Backing for morning-after pill in exceptional circumstances

Dr Francis Saliba

Sep 19th 2009, 09:53

@JasonFenech
“Ensoulment and intelligence … should not appear in the same phrase” (JF). Why? Is it because Jason Fenech says so?
“Give our youth a chance” (JF). Who is denying that? I only criticized brash generalized pontifications about the morning-after pill that disclose a total absence of any serious “research” about the different modes of action of different pills that have a great bearing on the problem of whether a pill is a contraceptive or an abortifacient. Is it immaterial to you whether a pill prevents conception or whether it kills a developing embryo?
“… the former (religion) makes a mockery of the latter (morality).” (JF). Prove it! The “mockery” is in your rash denial that since time immemorial it was religion that concerned itself with morality (in one way or another) more so than any parvenu materialistic atheism.
Do yourself a favour and try to stick to the subject of the blog and to present solid arguments, not unsubstantiated opinions. Try not to diverge into the usual antireligious senseless attack against “a flock of (holier than thou) vultures” carrying “the stench of institutional religion and double standards” that according to your inestimable opinion “poison everything”.

Charles J. Buttigieg

Sep 19th 2009, 08:56

@JasonFenech


I don’t accept the churches’ rule that the only permissible way to control birth is through coitus interruptus ,the safe period and abstinence; I believe that the birth pill, condoms and other forms of contraceptives are legitimate and humanistic.Sex and sexual satisfaction is a gift of nature and for those who are religious it’s also a gift from their Gods.

Being anti abortion is not about being religious or spiritual it’s about being humanistic and if one wants to be selfish ,its about protecting your own kind. The Animals in the jungle do not slaughter their own not even to survive hunger. And abortion is killing your own for your own survival and you cannot deny that.

I believe that life starts when the spermatozoon penetrates the egg, the medical science has not as yet established when that exactly happens, what they think today is only speculative and debatable. If I were a mother prepared to put my living offspring’s life in dire risk then I will take the risk of aborting my foetus with the ‘morning-after’ pill to spite the natural instincts of the animals in the jungle.

Jason Fenech

Sep 18th 2009, 23:18

Ensoulment and intelligence ... two words that should not appear in the same phrase!! The sadness of it all is that religious hotheads are not in the least concerned about the humanistic aspect of such issues. They are too absorbed safeguarding their ticket to wonderland and dishing out judgement based on twisted moral standards.

Case in point. A group of youths strive to hold an intelligent discussion and like a flock of vultures the holier than thou swoop down tearing down at rationality and the possibilty of discussing REAL solutions to REAL world issues.

Do yourself a favour. Give our youth a chance. This country is yearning for a breath of fresh air stagnant for too long with the stench of institutional religion and double standards.

And please stop confusing religion with morality. The latter predates the former while the former makes a mockery out of the latter.

Religion does indeed poison everything.

Dr Francis Saliba

Sep 18th 2009, 19:02

@CharlesJButtigieg I am certain that Wikipedia would agree that fools rush in where angels fear to tread. Just look at the pontificating comments about the “morning-after pill” by rank amateurs when the best medical and moral experts are still bashing their brains to establish the modus operandi of the different pills containing different ingredients and the exact moment of ensoulment that must be ascertained before any intelligent discussion about contraceptive/abortifacient pills!

Charles J. Buttigieg

Sep 18th 2009, 15:00

Referring to my last post, the last sentence, (I would consider the administration of the pill as an act of abortion. Only fools rush in where angels fear to tread.) was my conclusion and not Wikipedia’s.

Melissa Bagley

Sep 18th 2009, 13:15

Finally some people have taken it up..........better late than never!

Manuel Mangani

Sep 18th 2009, 11:05

@ Annalise Spiteri
".....I must insist that the whole resolution must be read before looking at things out of contest. The resolution was 100 percent in favour of life from the moment of conception. We invited persons with different opinions and convictions to speak to us; before debating we did our research."

What sort of research did you undertake? It appears that your research failed to unearth the simple fact that the morning-after pill may also act AFTER fertilisation, thereby causing the fertilised ovum to die. That amounts to an abortive, and not a contraceptive, act.

Duncan Pace

Sep 18th 2009, 10:56

well done! i thought the morning after pill was available over the counter, as it is in the rest of the world!! i Suggest it is implemented immediately, and freely distributed like condoms. BONGU MALTA!

edward bartolo

Sep 18th 2009, 10:49

Quote: "Every ejaculation into a condom is .. wow.. thousands and thousands of murders!"

Who do you want to fool?!

Sperm cells only carry the genetic database (DNA), they are not miniature babies. That belief has its roots in the Middle Ages. So, if you want to make a valid criticism, refer to what the church believes this present day, and, by the way, you cannot blame the church for that belief, because at that time, science didn't know the truth about sperms and eggs.

The church claims that a new human life starts as soon as there is a fertilised cell, and whether you like or not, science backs that idea. The reason is simply that the fertilised cell grows independently of the mother like a parasite. Can you say that the biological processes of parasites are entirely determined by their hosts?

E Compagno

Sep 18th 2009, 09:30

About time we had this pill! I'm not for abortion. I'm not for terminating the life of a child in the womb, but I am all for the choice of not letting it happen in the first place!

Morning after pill is the carry-on of contraception. If two consenting adults are having sex, not for the reasons of conceiving a child (omg! *shock* *horror*), and they take all precautions they can take and these precautions fail, then why should pregnancy we allowed to take place? You know right there and then that the condom has torn. Or that, darn it, missed my pill this morning. Or (although I wouldn't suggest this as a good form of contraception) he did not withdraw in time. Aren't all these methods preventing life? The morning after pill is preventing life at a stlightly later stage. More than that, it is preventing something that was unplanned, something he and she are unprepared for. Just like a condom, pill, IUD does.

This whole potential human talk sounds like every unfertilised egg is a potential murder committed. Every ejaculation into a condom is .. wow.. thousands and thousands of murders!

Well done youths. Keep it up.

Charles J. Buttigieg

Sep 18th 2009, 08:23

Once again refering to what Wikipidia has to say about the ‘morning after’ in that, some scientists believe that EC may possibly act after fertilization ,which leads to a possibility that this leads some to consider EC an abortifacient, I would consider the administration of the pill as an act of abortion. Only fools rush In where angels fear to tread.

Joe Galea

Sep 18th 2009, 08:17

Don't come and tell me that the day after you call the stuff inside the women's womb as an embryo? Most probably the sperm would still be floating around to find an egg to fertilise. So the day-after pill is good in those rape cases. You have to think also about the consequences that the woman that have been raped has had a very bad experience. I am sure it's not healthy for the baby to be born. I wouldn't be happy that I was born out of rape and that my father is some psychopath with a high probability that I have inherited his genetics and behaviour!! Just be rational people and keep the religious banters to the church.

Annalise Spiteri

Sep 18th 2009, 01:07

I wavered a bit before commenting, but after seeing words such as 'immature', 'sick,' 'misinformed' and 'murderers', I just had to put a few words down. Along with others who have commented before me, I too was a member of the nyp's party, dritt tal-hajja. Above all, I must insist that the whole resolution must be read before looking at things out of contest. The resolution was 100 percent in favour of life from the moment of conception. We invited persons with different opinions and convictions to speak to us; before debating we did our research. I refuse to be offended at faceless strangers on the internet, though I'm amazed at how people respond to opposing opinions. It is no wonder that our own parliamentarians are afraid to discuss such subjects. At least, I am glad that I am not an armchair critic, and that I got to participate in such an event.

Charles J. Buttigieg

Sep 17th 2009, 20:15

Quoting Wikiwiki.
Emergency contraceptive pills (ECPs)—sometimes simply referred to as emergency contraceptives (ECs) or the "morning-after pill"—are drugs that act both to prevent ovulation or fertilization and possibly post-fertilization implantation of a blastocyst (embryo). ECPs are distinct from medical abortion methods that act after implantation.[1]
Intrauterine devices (IUDs)—usually used as a primary contraception method, but sometimes used as emergency contraception.
As its name implies, EC is intended for occasional use, when primary means of contraception fail. Since EC methods act before implantation, they are medically and legally considered forms of contraception. Some scientists believe that EC may possibly act after fertilization (see Mechanism of action), a possibility that leads some to consider EC an abortifacient.

Dr Francis Saliba

Sep 17th 2009, 16:53

@AdrianCardona
In common with the rest of humanity I have had to assist relatives “in their own suffering and pain” dying from cruel terminal disease. My choice was to assist as best I could, to comfort them and to alleviate their suffering. Don’t you dare lecture me that I deprived them of some “dignified way to die” because I refrained from administering a lethal intravenous injection as if they were common criminals condemned to die!

Renata Muscat

Sep 17th 2009, 16:44

@jeremy lanfranco,
to clear things out...in some places where they make euthanasia no it is not the case that you have to be terminally ill to ask for it. even if that is volutary euthanasia there still can be abuse cause all have to admit that these people wont be in the right sate of mind!

second of all if we go the idea not to implement laws because of abuse... then we should go without laws because any law can be abused.

Renata Muscat

Sep 17th 2009, 16:38

Mr vincenti, i think you are very incorrect about saying we were misinformed....as you well know we did ask for the pro- life opinion..and thanks to you the few in our group that where infavour of abortion decided to change their mind...however we did look at other surveys talked with other people, and finally came up with our opinion... i am not telling u thats its secondry aim is not to cause an abortion but if taken in the right time by specialist it wont do any harm...and that is the reason we did present it that way in our resolution...we did not say we would make it legal as an over the counter pill!

Dr Francis Saliba

Sep 17th 2009, 16:35

@EdwardZammit
You misled me because the subject of the news item was the “morning-after pill”. Even so the case of a more advanced pregnancy putting at risk the life of the mother, complicated by the hypothesis that there would be no other remedy except the deliberate, intentional destruction of the baby in utero is a very, very rare situation indeed – if it ever occurs in this modern age of medicine.

Edward Zammit

Sep 17th 2009, 15:52

@ Dr Francis Saliba

To set things straight, I wasn't talking ( or meaning ) about a couple of hours old embryo, but later on well into the pregnancy.

Sorry for not being clear.

Dr Francis Saliba

Sep 17th 2009, 15:39

@Sdebono
Look who is screaming and shouting! Since time immemorial, mightier and more prominent people than today’s callow youths have monotonously and erroneously predicted the “death of God” and the “death of religion. It is these false prophecies of doom that have become unfulfilled voices “from the grave”.
Not only has Christianity (warts and all) outlived its detractors, but it has proved itself to be a most powerful contributor to Western civilization as we know it today.

P. Vincenti

Sep 17th 2009, 15:30

What is the Morning After Pill (MAP)?
The primary mechanism of the MAP is to inhibit ovulation, but this mechanism is not always operative. When breakthrough ovulation occurs, then secondary mechanisms operate to prevent clinically recognized pregnancy. These secondary mechanisms may occur either before or after fertilization. This means that in approximately1 out of three cases, the MAP pill may cause a chemical abortion.
Those who voted for this have not been informed correctly of what the MAP does. It is wrong to only focus on what the pill primarily intends to do without looking at the secondary effects. Human lives are stopped with the MAP.

Renata Muscat

Sep 17th 2009, 14:40

to all the rest of u that are basing their opinion on church...half of you have most probably children and all of you tell them to take the birth control pill not to get pregnant...and all this is...same thing...but instead of thinking with our heds and give our own opinion ...we go with the flow,, i encourage people to please do research, think and than make an opinion but before u talk just get things right in your heads and this doesnt only count for this issue.

and maybe in this country we should grow up a bit ...wen someone expresses their opinion which doesnt match with ours we have to offend and say negative things...lets be more mature.

Renata Muscat

Sep 17th 2009, 14:35

why does it take so long for some people to understand a little definition or conception! ill try again a make it clear... morning after pill and abortion are 2 different things... all the morning after pill is basically is an overdose of the normal birth control pill... all this does is stop ovulation....so if uve been raped during ovulation all this does is stop ovulation like the normal birth control pill...if u havent been raped during ovulation than u cannot be pregnant so if u take it obviously it will make no difference!

and i believe everyone uses birth control in some way or another... the only reason we would like to make it legalised is for the girls health...cos although morning after pill is illegal all you need to do is take 5 normal birth control pill and it will have the same effect...however if the morning after pill is given in hospital the girl can be observed by doctors since it can have its side effect such as bloth cloths..

R.Briffa

Sep 17th 2009, 13:38

this is what you call the " new era" and "the natural path of progress" !!! finding new ways to kill !! then if this is what you are calling "your world" you should be ashamed of it....a new world full of new ways to terminate life..a life..which in case of abortion..does not belong to you....you should thank God that you were granted the right to come into the world...and that you were not a victim of any 'exceptional circumstance' and deprived from the potential to live.......we won't dictate from our graves..but the ones you kill will...they will haunt your conscience forever !!!!

Eleanor

Sep 17th 2009, 13:18

The experience which is shared world wide by millions of women who have been through the trauma of abortion and had the courage to speak shows us that abortion at whatever stage may cause physical damage and deep psychological trauma that may leave the woman scarred for life unless she finds the right support to be able to look at the expereince for what it really meant; the death of her child and come to terms with it. The psychological pain the woman experiences is not only a living hell, but her state of being will affect all those around her. For all those interested and are open to find out more about abortion before suggesting what should and should not happen why not read a bit more about it - a starting point may be a book 'Forbidden Grief' written by a Psychotherapist Theresa Burke who has supported women through the painful process of healing the trauma of abortion. Let us serioulsy look into this reality and understand it for what it truly is before we cause alot of harm to our society. Abortion also sends an unconcious message that human beings are not worth being protected....

SDebono

Sep 17th 2009, 12:18

@ The fundementalists

You have absolutely no right to dictate to anyone how they live or end their lives or what their values should be. You have your opinion and thats fine but please keep in mind nobody asked you for them.

The morning after pill, Abortion, Euthenasia, IVF and Stem Cell Research all fall along the natural path of progress and the evolution of the human race. The death of religion in the west is nearing and i welcome it with open arms as the beginning of a great new era.

Religion has brought nothing but war and suffering to the world.

You may scream and shout and call the youth misguided all you want. But you forget that this is no longer your world, it belongs to us now. Please step aside and shut up. you will not stop natural progress. You've no right to dictate from the grave. And in case you haven't realised you've already failed.

I only hope you live to see the day abortion is legalised in Malta. I'ts not far off.

Renata Muscat

Sep 17th 2009, 12:10

well i'm here to comment about all this negative debate going on here, i was part of the nyp and also part of the party presenting the resolution dritt tal- hajja! to all the people down here giving negative comments pls do your research, and Mr bezzina a morning after pill doesnt leave the same effect of abortion this will simply stop conception it will stop the the perm from reaching the eggs so we r not requesting to destroy any kind of life.. if you are against that than your are against any other contreceptive...it was also stated in our resolution that it should be given by professionals and used at the right time.

also i would like to add that this was not as you all might be thinking a bunch of 18 yr olds talking about such issues without moral feelings, this took us months of research and we also talked to experts including doctors, lawyers, mp's, pro life , pro-choice, priests and others. i would like to note that not all the party was in favour it was proposed by a majority vote.

Raymond Bezzina

Sep 17th 2009, 11:36

Please permit me to make myself more clear about my previous comment.

When I mentioned the words "abortive pill" I was referring to the "morning after pill". I called it the abortive pill, because I believe that the morning after pill could do the same function as the abortive pill.

Dr Francis Saliba

Sep 17th 2009, 11:05

@EdwardZammit
You cannot be serious when you conjure up a non-existent “threat to the life of the mother” posed by a baby during the first few hours of its existence and when it has not even become firmly implanted in the mother’s womb. By way of contrast, the “morning after pill” is a very real and a very deliberate act of unprovoked destruction of an innocent bay in the total absence of any evidence that it is a threat to the life of the mother.

Raymond Bezzina

Sep 17th 2009, 09:52

To all those who are in favour of the abortive pill.

Taking the abortive pill means, that a person would be fully aware that she could be taking the life of a newly conceived human being. There is no doubt that human life begins there, therefore it is human life already.

Therefore, if these people do not respect such an innocent and defenceless human life, how can we believe that they would respect other defenceless persons, such as the elderly and the handicapped, who depend ENTIRELY on others for their survival?

albert debon

Sep 17th 2009, 09:27

if you (whoever you are/might be) where the child of a raped girl you still are:
-a great person (for believers - made in the image of God)
-amongst the best persons to provide your mother with true love (have long term goals rather than sort term virtual solutions!)
-innocent

Jeremy Lanfranco

Sep 17th 2009, 05:44

If this legislation had to actually materialise, we'll have dozens of 'alleged' rapes from boyfriends and one night stands. We'll have a bunch of 'alleged' rapists in court. But in the end is the unborn child to blame for the crime of another?
Euthanasia on the other hand is not something that is forced on older people to relieve the burden on others. Euthanasia (where legal) is strictly done on the patients request and is only authorised when they are certified as terminally ill. Thats why its also more appropriately referred to as 'assisted suicide'

Dr Francis Saliba

Sep 17th 2009, 03:03

@PhilipPace.
You are NOT recommending the separation of Church from State – that is already a fait accompli. You are seeking the suppression of the Constitutional right of the Catholic Church to exercise its duty to teach what is right and what is wrong. If our democratically elected representatives in parliament decide to legalize divorce, abortion and euthanasia they will be able to do so and there is nothing that the Church can do to prevent it . It would continue to teach that what has been legalized remains morally wrong. The Church does not have any right or any duty to fall in with your aspirations and to put its seal of approval on what it believes to be morally wrong. It has no right and no duty to choose expediency so that we don’t “keep lagging behind after the other EU member states”.

Carmel Serracino-Inglott

Sep 17th 2009, 00:56

As usual some label people who are against abortion ( which includes morning pill) as conservative, having an old mentality, backward. bounded with the Catholic Church, do not care about woman's rights and so on and so forth. THEY PURPOSELY IGNORE THE FACT THAT THEY ARE TRYING TO CRASH THE RIGHT OF A PERSON TO LIVE. THEY ARE ACCOMPLICES TO MURDER AND IN MY OPINION ALL THOSE WHO TRY TO PROMOTE ABORTION SHOULD BE CONDEMNED BY LAW AND PUNISHED. If you promote evasion of tax publicly, or to drive on the wrong side, or encourage children not to go to school you are liable to be prosecuted therefore why not for promoting murder? Maybe because in other countries they allow such absurdities Human rights yes for everybody but not for babies-- the most dependent human beings-- LOGICAL? The right of the mother is to PROTECT the baby ( I did not write her baby) not destroy the baby-- murder the baby with the help of doctors or chemicals. MURDER IS MURDER. Mothers to be if you kill your or the baby in your womb you are a murderer even if there is no god.

Graham Crocker

Sep 16th 2009, 23:39

All it does is prevent the embryo from attaching to the womb.

Sandro Agius, oh grow up you care more about a potential human than an actual human being. You're the type of guy who would prefer to see a womens life ruined, then have an unwanted microscopic thing go away. So what if its a human life, up till a 100 years ago the mortality rate was so high that people were still having large families.. you know on the off chance 5 of them suddenly dropped dead. Suddenly human life is so valuable that we have to force a woman to bring up a Rape child. It would be same women that would see the face of her rapist in her childs face and all you care about is the welfare of some microscopic entity that has the potential to become a human.

If a parent doesn't want a child ... the upbringing is going to be bad , hence the child abuse. The same people who care about the welfare of a microscopic embryo, do f*** all about the welfare of REAL Children ..Children rights are more important, even if priests molest them!

Gerry Cowie

Sep 16th 2009, 23:05

Heaven forbid if some of these young people ever get into power and still hold the same kind of misguided views on the value of human life.

It should also be remembered that these are not issues which are solely the concern of religious believers. Life and the right to live it are fundemental to all human beings.

With every freedom comes a responsibility!

Do they not realise that an embryo - a human being with potential, not a potential human being - would indeed be aborted by the fact that it is not allowed to settle in the womb.

What about those women who have been raped but chose of their own volition to keep their innocent child? They do exist, though people don't like you to know this.

As for the reason for saying no to euthenasia being that there is not enough research, shame on them! Since when has research alone been the key to such a moral dilemma? Here's hoping that maturity brings with it a healthy respect for human life from conception to natural death, rather than a creeping tendency towards the further cheapening of human life as if it were some kind of commodity!

Edward Zammit

Sep 16th 2009, 22:46

Please all you people who are making such a fuss about the morning after pill. Can anyone tell me what would they do if the actual unborn baby threatens the life of it's own mother ?? Apart from that how do you think that a father would look at that child when he knows that, that same child killed his wife/partner !?

You are saying, who are we to deny a child it's life ? Now i'm putting this question on, Who are we to deny a mother her life ??

Dr Sandro Vella

Sep 16th 2009, 21:16

The ever-increasing demand to legalise abortion and euthanasia in this country stems from a decline in values. Man is fast losing all sense of proportion, and wants to play God.
As a nation, we should not be ashamed of upholding values and basic human rights. Abortion equates the law of the jungle, where the weakest and most defenceless in society succumb to the might of criminal individuals who despise the value of human life. Besides being an immoral act in itself, the legalisation of euthanasia despises the aged and infirm, who may subtely (or not so subtely) be forced to request this procedure so as not to be a burden on relatives and society at large. These issues transcend religeous boundaries. Indeed, I feel that the conclusion of this morning's Youth Parliament sitting is the sign of a 'sick' society whose vision of the principles of justice and responsibility is at best blurred!

Andrew Cachia

Sep 16th 2009, 20:02

Sooner or later we will manage change. Change we need. enough of being conservative!!

Luca Caruana

Sep 16th 2009, 19:56

as for the quesiton of gender------the parliament was open to everyone and there was nothing stopping women enter it----and theywere given same chance of participating as the men. in the 'Partit tad Dritt tal Hajja' there was a total balance in fact.

philip pace

Sep 16th 2009, 18:51

How about organising something on how we can separate The Church from the State in this island.
I think that is the major problem that we have in Parliament.
When that happens it would be the best revoltution that Malta shall benefit from if we really mean what we say that we move on.
It is only after this process that subjects like Divorce etc can be really understood, explained and legalised.
As long as we remain like we are now, we keep lagging behind after the other EU member states.

adrian aquilina

Sep 16th 2009, 18:41

every women should be entitled to the morning after pill.......this is a crazy.backward country

marisa micallef

Sep 16th 2009, 18:27

thankfully our younger people are willing to show some compassion for women who are raped. thanks for making some sense

Chris Reiff

Sep 16th 2009, 18:23

@ M. Xuereb.

Maybe because fewer girls wanted to be there?

Charles J. Buttigieg

Sep 16th 2009, 18:19

The general view of the Roman Catholic religion is that any sexual act that involves destruction of seed, that is, ejaculation outside the vagina or neutralising the sperm inside the vagina is sinful and therefore not permissible. Even if and when the medical profession decides that it takes a few days after intercourse before the embryo implants itself in the womb, and the morning-after pill becomes considered as a mere contraceptive, the church would still consider it as sinful.

The question is, to legalise the morning-after pill, would our legislators be guided by medical science or by the teaching of the church?

My personal opinion is that in the event that medical science proves that the actual conception doesn’t start within 24 hours then the pill should be legalised but until that proof is available the morning-after pill would be considered as administrating an abortion and I insist against any form of abortion.

Martin Bonnici

Sep 16th 2009, 18:14

To Sandro Aguis & Co.

The morning pill is a pill that is taken the morning after intercourse, at which stage there is no baby, nor any human being present within the womb of the patient.

A woman's body is her own temple and no mythological being, man or other woman should tell her what she can and cannot do with it. Let women free to choose.

The morning after pill should be legalised and freely available to avoid any more single mothers.

S Farrugia

Sep 16th 2009, 18:12

Why all the moral high ground? Can someone explain to me what REALLY can be defined as immoral – bring an unwanted child into this world and abandoning him/her OR taking the morning after pill with the consequence of preventing NOT terminating a pregnancy. This is absurd that it is even being discussed or debated; every person has the fundamental right to choose.

Michael Seychell

Sep 16th 2009, 18:12

I was one of not more than ten persons in the strangers gallery to hear our youths discuss in a mature manner which should make some of our MPs blush.

Some commentators condemned these youths without having heard all their arguments and statements. Before voting for the motion on the morning-after pill, one of the youths explained that there was a research which states that if the morning-after pill is taken in the shortest possible time - before 24 hours - and under medical advice, conceivement- implantation - would not have taken place, and therefore there would be no abortion involved.

Unfortunatley I do not have the details of this research, but I hope the organisers will expand on this issue.

Michael Seychell
Tal-Pieta

T.gauci

Sep 16th 2009, 18:06

@R Briffa

Your religious belief is not relevant in the science world(the real world)

Manuel Mangani

Sep 16th 2009, 18:03

@ Martin Saliba
"....... and then maybe the maltese will be true Europeans and left alone to get on with their lives as they see fit ."

presumably by not allowing the more vulnerable human lives get along with theirs.....

Mark Grima

Sep 16th 2009, 18:02

Three cheers for the Youth Parliament! A glimmer of hope for an ethical, secular future for Malta.

C.Catania

Sep 16th 2009, 17:53

I was part of the youth parlament today.
The resolution on the morning after pill actually arised after I myself shared the opinion which became the basis of the proposition.
May I clarify that no baby exist in a nigthtime and we're just offering a prevention of pregnancy as one of the physical care given to the mother. If the woman refuses the morning after pill full support is to be given even if the woman becomes pregnant.
We're simply avoiding illegal abortions currently happening.

C Attard

Sep 16th 2009, 17:15

@Sandro Agius:
Your spelling, grammar and syntax (not to mention use of punctuation or lack thereof) are atrocious. Thank God it's back to school season! :-p

P AGIUS

Sep 16th 2009, 17:13

@adrian cardona

well said

@ Doctor Francis Saliba

The world is changing and we have to update ourselves even in these matters......the younger generation has a brain too.

David Wain

Sep 16th 2009, 17:13

This article demonstrates further the madness of GOL's proposal of having anti-abortion laws entrenched in our constitution.

Martin Saliba tells us that "God willing those fundamentalists will be dead by the time some of these young people are in parliament....." The problem is that if GOL's proposal is goes through, these fundamentalists he speaks about will shckle us and keep making decisions for us from beyond the grave.

Carmen Zammit

Sep 16th 2009, 17:11

Wheter conceived through rape, willingly or through IVF a human embryo still has the full potential of becoming a human being. What right do we have to kill another human person? Besides, do we know what that human person might one day achieve?
Victims of rape should be supported and given all possible help. However, killing an unborn child is not the solution but it is simply creating more psychological and probably even physical suffering to the suffering the victim has already gone through.

Lawrence Bonello

Sep 16th 2009, 17:11

As if its the baby's fault that his mother was raped!!
I thought they had come up with solutions to the 'couple of problems' that are afflicting these islands.
Oh and by the way, did you notice how articulate these youths sounded?
Almost as bright as some of our real MP's.

s. falzon

Sep 16th 2009, 17:07

How sad that lots of money is being spent on research to find microscopic LIFE somewhere out in space and to preserve it.

But the embryo in the womb is not considered as LIFE and so is not important.

How very very sad.

Adrian Cardona

Sep 16th 2009, 17:04

@Dr Francis Saliba
oh, and for the record, i do agree 100% with euthanasia when the sick and dying person himself wants it. Never imposed, but out of one's own free will, yes, i agree. There's nothing more depressing than not being allowed to choose a dignified way to die, and instead just being left there wallowing in their own suffering and pain just for religion's sake.

K. Pullicino

Sep 16th 2009, 17:03

Disagreeing with euthanasia but at the same time agreeing with the right to kill an unborn human being is one big fat illogical contradiction.

Adrian Cardona

Sep 16th 2009, 17:01

@Dr Francis Saliba
if you still believe in hell etc etc, i rest my case....

M. Xuereb

Sep 16th 2009, 16:51

From the video it seems that even at the youth parliament the gender balance is skewed. How come?

R Briffa

Sep 16th 2009, 16:51

be it a rape or not the baby should not suffer.....if the mother does not want the baby..she can bring him/her to the world and offer for adoption or something else..but who has the right to kill the baby? even before implantation...the life of a human being has begun from the moment of conception....and no one in the world has the right to terminate a pregnancy...whatever the circumstances...

martin saliba

Sep 16th 2009, 16:50

@ A Cardona.
God willing those fundumentalists will be dead by the time some of these young people are in parlament and then maybe the maltese will be true Europeans and left alone to get on with their lives as they see fit .

Sandro Agius

Sep 16th 2009, 16:50

This is just pity....what values are these "youths" presenting....morning after pill is something to be disgusted to hear from these persons which must make them to be ashamed of themselves...is not a child born from a rape also a person who has the right to live?....does two wrongs makes one right I ask....and what fault does this poor child have if there was a rape. This is a dangerous proposal which opens the door for abortions...Life must always be protected.

This is the thank you that they give to there mothers?

Albert Buttigieg

Sep 16th 2009, 16:48

In my opinion other interesting topics that this Youth Parliament can tackle in the near future are: what type of contribution are youths willing to give to make this world a better place to live, family, stress, politics as means of service, education, culture, art, sports etc.

Arnold Galea

Sep 16th 2009, 16:47

In these last decades like it or not many in our society are sexually active. In these circumstances it's better that measures such as the day after pill and the use of condoms is encouraged complimenting sex education would be more beneficial and would probably lead to less abortions at the same time.

Unfortunately those who have the power on this rock are so narrow minded so hypocrites and "Conservatives" that instead of dealing with these challenges with an open mind and without religious prejudice they deal with these problems with a fundamental perspective and this applies to all politicians from both sides.

Personally, I do not think that abortion is good or that is progressive, however, I would rather see our policy makers study the reasons behind abortions etc.....

Who said that there are no Fundamentalists in Malta?

A.Curmi

Sep 16th 2009, 16:30

Can we have these people make decisions for our country??? They seem to make decisions based on studies and not old mentalities like the rest of the politicians in our country!!!

Well done youths!!

Ian C Ellul

Sep 16th 2009, 16:30

I am not a fundamentalist but it is indeed sad for me to read this article. it is also quite ironic that the same youths are against euthanasia. It is easy to take decisions on behalf of vulnerable people or 'potential human beings' , for all that matters ... But after all, who am I to judge?

Edward Fenech

Sep 16th 2009, 16:27

So it will take at least another 2 generations for this country to grow up!

Dr Francis Saliba

Sep 16th 2009, 16:24

@AdrianCardona
Have no fear - no one can condemn you to hell. You can condemn yourself and God may condemn you but no creepy crawlie out of the woodwork can do it. Thank you for not condemning the elderly and the inform to a premature death through euthanasia. Ever so kind of you!

Adrian Cardona

Sep 16th 2009, 16:09

how nice to see some common sense in young people. Now just sit back and watch the fundamentalists crawl out of the woodwork once again to condemn us all to hell....