On the other hand, this begs the question of what those who reject the introduction of RH into the legal framework of the country are implying when they make liberal (almost monopolistic) use of the term "life" in the names of their advocacy movements. Groups that go by such names as "Filipinos for Life" and "Pro-Life" seem to be implying something. Is it that those who oppose them are anti-life?
If there is any "demonising" going on in this "debate" it seems the source of this practice is becoming quite obvious.
As in previous assertions and in the usual form that the religious tend to frame the "debate", Sotto makes a unilateral claim to righteousness to describe the motivation behind the position he takes...
“When you are doing something right, expect to be attacked. If God is using you to do something right, expect to be attacked viciously! I am rejoicing!” he added.
Yet in Item 7 in his response to Akbayan Youth chairperson and blogger Leloy Claudio (who earlier challenged Sotto to a debate), Sotto insists that having "differing opinions is part of the territory in a democracy, where ideas are shared, debated and assessed, for an informed citizenry," which is a contradiction of the penchant he had exhibited for claiming a special place in his God's favour with regard to his opposition to the RH Bill.