Leafing through a newspaper last week, I read Dr Joseph Muscat proclaim his opinion that since the ad hoc Parliamentary Committee had concluded to decide in favour of embryo freezing in complete agreement, then that opinion should stand. I cannot understand how he expects a committee to decide to do away with human lives in order for mothers to become pregnant, as a matter of expediency that is, when there are other ways for doing so. Even if there was no other way of doing so, it is incumbent to remind him that the right to innocent human life is a fundamental human right of an absolute order and may not be disclaimed at all. Dr Muscat has a doctorate in some economic field of study and I respect him for that! However, both he and other politicians seem to run away with the idea that in the ethics of life one can just up and say anything. They seem to forget that Bioethics is a discipline which is multi-faceted in nature and which requires proper input for equally proper output. What I am getting at is that it is wise when discussing certain issues to always take advice from qualified individuals before saying things that one is not qualified to utter. One ought to remember that rubbish in leads to rubbish out!

I still remember when we studied the notorious Mrs Malaprop in Sheridan’s The Rivals at school. She dropped malapropisms left, right and centre and gave her name to the same figure of speech of which the title to this piece is one of the most illustrious examples. I surmise that when politicians shoot from the hip rather than take the appropriate advice from the appropriate quarters, they often end up concocting political forms of malapropisms, that is they are inappropriate to the end! The first lesson in politics should be that of humility. The first lesson in humility is that it is best to ask for proper advice when you do not know rather than open one’s mouth to show all that you did not bother to seek that advice! Does it seem to arise that from what he is saying Dr Muscat seems to agree with embryo freezing regardless of their human rights and of what others are saying or I am I wrong on this?

Others showed surprise that the first reading of the legislation on IVF was termed “Embryo Protection Act”. All sorts of brouhaha was drummed up from the usual quarters showing their disapproval for a name that they seemed to say reflected how backwards we still are. Well, for these bright sparks of the 21st century, it is well to inform them that the Federal Republic of Germany, which we all hold to be one of the most advanced in Europe, has called its IVF law “The Embryo Protection Act”, seemingly having learnt their lessons from the atrocities of the last world war. Incidentally, in Germany, embryo freezing is not allowed! That however is not hip anymore and it is incumbent on certain quarters to pooh-pooh the idea of not freezing embryos because everybody else does it! However, I really do not give a fig what everybody else does because what really interests me is doing what is right.

Unfortunately, at the moment doing what is right is relatively out of fashion so we must wait until pseudo-reason turns full circle and becomes hip again and allows human beings the right to enjoy a life. It seems that life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is only within the grasp of a select few. Those in pursuit of happiness do not seem to know what Aristotle wrote 2,500 years ago with regard to what ultimately brings it about. Some say that virtue is that which helps us to do what is right and avoid what is wrong. Are right and wrong popular in today’s culture though? In the meantime, pending popularity, those human beings who are caught on the wrong side of the fence will have to excuse us all and put up with being systematically exterminated. Wonder what Mrs Malaprop would have made of today’s world? I somehow think that ‘prodigy’ would not be at the top of the list though!