if the claim is correct, then nine out of ten “Catholic” women need to be instructed more deeply on the doctrines of their faith and on the harmful effects of contraceptives and abortifacients. Not everything an individual wants is good or right; the truth is never the result of opinion surveys. Contraception is wrong not because the Church has banned it; the Church has banned it because it is wrong. No amount of surveys can change that.

The authors of the bill suggest that Catholics need not follow what the bishops are saying because Humanae Vitae, Paul VI’s 1968 encyclical on the regulation of birth, is not an infallible document. This is an unfortunate conclusion from an incomplete premise.

Church teaching on contraception did not begin with Paul VI. Onan’s case (Gen 38:8-10) is absolute proof; Pius XI and Pius XII pronounced on it before Humanae Vitae, appealing to Scripture, to the Fathers of the Church, and to tradition. While Humanae Vitae was not infallibly proposed, its teaching has been held definitively by all Catholic bishops. It meets the criteria set forth by Vatican II for an infallible exercise of the ordinary magisterium of the bishops throughout the world. As the theologian Russell Shaw points out, the Church has always taught contraception to be gravely sinful; she has never taught that it is good, permissible, or even only venially sinful.

9. THE NATURAL REGULATION OF CONCEPTIONS DOES NOT OFFEND THE CONSTITUTION OR THE RELIGIOUS BELIEF OF ANY COUPLE; IT IS IN FULL ACCORD WITH THE DEMANDS OF RESPONSIBLE PARENTHOOD, AND IS NOT CONTRACEPTION AT ALL. NO LAW IS NEEDED FOR THE STATE TO SUPPORT IT.

The Billings Method, which takes advantage of the fertility rhythm of the human body, has been attested by the WHO to be 99% effective. But as there is no money in it, no industry has promoted it like the various contraceptives and abortifacients. State support for it could spell the difference.

(Former Senator Francisco S. Tatad represents Asia-Pacific on the Governing Boards of International Right to Life Federation, Cincinnati, Ohio, and World Youth Alliance, New York, NY.)


source:: http://www.cfcffl.org/prolife/articles/whats_wrong_with_repro_bill_kit_tatad.htm

Friday, September 26, 2008

True love Waits

Teens should read this article by Sis. Mary Pilar Verzosa:

“Girl, I can’t stand it any longer! Ten minutes na and he has not texted back! Ano ba yan?...luv pa ba nya me?”…Daniel is the second bf of Abbie this year. She is 15 years old. He is 16, really good looking, a basketball player and malambing. Abbie is hoping that her relationship with Daniel will stay longer than her three months with Joshua. She does not even know now why she even agreed to be on with Joshua!

Abbie is just one among the many teens who easily get in and out of romantic relationships with the opposite sex. The cell phone makes it so quick for relationships to deepen and even become intimately physical – ending in love-making, pregnancy, abortion or sexually transmitted diseases. They are thrown into roller coaster emotions of passion, jealousy, anger and impatience, day dreaming and illusions, inspiration or frustration. One minute he or she is the one and only. The next minute, they cannot stand each others’ demanding attention and time. “Nasasakal na yata ako…”

Very often I get invited to high schools tospeak on Love, Sex and teenagers. Open Forum questions reveal how much the youth want to speak with someone who will understand their needs, feelings, dreams, and problems. They admit they are sometimes confused if it is now love and will sex make them closer because of conflicting messages they get from their parents , media, school and friends. They want answers and guidelines in order to avoid the horrible stories they hear about people committing suicide, getting abused and molested, fooled into relationships and getting date raped, getting pregnant or some disease.

We have lots of laughter and serious moments when they, both boys and girls, ask me how they can help their friends in complicated situations. I really feel their love and caring for one another. This is when I distribute the “I am a Responsible Boy” and the “I am a Responsible Girl” bookmarks. Before I end of the presentation, I challenge them to join the “True love Waits” Campaign. Millions of teens have already signed the cards. This is a serious commitment not to engage in premarital sex and a prayer to God to strengthen them to avoid temptations during courtship.

Be a pro-life advocate. Who knows how many souls you will be able to save!

If you are interested to join us, contact our Pro-life office at 911-2911. We can go to your school to promote this campaign. For questions and advices, text me at 0919-2030-637.

Monday, September 8, 2008

Parents: The Most Important Educators on Sexuality

The task of forming healthy sexual attitudes and understanding in children is one of the most important role of parents. In providing an education on love and sexuality to their children, parents must begin by refuting the propaganda that outside "experts" can do the job better than they can.

It is imperative for parents today to investigate what is being taught in the name of sex education. Parents have a right to examine curricular materials and textbooks. They can and must talk to the teachers and principals about what they hope to communicate. And to look carefully for a hidden agenda such as pro-homosexual and lesbian behavior, the safe sex distortion, the belief that premarital sex is a freedom of choice, and any suggestions that pits teenagers against their parents.

In a recently held conference on family life, parent-speakers stressed on the following points on why the home is the best place to convey sex information to children.

Parents know their children better than anyone else, they know their maturity level as well as what language they understand. Also, parents are more likely to inject the moral aspects of sexuality that are so important to the development of a wholesome view of sex. This does not been that information about sex should not be taught at church and at school. But sex education at church an d school should be complementary to what the child receives at home, not given in place of it.

School sex education classes ignore individual differences among children and break down the natural modesty of boys and girls. When children are taught academics, such as Math and Reading, they are given materials suitable to their level of readiness for these subjects. Yet, when it comes to the extremely sensitive area of sexuality, all children in the same grade level are given the same material, even if some are not yet physically or psychologically ready for the material. This is insensitive and harmful. Forcing boys and girls to listen to, view and openly discuss the sexual functioning of the opposite sex's anatomy while in their presence is embarrassing and contributes to the breakdown of the modesty that is natural and appropriate in human beings.

What is taught and how it is taught -- in sex education classes are not immediately known in detail by parents. This means that there is absolutely no way parents can control, or even find out what their children are being taught about sex unless they sit in the classroom or when their teenage child asks them to buy condom or IUD to be brought to class as part of their homework.

School sex education has never been shown to reduce the growing problem of teen pregnancy or abortion. In fact, in the United States, data shows the opposite: as federal funding for sex education programs increases, so do the rates of teen pregnancies and abortions. This proves that the contraceptive mentality encourages the youth to become promiscuous.

Children do not need Sex Education, they need Chastity Education. Kids need to learn how to say no and why saying no is in their best interest -- physically, emotionally and spiritually. Sexuality involves more than birth control pills. The school sends the wrong message to students when their sex education courses are mere "how to do it and how not to get caught" lessons. If schools spend more time on chastity education, the number of chaste teens would rise dramatically.

There is no such thing as" value-free" sex ed. When anything more than the biology is taught, someone's values are going to be presented. Telling students to "make up your own mind" tells them there are no standards to go by. Telling students it's "best to say 'no,' but if you're going to be sexually active, be protected" send them the message that the teacher doesn't really expect them to control themselves. Presenting birth control without saying it's wrong for them to use it tells the students the teacher doesn't think it's wrong.

The best lesson in sex parents can provide their children is the love and respect they show for each other. Parents convey attitudes and values about life and sexuality as they interact with their children each day. They are always available to their children for support, questions and direction and have much wisdom to share that comes from the faithful living out of their commitment as husband and wife and as parents.

Saturday, August 9, 2008

Why pop-control is not the Solution to Poverty

Why pop-control is not the Solution to Poverty

The main objective of a population program is to reduce fertility measured in terms of the number of children born of every woman. The means to achieve fertility reduction is to increase contraception, and sterilization (ligation). The persuasion is done mainly under the guise of health and well-being of women and family and are also directed at young people under the forms of anti-birth sex education programs from grade school to College level.

Population Policy is Anti-poor

The premise for the population control argument is as old as Thomas Malthus' 1789 essay on the social consequence of unchecked human population growth. The Malthusians today, are indoctrinating international opinion that poverty does not find its cause in social injustice, or in economic failure, or in political incompetence, or in ideological aberrations. According to them, poverty has its source in the dizzying proliferation of poor people, of the weak, the Blacks, the Indians, etc.

Most growth of the world's population takes place in the Third World, thus a tendency to claim that underdevelopment, poverty and hunger are caused by overpopulation or "the poor having too many children." Many people assume that these population control notions are valid because they have heard them so often, especially in the media. The population controllers never seem to see themselves as part of the "overpopulation problem," only the defenseless poor, whom they belittle, coerce and seek to reduce in number.

Poverty is not a fatality, nor is hunger. What the poor expect is that they be given aid to get out of their misery, not that they be left to stagnate after having been "offered" sterilization or contraception.

The following evidences unmistakably contradicts the assumption that the cause of poverty is too many people and that reducing the number of people will reduce poverty.

Debunking the myths of overpopulation. The world is not exploding!

When one looks around and sees the masses of people, the congestion, the homeless, the slums, the pollution, and gets caught up in the daily traffic jam, it is tempting to think that the world is indeed overpopulated. Currently the world population is numbered at 6,004,428,557 and is growing by an estimated one million people every four or five days. This rapid growth has caused much concern and it seemed to confirm the existence of a "population bomb."

However, the catastrophe that some saw approaching may in fact never come. The latest statistics from the United States Census Bureau reveals that the world's population growth rate has "declined to about 1.5 percent at present," the lowest rate in fifty years. The same study also says that the birth rate is declining faster than population has been growing that the U.S. Census Bureau has just cut its three year old estimate of world population in the year 2000 by one hundred twenty million, and in the year 2020 by more than three hundred million.

In the Philippines, improvements in female education, job opportunities outside the home, rising economic expectations, improved life expectancy, migration, low death rate are among the factors listed by experts on family life that decreased birth rates. So, even without the government family planning program of fertility reduction, there will be less babies born in the future.

Overcrowded cities, not overcrowded countries

According to basic calculations by area, all six billion people on the earth today would fit within the state of Texas, with each family having a house with a little yard. So, it is not a question of area. The problem is the growing concentration of large numbers of people in certain cities, caused by the deterioration and lack of opportunities in the rural areas. This migration to cities, occurring mostly in developing countries, has left most of the countryside uninhabited, while the cities are confronting serious problems with basic infrastructure, health services, food supplies, education, transportation, sewage disposal, and housing.

An example of this is Egypt, where 98% of the population (62 million) lives in a few cities on the banks of the Nile River, in an area that encompasses only 3.5% of Egypt's territory.

Every nation has enough resources and the capacity to feed its people well

In contrast to what the population controllers would have us believe, most countries in the world have the natural resources to feed and provide a life with dignity for every citizen. According to a report of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, every nation has the capacity to feed its people well. Thus, no Filipino should be starving. The problem is food distribution and not food supply.

Furthermore, population-control advocates also insist that it is better to have smaller populations in order to increase resources. If this were the case, then Bolivia, for example, with only 7.8 million people, but with a territory the size of California and Texas combined, and possessing abundant natural resources, would be a wealthy country, which unfortunately it is not.

There is no connection between population growth and economic growth

There is no population problem. Population growth is the result of the plunging death rate and increasing life expectancy worldwide. That is progress.
- Sheldon Richman
CATO Institute

In 1967, Nobel prize winning economist Simon Kuznets published the result of a study in which he compared population growth rates and economic growth rates of a group of countries over the last hundred years to see if high rates of population growth correlated with low rates of economic growth. He found that there was no connection. Indeed, historical data suggest the contrary, that population growth is a positive factor in the economic development process. Sheldon Richman of CATO Institute, in his testimony on International Population Stabilization and Reproductive Health Act further revealed that the United States, England, Hongkong, and other countries became rich during unprecedented growth in population. The most densely populated nations are among the richest. There are many nations much richer than the Philippines where population density is greater. There are also many nations much poorer than the Philippines where population density is lower. Low population density may contribute to poverty.

COUNTRY ----------------GNP($) PER CAPITA----------------PERSONS PER SQ. KM.
West Germany------------10,940---------------------------------635
Netherlands----------------9,316-------------------------------- -346
Japan---------------------11,300------------------------------- --840
Hongkong------------------7,136----------------------------- --4,850
South Korea---------------2,150--------------------------------1,121
India------------------------ 270----------------------------------606
Philippines-----------------1,740----------------------------------161
Ethiopia---------------------284------------------------------------27
Zambia---------------------730--------------------------------------8

Source: Statistical Abstract of U.S. World Development Report 1987

The true cause of poverty

International experts have identified that the causes of a country's underdevelopment, like that of the Philippines, can be both internal and external. The internal causes may include social injustice, unjust distribution of wealth, the absence of equal opportunity for all in education and economic life, poor political and economic administration combined with widespread corruption, exaggerated military budgets in contrast to inadequate spending on health and education, overconcentration of productive capacity in urban centers, the unbridled pursuit of profit at the expense of the common good, the heavy burden of foreign debt accompanied by lack of controls on the flight of capital, unequal access to property, etc. The list is endless!

Externally, underdeveloped nations are victims of an inequitable distribution of the worldrquote s resources as well as international trade and financial arrangements which work against t hem. Economic experts blame the economic recession being experienced in the Asian region to globalization. We are witnessing a reduction of jobs, a cutting of social services and the laying of greater stress on the laws of the international market rather than the laws of the land. Globalization means global competition in trade and business. As always the case has been, it is only the superpowers who win the game because with deregulation, privatization and liberalization of trade, they can maintain status quo.

Birth (Out Of) Control

"Since absolute security for one power means absolute insecurity for all others, it is obtainable only through conquest, never as part of a legitimate settlement."

- Henry A. Kissinger in World Politics, January 1956

Overpopulation is a concoction of contraceptive pushers and abortion pushers who have banded together in a conglomerate called International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF). These are owners of multinational corporations which manufacture infant formulas, contraceptives, condoms, IUDs, sterilization and abortion gadgets like suction machines. They are the same people who control international money lending institutions like the World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the Frankfurt-based Development Loan Corporation and the Asian Development Bank (ADB).

IPPF was founded by Margaret Sanger, the woman who coined the expressions "birth control", "human weeds," "less children from the unfit," "right to destroy," and "freedom of choice." This must sound familiar because Hitler applied this to thousands of Jews whom he considered an inferior human race. Margaret Sanger's whole life was devoted to racism and "contraceptive imperialism."

IBON Databank analysis says that, the Philippine's population program was undertaken to please the rich countries who provide money through loans, grants and investments, crucial to the government's economic plans. Rich countries, including the international organizations they dominate, are only willing to help the poor nations if they allow their population to be controlled. USAID, for example includes population reduction as one of the objectives for giving financial assistance to the Philippines. The focus of "planned parenthood" is an economic strategy of transnational corporations. As long as the population program exists in the Philippines, the foreign-dominated pharmaceutical industry has a ready market for contraceptives that pollute the internal environment of men and women.

Secondly, the Information Project for Africa in a book entitled Excessive Force: Power, Politics and Population Control also revealed that third world countries constitutes the largest population group. Out of every baby born, only one belongs to the white race. Obviously, if the third world population grows too fast, the white Anglo-Saxon race will eventually be swallowed. To quote Bertrand Russell, in his famous speech Marriage and Morals (London, 1929), "It cannot be expected that the most powerful will sit while other nations reverse the military nations balance of power by the mere process of breeding."

Is it moral to allow the Population Bill to be enacted to law?

Most of the countries in the West are suffering from a decline of births. As a consequence their population is ageing. In Japan, the average age of the labor force is 44. Countries whose population is slowing down are also suffering from economic stagnation. This is more than a coincidence. Slow population growth means smaller markets and therefore a less dynamic economy. Aside from these economic problems these countries are also suffering from many social and health problems: high divorce rates, breakdown of the family, juvenile delinquency, sexual promiscuity and serious side effects from the use of contraceptive methods.

Given this scenario there is no reason why we should support a bill that we know poses so many problems. If we appreciate and value the strength of the Filipino family we cannot remain indifferent to the government' s population control programs.

Natural Family Planning not Artificial Methods of Contraception

Catholic teachings has always been firm in its stand on the subject of population control: "The duty to safeguard the family demands that particular attention be given to securing for the husband and wife the liberty to decide responsibly, free from all social or legal coercion, the number of children they will have and the spacing of their births. It should not be the intent of governments or other agencies to decide for couples but rather to create the social conditions which will enable them to make appropriate decisions in the light of their responsibilities to God, to themselves, to the society of which they are part, and to the objective moral order. What the church calls "responsible parenthood" is not a question of unlimited procreation or lack of awareness of what is involved in rearing children, but rather the empowerment of couples to use their inviolable liberty wisely and responsibly, taking into account social and demographic realities as well as their own situation and legitimate desires, in the light of objective moral criteria.
(L'Osservatore Romano. 23 March 1994)

Scientists and millions of couples worldwide agree that modern scientific fertility awareness methods such as the Billings Ovulation Method are reliable, effective, safe, healthy and easy-to-use ways of planning the family.

Speaking on this subject, Mother Teresa of Calcutta has remarked: "In destroying the power of giving life through contraception, a husband or wife is doing something to self. This turns the attention to self and so it destroys the gift of love in him or her. In loving, the husband and wife must turn the attention to each other as happens in Natural Family Planning, and not to self, as happens in contraception."

Other References :
Mercedes Arzu Wilson, "Love & Family: Raising A Traditional Family in a Secular World" , Ignatius Press, San Francisco

Michael Schooyans, "Bioethics and Population", Copyright 1996 by Central Bureau, CCVA

Jacqueline R. Kasun, PhD, "Birth (out of) Control: The Failure of Government Family Planning Programs", The Population Research Institute, 1994

"Debunking the Population Myths: Philippine Setting", Manila: Pro-Life Philippines, 1993

Fr। Anthony Zimmerman, STD, "Catholic Teachings on Pro-Life Issues", Humanae Vitae Research Institute, Kagosima-ken, Japan, 1996

Wednesday, July 30, 2008

Baby Six Billion


Baby Six Billion

Fr. Frank Pavone
National Director
Priests for Life

I received a letter the other day scribbled with the following words: "All the rest of God's creation cannot continue to be destroyed because the human species is breeding itself out of resources. Get real…The world is already saturated with unwanted humans!"

Another pro-abortion person told me the world "sighs with relief" when people die from disasters.

Interesting perspective.

This way of thinking is fueled by comments often heard at the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), referring to a "world devastated by human activities." This description was used recently, as the world reached the "Day of Six Billion."

Our population has reached six billion. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? Population controllers mourn it as a disaster. On the other hand, a prestigious group of international leaders recently signed a statement entitled "Welcome, Baby Six Billion," which pointed out that this event is a blessing.

Overpopulation fears are too often misplaced. The problem is neither that there are too many people nor that there are too few resources. The problems, instead, are selfishness, the use of food as a weapon by dictators, and the interference by some governments with food production and adequate distribution.

As far as the existence of resources, to quote the statement mentioned above, "Enough grain is produced for every person on earth to consume 3500 calories daily. If you add to that meat, fish, fruit and all other food sources, there is 4.3 pounds of food produced per person every day."

As far as the number of people, the statement points out, "Underpopulation, not overpopulation, is the greater threat to the world today. By the beginning of next year, over seventy countries representing over half the world's population will have below replacement rate fertility - defined as 2.1 children per woman. The populations of the developed nations are not doubling today, but are declining."

During the years I worked at the Vatican, there was hardly a day that some document from the United Nations did not come across my desk. No matter what the theme of the paper, the concern about "too many people" was rarely absent.

Except, that is, for the reports about what the experts in demography were saying. The concern over declining population has solid evidence to back it up, and meetings have been held at UN headquarters to discuss what to do about it. No clear solution is in sight.

We might get a clue where to start, however, by reflecting on our reaction to the birth of the world's Six Billionth Baby. Can we rejoice? Can we give thanks for life, which "is always a good" (Evangelium Vitae 30)? Can we bring ourselves, and at least one other person, to echo the sentiments of the recent statement which concluded by saying, "We are grateful that Baby Six Billion has come into the world. Baby Six Billion, boy or girl, red or yellow, black or white, is not a liability, but an asset. Not a curse, but a blessing. For all of us."

Canada Catholic Bishop Will Deny Politicians Communion if They Support Abortion

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
February 28
, 2008
(

Ottawa, Canada (LifeNews.com) -- A top Catholic official in Canada is encouraging elected officials of the Catholic faith to turn from their pro-abortion views if they want to continue receiving communion. Ottawa Archbishop Terrence Prendergast says he will first speak with politicians who support abortion and encourage them to convert to the pro-life perspective.

But, for those elected officials who continue to advocate legal abortions, he would tell them they shouldn't be taking part in the Christian sacrament.

“Given your stubbornness on this particular issue, you should not publicly receive the Eucharist until you’ve changed your mind," he told the Western Catholic Reporter about what he'd say.

Archbishop Prendergast's warning would be instructional rather than condemning.

“The bishop is not a policeman,” he said. “He is a father in Christ, a Shepherd of his flock.”

He also encouraged Catholic parishioners to do their own part to urge Catholic politicians to follow the teachings of the Church in their public policy.

“We all have to live our lives as faithful Christians in politics, in public life, in the schools and in every area of life,” he said. “As I get to know the politicians I will speak to them on these issues and hopefully we’ll be able to make progress."

Last month, Saint Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke said St. Louis University basketball coach Rick Majerus was wrong to make pro-abortion comments while attending a rally for pro-abortion presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Burke told the Post-Dispatch he would deny the coach communion because his views on abortion and human life are so far out of step with the Catholic Church.

The Catholic leader received significant attention during the 2004 presidential election for saying he would not give communion to Democratic candidate John Kerry, who backed abortion and embryonic stem cell research।

Monday, July 28, 2008

How does the birth control pill work?

All birth control pills:

Act to suppress ovulation - but does not always succeed in doing this. What doe this mean? That "breakthrough" ovulation can occur.

Cause changes in the cervical mucus- but this doesn't always have its intended effect, which is to prevent the sperm from reaching the ovu.

Cause change in the lining of the womb- so that it doesn't grow to its proper natural thickness. If a fertilized ovum (in essence, a human embryo and therefore a human life) comes into the thinner, altered lining of the womb, the embryo cannot implant,a nd so dies. This is chemical abortion.

Slow the movement in the fallopian tubes. This sometimes results in an ectopic pregnancy.

-Love Life Magazine Volume 1 no. 2, page 15

A summary of "An Analysis of the Estimated Figure of induced abortions in

sharing with you another insightful article from the prolife newsletter 7/28/08:

A summary of "An Analysis of the Estimated Figure of induced abortions in
the Philippines in 2000 as published in a 2006 Guttmacher Institute report
by Susheela Singh et al"
By Dr. Roberto De Vera
University of Asia and the Pacific

In the 2006 Guttmacher Institute report "Unintended Pregnancies and Induced
Abortions in the Philippines: Causes and Consequences", Susheela Singh et al
estimated that there were 473,000 induced abortions completed in the
Philippines in 2000 using a method consisting of three steps. First, based
on reports gathered from 2,039 hospitals which contained the top ten leading
causes of admission in the 1999-2001 period, they arrived at an estimate of
the number of women in 2000 who were hospitalized due to complications from
both induced and spontaneous abortions. Second, they calculated the number
of women hospitalized for induced abortions by subtracting the estimated
number of women hospitalized for spontaneous abortions (or miscarriages)
from the estimated number of women hospitalized for induced and spontaneous
abortions. Finally, they arrived at the estimated number of women who had
induced abortions by multiplying the estimated number of women hospitalized
for complications due to induced abortions by 6 to account for the women who
had induced abortions who didn't go to the hospital.

We find that their method overestimates the figure of induced abortions in
the Philippines in 2000 because of three flaws. These flaws had the effect
of 1) overestimating the figure for women hospitalized for spontaneous and
induced abortions due to an assumption that is weakly supported by
statistical data; 2) underestimating the number of women hospitalized for
complications due to spontaneous abortions (or miscarriages) because it
mistakenly covers only those women with spontaneous abortions occurring in
12th to 22nd week of pregnancy who were hospitalized for complications; and
3) using a multiplier which most likely is higher than the ratio of the
number of women who have induced abortions to the number of women who are
hospitalized for complications due to induced abortions.

Using modified version of the Singh et al methodology (corrected to account
for the above flaws), we arrived at an alternative estimate of 25,924
induced abortions in the Philippines in 2000 (1.3 abortions per 1,000 women
in the reproductive age). Using a second method, we multiplied 0.0117, the
share of induced abortions to live births by the number of live births in
2000, to arrive at second estimate of 20,831 induced abortions in the
Philippines in 2000 (1.1 abortions per 1,000 women of reproductive age). We
consider these two estimates of induced abortion in the Philippines in 2000
to be more reasonable than the 473,000 estimate (24.5 induced abortions per
1,000 women of reproductive age) published in the 2006 Guttmacher Institute
report.


Ma. Fenny C. Tatad
Executive Director, Bishops-Legislators Caucus of the Philippines

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Titus 2 Wife And Mommy For The Glory Of God: The truth about birth control

Titus 2 Wife And Mommy For The Glory Of God: The truth about birth control

GLOBAL FILIPINO NATION CAUTIONS NATIONAL OFFICIALS ON POPULATION POLICY


This statement focuses on population policy in the context of poverty
alleviation goals of the country. The main contention is the fact that
population control measures are not effective in bringing down birth rates.
The statement abstains from contentious debates relating to women's rights,
health issues, pro-life vs. pro-choice polemic, the religious stance,
environmental impact, eugenics and nativism. Those important debates, which
should be reserved for separate fora, do not directly relate to poverty
alleviation.

-------------------------
Global Filipino Nation (GFN), an international association of global
Filipinos, their families and onshore Filipinos advocating good governance,
has cautioned national officials from labeling divergent views on population
policy and control as "narrow-minded, parochial and stupid". On the
contrary, GFN asserts that worldwide economic history and empirical evidence
do not support the policy premise that population control measures
effectively bring down birth rates, thus advancing poverty alleviation
goals.

Evidence shows that population growth rates decline, not a result of
deliberate population policy, but due to economic growth, education and the
rise of women's rights.

At the lowest stage of economic development, population growth rates tend to
be high. Children, including sons and daughters of age and married, serve a
social insurance function: working in the fields, contributing to family
income, fulfilling household tasks, helping finance the schooling of
siblings and providing for the old age of parents.

As societies grow economically, incomes rise and formal forms of social
insurance develop -- resulting in the reduced value of children as an
informal form of social insurance. Awareness and expectations of social
mobility spread, inducing the youth to postpone the age of marriage and
couples to reduce the number of children. Movements promoting women's
rights and gender equality have contributed to a decrease in the number of
children.

Worldwide population control measures adopted have not been effective. They
have been introduced generally when population growth rates have been on the
decline in many countries, including China. Even the Philippines is
undergoing a perceptible population growth decline, with the rate dropping
from the 3%+ levels of the 60s to the current level of 1.95% as estimated by
the Philippine National Statistical Coordination Board. Growth rate data
would be more meaningful if net migration figures are revealed.

Birth rates in highly-developed countries have decreased to bare replacement
levels. Many Western nations, such as the U.S. and Canada, grow only due to
immigration. Some European countries are facing an absolute decline in
population. Japan would experience a declining population as the post-World
War II generation dies off. More and more observers are becoming fearful of
too many elderly people rather than too many babies. Ironically, the still
relatively robust birth rate of the Philippines has served as a national
social safety net, given population migration *cum* remittances.

Policy makers should exercise caution lest they succumb to the geopolitical
goals of developed countries and the perceived post-Cold War era concerns
about immigration pressures, national security and environmental
degradation. Policy makers, especially politicians, should also resist the
temptation of formulating judgments on what is good for families and making
major decisions in the lives of the people.

GFN urges policy makers to focus on pro-growth policies, including
dismantling the special interest obstacles to growth, rather than apply
resources to misguided population policy.
source: prolife e-mail newsletter

Understanding the Catholic Stand: Why Pills Cause Early Abortion


Us Filipinos should always defend life--because life is for everyone: born or unborn. That is why it's important to appreciate where the Church stands on controversial issues and why.

Here's a way to learn more why we should defend our Catholic faith's stand against the Reproductive Health Bill.

The Church is against the bill because, among other things, the Reproductive Health Bill will allow abortion. How? The Catholic Church has always taught that "Life begins at conception" that is, upon the union of the sperm and the egg.

Population Control groups are now insisting now that "life begins at implantation." This gives them the excuse to destroy the fertilized egg (3-5day old fetus/baby) before implantation which is what most contraceptive pills do. Some 15 years ago, oral contraceptive pills had 400 mcg. of ethinyl estradiol to prevent ovulation (ovary's production of a mature ovum) but caused nausea and headaches, which made it unpopular. They reduced ethinyl estradiol to less than 10% (30 mcg), to make it more popular. Oral contraceptive pills today have reduced contents of ethinyl estradiol, which allows ovulation (production of a mature egg and the union of the sperm with the egg). BUT why won't you get pregnant? Oral contraceptives now have an added chemical, levonorgestrel, that prevents implantation of the fertilized egg ( 3-5day old fetus/baby). This causes early abortion.

I am learning much from the website of Pro-Life Philippines, which tackles contraception and other anti-life issues: www.prolife.org.ph