Ethical and moral choices need to be considered to fight teen pregnancy
YOUR leading article (“Teen Sex - ticking Bomb”, May 5) is unfortunately very accurate. I was I was prompted to write this after I discovered a dead new-born infant discarded in a shopping bag close to the Harbour entrance. This issue is far more threatening to our society than people wish to acknowledge and has become a tragedy of epidemic proportions.
It is high time we admit the ongoing campaigns by government and other institutions, to bring this under control, have failed dismally. The figures produced out of your survey prove it.
Huge amounts of money are continually being spent on advertising, campaigning for the use of condoms or having one partner. This is clearly not working, specifically among teenagers. Never is there a mention of a behavioural or moral check.
Morals are not merely a religious concept. Many atheists and non-believers alike live with deep self-respect and high principles and treat others accordingly.
As a society, we prefer to promote the use of condoms, thereby strengthening the belief our children do not possess the moral fibre needed for self-discipline and control and are incapable of decent behaviour.
We rather advocate a strip of latex as an alternative. Therein lies the real tragedy. What message are you sending to your children?
When is this generation going to hear you cannot place a condom over your conscience, or the consequences of your actions?
How many teens will never realise their full potential because of an unwanted pregnancy? I am yet to read, or see, an advert on moral values as opposed to condoms.
We are a nation about to inherit a grim future. If this is the same generation that will some day hold the reins in government or industry, we are in serious trouble without the basics of decency and respect. — Harry Coates, East London IT JUST goes to show there are so many people out there who are either corrupt or support corruption and theft.
This group who call themselves the Friends of Zukisa Faku: do they realise if she was not caught out for using municipal credit she would have shut up and no one would have known what she stole from us, the taxpayers? So why then must she get away with it? It is theft and she must walk the walk.
If she does not have to answer for her wrongdoing, she will at some point do it again. So no matter who you are or what your position is in government or any political party, if you are corrupt or a thief, walk the walk. — Brian, via e-mail THE ongoing spat about the grading of Buffalo City Metropolitan Municipality councillors has once again exposed the under-belly of ANC corruption. It is clear the main driving force has been an upgrading of our local councillors’ salaries to get more money for themselves and not trying to get more money for service delivery.
BCMM should remain part of Amathole district council where it can better integrate with the development of that region. It is indeed nonsense for BCMM to pay its councillors the rate of the big metros.
That will do nothing to improve service delivery. In fact, it is more democratic for councillors to be paid on the level of the average pay of the council employees! —
Costa Gazi, e-mail I WAS somewhat stunned to read more money was to be poured into the failed tea estates in the former Transkei. I visited, and was instrumental, in supplying equipment to tea and sugar estates that had failed due to gross mismanagement under earlier governments in Mozambique, Uganda and Tanzania. In my humble, though I believe well founded opinion, it is utterly pointless to put more money into this bottomless pit as they will fail in the end and the jobs will be lost anyway. There are only three options:
Sell these estates to qualified and experienced private enterprise, as was done successfully in Tanzania with the sugar estates.
Retain ownership, clean out all current management and replace with overseas management, who have the right proven skills to run a tea estate
Cut losses and close them down. There is nothing more to say. — Deryck Eddy, via e-mail AS A so-called “coloured South African”, who fought apartheid, I was nauseated by FW de Klerk’s justification of apartheid during the Christiane Amanpour interview on CNN.
Amanpour asked him at least twice: would he be willing now to apologise for apartheid? He obfuscated and did not directly apologise, but stated he apologised for apartheid during the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and he takes no responsibility for the lives that were ruined and lost because of apartheid.
For De Klerk to object to the link to nazism is his attempt to rewrite history: the father and architect of apartheid, Hendrick Verwoerd, was a convicted Nazi sympathiser, who got inspiration for apartheid from nazism where the cornerstone was racial superiority. Verwoerd and most Afrikaner nationalists at the time of World War 2 sympathised with Nazi Germany.
Nelson Mandela encouraged the Nobel Peace Prize to be given to De Klerk for the sake of reconciliation. As disadvantaged South Africans we accepted this because we saw it as a small sacrifice towards a bloodless transformation to democracy, and I feel too much credit is given to De Klerk in this regard.
The fact of the matter is we inherited a country on the brink of social and economic collapse. The reason for the 1994 “miracle” was because of how close we came to an all out civil war. If not for Mandela’s appeal for forgiveness, a war would have cost many lives. The truth is De Klerk and his fellow Nats had their backs against the wall, and for survival had to negotiate. — N Kleinsmidt, Cape Town