Dear Editor,
A few weeks ago 31-year-old Savita Halappanavar died in Ireland after being denied an abortion.
Savita found herself having problems with her pregnancy and placed herself in the hands of eminent doctors at Galway University Hospital in Dublin. She was 17 weeks pregnant.
The problem went on for three and a half days, and Savita was in terrible agony all that time. She asked for the pregnancy to be terminated because she was having severe back pain and was miscarrying, but was told she was in a Catholic country.
A few days later she died from septicaemia.
The prime minister of Ireland, Enda Kenny, said "A child has been lost, a mother has died, and a husband is bereaved. That is a tragedy."
But the woman's right to life had been disregarded.
Here in Jamaica two students at UTech were recently beaten by security guards who found them in a compromising position. Their lives and rights were also being disregarded in that beating.
Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller has said that there should be no discrimination against gays and lesbians, and that the government would adopt a more tolerant view of their activities. Former Prime Minister Bruce Golding said he would have no gay men in his Cabinet.
Simpson Miller's policy is the one to which the country might gravitate. If that policy were made into law, then we would not have homosexuals being attacked. But what do the churches say about abortion and gays - two social and moral topics?
They say it is contrary to the laws of God. "Abortion on demand or for personal reasons is morally wrong." That may be so, but the incident described above does not fit. If Savita had been given the required surgery, more than likely she would be alive today.
Does all this mean that the right to life and the right to sexual orientation must follow religious views? We have too many anachronisms in our culture that delight our churches without consideration for basic human rights. We have to consider that changes may be required with time, and religion was made for man, not man for religion.
Ramesh Sujanani
rsujanani78@gmail.com
Religion, rights and recognition
-->
A few weeks ago 31-year-old Savita Halappanavar died in Ireland after being denied an abortion.
Savita found herself having problems with her pregnancy and placed herself in the hands of eminent doctors at Galway University Hospital in Dublin. She was 17 weeks pregnant.
The problem went on for three and a half days, and Savita was in terrible agony all that time. She asked for the pregnancy to be terminated because she was having severe back pain and was miscarrying, but was told she was in a Catholic country.
A few days later she died from septicaemia.
The prime minister of Ireland, Enda Kenny, said "A child has been lost, a mother has died, and a husband is bereaved. That is a tragedy."
But the woman's right to life had been disregarded.
Here in Jamaica two students at UTech were recently beaten by security guards who found them in a compromising position. Their lives and rights were also being disregarded in that beating.
Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller has said that there should be no discrimination against gays and lesbians, and that the government would adopt a more tolerant view of their activities. Former Prime Minister Bruce Golding said he would have no gay men in his Cabinet.
Simpson Miller's policy is the one to which the country might gravitate. If that policy were made into law, then we would not have homosexuals being attacked. But what do the churches say about abortion and gays - two social and moral topics?
They say it is contrary to the laws of God. "Abortion on demand or for personal reasons is morally wrong." That may be so, but the incident described above does not fit. If Savita had been given the required surgery, more than likely she would be alive today.
Does all this mean that the right to life and the right to sexual orientation must follow religious views? We have too many anachronisms in our culture that delight our churches without consideration for basic human rights. We have to consider that changes may be required with time, and religion was made for man, not man for religion.
Ramesh Sujanani
rsujanani78@gmail.com
Religion, rights and recognition
-->