Business Matters

Rapid road to demographic suicide


Whatever happens to the RH Law, our leaders in the next five to 10 years must make sure that no program to aggressively promote a contraceptive mentality among the poor will be part of the implementing rules and regulations. We cannot make the same mistakes of China and Thailand, which are now on an irreversible road to demographic suicide because of the birth control programs their governments pursued just 20 to 30 years ago.

Total Fertility Rate (TFR) in the Philippines was six babies per fertile woman in 1975. Without any aggressive program for birth control over the last 30 years, that rate has fallen to 3.1 babies today through such natural trends as later marriages, education of women, urbanization and industrialization. In another 30 years, that rate will fall below replacement of 2.1 babies per fertile woman. The birth controllers say that there is nothing to worry about because even at below replacement, the population will continue to grow because of a “growth momentum” that can last for decades. What the RH proponents do not tell us is that any growth in population that occurs after the TFR drops below fertility rate will be in the number of those over 65—i.e., people will be living longer and longer. The labor force, however, will start to shrink, with the consequent financial burden on an economy that has to support more and more retired people with less and less productive workers.

The cases of Thailand and China are very instructive. Both countries still have growing populations but are already suffering from serious labor shortages because of aging. Both are far from being developed countries but are undergoing the demographic pains of such highly developed countries as Japan and Singapore. A recent report from Digital Media (May 25, 2013) estimates that Thailand is already lacking 1.6 million workers despite having a population of 65 million. The following was datelined Bangkok: “Thailand’s current labor shortage will become more severe with two government mega projects needing at least 530,000 more workers, a senior Thai official said today. Pravit Khingpol, Department of Employment director general, said the country will be short by 1.6 million persons in the labor force and foreign workers will have to be hired. The planned Bt 2 trillion in infrastructure development projects will need at least 450,00 workers and the Bt 350 billion water management project another 80,000 laborers, he said.”

In over just one generation of aggressive birth control programs, Thailand is suffering from labor shortages. It is clear that the so-called growth momentum does not exist, and it would be against sustainable development for the Philippines to aggressively promote birth control, especially among the low-income households who are the only ones still not affected by a contraceptive mentality. The same thing can be affirmed of China, which implemented, sometimes brutally, a one-child policy. In no time at all (again no growth momentum), China’s youth labor supply has started to decline.

A report published by Silk Road Associates, titled “The End of Made in China,” describes the labor shortage in that country: “It was once popular to talk of China’s endless supply of cheap labor. Not anymore. Labor supply has shrunk dramatically over the past decade. China’s youth demographic is expected to decline by 44 million over the next 10 years, according to the United Nations’ population projection division. Indeed, the average Chinese national is 35 years old, compared to the average Cambodian (23 years) and average Bangladeshi (24 years). [The equivalent figure in the Philippines is 23 years.] The result is massive labor shortages. Officials in the southern Pearl River Delta, for instance, estimate the region suffers a shortfall of 600,000 workers.”

Needless to say these labor shortages in Thailand and China have pushed their wages upward. Average monthly wages in China, according to the International Labor Organization (March 2012), are now at $656, while those in Thailand are at $489, as compared to $279 in the Philippines and $295 in India. No wonder there is an upsurge of Japanese and Korean manufacturing enterprises moving to the Philippines, as reported by Director General Lilia de Lima of the Philippine Export Processing Zone. China is no longer the preferred site of labor-intensive manufacturing operations. These trends should be a warning to our government to either repeal the RH Law or at least slow down its aggressive implementation.

The Philippine Constitution refers again and again to sustainable development. Obviously, the RH Law will not promote sustainable development. In that sense, it is unconstitutional. There is no need to push the TFR below replacement level at too rapid a pace. We cannot solve the problems of today by harming the economic welfare of future generations who will surely suffer labor shortages if we follow the examples of China and Thailand. There are numerous positive ways of addressing the problem of mass poverty without endangering future generations, as the Chinese and the Thais have already done.

Bernardo M. Villegas ( is senior vice president of the University of Asia and the Pacific.

Get Inquirer updates while on the go, add us on these apps:

Inquirer Viber

Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.

  • vendetta07

    I’m not an expert in religion, but I believe with all my heart that God supports the RH law. For example, Christians are taught to ‘love thy neighbor’. It is a shame to see standbys and children begging on the street. I could give them some money, but it would be better if their parents had the knowledge of what they were doing with their families beforehand. It’s better to ‘teach a person to fish instead of giving them a fish’, and I believe that is what the RH law provides.

    I know that the bible says ‘go forth and multiply’, but it did not say, ‘go forth and multiply until it is unsustainable’. In the past, most people worked in agriculture, and a large family meant more workers to farm the land. Nowadays, a single farming machine can do the work of a hundred men.

    I also understand the church’s position against ‘artificial’ conception. But the word ‘artificial’ is just another term for ‘man-made’. Since God created man in his image, things that are artificial are indirectly created by God.

    There is also the argument that the government should be doing more to create jobs and improve the economy. But there is a popular saying that ‘God helps those who help themselves’. I think the government can only do so much, and it is up to families to make their own decisions on their welfare. Jobs nowadays need a lot of training and education since machines replaced low-skilled jobs. It is hard for a child to study if he is always hungry. The government can’t create enough jobs for everyone because technology is changing the world economy, and having educated children is the only way to make sure that they can get jobs in the future. Continuing to blindly depend on the government for everything only perpetuates a welfare-mentality.

    Some may argue that giving out free contraceptives is welfare, but I disagree because sexual education is also included in the law. Our bodies are sacred because they are created in God’s image, therefore it would be a good thing to learn about it. It is true when the priests said ‘God works in mysterious ways’, and I believe this is one of his ways.

    • mad_as_Hamlet

      * * * * * * * *
      I just wish to express my admiration for this statement you made: “I’m not an expert in religion … .”

      You see, to my mind, making that kind of statement requires some decent degree of humility, because I have observed that if there is any field that most people claim to have an expertise in, it is in religion. Although, I suspect that they mean their religion. And which is not really much of an expertise.
      – – -

      • vendetta07

        Thank you, I am as humble as they come. God bless you.

    • just_anotherperson

      Following your logic, a nuclear bomb is man made thus indirectly created by God.

      • vendetta07

        Sodom and Gomorrah were entire cities destroyed by God, similar to a nuclear bomb.

    • Mang Teban

      Incredible arguments you have there, vendetta07.

      A) You believe with all your heart that God supports the RH law. Really? Why should God support your RH law? Does the RH law even give respect to the creation of life? Do you know that God creates life and puts a soul in the life created at the instance of the union of the egg cell and sperm cell? Is there a need for God to delay in hours or days for life to begin as the RH gang insists that conception is not the beginning of life? God is the Author of Life. Why do you think that God would contradict Himself? Does the RH law decide when a soul comes into a human being? Or, do you even know that humans are unique because we are the only creatures with a soul?

      B) You see poor folks idle (maybe jobless) or children begging needing help. You say it is better “to teach them to fish than give them a fish.” Fine. Why do you think that contraceptives will make them feel better? Why not give the poor jobs and access to economic opportunities (low interest-small business credit, affordable cost of basic commodities -food, transportation, utilities, etc.) which is the real meaning of “teaching them to fish”? Condoms or pills will never put food on the table or give employment to the jobless.

      C) Success in agriculture is not based on mechanical technology alone. Successful farms in other countries are mechanized but are manned by productive labor force. Have you been to a rice field? Do you sow seeds to plant rice? NO. Planting rice is by hand. A machine may make it possible to imitate rice farmers but it cannot entirely replace the need for human labor to move the produce from field to barn to distribution centers. Can you choose the right kind of vegetable to harvest (cabbage, carrot, pechay, onion, ginger, etc.) with the use of machines? Apparently, your knowledge of agriculture is as fantastic as your claim that you do not need people to run a farm. Machines can do the work. Hindi po, bossing.

      D) The word “artificial” is WSYWYG (what you see is what you get) or in simple language, “as is, where is”. Natural family planning methods have nothing synthetic or plastic or chemically-tainted in them. So, your analogy that the artificial contraption is man-made and a tangentially opposite metaphor that “we are created in the image of God” and all things artificial are ‘created by God’ is entirely weird. Any Philosophy devotee will really have a hard time to swallow your logic.

      E) God helps those who help themselves. Good you brought this up. Why do you think that the RH law is about helping the State make it easier to ‘educate’ her citizens to help themselves? Absolutely revolting and off-side as in soccer. A violation of what the popular adage really means. If you want God to help you, start by loving yourself. Your body is a temple of Christ. Pills will destroy that temple and other RH contraptions defy the very purpose of your body’s being.

      F) PNoy’s national agenda for population control equipped by the RH law is an indolent way to improve our economy. Reducing families to what Prof. Bernardo M. Villegas is pointing out that is happening to China and Thailand is the wrong solution to the hunger and poverty problems pervading in our country today. Of course, the State has the primary responsibility to create jobs and encourage trade. But how can the State propel the economy with palliative solutions like contraception? Crazy….really a case of low-grade quality of governance.

      Finally, please do not play cute by using your “theological” expressions and twist their meanings to suit your defense of an anti-God tool called contraception masquerading to care for mothers when it precisely stops births..and NOTHING ELSE.

      • vendetta07

        Hello Mang Teban,

        I don’t mean to offend you with my opinion, and I still love you as a brother in Christ. I believe God wants RH law based on Matthew 22:34-40, The Greatest Commandment:

        34 Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35 One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

        37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[b] 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

        I believe that RH will help all of our neighbors by giving them the knowledge to plan their families. We can teach them about their bodies and sexual education. I don’t believe sexual education is evil because like you mentioned, our bodies are a temple of Christ. Of course this alone won’t instantly transform society into a wealthy paradise since it is only one solution among many such as the ones that you have mentioned.

        Also, I like this quote by Sister Joan Chittister:

        “I think in many cases, your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed. And why would I think that you don’t? Because you don’t want any tax money to go there. That’s not pro-life. That’s pro-birth. We need a much broader conversation on what the morality of pro-life is.”

        God bless you

      • Mang Teban

        Since you seem to like quotations from the Sacred Scriptures, here is one that you should really, really discern :
        (Luke 6:46)
        “Why do you call me, Lord, Lord, but not do what I command you?”

      • Tommy

        Another moron equating the Church’s opinion with God’s.

        As a Catholic, I do not believe that God wanted millions of Muslims killed in the Crusades. I do not believe God wanted the Inquisition. I do not believe God wanted scientists such as Galileo persecuted.

        The Church has made mistakes, too many to claim infallibility. God does not makes mistakes. By equating the two, you insult the Lord.

      • Mang Teban

        You made your own judgments and clearly, there is nothing to explain.

      • sked482

        And did God said “Thou shalt have no Reproductive Health Law or use contraceptives” ?

      • Crazy_horse101010

        what good is it to teach them to fish when there is no fish you might has well throw your net in a swimming poll. and where are you going to put them on farms, that the soil is used up from over farming. funny birth control works everwhere else but wont work here. besides everyone knows you are a fanatic who will say anything to support the church. if god came down and said you were wrong you would throw rocks at him. this garbage has been going on for 60 years and every country voted for birth control. so go cry to them

    • sugbugrove

      try checking the redundancy of RH Law(PDAF again???)….otherwise one can be guilty of indifference .

  • diwaenergy

    This is my most hated argument from anti-RH side. I do not like people who have children just because they want their children take care of them when they grow old. Their children is their retirement plan which to me, is enough justification abandon them when they grow old.

    Should we not look at our children for what we can give them rather what they can do for us?

    What is the use of having a bright demographic future if your current state is full of hardship and misery? Do we want that as a perpetual situation?

    Also, i wish and hope that our leaders see their fellow countrymen more than just cheap labor to compete with other cheap labor of the world.

    I urge the writer to go to our slums and tell a mother of six who cannot feed her children and who can not give proper attention, time and affection to each of her children that we cannot help her because our country needs cheap labor.

    • Jane Tan

      Its the easiest argument to refute. My most hated argument is that it is another outlet for corrupt individuals to siphon government funds, followed by… the very hypocritical and communist free healthcare instead of condoms.

      I can actually feel my braincells crying out and pitying the person because they can sense the person making these arguments has none of their own.

  • Garote

    Bernardo Villegas’ article shows a professional journalist at work, who reports only the truth and not propaganda. He is not like the other writers who are trolls of the pharmaceutical companies and who allow themselves to be used to write lies. When you have incompetent and unthinking lawmakers like Pia Cayetano and Edcel Lagman, including few SC justices who know no better that the next guy on the street, who just accept hook-line-and-sinker the lies and propaganda of the pharmaceutical companies in order to fool the Filipino people into accepting contraceptives and abortificient drugs for the purpose of raking huge profit, we get a perilous and harmful law such as the RH law.

    • Crazy_horse101010

      ad which pharmaceutical companies this question has been asked many times no answer i have stock in pharma companies and never seen anything written concerning the philipines so who are they? the only lies are the ones spread by the church such has condoms have holes in them then say condoms wont work because kids will blow them up for balloons so which is it. and why is it that women in countries that have been using the pill for 60 lives live 10 to 12 years longer than here. nice try and ive known many women who have taken the pill including my family and they had no problems.

    • toe13

      Again, assumptions, without solid basis. Can you tell what pharmaceutical companies you are talking about?

      At least I can say Bernardo Villegas is an Opus Dei (check their website). Can we expect something good he’ll tell about RH Law?

    • Tommy

      No, he isn’t a ‘professional journalist’. You just like the article because it agrees with your narrow minded beliefs.

      Villegas’ background ALONE indicates he’ll be biased. Anyone with a decent academic background will tell you that this article cherry picks facts to support the author’s biases.

      The likes of Cayetano and Lagman are supported by factions such as the UP and Ateneo economics faculties. The (unbiased) academic community is behind THEM. So no, you lot are the ignorant ones.

  • 82hbf01

    RH LAW from an outsider 17Aug2013

    Pls allow an Outsider Point of View. (OPV). . from 34,000 feet above ground seeing the issue of RH Law. . to the level that this may be irrelevant to some politicians (great kuno as they think they are in a country that is deeply un-developed and whose resources are deeply stolen) whose pockets are already deeply convinced by the foreigner’s lobby money who wish to sell condoms here to prop-up their country’s economy & de-populate the world using man-made technologies. . .The OPV thought
    that the title of the Law is a MISNOMER. . THERE IS SOME SORT OF A DECEPTION HERE. . Because the term “REPRODUCTIVE” actually refers to the Filipinos’ (or humans’) “REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM”. . male (penis, prostate, the balls, seminal fluid, male hormone balance, etc) & female (vagina, uterus,
    ovaries, cervix, female hormones balance, etc). . “HEALTH” is their wellness
    and the state of being free from diseases. . .”LAW” is the legal measures TO
    PROTECT that state of health of the Filipinos’ REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM. .


    [1] . . . MICRO-WAVE RADIATION from celfones & cell sites installed within a populated area?

    [2] . . .PRIMARY & SECONDARY X-RAYS FROM SATTELITES by advanced nations scanning our lands hitting populations searching for minerals and other valuable resources quantifying how much they can profit by mining them. . unmindful if Filipinos’ reproductive system is diseased or they are getting cancer in the process. .?

    [3] . ..CHLORINATED SWIMMING POOLS. . where the Filipinas get ovarian, cervical, and uterian cancers and are later un-able to give birth

    [4] . . . FOODS (FRIED CHICKENS) WITH FEMALE HORMONES. . .converting the masculinity & real manhood of Filipinos to absurdities (hormonal imbalance = ‘BADINGS’). . Making their lives miserable when they grow old. . no families. . no children. .

    RH LAW from an outsider. . . . . should be re-named a “CONDOM LAW”. . It really does not protect the Filipinos’ REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM. .’CONDOM’ A SYMBOLISM TO THE DIFFERENT BIRTH-CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES DISCUSSED IN THE RH LAW. . .

    • Jane Tan

      I can also simplify and rename the anti-RH movement to the following:

      1) Irresponsible Parents Unite.
      2) We are Free to be Communists!
      3) Single Teenage Parents Support Group.
      4) Babies Unlimited Inc.

      • Tommy

        You forgot about the ‘Death to poor rural Filipina mothers Party’.

        Because hey, if they’re going to pretend every pro-RH advocate is a paid lackey of some random international conspiracy / big pharma, then why can’t WE assume they’ve got ulterior motives?

    • sked482

      Perhaps you should come down to see the reality on the ground instead of keeping your head in the clouds.

      1. It does promote women’s health. There are much more women who die from maternal causes than any of the ridiculous things you mentioned above. Things like early and late pregnancies, very close pregnancies, too many pregnancies, etc.

      2. HIV and AIDS also kill a significant number of victims and could be a potential epidemic if left unchecked.

      3. There are estimates of tens to hundreds of thousands of illegal abortions in the country every year. This is a very real threat to life that the RH law seeks to minimize.

      4. The RH Law is not all about contraceptives or condoms so your suggestion to rename the law as such is pointless. Read it first before making baseless conclusions.

      It’s funny when those who make baseless pronouncements and ridiculous assertions can even talk about deception in the law, when it is them who excel in spreading falsehood and misinformation.

      • 82hbf01

        @sked482:disqus . .Hi Sir or Ma’m. . Kapatid. . just adress specifically my scientific concerns on the protection of the Filipinos’ REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH. . and you will convnce me. . don’t be off-tangent . . and ‘propagandical’. . Hindi ka pa nagpapakilala kung sino ka

      • sked482

        Ha, look at our posts and see who’s doing propaganda.

        Okay, I’ll try to explain it to you in simple terms since you seem to have not understand my post. Your basic argument is that the RH Bill does not deal with reproductive health because it does not address the imagined danger to health that you mentioned in your list. My counter argument is that the RH bill does address health needs, in fact with more serious and life-threatening issues such as the ones I listed, all related to reproduction. It therefore refutes your contention, even if it does not address the imagined dangers in your ridiculous list, since there are more important and serious issues related to reproduction that it seeks to address.

        Now it’s no longer my problem if you’re still too myopic to see that. Talk about being off-tangent and “propagandical”. Sheeesh.

      • 82hbf01

        “Your basic argument is that the RH Bill does not deal with reproductive health”. . Your are off-tangent again. . Pls. calibrate your understanding. . and come back to me. .

      • sked482

        Naaah, I’ve explained my point well enough. As I said, it’s no longer my problem if you don’t understand. I’ll just leave you to your whims. Enjoy.

      • 82hbf01

        You are not following instructions. . bumalik ka. . Bata ka pa, Iho sa civilized brainstorming to attain a specific collective objective. . .Di ka pa marunong to harmonize your thinking to the wavelength of your adversary to come out with a constructive output. . .kailangan turuan ka pa

      • sked482

        You claim to have an outsider point of view yet you are obviously too myopic and want the discussion to go according only to your narrow way of thinking. Too bad for you the world doesn’t work that way. Oh well I guess you could still learn… or not. Good luck.

      • 82hbf01

        Thanks and God bless you and your loved ones. . .Later you will learn how the micro-wave radiation of the cp you are using daily will lose the rigidity and strength of your “triple-A”. . .And x-rays from several dozens of satellites roaming above the earth looking for minerals to mine?. . how it affect not only the Filipinos but all the humans reproductive system?. . .You will understand that in your next life. . I am the only one exposing that in the whole world. .

    • panhase

      You are being sarcastic, right?

      • Tommy

        I think he’s just a crazy person.

      • 82hbf01

        Crazy . . for an emergence of a more competent, “PORK-BARREL-TRANSCENDENT” majority law-makers & President. . who signed this . . “CONDOM” LAW. . protecting kuno the health of the Flipinos’ REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM YET LIMITING ONLY THE TECHNOLOGY TO BIRTH CONTROL . . and changng kuno their behaviour. . .un-mindful of the spectroscopic & chemically-induced harm to that system. . Let’s attack ideas and respect the person. . LET US BE SUPERIOR FILIPINOS. .

      • Tommy

        Nope, just crazy.

        Hey, studies have found that eating rice slightly increases the risk of cancer. Go start railing against rice, please.

      • 82hbf01

        Thanks, I’ll try that. . .Let go back to the the technologies that will protect the the REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM OF THE FILIPINOS. . BOTH MALE & FEMALE. . .You research also . . defIne the problem scientifically. . offer its solution. . combine it wth me. . and lets suggest them be added to the “CONDOM LAW”. . and rename it back to “REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH LAW”

      • Tommy

        I would, but I’m not a crazy person.

        But IF I were to take your opinion seriously (I do not) and if I were inclined to actually address your ‘points’, I would start out by saying that just because something is entitled the Reproductive Health Law, it doesn’t mean it has to address ALL aspects of reproductive health.

        Using YOUR logic, calling it the ‘CONDOM LAW’ would be even dumber, as it provides for other types of contraceptives, and dedicates most of its budget to things like rural midwives, rural health clinics, and sex education / family planning.

        So even using YOUR crazy logic, you’re wrong.

      • 82hbf01

        Thanks for that honor.. .for being higher . .for ‘crazier’ is one who entertains a ‘crazy one’. . .I respect you and I salute as a warrior for better Laws. . .Laws are viewed to be competent, effective, relevant, not only philosophical but scientific as well MUCH MORE. . .and encompassing covering ALL that refers to its so-called “HEALTH”. . REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH for that matter. . .You do not understand SPECTROSCOPY & CHEMISTRY as well in relation to REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH. .Its OK. . .Lets keep fightng in a civilized manner. . making each one a better person. . a better Filipino. . for the progress of our nation . . nor necessary be a ‘fanatic’ for a particlular persuasion. . let’s be open. . .unless one is paid for dong that. . . I’ll be the ‘creaziest’ then if I continue dong that. . .if you are that. . .

      • Tommy

        My point was that just because a law is named for something, it doesn’t have to address EVERY SINGLE ISSUE that pertains to that law, especially the dubious scientific claims you appear to be obsessed with.

        Aaaaand I’m done.

      • 82hbf01

        You are young and your intellect is easilly saturated and get emotional. . .. .”doesn’t have to address EVERY SINGLE ISSUE”. . .I told you a LAW must be all-encompassing LIKE THE LAW OF GRAVITY made by a competent lawmaker. . . . .”dubious scientific claims”. .My name is Harry Freires, a Filipino inventor on Water, a chemical engineer by profession, you can check me at the GOOGLE SEARCH who I am. . I teach SPECTROSCOPY APPLIED IN ANALYTICAL FIELD. . and CHEMISTRY. . in the university level. . Sino ka ba?. . Di ka pa marunong to harmonize your thinking to the wavelength of your adversary to come out with a constructive output

      • Tommy

        ‘I told you a LAW must be all-encompassing LIKE THE LAW OF GRAVITY’

        And I told you it doesn’t, and honestly the idea that it does is bloody stupid.

        And your being a chemical engineer has zero bearing on your legal knowledge.

      • 82hbf01


  • Pangasugan

    Demographic suicide? Mr Villegas seems unfamiliar with the mathematics of demographics and sustainable growth in population. It is not a simple as a straight line projection but a curve the behavior of which are influenced by many conditions/parameters. Labor shortage is just a temporary phenomenon which can be addressed by increased productivity (more efficient labor force) and mechanization. For this reason, this alleged labor shortage in China and Thailand is not even in the radar of mainstream economists.
    Our problem is TODAY – not the future. We should address the problems we have NOW and after doing that. prepare for the possible problems that MAY come in the future. The future will have different economic parameters (productivity, labor cost, GDP, etc) which are still unknown today. The problem today is POVERTY and lack of government resources which can only be addressed by controlling the population growth. The population growth and of the Philippines is very alarming like a train running without a brake and even accelerating due to the ignorance of the masses. We need to control it NOW to a manageable rate

  • Garo Ungaro

    Had a good intentions but in the end another good source of corruptions….

  • virgoyap

    Why mention only two countries such as Thailand and China which is according to him is on a road of rapid demographic suicide? How about the rest of the countries of the world which have also their own RH law? Are they also on the verge of democratic suicide? I think this way of thinking is too simplistic that will not lead us to a wholistic reality.


    Kudos, sir!
    Keep the fire burning!

  • toe13

    He should also put in his disclaimer that he’s an Opus Dei.
    Can we consider this article an “unbiased” one?

    Anyway, in fairness to him, unlike most of all anti-RH, his arguments has substance naman, though selective nga lang.


    RH Law was passed because of the heavy outpouring of the PORK (as manipulated by the Office of the President)…how could one think that this is done under the purity of intentions and for the poor, when in fact, the PORK distribution was used to pass this law…
    I heard someone shouting, “Where’s your net context?”….Hahahaha!

    • Jane Tan

      First get rid of the CCT, which is more than double the RH Budget, then we’ll talk.

      • Tommy

        The CCT is fine, and given it’s success in places like Brazil it’s worth a shot.

        There’s certainly room for both in the national budget, and if we want to cut ANYTHING there are certainly worthier candidates, like he PDAF.

    • Tommy

      Please change your username.

      Someone so stupid shouldn’t be posting under the name of someone so intelligent.

    • sked482

      Running out of arguments again. So what.

To subscribe to the Philippine Daily Inquirer newspaper in the Philippines, call +63 2 896-6000 for Metro Manila and Metro Cebu or email your subscription request here.

Factual errors? Contact the Philippine Daily Inquirer's day desk. Believe this article violates journalistic ethics? Contact the Inquirer's Reader's Advocate. Or write The Readers' Advocate:

c/o Philippine Daily Inquirer Chino Roces Avenue corner Yague and Mascardo Streets, Makati City,Metro Manila, Philippines Or fax nos. +63 2 8974793 to 94


editors' picks