Ethics in the R.H. Bill: Benefit or Hassle?

            Ethics can be such a pain in the ass sometimes. Even when the answer is conveniently placed in front of people, they still find a way to contemplate about every single irrelevant ethical detail. Take the R.H. Bill for example; how long has this argument been going on? Most people would say that it’s been going on for almost a decade but if you research further the issue about reproductive health stems as far back as late 1970’s. And all of this is because of something as petty as ethics. Sometimes, when thinking about issues like the R.H. Bill, I actually question how human culture has devolved into something this diverse and indecisive.

            Let’s face it, we all like sex. It’s a part of our human nature. It’s a physiological and psychological need that exists in each and every person. Having said that, it is still, however, left to every single individual who and when they have sex. So why not apply that same reasoning to people. I’m pretty sure that the only reason why the government is stalling on something as simple as this is because of the church. I understand that much. What I don’t understand is why the church is so frustrated with it. Yes the church disagrees with it, fine. We all get that. But why stop us from making our own decisions? The church follows the word of God ridiculously literal that it’s actually funny sometimes so why not follow God when he gave us the free will to make our own decisions? Yes, we know we’re going to hell when we screw with God. To be honest, we’ve been hearing about that since we were kids and we’re sick and tired of it. So why not just let us make our own choices and let us face the consequences of our screw-ups in our own way? Isn’t that what God has been doing ever since He created us?

            Another thing I’d like to seriously point out about the beliefs of the church is that most of the time, their own beliefs clash with one another. It doesn’t even make sense sometimes. Let’s give a hypothetical situation. Let’s say there is a family in poverty and they live in a slum area. They already have three kids which obviously more than they can afford. When asked, they prefer not to have another child. So how does that work? They’re married so they obviously have the right to have sexual intercourse. If they no longer want children they’re not allowed to have sex anymore? Doesn’t that also contradict their beliefs that married couples should be allowed to have sex as a symbol of their love?

            I know that life is never a black or white situation but sometimes, there are black or white situations. The R.H. Bill is about choice and not about life, or morality, or any ethical crap people keep bringing up. It’s for people to make their own decisions and for the progress of society.