On RH Law
I will support any move as long as it is legal and constitutional because I voted against the RH Law. Why? I have colleagues in the Senate who are victims of the use of contraceptives. These are fathers and mothers. And I don’t want to legitimize this or even legalize this.
Second reason, can you imagine putting together the complex variables that go with reproductive health, population management, and responsible parenthood when we cannot even feed our mothers? We cannot even feed children between the ages of 0 to 6 even as part of our educational system.
The information that is coming our way is alarming. It is estimated by no less than the World Health Organization by the United Nation that 80 to 100 Filipino children die everyday from malnutrition and malnutrition-related causes.
If this is the way we take care of our most precious and strategic resource? We have serious strategic problems and I don’t think we can be competitive even in the next millennium.
It’s a legal issue. Consistent with my stand on RH Bill, why open the flood gates again for adverse impact on the integrity of the family and the sanctity of marriage?
I have no problem with people living together trying it out but these are serious issues that impact and strike at the core of our values as a nation.
If you consider the impact on our strongest, political, economical, and social unit, the family, the effects are too complex to even contemplate.
The same issue. It’s a legal issue. I have no problem with people of the same sex living together adopting a child but the issue here goes beyond gender already or same sex.
The issue is political unity, productivity, love of God, country, and family. As long as these objectives are achieved socially then isolate the legal issue.
No to death penalty
The penalty is secondary to the swiftness of the justice system: prosecution when it reaches the courts, due process and the rule of law must be applied based on rules governing evidence.
All these issues cannot be tried by publicity or forum shopping. There are courts to resolve this and it is in this light that I continue to support issues that will impact on this.
Territorial row with China
Our audience is the global community. China will insist on bilateral resolution, a one-on-one situation. I think, to the credit of our government, we have done what necessary. They put it before International Tribunal on the Law on the Sea, put it at the doorstep of the ASEAN and try to reason with China, which does not seem to work because the information that is reaching us is that they have posted already as we predicted three ships. They have put up a tollgate.
Because the resolution in the international tribunal will be protracted, the proposal that we should revive is a joint exploration and use, getting together the other claimants and telling China "Why don’t we – because you have the resources and capability - find out what’s under the Scarborough Shoals? Let’s all benefit from equitable share." That is the most practical approach because our economy needs that now.
On RH Law