The Church, the State and Women's Bodies in the Context of Religious Fundamentalism in the Philippines

Abstract

After almost 500 years of Spanish colonial rule, Canon law and laws of Spanish origin continue to dominate Philippine family, civil and penal law. Most if not all of these laws place serious limitations on the realisation of women's sexual and reproductive rights. Since 2002, the current president, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, has increasingly substituted church dogma for state policy, i.e. revoking the reproductive health and family planning policies of her predecessor, rejecting all modern contraceptive methods as forms of abortion, limiting government support for family planning to providing natural methods to married couples, and restricting access to emergency contraception. This article reflects on which advocacy methods will best serve the goals of sexual and reproductive rights when conservative church interests dominate state policy, as is currently the case in the Philippines. Religious fundamentalists, at one and the same time, argue for religious accommodation of their views by the state on the grounds of religious freedom but refuse to entertain, let alone accommodate, a plurality of views on women's sexuality. Thus, it is not enough to base a case in support of sexual and reproductive rights on the separation of church and state since, even though the State claims it is secular, it still manages to impose restrictions and control over women's bodies.

Résumé

Après cing siècles de colonisation, les lois d'origine espagnole continuent de dominer le droit pénal, civil et familial philippin. Toutes ces lois limitent gravement la réalisation des droits génésiques des femmes. Depuis 2002, la Présidente philippine, Arroyo, remplace souvent la politique de l'État par le dogme de l'Église, révoquant les politiques de santé génésique et de planification familiale de son prédécesseur, rejetant toutes les méthodes modernes de contraception comme formes d'avortement, limitant l'appui public aux méthodes naturelles de planification pour les couples mariés, et restreignant l'accès è la contraception d'urgence. Cet article réfléchit aux méthodes de plaidoyer qui peuvent servir les droits génésique et de planification familiale de son prédécesseur, rejetant toutes les méthodes modernes de contraception comme formes d'avortement, limitant l'appui public aux méthodes naturelles de planification pour les couples mariés, et restreignant l'accés à la contraception d'urgence. Cet article réfléchit aux méthodes de plaidoyer qui peuvent servir les droits génésiques quand les intérêts conservateurs de l'Église dominent la politique de l'État. Les fondamentalistes religieux demandent à l'État d'utiliser leurs idées au nom de la liberté religieuse, mais refusent de tenir compte d' une pluralité d'idées sur la sexualité féminine. II ne suffit donc pas de soutenir les droits génésiques en se fondant sur la séparation de l'Eglise et de l'État puisque, si l'État affirme qu'il est laïque, il impose néanmoins des restrictions et un contrôle sur le corps des femmes./abs>

Resumen

Después de siglos de imperio colonial, leyes de origen español aún limitan el cumplimiento de los derechos sexuales y reproductivos de las mujeres en Filipinas. Desde 2002, la presidenta actual Arroyo ha sustituido el dogma eclesiástico por las polı́ticas del estado, revocando polı́ticas de salud reproductiva de planificación familiar de su predecesora rechazo métodos anticonceptivos modernos como modalidades de aborto, la limitando el apoyo gubernamental para los programas de planificación familiar para suministrar métodos naturales de planificación a las parejas casadas, y ha restringido el acceso a la anticoncepción de emergencia. Este artı́culo reflexiona sobre los métodos de gestorı́a que cubrirán las metas de los derechos sexuales y reproductivos cuando los intereses eclesiásticos conservadores dominan las polı́ticas del Estado respete sus puntos de vista, pero, rehúsan considerar, una pluralidad de opiniones sobre la sexualidad de las mujeres. No basta con basar un caso a por los derechos sexuales y reproductivos en la separación de la Iglesia y el Estado ya que, a pesar de que el Estado dice ser secular, aún impone restricciones y control sobre el cuerpo de la mujer.

Key Words:

• contraception
• reproductive rights
• law and policy
• separation of church and state
• fundamentalism
• Roman Catholic church
• Philippines

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Ms Hiyasmin H Lapitan, Ms Chrissie Ann L Barredo and Ms Maria Karmela J Franco of UP Law for doing initial research as interns of the Womenlead Foundation, Inc. The author also wishes to acknowledge Dr Sylvia Estrada Claudio of Likhaan for often lengthy comments on the ideas that started this article.

Notes

Apart from the penal law, a host of laws single out induced abortion as an exclusion in medical benefits coverage, curiously only for Public Health Employees under Republic Act 7305, March 26, 1992 and sugar plantation workers under Republic Act 6982, May 1, 1991. Other government-run social security benefits do not contain such exclusions. A legal exception to intentional abortion are so-called therapeutic abortions, which was established under Republic Act 2382, June 20, 1959. However, the Philippine Midwifery Act Republic Act 7392 April 10, 1992, and Philippine Pharmacy Act Republic Act 5921 June 21, 1969 consider the performance of abortions and assisting in the performance thereof as grounds for the cancellation of licenses. The Philippine Medical Act and Philippine Pharmacy Law use the term criminal abortions but the Philippine Midwifery Act makes no such distinction.

† Taken from New Code of Canon Law issued in 1983 by Pope John Paul II under Canon 1095.

* Citing the World Health Organization on the efficacy and safety of emergency contraception, the former Health Secretary Dr Alberto Romulo issued the original DoH position, which led to the registration of Postinor.

* Cases of this nature are common in the civil service, where women are barred from claiming maternity benefits if the reported father is not their legal husband. While draft legislation has been tabled to amend the law, the Civil Service Commissioner, who is a known women's rights advocate, has found a way around the law by asking women not to make any reference to (name) the biological father in their claim. (Interviews with Civil Service Commission Chairperson, Karina David, 2002)