Paetenians Home on the Net


please read before posting

Discussion Forums for the people of Paete, Laguna, Philippines
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch    UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Birth Control versus Population Control

Post new topic   Reply to topic   printer-friendly view    USAP PAETE Forum Index -> Usap Paete
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message

Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 5060
Location: Angel C. de Dios

PostPosted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 6:37 am    Post subject: Birth Control versus Population Control Reply with quote

Birth Control versus Population Control

I recognize the right of a couple to practice birth control and choose whatever method they deem fit and acceptable. I will also not be against the government providing subsidy to local health centers so that people have greater access to contraceptives. Birth control, as it is practiced freely between a couple, is a right I recognize a couple should have.

My problem is not birth control. It is population control. Population control takes the bedroom scene out into society. Population control has a social agenda, a clear objective. Having such a clear aim makes it very different from birth control. It is no longer individual. It is now a social matter, transcending the private bedroom of a couple. Choices are no longer free if it is clear that population control is the objective. Yes, there is a choice between artificial and natural methods – but the choice not to do either is lost. It may not be one hundred percent coercive, but clearly it is no longer one hundred percent free.

In the context of population control, contraceptives are essential medicines and unwanted pregnancy is then considered a disease. The ideal size of a family would be both consciously and subconsciously imprinted on all members of society. Medical professionals and health care workers would no longer see the offer of family planning as a service, but as an obligation and as an order to fulfill the goals of population control. A movement of population control that specially targets the rural poor exposes itself to a great potential of abuse, overzealousness and coercion (even if it is not authorized or sanctioned by the proposed bill).

The Philippines does not need the RH Bill if it was only about birth control. Birth control is not illegal in the Philippines. Increasing access to birth control is not illegal in the Philippines. The national government and local government units can already do this without a bill. The government does not need a bill to promote maternal health. The government does not need a bill to reduce child mortality. These are actions we already expect a government should do for its citizens. What is new in the bill is population control. And that is what I am strongly against.

There are times when we feel that we are so overwhelmed by a problem, we are very much tempted to take the easy way out instead of hitting the problem directly. Population growth is evident in the developing countries. The developed countries have much lower population growth rate. What is amazing here is that the developed countries began their reduction in birth rate before contraceptives were widely used. Poverty, oppression of the poor, unequal distribution of income and opportunities, corruption in government, poor education are the causes of a high population growth rate. It is not the other
way around.

Birth control should not be made population control. Birth control may well be a matter of individual conscience but population control deals with the conscience of a nation.

This is my opinion.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Forum Moderator

Joined: 02 Dec 2009
Posts: 130
Location: Teody Alberto

PostPosted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 12:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote


Thank you for your exposition.

Does it mean that you are against, "One Child Policy", as the Chinese
government has been implementing?

If the Philippine is seeking the same path, does RH bill would mean a subtle way to do it?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 5060
Location: Angel C. de Dios

PostPosted: Sun Oct 17, 2010 1:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The following is taken from An Asia Pacific Issues Report.
It was prepared and written by Wang Feng,
an Associate Professor at the University of California, Irvine

The entire report can be found here:

Is the One-Child Policy Necessary
for Population Control?

Has the one-child policy been necessary for controlling
China’s population growth? Proponents of the
policy initially rationalized it as an emergency control
measure, anticipating the large number of births expected
from the baby boomers of the 1960s. These
proponents have long claimed that without the policy,
fertility would have been high or at least would
not have declined to the current low level. Such thinking
still garners wide currency today and is used as
an argument for continuing the one-child policy.
But the argument, while appealing, cannot be verified
in the absence of evidence from an alternative
policy implemented at the same time and within the
same national context.

Counterarguments, backed by empirical evidence,
question the claim that the one-child policy has
been necessary. Critics point out that fertility levels
dropped by more than 50 percent in the 1970s, from
5.8 children per woman in 1970 to 2.7 in 1979, in
the absence of a policy that forbade couples to have
a second child. This decline was associated with the
government’s “later-longer-fewer” policy; that is, later
marriage, longer birth interval, fewer births. Critics
also note that during the 1980s, when the one-child
policy was then recently implemented, fertility level
hardly changed.vii It was not until the 1990s, in conjunction
with institutional changes associated with
market reforms, that fertility further declined.

These sweeping changes in China’s economic system
and social values may have been more important
than the stringent population policy in furthering
fertility decline in the 1990s. First, in the decades
following the imposition of the one-child policy,
collective farming was dissolved in the countryside and
government-guaranteed employment and housing
benefits were phased out in the cities. These changes
alone removed the economic security that once lowered
the cost of childbearing and encouraged higher
fertility rates. Second, new economic opportunities and
rising incomes led aspiring young Chinese to direct
their energy away from marriage and childbearing.
Age at first marriage among women, for instance, rose
from 22 to 24 in the 1990s; this is clear evidence of
changing demographic preferences not affected by the
one-child policy. Third, parents must invest more in
their children’s education due to market demand for
educated labor and intensified competition in the
labor market for better employment. This increase in
the cost of childrearing may well have further dampened
reproductive desires. Since the late 1990s, some
couples entitled to have a second child have voluntarily
foregone their birth quotas, being content with
only one child.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Forum Moderator

Joined: 02 Dec 2009
Posts: 130
Location: Teody Alberto

PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2010 2:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Very Interesting;

With my limited comprehension, I would assume that "One Child Policy" alone would not work, if not coupled with internal motivation from the people themselves with various considerations like economy,
social status, educated choices and many more.

It seems that "One Child Policy" can not take credit for carving population growth in China, but most of all, social awareness and responsibility might be the culprit.

It is also interesting that, while developed countries like America, Japan, and most of Europeans countries benefits in controlling population, one foreseeable set back is the declining younger population to support the growing numbers of retirees.

Here is the compelling fact here in America, by the time that we retire, those who were born in the 60's, according Social Security's projection, we could only avail of 75% of our due benefits, and it is not even known for how long it will last.

Worst case scenario, Social Security will be totally depleted, that we could not even get a single cent from what we had contributed during our working years, that is a grim projection.

That was compounded by Federal Policy that keep on draining the people's money.

At least for now, declining family-originated population, is being compensated by "Open Immigration Policy" here in America.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2010 10:49 pm    Post subject: Birth Control /Population Control Reply with quote

I agree that Social and Economic changes influence the reduction of the population growth in China. But I also think that making a rule of having only one child made a bigger dent. the author postulates that perhaps the rule was not necessary because there has been a gradual reduction of births before the enactment of that regulation. I really think that both were instrumental in the birth reduction. I also agree that the Chinese government should now relax that ruling and allow couples to have to have more than one child. but that is the beauty of the law, it can be changed. unlike the Ten Commandments. Now if you think birth control aside from abstinence is a sin, that is different story. I do NOT support Abortion, I think that is a sin that cries to heaven for revenge, but birth control, my personal belief is ok. Two supposedly catholic countries allow abortion on demand during the first trimester Italy and Spain.... DocTabia
Back to top

Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 5060
Location: Angel C. de Dios

PostPosted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 7:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote


It is certainly one area that scientists are quite careful in drawing a conclusion. As Wang Feng noted,

"....But the argument, while appealing, cannot be verified
in the absence of evidence from an alternative
policy implemented at the same time and within the
same national context."


With regard to my stand on the issue - as stated in my post, I recognize the difference between the two levels - personal and national. On the individual level, I recognize the importance of choice, but on the national level, I worry about the control.

There is a conservative group in Virginia called the Population Research Institute. This group is pro-life and of course, would be biased against population control. Interesting enough, they had an article about 15 years ago regarding the Philippine government, and it was relating a speech given by then Health secretary Flavier:

Whether this article faithfully reproduces what Flavier actually said in Cairo - that is a valid question knowing that the Population Research Institute has bias. However, whether they made up this story or not, what it illustrates is the potential set of mind that population control could create. And it is worrisome.


PRI Review

Philippine Population Control 'Little Man' Boosts and Brags in Cairo, or 'The Story of Health Minister Flavier'

By Jean M. Guilfoyle 1994 (v4, n6) November/December

Health Minister Flavier is a short four and a half feet or so tall — but he talks BIG, and he mouths SMART — proud of what he’s put over on his people. Humor, he says is the way to succeed. After all, the big guys wouldn’t look so wonderful beating up on such a little fellow as Health Minister Flavier! And as he talks, a new understanding of the scope, methods and attitudes of the population control folk begins to take on a new meaning, particularly for the Philippine citizens who traveled many miles to Cairo to hear what he had to say.

Now it’s a known fact that the United Nations utilizes non-governmental agencies (NGOs) to carry out its agenda at the community level. This method is, in fact, sometimes viewed as an expression of democracy at work. However, as with the United Nations itself, these organizations can become ‘unelected’ rulers’ carrying out externally directed policy at the local level. NGOs are often funded by sources external to the countries themselves and mask the influence of those with vested interests in the outcome of their activities, including members of governmental bureaucracies such as Dr. Juan M. Flavier.

During the United Nations’ International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) held in Cairo in September 1994, citizens of various countries exhibited sufficient interest in the outcome to attend and note the behaviors, activities and intentions of their government representatives. And so it was that Philippine citizens can now freely circulate a video of the ‘Little Man’ as he hit the big time in the Cairo arena. This article presents direct quotations from a workshop for NGOs run by Dr. Flavier, at the NGO Forum in Cairo. Americans will be interested to learn that Dr. Flavier was trained at The Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, undoubtedly with the generous assistance of American tax payers. The Johns Hopkins University (JHU) has benefited financially for some time by supping at the money trough of the U.S. Agency for International Development. JHU has, during Fiscal Year 1993 received almost $80 million in 1994 for producing population propaganda programs in developing countries. In addition, the University trains physicians in population control methodology. Dr. Juan M. Flavier is one of their educational products, as is Dr. Nafis Sadik, executive director of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA).

Health Minister Flavier speaks
In the course of his Cairo talk, Dr. Flavier discussed problems he had encountered in activating population control programs among the Philippine people and the methods he used to overcome “apathy” and “resistance” among various levels of the Philippine society. In that interest, Dr. Flavier also described his use of externally-funded non-governmental agencies. From this point forward, we will let Dr. Flavier speak for himself.

“I found out that I was very vulnerable because I was in government. All the senators and all the congressmen in one snap of the finger can cut my budget and I am nowhere to be found. So what did I do? Something that you must realize — the power of the NGO. I decided that I’ll do it through the NGOs and that‘s exactly what I did, up to today.

“Why? Because when I do it they shoot me, but when you do it they can’t talk. They can’t abolish you. Not only that: You are the electorate, at least you pretend to be the electorate. That is why.

“Let us do it systematically. I said there are five areas we’re gonna get the NGOs to do: advocacy; information, education and communication (IEC), supplies, i.e., contraceptives; and [manage] the clinics. And what I did was get NGOs for each one of them — and by underground!

“Are there spies around here? You’re all my friends, ha? This is an open secret, that is why they are so sore .… all this was happening quietly. Once it was installed, there was no way it could be removed. And what we did was — we got a lead agency NGO for each [activity].”

— on the use of NGOs
“I‘ll give you a good example. I found out [how] to distribute contraceptive supplies in an island structure like the Philippines. We have 7,107 islands when it is high tide — when it is low tide — a few more .… I found out that CARE, you know the property of America you meet everywhere. They are the world’s expert in distributing food all over. They know the system. They have been doing it for 45 years. So I said: ‘That’s the group! They’re gonna bring together with the food, condoms, pills and IUDs.’ It worked!

“We had a contract with them .… You have to know how to play the game .… And they cannot drive CARE away because there is a [previous] agreement between government and CARE to be there and they’re there! And they just add on the boxes and the boxes all over the Philippines. So when they [the people] complain about the IUD, and condoms and pills all over, including villages, it is because of that one — CARE! Now I could also honestly say that I am not spending money of the government for the supplies. Yet, once the demand is there, then, we can begin to shift.

“Its the same with IEC — I got a group! Its an NGO from Johns Hopkins University Center for Communication. Why them? Because I graduated from that school. It’s a good school. Why do I say they’re good — they know their business. And what happens when there is a need for IEC — I don’t do it — [Johns Hopkins University] group does it for the government. Anybody who wants materials, you just go to them. You don’t even have to pass through the government you know, that’s the beauty — you don’t even have to [deal with government] red tape.”

— on hospitals
“We were also very specific in terms of what groups to work with. I found out that I was in control of all the hospitals. Wow! I said, I can do it gently. What does that mean? They get persuasion! If they don’t follow directions, I do not give them a license! And these hospitals, up to now, still provide for 70 percent of all the family planning services. Even where I want the NGOs to come in, it is not yet that practical because we don’t have the facilities for the NGO world to really take over — not yet, anyway. That is something I am trying to facilitate and make [happen] so the [NGOs] can come in.”

— on government agencies
“I made sure that the other departments of the government were in the stream of things because I am in the Department of Health. We’re natural for family planning but if we don’t use all the other departments — labor, defense, education, environment we’ve missed the point. Why? Because each one of them have their own clientele that are really made to order. What do I mean Environment? [I mean] they have all the foresters that are working with the people who are now encroaching on the mountains because of sheer population explosion on the plains and so they are very eager to work with us.

“Militaries — oh what a wonderful group to work with! Why? They also have gentle persuasion. When they say to use condoms and they don’t, they shoot them! Wow!”

— on local governments
“There is a track we are still developing — the local governments. There is new law that effectively evolved provincial [government], that would be equivalent to the states in the United States and districts in some areas. But anyway, they are now independent so we’re working through them through a system of ‘lateral persuasion.’ What does that mean? Very simple. If [local governments] have a population officer, they get one point; a contraceptive system in place, one point; a training system, one point; IEC, one point; clinics in place, one point. If your rate of contraceptive users is so much, you get one point, more, you get six points, and I give you a car. Now, where to get the car is something else. Very, very interesting because there [are] a lot of interesting things being generated so why don’t we just stop at that. [This is] the appetizer.”

— on the Catholic Church
“We were in trouble with the Church but that’s alright because 98 percent of the Filipinos said that they want the government to provide family planning services [based on Flavier’s survey]. The two percent — we just kill them!

“If you want to anger the Church, make fun of it. And I did it without meaning to. But when I found out that they were getting angry, I used more of it. Example: they were all heated-up about the condom. So, I invented a luminous condom for the older priests. And they said, ‘Why luminous?’ I said ‘at their age, they need to know where it is.’”

— on Philippine citizens
“Then there were those who are called Ilocanos in our country. They are very thrifty. They would be the equivalent of the Scots. They are very tight about it. So, I invented the Ilocano or the Scot’s condom. And everybody was saying, what is it? I said, it’s a kind of condom that has five characteristics: it is reusable, it is washable, it is invertible, like the tire, it is recappable, and when it develops a hole, it is revulcanizable.

Overnight everybody was talking about it. “Then when they started hitting me personally, because they were saying that I was promoting promiscuity, ah, lechery, incest and all that I said was, ‘What! Me? I can’t even spell those words, you know.’ And then they call me the agent of the devil, and the agent of Satan. Instead of answering, I said: ‘Look at this face. So angelic and so cherubic. How can I be able to do those things?’ And I found out it angered them. And I found it very effective.

“The Cardinal called me a liar. What do you do? And they’re angry that I do not take them seriously .… It just happens that the name of our Cardinal is Cardinal Sin so when I was asked by the media about the fact that he called me a liar, I just very, very cutely said, ‘It is a sin to tell a lie!’ And it angered him. But that humorous approach to the whole thing created all the excitement we need .…

“The trick is to become famous. At least, become known. Then they’ll [funding agencies] come knocking at your door. I become famous, maybe the word is notorious. For if you are not working with Dr. Flavier, then, you don’t count. So, that’s when you begin to have clout. I like that word. And, then you’ll find they’ll just come. Why? Their business is to give money. If they cannot give it, they are nobody. So they have to give but they also want to give to those that are known. And that is why you know when they say, ‘You work with Dr. Flavier and you say ‘no’, then you don’t count.’”

A review of the partial record in the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), Inventory of Population Projects reveals that a lengthy list of NGOs, funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), are active in the Philippines. The organizational names troop across the pages implicating U.S. citizens in numerous experimental programs through the use of their tax dollars: The Association for Voluntary Sterilization, Family Health International, International Planned Parenthood Federation, Johns Hopkins Program for International Education in Reproductive Health, the Johns Hopkins University Population Communication Services, etc.

Most Americans have no idea at all that their country is funding such programs. Yet, this well-financed entourage continues to manipulate and experiment on people in developing countries through the services of others like the self-styled, famous ‘little man’ of the Philippines — Health Minister Juan M. Flavier.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
tagapayti di nag eenglish

PostPosted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 9:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

baka puede tagalogin ang usapan para maintindihan namin?
Back to top

Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 5060
Location: Angel C. de Dios

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 6:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ang pagpipigil ng pag-aanak (birth control) ay kaiba sa pagpipigil ng pagrarami ng mga tao (population growth control)

Aking kinikilala ang karapatan ng mga tao makapagplano ng pamilya. Kasama na rito ang paggamit ng iba't ibang paraan para pigilin ang pag-aanak. Hindi rin ako tutol kung ang pamahalaan ay magsisikap na magbahagi ng mga iba't ibang contraceptives para sa mamamayan. Ang paggamit ng contraceptives, sa aking palagay, ay isang karapatan ng mag-asawa kung ito ay malayang isinasagawa.

Ang aking suliranin ay hindi ang pagpigil ng pag-aanak kundi ang pagpigil ng pagpaparami ng tao. Ang "population control" ay iba sa "birth control". Kapag "population control" ang pinag-uusapan, ito ay hindi na nasasailalim sa pagpasiya ng isang mag-asawa kundi sa isang pagpasiya ng buong bayan. Dahil dito, ang malayang pagpasiya ng bawat tao ay mawawala. Oo nga at malaya pa ring pumili ang bawat pamilya kung anong paraan ang kanilang gagamitin subalit hindi na malaya ang pamilyang pumili na mag-anak ng mas marami kaysa sa ibig ng lipunan.

Dahil ang "population control" ay may malinaw na pakay. Ang "contraceptives" sa paningin ng lipunan ay magiging kinakailangan na gamot sa bawat pagamutan ng bayan. At ang hindi kanaisnais na pagbubuntis ay magiging sakit sa mata ng lipunan. Ang karapat dapat na laki ng pamilya ay itatanim sa isip at puso ng bawat tao. Ang mga manggagamot at mga tumutulong sa kalusuguan ng tao ay magsisimulang mag-isip na ang "population control" ay isang mahalagang programa. Dahil dito, ang "population control" ay magiging obligasyon at hindi na isang serbisyo para sa mamamayan. Ang "population control", lalo na kung itutuon sa mahihirap at sa mga taong nakatira sa mga lalawigan ay madaling maging sapilitan. Ito ay mangyayari kahit hindi sinasaad ng panukalang batas.

Hindi kailangan ng Pilipinas ang panukalang batas ukol sa "reproductive health" kung ang pakay ay "birth control" lamang. Sa kasalukuyan, hindi bawal ang paggamit ng "contraceptives" sa Pilipinas. Hindi rin bawal sa Pilipinas kung gagawing mas madali ang pagkamit nitong mga "contraceptives". Hindi rin kailangan ang batas kung ang layon ay pangalagaan ang kalusugan ng ina bago at pagkatapos ng pag-aanak. Hindi rin kailangan ang batas kung ang pakay ay sikaping pababain ang bilang ng mga namamatay na sanggol. Ang mga ito ay mga layuning ating inaasahan na sa ating pamahalaan. Ang natatanging bago sa panukalang batas ay "population control". At dito ako hindi sang-ayon.

Napakalaki at napakarami ng mga suliranin ng lipunan sa Pilipinas. Dahil dito, malimit tayong matukso na gumamit ng panandaliang lunas. Ang pagrami ng tao ay tunay na nangyayari sa lahat ng mga umuunlad na bansa samantalang sa mga maunlad na bansa, ang bilang ng mga tao ay hindi na mabilis o hindi na rumarami. Ang dapat tingnan dito ay ang katunayan na sa karamihan na maunlad na bansa, ang pagtigil ng pagpaparami ng tao ay naganap bago sa malawak na paggamit ng "contraceptives" Ang tunay na sanhi ng malaking populasyon o bilis sa pagapaparami ng tao ay kahirapan, kawalan ng edukasyon, ang pagnanakaw ng mga namamahala sa kaban ng bayan, ang pag-aapi sa mga mahihirap, ang mga proyekto na hindi malaganap ang natutulungan. Ang population ay epekto at hindi sanhi.

Ang paggamit ng "contraceptives" o pagpapalano ng pamilya ay nakasalalay sa kanikaniyang budhi. Ang "population control" ay nakasalalay sa budhi ng sambayanang Pilipino.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website

Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 5060
Location: Angel C. de Dios

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 9:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hindi ko na tatagalugin ang mga sumunod na tugon sa aking naisulat. Ang aking lamang ipapaliwanag ay ang kalakihan ng kinakailangang pag-aaral upang tuwirang maunawaan kung bakit rumarami ang tao sa bayan. Nakakalungkot kung ating pagmasdan ang ginagawa ng mga diyaryo sa Pilipinas. Malimit na ginagamit ang pagsasaad ng isang kuwento tungkol sa isang pamilya upang bigyan ng dahilan ang kanilang ipinaglalaban. Ito ay mga anekdota lamang at hindi tunay na nakakatulong sa ating pag-unawa sa suliranin ng kahirapan at malalaking pamilya.

Ang kinakailangan ay isang masusing pag-aaral. Sa pag-aaral kinakailangang timbanging ang wasto at mali at itong pagtitimbang ay kinakailangang nakasalalay sa mahusay na bilang o "data". Upang maunawaan ang aking nilalahad, heto ang isang halimbawa ng isang bahagi ng data na kailangang pagtuunan ng pansin:

Ang demograpiya - tulad ng dami sa populasyon na mga bata, teenager, lalaki, babae, at iba pa ay kailangan upang masuring mabuti hindi lang ang dahilan kundi, at ito ay mas mahalaga, ang magiging epekto ng isang programa para sa buong bayan. Nabanggit nga ng isa sa mga tugon ang problema ng "social security". Ang pagpigil sa paglaki ng rami ng tao, kung magtatagumpay (at ito ay malaki pa ring katanungan) ay mangagahulugan na sa darating na mga taon, magiging mas marami ang matatanda kaysa sa mga bata. Ito ay malamang na mangyayari dahil sa pag-unlad ng bansa, tumatagal ang buhay ng bawat tao. Sa katunayan, isa sa pinakaunang dahilan kung bakit tuloy na lumalaki ang populasyon ng mga umuunlad na bansa ay ang humahabang buhay ng mga tao - dahil na rin sa pag-unlad sa kalusugan at paglaban sa mga sakit.

Dahil sa tunay na masalimuot ang pag-aaral sa populasyon, kinakailangang magkaroon ng mga mahigpit na gabay ang pamahalaan ukol sa mga paraan na gagamitin. Sa aking paniwala, ang pag-unlad ay hindi tunay na gabay, ngunit isang paraan. Ang ibig sabihin nito, huwag pigilin ang populasyon upang masugpo ang kahirapan kundi sugpuin ang kahirapan upang mapigil ang mabilis na paglaki ng populasyon. Ang mga tunay na gabay ay ang karapatan ng bawat tao. Sa ano mang programa ng pamahalaan kinakailangang igalang ang malayang pag-iisip dahil ito ay isa sa mga natatanging karapatan ng tao. Ang isa pang gabay ay kultura - ito ay isang tunay na yaman ng tao at hindi matutumbasan ng pag-unlad sa ekonomiya, pagkain o rami ng salapi. Ang isang yaman ng kulturang Pilipino ay ang ating pagmamahal sa ating mga magulang. Ito ay isang halimbawa ng isang gabay upang masugpo ang iresponsableng pagmamagulang. Kung ating iisipin - lalong mahirap pangalagaan ang ating mga magulang sa kanilang katandaan kung sabay sabay at sunod sunod ang ating pag-aanak. Hindi nating makakayang sabay pagtuunan ng pansin ang maraming anak at ang ating mga magulang.

Isa pang halimbawa: Ang responsableng pagmamagulang ay nagsisimula sa araw na tayo ay magpakasal. Ito ay ayon din sa ating kultura. Dito natin makikita ang unang yugto ng ating pagyakap sa isang pananagutan - pananagutan ng isang pamilya. Sa yugtong ito kinakailangang isipin kung tayo ay handa na o hindi. Isa sa pinakamahalagang dahilan kung bakit bumagal ang pagdami ng tao sa Tsina ay ang pagtataas ng kinakailangang edad para mag-asawa. At marami ang nagsasabi na ito ay mas epektibo kaysa "one-child" policy o paggamit ng "contraceptives". Kung tutuusin, ito ay isang batas na napakamura (halos walang gastos).

Maraming mababasa sa internet upang lalong maliwanagan ang ating mga suliranin. Kaya lang, karamihan nito ay sa Ingles. Ang sumusunod ay isang halimbawa:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic   printer-friendly view    USAP PAETE Forum Index -> Usap Paete All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:  
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group