Babies in the Womb are NOT a "Clump of Cells"-They are BABY HUMANS!

No to dehumanization of unborn babies! 

They are babies, not "blood clots", nor are they "a clump of cells"!

Mga Katotohanang Ayaw ng Mga Promotor ng RH Bill na Malaman ng Taumbayan

The Answer to A Crisis Pregnancy is to Eliminate the Crisis, NOT THE CHILD

No to abortion! Killing a baby will not solve a problem!

Coercion and the RH Bill :The State and RH Indoctrination

You have probably heard the RH supporters’ claims that the RH bill will give “informed choice” to the public, that it is for “women’s health” and for “obstetric care”. However behind this benign rhetoric is the heavy hand of the State in RH indoctrination. Section 16 is all about mandatory sex education for ALL students (both private or public schools, regardless of religious affiliation) – from grade 5 to 4^th year high school.  Section 24 ensures a nationwide  RH “mass indoctrination” by “a heightened nationwide multi-media campaign to raise the level of public awareness of the protection and promotion of reproductive health and rights including family planning and population and development.” Far from offering the public informed choice, it actually sets up an RH indoctrination platform, where no one is allowed to express disagreement nor speak their opinions on the intent of the bill under pain of imprisonment.

You see, the RH bill is coercive. Why is it coercive? It punishes those who object to its provisions. It punishes those who will teach something different from its provisions.

How can it be coercive? Look at Section 28, “Prohibited Acts”

1.       The RH bill punishes local government officials, regardless of their religious beliefs, budgets, and provinces’ health needs, if they do not implement the RH bill in their local government unit.

2.       The RH bill punishes health professionals who withhold information on RH services, and it especially targets those who will do so because of religious convictions. If a pro-life, Catholic nurse or obstetrician chooses to only teach natural family planning to a patient, it is her right to do so and no law should force her to recommend artificial contraception.

3.       The RH bill punishes health professionals who refuse to give RH services. And the religious objectors are required to refer. Why should someone who is objecting be forced to refer , against his own conscience, by a law?

4.       The RH bill punishes anyone who “will engage in malicious disinformation”  about the intents and provisions of the bill. The RH bill dissenters who have different opinions than those who crafted the RH bill are the targets here. Obviously, it will not apply to RH supporters and advocates.

Besides, who determines what it the  “correct” information and what is “incorrect” (to determine what is“disinformation”)? The RH sponsors, lobbyists, advocates and their resource persons. YET, in the present RH bill debates in Congress and the social media, RH bill advocates, lobbyists, supporters are ALREADY denying RECENT(dated May 2011) unbiased evidence-based scientific information (from the WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer , no less) that states that “combined oral contraceptives are group 1 CARCINOGENS” and that “there is SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE on the carcinogenicity of combined oral contraceptives”. If these people who wrote the RH bill and are lobbying for it are denying medical facts NOW, how can they be trusted to determine correct information?  Medical science is ever-changing, and new researches reveal causes, effects and correlations that were not known before. In this example, carcinogenicity of combined oral contraceptives is established by new findings. How can a proposed law punish “disinformation”, in the ever-changing  field of medical science?

Moreover, RH advocates are also denying basic scientific facts like the beginning of life. From high school we are taught that a new human life begins at fertilization, at the moment of zygote formation. We have RH advocates who call the unborn as “not human” or “not persons”  and those who arbitrarily, but absurdly, move the beginning of life from the moment of fertilization to implantation. With these absurd unscientific assertions of RH advocates, how can the RH bill determine what is “incorrect” or what is “disinformation” when they themselves deny plain-as-day scientific facts and findings?

          

To be truly fair, RH advocates denying scientific facts and downplaying cancer risks from oral contraceptives must also be punished because these are all medical disinformation. But if it is ONLY these RH consultants/advocates who will determine what is “correct”, then ONLY pro-life advocates will be punished. This is highly discriminatory and truly biased.

The RH bill is like a giant indoctrination and coercion machine. It violates the principles of free speech, and the freedom to practice one’s religion. These are just more reasons to say NO to the RH bill.

A LIFE WITH POTENTIAL! (from liveaction.org)

Senator underestimates sensitivity of Filipinos

Senator underestimates sensitivity of Filipinos

written by retired principal Esperanza Sagra; chiding Sen. Santiago and her premarital-sex-promoting remarks

On TV news last Nov. 25, our very assertive senator dished out sex like she were giving out lollipops to little kids. In that one minute or so coverage, her message must have sunk deep into the nation’s viewing audience.

What was very alarming was her sweeping statement that if you do not like sex, you’ve got to see a doctor because you are abnormal. What for? Because of a brain damage or something? Isn’t she aware that there are many people who opt out of sex for higher dimensions of spirituality? Surely priests and nuns, bishops and cardinals and, above all, the pope are not abnormal people, considering the responsibilities they are holding.

By endorsing a piece of legislation like the RH bill, this senator was expected by the people to do a candid but dignified handling of the topic because controversy over this issue has been raging for months. But no, she seemed to be taking it lightly, somewhat jokingly without regard to the repercussions of her pronouncements. And to think that it was a lady-senator who could have been our president telling university students to buy condoms if they could no longer suppress their sexual urges. It sounds like she was encouraging the indiscriminate use of condoms. No, madam senator, not that easy, not that fast. You have to be married first and, in a Christian society, we follow rules. Rules that preserve life, and rules that do not kill.

You have overlooked the fact that Filipinos have dignity and moral values. They don’t copulate like dogs by the roadside to satisfy a sexual urge. You underestimate the sensitivity of Filipino society. Please do not bark this way or the big bone will fall from your mouth.

—ESPERANZA M. SAGRA,

retired principal,

Surallah, South Cotabato;

100% of "undecided" TV studio audience votes "NOT IN FAVOR OF THE RH BILL" after hearing both sides

At the TV5 RH Bill debate televised last Sunday, August 21, 2011, the studio audience was comprised of people who were all undecided about the RH bill.They were the ones allowed to vote on the questions. Results of the voting were flashed after two seconds. The pro-lifers and the RH advocates were there but were not voters, only spectators.

At the end of the program, after hearing all the arguments and debates, the undecided-on-the-RH-bill audience was asked: "Pabor ka ba sa RH bill?" This picture shows the results. 100% -HINDI pabor sa RH bill. ONE HUNDRED PERCENT.

Given all the arguments and information, the undecided see what is wrong with the bill and decide against it.

Again, we say that there is nothing wrong with maternal health, prevention of disease and responsible parenthood in themselves. But this bill is a part of the package of a culture of death--it is the means and the ways to achieve these health goals which is immoral. Six years of state-controlled mandatory non-moral, non=Biblical sex education is unacceptable in any form to Christians, because sex is always a moral issue. Even in many states in the US they have no such mandatory sex ed. And it is not six years where it is mandatory. The next generation, starting with next year's students, if the bill is passed, will be recipients of the sex ed. The sexualization of an entire generation of Filipino young people will begin.

State provision of free contraception is also not done in a first world country like the US. Why should it be done in our country?

Population control is not Biblical. The Bible always welcomes children and considers them a blessing. Successful population control in the Bible was done by Herod and Pharaoh.

Freedom of conscience of health professionals is also trampled upon by the RH bill. Freedom of speech of those who disagree with the RH bill is also trampled upon as it promises to punish anyone who will give disinformation on the bill. Moreover, the RH bill's declaration of policy says that it will eradicate any laws or policies that infringe on reproductive rights. In countries where abortion is legal, reproductive rights include access to abortion.

RH bill advocates, save for one doctor, consistently, though unethically, deny medical research from the WHO and the Mayo CLinic and cancer research journals that say that oral contraceptives are carcinogens. RH bill advocates also absurdly say that life begins at implantation in the womb when any embryology text book and elementary/middle school science textbook will tell you that life begins at fertilization, when the egg and the sperm unite and the zygote forms. There is consistent dehumanization of the zygote, the embryo and the fetus by some RH bill advocates to suit their stand on embryocidal and abortifacient contraception and abortion. Some RH bill advocates and lobbyists are vocal for their support of legalization of abortion. There is not one provision nor mention on the humanity of the zygote,embryo,or fetus in the entire RH bill. Children are called "unplanned/mistimed pregnancies".

Therefore those who support the RH bill for its health ends ought to rethink what they are bargaining for. The RH bill is not merely a health care program. It will be a law if passed, with a huge budget, implementation mechanisms to ensure it is followed, punishments and imprisonments for violations. The DOH already has maternal health care programs, family planning programs, and already purchases contraceptives to be given for free. Half of its budget goes to such programs already. An existing law,The Magna Carta for Women, RA 9710, already contains all the maternal health, obstetric care and family planning provisions seen in the RH bill. RA 8504, Philippine AIDS Prevention and Control Act, already addresses HIV and AIDS.The health ends of the RH bill are already addressed by existing programs and laws. Therefore the RH bill is not necessary for the health ends it wants to address. We must not let the soul of our nation be sold to an immoral, God-hating culture of death. The moral costs of the RH bill are too great for the benefits it claims to give.

More Pictures: Harm from IUDs to Embryos and to Women

IUDs (intrauterine devices)have been shown "to have pre-fertilization and POST-FERTILIZATION mechanisms of action",which make them unacceptable to Christians who believe that God created life starting at conception/fertilization.(from Mechanisms of action of intrauterine devices: update and estimation of postfertilization effects. Am J Obstet Gynecol.  2002; 187(6):1699-708 Stanford JB; Mikolajczyk RT)

Well, more than being able to prevent embryos from implanting in their mothers' wombs, IUDs have been found to cause harm to women. A hard object does not belong inside a soft body! 


To women: if you are a Christian, don't have an IUD placed. IUDs can prevent implantation of an embryo that God has made in His image, and an IUD can damage your body. If you are not a Christian, I hope these images discourage you from having one placed. Your doctor should show you these pictures even before he/she suggests IUD placement.


Here are pictures from recent medical journal articles that show IUDs stuck in organs outside the uterus--which means that the IUDs perforated the uterus first THEN proceeded to puncture/damage other organs of the body.

Xray :bladder stones with an IUD inside from Archivos Españoles de Urologia, 61, 5 (640-643), 2008

Bladder stones removed from the body: with an IUD trapped inside the stones

from Archivos Españoles de Urologia, 61, 5 (640-643), 2008

IUD in foreign body granuloma
from Journal of Medical Case Reports 2009, 3:7007doi:10.1186/1752-1947-3-7007

Xray: large bladder stones with an IUD inside
J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod 1999: 28, 162-164

Removed from the body: large bladder stones with an IUD inside
J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod 1999: 28, 162-164

Removed from the body:
IUD stuck in appendix and mesoappendix (body tissue attaching the appendix to the intestine) from Arquivos de Gastroenterologia vol.40 no.1 São Paulo Jan./Mar. 2003

Xray of giant vaginal stone with embedded IUD
 from Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 2001 Oct;94(10):522-3.

Removed from the body:
Giant vaginal stone with embedded IUD
from Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 2001 Oct;94(10):522-3.

(a) Intra-operative photograph showing migratory
“Saf-T-Coil” IUCD, with each arm wrapped around a loop of mid ileum.
(b) Operative note depicting configuration of “Saf-T-Coil” IUCD causing closed loop bowel obstruction.
(c) Resected specimen-ischaemic loop of small bowel.
(d) Obstructing “Saf-T-Coil” IUCD removed from abdomen.
Pictures and captions above from Case Report Med. 2010; 2010: 740642. 

Please see a related blog post at Filipinos for Life : The Dangers of IUDs

"Pampers-for every little miracle" --beautiful video

Every child is precious, because she is made in God's image. Whether she has special needs, many needs, "unwanted" or "mistimed",conceived or fertilized through IVF or not, adopted, born fullterm or premature, born to a teenage mom, she is still precious because her value comes from the One who made her- God.

Christians: Things you need to know about the RH bill #2. There are contraceptives in the RH bill which are harmful to women.

There are contraceptives in the RH bill which are harmful to women.The RH bill says it shall provide “medically safe contraceptives” and will even purchase such contraceptives together with essential medicines for all LGUs. But there is a whole lot of evidence for harmful effects to women of certain contraceptives.

These harmful effects are the following:

1) Oral contraceptives increase the risk of developing breast cancer.
2) Oral contraceptives increase the risk of suffering from venous thrombosis.
3) Intrauterine devices can cause perforation of the uterus and other internal body parts and life-threatening infections.

I present here medical evidence from scientific journals for each of the abovementioned harmful effects.

1) Oral contraceptives increase the risk of developing breast cancer.

The Filipino public MUST KNOW that oral contraceptives increase the risk of developing breast cancer. Certain RH bill advocates have downplayed this increased risk of breast cancer from pills, and have even labeled prolifers to be “misinforming” or “lying” about this . Here we present several studies from scientific journals that state this very same finding. These prestigious researchers are definitely not misinforming. Well, even an RH bill advocate (former DOH secretary Cabral) admitted in a radio interview on April 27,2011 that oral contraceptives do increase the risk of developing breast cancer.

A 2006 study published by researchers at the prestigious Mayo Clinic in the peer-reviewed medical journal Mayo Clinic Proceedings stated that:

“Use of oral contraceptives is associated with an increased risk of premenopausal breast cancer, especially with use before first full term pregnancy in parous women.” (parous=has given birth to a live infant)
Oral Contraceptive Use as a Risk Factor for Premenopausal Breast Cancer: A Meta-analysis.doi: 10.4065/​81.10.1290. Mayo Clinic Proceedings October 2006 vol. 81 no. 10 1290-1302. Chris Kahlenborn, MD, Francesmary Modugno, PhD, MPH, Douglas M. Potter, PhD and Walter B. Severs, PhD

A more recent study, published in 2010, by cancer researchers in the US, concluded that:

“Current use of oral contraceptives carries an excess risk of breast cancer. Levonorgestrel used in triphasic preparations may account for much of this elevation in risk.”
-Oral contraceptive use and breast cancer: a prospective study of young women.Hunter, DJ et al.Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention Journal ; 2010 Oct;19(10):2496-502. Epub 2010 Aug 27.(American Association for Cancer Research)

Two well-known Filipino researchers from the University of the Philippines also found the same results in the Filipino population. They published their study in the Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology. They stated:

“Women who are currently on combined oral contraceptives or who have used them in the last 10 years are at a slightly increased risk of having breast cancer diagnosed and additional cancers diagnosed tend to be localized to the breast. There is no evidence of an increased risk 10 or more years after stopping use …Post-menopausal women are at an increased risk of having breast cancer diagnosed while on hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and in the 5 years after stopping use, relative risk was increased by 2.7% for each year of use. There is no evidence of an increased risk of breast cancer 5 or more years after stopping HRT .”

Cancer and the Philippine Cancer Control Program.Ngelangel,CA and Wang, EHM. Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology (2002) 32(suppl 1): S52-S61.doi: 10.1093/jjco/hye126

Experimental biologists in yet another study state that combinations of synthetic progestins and estrogens increase the risk of breast cancer.:

“There is now considerable evidence that using a combination of synthetic progestins and estrogens in hormone replacement therapy (HRT) increases the risk of breast cancer compared with estrogen alone. Furthermore, the World Health Organization has recently cited combination contraceptives, which contain synthetic progestins, as potentially carcinogenic to humans, particularly for increased breast cancer risk.”

The researchers furthermore explain the mechanism how synthetic progestins and estrogens, which are used in hormone replacement therapy,but are also found in oral contraceptives, affect the breast. Breast tissues in women respond to hormonal changes in a woman’s menstrual cycle, as part of God’s design , to prepare for breast changes in case of pregnancy. The study explains how hormones in oral contraceptives and hormone replacement therapy alter these normal cyclical changes in breast cells:

“Disruption of androgen action by synthetic progestins may have serious deleterious side effects in the breast, where the balance between estrogen signaling and androgen signaling plays a critical role in breast homeostasis. Here, we review the role of androgen signaling in the normal breast and in breast cancer and present new data demonstrating that androgen receptor function can be perturbed by low doses of MPA(medroxyprogesterone acetate), similar to doses achieved in serum of women taking HRT. We propose that the observed excess of breast malignancies associated with combined HRT may be explained, in part, by synthetic progestins such as MPA acting as endocrine disruptors to negate the protective effects of androgen signaling in the breast." 

Disruption of androgen receptor signaling by synthetic progestins may increase risk of developing breast cancer. FASEB(Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology) Journal. 2007 Aug;21(10):2285-93. Epub 2007 Apr 5.Birrell SN, et al

Both endogenous (naturally in the body) and synthetic (in contraceptives and HRT) estrogens are responsible for breast cancer cell proliferation (in estrogen-sensitive tumors). That is why anti-estrogen medications are efficacious in preventing and treating breast cancer. This is what French and Italian researchers reported in the Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology :

“The greater breast cancer risk persistently related to the use of HRT preparations containing estrogen and synthetic progestins seems in all likelihood due to the regimen and/or to the kind of progestin used. The “non-physiological” continuous-combined regimen, could increase the risk because it does not allow sloughing of lobular duct epithelium (such as occurs when progesterone declines at the end of the normal menstrual cycle). More importantly, many of the progestins used have several non-progesterone like actions that potentiate the proliferative effect of estrogens on breast tissue and estrogensensitive cancer cells.”
-Progestins and progesterone in hormone replacement therapy and the risk of breast cancer. Carlo Campagnoli, Françoise Clavel-Chapelon, Rudolf Kaaks, Clementina Peris, and Franco Berrino J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2005 July ; 96(2): 95–108.

On the Philippine Breast Cancer Network website they put a statement: "Some of the causes of breast cancer ... can only be controlled by political and social action aimed at reducing the production, use, transport and disposal of agents that directly or indirectly affect breast cancer risks.- Environmental Health Perspectives, September 1998”

If we were to follow this recommendation above for breast cancer, logically, therefore, the government “must reduce the production, use, transport and disposal of hormonal contraceptives.”-because hormonal contraceptives directly increase breast cancer risk.

The government tries to reduce smoking through public health awareness education to prevent lung cancer. Yet the RH bill will include these breast-cancer-risk-increasing hormonal contraceptives together with the purchase of essential medicines (Section 10) for all national and local hospitals and local government units.

2) Oral contraceptives increase risk of developing venous thrombosis

That oral contraceptives increase the risk of developing venous thrombosis is also a well-known fact.
Researchers from the Netherlands studied 1524 OC users vs 1760 non-users of oral contraceptives in their country. In their 2009 study, they concluded:

“ Currently available oral contraceptives increasedthe risk of venous thrombosis fivefold compared with non-use . The risk clearly differed by type of progestogen and dose of oestrogen. The use of oral contraceptives containing levonorgestrel was associated with an almost fourfold increased risk of venous thrombosis relative to non-users, whereas the risk of venous thrombosis compared with non-use was increased 5.6- fold for gestodene, 7.3-fold for desogestrel , 6.8-fold for cyproterone acetate and 6.3-fold for drospirenone. The risk of venous thrombosis was positively associated with oestrogen dose. We confirmed a high risk of venous thrombosis during the first months of oral contraceptive use irrespective of the type of oral contraceptives.” -

The venous thrombotic risk of oral contraceptives, effects of oestrogen dose and progestogen type: results of the MEGA case-control study . British Medical Journal. 2009 Aug 13;339:b2921 . A van Hylckama Vlieg, F M Helmerhorst, J P Vandenbroucke, C J M Doggen, F R Rosendaal.

3) Intrauterine devices can cause perforation of the uterus and other internal body parts and life-threatening infections.
The Filipino public must know about these cases and see for themselves that these are not medically “safe” devices.

Let this picture speak for itself. This is an IUD that has perforated the large intestine. It perforated the uterine wall and then the large intestine. Remember, IUDs are hard foreign bodies and they do not belong in a soft internal organ.This is from the from Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2010 Jul-Sep.JSLS (2010)14:456–458 Laparoscopic Removal of an Intrauterine Device Following Colon Perforation.Arie Bitterman, MD, Oleg Lefel, MD, Yakir Segev, MD, MSc, Ofer Lavie, MD.


Here is another picture of an IUD that has perforated the bladder. It is from the Canadian Urology Association Journal 2010 Oct;4(5):E141-3. Intravesical migration of an intrauterine device detected in a pregnant woman.Tosun M, Celik H, Yavuz E, Cetinkaya MB.


Korean researchers also report of a case of a patient who had had vague lower abdominal pain for three months. They state:

"The abdominal X-ray, computed tomography and colonoscopy revealed that the IUD had penetrated into the descending colon."Penetration of the descending colon by a migrating intrauterine contraceptive device.J Korean Soc Coloproctology. 2010 Dec;26(6):433-6. Epub 2010 Dec 31.Park JM, et al.

Researchers from Greece report of a woman who had actinomycosis ( a bacterial infection from Actinomyces israelii) stemming from an IUD. They report:

"Ultrasound and computed tomography were performed, revealing an ovarian tumor formation and acute appendicitis. The patient underwent exploratory laparotomy, unilateral ovarectomy due to acute abscess and finally appendectomy. The role of IUD as a factor in the dissemination of the infection is very important.” Actinomycosis of the appendix and pelvis: a case report. J Reprod Med. 2008; 53(9):711-3 Peitsidis P et al

American researchers report of a woman who had Pseudomonas infection (a bacterial infection from Pseudomonas aeruginosa):

“Case: a 35-year-old woman with an IUD for 6 years with pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) . Authors implemented antibiotic therapy. Her clinical course worsened, and exploratory surgery revealed a right tubo-ovarian abscess with multiple loculated pelvic abscesses. Culture of the IUD found heavy growth of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. “Pseudomonas aeruginosa-infected IUD associated with pelvic inflammatory disease. A case report.J Reprod Med. 2002; 47(12):1035-7 .King JA; Olsen TG; Lim R; Nycum LR.

Infections may also be fatal. Researchers from Poland report of a woman who died from Actinomycosis infection from her IUD:

“Case: 49-year-old woman who had been using an intrauterine contraceptive device for 20 years. The pelvic actinomycosis in her case led to sepsis and consequently to her death. Colonisation with Actinomyces israeli in women using IUD may amount up to even 20%.” Pelvic actynomycosis as the result of a long standing use of an intrauterine device. Case report. Ginekol Pol. 2007; 78(12):995-7. Grabiec M; et al.

We have shown you the harmful effects of these contraceptives which are included in the RH bill. In our earlier blog post, we showed how the RH bill does not uphold life from conception,which is just one reason to reject the RH bill. Here we have shown you the harmful effects of contraceptives, the foremost of which is breast cancer. Breast cancer is more than a mere side-effect. Side effects are things like “headaches”, “skin rashes” or “dizziness”. This is breast cancer: a malignant, spreading,and ultimately fatal disease of breast tissue. This is definitely something the public must know, because according to the article written the UP researchers mentioned in this blogpost, breast cancer is the 2nd leading cancer site in the Philippines. Let the public reject the RH bill. We cannot afford the health costs of these harmful effects of contraceptives which the RH bill will purchase nationwide by the millions- especially the health cost of breast cancer.

Christians: Things You Need to Know about the RH Bill #1 : it does not uphold life as starting at conception

The RH bill does not uphold life as starting from conception, which is the moment of fertilization, or when the egg and the sperm unite to form a diploid zygote. Embryologists, without a doubt,say that life starts at the point of conception, when the zygote is formed:

“Each human being starts his life, his very being, as an ordinary cell called the zygote, measuring less than 0.2 mm in diameter.”
Essentials of Human Embryology, S.M. Bhatnagar et. al., 1983, Orient Longman, India

“The male and female sex cells or gametes…unite at fertilization to initiate the embryonic development of a new individual.”
“Fertilization takes place in the oviduct (fallopian tubes)... resulting in the formation of a zygote containing a single diploid nucleus.”
“Embryonic development is considered to begin at this point.”
“This moment of zygote formation may be taken as the beginning or zero time point of embryonic development."  

Essentials of Human Embryology (pp. 1-17),Larsen, W.J. 1998. Churchill Livingstone, New York.

"Zygote: this cell results from the union of an oocyte(egg) and a sperm. A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo).
Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm ... unites with a female gamete or oocyte(egg) ... to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent(multi-potential) cell marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.

The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology by Moore, K. and T.V.N. Persaud. 1998. (6th ed.), W.B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia. (pp 2-18)

If life begins at conception, therefore any contraceptive that kills a conceived life or prevents a human life from implanting in his mother's womb(thereby killing him) after the point of conception, is what is called an abortifacient, or a drug causing abortion or death of a human life.

Which contraceptives included in the RH bill are abortifacient?

1. The IUD or intrauterine device

According to medical researchers in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, IUDs have both a prefertilization and postfertilization effect:

"There are many potential mechanisms of action for the intrauterine device (IUD), which vary by type of IUD (inert, copper, or hormonal). On the basis of available data for fertilization rates and clinical pregnancy rates, the relative contribution of mechanisms acting before or after fertilization were quantitatively estimated. These estimates indicate that, although prefertilization effects are more prominent for the copper IUD, both prefertilization and postfertilization mechanisms of action contribute significantly to the effectiveness of all types of intrauterine devices."
Mechanisms of action of intrauterine devices: update and estimation of postfertilization effects.
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002; 187(6):1699-708
Stanford JB; Mikolajczyk RT

And yet some RH bill advocates deny that IUDs have a post-fertilization effect. They say pro-lifers are "misinforming".But Drs.Stanford and Mikolajczyk in the article above are not "misinforming".The fact is that IUDs can prevent a living human life from implanting in his mother's womb.And the public should know about that so they can have a true "informed choice"- they can stay away from this contraceptive which kills conceived life.

2. Hormonal contraceptives: in all its forms, whether as oral contraceptive pills,injections, implants, patches and hormone-releasing IUDs, etc., have both prefertilization and post-fertilization mechanisms of action.

These are the three ways that hormonal contraceptives act:

First effect: stops ovulation (not all of the time)-(pre-fertilization)
Second effect : prevents sperm from migrating to the fallopian tube -(pre-fertilization)
Third effect: prevents implantation of a fertilized egg or zygote or blastocyst(when breakthrough ovulation occurs, as prevention of ovulation is not 100% foolproof)- (post-fertilization)

Remember, not all women taking these hormonal contraceptives are at the exact same stage of their menstrual cycle, so that means that the mechanism of action cannot be confined to pre-fertilization only, as RH bill advocates claim. Saying that hormonal contraceptives do not act on a conceived life is misinformation, and in fact, two editors of the peer-reviewed reproductive health journal “Contraception” said:

“To make an informed choice, women must know that emergency contraceptive pills — like all regular hormonal contraceptives such as the birth control pill, the progestin-containing implant and the injectable depot medroxyprogesterone acetate — may prevent pregnancy by delaying or inhibiting ovulation, inhibiting fertilization, or inhibiting implantation of a fertilized egg in the endometrium.”
Editorial / Contraception 74 (2006) 87 – 89
James Trussell and Beth Jordan

Two researchers, Walter L. Larimore, MD and Joseph B. Stanford, MD, MSPH, in the Archives of Family Medicine, also said:

We found the evidence supporting postfertilization effects for OCs in the prevention of clinically recognized pregnancy(implantation) to range from poor (level III) to very good (level II.2). Specifically, evidence based on alterations in endometrial biochemistry and histology (level III), evidence based on endometrial thickness and endometrial receptivity from research studying in vitro fertilization (level II.2), and evidence based on endometrial integrins (level II.3) all support the possibility of peri-implantation or postimplantation effects. Furthermore, evidence based on ectopic-to-intrauterine risk ratios from multiple case-control studies (level II.2) supports the possibility of postfertilization preimplantation, peri-implantation, or postimplantation effects...The available evidence supports the hypothesis that when ovulation and fertilization occur in women taking OCs, postfertilization effects are operative on occasion to prevent clinically recognized pregnancy(implantation).

Walter L. Larimore, MD; Joseph B. Stanford, MD, MSPH
Arch Fam Med. 2000;9:126-133.

Certain RH bill advocates have gone so far as to redefine the meaning of conception- by saying that "conception begins at the moment of implantation"-which is totally false. They even say that the Latin word for conceive means pregnancy. But no Latin word can change the fact that human life begins at fertilization, which is also called conception. We have shown evidence from three Embryology books, no less, that life begins at fertilization, when the zygote is formed. This absurd redefinition is merely a "conscience-numbing" redefinition so that they can sell IUDs and hormonal contraceptives so that the users will not have "guilt" at having killed an embryo. This is an example of altering the definitions because the real definition makes them purveyors of human-life-killing contraceptives. This redefinition also allows them to convince people that contraceptives are “okay” because it “does not kill” conceived life – because they changed the meaning of “conception”. People who have been convinced by such a redefinition then make decisions based on this redefinition. But no matter how they redefine ‘conception’, the fact still remains that the diploid zygote is the start of human life. Think of it—if you, as an embryo, failed to implant in your mother’s womb, you would not be here.

"Dear Mama" : a poem by John Juat (letter from an unborn baby to his mom)

image from momtobee.com

Dear Mama

By: John B. Juat

Dear Mama, do you hear me whisper?
I’m calling you from within “mother, mother”.
Can you understand me? I really wonder.
Listen for a while, mom, I don’t mean to bother.

Dear Mama, I want to learn to crawl, sit and stand
I want to learn to walk as you guide me by the hand
I want you bathe me, tickle me, hug me, and let me understand
That you’ll love and guide me by your loving hand

Dear Mama, I want to become a baby.
I want to learn to count from one to three
I want to learn the alphabet from A to Z
I want to see you smile each time I say “mommy”

Dear Mama, I want to be able to study in school
There I can meet and play with friends. Isn’t that cool?
I want my knowledge to be like water in a swimming pool
I want to be able to proudly tell you, “Mom, you rule!”

Dear Mama, I want to spend a lot of time with the friends I meet
I want to go to the mall to shop, watch a movie and grab a bite to eat
I want to be responsible and independent; I want to stand on my 2 feet
And by the time I’m 18, I already want to be in the driver seat

Dear Mama, I want to finish my college education
I want you to wear my medal on stage upon my graduation
I want to let you know it’s worth paying for my tuition
Because I will have what it takes to fulfill my dream, my mission

Dear Mama, I want to find work and earn enough money
So that someday I can be able to support a family
I also want to be a responsible citizen and give back to the community
And help in whatever way I can to alleviate poverty

Dear Mama, after long years of being blessed with a special friendship
And after a few years of knowing my possible partner in courtship
I now want to be able to have a romantic relationship
Where together with my dearest love, we’ll endure every kind of hardship

Dear mama, i want to start and support my own family,
And raise up well the children God will grant me.
I wish to generate life as to share with them true charity.
Bonded in unity and love, our family will surely be happy

Dear Mama, when my time has come, I want to see Jesus face to face
And forever I will be happy in this peaceful and glorious place
I want to join the company of angels in singing songs of praise
And simply take my rest for all eternity enjoying His loving embrace

You see, mama, there’s a lot of things that I want to do
My entire future is in your hands, it’s all up to you
Let me be your choice mama, show that your love for me is true.
So that someday all my dreams could come true.

"The value of human life comes from the One who made it"-Rev.Dr. James I. Lamb, Lutherans for Life

10 week old baby in the womb whose mom needed to have a hysterectomy

“Every human life has value. That value does not come from its usefulness or how it looks or how big or healthy or productive it is … The value of human life comes from the One who made it, who bought it back, and who desires to call every life for His eternal purpose. The embryo in the Petri dish, the baby in the womb, baby Sally in the neonatal intensive care unit, Uncle Ralph in the Alzheimer’s unit, grandma in the nursing home bed, you and me—we all have value because of what God has done.”-Rev. Dr. James I. Lamb, executive director of Lutherans For Life

Video:"Thoughts of A Troubled Mother" together w/ "Reply of the Unborn" - please watch til the end

"Mama, I do not need power, fame and abundant money
Love me wholeheartedly, mama, it's enough for me"

Thoughts of a Troubled Mother
By: John B. Juat

This pregnancy is giving me so much stress
I've made a mistake; I've made a huge mess
Since I'm not ready to suffer the consequences
To abort my child is the only option, I guess

It's my body, it's my life, I should be free to choose
People may not agree, but I have my own views
If I take away the life of an unborn, what is there to lose?
I believe that not being ready is a reasonable excuse

It's okay if my own child I decide to kill
Anyway each of us are given free will
At least I'll have one less obligation to fulfill
At least I'll have one less mouth to fill

This has been such a huge burden on me
If i continue this, I will no long be so happy
Sickness, weakening, discomfort brought about my pregnancy
If i continue this, I will no long be free

It will be pointless to let my child live
Because there is absolutely nothing i can possibly give


Reply to Thoughts of a Troubled Mother
By: John B. Juat

Dearest mama, I'm sad to see you so troubled because of me
But I hope you will allow me to see the earth's beauty
Please mama, take me home, and let me be a part of your family
Where I will experience abundant joy, love, and harmony

Choose me, mama; allow me to grow in your womb
Nourish me with love; please don't let this be my tomb
You may be scared and worried, I can easily assume
But let me live, mama, in this world there's so much room!

I am precious and beautiful; I am not filthy mud
I am meant to be this perfectly bloomed rose, though I'm still a bud
What don't you understand, mama? I am more than just blood
I am already being formed in the image of our Loving God

Let me live even if there are countless worries, it may seem
Let your love flow to me like a free-flowing stream
I have so much potential in me, I am capable of living my dream
So open your heart, open your ears, mama; listen to my silent scream

Listen to me carefully, mama, please hear my plea
Accept me, love me, and respect my dignity
Ask for guidance, mama, that you will clearly see
I am meant to be with my Creator someday for all eternity

Mama, I hope you understand how much I love you
It's an immeasurable kind of love that i assure you is true
I am a treasure, a gift, a blessing; I will make your life new
Please give me this chance, mama; I hope you love me too

Mama, I do not need power, fame and abundant money
Love me wholeheartedly, mama, it's enough for me

Hindi Dugo Lamang

Sila'y mga sanggol, hindi dugo lamang. This is a six-week old aborted baby. Created in the image of God. Mercilessly killed.