#4-The Prospects Get Brighter for the Protection of Children as the Nobel Peace Prize Is Awarded to a Child and for the Protection of Children (and Not to Pope Francis)

This week while searching for a topic I felt like sharing on the blog I looked at some of the websites suggested on the right hand side of the class Argumentation and Critical Thinking Blog. I had never visited many of these sites and wanted to see what information I could find. I wanted to find an article where most, if not all of the information was cogent. I think I found a pretty good article that fits that description. I visited the Justia site and found an interesting article in the Civil Rights section about the Nobel Peace Prize. The article is titled, “The Prospects Get Brighter for the Protection of Children as the Nobel Peace Prize Is Awarded to a child and for the Protection of Children (and Not to Pope Francis).” The article states that the Norwegian Nobel Committee received the most nominations in history this year. It also said that before the announcement the media focused on Pope Francis and Edward Snowden. The Pope was the favorite to win.

The Committee made the historic announcement that the winners would be Malala Yousafzai and Kailash Satyarthi for their work on the education and protection of children. This was so historic because it is the first time a child has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. (Malala is still 17.) A few years ago, instead of being a hero for speaking out on behalf of children she would have been one who should “be seen and not heard”. It is also historic because it is the first time the award has been awarded solely for the protection of children. The article goes on to say that both recipients have been outspoken about the education of children and the need to rescue children. Interestingly, the award generated opposition to Malala in her homeland. The article stated that because this prestigious award was given to a child it should give hope to children who are “crushed by fanatical Muslims,” and give hope to oppressed children’s advocates worldwide.

It is said that this is an important moment in the civil rights movement for children. I had never heard of such a thing so this intrigued me. In the history of the Nobel Peace Prize “ninety-five Nobel Peace Prizes have been awarded, to 88 men, 15 women, and 22 individual organizations.” Even more interesting is that the typical categories have been for the “peace movement,” “negotiation,” and “world organizing.”  A few other awards have been given for humanitarian and human rights issues. In 2003, the award was given for women’s and children’s rights, but this is the first time children have been the main focus.

Here is where the article gets really interesting. The article talks about how the “scourge of child sex abuse and trafficking is impossible to overestimate.” Then the article takes a turn and says that the Roman Catholic Church, which Pope Francis is the leader of, has been the “institutional home for clergy abusers and bishop abettors in large numbers over many decades, if not centuries.” It claims that the Pope was nominated for his peacemaking gestures, but he has had a “sorry history of cover-up in Argentina.” It claims that the Pope has moved slowly to protect children and punish abusers.

 The article claims that if the Pope would have won the award it would have sent an implicit message to all of the victims that their “needs have been considered second-order.” Instead, by awarding two individuals who have tried to help children and protect children they sent the message to the powerful people that argue they should have won the award because they have made so many other fine contributions that the endangerment of children is not acceptable no matter what other good you have done.

The article says that Pope Francis has a long way to go before he could receive the Nobel Peace Prize. The world and those who thought Pope Francis should win have a long way to go and “much left to do to protect our children.”

This article made me think about a few different things. I was so happy that these two individuals won the award so that the education and protection of children could come in the spotlight. I was interested in and agree with the statement that this is “an important moment in the civil rights movement for children.” I hadn’t really thought about children needing a civil rights movement, but obviously they do. The article mentioned that we have a problem here in the United States as well and referred to an article titled,God v. The Gavel:the Perils of Extreme Religious Liberty which talks about children here in the states who are in danger and need rescuing. I had not really thought about the problem we have right here in our own backyards.

I think this article is cogent in the reporting of details. Some might say that it makes a few generalizations when speaking of the Catholic Church and those who were speculating on who would win the Nobel Peace Prize and why. I think the information in the article is cogent and is backed up by other news sources and articles that show the problems within the Catholic Church. I do not think it is a problem only in the Catholic Church, but the information given is cogent. I also think it is a cogent statement to say that those who speculated that the Pope would win did probably not think about any of the bad things the Pope and Catholic Church have done or the Civil Rights of Children.