RH law ‘gone berserk,’ critic tells SC

Carmela Fonbuena

This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.

Lawyer Luisito Liban tells Supreme Court justices that the RH law violates religious freedom

MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court resumed on Tuesday afternoon, July 23, hearing arguments against the constitutionality of the Reproductive Health (RH) law. 

Anti-RH law lawyer Luisito Liban started Day 2 of the oral arguments explaining to the High Court how the measure violates freedom of religion. 

The RH law does not force health care providers to perform RH services if they consider it a “sin.” Section 7 and Section 23 of the RH law allows a Catholic health care provider to refer a person seeking RH services to another one.

But here’s the problem, Liban told the High Court. He said the RH law puts a Catholic health care provider in a dilemma. “By referring to another health care provider, the Catholic commits grave offense under the teachings of the Catholic Church,” Liban said. 

Liban pointed out that a Catholic, by passing on the responsibility to deliver the prohibited RH services to another, would be “leading another to commit a serious sin.”

“If the person seeking RH services gets the services, the Catholic objector becomes responsible for the sin of the person,” Liban explained.  

The RH law, he said, puts any Filipino Catholic in a difficult situation where he only has 2 choices:

1) Obey his religious beliefs at the risk of facing sanctions (meaning the Catholic neither performs RH services nor refers the person seeking RH services to another health care provider)

2) Obey the law to avoid criminal sanctions

“The burden is great…. It violates the constitutional right to religion,” Liban said.

Liban also argued maternal death should not be a reason for government to legislate the distribution of contraceptives.

He said that other serious illnesses, not just the dangers of giving birth, kill Filipinos.

No law of the same magnitude has been passed especially to address these serious illness. Congress is discriminating,” Liban said.  

“The RH law is a piece of legistion that has gone berserk. It violates the Constitution…and the rights of the poor. It’s an aggressive population control measure.”

Oral arguments continue as of posting.

Petitioners have asked the Court to nullify the law on grounds of unconstitutionality. These petitions prompted the justices to temporarily stop the implementation of the law.  — Rappler.com

 

Add a comment

Sort by

There are no comments yet. Add your comment to start the conversation.

Summarize this article with AI

How does this make you feel?

Loading
Download the Rappler App!