25 Jan 2009 |
|
The greatest tragedy in life is not poverty or want. It is not recent political and consequent economic and health turmoil in Zimbabwe or the upheaval in the Eastern part of the Democratic Republic of Congo which has equally left many children orphaned, taken thousands of our own kind away, made life extremely miserable for several others. The greatest tragedy in life is not the just concluded Israeli military action in Gaza, which has left many permanently mutilated, caused the premature death of others. It is not the wars which take place around the globe and whose impacts on the lives of many will never be forgotten for thousands of years to come. The greatest tragedy is not the crisis in Niger/Delta region which has made movement in that area pretty unsafe for foreigners. Caused the premature closure of certain oil and gas companies, forced many foreigners to flee this country. The greatest tragedy, we must admit, is when a woman, all in the name of freedom of choice, deliberately deprives herself and the entire human race ‘a future’. Our children are our future, for as long as we continue to terminate the lives of these unborn children by way of ‘direct abortion’, we deprive ourselves of ‘a future’. And remember as they say, ‘a man without a future is a man without a bearing’. Bearing adds meaning and colour to our lives so that when life is without a bearing, it would simply become meaningless. However, it’s because life is meaningful and because we have a future explains why we can afford to wake up very early in the morning for work or go to bed late. It must equally be noted that what makes this dilemma different from the war in Congo or in Gaza or the present political and health situation in Zimbabwe is that a critical study of the situation in these countries has shown that underlying each situation is the desire, on either side to protect their own kind, at least in principle, and to ensure their continuous existence, while abortion is nothing like this. In the case of abortion, there is a direct attempt to prevent the furtherance of the human species which makes me question why President Barack Obama would lift the prohibition placed by the Bush administration on foreign aid programmes which provide services and information about abortion. Only a day after his inauguration, the man is already telling us, ‘okay guys, it is abortion galore. You can start killing your unborn babies, your future’. Yet this is a man whom many across the world had looked up to, before he was sworn, as someone who would bring stand up for us, defend us and our future. But what has he done? He is promising to give us more money to put an end to our race. Let us sincerely ask ourselves, Is the kind of change we desire? Is this kind of change we can actually believe in? What I am yet to understand is why a man, in his right senses, would want to finance a programme as evil as abortion. In the face of the recent economic turmoil, when urgent and concrete decisions on the current issues are an imperative, yet the first thing the man is proposing for us to start aborting babies, our own future. President Obama claims that women, whose contraceptives had failed during sexual intercourse, have a right to decide whether to keep the pregnancy which may result from such intercourse or not. In other words, women have a right to decide whether they want to keep ‘their future' or ‘not'. But is this rationally appealing? First, women do not have a right to do to themselves or to the life of the unborn child anything they want if it would adversely affect others. Now, our children are our future. Hence, women do not have the right to choose whether to keep their pregnancy or not, most especially when keeping the baby would not directly cause the death of the mother. This is simple logic and it is self-evident. It is self-evident that our children are our future, not only the future of women but the future of the entire human race. And since the entire human race is larger than women, it logically follows that no single group within this race has the right to decide for the race, most especially if that decision would have adverse effect on the entire race. Consequently, you must agree with me that the whole of idea of a freedom of choice to determine whether to keep a baby or not, especially when the pregnancy poses no serious threat to the life of the mother, must be immediately jettisoned and their proponents dismissed. Some others have equally argued that women who are too poor or young girls who may be too young for the task of motherhood, should not be obliged to keep their pregnancy, since keeping it would either bring more mystery to the life of the mother and her child or interrupt the education of the mother. But this, in itself, is ridiculous. It would immediately be seen to be ridiculous as soon as we ask the question, why? Why would a young girl or poor lady freely consent to having sex with another most especially when she knows very well that she does not possess the wherewithal for an equal responsibility of motherhood? I admit that some may have been victims of rape still, it is no excuse. But what is more pathetic is when you hear a woman say to you that the reason why she wants abortion is because the pregnancy would disfigure her. It would make men run away from her. It would make her naturally ‘unappealing' to her boyfriends and the outside world. This is as pathetic as it is a fundamental mistake. It is a fundamental mistake because the obligation to protect the life of the unborn child, who is equally the future of any country, does not stem from the way people would perceive or not perceive you. Rather, the obligation comes from an essential nature which defines our humanity, our species. It comes from an essential need to ‘propagate and preserve our kind'. For one thing, at least in principle, we all desire the physical well being of our fellow brothers and sisters and their continuous existence in history, for this is essentially what underlies all our human endeavours, scientific and technological discoveries, innovation, creativities, human right movements, and the zeal we put into work, our dedication. It essentially underlies the reason why we condemn our leaders when they go wrong, our mutual corrections, name them. We do all these things because we have recognized that doing otherwise would have adverse effect on us and on our future. Additionally with propagation and preservation of our kind comes the equal responsibility of educating our young ones. In other words, it is not propagation and preservation of species we would have to worry about, as if that is all there is to having a good future. There is an equal responsibility for us to train them in a line of good moral tradition, by way of education. This is so that they can become people we can be proud of. And this point brings us to the second score of this article, which is an attempt to examine the present situation in Pakistan. You would imagine that in a country there so much political instability, turmoil, uncertainties, disturbances and so on, there would a massive drive for the education of ones as a way of remedying the situation. But this is not the case in Pakistan. There are a group of Islamic extremists, popularly called the Talibans, who have consistently threatened to blow up any school who would admit girls in her classrooms. As if to make do of their threats, about 7 schools have been blown up so far in that region. The situation in this region is disheartening, pathetic and criminal. It is in this same region you would hear about young girls being forced into early marriage, women constantly abused by their husbands etc. A country where acts such as these are the order of the day can never know progress. Please, don't confuse my ideals for feminism, because I am not even close to being one. However, I believe in a cross-board education. In other words, I strongly believe that both girls and boys should have an equal assess to education and a good life. This is everyone's fundamental and inalienable human right. Hence, the obligation to protect the future does not negate the education of girls, as if by the term ‘children', only boys are being referred to. No, this is not the case. The term is a generic one which refers to anything that could fall under that category, here including boys and girls without any exclusion. These are our future which we must dutifully protect. They are our responsibility we must not shy away from, all in the name of freedom of choice. Cornelius Ewuoso OP A commentator on national and international issues From Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
# 
Your Comments
Please make The Square an enjoyable experience for everyone by refraining from gratuitous ad-hominem contributions, defamatory comments and off-topic posting. Such posts will be removed.