The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

WHITBY FREE PRESS, WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 19, 1984, PAGE 5 "I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson ~2a1r¶L~ .1J.Ii A Ak àA AA AIA* CROW'S NEST by Michael Knell I have just witnessed themost exciting and exhilarating experience of my life. Last Sunday morning, at 8:22 to be precise, I had the joy and honor to wit- ness the birth of my son - all nine pounds, two ounces of him. Circumstances prevented me from being there when my daughter - now five years old - was born and I promised myself that when my wife bore our second (and probably last) child, I would be there. And I'm glad I did. To see a new life come into this world is a wonderful experience and one I now firmly believe should be shared by both the father and the mother of their child. Aside from the emotional high, it gives one a sense of perspective and adds a dimension to one's growth as a human being. The result of those long months of waiting, ending in those few hours of great pain for the mother is indescribable joy. Seeing my son at the moment of his bir- th has made me a better human being because I know now certain things that I only suspected to be true a day earlier. I find that I no longer truly understand those people who say they don't want children, who choose instead to concentrate their lives on the advancement of their career. I have suddenly discovered that the best career a man and woman can have is that of being a parent. Granted, the responsibilities are awesome and frightening. One is never sure that your doing the right thing - that your teaching your children the things they need to know to have full and happy lives. Being a parent fills me with grave doubts and fears and I find myself questioning everything I do. But I am now convinced that the true measure of a man, and of a woman, are the children that he or she leaves behind. Martin Luther King, perhaps one of the greatest men of this century once said: "I have a dream that one day my two little children will be judged, not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." While he was speaking at a mid-1960's civil rights rally and addressing the issue of racism in the United States, he also gave us an insight into the roles each of us, with children, play as parents. If we are to be judged as parents, it will be by the content of our children's character. With luck, hard work and love everything that is good about my wife and I will be passed to our children. Everything else that I do in life, even should I win the Pulitzer Prize, will pale against my achievements as a parent. If I am successful as a parent, then I will be a success as a human being. This is the ultimate-responsibility that any human being can accept and more than ever I am convinced that this is a responsibility that must be accepted voluntarily. If anyone decides that for whatever reason he or she does not want children they should never have any. A few weeks ago, I commented on the outcome of the trial of Dr. Henry Morgentaler - Canada's premier abortionist. Now, more than ever, I'm convin- ced that the position I took is the only sane and reasonable one. Perhaps, without knowing it, the good doctor is doing more than he realizes to ensure that the family is stronger than ever. What he is doing is aiding those who don't want a family and, therefore, shouldn't have a family. Hopefully, those that do are stronger, better, more compassionate, more able and more loving parents because they became parents by choice. The entire debate that currently rages in the hallways of our legislatures and at the bars of our courts has, for me, come into perspective. The greatest of all responsibilities is the responsibility one takes for the life of another human being. Babies and children are cute and loveable but above all else they are human beings with needs and wants and rights. Children have a right to live withlove and care. They did not ask to come into this world so the obligation rests with those of us who brought them into the world to ensure that their rights are met and preserved. I will admit that this insight did not come to me in that brief, shining moment when I saw my son come into the world gasping his first breath and crying out for life. These thoughts came in the later hours when I had time to think and reflect on the day's events. Now more than ever I want to ensure that this society reaches its full poten- tial. I wil no longerbe all that willing to endure the mindless meanderings of our education system. I will no longer excercise patience with the bureacrats who have control over our lives. My children will need the best education that they can get. They will need to work when they become ·adults. They will need to live in a world where the threat of war doesn't exist. They will need to live in a country whose natural resources aren't polluted beyond use. They will need to live in a society where freedom is prized above all else. They will need to be unfetered by restrictions against freedom of thought, speech and opinion. I have been a working journalist for five years. During this time I have held these ideals but in the last few hours they have become more personal. They are no longer the ideals of someone with stars in his eyes but have become the goals of a man with a stake in the future. Most of what I have commritted to paper sounds mushy and even trite but reflecting on conversations I have had with friends, who like me are parents,'I arn not ail that sure they are wrong. Being a parent gives one a purpose in life. It gives one a goal, it gives one a sense of being. I know tbat these things can be reached through other means. Every human being bas within himn the potential to find bis own goal in life. But nothing crystalizes these goals into action more than children. Having accepted responsibility for their welfare one must find the means by which to provide for it. And that, I'm convinced, is the ultimate purpose in life - to build a better world for our children to live in. SOL WAY "We wuz robbed!" I think it was fight manager- promoter Mike Jacobs, a man who had scant use for the niceties of grammar and symtax, who said it. He also said: "I shoulda stood in bed." A poet. A philosopher. And a man who really understood the system. ' Jacobs lived in a rough-and-tumble world. A world of winners and losers. Justice and fairness had very little to do with it. "Clout" was everything. The bigger the fist the better your chances. But we are civilized and democratized and humanized. We profess not to believe in the "Jungle of Live", but instead to believe in equity and justice under law. Our justice system is less than perfect. Democracy is less than perfect. "Perfect" systems work better because they put dissenters in jail without too much fuss over due process. Mike Jacobs would have been right at home among the pro-life people shouting "We wuz rob- bed." Having subjected Dr. Henry Morgenthaler to a properly constituted trial by jury (the fourth of them if you include the three in Quebec) which found him innocent of all charges, they then repudiated the verdict. "They wuz robbed!" The idea of a trial is to settle, in a democratic fashion, an issue of wrong-doing. No one canstop any individual from disagreeing with the verdict of a jury and the sentencing by a judge. But it is grossly improper to subject the system to abuse; improper because the system thatappears to have wronged you this time, may shelter and protect you next time. The pro- lifers (and I object to that title - it sounds like they have a monopoly on "life") complained: (a) that the verdict was impossible because the man was a self-confessed abortionist; (b) that by some scien- tific selection system those lawyers were able to pick a jury that would be sympathetic and subvert the rights of the anti-abortionists. As for the "pro-choice" forces, they can gloat over how "justice triumphed" again and that the verdict went in their favor, not because it was ex- posed to the system of due process, but because somehow their cause was more just, more humane, and that after all the jury only did what any right- thinking jury could do. This, in spite of the shameful way the presiding judge loaded the dice against Morgenthaler. I suppose there are people who will say, for exaniple, that John De Lorean should have been jailed for life for his cocaine dealings and that he got off only because he had a high-priced lawyer. The same quality of high priced legal counsel didn't do Ross Thatcher much good. What I see is that we agree with democracy, but as John Schlesingèr (one of John Kennedy's "wise men") said about Lyndon Johnson: "President Johnson believes in free speech. He just doesn't believe anyone should be allowed to use it." There is another apparently undemocratic element in the system of due process. The jury system says that a person shal be tried by a jury of their peers. Meanihg equals. Meaning sharing the same general public standard, same level of in- telligence or education. Fat chance. The jury system does reflect community standar- ds; it does reflect general public attitudes; it can never ever by perfect. When the judge "charges" the jury before they retire, it is to try to make the jury reserve its own private prejudices and deal with the defendant on the basis of the law and the rules of evidence. It doesn't work that way. There have been some terrible juries and sorne grotesque convictions. Think of the jury that hanged the Scottsboro Boys, think of the jury that hanged Riel, think of the Chicago Haymaket Riot Trials. History is filled with injustice done because the jury reflected the general public hysteria and prejudice, rather than the purity of law. I am ashamed that we have a group of people cheering for McMurtry's decision to appeal. They cheer for the wrong reason. Having been "robbed" in the first place, they now cry for "true" justice. The attorney general, to his credit, is not serving those people. He is at least preserving the im- pression that he is serving the systern of justice in asking for a review. The "pro-lifers" want to believe it is a blow for their side. The "pro- choicers" want to believe it is an insidious attempt to persecute Morgenthaler. But that's how real justice works. Imperfect it may be, but it is the only system I would trust to judge me, or to protect me. Those who abuse it would overthrow it. And then what? w mp une" f ZUPU w