John Fenech, San Ġwann
Students want the best of both worlds
The mindset of most University students in the recent survey Religious Beliefs and Attitudes was on a par with those participants in previous surveys or discussions. The overall conclusion remains the same: Like others before them, they want the best of both worlds.
The University students' age varies between 18 and 26 years and the population is made up of 58 per cent female and 42 per cent male, including 750 foreign students. The conclusions regarding the moral dimension might have presented a different analysis if the survey was set for confidence levels of 99 per cent with an error margin of +- 3 per cent for a minimum 50 per cent return rate, with a proportional gender and age distribution.
The Golden Rule is an ethical code that states one has a right to just treatment and a responsibility to ensure justice for others. This is recognised by all cultures. Therefore religious beliefs are incidental to the central theme of this survey - responsibility. The questions about religious beliefs tend to expose a certain amount of hypocrisy in the answers given!
Marriage is uniquely beneficial to society because it is the foundation of the family and the basic building block of society. But... these young people prefer to have a trial period, if possible without a defined time frame. Mind you, the parent's home is still the official lodging. So if the daily chores or those silly and downright boring things that married couples have to deal with day in day out happen to be a wee bit too much of a hassle... then in the most civilised and amicable manner they will call it a day and return with haste to the secure lodgings of their parent's home!
On the other hand, if they manage to surpass the trials of living together and accept each other's intimate needs, then marriage might be on the cards - although it requires nerves of steel, unbelievable courage, and a substantial bank account, to tie the knot. Alas, if the worst had to happen, in spite of the running-in period, the intelligent couple have the answer... divorce! (The tattoo may be a wee bit more difficult to remove.)
Fortunately, abortion was not hijacked to the whims of personal egoism. Although preservation of life must never be in doubt, it is possible that these young people believe otherwise. Who cares about a homicide here and there, between loving couples! The irrevocable statement of the feminist lobby is: "The woman's body is her own". And rightly so, this argument holds true for every cell that the woman was born with. But the mother's womb serves only as a safe place for the gestation period of the foetus before birth. Mummy is not carrying a lifeless appendage; it is not an unwanted invasive lump. If it evolved by consent then the bearer has the moral obligation to protect it against any harm.
Tongue-in-cheek these young people (91 per cent) acknowledge that they are believers. The other nine per cent believe in everything and nothing. For those who declare to be Roman Catholics, do you honestly believe yourself when you demand that the institution should change or modify its teaching and beliefs to accommodate and at the same time encourage your egoistic pastimes?
You have the absolute freedom to live your lifestyle as you deem fit, no one is to judge you, but yourself. But do not demand the blessing or the nod of approval or a pat on the back from those who have consistently upheld beliefs which are contrary to your way of life. If you do not wish to be imposed upon do not impose on others!
Normally such a bargain is sought by those who seek to enjoy one's lifestyle with as few moral obligations as possible but at the same time will hedge their bets for the afterlife. So they devise a personal moral insurance policy just to be on the safe side!
8 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
john fenech
Jul 3rd 2009, 17:24
M’s Sammut I am all in favour of reasonable and healthy living. Most civilisations for the past 8000 years have been seeking ways to improve their lifestyle for the better. I humbly advice that clubbing and tilling the land, are not even distant cousins, even with the aid of modern machinery! Thanks for taking the time to clarify your first comment. Let me assure you that my sentiment is not because of a religious belief. As you are aware ethics are not the monopoly of any one particular religion. As I have several times pointed out I am a firm believer in ‘The ethic of reciprocity’. And I am sure that most of the younger generation understand the meaning of this principle, but at times find it tough to put up with it. Therefore it is egoistic and irresponsible when this principle is diluted to suite the individual. Just a curiosity, if life has changed for the better, why is this fixation with certain folks that principles belong to the archives?
C.Sammut
Jul 2nd 2009, 21:17
Mr Fenech
I was referring to your two articles:
'But... these young people prefer to have a trial period, if possible without a defined time frame. Mind you, the parent's home is still the official lodging. So if the daily chores or those silly and downright boring things that married couples have to deal with day in day out happen to be a wee bit too much of a hassle... then in the most civilised and amicable manner they will call it a day and return with haste to the secure lodgings of their parent's home!'
and
'Alas, if the worst had to happen, in spite of the running-in period, the intelligent couple have the answer... divorce! (The tattoo may be a wee bit more difficult to remove.)'
The truth is that the lifestyle one has to lead today leads to choosing lifestyles which leave one sane and healthy. This perhaps is not out of selfishness, but out of knowledge. And I don't condone this. People don't toil in their fields from sunup till sundown and then go to sleep as was done when the Holy Scripture was penned. Life is much more different nowadays.
john fenech
Jul 2nd 2009, 18:05
Mr. Tabone I have pointed out, twice, that our behaviour towards one another must be governed by the ethics of Reciprocity, “one has a right to just treatment and a responsibility to ensure justice for others”. On the other hand my reference to absolute freedom to live one’s life style as deems fit was in direct reference to the student’s religious beliefs or lack of them! I wish to rest your mind at easy Mr. Farrugia, dealing with your comments is no stress at all; understanding young people is not such a big deal if you analyse the survey answers you should be on your way! But understand your objection is another kettle of fish since you did not present any!
Joe Tabone-Adami
Jul 2nd 2009, 15:45
I doubt as to how truly representative the survey can be - given that it shows the opinions of less than 5% of the University student population. However that may be, those replying to the set questions (of whom 91% purported to be believers) do not show very deep familiarity with Catholic apologetics and tenets. On the contrary, however empiric their system of acquiring knowledge, some still accept re-incarnation, pantheism and fortune-telling!
As regards the writer's assertion that one has the absolute freedom to live a lifestyle as one
deems fit, it must be pointed out that one's rights are circumscribed by - and should not impinge upon - the rights of other individuals and of society as a whole That is why civilized society is governed by a code of laws covering so many aspects of one's behaviour.
Otherwise, the contribution (in so far as it relates to those items discussed therein) is a realistic assessment of the survey outcome - but not necessarily of educated youth.
Franco Farrugia
Jul 2nd 2009, 15:29
@ Mr Fenech - I suggest that you give yourself a break; that extra stress is bad for you, you know. And I still maintain you are completely separated from the way young people think.
john fenech
Jul 2nd 2009, 11:01
M’s Sammut what do you mean by old principles? That upholding the sacrosanct right to life or the right to just treatment and a responsibility to ensure justice for others is old fashioned? Or do you mean that these rights should apply whenever it tickles the fancy at the opportune moment of the capricious individual!? On the other hand were did I differ on equal rights and responsibility of the gender? In fact I proposed for a better survey-sampling to include the female students!
Mr. Farrugia you are judging me... but at the same time condemn me because you think I am passing judgement! It is precisely the same attitude of those who insist that ethical obligation is their private domain to fiddle with at their convenience!
I based my comments on the Ethics of Reciprocity as found in all culture, irrespective of creed. Therefore dear Monsieur and Madame do not put the cart where it does not belong!
C.Sammut
Jul 2nd 2009, 09:38
Article written by a man. In the Bible you will find articles which say something like ' a woman is to serve a man' ... this nowadays no longer holds as reality although serving each other would certainly help in a relationship. So surely what was penned ages ago, should these days be revised to reflect our current improved knowledge and life?
Does Almighty enlightenment these days mean stick to your old principles?
Franco Farrugia
Jul 2nd 2009, 09:33
@ Mr Fenech - I really think that you are judging, for all you claim that you are not. What right have you to judge what people's morality is like? It is an interior thing, an intimate relationship with the Creator and you, sir, have no right to intrude on it. I really think, from your writing, that you haven't the faintest clue how young people think. And besides, the results of this survey show that university students are thinking on the same level as everybody else in Malta.