When I was young and curious, I asked my father, “Pa, where do babies come from?” Pointing a finger at mom, he explained that she was better qualified to answer me.
“Ma, where do babies come from?” Without hesitation, mom pointed to grandma, who happened to be visiting, as being the proper person to ask.
“Nanna, where do babies come from?” Her lips formed a wide smile, her blue eyes seemed bigger than ever, her freckled fair face matched her flaming red hair; she picked me up, as she always did, and ... “Oh! Here’s grandfather. He is the wisest man. Better ask him!”
Grandpa had just entered our living room, thanking heaven for allowing us to meet in the house rather than in the bomb-shelter. It was c. 1944 when we first started enjoying the relative tranquillity of not getting bombed day and night.
“Nannu, where do babies come from?” Known for his integrity, wisdom, and a no-nonsense approach, he took me aside, complimented me for “now being old enough to know”, and came straight to the point: “Babies come from the Bir tal-Luretu, delivered by the hand of the Holy Virgin.”
And so it came to pass that I lost my innocence. Armed with this kernel of “grown-up knowledge”, I became a frequent visitor to the Chapel of Our Lady of Loreto, on the outskirts of Gudja.
Whenever the code-phrase, “Ġejja l-majjistra (the midwife is coming)” was heard, the ‘knowledgeable’ kids took off to the chapel to witness the miracle.
If olive trees could talk, those in the garden of that chapel would tell of generation after generation of Gudja kids scrambling to climb up their trunks to camouflage themselves in the hope of catching the Holy Mother delivering a baby from the well on the parvis of the chapel.
If Dr Michael Asciak were to take a survey of all Gudjani 65 or older, and ask them ‘the question’, he would be forgiven if he were to conclude that the survey’s result indicate, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that life does not begin at conception, but in the cistern (that was) on the parvis of tal-Luretu ... and therefore, all Gudjani − from a certain era − are ‘children of God’. But he would get a completely different answer, and conclusion, if the survey included all Gudjani regardless of age.
As his latest letter entitled “A Catch-22 situation” shows (TMIS, 18 September), he has chosen to bolster his argument by referring solely to ‘eminent’ experts who already share his views. If he were to face reality and pay attention to those who have an opposing view, he might realise that there is a whole body of experts who will not accept his philosophy for the simple reason that his reasoning is based on myth and religious dogma.
The last sentence of his closing paragraph − “The fact remains that a doctor treating a pregnant human mother or practising IVF has more than one human being under his care and he has no right to choose the intrinsic value of one of these lives over that of the others but is obliged to respect all human life equally.” − sums up how bad his reasoning is.
“Human” this and “human” that − there is no need for verbiage. We are not discussing chimps or gorillas.
No amount of philosophising can change the accepted meaning of words as found in the dictionary. Thus: Lamppost <> flagpole; Bird <> airplane; Lemon <> orange; Tadpole <> frog; Caterpillar <> butterfly;
Embryo <> person.
The woman, as elucidated in the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada, is the key person to decide on her own future. It’s neither the doctor’s decision nor the State’s.
Articles 241 to 244 of the Criminal Code criminalizing abortion are an abomination, reducing Maltese women to second-class citizens. That is a gross violation of the Constitution.
Mercifully, invalidating this irrational law can be done by the Constitutional Court. Unlike the divorce debacle, no referendum is required. I expect it to happen in the near future.
CJohn Zammit
Fort Erie
CANADA