Recently, a tweet caught my eye.

Posted by @mmaryannwright - it was a link to a story about two couples who were suing a hospital for failing to detect that their children were carrying the condition Trisomy 21

The allegation is that ante-natal testing was negligent and failed to detect the presence of the condition.

The parents claim that had they been made aware of the presence of the condition that they would have terminated their respective pregnancies.

The couples are suing for the depression, shock and anxiety that they have suffered as a result of having believed that they were to have a healthy child, free from defect; only to discover that they in fact were presented with a child with a chromosomal disorder.

They are also seeking compensation for the continuing costs of raising a child with such a disorder.

One of the children also suffers heart, kidney and thyroid problems and can’t walk.

The tweet that accompanied the link was:

These kind of people make me sick

That is her opinion, that is fine. I don’t know her personal circumstance, whether or not she has raised a disabled child or has a disabled sibling and as such, it would be wrong of me to form an opinion about her as a result of her tweet.

What struck me though was that in saying what she did – that they made her “sick”, she appeared to show absolutely no empathy for what the couples in question experienced.

To declare my hand (I am not going to say “pro choice” – such a misnomer) – I believe that people have the right to make an informed choice about matters which have the potential to impact their lives, adversely or otherwise.

I replied and the conversation want this way:

What I took issue with was the arrogance implicit in what this person was saying.

“These kind of people” make her “sick”.

No explanation as to why, just a judgement, no explanation as to whether or not she had walked a kilometre in their shoes, just a scathing character assessment that throughout the fragmented Twitter conversation, appeared to show a complete inability of this individual to empathise with four distressed human beings.

In her final comment to me; she said “I hope for your sake you’re trolling.”

The supreme arrogance of such a statement, along with this persons willingness to condemn people for being so terrible as to be desirous of having a choice; tells me a lot about her character, values and morals.

I will leave you to make your own assessment of this person – without knowing her personal circumstances, it would be wrong of me to perform an analysis of her character.

What I will say however is that nobody has the right to judge a fellow human being without knowing what that person has experienced, what their personal circumstances are.

Unfortunately a driving force behind the judgement of the actions of others is religion.

To suggest that abortion is wrong, that same sex relationships are abhorrent, that an unmarried woman is unfit to be the leader of a nation, that women are inferior to men – these are the constructs of religion.

Interestingly, and I am not suggesting that the person who tweeted the original tweet is religious, not for one moment – but the religious who condemn things such as abortion, homosexuality and the like forget that in their sacred text, it says:

Leviticus 21:

16 Then the Lord said to Moses,
17 “Give the following instructions to Aaron: In all future generations, none of your descendants who has any defect will qualify to offer food to his God.
18 No one who has a defect qualifies, whether he is blind, lame, disfigured, deformed,
19 or has a broken foot or arm,
20 or is hunchbacked or dwarfed, or has a defective eye, or skin sores or scabs, or damaged testicles.
21 No descendant of Aaron who has a defect may approach the altar to present special gifts to the Lord. Since he has a defect, he may not approach the altar to offer food to his God.
22 However, he may eat from the food offered to God, including the holy offerings and the most holy offerings.
23 Yet because of his physical defect, he may not enter the room behind the inner curtain or approach the altar, for this would defile my holy places. I am the Lord who makes them holy.”

For mine, this is the “sacred book” of the Christians vigorously promoting abortion.

Of course they had to get the “testicles” in there didn’t they? Jesus Christ – why are they all so obsessed with sex?!

As such, no true Christian can condemn abortion for “theraputic” reasons if they wish to claim that they honour the word of their god.

UPDATE

After I posted this, the tweets from the individual in question were (read from bottom up) somewhat amusing. I didn’t bite back and was quite nice to her, providing my email address should she wish to discuss the matter and offering her an unfettered, unedited right of reply on this page.

To date, she hasn’t accepted.

Defamation?

The OED definition is as follows:

n:

1. the quality of beng honest

honest:

adj:

1. free of deceit; truthful and sincere.
2. fairly earned: an honest living.
3. simple and unpretentious.

Put simply, if one is to be honest, one does not lie nor engage in behaviour of a deceptive, duplicitious or misrepresentative nature.

When looked at from a more than one dimensional perspective however, particularly if the glasses shrouding the eyes viewing the concept are tainted with a hidden agenda, the concept of honesty can become somewhat more complex.

It need not be.

I believe that people are either inherently honest or inherently duplicitous. Those who make up the latter group (who, strangely enough, often tend to be successfully employed in roles encompassing areas such as advertising, marketing, politics and the like) often tend to attempt to justify their deceit when caught out, with patronising idioms and condescending clichés.

It could be argued that their justification of their deceit is in itself, a continuance of a treacherous pattern of behaviour that has become so much of a second nature to them, that in attempting to express honesty, they further the dishonesty.

A politician who “made an honest mistake”, a lover who “thought that it would hurt you if I told you”, a colleague who “unintentionally misrepresented the facts” are all still continuing to engage in behaviour that has become, it would seem; ingrained.

In failing to take responsibility for their actions, to admit that they were dishonest, they are merely prolonging the deception.

The use of such terminology, when brought to account; is indicative of a complete failure to understand the basic concept of honesty.

To understand is to simply say “I am sorry, I lied”.

What is more difficult:

• to be honest, regardless of the cost
• to continue the charade, despite everyone listening knowing that it is self serving justification
• to fall on ones sword when discovered and endure the shame of the admission of duplicity

Despite what one may think, I would submit that the first option is the easiest, and by far the most rewarding;  even if it may fill one with apprehension and trepidation.

It is also the only option that affords all parties in any given situation, the respect that any decent human being would afford not only another; but also themselves.

Sadly, those who engage in deceitful behaviour have often done so for so long, not only toward others, but to themselves as well; that it has become second nature to them.

Whilst lying, misrepresentation, deception, clouding the truth; call it what you will, may initially seem to be the easy option… in the long run, it merely leads to a chain of misery; each link rustier than the one proceeding it.

Openness and honesty, particularly where matters of great importance are at stake, may seem daunting; however, whatever the outcome as a result of complete transparency; one will have maintained self respect and possibly even gain that of another.

There is, in our day to day relationships with our fellow human beings; colleagues, friends, lovers, family members; never a reason to be dishonest.

There is always a cost associated with honesty, though the interest rates applied to dishonesty can be merciless.

An investment in honesty will always return far much more than the short term “gains” one may believe one received when taking out a loan on deceit.