Dear Editor,
Minister Lisa Hanna has expressed outrage at the brutal beheading of a four-year-old baby whose remains were later dumped in a sinkhole. Recently she was quoted in the Observer reiterating outrage at violence against children while in attendance at a victim's funeral. She went on to even mention the disrespectful attire of some in attendance. However, in June, she suggested that increasing the abortion rates among poor women was necessary to lower crime.
According to Minister Hanna's "crime plan", the only problem with the beheading of the four-year-old baby is that it happened four years too late. Duanvale is not an affluent community. What if the baby's limbs were pulled apart while still inside her mother's womb, or if a doctor had beheaded her at a forced birth? Would Minister Hanna have celebrated that as the exercise of the mother's reproductive right? Would she have seen that baby's decapitation as the extermination of another potential criminal or teenage mother who could have infested Jamaican society with crime? Considering that the difference between a 4-month old fetus and a 4-year-old baby are mainly in size and location, how can the minister of youth bemoan the insufficient number of abortions of potential criminals among the poor, while grieving the violent destruction of an older child? Is she speaking with a forked tongue?
Is Minister Hanna's passionate advocacy for protection of children from violence, while simultaneously pushing for the most violent act (death) against the most vulnerable children (unborn) confusion, moral incongruence, or blatant hypocrisy?
Alexander Smith
lexsmith269@gmail.com
Minister Hanna's hypocritical 'crime plan'
-->
Minister Lisa Hanna has expressed outrage at the brutal beheading of a four-year-old baby whose remains were later dumped in a sinkhole. Recently she was quoted in the Observer reiterating outrage at violence against children while in attendance at a victim's funeral. She went on to even mention the disrespectful attire of some in attendance. However, in June, she suggested that increasing the abortion rates among poor women was necessary to lower crime.
According to Minister Hanna's "crime plan", the only problem with the beheading of the four-year-old baby is that it happened four years too late. Duanvale is not an affluent community. What if the baby's limbs were pulled apart while still inside her mother's womb, or if a doctor had beheaded her at a forced birth? Would Minister Hanna have celebrated that as the exercise of the mother's reproductive right? Would she have seen that baby's decapitation as the extermination of another potential criminal or teenage mother who could have infested Jamaican society with crime? Considering that the difference between a 4-month old fetus and a 4-year-old baby are mainly in size and location, how can the minister of youth bemoan the insufficient number of abortions of potential criminals among the poor, while grieving the violent destruction of an older child? Is she speaking with a forked tongue?
Is Minister Hanna's passionate advocacy for protection of children from violence, while simultaneously pushing for the most violent act (death) against the most vulnerable children (unborn) confusion, moral incongruence, or blatant hypocrisy?
Alexander Smith
lexsmith269@gmail.com
Minister Hanna's hypocritical 'crime plan'
-->