From Fr P. Serracino Inglott

It goes very much against my grain as an opera-librettist to seek to blunt even slightly the achievement of anyone who has managed to establish the picture of a melodramatic contrast between two academic colleagues as “Mr. G. Borg” (whoever he might be) admirably succeeded in doing in your columns last Sunday.

Nevertheless, the publication of the letter requires me to point out at least three matters of fact that “Mr G. Borg” could hardly have known just by watching the television programme that inspired his epistle.

To begin with, the first of the three snippets actually broadcast from the longish interview that had been recorded was linked to another remark, oddly omitted. After saying that the living human organism in a mother’s womb before at least the 14th day of pregnancy could not be said to be a “person” in the ordinary sense of the word, I added that it still deserved to be treated with all the respect due to a living human organism.

Secondly, the third snippet broadcast, accompanied by the grimace that seems to have greatly delighted “Mr. G. Borg”, was not actually spoken in the context of the preceding remark but with reference to the opinion that a new person comes into existence upon penetration rather than some 24 hours later.

Thirdly, although no issue seems to have been taken up on my statement about stem cells, I imagine I might have possibly expressed myself more cogently on the topic.

Consequently, the difference in practice, if not also in theory, between Professor Agius and myself turns out to be a molehill rather than a mountain. Sadly, I have to renounce the delightful picture of myself as an enlightened latter-day Christian Moses battling against the Pharaonic forces of obscurity. But thank you kindly for having enabled me to entertain the idea at least while I was reading the letter from “Mr G. Borg”.

Peter Serracino Inglott