The Sunday Mail
Life Issues with FGK
Great teachers across all popular religions and all passionate scientists who have unravelled to us some of the most amazing mysteries about human behaviour, have been trying tirelessly during their lifetime to establish within the human nature what exactly can be done in order to create a reverent heart within a human soul.
Issues of morals and values form the pith of the difference between humanity and wildlife. The very existence of moral behaviour raises the enormous question of why people ever try to pursue the good in the first place. Lying, killing, taking what is not yours, raping another person, fighting a fellow human being to hurt them, scolding your neighbour and taking another person’s wife and all other sinister attributes that advance personal interests are all aberrant behaviours.
On the other hand, giving to others, caring, resisting temptation, sacrifice, commitment to good are values which brings one a reputable name. This concept of what is good to individuals and society saw the birth of this special branch of principles called ethics.
Ethics are rooted in the ancient Greek philosophical inquiry of moral life. It refers to a system of principles which can critically change previous considerations about choices and actions. Ethics seek to establish what is good for individuals and society. It is also described as moral philosophy because it has been derived from morals agreed within religions, philosophies and cultures.
Much concern and debate dwells on topics like abortion, euthanasia, human rights and professional conduct, war, animal rights, capital punishment, et cetera.
One of the most popular argument in the world is that of administering life-limiting measures to a sick patient or person who is deemed to be beyond the healing phase.
This is euthanasia – termination of a very sick person’s life in order to relieve them of their suffering. A person who undergoes euthanasia usually has an incurable condition.
It is popular opinion that life is to be respected and no fellow human being can decide the fate of another – whether the person is abnormal mentally or physically. No one person should decide when another’s life should end because the belief is that God has the final carte-blanche` on who lives and who dies.
But in developed parts of the world, opinions challenging this school of thought have emerged suggesting the contrary. They say there are moments when physical harm and discomfort from pain can torment a person who is at a point of no return to normalcy.
Therefore, they talk of mercy-killing or euthanasia as a way of redeeming the patient from pain by offering an involuntary send-off to heaven. Should this act be justified or not? In some countries, medical personnel are allowed by law to end a person’s life through painless means, as long as the patient and their family agree.
But who knows the thoughts within the consciousness of such a soul? As long as we see life in a person, regardless of the suffering they are going through, it is the conviction of the writer that God has not decided yet to end the person’s life so why should another creature decide on the fate in such sacrosanct matters where divinity should exercise authority over humanity by virtue of being the giver of life?
History has also recorded events of capital punishment – from crucifixion to stoning. Jesus Christ, being one popular example, was crucified during the governorship of Pontius Pilate who ruled the Roman province of Judea under the emperor Tiberius between AD 26–36.
Years after the capital punishment on Jesus Christ, Stephen the saint was also killed. He was condemned for committing blasphemy against the Jewish Temple, and was stoned to death as his punishment.
Until now, methods of capital punishment have been invented, they have evolved, improved, gotten more lethal and smarter.
Somewhere under the sun, today, it is their last day. They are being executed or hanged, or some lethal poison that kills within seconds is being injected into their veins for allegedly committing a crime. In this present day and age, should we continue ending one’s right to life for their crimes?
Those who have committed murder, rape and mass killings might deserve that but what about those who are wrongly accused? We have developed our justice systems to be effective in punishment but have we developed them to be precise in proving guilt?
Is capital punishment justified then when we have a system that can make errors in condemning the righteous?
Some who are in support of capital punishment believe it deters crimes and, more often than not, believe that certain crimes eliminate one’s right to life. But can we not develop a system of expression or communication of fundamental values or norms to the offenders behind bars for purposes of educating or reforming them and even convicting them to the faith of God?
Other issues include abortion of a foetus with a disability.
When we look at this from the point of view where we already have other disabled people who are amongst us, doesn’t it seem to be an unjust treatment or stigmatisation against the disabled community?
Are we not then denying disabled persons the right to live by attempting to eliminate all disabled genes from the human race?
We are not denying the fact that deciding to have a baby with Down Syndrome is not an easy choice to make. Is having a baby with disability a noble thing to do or mothers should find peace in the selfishness of aborting the baby?
This is a continual debate that rages on and on.
Raising a child with a severe disability can be exhausting and difficult, but they too are a living soul. We have had children who are disabled but extremely intelligent, some excel in gymnastics and various sports and some have been renowned motivational speakers. These are champions who could have been aborted but they have proven the world wrong by doing far much better in life.
The question will forever remain – should abortion of a disabled foetus be justified? Others say women who choose to end pregnancies because of potential disability can be acting out of compassion, knowing that they do not have the ability to care for a child with special needs.
What say you?
It is probably best to make decisions and choices out of intuition than conscious reasoning by battling facts and the status quo.
Intuition is that magical feeling or hunch which usually comes from the subconscious mind or shall we say it is an inspiration from God into your soul on what one should do.
Ethics, as principles, are good but facts surrounding them can compromise their integrity. Isn’t it always best to rely on the inner voice that comes from one’s spirit which is usually God-inspired?
For it is only this part that makes us different from animals.
We have the ability to discern right from wrong, good or bad, holy or evil – that is why when one gets to a dangerous place, say a graveyard, their hair can respond as if there is an electric flow.
This is all proof that we have God watching over us and our decisions matter to Him. Life is given by Him and therefore, our actions towards other lives should be more beneficial to one another.
We need much more than ethics and morals to act right and do good in life. More on this topic will be discussed in the coming chapters!
Facebook: Life Issues With FGK; Instagram: Life Issues With FGK; website: www.fgklifeissues.co.zw.