Joe Zammit, Paola
Divorce initiative and the people's say (2)
According to the opinion poll carried out by timesofmalta.com on whether a decision on divorce should be taken by Parliament or by the people at a referendum, over 77 per cent had opted for a referendum at the time of writing.
Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando has fallen in love with the Irish mode of divorce but he overlooked the fact that divorce in Ireland was introduced in 1995 through a referendum and not by a Private Member's Bill. At least, he should have asked for a referendum first, even though, according to the Constitution of Malta, it would not be binding in this case.
Since marriage precedes the state, and the family is the foundation cell of society, divorce will affect marriages, families and the whole of society.
In other words it will have an impact - in this case a negative one - on me, on you and on all Maltese and Gozitans.
So, all Maltese and Gozitans must have a direct and clear say on the introduction or otherwise of divorce in our legislation. This "direct and clear say" points only to a referendum.
At a general election, all political parties will have many issues in their electoral programmes. So, mixing divorce with other issues is not advisable. At most, they can promise a referendum on divorce during their term of office, if elected. A Private Member's Bill is inadequate to such an important and national issue as divorce.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
43 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Joseph John Meli
Jul 23rd 2010, 09:37
@Dr. Lynn Zahra::I can offer you an American Survey Proof that due to divorce, children of such parents are more likely to finish up in this situation and the state would be in a burden state with the ever increase of further criminality acts. Thereby, the church and the Government have to study in depth so as one would be more careful before one could consider the introduction of divorce in the Maltese islands!!
Good to mentioned also that the European Court for Human Rights in a sentence dated 18-12-86, in the case Johnston & Others vs Ireland, Johnston & others lost their case, because the Court did not find that Article 8 of the Human Rights obliged the country (in this case Ireland) to introduce divorce or to help the adults to better recognize their relationship.
One of the Judges was a Maltese, and the same thing can probably be stated in the case of Malta when we are stating that divorce is a civil right and out constitution gives a clear picture of our actual Christian/catholic faith...To change our constitution you must have 3/4 of the members in favour which is difficult!!!
Joe Zammit
Jul 22nd 2010, 16:15
A simple argument:
Never make a compromise with evil.
Divorce is evil, condemned by Christ.
Therefore, never make a compromise with divorce.
DIVORCE NEVER!
victor pulis
Jul 23rd 2010, 16:27
Very convincing as usual. yawn!
Andrew Farrugia
Jul 22nd 2010, 14:58
@ Lino Apap
Where did i force my beliefs "down other people's throats"? I simply defended the presence of the Cross in the classroom and briefly mentioned some of ways i will adopt should a retrograde court of law decide, in its infinite depravity, to remove the Cross from public places.
Lino Apap
Jul 22nd 2010, 07:08
@ Joseph Meli - pray tell me - what is the difference in the effect that separation has on children? Is the fact that their parents are separated but not D.I.V.O.R.C.E.D leaving any less negative on them than those chidlren whose parents have done the D-Word. Give me facts and figures on this Mr. Meli!
@ Joseph Zammit - please do not play this tune any longer - it is so jangled and out of tune that it is not even funny any more. God is no more betrayed by divorce than he is by a separated couple going their separate ways after their marriage has broken down!
@ Andrew Farrugia - good for you; it appears that you are ready to stand up for what you believe in. However, you should allow other people to do the same and not force your beliefs down their throats like Messrs Zammit and Meli would like to do.
Joseph Meli
Jul 23rd 2010, 09:40
Since 1974, about 1 million children p.a. have seen their parents divorce — and exposed to divorce two to three times more likely than their peers in intact...marriages to suffer from serious social or psychological...pathologies. In book Growing Up with a...Single Parent: What Hurts, What Helps, sociologists Sara McLanahan and Gary Sandefur found 31% of adolescents with divorced parents dropped out of high school, compared to 13% of children from intact families. They concluded that 33% adolescent girls whose parents divorced became teen mothers, compared to 11% of girls from..continuously married families. And McLanahan & co., found that 11% of boys from divorced families end up in...prison before the age of 32, compared to 5% of boys who come from....intact homes.
Tracy Caruana
Jul 21st 2010, 21:37
Ta hmar li jien nistaqsi x'differenza hemm bejn separazzjoni u divorzju. Il-koppja xorta mhux qed jghixu flimkien. Il-knisja kuntenta hekk imma allura ghandom jibqghu hekk?Allura jekk imbaghad jigri li f'hafna kazi jigri, dawn it-tnejn li huma jfittxu partner iehor u Ipoggu, imbaghad il-knisja ttambar kontra ko-abitazzjoni.
X'baqaghla taghmel mela dil povra koppja?. Anke patrijiet illum jikkoabitaw u l-kurja taf bihom. Mela ghalfejn dal kalvarju kollu fuq divorzju, koabitazzjoni ecc ecc.
Joseph MELI
Jul 21st 2010, 19:56
Since 1974, about 1 million children p.a. have seen their parents divorce — and exposed to divorce two to three times more likely than their peers in intact...marriages to suffer from serious social or psychological...pathologies. In book Growing Up with a...Single Parent: What Hurts, What Helps, sociologists Sara McLanahan and Gary Sandefur found 31% of adolescents with divorced parents dropped out of high school, compared to 13% of children from intact families. They concluded that 33% adolescent girls whose parents divorced became teen mothers, compared to 11% of girls from..continuously married families. And McLanahan & co., found that 11% of boys from divorced families end up in...prison before the age of 32, compared to 5% of boys who come from....intact homes.
Research indicates that....remarriage is no salve for children wounded by divorce. Indeed, as sociologist Andrew Cherlin notes in his important...new book, The Marriage-Go-Round, "children whose parents have remarried do not have higher levels of well-being than children in..lone-parent families." The reason? Often, the establishment of a step-family results in yet another..move for a child, requiring adjustment to a new caretaker and new step-siblings — all of which can be difficult for children, who tend to thrive on stability.
Joseph Micallef
Jul 22nd 2010, 08:40
Ok - so what would all these studies show differently from what's happening already with separations and co-habitation? Answers please.
Joseph MELI
Jul 26th 2010, 18:34
Joseph Micallef: Both have to use the force of forgiveness, start a new life ask God for his intervention and help and he would help you.
Joseph MELI
Jul 27th 2010, 13:05
@Joseph Micallef: Survey gave a clear indication that those that had been praying, hearing mass etc. from those that had...separated or...divorced, was as St. Paul told us, "those that pray together, stay together."Although...religion plays an important role in fostering a strong family orientation among men, it is by no means a silver bullet when it comes to addressing the challenges of the contemporary male problematic.
These communities have been particularly hard hit by the cultural and economic changes of the last half-century—e.g., the sexual..revolution, deindustrialization, etc.—that have fueled men’s separation from family life.
Judging by the results reported in this brief, religious men (and their wives) enjoy happier marriages, they are less likely to father a child outside of...wedlock. Therefore, any effort to strengthen men’s ties to their children and families must acknowledge and incorporate the important role that religious institutions play in directing men’s hearts toward home.
" Wilcox told Cybercast News Service. "But when they do, they are significantly happier..in their marriages, and they are much less likely to divorce, compared to couples who do not attend church. I would say that church..attendance is a beneficial component of marriage when it is done together.
Joe Zammit
Jul 21st 2010, 19:42
The teaching of the Catholic Church on marriage excluding divorce is based on the infallible words of Christ. Christ knows more than all of us what is good and bad for us. He told us clearly not to resort to divorce and spoke limpidly as well when he said that those who divorce and enter a second marriage are adulterers and adulteresses.
To speak in favour of divorce is irresponsible.
No MP can vote for divorce without sinning grievously. Christ forbids us to resort to divorce because what God has united let no man, no State put asunder! The great majority of Maltese and Gozitans who form the Maltese State are against divorce!
No MP can vote in favour of divorce without sinning seriously against God. God does not want divorce. So no MP who loves God can promote divorce.
Voting in favour of divorce = betraying God!
Joseph MELI
Jul 21st 2010, 19:27
@Dr. Lynn Zahra::I can offer you an American Survey Proof that due to divorce, children of such parents are more likely to finish up in this situation and the state would be in a burden state with the ever increase of further criminality acts.
Since 1974, about 1 million children p.a. have seen their parents divorce — and children who are exposed to divorce are two to three times more likely than their peers in intact marriages to suffer from serious social or psychological pathologies. In their book Growing Up with a Single Parent:
What Hurts, What Helps, sociologists Sara McLanahan and Gary Sandefur found that 31% of adolescents with divorced parents dropped out of high school, compared to 13% of children from intact families. They concluded that 33% adolescent girls whose parents divorced became teen mothers, compared to 11% of girls from continuously married families.
Andrew Farrugia
Jul 21st 2010, 18:50
@ Dr Lynn Zahra
"Remember the Lautsi case, the one where people not of Catholic faith were offended with the Crucifix exhibited in classrooms? That was against one's freedom of religion>>>"
Well, I have got news for you Dr Zahra. Irrespective of whatever ANY court decides there are a thousand and one ways i have already figured out about having the Crucifix in any classroom where i happen to be teaching: i can wear one, i can plaster one over my files, my books, i can even have one etched on my briefcase, etc., etc.,. I really cannot understand some people who are today denigrating the Cross. I remember that years ago I was forced to take a sacred oath when disciplinary procedures were brought against me and others for not going to work on a particular Mnarja day. I took that oath in all honesty and sincerity even if it meant condemning myself to the dastardly vindictiveness of the authorities in those days. We shall overcome.
Joe Grima Brussels
Jul 21st 2010, 18:12
Practically ALL those who are in favour of divorce, claim that divorce IS A HUMAN RIGHT. The word HUMAN DUTY is practically never mentioned! Why????
Every human being HAS A HUMAN RIGHT to marry. Every human being has the DUTY to safeguard, enrich and defend that marriage. But the word DUTY is not that popular, is it? For many, their belief is that it is a human right to marry, and a human right to devorce, without bothering with the burden of DUTY.
It's easier and more comfortable that way, isn't it? Convenience! Or better, 'disposable' lover.
George Vella
Jul 22nd 2010, 03:26
Mr. Grima you could not have put it better, many thanks. You are right because man's selfishness always tries to obliterate the sacred word DUTY. ...and this especially goes when a couple have children.
Joseph Micallef
Jul 22nd 2010, 08:47
Ok so you are saying that there should be no legal separations neither and neithr any annulments - correct? Oh and the governments should ban or disallow co-habitations as well! Correct me I am misinterpreting you, because from your words it seems that one should stay married as a duty, whatever quality of marriage it turns out to be.
Joseph Calleja
Jul 21st 2010, 15:51
Mr Zammit here you go again, it is becoming a joy listening to you and your sermons. Very entertaining at best, check the comments. You and I know that over two thirds of Maltese men and women are living in sin, COHABITING.( nasty word). 59% off the people opt for divorce, at least 300 men and women in Malta are gay or lesbian, probably a lot more. The rest only God knows. The writing is on the wall and that's why the billboard in Zebbug. The Catholic church is doing what it is supposed to do but I think it is going about it the wrong way. I think you are going about it the wrong way because you are doing more harm than good by condemning people that don't agree with you. You are not the church, nor the judge,let the Bishops and the priests do the talking, it's their job. You are entitled to your opinion but then so are others, all you are doing is infuriating people with your quotes and nobody cares. Again, Joe, check the comments. Maybe the end of the world is coming? Who knows?.
Joe Zammit
Jul 22nd 2010, 11:48
Joseph, are you so gullible to swallow the carrot of the 59%? Time will tell!
Peter Green
Jul 21st 2010, 15:42
@Joe Zammit
This is what God says in the bible about divorce (Deuteronomy 24:1-4):
24 If a man marries a woman who becomes displeasing to him because he finds something indecent about her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, 2 and if after she leaves his house she becomes the wife of another man, 3 and her second husband dislikes her and writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, or if he dies, 4 then her first husband, who divorced her, is not allowed to marry her again after she has been defiled. That would be detestable in the eyes of the Lord. Do not bring sin upon the land the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance.
Did Jesus (God) change his mind after he came to earth a few hundred years later?
Is the Old Testament God different from the New Testament God?
Wilfred L Camilleri
Jul 21st 2010, 16:56
Did you ever read Matthew 19:6. "Now are they not two then, but one flesh. Let not man therefore put a sunder, that which God hath joined together."
As to your question whether Jesus (God) changed his mind after he came to earth the answer is no and no the Old Testament God is not different from the New Testament God. But remember what Jesus said about the law of Moses in the old testament. "Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you: 'Whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.'
Duncan Scerri
Jul 21st 2010, 18:34
"Is the Old Testament God different from the New Testament God?"
No, it's the same god of Abraham. The same god who allows Protestants, Jews and Muslims to divorce.
It's only the man-made Catholic church that does not like divorce. Perhaps they would have a different view, were they still allowed to be married themselves, as they were before the Reformation. Sounds like a case of "dog in the manger".
Joe Zammit
Jul 21st 2010, 19:44
Peter, what you have written proves that you are still GREEN in Holy Scripture.
Joe Grima Brussels
Jul 21st 2010, 22:20
No Peter, Jesus did not change His mind regarding divorce, BUT MOSES DID. Actually Jesus blamed Moses for bowing under pressure 'because of their stubborness'.
Another thing: Moses was the Lord's ambassador. Jesus IS the Lord. So what Jesus teaches, is superior to what His ambassador says!!!!!
But for those who find Jesus' words unpleasant, keeping to the Old Testament is a better option. As if pretending not have heard Jesus' teachings, makesa them guiltless!
It is more 'convenient' to cling to the weak Moses, rather than accept Jesus' strong condemnation.
Victor Pulis
Apr 19th 2011, 20:32
Putting asunder means separating. The church allows separation therefore it is contravening God's law.
There is not one single case of God punishing anyone for divorcing his spouse. Why, when God punished the jews even for eating certain food and for wearing two fabrics together?! Divorce was governed by law presumably from God and we even read that bigamy was practised Deuteronomy 21;15-17. Did God give in to the hardness of their heart?
victor caruana
Jul 21st 2010, 15:01
Just a simple question to joe zammit:
do you agree that cohabitation, currently in vigore, is the best alternative to divorce?
if your answer is no, what in your opinion is the alternative to broken marraige....don't give us bla blaing.
if your answer is yes, what is the difference, apart from legal conditions, between cohabitation and divorce.
Is it DIVORCE NEVER but COHABITATION FOR EVER.
Joe Zammit
Jul 21st 2010, 15:48
Victor, the answer is easy: divorce means the dissolution of a valid marriage. That dissolution is not possible. In marriage it is God who is uniting two together. The State has absolutely no say in the celebration of marriage. If the State has no say in marriage, it has no power to dissolve it. So it's useless argue between divorce and cohabitation. Cohabitants are cohabitating because they want to; they can just separate. But marriage is for ever, even in the case of civil marriage.
victor pulis
Jul 21st 2010, 16:40
Joe you answered,(or attempted to anyway) Victor Caruana now will you answer me? i have been asking you the same questions for days now but no word from you yet. Where do you find annulment mentioned in the gospel? How are children of annulled couples affected?
Franco Farrugia
Jul 21st 2010, 18:42
@ Joe Zammit: If I were you, I would write less, reflect more.
If I have no say in some matter, I do not recognise it.
If the State has no say in the sacrament of marriage, and you are right (that is why there is the civil marriage that takes place some days before the religious function), then, that means that the State does not recognise the sacrament of marriage ON ITS OWN. And since the State does not recognise the sacrament of marriage on its own, then, there should be no problem, should there? Divorce would merely come in, in relation to the civil marriage. Even hence, the Church should have no say in the matter either because the sacrament of marriage, according to it, is going to remain 'intact'. No?
Dr.Lynn Zahra
Jul 21st 2010, 13:58
@Joe Zammit:
Mr.Zammit I am going to file a Constitutional case in the European Court of Human Rights demanding my right to remarry. That is an individula right.
Remember the Lautsi case, the one where people not of Catholic faith were offended with the crucifix exhibited in classrooms?
That was against one's freedom of religion, something which you can never understand.
But I understand you. You believe, like the pharisees, that only what you think and your interpretation of the bible is right - you have no respect for the opinion of others and certainly no mercy for those who made a mistake in assessing the character of their fiance' and married him.
You should set an example and show compassion not anger and a one size fits all attitude if you genuinely want people to believe in your Church's teachings.
Those who'd like more information on the Constitutional Court case I am filing soon please contact me at my new e-mail address : lynnzahra.leagle@gmail.com.
David Buttigieg
Jul 21st 2010, 16:24
"Mr.Zammit I am going to file a Constitutional case in the European Court of Human Rights demanding my right to remarry."
I wish you would really do it, I'm not a man of means but would contribute what little I can towards expenses.
So would, I'm sure, many others!
By the way, for the record I am a practising Catholic who honestly believes re-marrying is a sin, it's just that I believe in following Christ's example who NEVER FORCED people to follow him!
That would be a far far greater sin, and in any case I firmly believe Church and state MUST be separate!
Joe Grima Brussels
Jul 21st 2010, 19:13
I believe that the Pharisees were actually IN FAVOUR of divorce. Didn't they question Jesus about it, to trap him?
I am also to believe, that many lawyers are also in favour, for one 'practical' reason, as every divorce is a good source of income for them, is that so? Many a lawyer will be grateful to you if you succeed in your 'mission of mercy' with the ECHR!
Dr. John Zammit
Jul 21st 2010, 19:28
Dr. Lynn Zahra, I tried to send you an e-mail about your constitutional case but it is not going in. Check wether your e-mail address is correct. I support you in your case.
R.Gauci
Jul 21st 2010, 12:10
Mr.Zammit if you had read about the Irish Divorce Model you should know that it has several CONDITIONS ,the most important one is that to allow APPLY FOR IT ONLY couples which had been LEGALLY SEPARATED for at least FOUR YEARS (these can be set to more by lawmakers our MPS) and be able to marry again if they want to do so.
So my question which I asked several times on these letters regarding this subject will remain always the same and I really hope somebody like you can answer it to me is:
Why all this fuss and scaremongering by people like you in our society that the introduction of divorce with these CONDITIONS will bring more broken couples and families when these have been already broken by a legal separation something which is allowed and already happening in our country and no individual,party or institution was opposed to this LEGAL SEPARATION BILL when it was introduced or asked a referendum for it?
Ideally a couple live together until death but everyone knows that this is impossible for various reasons so what's wrong in giving a chance to start again?!
victor pulis
Jul 21st 2010, 11:25
@ Joe Zammit
'Since marriage precedes the state, and the family is the foundation cell of society, divorce will affect marriages, families and the whole of society.'
I beg to differ. Divorce will not affect strong and successful marriages but those marriages which have been irrevocably broken (they exist Mr. Zammit ) Cohabitation also affects society. What is the church's opinion on this? What if a referendum is held and the yes vote triumphs?
Would you write in to say that more than half of Maltese are destine for hell as you so often preach?
David Buttigieg
Jul 21st 2010, 12:11
Mr Pulis,
People like Joe Zammit would probably outlaw co-habitation, adultery and homosexuality too if they could!
They probably would love it if the country were run from the Curia!
David Buttigieg
Jul 21st 2010, 10:52
Joe 'Holier then thou' Zammit,
The only reason the Irish had a referendum was because they had to change the constitution, which in their case requires a referendum.
It was not for 'permission' to introduce divorce.
In Malta, contrary to popular belief, divorce is already legal, it is just not available! There is no need to change the constitution, and if you manage to explain how another person's divorce affects you, I would really appreciate it, as all we got from you on the subject is a lot of hot air on some of your god concepts or other!
Joe Zammit
Jul 21st 2010, 12:34
David, in Ireland there was a constitutional ban on divorce and the only way to withdraw it was through a referendum. But it was still a referendum in which the electorate had a say. And there is still the possibility to reinclude the ban through another referendum. In Malta divorce is not legal. What we have is just registration of a divorce given abroad and in a limited way. Not all divorces abroad are recognised in Malta.
David Buttigieg
Jul 21st 2010, 12:48
Joe Zammit,
Completely wrong, divorce is perfectly legal here, there is just no legislation for it, because contrary to Ireland there was never any ban on divorce in our constitution, and for argument's sake, contrary to Ireland we do not need a referendum to change our constitution!
Pity - for you!
Joe Zammit
Jul 21st 2010, 13:22
David, you are contradicting yourself. You are saying there no legislation on divorce in Malta and at the same time you are saying divorce is legal. If there is no law how can it be legal? Legal means "according to law".
David Buttigieg
Jul 21st 2010, 16:17
@Joe Zammit,
Let me try and explain it as simply as you may possibly understand it! One cannot get divorced in Malta because there is no legislation for it and NOT because it is illegal, hence if I get a divorce abroad it is recognised as such and I can get married again in Malta, even as a Maltese citizen I am recognised as divorced because it is NOT illegal for a Maltese to be divorced.
If, I go to a country where polygamy is allowed, and I get married there whilst still married here, I may be charged with bigamy upon returning to Malta because polygamy, unlike divorce, is ILLEGAL here!
Get the difference?
Since there is no legislation for it, the courts etc cannot act upon it but that does not make it illegal!
Joe Zammit
Jul 21st 2010, 17:00
David, you are confusing everything. You don't know law and so it's useless for me to argue with you.
Franco Farrugia
Jul 21st 2010, 10:00
Zammit's letter reminds me of what Ranier Fsadni wrote in one of his article, a couple of weeks ago. Enough said for those who are intelligent enough to think.