Inquirer’s editorial cartoon on its Jan. 17 issue went beyond the boundaries of journalistic criticism as it seeks to portray the implementation of a law based on the rights of women and individuals to achieve their sexual and reproductive health and rights with “drug killings.”
The caricature seeks to make a comparison that does not exist: a law that upholds rights compared with purported extrajudicial actions. Does the Inquirer seek to convey the idea that both lead to deaths of Filipinos?
The government agencies concerned (Department of Health, Commission on Population and others) have always upheld the Constitution and the Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act (RPRH or RH law). Both guarantee the right of families to raise the number of children they desire in a responsible manner; induced abortion or the use of abortifacients will never have a place in our family planning program.
To convey the idea that the RH law leads to death is a barefaced lie and has no basis in word or fact.
How can an executive order on the RH law which has been praised by human rights agencies and defenders be equated with “drug killings” which the same agencies, groups and individuals may have criticized in the past?
At the very least, the Inquirer should apologize for going beyond the boundaries of constructive criticism.
JUAN A. PEREZ III, MD, MPH executive director, Commission on Population
First Gen explains position on fuel mix