Sent
to The Star, Johannesburg, Sun 09/03/2014 20:55. Not published.
Sir
John Rowland (The
Star, Thursday March 6 2014) in “Punish the guilty, save the innocent”, says
that everything he wrote “has a Christian base”.
A difficulty with
Christianity is that there are (per Wikipedia) around 3000 different
sects. Across the spectrum, there are radically divergent views.
Many sects regard the others as hell-bound non-Christians. “Christians”
can be as diverse as Catholics and the ZCC. All claim to be following
“God’s Word”.
What sort of god is
unable to express himself clearly enough to avoid being misunderstood in 2999
different ways?
As Ricky Gervais
says, “It’s almost as if The Bible was written by racist, sexist, homophobic,
violent, sexually frustrated men, instead of a loving God. Weird”.
If there were any
truth in religion, over time it would converge to a consensus. This
happens in science. Instead, religion produces ever more schisms.
This is ample proof that religion has no basis in fact.
Hence, Mr Rowland’s
“Christian base” is built on sand.
“By their fruits ye
shall know them”: Religion –particularly Christianity– has produced
sumptuous churches, rich preachers, poor masses, ignorance, fear, disagreement,
hatred, inquisition, persecution, pogroms, wars, and misery. It has
suppressed freedom, progress, science, and human rights.
Given its history,
it should be clear that religion has no moral authority. Rather, faith
marks a person as one that believes things that aren’t true. A religion
is a badge of the irrational, something of which to be deeply ashamed.
Religion is an
unreliable guide. Let us look instead to facts, to science.
Mr Rowland argues
against abortion with the usual dishonest emotive argument that a “baby” is
aborted. This is hardly true.
The fertilized egg
is known as a zygote. It develops rapidly into a mass of cells called a
blastocyst. This becomes an embryo, which looks like a fish. From
around 10 weeks, it begins to have some human characteristics and is known
until birth as a foetus.
A first trimester
embryo or foetus is not a viable human being. The nail clippings Mr
Rowland so callously discards are just as much human tissue, just as capable of
independent life. Should nail parings be given human rights?
Later in pregnancy,
things become more complicated, and our treatment should be more sensitive and
circumspect.
Of course, the
unspoken reason that Mr Rowland opposes all abortion is the concept of a
“soul”. His particular branch of his particular religion probably holds
the belief (not necessarily shared by other sects or religions) that the “soul”
enters the body at conception. This gives a zygote, in his eyes, the same
rights as a fully-grown woman.
Science has found
no evidence of the existence of a “soul”, just as it has found no evidence for
any gods. This may distress those who are suffering under the yoke of
religion in the hope of a glorious Hereafter, but it is so. There is no
afterlife, no Heaven to come. It is up to us to make this Earth our
Heaven during the brief time that we have here.
I agree with
Rowland that “women who find themselves pregnant in distressing circumstances
must be helped with all the compassion that society can provide”. That
compassion should include every woman’s right to cheap, safe, legal, early
abortion. Having an abortion is no easy decision. It should not be
further complicated by a patriarchal religion that still regards women as
property useful only for producing male heirs.
