This is a Bill about a range of matters to do with reproduction.

It is very
broad, and while it does contain good health messages such as the
promotion of breast feeding, gender equity, good infant and child
nutrition, and the elimination of violence against women, it
is also directed primarily at population control. It is
important to note that whereas the general tone of the Bill
does appear to be positive and health‐promoting in style, upon
closer scrutiny it contains deeply problematic principles,
impositions and subtexts. Legislation must always
be considered on several levels, and ultimately this Bill must
be examined with a view to testing its possible limits when
applied in real world contexts. The Bill is overtly about state
intervention into people’s private lives by
strongly promoting contraception and its
enforced provision, state run sex education with potential
undermining of parental influence, and denying
conscientious objection. However, a critical subtext of the bill is that it
has the strong potential to lay the ground for states anctioned
abortion, even though it appears to uphold the current
illegal status
of abortion. Other subtexts include targeting the poor for populati
on control and promoting reproductive technology (which involves the
routine destruction of human embryos). It is fundamentally unjust
that the state, in its promotion of its secular population
control ideals, will be using the financial resources of the p
rimarily religious
community whose faith teaches clear opposition to those i
deals.