What can a prisoner’s dilemma do to help our government officials make choices? Well, for one, this can help solve the most controversial topic we have in the present, the Reproductive Health Bill (HB4244) also known as the RH bill. There are two opposing parties regarding this bill. It is between the government and the Church. It is under the Philippine law (Article II, Section 6), that there is a clear separation between the Church and the state; though, being in a catholic country, it is inevitable to apply this law. Most of the time, the Church, can interfere with the laws being put up in our government especially when they think that it is a must.
The Reproductive Health Bill was first introduced by Hon. Edcel Lagaman to provide for a comprehensive policy on responsible parenthood and also to regulate the increasing population we have today. The Church was against this law because then the value of the natural family planning would not be practiced. They said that it would kill unborn babies which are against pro-life. There have been debates between them together with their supporters whether to pass this law or not. This is where the prisoner’s dilemma takes place. Now, we would be able to see the possible outcomes between the government and the Church through their self-interest.
The two possible actions regarding the situation given is to either both join and work together to weigh their interests or to both follow their own personal perceptions. If they both cooperate with each other, amendment of the bill can happen at the same time, both groups get an edge on this decision. Both of them would be able to benefit from their self interest. Then of course, both get what they want. On the other hand, when the both of them decide to follow their own self interest, then there would be a possibility that chaos would happen. Let us just say that the government would approve the bill then rallies from the supporters of the Church would be evident all over. The Church has the power to do something the state would not want. An example to this would be that, the Church can give a bad publicity to its followers that would result for them not to vote the government official in the elections anymore. It would result to a bad impact to some government officials which they do not want to happen.
In terms of the choices given in the prisoner’s dilemma, there are four possible choices each group can pick. A win-win, win-lose, lose-win and lose-lose situations. The four choices have their own benefits and consequences together with them.
The government’s most preferred choice would definitely pass the bill since economically speaking; it would help lessen our population. It would give the women of today the option to decide for their own bodies. It would help people be more aware and help them be more knowledgeable. When this happens, it would create a huge gap between the Church and the government. Church would definitely protest against them. Their second option would bring them to an equal cooperation with the Church for the betterment of the both. If this would happen, then there would be few adjustments in the bill at the same time, get the interest of the Church. The third option would be to simply ignore the bill. Ignoring the bill would bring the Church to keep quiet and forget about the whole thing. Lastly, losing is their very last resort. They do not want this to happen because then they would be inferior of the Church which is the last thing they would want to happen.
The other group, which is the Church, would definitely choose not to pass the bill. Being a Catholic country, again, they would care for the people to practice morality everywhere. In the bill, the Church contradicts the content of it since for them it provokes people to disobey the Catholic teachings. It would ruin young people’s minds. Their second option is the same with the government’s; to cooperate together to come up with an equal decision. Both would benefit if this would happen. The third option would not to mind the bill since it would be useless to fight for it anymore and their very least preferred choice would be to pass the bill. If this happens, they would lose, giving a bad reputation to the name of the Church.
Until now there is no decision made between the two groups. I believe that the prisoner’s dilemma has once again helped a situation occurring in our world today. It has given opportunities for people to decide. The benefits and consequences are both weighed with its help. Now the both groups together with their supporters can finally see the pros and cons. They can judge facts based from each other without jumping into conclusions.
In my own opinion, I think that the government should change some parts of the said bill in order for the Church to approve it. With this, both the government and the church would benefit. In reality, this law is needed in order to keep our population from increasing though we again have to consider the Church’s interest. It would be a win-win situation for both government and the Church if they choose to cooperate and still pursue their self-interest and yet reach the mutually-beneficial outcome.
-panda
The Reproductive Health bill is one of the most controversial issues that have been presented in our time. Because of this, a lot of people have been linked to the said topic, either for it or against it. The blogger was successfully able to narrow these advocates to just two parties, which are, the church and state. In class, the Prisoner’s dilemma has been discussed to show the reasons behind the decision making of an individual or groups of people. These reasons are then ranked in order of which seems to be more appealing to the two main groups involved.
TumugonBurahinI agree with what you said that for both parties, the most obvious choice they would pick would be the passing of the bill or for the ultimate dismissing of the bill and that would be their number one priority. Their least choice, on the other hand, would be to just not mind the bill for it would affect both the images of the Church and state. Having said this, I believe both parties are still mainly focusing on their self-interests alone, thus no final say on the bill whatsoever has been made until this very day.
I agree wholeheartedly with the blogger when he/she stated that if both groups focus on their self-interests alone, not only will the debates and discussions on the said bill will last longer but also it will eventually leave the Filipino people divided. The blogger was right in saying that cooperation between the two parties is the most realistic thing to do. The two should meet a compromise in order to achieve a bill that contains both their interest. By doing so, not only will the debates on the RH bill will be put to an end but the benefits of the bill will also help our nation because of the compromise made to fit everyone’s needs and beliefs.
-Bonsai (from http://ventbox111.wordpress.com)
First of all, I commend the way you applied the Prisoners’ Dilemma to the case of the RH Bill. It was a good application of it and the way you explained it wasn’t vague, it was easily comprehensible and very straight to the point. You pointed out one important thing: the separation of the Church and State and said that it is almost impossible for this to work out. Contrary to what you said, I believe it is possible – but only if what the State does is in favor with the Church’s stands and beliefs. If the Church believes that what the State is trying to implement is against their beliefs, that’s the time they intervene and voice out their opinions. Also, the application of the Prisoners’ Dilemma was very clear and easy to understand since you pointed out the four choices that are available in the situation. A win-win, win-lose, lose-win or a lose-lose situation. However, I do not believe that ignoring the bill would be the lose-lose situation, I think if both the Church and the State don’t cooperate – that would be the lose-lose situation because that would immediately lead to chaos and the problem will never be solved. You concluded by saying that you think the government should alter the bill in order to fit the criteria of the Church and I think that should be done also because if they don’t, the Church will probably never be open to accepting the provisions that they have now for the Law. Because in the end, they should both think of what benefits majority of the society, because of after all, they are both in power because they want to help and cater to the needs of the Filipino citizens.
TumugonBurahin-Carapiet