27 July 2011
Sunway’s A-Level Class 2010 race to the finish line
“Go confidently now in the direction of your dreams. Live the life you have imagined,” said Henry David Thoreau, a famous American Essayist, Poet and Philosopher. Sunway College’s A-Level 2010 students who recently completed the final hurdles will be headed towards the direction of their dreams as they emerged achievers at the A-Level Achievement and Awards Ceremony (Triple A Night) held recently.
The 257 January, March and July 2010 Intake students persevered and overcame the challenges of this premier pre- university programme as proud parents and teachers witnessed their graduation during the Triple A Awards Night.
The 257 January, March and July 2010 Intake students persevered and overcame the challenges of this premier pre- university programme as proud parents and teachers witnessed their graduation during the Triple A Awards Night.
21 July 2011
Launch of Deloitte Tax Challenge 2011
The fourth edition of the Deloitte Tax Challenge was launched in Sunway University recently. Jointly officiated by Mr Teo Ee Sing, Executive Director of Sunway TES, the financial courses arm of Sunway and Mr. Yee Wing Peng, the Managing Director of Deloitte KassimChan Tax Services Sdn. Bhd, the Deloitte Tax Challenge is the only event of its kind in Malaysia which promotes the Tax profession as a career to undergraduates of all universities here.
 | |
| Mr Teo Ee Sing, Mr Yee Wee Peng (centre) and Nizar Najib pressing the green button to mark the launch of the Deloitte Tax Challenge 2011. |
Sunway’s 6th FIA batch of budding success ready to venture the world
Sunway College’s home-grown pre-university programme, the Foundation in Arts (FIA) recently produced their 6th batch of graduates with 98 graduating students. The students who had demonstrated dedication, determination and enthusiasm throughout their course of studying the FIA programme saw their proud parents and teachers witness them making a momentous step in their graduation ceremony. Also present were Mr Lee Weng Keng, CEO Education and Health Care, Sunway Group; Professor David Ngo Chek Ling, Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Sunway University; Elizabeth Lee, Executive Director, Sunway Education Group and Dr Katijah Khalid, Chief Executive, Sunway College.
The students did not only receive a certificate of completion but 53 students were awarded the Tan Sri Dato Seri (Dr) Jeffrey Cheah Continuing Scholarship. Ho Su Ann was the highest scorer with a total accumulation of 92.05% followed by Ku Gim Chai at 90.00% and Ng Wan Ru with 88.90%. The three students who were among the other scholarship recipients will continue to pursue their undergraduate studies in the BSc (Hons) Accounting and Finance in the School of Business, Sunway University.
 |
| 53 students were awarded the Tan Sri Dato Seri (Dr) Jeffrey Cheah Continuing Scholarship to pursue their undergraduate studies in Sunway University. |
The students did not only receive a certificate of completion but 53 students were awarded the Tan Sri Dato Seri (Dr) Jeffrey Cheah Continuing Scholarship. Ho Su Ann was the highest scorer with a total accumulation of 92.05% followed by Ku Gim Chai at 90.00% and Ng Wan Ru with 88.90%. The three students who were among the other scholarship recipients will continue to pursue their undergraduate studies in the BSc (Hons) Accounting and Finance in the School of Business, Sunway University.
12 July 2011
See Ju Vin wins 2nd place in BIC Campus Speed Writing Competition
See Ju Vin, who represented Sunway College in the BIC Campus Speed Writing Competition won 2nd place and took away RM 300 cash prize, product hamper worth RM 50 and a certificate of participation. See, a Sunway-TES student who is currently completing her 4th semester in ACCA completed the challenge in 2:11 minutes.
 |
| (From left) See, BIC-GBA Sdn Bhd marketing Benny Chia, Sooi, Linda and Thew during the prize giving ceremony. |
Oxford & Cambridge Essay Writing Competition's winning essays- Champion
Ian Tan Wei Chuen (SMK USJ12)
“Push! Push!” the doctor clad in immaculate white attire urges as the woman giving birth lets out blood-curdling screams throughout the room. She suffers while the doctor toils for hours on end in a seemingly endless battle. Then, a miracle happens. A head peeks out and a baby emerges. A new person, a new life and a new soul is born. Tears of joy stream down the cheeks of the people in the room as they rejoice in their victory of a lengthy battle for a new human life. Fast-forward by twenty years when the child is now undergoing further education. A rite of passage into the adult world, you might say. As the thorns of adolescence remain in his or her character, he or she retains some form of innocence. However as wars rage around the world, as economic crises ravage the livelihood of a half of the human population and as the youth panders over a greater purpose in life besides power and money, the youth is left to think, “What am I living for ?” Material gains may bring all the thrill and luxuries in the world, but to what effect? Have you ever thought of what you would buy if you have everything? You do get to impress people, of course but will they love you? Power may grant you control, but it does not always garner appreciation. As the string of mistakes made by us in our lives lengthens and we come to closer terms with the issue of death, sometimes we have to realise that all that we have is our soul.
We have always heard of people and their perspectives on life and some of us are left to wonder, “How do these people think like that?” I have been on the receiving end of that thought at times and there is one thing which all optimistic and happy people in the world possess. They realise that money and power are not always everything in this pessimistic, demanding world. You are. We only have ourselves in at least some senses of the phrase and our happiness and success really depends on us, ourselves, our souls. Our soul may often be associated with spirituality but let us look from a more practical angle and associate it with intentions instead. Thus, the soul can be defined as a person’s life force and intentions. If our intentions are pure and uncontaminated, we will undoubtedly be happy and there is proof of it. Have you ever felt what it is like to give to society? It feels good, does it not? It gives you a rush of euphoria unlike taking, which oftentimes leaves you guilty and what not. Just to give you a clearer picture, let us delve further into his intriguing concept.
Take warren Buffett as an example. While he may be a taker of society in some ways, he is a giver in many other ways, obviously, he is known as possibly the greatest investor of all time but he does it through skill and foresight unlike speculators who merely try their luck at the stock exchanges. He has all the money in the world, yet almost all of it is stuck in the stock markets. He still lives in the same humble townhouse in Omaha, Nebraska as he did forty years ago, he drivers his own cheap, generic Lincoln Town Car around on his own as everybody else does and the most expensive thing he has is probably his house and suit, physically speaking. He does not utilise that money for his own material gains, but for something bigger, investing. He has always gone against the advice of economists and come out victorious. He has pledged half of his forty billion dollar fortune to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, a philanthropic organisation and has restructured Berkshire Hathaway, his company to ease the task for his successors. So, he is really fiving rather than taking. He wants to ensure the bright future of his peers, his people and organisations the lives of the poor and he will have a clean slate of life. He is one with a pure soul and he has only relied on himself and his soul to succeed. To this day, he still relies on himself and remains in his humble lifestyle, still holding on to that which he is passionate about.
Besides that, the soul can be related to happiness and how the soul perceives it. One famous use of that perception is to do what you love. There is no use doing something you do not love yet gain from it. Life will probably become very depressing indeed. Take for example, Lance Armstrong. He is now the best cyclist in the world by far, surpassing all others by inconceivably large margins. How? He does not have any augmented abilities he has the will and passion to succeed in the sport he loves the most. The most surprising fact is that he was struck down by cancer in the past. When everything around him collapsed and life went into a downward spiral, he was subjected to more threatening ordeals such as chemotherapy and sometimes, depression. Despite that, he retained his love for cycling and soul was burning with desire to touch those handlebars and pedals again. He did and after a year, he had being cured of cancer, he won and he has never stopped since. He is now an ambassador for cancer victims and he urges them to fight for their lives and what they love in hopes that they will he as lucky as him. Lance Armstrong achieved victory against cancer and against modern perceptions of death as well as cycling records previously thought as impossible by himself. All this was done through his fiery soul, a very strong, self-sufficient one indeed, He had achieved unimaginable success with it.
But what of us? Shall we not be successful as well? That really depends on our perspectives in life and the soul. If the soul works toward that constant improvement of our humane being and for the better of others, then yes, I would consider that successful, do you not? For instance, educators who choose to raise the capabilities of their students for a bright future ahead, academia who research fields of knowledge so that we know all that is around us and ourselves better and happiness of each other. So, as you can see , all we have and all we need are souls because while we may be down in the dumps or doubtful about life, we sometimes do not realise that the soul exists for a larger, more noble purpose. We just have to notice it and embrace our souls to truly achieve success in every sense of the word.
So do go back and look into your soul today. You may find something valuable in there which may just be your key to your own personal success.
“Push! Push!” the doctor clad in immaculate white attire urges as the woman giving birth lets out blood-curdling screams throughout the room. She suffers while the doctor toils for hours on end in a seemingly endless battle. Then, a miracle happens. A head peeks out and a baby emerges. A new person, a new life and a new soul is born. Tears of joy stream down the cheeks of the people in the room as they rejoice in their victory of a lengthy battle for a new human life. Fast-forward by twenty years when the child is now undergoing further education. A rite of passage into the adult world, you might say. As the thorns of adolescence remain in his or her character, he or she retains some form of innocence. However as wars rage around the world, as economic crises ravage the livelihood of a half of the human population and as the youth panders over a greater purpose in life besides power and money, the youth is left to think, “What am I living for ?” Material gains may bring all the thrill and luxuries in the world, but to what effect? Have you ever thought of what you would buy if you have everything? You do get to impress people, of course but will they love you? Power may grant you control, but it does not always garner appreciation. As the string of mistakes made by us in our lives lengthens and we come to closer terms with the issue of death, sometimes we have to realise that all that we have is our soul.
We have always heard of people and their perspectives on life and some of us are left to wonder, “How do these people think like that?” I have been on the receiving end of that thought at times and there is one thing which all optimistic and happy people in the world possess. They realise that money and power are not always everything in this pessimistic, demanding world. You are. We only have ourselves in at least some senses of the phrase and our happiness and success really depends on us, ourselves, our souls. Our soul may often be associated with spirituality but let us look from a more practical angle and associate it with intentions instead. Thus, the soul can be defined as a person’s life force and intentions. If our intentions are pure and uncontaminated, we will undoubtedly be happy and there is proof of it. Have you ever felt what it is like to give to society? It feels good, does it not? It gives you a rush of euphoria unlike taking, which oftentimes leaves you guilty and what not. Just to give you a clearer picture, let us delve further into his intriguing concept.
Take warren Buffett as an example. While he may be a taker of society in some ways, he is a giver in many other ways, obviously, he is known as possibly the greatest investor of all time but he does it through skill and foresight unlike speculators who merely try their luck at the stock exchanges. He has all the money in the world, yet almost all of it is stuck in the stock markets. He still lives in the same humble townhouse in Omaha, Nebraska as he did forty years ago, he drivers his own cheap, generic Lincoln Town Car around on his own as everybody else does and the most expensive thing he has is probably his house and suit, physically speaking. He does not utilise that money for his own material gains, but for something bigger, investing. He has always gone against the advice of economists and come out victorious. He has pledged half of his forty billion dollar fortune to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, a philanthropic organisation and has restructured Berkshire Hathaway, his company to ease the task for his successors. So, he is really fiving rather than taking. He wants to ensure the bright future of his peers, his people and organisations the lives of the poor and he will have a clean slate of life. He is one with a pure soul and he has only relied on himself and his soul to succeed. To this day, he still relies on himself and remains in his humble lifestyle, still holding on to that which he is passionate about.
Besides that, the soul can be related to happiness and how the soul perceives it. One famous use of that perception is to do what you love. There is no use doing something you do not love yet gain from it. Life will probably become very depressing indeed. Take for example, Lance Armstrong. He is now the best cyclist in the world by far, surpassing all others by inconceivably large margins. How? He does not have any augmented abilities he has the will and passion to succeed in the sport he loves the most. The most surprising fact is that he was struck down by cancer in the past. When everything around him collapsed and life went into a downward spiral, he was subjected to more threatening ordeals such as chemotherapy and sometimes, depression. Despite that, he retained his love for cycling and soul was burning with desire to touch those handlebars and pedals again. He did and after a year, he had being cured of cancer, he won and he has never stopped since. He is now an ambassador for cancer victims and he urges them to fight for their lives and what they love in hopes that they will he as lucky as him. Lance Armstrong achieved victory against cancer and against modern perceptions of death as well as cycling records previously thought as impossible by himself. All this was done through his fiery soul, a very strong, self-sufficient one indeed, He had achieved unimaginable success with it.
But what of us? Shall we not be successful as well? That really depends on our perspectives in life and the soul. If the soul works toward that constant improvement of our humane being and for the better of others, then yes, I would consider that successful, do you not? For instance, educators who choose to raise the capabilities of their students for a bright future ahead, academia who research fields of knowledge so that we know all that is around us and ourselves better and happiness of each other. So, as you can see , all we have and all we need are souls because while we may be down in the dumps or doubtful about life, we sometimes do not realise that the soul exists for a larger, more noble purpose. We just have to notice it and embrace our souls to truly achieve success in every sense of the word.
So do go back and look into your soul today. You may find something valuable in there which may just be your key to your own personal success.
Oxford & Cambridge Essay Writing Competition's winning essays- 1st runner up
Sharannya a/p Suresh (SMK Puteri Seremban)
If you live in the city, chances are high that you see thousands of people everyday in passing. Men and women from all sorts of backgrounds, behaviour and not to mention dressing habits. Some are so inconspicuous that you forget about them a second after you glimpse them, but a rare number stay in our minds for quite a time. The biggest factor as arguably their looks and a big part of them are clothes. In big cities, women tend to be more open and are up-front about their overall lives. They dress outrageously sometimes, and might behave even more so. So, the question is, should the law require women to dress modestly, especially in public?
Some parties campaign this concept ferociously, while others protest at this blatant opposition of women’s rights. Even in Malaysia, a few years back, women in states life Kelantan were not allowed to wear ‘tight’ clothes like jeans! In Abu Dhabi, you get weird looks if you walk down the street in sleeveless blouses. But that is just their culture. Asian countries are still famous for their mild-mannered behaviour, although those who do practice it are becoming less everyday. Countries in the west are more accepting of crazily-dressed women. In fact, it might even become a fashion trend! But they do have to draw the line at full nudity. Meanwhile, here, you might get the ‘evil eye’ if you prance down streets in revealing clothes.
Like all other matters, this issue has two sides, too. Modestly dressed women tend to be shielded from catcalls and wolf-whistles most of the time. They will still get this sexist treatment, but they get it in marginally diluted doses compared to women who are dressed sexily. That is a pure fact. Sometimes, modest dressing can save you from bad situations too. Convicted rapists admit that they only committed the crime because they couldn’t control themselves after seeing sexy women. It may see, a lame excuse for their wrong doing, but we cannot deny that women don’t exactly dress conservatively are just asking for trouble, especially if they happen to be in ‘strategic’ places like, say, dark streets.
Modest dressing doesn’t always mean frumpy, or ‘badly dressed’. Most of the young women nowadays dress according to ever-changing fashion trends. The trick is always to find a look that is suitable for you. Like Oscar Wilde once said ‘Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerant that we have to keep changing it. Latest trends on the runway don’t always look at home on the streets. Evergreen looks always make a good impression, even with people we have just met. You will look modern, elegant and still have leftover space for style. Self-help books and even newspaper articles, say that people who are dressed modestly, especially women, are more likely to be except maybe the fashion and designing industries. If you want to work there, wear ‘Loud’ coloured clothes all you want!
Of course, activists who campaign for women’s rights are vehemently against any ideas of this sort. This is, the twenty-first century, after all. Women shouldn’t have to dress in a certain way just to escape the unwanted attentions of caveman-like louts. It’s a free country, or a free-world, in this case. Outlawing outrageous clothes are actually curbing the rights of women to dress how they want, whenever they want. And after all, men with nasty behaviours will go after any girl or woman, safe is to have street-smarts, and maybe even a pepper spray handy. If laws are implemented to force women to dress conservatively (without their choice, too), mankind will be taking a giant step backward.
There is no denying the fact that it is the norm in Asian Countries, especially, to be obedient and just walk in our ancestors footsteps. The old generation find it very hard to accept their grandchildren’s newfound ‘style’. Clothes that are too tight are considered a taboo. Forget midriff-baring shirts. Parents are more understanding, but they, too have limits. Teenage girls, who sometimes follow fashion trends to fit in with their friends, end up getting frustrated. However, they will eventually understand their families’ mindsets as they grow up and mature. The key is compromise. Everyone has to give and take in the end for all parties to be satisfied. Even members of the unbending old generation might budge just a little. Life is just not long enough for us get worked up about simple things, really.
Clearly, controversial headlines in the newspapers might lead us to think that all females should be required to dress modestly for their own sakes. But we must ask ourselves, is this what ALL the women want, or need? Does a simple law protect and shield a certain thing from harm? Like they say, rules are made to be broken. Besides, even corporate industries are becoming more relaxed about be maintained to keep up a respectable front. But clothes and dressing-habits are subjective. Women should be sensitive and smart enough to know what to wear at times, based on the nature of the occasions. You can’t wear dresses suitable for nightclubs to a temple the next day!. In the end, it is up to the millions of women by whim! Women should have their own fates and futures in their own hands. To be or not to be (modestly dressed!) ?
If you live in the city, chances are high that you see thousands of people everyday in passing. Men and women from all sorts of backgrounds, behaviour and not to mention dressing habits. Some are so inconspicuous that you forget about them a second after you glimpse them, but a rare number stay in our minds for quite a time. The biggest factor as arguably their looks and a big part of them are clothes. In big cities, women tend to be more open and are up-front about their overall lives. They dress outrageously sometimes, and might behave even more so. So, the question is, should the law require women to dress modestly, especially in public?
Some parties campaign this concept ferociously, while others protest at this blatant opposition of women’s rights. Even in Malaysia, a few years back, women in states life Kelantan were not allowed to wear ‘tight’ clothes like jeans! In Abu Dhabi, you get weird looks if you walk down the street in sleeveless blouses. But that is just their culture. Asian countries are still famous for their mild-mannered behaviour, although those who do practice it are becoming less everyday. Countries in the west are more accepting of crazily-dressed women. In fact, it might even become a fashion trend! But they do have to draw the line at full nudity. Meanwhile, here, you might get the ‘evil eye’ if you prance down streets in revealing clothes.
Like all other matters, this issue has two sides, too. Modestly dressed women tend to be shielded from catcalls and wolf-whistles most of the time. They will still get this sexist treatment, but they get it in marginally diluted doses compared to women who are dressed sexily. That is a pure fact. Sometimes, modest dressing can save you from bad situations too. Convicted rapists admit that they only committed the crime because they couldn’t control themselves after seeing sexy women. It may see, a lame excuse for their wrong doing, but we cannot deny that women don’t exactly dress conservatively are just asking for trouble, especially if they happen to be in ‘strategic’ places like, say, dark streets.
Modest dressing doesn’t always mean frumpy, or ‘badly dressed’. Most of the young women nowadays dress according to ever-changing fashion trends. The trick is always to find a look that is suitable for you. Like Oscar Wilde once said ‘Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerant that we have to keep changing it. Latest trends on the runway don’t always look at home on the streets. Evergreen looks always make a good impression, even with people we have just met. You will look modern, elegant and still have leftover space for style. Self-help books and even newspaper articles, say that people who are dressed modestly, especially women, are more likely to be except maybe the fashion and designing industries. If you want to work there, wear ‘Loud’ coloured clothes all you want!
Of course, activists who campaign for women’s rights are vehemently against any ideas of this sort. This is, the twenty-first century, after all. Women shouldn’t have to dress in a certain way just to escape the unwanted attentions of caveman-like louts. It’s a free country, or a free-world, in this case. Outlawing outrageous clothes are actually curbing the rights of women to dress how they want, whenever they want. And after all, men with nasty behaviours will go after any girl or woman, safe is to have street-smarts, and maybe even a pepper spray handy. If laws are implemented to force women to dress conservatively (without their choice, too), mankind will be taking a giant step backward.
There is no denying the fact that it is the norm in Asian Countries, especially, to be obedient and just walk in our ancestors footsteps. The old generation find it very hard to accept their grandchildren’s newfound ‘style’. Clothes that are too tight are considered a taboo. Forget midriff-baring shirts. Parents are more understanding, but they, too have limits. Teenage girls, who sometimes follow fashion trends to fit in with their friends, end up getting frustrated. However, they will eventually understand their families’ mindsets as they grow up and mature. The key is compromise. Everyone has to give and take in the end for all parties to be satisfied. Even members of the unbending old generation might budge just a little. Life is just not long enough for us get worked up about simple things, really.
Clearly, controversial headlines in the newspapers might lead us to think that all females should be required to dress modestly for their own sakes. But we must ask ourselves, is this what ALL the women want, or need? Does a simple law protect and shield a certain thing from harm? Like they say, rules are made to be broken. Besides, even corporate industries are becoming more relaxed about be maintained to keep up a respectable front. But clothes and dressing-habits are subjective. Women should be sensitive and smart enough to know what to wear at times, based on the nature of the occasions. You can’t wear dresses suitable for nightclubs to a temple the next day!. In the end, it is up to the millions of women by whim! Women should have their own fates and futures in their own hands. To be or not to be (modestly dressed!) ?
Oxford & Cambridge Essay Writing Competition's winning essays- 2nd runner up
Nur Amalina Binti Khairul Anuar (SMK (P) Methodist Klang)
The ‘One child per family’ policy has been making waves worldwide ever since it
was first implemented in china years ago. Heated debates were held in all four corners of the world, discussing the pros and cons of the aforementioned policy. Some agreed, some disagreed and some just agreed to disagree. This particular topic is still relevant even though a substantial period of time has passed. So, the big question is: Should parents have only one child?
There is no doubt that it is in man’s nature to want to reproduce and gain offspring. It is simply in our genetic makeup, a trait that has not been altered even countless years of evolution. Ergo, this all comes down to a simple matter of preference. Some parents might only want to remain childless. Others may want busloads of children while others parents might only want one child. A majority of the nations on the earth place emphasis on the freedom of rights of its citizens. Whether it be freedom of speech or the liberty to practise any religion of choice, the rights of a country’s people is one of the most pivotal, if not the most crucial, building block of a nation. Do these rights, these liberties, not encompass the choice of the number of offspring that one wants? To go against these rules would be hypocritical for a nation as these rights are written in black and white in the very constitutions that are akin to the core of a nation’s framework.
If there was to be a golden rule about one child to every set of parents, it would certainly have a detrimental effect for the married couple. However, what of the effects to the child itself? The bonds of siblings are some of the strongest ties in existence. An only child might very well have a lack of companionship. Some might argue that peers can offer the same camaraderie. After all, the ubiquitous sayings of ‘my sister from another mister’ or even, ‘my brother from another mother’ would probably not have originated, no? However, it should be noted that even if something is similar to another object, it is still not necessarily the exact one and the same. As the adage goes, blood is thicker than water. Just by being related by blood, a relationship can hold a much deeper meaning.
When discussing this particular delicate (and controversial) subject, there is no doubt that the matter of twins and the like has to be brought up. If perchance a law about parents only having only one child were to be legislated and passes in every country on the face of the earth, what will become of twins, triplets, quadruplets, etcetera, etcetera? Does this mean that the other children will have an intake of air? Does this rule translate to the killings of children that have not even had an opportunity to pry their eyes open and take a glimpse of this world? Furthermore, if this were the case, how would the process of choosing which getting rid of the others. Besides which, who is to say that the parents (or policy makers) can play god and have the final word on the birth of children?
On a national scale, the nation of having a single child to every set of parents ratio will affect countries. The population will decrease, leaving nations with insufficient manpower. This in turn will cause economies to fail, leaving numerous nations in an even worse recession than there is now and leaves the world’s population poverty-stricken. Loss of productivity will be a constant variable, affecting he strength and dominance as well as the competitiveness of a country on the global stage. The utter lack of sufficient manpower will leave a country at it’s knees, a sitting duck to possible threats on both a domestic and international scale. Wars might very well rage and the homicides of people might be rampant if certain Machiavellian people were to take advantage of opportune moments.
Should parents have only one child? I for one, disagree. Such measures will certainly affect individuals, families, communities, nations and even the world in more ways than one. Future generations will very well face more problems if such rules were to be abided. For every action there is an equal reaction, or in other words, doing so will certainly cause a butterfly effect. Therefore, it is pivotal that today’s people make suitable decisions to ensure the wellbeing of humanity.
The ‘One child per family’ policy has been making waves worldwide ever since it
was first implemented in china years ago. Heated debates were held in all four corners of the world, discussing the pros and cons of the aforementioned policy. Some agreed, some disagreed and some just agreed to disagree. This particular topic is still relevant even though a substantial period of time has passed. So, the big question is: Should parents have only one child?
There is no doubt that it is in man’s nature to want to reproduce and gain offspring. It is simply in our genetic makeup, a trait that has not been altered even countless years of evolution. Ergo, this all comes down to a simple matter of preference. Some parents might only want to remain childless. Others may want busloads of children while others parents might only want one child. A majority of the nations on the earth place emphasis on the freedom of rights of its citizens. Whether it be freedom of speech or the liberty to practise any religion of choice, the rights of a country’s people is one of the most pivotal, if not the most crucial, building block of a nation. Do these rights, these liberties, not encompass the choice of the number of offspring that one wants? To go against these rules would be hypocritical for a nation as these rights are written in black and white in the very constitutions that are akin to the core of a nation’s framework.
If there was to be a golden rule about one child to every set of parents, it would certainly have a detrimental effect for the married couple. However, what of the effects to the child itself? The bonds of siblings are some of the strongest ties in existence. An only child might very well have a lack of companionship. Some might argue that peers can offer the same camaraderie. After all, the ubiquitous sayings of ‘my sister from another mister’ or even, ‘my brother from another mother’ would probably not have originated, no? However, it should be noted that even if something is similar to another object, it is still not necessarily the exact one and the same. As the adage goes, blood is thicker than water. Just by being related by blood, a relationship can hold a much deeper meaning.
When discussing this particular delicate (and controversial) subject, there is no doubt that the matter of twins and the like has to be brought up. If perchance a law about parents only having only one child were to be legislated and passes in every country on the face of the earth, what will become of twins, triplets, quadruplets, etcetera, etcetera? Does this mean that the other children will have an intake of air? Does this rule translate to the killings of children that have not even had an opportunity to pry their eyes open and take a glimpse of this world? Furthermore, if this were the case, how would the process of choosing which getting rid of the others. Besides which, who is to say that the parents (or policy makers) can play god and have the final word on the birth of children?
On a national scale, the nation of having a single child to every set of parents ratio will affect countries. The population will decrease, leaving nations with insufficient manpower. This in turn will cause economies to fail, leaving numerous nations in an even worse recession than there is now and leaves the world’s population poverty-stricken. Loss of productivity will be a constant variable, affecting he strength and dominance as well as the competitiveness of a country on the global stage. The utter lack of sufficient manpower will leave a country at it’s knees, a sitting duck to possible threats on both a domestic and international scale. Wars might very well rage and the homicides of people might be rampant if certain Machiavellian people were to take advantage of opportune moments.
Should parents have only one child? I for one, disagree. Such measures will certainly affect individuals, families, communities, nations and even the world in more ways than one. Future generations will very well face more problems if such rules were to be abided. For every action there is an equal reaction, or in other words, doing so will certainly cause a butterfly effect. Therefore, it is pivotal that today’s people make suitable decisions to ensure the wellbeing of humanity.
07 July 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)