By inviting Rebecca Gomperts, of the abortion ship and pro-choice organisation Women on Waves, to debate and promote the legalisation of abortion, controversial lawyer Emy Bezzina is bound to stoke strong emotions.
By its very nature, the concept of abortion raises very grave social, legal, medical and moral issues. Undoubtedly, an unplanned or an unwanted pregnancy places great responsibilities upon any prospective mother. This is made all the more serious when one is dealing with pregnancies out of wedlock, or where serious medical, financial or emotional issues are at stake.
Very rarely are there circumstances, such as cancer of the uterus and ectopic pregnancies, when saving a mother's life demands an indirect and unintentional abortion. A mother might be faced with a life-threatening condition that places the life of the foetus in jeopardy. It is often a question of saving one life rather than allowing two to perish. In such cases, Malta definitely does not need the expertise of Dr Gomperts.
Very often, abortion legislation is invoked in cases of rape or forced incest and, although exceptional, such cases cannot be swept under the carpet. To further compound the issue, people question at which stage the embryo acquires personhood and can be deemed an individual in its own right.
Today, most scientific data recognise that this starts as early as after the first 14 days of conception. However, even so, a pre-embryo has the full potential to develop into a human being. One does not have the right to escape victimisation at the expense of creating a new victim.
Dr Gomperts' statement that "I do not take into account the child because I do not call it a child to start off with" betrays a callous disregard for the intrinsic and sacred right to life of an embryo.
Dr Gomperts presents abortion as an inviolable right for women. Her outright dismissal of religious beliefs and the fact that she places contraception on a par with abortion betrays her ingrained antagonism to moral concepts and her inability to participate in a meaningful debate.
It is true that women facing an unintended, unwanted or otherwise troublesome pregnancy face emotionally painful, stressful and embarrassing situations. But an innocent and defenceless person deserves protection.
Condemning abortion should not be the only response to mothers facing distressing emotional and economic strains or a defective foetus. A caring society, worthy of the name, owes these women all the assistance necessary to cope with their predicament.
The right to life is a universally-recognised human right. If people live in poverty, absence of basic health care and ignorance, the answer should not be abortion of their offspring but the more arduous commitment to eliminate their degrading social disadvantages.
By legalising abortion, society would be crossing a fundamental moral line. Our understanding of unborn life is not what it was in the Middle Ages. Many children today had their first photos taken in utero. There is no longer any doubt about what abortion is: Killing. Will Malta make a stand against the pervasive culture of death?
This country must not be seduced into thinking that moral codes are relative and that freedom of expression is an absolute right. The right of one person ends where the right of another begins. Does Dr Gomperts have the right to promote the legalised killing of others, even if still unborn?
One hopes her visit will raise public opinion in Malta to ensure that life is revered, not only in utero but throughout its earthly existence onto its natural end.