Updated: Muscat has reservations on proposed Constitutional ban on abortion

Jevin Micallef

Sep 26th 2008, 11:30

What a refreshing change Joseph Muscat is from Alfred Sant. Unlike his predecessor he has made his views on immigration, abortion and divorce known with no corners cut for fear of losing votes.

If he retains this approach he will definitely be syphoning off a large chunk of liberal voters who usually vote PN including myself.

Admittedly its still early days but JM's stand are making the PN look pale and tattered.

Joseph Schembri

Sep 25th 2008, 19:41

How one can compare the abuse of an 'innocent' 16 year old 'child' leading to pregnancy with abortion is beyond my comprehension. Maybe I cannot understand this because I am a man and not a woman.

As a father I have seen a three month old foetus (what a cold clinical word!) move, via the magic of ultrasound and I am disgusted by people who say that that is not a human being.

But after having said all this I do not know how I would feel about abortion if I were told that the baby would have horrible congenital defects (see cases where the mother took thalidomide during pregnancy) which would lead to a life full of suffering.

In any case I am against a constitutional amendment as I detest fundamentalism of any kind.

K. Pullicino

Sep 25th 2008, 14:27

"The only people who should have the power to decide about abortion are women - for this affects women and their bodies and nobody else. Safe abortions should be legally available for those who want them. This is the norm in most civilised liberal democracies."

How can you have a democracy if you're saying that men shouldn't be allowed to decide on abortion? Malta is so "liberal" that it gives everyone the liberty and chance to live without having death imposed.

"Obviously, to the warped mind this makes sense. Better to protect a bunch of cells that could potentially become a baby, then not to molest, corrupt and forever ruin the life of an innocent child, now that he is no longer a foetus."

What sort of twisted thinking is this? Anyone here said that molesting and abusing children is less horrible than abortion? Of course it's wrong and we should do our utmost to prevent it.

"It is better not to be born at all in the best of times, more so if unloved and unwanted."

If one's mother doesn't love her child, there are many more that are ready to love the child.

David Seychell

Sep 20th 2008, 23:41

@dvella

"this baby had to be born in the 2nd 3rd or 4th month it will have no chance of surviving on its own, so NO this is not a human being."

Neither a 1 year old child would survive on its own since he can't even drink a glass of water on its own. But this doesn't make him and less human and the same applies to paralyzed people.

The point is that you can't use this argument as a valid to tool to decide what is or isn't a human being.

On the other hand I agree that after conception there still MIGHT be a time frame before a human is formed. I think that the problem in pinpointing the exact moment when a human is formed is that we don't have a clear definintion of what is a human being.

Stanley Cassar Darien

Sep 20th 2008, 21:18

@ David Seychell

Personally I would be really happy if I had to become a father but I was not talking about myself here. ..Pretty basic really, they are telling women and their female children and grandchildren that they can't be trusted and that is insulting and idiotic.

If Gift for life really want to make a difference, then there are so many social issues that they can help out with, social housing for single mothers or fathers, contraception and access to professional help would be more appreciated.

This is just a total waste of money and time. I agree with you that men can have an opinion about abortion, but these men here are not giving us their opinion, they are trying to pressure politicians (males of course) to come up with a constitutional ban when we don't even have abortion.

dvella

Sep 20th 2008, 21:12

there is a reason why abortion is only done till a certain window of time. If this baby had to be born in the 2nd 3rd or 4th month it will have no chance of surviving on its own, so NO this is not a human being.

Joseph Schembri

Sep 20th 2008, 19:25

What a confused society we are living in. In the 'developed' world it is OK to literally tear to a bloody goo a baby still in its mother womb but once that baby is born if his mother spanks him for being naughty then she is guilty of child abuse, can end up in prison and never see her child again.

And don't tell me not to call it a baby while it is still in the womb - I don't care what the legal definition is but once you see a baby moving inside a pregnant woman using the newly introduced 3-D ultrasound you see a separate individual. It is NOT a part of the woman's body, they are two quite distinct individuals, even the blood supply is not shared.

David Seychell

Sep 20th 2008, 18:36

@Emma xerri

Do you consider a 6 months old creature (counting from conception) in the womb with a brain, eyes, nose, mouth, hands, fingers and a pumping heart a mere

"a bunch of cells"?

And please leave religion out from this argument cause till now only the 'Pro choice to Terminate' mentioned religion in this blog. I am not a religious person by the way.

Emma xerri

Sep 20th 2008, 18:00

@David Seychel. Medically and legally a foetus is neither a baby nor a person.

The only people who should have the power to decide about abortion are women - for this affects women and their bodies and nobody else. Safe abortions should be legally available for those who want them. This is the norm in most civilised liberal democracies.

A Government's mandate should not be to impose religious dogma on its citizens. If that is the kind of Government that one wishes, then maybe one should move to Iran or Saudi Arabia or Vatican City.

Citing Church morality in this issue is very dubious, since Catholic teachings in regards to other issues where human suffering is concerned are very suspect indeed. For example the Church was against pain relief for women during childbirth, is against the use of condoms to prevent AIDS/HIV, not to mention the silence if not outright support of dictatorships in South America where thousands of people 'vanished'.

It is better not to be born at all in the best of times, more so if unloved and unwanted. The hundreds of sickening cases in the world of parents torturing and abusing their children bear witness to this.

David Seychell

Sep 20th 2008, 15:48

@Stanley Cassar Darien

So you want society to let YOU "decide the future of" yourself and make all the sexual mistakes you want but then it is the innocent BABY that must pay for your mistakes by it's own life.

And by the way: This is not a question of men or women. This is a question of human beings.

Emma Xerri

Sep 20th 2008, 15:48

The Constitution is for all Maltese, so NO the abortion issue should not come remotely near the Constitution.

A safe medical abortion should be the right and choice of the woman herself. There is no other ways about it. Anything else is just misogyny.

For all you religious fanatics and the rights of the unborn, how is this for sheer hypocricy. In Canada, Dr Morgantaler, an abortion pioneer who saved thousands of women from certain death from backstreet abortions and who was persecuted and even jailed for performing and advocating safe abortions was recently awarded the "Order of Canada" . A priest who had earlier also been awarded the prestigious award, returned the "Order of Canada in protest and indignation.

It turned out that this priest had susequent to receiving the Order of Canada, been convicted for being a paedophile and had been molesting children. He did not think of returning his Order of Canada then.

Obiously, to the warped mind this makes sense. Better to protect a bunch of cells that could potentially become a baby, then not to molest, corrupt and forever ruin the life of an innocent child, now that he is no longer a foetus.

Corinne Vella

Sep 20th 2008, 13:04

It seems that we can't make up our minds about the central issue here. There are plenty of remarks about abortion and whether it should be legalised but few about whether that decision should be controlled by middle-aged men who are largely unaffected by abortion and its consequences.

Noel Miceli

Sep 20th 2008, 12:54

The time will come when the righteous will be forced to take up arms in defense of the weak, defenceless, forgotten ones. The heros will stand tall like men who have saved a child from a band of thugs, for that is what they will have done a thousand times over.

David J Camilleri

Sep 20th 2008, 10:41

Dwell on these quotes from comments on this article....

'the foetus has no legal status'

'I think that the decision to carry or not the pregnancy or carry out an abortion should be reserved only to the woman bearing the embryo'

'abortion is NOT murder''Murder has always been committed, as has abortion and no constitutional amendment will prevent them'

.....and others.

When discussing abortion some tend to think only about the religious implications, but actually I think there is much more to it. It is the human conscience, whether Catholic, Muslim, Hindu, Atheist etc... that is involved. No doubt human conscience regarding the fundamentals of what is right or wrong has been warped beyond recognition in some areas, with individuals finding loop-holes such as that of the very definition of the beginning of life in any country's constitution.

Just reminding people who have voiced their opinion with these quotes that maybe, then, we should find loop-holes to 'eliminate' people identified by some groups of individuals as 'undesirables'... e.g. the physically and mentally impaired,, the sick and elderly, ethnic minorities etc...

Oh, I almost forgot that somebody had tried all this with a certain degree of success about 70 years ago.

Stanley Cassar Darien

Sep 20th 2008, 02:26

It's usually women who discuss abortion around the world, but here somehow, men will decide the future of women and their female children, if I was a woman living in Malta I would go mental.

p.grima

Sep 20th 2008, 00:02

@-Renald Galea- "If he succumbs to GoL's bullying tactics he can safely slink to the backwaters of the political arena and relegate himself to the ranks of the weak and impressionable." - You seem to be trying to manipulate and/or bully Dr.Muscat. I'm sure he knows better than that.

In the democratic state that we live in (thank God) the GoL have the same right of thought that you and I do.

p.grima

Sep 19th 2008, 23:53

Can Dr.Muscat kindly explain exactly what these "reservations" are?

p.grima

Sep 19th 2008, 23:37

@-wally vella-zarb- There was this ten year old boy who went into the shop next door asking for cigarettes and vodka. The retailer, (who knew very well the boy's age and what the law says) knows that if he doesn't sell to the boy, that boy will get what he wants from somewhere else anyway.

So what do you (and all other pro-choicers) think the vendor should do?
Should he sell to that boy in order not to lose a custom?
Or should he abide by the law and tell the boy to shop elsewhere.

It is the same with abortion: If anyone wants to perform it, let them go elsewhere. I wouldn't want our island to be stained with innocent blood.

dvella

Sep 19th 2008, 18:10

Abortion will be legalized in the near future. Malta cant live in the past anymore. All of those who do not agree with it, simply do not resort to it.

john calleja

Sep 19th 2008, 16:21

abortion is not a murder legally. it is the wilfull termination of the foetus, which has no legal status. in fact in the case of a stillborn no birth or death certificates are issued.

David Seychell

Sep 19th 2008, 15:15

@dvella

I think that the killing of an innocent and defenseless creature by it's own mother is not something worth "Laughing Out Loud" - in short LOL-. Anyway to answer your question:

All humans have an innate survival instinct which is especially strong in the youngest who still have all their life ahead of them.

I once saw a video of an abortion where the baby even if still in the womb tried to fight back the menacing blade, in vain though.

Carrol Camilleri

Sep 19th 2008, 12:18

Muscat will sway PN voters who are sick and tired of the over the top convservatism of both the old and young Nationalist candidates. They have no chance of winning next general election and the forthcoming MEP elections if they do not realise that a change is needed !

It ridiculous that we are still discussing the pros & cons of divorce and this unbelievable entrenchment idea. Muscat seems to have gauged a mood of change. Lets hope it lasts, before he is shut up by the "elders" too.

Joseph Schembri

Sep 19th 2008, 11:43

This is a true story that I heard a doctor from an Italian abortion clinic tell. :

A married woman turned up for an abortion. She was asked to fill in a form. One of the questions was whether she had ever had an abortion. She wrote down: 'yes 6 times'.

The doctor was shocked and he asked her whether she had ever heard about contraception and her answer was 'Yes but the priest tells me that it is sinful to use a condom'. The doctor of course asked her whether the priest had also told her that abortion was sinful.

Her answer? "Yes but I only abort once in a while and If I use contraception I'd have to do it everyday - that would make me commit more sins."

I repeat that the doctor recounting this story said that it was true. I wonder what GOL have to say about contraception.

M Schembri

Sep 19th 2008, 11:00

Chanelle, you can look all over the internet and you will definetly find loads of articles of people who suffered from abortion - but if you open up your eyes you will find ones that benefited from it too. Even though I am personally pro-choice, my point was that in Malta we need proper sex education - sex education that probably this Ms. Tope would have greatly benefited from since at 15 she was already 11 weeks pregnant. This way we won't have underage kids going for an abortion just because their boyfriend or whoever convinced them that it (pregnancy) won't happen to them. When I was 16 (I'm 24 now) my mum already explained to me my bf should wear a condom if there was going to be sexual intercourse, and I kept safe - free from pregnancy and STDs, now I know not everyone is as lucky as I am, but these lessons should be thought to our kids - not just because of unwanted pregnancies but also because of sexually transmitted infections which everybody seems to be oblivious about!

dvella

Sep 19th 2008, 10:44

And whoever say that babies want to live ( eg David Seychell ) how do you know this? you speak to them? read minds? belly sign language? LOL

dvella

Sep 19th 2008, 10:42

i look around me and i believe it is 2008. i come online and read these comments and feel as if im transported back into 1708.

Abortion is down to the individual wheter to have it or not. NOONE can interfer with that decision.
So please start living in the 21st century.

André Xuereb

Sep 19th 2008, 10:36

Correction: it was her uncle, not her father, who raped her. Couldn't find the story earlier on to confirm. My apologies.

André Xuereb

Sep 19th 2008, 10:35

Chanelle,
The 11-year-old in question took her case to the highest law courts because she wanted to have the abortion. Read http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7477448.stm for further details.
Anyway, I didn't want to be sidetracked. My point was that abortion, like divorce, is not an inherently good solution to a problem. It is a solution to a problem (which exists, make no doubt about that!) when no other solution will help.
In any case, whether I am pro- or anti-abortion is irrelevant. The issue here, as many have pointed out, is that GoL want to entrench _their own_ ideas into the constitution; which is definite abuse of the constitution.

Fabrizio Ellul

Sep 19th 2008, 10:24

I think, people should reflect on the simple fact that any woman who wishes to terminate her pregnancy - regardless whether or not is illegal in Malta or written down in the constitution - can do that in any E.U. state (apart from Ireland).

If anything, one should argue on 'social discrimination' grounds rather than filling blogs and comments with theologian and philosophical contributions.

Andrew Sciberras

Sep 19th 2008, 10:18

This issue has got nothing to do with being pro-life or pro-choice. That is an ethical debate which seems to have no end. The issue here is that the Constitution of Malta is under threat. As many people have already mentioned, abortion is already illegal here and neither are there any tangible movements calling for abortion from any sector of society. Therefore to 'protect' something or someone which is currently already heavily protected and is not under any threat by our society to me sounds like fundamentalism.

Chanelle Busuttil

Sep 19th 2008, 10:14

Andre,
my point exactly; what choice did that 11 year old have???? I have read tens of personal stories of of grown women in that 11 year old's position, who at such a tender age did not even know what was happening and realised only years later, and it filled them with despair for not having resisted and anger towrds their parents. That story is a prime example of forced abortion showing clearly that abortion is the 'non-choice'

To Tim Ripard and similar

'they should be proposing that murder is banned by the constitution'

I suggest you read the constitution. The right to life is in the constitution already and therefore murder IS banned in the constitution. Also in the constitution are non-issues like the colours of our national flag and the establishment of local councils!!!! That is 2 out of 124 Articles!!! Simply so that issues which can easily be used in the favour of one party or other if overturned, WILL NOT!!

John Saliba

Sep 19th 2008, 10:09

Whoever thinks that woman would opt for abortion as easily as deciding to buy a couple of pastizzi then do get your head examined.

Heaven pity a woman who has to be faced with such a choice....and make no mistake this GOL proposal will not in any way restrict that choice.

André Xuereb

Sep 19th 2008, 09:45

Ms Busuttil: That is why entrenchment is a non-starter. What is sorely needed is a serious counselling service that explores all the options and helps a woman choose what is best for her in her situation. The page you pasted is not scientific evidence in any way or form; just one person expressing her opinion on a site that may or may not have a bias (you provide no sources).
Yes, in some cases abortion may be a way out (by way of example: an 11 year old girl in an Eastern European country was recently granted the right to abort her pregnancy after being raped by her father.) Give me one "pro-life" (hah!) reason why this abortion was wrong.

K Pullicino: The "human being" at conception is no more a person than any ball of cells I could remove from my body. Please stop quoting the words "scientific fact" when you clearly don't know what they mean.

R. Bartolo

Sep 19th 2008, 09:38

How come that most people who are against abortion are people you would never want to have sex with in the first place?
And how come when it is us, it's an abortion, but when it is a chicken, it's an omelette?
(paraphrased from George Carlin)

Chanelle Busuttil

Sep 19th 2008, 09:13

To M Schembri

How about the Sydeny Morning Herald then - today's edition!

'Madeleine Tope, 20, said she was 15 years old and 11 weeks' pregnant when she had an abortion at a city clinic she had gone to seek advice.

She said she was rushed through the procedure and was offered no follow-up counselling.

"I've been suffering this grief for four years," she said.

"I'm not religious. I don't think I have done something to offend God but I have morals. I killed my own child, and I can't live with that."

Ms Tope said she only sought help to deal with her grief last year.

"It was only after that, acknowledging the baby was real, that I could deal with it more positively."

She now has two children, a son and a daughter but said she would never fully recover from the trauma.

"I can try and channel my despair into something positive and try to help people but at the end of the day I will never get my baby back. At 15, I ruined my life," she said'

Post Abortion Sydrome (PAS) is real and not biased.

Fabrizio Ellul

Sep 19th 2008, 08:57

I Can't understand why GoL turned a non-issue into a national one.

Edward Mifsud

Sep 19th 2008, 08:51

So far Joseph Muscat is coming out as a straight talking no nonsense leader unlike Alfred Sant before him.

I am pro Nationalist have always disagreed with the party on divorce and recently on entrenching an abortion clause in our consititution.

So it comes as a surprise that for the first time in two decades I actually like what I hear from a labour leader. I may be darned but Joseph Muscat is more of a liberal democrat than a Labourite/socialist.

Charmaine Chetcuti

Sep 19th 2008, 07:19

As other persons commented, I think that the decision to carry or not the pregnancy or carry out an abortion should be reserved only to the woman bearing the embryo. Including or not the abortion ban in our constitution will only encourage women to seek underground methods (for those who can afford to pay) or diy methods for abortion with a greater mortality risk for these women.

I think that abortion should be introduced, and institutionalized so that women who, AFTER CONSULTATION, decide to go for abortion, do not risk their lives every second of the procedure.

Sandro Galea-Soler

Sep 19th 2008, 07:02

People who describe themselves as pro-choice may not be aware of the fact that just last year (2007), 193,000 abortions (yes, equal to almost half the population of Malta) were performed in the UK alone - for me,one word describes it all: MASSACRE
Another point: all these comments about respecting the rights of minorities - why not introduce capital punishment, legalise euthanansia, permit race/''hate' crimes, relax gun control laws etc.., after all, there are minorities in Malta who firmly believe in such things.

Robert Cassar

Sep 19th 2008, 03:51

I had always voted for PN in my life but after seeing how Joseph is conducting business he is earning my respect. I do not know the guy in person never meet him or even saw him but definitely I see that his views reflect the reality of today’s world. I know its still early days but finally it seems that we have found an alternative leader that can give new hope to people.

My advice to JM is to -

Tackle the issue of illegal immigration as this is pissing off people big time
Remove the duties and taxes on cars originating from EU as the prices we pay in Malta are ridiculous. I really cannot understand why I cannot go to UK or any other EU country get a car from there and bring it over to Malta! Why will I have to pay more then the actual cost of the car in duties taxes etc of here? for me this does not make any sense so please JM make something about it since Dr Gonzi does not want to listen.

David Seychell

Sep 19th 2008, 00:56

Women should not have a legal right to impose their fatal will on their babies. All babies want to live. So women please be democratic and respect their opinion and if you don't want to keep your baby just give it for adoption and maybe you will even get paid.

wally vella-zarb

Sep 19th 2008, 00:20

Okay, let us for a moment imagine that this issue of abortion is finally entrenched in the Constitution.

Scenario: A woman becomes pregnant and - for whatever reason that makes sense to her - decides that she wants to terminate her pregnancy.

Question: What happens then?
Answer: She takes the next trip to Sicily and has an abortion. As simple as that.

Question: How will the entrenchment prevent her from doing what she wants?
Answer: ???

Clear, logical, answers to this question are solicited from the pro-entrenchment camp. Meanwhile we continue to wait with bated breath ...

A. Muscat

Sep 18th 2008, 23:18

Reckless sex in our culture is the key-word for our endless social problems, this of course including the abortion.
We should start using logic and follow the bible.lol
Look here what the bible says about a trivial incident- I wonder what the bible says about abortion?
Deuteronomy 25:11-12
11 If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, 12 you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity.

Daphne Caruana Galizia

Sep 18th 2008, 23:05

@Carmel Serracino Inglott and other hysterical (unfortunate choice of adjective) persons who claim that abortion is murder: abortion is NOT murder. The Criminal Code makes a clear distinction between the unlawful ending of a pregnancy, and murder. Murder, to put it in terms that you might perhaps understand, involves the killing of somebody with a date of birth, known or unknown. The Criminal Code does not use the word abortion for the simple reason that abortion is a medical term used for the termination of a pregnancy in anything other than a birth. An abortion may be spontaneous or triggered by an accident, otherwise known as a miscarriage, or it can be deliberately wrought, an unlawful act in Malta.

marianne henderson

Sep 18th 2008, 22:36

Oh please, what chance does any girl get...
Catholic church saying using protection is a sin, and if you get pregnant it is yours without help from the father for life.When is someone going to stick up for the girls, sometimes making only one mistake?
I am a foreigner as such, but lived in Malta for years.
Have you ever seen unwanted, abused, neglected children?
Am not for abortion at all, but in some cases abortion should be an option, not only financial.

If the child has to endure a life of abuse and neglect, maybe ask yourself why? and also ask yourself, when they become an adult in which hospital or prison would they be?
I am not pro abortion, but have seen many cases where that might have been
the right choice
The child's quality of life , was less than a cat on the street.
And this is in Malta!
All children have the right of life, and love.
But if either are lacking, maybe termination is the right choice
Sometimes we have to take a stand.
Can we give the best to our unborn child?

Arnold Galea

Sep 18th 2008, 22:33

Abortion is a very complicated issue and a very serious debate has to start which will involve all interested parties.

The Gift of Life are going to the very extreme, this may be that they are scared that Malta will become like other countries and introduce abortion.

Abortion in my opinion is a very negative thing to do and to see, however, what is needed is a genuine effort to learn about the real reasons why people decide to carry out abortions.

There is the financial pressures, increase in selfishness and many other factors of which personally, I am not aware.

Gift of Life and all of us should concentrate on tackling these problems rather than changing the Constitution and include an extreme Law like this.

On the other hand there are cases for example when the babies are extremely disabled or children that will be born with HIV like in Africa where yes abortion is a solution.

Tim Ripard

Sep 18th 2008, 21:50

If GOL believe in the gift of life, they should be proposing that murder is banned by the constitution. That they have not done so clearly shows that their interest is in re-introducing religious fundamentalism and not protecting life. This campaign is a ridiculous waste of time. Murder has always been committed, as has abortion and no constitutional amendment will prevent them. As others have pointed out, this is a thinly disguised effort to reduce women's rights. What's next? A constitutional amendment to ban women from voting?

I Grech

Sep 18th 2008, 21:39

...cont

I am pro-abortion yes. I would rather have a child not born than see that child growing up abadoned, unloved, abused, uneducated. I am also for having equal access to facilites for everyone. Why can someone from a better off family go to Sicily or the Uk and have an abortion while someone less off not? I am also for having all my choices available to me and I be responsable for my actions and their consequences.

André Xuereb

Sep 18th 2008, 21:39

It's amazing how a group of pompous middle-aged men (thanks DCG) have once and for all solved all the philosophical issues surrounding the question of whether the unborn foetus (there is no such thing as an "unborn child") is to be attributed with all the qualities of personhood from day one. So pray tell, what are the attributes that make an organism a person?
(a) Human DNA? In that case, I am committing murder by scraping some cells from the inside of my cheeks and then proceeding to destroy them.
(b) A nervous system? For the first couple of weeks a foetus has no nervous system.
(c) A soul? Haha.

Will anyone from the GoL define a "person", and proceed with all the implications that this entails? (See (a) above for an example of such implications.) Then, if a foetus is to be considered a person, abortion would be equal to murder, in which case entrenchment makes no sense (murder is highly illegal anyway). If not, entrenchment makes no sense (what is there to entrench?) Hmm...

PS: I applaud Dr Muscat's stand on this one (although I believe "reservations" is not a strong enough word for this issue.)

I Grech

Sep 18th 2008, 21:34

@ Edwin Formosa: Unwanted children end up being not-so-nice-members of society as someone else quoted further down in the comments. Do you have a plan to open a creche for unwanted children and have enough love, affection, etc... to give each one of them as a person who grows up in a stable family gets?

Secondly, maybe you misread my point, this is NOT about abortion. It is about messing about with the Constitution and limiting the freedom of choice of people so that a few crusaders can feel like they saved the world. What would you say if someone wanted to introduce in the Constitution that women cannot go to school or work and have to wear a burqa. As with the issue at hand, this matter would imply that the will of the fanatic few would be imposed on the majority and women turned to mere pets and slaves.

cont.....

K. Pullicino

Sep 18th 2008, 21:26

So many people are talking about how wrong fundamentalism is. Does this mean that we should stop considering the right to life as a fundamental right and refer to it as simply another right? After all, without life there wouldn't be anything, would there?

This is not even about religion... it's a scientific fact that a new human being comes into existence at conception. I hope we don't become like all the other countries in Europe that protect life, even through their Constitution, but then legalise abortion through the law. They didn't have the decency to remove the right to life from the Constitution making the whole thing a joke.

Charles J Buttigieg

Sep 18th 2008, 21:01

Joseph you came out smelling of roses after you made your unequivocal statement about the divorse issue and people respected you for that. You made your point about abortion too and people will trust you. Personally I would have expected you to be more definete about the entrenchment issue and made it clear to the fundamentalist lobby that you did not leave Brussels to come here to play games. A sizeable number of PN supporters that I know trust and respect you because unlike the PM you are a progressive liberal. Kuragg Joseph, tell GOL that we know what their game is.

CARMEL SERRACINO-INGLOTT

Sep 18th 2008, 20:36

Many speak of the right of woman and ignore the rights of the unborn person. These many state that they are against abortion and murder but they want or wish that everybody can murder not the born persons but the unborn ones. To me murder is murder and the constitution IS the machine that will further defend the persons which are living in the womb; and defend them from what? MURDER.

Edwin Formosa

Sep 18th 2008, 20:15

Some of our Maltese -pro -divorce -Christian -guys are personally against abortion now, but will eventually become pro-choice politically correct.

Edwin Formosa

Sep 18th 2008, 20:03

modern definition of murder : " a private matter belonging to the foetus-bearing person"

Victor Buhagiar

Sep 18th 2008, 20:00

Abortion is MURDER. There is no question of choice here. The baby has a right to live. Those in favour of abortion always forget the right of choice of ther baby. Wonder what they would say had their mother aborted them.

David Farrugia

Sep 18th 2008, 19:56

The Constitution is not something you play with. Bravo Dr. Muscat!! Don't fall for these fundamentalists.

Christian Morales

Sep 18th 2008, 19:49

No this is not merely about freedom of choice. It is about the kind of society we would like to live in. You cannot have a system of laws that is devoid of moral values since no government, no judiciary and no legislature can be morally neutral. Do we want to recognise that abortion is the killing of human life at its germinal, or perhaps not so germinal stages? Do we want to live in a society were the medical profession is poisoned by this disrespect for innocent and defenseless human life? Choice comes with responsibility and, as we all very well know from human adult choices, this responsibility requires maturity and a sound moral formation. In other words, we need to educate each other in favour of life and not against it, and offer all the moral, psychological, social, economic support to expecting mothers who are insufficiently prepared, or who are very reluctant before the prospect of maternity whatever its original causes.

Edwin Formosa

Sep 18th 2008, 19:36

@ I Grech "The rest are bound to end up with an unwanted child. Are not all citizens equal? " Of course not all citezens are equal!!!! Some are 'unwanted' .......according to the 'wanted' ones ...like you.

M Schembri

Sep 18th 2008, 19:03

Dear Chanelle Busuttil

If you want to quote numbers from somewhere don't quote them from a very biased prolife website. That is not research you're doing, but just reading literature from people who have your same views.

If someone wants an aborition becuase they don't want the child maybe it's because they had unprotected sex, and we all know what the stance of the church is against CONTRACEPTION.

So wouldn't it be better if we educate ourselves first! Personally I am pro choice but I believe that before we introduce abortion to our country we better start implementing other things - like proper sex education and so on - after all prevention is better than cure!

Paul Barrett

Sep 18th 2008, 18:47

How would fiddling with the Constitution change anything. As abortion is already illegal, I cannot see any point in fiddling with the constitution unless it is the thin edge of the wedge to also ban the use of contraceptives/condoms etc.

Abortion was made "legal" in other countries to prevent "back street abortions" in none clinical environments often with tragic results. There are certain aspects that are personal and private to the individual - in principle and normal circumstances, I agree that abortion is wrong. Having said that, it is a personal decision which is already made doubly traumatic by forcing those that have made that difficult decision to have to leave the support of their family to go abroad for treatment.

A Mangion

Sep 18th 2008, 18:33

Please!! We have had enough of beating about the bush. Are we against abortion or are we in favour of it?? Times really do change. Some years back we did not know how to spell the word "democracy"; today, for everything under the sun we mention "democracy" or "freedom of choice". I. Grech stated that "we, as individual citizens, HAVE TO have the freedom to choose on any matter that concerns us as indivdiuals". On any matter?? Do we, for example, have the freedom to kill or to walk naked in the streets?

Let's grow up and call a spade a spade. If we are really and truly against abortion, why should we have reservations? Abortion is not a matter of "a new lifestyle" dear Mr Borg Micallef. If a new lifestyle means that abortion can be allowed than, yes, let's entrench it.

Daphne Caruana Galizia

Sep 18th 2008, 18:19

Chantelle, and how many women have babies because other people like Gift of Life pressure them into doing so? Your argument swings both ways.

I am pleased to see that, finally, people are speaking out against the pompous middle-aged men of Gift of Life and their abhorrent crusade to control the lives of women.

Is Malta the last remaining country outside the Arab world where men feel able to do this openly and with no shame?

Jeremy J Camilleri

Sep 18th 2008, 18:12

Channelle...the argument is not pro and against abortion.. it is regarding the constitution..

Do you seriously think that entrenching this law in our constitution would make it harder for anyone to have an abortion?

Much ado about nothing..this is only about ego....

eric saliba

Sep 18th 2008, 18:11

the main point here is not the act of abortion itself but having someone impose his / her will on others. we all know that any female who wants an abortion can have one in sicily or london so all this fuss about protecting an unborn child is a waste of time and space.
all those who are against abortion are free not to have one but no one should impose his will on others.
and btw the same applies to divorce and euthanasia.

R. Bartolo

Sep 18th 2008, 17:53

Quoting studies and evidence, what about the evidence that legalized abortion has contributed significantly to recent crime reductions in the USA?

It is simple... Babies most likely to be aborted, are babies most likely to be unwanted, which are also the ones most likely to become criminals.
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=174508

Anyone cares to comment about such facts?

John Abela

Sep 18th 2008, 17:52

Malta is a democracy and not a theocracy (like Iran). I am as anti-abortion as they come but let's keep fundamentalist religion away from our consititution. Why not put murder, fraud, and all other criminal acts in the consitution too? This is madness. I wish fundamentalist religious groups would stop forcing their religion down people's throats. I have always voted PN but I am fully behind Dr. Muscat on this one and I am glad that someone has the courage to stand up to the religious right. I want Malta to be a free secular society where people are free to choose their life-style.

s.bugeja

Sep 18th 2008, 17:48

@Keith Borg Micallef
Have you asked the baby if it wants to be aborted(killed)?
That's the whole point of the abortion issue. There is a second person involved. a person who is still unable to defend him/herself. We should keep this in mind. it is up to society as a whole to see that these persons are protected.

M Vella

Sep 18th 2008, 17:46

If GOL truly believe in their cause, their priority should be to convince Government to pay child allowance as from conception date, therefore reinforcing the fact that life begins at conception. In the UK, allowance starts on the 27th week from conception therefore enforcing the abortion concept, basically saying that a child is only a person at week 27.

Using the constitution is more than an overkill especially when there is no one who is promoting abortion in Malta.

K. Pullicino

Sep 18th 2008, 17:42

Life can never be protected enough.

"the state is duty bound to provide a legal framework for such."

The state is duty bound (by the Constitution) to prevent all that is not in the interest of the Maltese society as a whole.

Marco Desira

Sep 18th 2008, 17:35

I quote I Grech
"we, as individual citizens, HAVE TO have the freedom to choose on any matter that concerns us as individuals"

What is being missed here is that abortion is not about the mother nor about the father. Abortion is but about the defenceless unborn child. A child who was lucky enough to be conceived is suddenly denied the chance to live. Who has the right to decide on who is to live or not???

Chanelle Busuttil

Sep 18th 2008, 17:25

In a survey of American women who underwent abortions, 64% reported that they were pressured to abort by others. Many abortions are primarily the result of pressure, emotional blackmail, coercion, threats, or violence from boyfriends, husbands, parents, employers, doctors, counselors or other people with direct influence over women's lives.

Making abortion easily available has also made it easy for others to pressure or even force women and girls into unwanted abortions. If given real support, options, and resources to have their children, the vast majority of women having abortions would continue the pregnancy. Instead of receiving support, however, many find that they are pushed, coerced, lied to, or threatened until they undergo an abortion.

Coerced abortion exposes abortion as the "unchoice" and dispels the myth that every woman is freely choosing abortion according to her own conscience and maternal desires. In fact, at least 70 percent of aborting women say that abortion violated their moral beliefs and maternal desires. (Elliot Institute)

The ammendment to the constitution will not only defend the right to life of the unborn but also many women who in the hardest time of their lives make a decision which kills them from inside.

Jeremy J Camilleri

Sep 18th 2008, 17:25

Much ado about nothing. Dr Muscat has not accepted this proposal. He stated that he had reservations on the proposed amendment. He was clear. Obviously the GOL is trying to use his polite democratic attitude toward s there own end.

As for abortion...again, much ado about nothing..I believe that abortion is murder., but that is my opinion.
As with most things Maltese, it being a criminal act is just a joke. An abortion is only a ferry trip away.....and technically, since you do not even need a passport, well...its just like catching a bus, so, even should it be entrenched in our constitution...I can't say what that would change apart from some gloating fundamentalist claiming that he succeeded.

I Grech

Sep 18th 2008, 17:16

This is not about abortion. This is about freedom of choice. In this society we, as individual citizens, HAVE TO have the freedom to choose on any matter that concerns us as indivdiuals. If anyone is not comfortable with abortion, then do not do it. Simple. However any citizen who for whatever reasons wants to have the procedure, the state is duty bound to provide a legal framework for such.

A second point: It is not like maltese citizens are not having abortions overseas. This alone means that abortions are accesible only to the few who can afford to travel overseas and have the procedure done. The rest are bound to end up with an unwanted child. Are not all citizens equal? Or does the state allow loopholes for inequalities to exist?

Andrew Sciberras

Sep 18th 2008, 17:15

This is clearly abuse of the Constitution of Malta. The Constitution is not the place for abortion. For crying out loud, abortion is already a criminal offense punishable with up to 3 years imprisonment. But of course GoL wants to seal the issue forever through the complexities and rigidity of the Constitution of Malta. We should never transform our Constitution into a fundamentalist one. I advise the MLP to think long and hard on this issue and to have the courage to tell GoL - 'Thanks, but no thanks'.

Keith Borg-Micallef

Sep 18th 2008, 17:07

At least!! Something positive! Dr. Muscat is sane then… Hehe.

No, really, to accommodate these guys would be simply appalling. Dr. Muscat’s reservations are fully understandable. After all, he is a democrat. And as he said in his TV special, he has a new lajfstajl…which probably enables him to see what a cacophony of idiocy it would be to amend the constitution for such a reason...

Raphael Vassallo

Sep 18th 2008, 17:05

"The group in a statement later did not directly mention Dr Muscat's reservations, but said Dr Muscat had asked for more time to allow him and the MLP to reflect on the proposal."

This changes everything. It is evident that Muscat's position was distorted by GoL's statement.

I think we are owed an explanation from GoL as to why neither Muscat's reservations nor the references to Prof Seraccino Inglott and Prof Wain were mentioned.

Marco Abela

Sep 18th 2008, 17:04

Joseph Muscat I respect your stands with no strings attached. Coming from a Nationalist consider this a double compliment.

michael fenech

Sep 18th 2008, 17:04

I agree 100% that the unborn child does indeed have a right to life.
But on the other hand to put something like that in the Constitution you are wide open to a lot of other problems

Raisa Bianco-Bianchi

Sep 18th 2008, 17:00

Oh, you see!! Dr. Muscat himself has reservations on this topic. Well, done! At least he bears in mind that it would be deplorable to amend the constitution to please the GOL.

Raisa Bianco-Bianchi

Sep 18th 2008, 16:57

@ Pauline Barbara

The GOL will be meeting Gonzi further on, as he hasn't confirmed a date yet.

Mr. Muscat is the second Labour Party Leader (even though still unofficial, but still celebrated the 100days) to whom the GOL spoke to. Mr. Sant being the 1st one, and who also refused to sign the petition. (Something I truly admired in him) He also had prohibited the Labour Party to debate on such a topic.

Charles sammut

Sep 18th 2008, 16:54

More noise from GOL. In effect, who cares? In effect, what will it achieve? Pozzallo is only 90 minutes away and you don't even have to go through immigration now.

And haven't our politicians, in their infinite wisdom, already voted in favour of the EU constitution? So it is only a matter of time before our own Catholic Constitution will have to be dumped for the harmonised EU version.

Having said that, I am not in favour of abortion unless there are exceptional circumstances and then under stringent conditions. But the Constitution is not the proper instrument to legislate about it. It belongs in the Criminal Code. And Dr Joseph Muscat should have had the political integrity to tell these people where to get off.

Raisa Bianco-Bianchi

Sep 18th 2008, 16:45

@ K. Pullicino

I am terribly sorry it hurts you. Nonetheless, I am not applauding abortion, but just saying that this amendment (are you happy now Mr Galea? When I will become some Law freak I'll make you happier do not worry) is, unquestionably, unfair. You cannot impose on others; that would be deplorable. Everyone must live his own life, without interfering in others'. Apparently, however, this is not the case here in Malta. The law already protects unborn children, hence to further amend the Constitution is simply erroneous.

David Bailey

Sep 18th 2008, 16:45

Why is Dr Muscat wasting time with these people? This issue needs to be pushed down to the lowest priority possible by both parties so they can start addressing things that really affect us: the economy, rising food prices and inflation, the environment, illegal immigration and many more pressing issues.

After all whether you agree with abortion or not it is always a personal choice - a choice which is non existent on our islands.. We already a discriminatory law against woman preventing them from undergoing abortions legally, we don't need it in the constitution. GoL please stop wasting our politician's time and bury your discriminatory and undemocratic agenda.

Pauline Barbara

Sep 18th 2008, 16:40

Just out of curiosity has this prolife group approached Gonzi as prime minister for a meeting to see what his view is on this subject (after all he is in a stronger political position to effect the change in law they want).

If they haven't, then one can only question why?? I doubt MLP will adhere to this proposal, Joseph Muscat has just stated re: divorce that he doesn't believe anyone should impose their beliefs on others and the question of divorce should be resolved by a free vote on both sides of parliament.

Should Joseph Muscat dismiss this proposal at point blank or discuss it at party level? Lets be honest here this is a hot potato and to dismiss this group without even taking their proposal into consideration could insult the sensitivity of a number of people. Politics is a balancing game and rushing into decisions has been the downfall of MLP in the past, therefore I agree that MLP has agreed to discuss this issue, before presenting this group with their decision.

K Xuereb

Sep 18th 2008, 16:39

No one is applauding abortion here. Not even those who had to resort one do.

It's the ramming of the beliefs of a lone group down down our collective throats that annoys everyone.

As Raphael Vassallo pointed out earlier, the illegality of abortion is amply covered and is also safeguarded from any intrusion from Brussels. But this apparently is not enough for the mullahs at GoL, they also want to shackle future generations.

All this is overkill.

K. Pullicino

Sep 18th 2008, 16:25

"Get a Life! Live and let others live."

It hurts me to see people applauding abortion while saying the above statement since you continue to show that you're probably unaware of what goes on during an abortion. I'll pass a statement which perhaps you should think about:

Love Life and Life will Love you back.

l Galea

Sep 18th 2008, 16:24

@Raisa Bianco-bianchi
Raisa,
When you speak about the Constitution you do not speak of some ridiculous law put into our Constitution. You speak of amending the Constitution. The Constitution is itself a law, indeed the highest law of the land with which all other laws have to conform.

@Raphael Vassallo
So if a tiny minority is in favour of murder do you expect us to introduce the right to murder so that the tiny minority does not feel excluded?

This is apart from the argument and the pros and cons of whether or not the prohibition of abortion should or should not be in the Constitution.

Jan Sammut

Sep 18th 2008, 16:14

When will the Pro-Life lobby crawl out from the rock they have been living under. The whole argument is a non starter as there is absolutely nothing stopping someone getting on a 1Euro flight to London for an abortion in the morning and being back for dinner. (I am aware that flying within 24hrs of an abortion is contra-indicated but I know 2 people who have done this).

So please, stop the fuss. you have no right to impose your beliefs onto other people, but the fact that doing so will not change anything one bit just makes you look cretinous.

K. Pullicino

Sep 18th 2008, 16:13

Actually, the Constitution is the place where rights regarding life and death should be placed. I believe that something as serious as abortion should get into the Constitution since, after all, it is the Constitution that already gives us the right to live. The proposed amendment also makes it even clearer to the nitpickers that the Constitution acknowledges the biological fact that human life starts at conception and that if we're serious when it comes to protecting human rights, we won't discriminate between humans who are born and humans who aren't.

Raisa Bianco-Bianchi

Sep 18th 2008, 16:10

I find myself to fully concur with Mr. Borg-Micallef’s opinion. If I am living a democratic country I should be allowed to have certain rights. I am certainly not to consent to murders and so on to be ingrained in our Constitution. Nevertheless, such a thing like abortion should surely not be “banned”, by some ridiculous law put into our Constitution.

Why cannot you people accept it that there might be other people who do not agree with you? If you are against abortion it is ok with those who are in favour of it. When you dislike something you simply do not do it. But do not touch our Constitution to satisfy someone’s ridiculousness.

As Mr. Renald Galea said, rightly so, GOL, Get a Life! Live and let others live.

Raphael Vassallo

Sep 18th 2008, 16:10

What a pity. Joseph Muscat has passed up an excellent opportunity to establish his progressive credentials once and for all. But that is beside the point.

The main points are these;

a) Malta already offers more legal protection to the unborn child than any other nation on earth. This includes a ban on abortion (wihout mitigating factors) in the Criminal Code; the Domestic Violence Act which defnes the unborn child as a family member, with full rights; and a protocol obtained during EU negotiations to prevent abortion being legalised by means of pressure from Europe.

b) There is no tangible movement demanding the introduction of abortion to Malta;

c) Even if a tiny a pro-choice minority exists in this country, it also has the right to be represented by the Constitution and not made to feel excluded on a national basis.

d) Future generations should not be shackled. If pro-life arguments were as strong as their exponents make them out to be, they should be able to stand on their own merits without any need for artificial preemptive measures.

As for Joseph Muscat, please remember that other viewpoints exist, too.

wally vella-zarb

Sep 18th 2008, 15:57

Most people are against abortion; some oppose it regardless of the circumstances, while some have specific reservations.

The Laws are already there. Eventually, they may - or may not - be modified to cater for the fact that many do go abroad to procure a legal abortion and it is only the not so affluent who wish to, but do not.

But why have it entrenched? Where do we draw the line? Shall we now also entrench Murder? Rape? Robbery?

Adrian Micallef

Sep 18th 2008, 15:54

I am against abortion - however the Constitution is not the right instrument nor place to include such a clause. At this rate we will have all NGOs and pressure groups wanting to insert their cause into the Constitution. This is just fundamentalist.

Bertu Cassar

Sep 18th 2008, 15:52

So first and foremost i want to state that I do not agree with the principle of abortion.

Now I have a couple of questions for you, If a woman is pregnant and she is killed, is the killer sentenced for 1 or 2 murders? if a woman that knows that she has HIV/aids and decides to get pregnant, isn't that imposing on the baby something he/she cannot control? and if that is so there should be some legal repercutions? If a woman is beaten whilst pregnant and the baby dies, is the person who beat her charged with man slaughter also? and finally if a babby is "miscarried" and a baby has a right to live an autopsy should be carried out and the mother (whilst probably depressed beyond consolation) questioned and tested for the cause.

Saying that abortion goes against life is acceptable in my opinion but by banning it this will launch us on a new plateaux. If abortion is banned we would have to justify why this is done and women would have to register when they get pregnant and go through hell if the baby dies.

Keith Borg-Micallef

Sep 18th 2008, 15:50

Oh please. They want to put this in our Constitution!!!!! If someone is against abortion, then this someone will never plump for it. But if someone wants to undergo it, then this person must be allowed to do it.

I am a Maltese citizen, and I do not want this "ban" to be entrenched in our Constitution. Like me, there are many, many more people who do not want it to happen. I am not saying that only Dr. Muscat's party should not consider this proposal, but any other party as well. This Constitution is OUR constitution, not just of those wanting this ban to be implemented.

Sometimes it's more a question to look pious with these people rather than to really protect the babies. Can you please explain me one thing?? If someone is against abortion, will this someone ever opt for it? I guess they won't. So why should those who want it be denied excess to it? It is up to the person carrying the baby to decide.

Those wanting it, still go abroad to have it done on them. So perhaps legalizing it would turn out to a better option.

Franco Farrugia

Sep 18th 2008, 15:46

Dr Muscat should have given an outright NO. Abortion, rightly, is already properly banned by law and at the same time, I am totally against any witch-hunts: the prosecution of post-abortion women.

K Xuereb

Sep 18th 2008, 15:46

@ K Pullicino

The whole point of this lobby is to make it harder, if not outright impossible, to decriminalise abortion.

So if it will be as easy as you say to remove it from the Constition, what's the point of entrenching what's already provided for in the Criminal Code in the first place?

Pull the other one Mr/Ms Pullicino.

Pity Dr Muscat didn't give these guys the short shrift.

Joe Grima

Sep 18th 2008, 15:45

What is progessive, modernist Joseph doing considering this fundumentalist proposal? I am against abortion but I will not dream of imposing my opinions on others constitutionally. As a politician Joseph should stop being polite and address issues and people crudely so that people will know where he stands on the issues they propose to him.

Renald Galea

Sep 18th 2008, 15:39

At the start of his political career, Dr Muscat should show the country that he is one who does not take lightly to being bullied. If he succumbs to GoL's bullying tactics he can safely slink to the backwaters of the political arena and relegate himself to the ranks of the weak and impressionable.
I believe he has committed one big mistake by acknowledging GoL and what it stands for. He has unwisely succumbed to the "sitting on the wall" tactic by begging for more time to mull the conundrum over.
We expect our potential future prime minister not to be pushed around by a bunch of hypocritical fundamentalists.
Gift of Life, get a life!

Keith Borg-Micallef

Sep 18th 2008, 15:31

Wait, I might get misunderstood with my last posting here. I am against resorting to abortion as in the sense that if something can be done to prevent it, it would be better. But I know there are certain cases in which this comes out to be essential.

Anyhow, everyone has an opinion on abortion; those against it may not resort to it. But those who are OK with it, then they should be allowed to undergo it. No one should impose his opinion on others! Especially in a democratic country.

K. Pullicino

Sep 18th 2008, 15:26

Don't worry Mr. Borg-Micallef. If in the future, the majority will want to implement abortion, they can remove the right from the Constitution as easy as it would be added.

Oh, and protecting life is not "imposing" on others. It simply discourages abortions.

Ian Pace

Sep 18th 2008, 15:25

Any pro-life proposal should be welcomed. It is true that we live in a democratic society. Mr Borg-Micallef remarked that "imposing on others would be simply pathological!" So allow me to ask, should we start allowing murder? Rape? And every other criminal act since we are at it? According to Mr Borg-MIcallef's line of thinking our ancestors imposed on our democratic right when "certain acts" amonsgt the civil society were acknowledged as criminal and subsequently penalised. Policitians are elected to safeguard the interest of the society that elected them. For a change it seems that a no-voter (the unborn child) is being given a right! Well done to Dr Muscat and every other policitian, from all sides, that will put this porposal forward and eventually into our Constituition.

George Caruana

Sep 18th 2008, 15:23

Further to Mr. Keith's comments, it is quite naive to think that more legal restrictions will reduce terminations. On the other hand, a controlled and regulated process will increase the chances of saving pregnancies. However, it remains a private matter belonging to the foetus-bearing person.

P.Borg

Sep 18th 2008, 15:22

Keith

Nothing to do with democracy. Are you saying that since we are a democratic country one should be allowed to kill!!

'Imposing 'them from doing that would be un democratic??

Abortion is a much much more complicated subject than that.

The hardest question is, 'When does the impregnated egg become a human being?'

Keith Borg-Micallef

Sep 18th 2008, 15:08

Oh please!! I sincerely hope that Dr. Muscat won't consider this pathetic proposal.

I am against abortion as well. Nonetheless, we are supposed to reside in a Democratic country, and imposing on others would be simply pathological!

Entrenching such a clause in our Constitution would be totally erroneous!!! The Constitution is what rules this island, having it changed to satisfy this Vincenti and Mifsud guys would be balderdash.

I am sure Dr. Muscat is wise enough not to let these people impose on others!!!