Teenagers and the RH bill

published 20 Oct 2008, MST

I had the good fortune of spending one Monday afternoon with 120 or so high school campus journalists from the divisions of Pasig and San Juan. These kids were representing their schools to the National Schools Press Conference in either Editorial Writing or its Filipino equivalent, Pagsulat ng Pangulong Tudling. I spent a good hour talking about my work in this paper.

But the highlight of the activity was the actual contest that took place later that afternoon. I could not stay to observe the students as they wrote their pieces—I had to leave for the newsroom—but I left the sealed envelope containing the subject matter of their assignment with the organizers. The entries would be brought to my office the following day so that I could pick out the winners. I looked forward to reading what those kids had to say.

The topic was this: “Should the Catholic Church interfere with the passing of the reproductive health bill in Congress?” Contestants in Filipino received an identical assignment. As anybody should, I based my judgment on the writing of the opinion pieces— the form of the essays and not the positions they took, per se.

But a good bonus in doing so, and I admit this was my intention for giving the topic in the first place, was having a peek into the minds of these 15 or 16 year olds and learning what they really thought of the issue. After all, members of this age group were whom lawmakers had in mind when they were contemplating some provisions of the bill, specifically that on sex education.

(That would have been a great question, wouldn’t it? Ask high school students who would best carry out the business of telling them about sex? Fortunately that part is not up to them. They would probably say their teachers were too academic [or ignorant, in the case of some] and their parents too awkward. The adventurous [and bravely truthful] ones would probably say their peers were the better source. Or, horrors, the Internet.)

Expectedly, most of the contestants who took the position that the Church should not interfere based their arguments on the Constitutional provision on the separation of Church and State. It’s what most grownups who engage in the discourse invoke all the time, too.

On the contrary, those who argued that lawmakers must listen to the Church said today’s generation had become too licentious and needed to be corrected or that married couples should not be prevented from performing their mandate to “go forth and multiply.”

My observation was that most of the entries sounded like propaganda material from either the congressmen-supporters of the bill or the leaders of the Catholic Church. They students drew a line between the bad guys and the good. Maybe this was the kind of absolute reasoning that they saw in the news or heard from their parents, teachers or religious leaders. It was as if one had to be passionately for the interference, or adamantly against it. The Church had to be the primary voice in the debate, or be absent from it altogether.

Of course, it could also be that the children were under a lot of pressure that afternoon. It was a competition, after all, and they were given only a fixed amount of time to write their pieces.

* * *

But who says the Church should keep its hands off the issue? It should meddle all right. In doing so, however, it must realize that people—younger ones especially—are turned off by a dogmatic approach especially when pronouncements are uttered by overzealous priests and bishops who, when they speak of marital love, for instance, are talking above their heads. Even more so when some of these Church leaders display arrogance towards those who don’t share their opinion. “Judge your neighbor” is not among the teachings of Christ, is it?

The reproductive heath bill promises, and merely, to make people aware of the options available to them. Thus, every couple can use their free will in deciding which among these options would work well for them, based on the foundations given them by their families AND THEIR CHURCH. It is here, in the very intimate and personal decision-making process, that the Church’s guidance matters most.

Now there is talk that even if the bill hurdles Congress, the President would veto it anyway so she can remain in the good graces of the Catholic Church. I really and truly hope this is just talk. Filipinos are too downtrodden already; we can use some empowerment. And choice is always power—when we are free to act according to our personal beliefs.