Conscience

During last week’s symposium at the University of the Philippines, the only speakers present were the proponents of the RH bill, notably Sen. Pia Cayetano and Miriam Santiago. They are on a campus tour to campaign for their bill.

Cayetano said the RH bill “does not legalize abortion.” Of course their bill does not specifically say so, but what does it mean when one kills the child in the womb of the mother by preventing it from growing into full term? Surely she knows what the word abortion means in biological terms - “arrest of development”. When a contraceptive chemical or instrument is used to prevent or arrest the life inside the womb to develop and effectively expel it, is that not abortion?  Do I need to use the word murder to end life? Can I justify this act by saying I just plunged the knife into his heart but I did not murder?

The problem with Cayetano, Santiago, Garin, Lagman, Biazon and the rest is that they do not believe that when the sperm penetrates the egg life is created and they say the zygote or fertilized egg is not human but a mass of flesh or as one pro-RH said, an “intruder into the womb of the woman” and as such it has no rights and can be prevented from further developing lest it endangers the life of the woman. It is unwanted ergo expel it, as simple as that.

The question that still remains unanswered by the pro-RH people is: “if that zygote is not human at its fertilization, how come it grew or developed into a human being? Were Cayetano, Santiago, Garin, Lagman and the rest frogs or snakes that grew or developed into humans? If so, at what point in time inside the womb did their transformation from frog or snake to human take place? The pro-RH people must be the exception to the natural law that frogs and snakes grow and die as frogs and snakes; that humans grow and die as humans. If they refuse to accept that they were humans at the time of their conception, what are they? 

Santiago talked about human rights but denies rights to the newly conceived human being. At the root of this wrong premise is that she and the rest do not believe that the fertilized egg is human until after several weeks and then have rights. While they talk about the rights of the child and the mother they also refuse to tell us when this child in the womb has gained rights. Perhaps at their pleasure as legislators – they decide when a human being can be bestowed rights? Have they become gods like Lucifer whose ambitions have led him to declare that he is god and his legion of followers in this world think they are gods and believe in no other except when it is convenient for their personal or group interests? Are they Catholics by convenience? If not they ought to live their Catholic faith.

Cayetano declared that the RH bill “does not involve any coercion.” That is far from the truth, or is this another deception that had been the tactic and hallmark of the arguments of the pro-death people? If indeed there is no coercion, why should their proposed law penalize the physician who refuses to perform ligation or abortion by prescribing contraceptive pills? Why are opponents of RH to be fined or jailed for speaking against it once it becomes law?

She said the proposal respects “the consciences and their religious beliefs” referring to the husband and the wife. This is a siren song, a really good point that appeals to those who want to do things their own way in the first place. “Conscience” is being used as an excuse. The problem is that in invoking conscience Cayetano and the rest, including Catholics who are likely to disagree with the teachings of the Church on sexual matters leave out an important element of this invocation of conscience. The referral to conscience is moral only when one’s conscience is properly formed and the conclusion one arrives at are in accord with the natural and moral law and as expressed (for those who claim to be Catholics) by the Magesterium or teachings authority of the Church.   

The result of their free-for-all conscience is what is called relativism – everything is subject to what one wants to believe regardless of the objective, moral and natural truth. Hitler, Stalin and the recent mass murderer in Norway would be justified because their conscience tells them to rid the world of “evils” of Judaism, capitalism and migration.*

back to top