# Not all Christians oppose abortion
Graham McINTOSH’S emotional attack on Charles Villa- Vicencio (M&G July 28 to August 3) shows he has not researched his topic sufficiently. As he becomes more aware of the developing ecumenical consensus worldwide on ethical questions that challenge the traditional teaching of the church on abortion, he may regret his emphatic statement, “Christians must oppose abortion”.
In a publication by the Religious Coalition for Abortion Rights, Washington DC, entitled We Affirm, statements are recorded by some 35 Protestant, Jewish and other denominations in support of the right of women to choose abortion as one among a whole range of options, including childbirth and adoption.
At the recent UN Cairo Conference on population, Wilfried Steen of the Evangelical Church in Germany stated that the WCC churches did not accept abortion as a family planning method, but a growing number of churches recognised “that the unjust treatment and systematic exploitation of women make legal recourse to safe, voluntary abortion a moral necessity”.
Perhaps we need a little of the humility of which the Reverend Wesley Mabuza spoke so movingly on the recent Constitutional Talk TV programme. He said: “We must not play God as if we understand the total circumstances of the person (choosing abortion) … It is absolutely necessary that we stop being emotional about this, that we understand … as men … that we do not have the slightest inkling of what women go through, either when they are giving birth or when they are undergoing abortion … and that is why this matter does not require us to be judgmental … when people are actually trying to give people rights, it is not just a question of a democratic right, it is a survival right for many people.” — Dot Cleminshaw, Newlands
* GRAHAM McIntosh is entitled to his opinions on abortion, but his totalitarian view of the Christian religion is disgraceful. He says that “one’s faith demands that there are non-negotiable issues” and that abortion is one of these. In other words he is saying that anyone who disagrees with Graham McIntosh on abortion is not a Christian.
McIntosh makes a ridiculous to-do over the God-given right to life, but is convinced that God makes an exception for capital punishment. His claim that most backstreet abortions are performed in hospitals by trained personnel shows appalling ignorance of how most South Africans really live.
Still, it is his religious intolerance which is most destructive. He refers to “Christians” and “Christian responsibility” as if all Christians were effectively identical (except for people like Villa-Vicencio who must be stripped of the title of Christian). This would come as a surprise to Ulsterites, or even the South African Reformed Churches. The “crisp and clear truths of our faith” exist only in the mind of McIntosh and the minority of South African Christians who belong to his church.
We have escaped from a tyranny which was heavily justified by an appeal to “Christian values”. When Verwoerd or Botha talked of “Christianity”, they meant the values which they and their racist followers supported. Now we face an equally bigoted political assault from religious reactionaries claiming that Jesus supports the death penalty, the thrashing of children, and forcing unwanted babies on impoverished mothers. — Matthew Blatchford, English Department, University of Zululand
# Wilhelm could yet become a transplant fan
GOD forbid that a heart recipient, Class of ’93, should ever wish cardiac transplantation on anyone, but after reading Janet Wilhelm’s unkind column, Man Friday (M&G July 21 to 27), I really would love to be there if ever she, choking, swollen, sweating and terrified, had to hear a cardiologist offer transplantation to save her
It’s an odds-on bet that she would have a Damascus-road experience, changing instantly from acerbic pontificator to ardent fan of cardiac grafting.
It is amazing how many writers still regard organ transplantation as white man’s magic for a rich, elitist bunch of fat cats, with transplant surgeons playing God and all concerned stealing money that should be buying medicines for the poor millions.
South Africa’s only established transplantation centre with a track record to speak of — the University of Cape Town heart unit at Groote Schuur Hospital — has a 27-year history of being non-racial. Chris Barnard insisted on it. The current team was dubbed “The Rainbow Team” by Pace magazine earlier in the year and praised for its “labours of love”.
>From pre-teen youngsters to retired men in their 70s, 137 southern Africans have had their lives extended and enhanced. We are not disabled, crippled, or unwell — we are active, productive and fun-loving members of society who accepted what is now a recognised final option for terminal cardiac patients.
Tell the kids of post-transplant mothers that the plug should have been pulled on mommy. Tell anyone down here that the most famous heart unit in the world should go down the tubes and you’d have the mother of all fights on your hands.
Why this continued simplistic argument of a rich-vs- poor choice? Why not rather focus all our brain power on solving the dilemma of high-tech medicine in a land where the public health care system has suffered 350 years of colonialism and apartheid? Surely the land that spent millions on the Rugby World Cup, spends millions on the world’s diplomatic cocktail circuit and is the power house of Africa — if not the southern hemisphere — ought to offer the best of both medical worlds to as many as possible. Private funding; a state lottery; a small levy on every citizen and resident towards the health budget; supra-regional funding — there are many options. — Harry Weir, Fish Hoek
# Listen to the African night
PROFESSOR Robert E Dowse’s dismissal of Professor MW Makgoba’s views on the university in Africa as “hot air escaping” (M&G June 9 to 14) is rather unbecoming of a scholar. He questions Professor Makgoba for not providing enough detail, but his own contribution dwells on the irrelevant and fails to contribute to the fundamental question addressed by Makgoba — the role of the university in the new Africa. I advise Professor Dowse to listen carefully to Africans. Then he might grasp the African nettle. The African night does not yield its secrets to those who do not stand still long enough to listen.
We know that the role of the university in Europe, the US, Japan, Russia, China, etc, has changed since World War II in order for it to meet the needs of those societies. If this change did not take place, it would have become irrelevant. So what is Professor Dowse’s real problem? Is his concern the preservation of the status quo?
Professor Dowse’s real problem is that he comes out of the school of academic apologists who seek to maintain an education system designed to meet the needs of other societies. It perpetuates and continues to justify distortions and half-truths in the name of value-free and objective science.
Research in archaeology and anthropology puts into question the orthodox view about the origins of science, agriculture, astronomy, oceanography, etc. This evidence has not seen the light of day, because it is inconsistent with the conventional facts about the role and place of Africa in the scheme of the Western historiography.
Western universities and institutions have, for example, deliberately failed to integrate information on the presence of Africans in America well before Columbus set foot on Cuba.
The trauma which Africa has experienced in the last 400 years of slave trade and economic, political and social exploitation has left an indelible mark on the African person. Only Africans themselves can free themselves from the effects of this. We need the university in Africa to do this. — Kaluba J Ngwisha, Professor of Sociology and Dean, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Swaziland
# Don’t keep Indonesia on hold
YOU report that Indonesia is a country put “on hold” as far as South African arms sales are concerned because it has armed internal resistance campaigns. This is welcome news.
People in a number of so-called “Outer Islands” of Indonesia have long been fighting domination from the island of Java. Contested territories include Aceh in North Sumatra and West Papua (Irian Jaya) on the island of Papua New Guinea. The Indonesian military is also engaged in the suppression of the democratic and worker rights of all Indonesians.
But Indonesia is also in occupation — a most brutal military occupation — of another country, East Timor. This occupation has been declared illegal by the United Nations through numerous resolutions, including two by the Security Council.
These should be reasons enough for the government of South Africa to move Indonesia off “hold” and squarely into the category of “no arms sales”.
South Africans should know that if military equipment is sold to Indonesia, it will not be used against external aggressors but against the people of Indonesia and East Timor. — Celia Mather, S A Representative, TAPOL (Indonesia Human Rights Campaign), Salt River
# Briefly
IT is somewhat surprising that Ivor Powell (“All fired up without the funds”, M&G August 4 to 10) falls into the old South African trap of confusing difference and debate with animosity. Contrary to his perception, the relationship between Actag (including its chairperson, Andries Oliphant) and the Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology is a healthy and productive one. I want to clarify two aspects of this relationship.
* Actag was established by the minister as an independent group. Its report is valuable to us precisely because it reflects the aspirations of the arts and culture community — not government’s. The accurate representation of the views of artists and cultural workers is a vital input to our white paper.
* The department is committed to the principle of arm’s-length funding for the arts. Independent arts bodies are a feature of most democratic societies. To counterpoint Actag and the department on this issue is inaccurate. What remains to be debated is not the principle of arm’s-length, but rather its interpretation — precise nature and extent of autonomy, and the respective roles of the government and the arts councils. — Roger Jardine, Director- General, Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology, Pretoria
IS the process of establishing the truth and achieving reconciliation served by Paul Erasmus’ gratuitous descriptions of past “dirty tricks” and atrocities so blithely published in the Mail & Guardian?
There is no suggestion of contriteness on his part as he catalogues his evil deeds in the service of the apartheid regime; his attitude verges on gloating at the successes achieved by vicious and underhand means.
I find it troubling that a criminal such as this should be afforded regular space in your pages to trumpet his self-styled confessions, while his victims still suffer the effects of his crimes.
He attains a degree of credibility and glamour that makes a mockery of the vital process of truth and reconciliation that our nation is now engaging in. — Chip Snaddon, Woodstock