Gay rights activists object to President's definition of marriage
The Malta Gay Rights Movement is objecting to President George Abela's narrow definition of marriage, which it believes excludes a "significant majority".
In an open letter to Dr Abela, MGRM referred to his definition of the family as a man and a woman, in a life-long commitment, linked to procreation. Addressing a national conference on the family last Saturday, he also emphasised the need for both a mother and a father for a family to exist.
"Whether intentionally or not, he excluded all those married couples who could not have children, including childless couples, adoptive parents, foster parents, single parents, cohabiting couples and any children they might have, and, of course, gay and lesbian parents," the movement said.
Asked for its reaction, the President's Office said: "The speech is available publicly and, as a public text, it is subject to whatever interpretation anybody who reads it might attribute to it. There is, therefore, nothing to add to what has been in the public domain for the past four days."
MGRM said in explaining the understanding of marriage in Maltese law, the President held that this was understood to mean the natural union of a man and a woman based on the difference between the sexes.
"The implication is that a union between two people of the same sex is, of course, unnatural. Clinging to this 'understanding' is a failure to acknowledge that, while up to 40 or so odd years ago homosexuality was deemed unnatural and a mental illness, science and research have taught us this is not the case," it said.
"Homosexuality is simply a natural and normal variant in human nature as well as in other species. While there are plenty of countries that have failed to take on this knowledge and continue to criminalise homosexuality, we were under the impression that, in line with other Western nations, Malta had actually moved on."
MGRM said in its letter, also addressed to the permanent secretary at the Social Policy Ministry, Frans Borg, that, to "make matters worse", the President also questioned whether children adopted by same-sex couples could lead to them suffering psychological and social harm.
It said it was parenting qualities such as love, commitment, responsibility and the ability to provide for the needs of the child that mattered.
To suggest that by simply being gay or lesbian caused harm to children was "as ridiculous as stating that no harm will befall children if their carer happens to be heterosexual".
MGRM lamented that throughout the conference, the move towards secularisation was touted as a threat to the family. The underlying message was that anyone not subscribing to Catholicism was completely lacking in any form of value system or, at most, could only hold an inferior set of values.
All unmarried and separated parents were presented as selfish and irresponsible, parading one sexual partner after another with no thought to their children; all children whose parents had undergone a separation were presented as irremediably traumatised; the increased diagnoses of attention deficit disorders in children simply the result of unloving parents.
It said the introduction of divorce in Malta would unequivocally lead to the conceptualisation of marriage as a loose knot that could be easily untied at the first hurdle.
It felt the conference failed entirely to critically engage the subject matter its title portrayed: there was only one family being considered and all others were demonised and shot down.
MGRM said the conference was nothing more than "propaganda for a conservative government's agenda" and the religious right that sat solidly behind it.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
Petrol price up 6c
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
24 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Kurt Mifsud
Jan 29th 2010, 19:27
@J Farrugia Jigifieri skond int jekk jien ma nkunx jista jkolli tfal, jew xi hadd minni jew il-mara tieghi nigu neqsin, naqghu mid-definizzjoni "tieghek" ta familja. Jien ili nqis ruhi familja mat-tfajla tieghi minn meta ikkommettejt ruhi ghaliha u m'ghandix bzonn la crieket u lanqas cerimonji jiswew l-eluf tal-liri, irrelevanti minn x'tahseb int u dawk bhalek li ghad irridu nhabbtu wiccna maghhom sa ftit generazzjonijiet ohra. Forsi wara dal-pajjiz jiehu naqra r-ruh sa fl-ahhar!
Franco Farrugia
Jan 29th 2010, 13:25
@ Paul Borg: LLLLOOOOLLLLLLL. You have omitted telling us which are you - the nut or the bolt?
Mario Gerada
Jan 29th 2010, 10:15
Ma x'biza! Seems like the crisis is more within Catholicism (as it is being practiced) itself rather then the family debate! The below comments from 'Catholics' are most worrying/scary!
Joseph A Borg
Jan 29th 2010, 10:10
@ David Borg: "Secularisation often results in a decrease of moral values and greater permissiveness, causing further erosion of the family"
you used the fluffy words: often, moral, greater, further. Assertion disqualified for being a useless jumble of bigoted and prejudiced hand waving masked as civil concern.
"Regarding gay adoption, the natural and traditional form of the family is also the best way to bring up children…"
At least you backed that up with a citation, the problem is that you used NARTH. They are a bunch of snake-oil merchants peddling discredited theories about homosexuality to make loads of money offering 'therapy'.
I recommend that when you cite something, use properly conducted studies, not the opinion of others even if they have epaulets, glorified prefixes and suffixes etc… I'm attaching a reference to an real study of actual families that indicates the opposite of what NARTH states:
"A new _study_ calls into question the idea that “fatherless” children are necessarily at a disadvantage or that men provide a different, indispensable set of parenting skills than women."
http://futurity.org/top-stories/good-parents-wanted-all-genders-apply/
Joseph A Borg
Jan 29th 2010, 10:07
@ john galea: "Say a father wants to marry his daughter or a mother wants to marry her son or a sister wants to marry her brother or a man wants more than one wife or a wife wants more than one husband"
my goodness! then we'll have moral, upright citizens wanting to marry their dogs, then zombies will invade the country and we'll have to fight them off with axe and pitch-forks to the last man!
J Farrugia
Jan 29th 2010, 07:45
it's people like you who should be ashamed of themselves not the undersigned. It's you who feel unsecure when someone (this time it was HE The President of Malta) says the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. The truth is that there is only one type of family: Father, Mother and children.
We will continue to speak the God given truth and let those who tremble at this state of affairs, open up their eyes. It's people like you who should feel ashamed. Instead of acting correctly and in a humble way, MGRM is opening wounds and milking them with salt. That's what MGRM is doing. It is trembling at its own destruction.
Paul Borg
Jan 29th 2010, 00:47
A bolt is defined as made up of a screw and a nut. Neither two nuts by themselves nor two screws by themselves will ever make a bolt or ever fulfil the functions of a bolt, regardless of how offended the two screws or the two bolts because of this fundamental and scientific fact. The same principles apply to the fundamentals of biology and natural law.
Joseph Carmel Chetcuti
Jan 28th 2010, 21:47
@J Galea who says that marriage is a union between a man and a woman "period", let me say that he is factually wrong. The Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Canada, Norway, Sweden, Portugal and South Africa all have same-sex marriages. Other countries will follow. It is now only a matter of time before Malta follows. History moves on and does not stop at a period of Galea's choosing.
As for those speaking of 'normality', may I ask them - what is so normal about God becoming man, God being born of a virgin, and God dying and rising from the dead? Catholics are the least entitled to put forward arguments based on 'normality'. The central tenets of their faith are abnormal and queer in the extreme.
Finally, definitions can be either descriptive or normative. A descriptive definition of marriage has to take into account the fact that some countries have same-sex marriages. A normative definition of marriage, as that suggested by the President of Malta, ignores this reality. It seeks to define marriage to what it is not. Descriptive definitions of marriage that exclude same-sex marriages are wrong because same-sex marriages ALREADY exist.
Joseph Carmel Chetcuti
Jan 28th 2010, 21:26
I cannot understand how a definition of "marriage" as a union between a man and a woman will strengthen (heterosexual) marriage. I mean how has it helped the heterosexual family in Australia and the USA where marriage was defined as that sort of union? Perhaps it is a convenient approach for politicians to be seen to be doing something to help the family without actually doing anything.
It is disappointing that those who want to confine marriage to that between a man and a woman and identify the family with only that created in a hetreosexual environement have no understanding of the historical development of both institutions. Heterosexual marriage a hundred years ago is not what it is today. Women occupy a different place in the family, as do children. There are no dowries. Arranged marriages are unacceptable. And so on!
The Gonzi government will probably introduce some minor reforms recognizing gay/lesbian relationships as it goes about redining marriage in an effort to pacify the lunatic right.
I just wonder why it falls on the President of Malta to do the 'political' work rather than on the PM? Why is the President not distancing himself from politics?
Robert Scullion
Jan 28th 2010, 20:18
@David Borg
"Besides according to some reasearch, childdren brough up by homosexual couples have a greater possibility of being homosexual or engaging in homosexual activity"
If that is true (which it isn't - still good to use American right-wing links to support your case, even if their judgement is dodgy) perhaps you could explain why some people grow up gay after living in a home with a mother and a father?
Franco Farrugia
Jan 28th 2010, 20:11
J Farrugia shouldn't be attacked. He should be pitied. And all those around him should be pitied in a special way, especially anyone who is dependent on him and at his mercy. He is still hanging on in the Old Testament.
The very Old Testament, har-har!
Maria Camilleri
Jan 28th 2010, 18:52
@ Jimmy Magro:
"Will the police take action against Trevor Zahra who also wrote a book full with chocolate experiences" ..... chocolate experiences? Is it that I do not understand your English or are you trying using a euphemism?
Franco Farrugia
Jan 28th 2010, 18:39
@ Doris Muscat: Whn MGRM express an opinion, it is just that, an opinion - their way of looking at things. What happened last Saturday at that family conference was different: then, we had the President, no less, making his views known, cutting short any possibility of a healthy discussion in this country about a very important and strong social issue. The President's is not just any other opinion - and he is supposed, and brands himself, as the President of the Maltese people. How soon tha honeymoon passed! Ask many people as to whether they see in him anyone different from previous incumbents of the Presidency. He has further divided the people with his words. No wonder he never became Leader of the PL. What's Left in him? Nothing!
How convenient for many people, including you, to bring in God into the equation. Well, I, for one, do not need to be told by people like you about what God did and didn't do. 'God' comes very easy in your speeches and writings - but how difficult it is to live him, day in, day out!
GiovDeMartino
Jan 28th 2010, 18:35
Ragel jizzewweg ragel!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Tibqaghux iddahhquna l-ahwa. Mela x'ridtuh ighid il-President?
Bernard Muscat
Jan 28th 2010, 17:16
J Farrugia: We'll start taking you seriously when you grow up and start having the guts to write your full name rather than hiding behind the initial of your first name. Until then, you are just someone who is ashamed of the opinion he holds. I don't blame you.
Julian Maddalo
Jan 28th 2010, 17:02
J. Farrugia and everyone else, why is it that you get so worked up, annoyed, frantic and even offended when the subject of gay rights is remotely referred to?
It's not like anyone's suggesting gay rights versus straight rights. Like it's never really black rights versus white rights, women's rights versus men's rights, children's rights versus adults' rights.
Just take a chill pill and stop the agro comments. Oh, and a 5-minute walk will give you a much-needed reality check....just count the 'family' varieties and see that times have changed, even in Malta.
Rosette Thake
Jan 28th 2010, 16:45
@ J Farrugia
A most Christian attitude indeed! Such hateful words are usually a sign of gross insecurity. I wonder if you could possibly give us an example of when Jesus Christ used such intolerant and uncharitable language. I would rather not be considered a Christian if I had to share the label with you!
john galea
Jan 28th 2010, 16:45
The problem with defining marriage more broadly will result in people demanding the right to marry their own children. SAy a father wants to marry his daughter or a mother wants to marry her son or a sister wants to marry her brother or a man wants more than one wife or a wife wants more than one husband. Marriage is the union between one man and one women period!
J Farrugia
Jan 28th 2010, 15:17
Colette Farrugia Bennett - No Collette we will never accept your style of fam,ily. It is you who have to accept what is the truth and normality. Unless you do that you will remain what you are : an outcast. That's why we use this word: outcast. You are casting yourself out of our world yourself and with your own volition. So dont try to teach us anything. You have nothing to teach us.
Ramon Casha
Jan 28th 2010, 14:52
@David Borg: Interesting that the article you quoted from the Italian constitution does not specify that the spouses need to be of different sexes.
PS: You should know that NARTH is a known fundamentalist anti-gay organisation.
David Borg
Jan 28th 2010, 14:25
The President dwelt on the concept of the family.
This concept is described in Article 29 of the Italian Constitution. The family is a "società naturale fondata sul matrimonio. Il matrimonio è ordinato sulla eguaglianza morale e giuridica dei coniugi, con i limiti stabiliti dalla legge a garanzia dell'unità familiare" (My translation is: natural society based on marriage. Marriage is based on the moral and legal equality of the spouses, with restrictions established by law to ensure family unity.)
Similary, in social sciences, the concept of the family is linked primarily with children.
Secularisation often results in a decrease of moral values and greater permissiveness, causing further erosion of the family.
Regarding gay adoption, the natural and traditional form of the family is also the best way to bring up children. The bringing up of children without a father or a mother is not ideal and should not be encouraged. Besides according to some reasearch, childdren brough up by homosexual couples have a greater possibility of being homosexual or engaging in homosexual activity (see http://www.drtraycehansen.com/Pages/writings_notinthebest.html and http://www.narth.com/docs/does.html).
Colette Farrugia Bennett
Jan 28th 2010, 13:10
@ Doris Muscat
If I accept that upholding the Roman Catholic religion is a sound principle, then I ask you to accept my sound principle of love and diverse family life. Unless there is a threat to Roman Catholics, they should by no means marginalise and discriminate against anyone who does not share the same principles. Another aspect that Roman Catholics should not accept is their leader preaching of love and then equating gay people with bush fires!
Where is the Love!
Jimmy Magro
Jan 28th 2010, 13:10
I think the police would need to work overtime to take action to people putting obscene statements. They will have the privelege of going together with Realta editor who is facing criminal charges in court Will the police take action against Trevor Zahra who also wrote a book full with chocolate experiences.
Let the justice balance be equal with everyone.
Doris Muscat
Jan 28th 2010, 12:32
To MGRM - your group has the right to say anything, other people aren't allowed to differ!!! You (MGRM) are always right and the victims and anyone trying to uphold that God made them a man and a woman is excluding everybody else!!! You need to be more tolerant and there's no need to feel marginalised because somebody has a sound principal!!