Advert

Two Nationalist MPs join anti-divorce Facebook group

An anti-divorce Facebook group which has already garnered the support of 1,500 members has been joined by Nationalist MPs Franco Debono and Edwin Vassallo.

But when contacted, Dr Debono said he could not really remember joining the group.

“If you say I’m on the group, then yes I’m on the group. I’m taking your word for it. I’m not contesting it... In principle, I am not in favour of divorce. But there is an ongoing discussion and I intend to follow it...”

He stressed, however, that he was not one to take a “frontline” stance on this issue and there were other MPs for that. He said he was more interested in issues such as the South and the right to a lawyer when under arrest.

Mr Vassallo, on the other hand, was more convinced about his membership in the group and said he was yet to be persuaded that divorce could remedy the situation today.

“I’ve been saying this... I am convinced because I know the consequences that divorce has had abroad. As chairman of the Social Affairs Committee I’m constantly in touch with the consequences of separation. I think divorce will just make the pain worse.”

The group also attracted the much loved sexagenarian rock ‘n roll star Freddie Portelli, ironically famous for his break-up song Mur u Ħallini (Go and leave me alone).

The group, entitled “We say no to divorce in Malta”, starts by pointing out that Malta is one of only two countries in the world which does not permit divorce.

“We aim at gathering those who understand that we should not follow where others have failed. It is our conviction, supported by statistics, that divorce should not be legalised.”

The group’s young creators, Benjamin Camilleri and Alexander Vivian Grima, appealed for anyone who does not favour divorce to join the group, regardless of their reasons.

“Many people argue that divorce is unholy and it goes against the wishes of God and the Church. At the same time there are those who do not believe in divorce, not for spiritual reasons but more in terms of social morals... This group is aimed at gathering all anti-divorce Maltese people into a single group, whatever the reason may be.

“We may not agree on why divorce should not be introduced in Malta, but we all have a common enemy: Divorce itself.”

When contacted, Mr Camilleri said he had not expected such a “huge and fervent” response but always believed there was a silent majority against divorce which is afraid of making its voice heard.

In fact he said he had “no qualms” about there being a referendum on the issue.

Advert

96 Comments

Post comment

Comments are submitted under the express understanding and condition that the editor may, and is authorised to, disclose any/all of the above personal information to any person or entity requesting the information for the purposes of legal action on grounds that such person or entity is aggrieved by any comment so submitted.

At this time your comment will not be displayed immediately upon posting. Please allow some time for your comment to be moderated before it is displayed.

Your User Profile is incomplete.
Please click here to complete your profile before posting comments.

B. Cachia

Aug 1st 2010, 12:49

Yes, this is the only strong argument that I know of against the introduction of divorce: it would change the nature of the marriage contract, watering it down considerably. To some extent, this has happened already, with the removal of the social stigma that once used to be associated with separation and cohabitation but, yes, divorce could well weaken it further.

In my view, the debate should be about 'how' to introduce divorce. For example, we currently have two parallel systems for annulment where the Church tribunal decides on Catholic marriages and the Courts decide in other cases (civil marriage, or cases where both parties agree on a civil process). Why not have a similar model for divorce, which would mean that this would be available only to couples married in a civil ceremony or where there is the consent of both? In this way, the option of a Catholic marriage sanctioned and protected by the State would remain in place. That is the option I would choose for myself, or not get married at all. I think that many couples, when considering their options, would likewise opt for a 'strong' marriage vow as opposed to a 'weak' one.

B. Cachia

Aug 1st 2010, 20:55

@ Joe Zammit: And what about cohabitation, heresy, homosexuality, contraception, non-attendance of mass etc? Is the Catholic politician who stands idly by and does not take action to outlaw and prevent these activities also 'sinning seriously against God'? If so, what penalties do you propose that a Catholic politician should impose on heretics, for example?

C Grech

Jul 31st 2010, 09:17

Well said, Ms Calleja. The mentality presented by some here on this blog is one such that if you are married - and divorce is eventually legalised - then all married couples will be getting divorced. Blinkered mentality, or what?? Not everybody is lucky enough to land themselves in a happy marriage. What happens to that wife and kids where the husband/father just takes off (not necessarily with someone else) and they are left in limbo - not knowing whether he's coming back or not? What about victims of physical/psychological abuse, be they spouses or kids? Couples grow together in marriage when they work hard at it, communicate and most of all have RESPECT for each other. When one side starts to evade and disrespect the other, that's when trouble sets in.
PS - As for Dr Debono not remembering joining the Facebrook group, words fail me!!

m. borg (slm)

Jul 31st 2010, 14:24

As if not voting for those two but still vote gonziPN will change anything the stance taken by gonziPN will still mean no to divorce.
How naive.

victor pulis

Jul 30th 2010, 18:55

How can they go against the current if according to them they are in the majority?

MBorg

Jul 30th 2010, 16:31

We have been getting this comment over and over.

It seems that some people commenting here are happy to let us know that they are now wise enough to know that the earth is not flat.

What this has to do with divorce is beyond me.

Ramon Casha

Jul 31st 2010, 07:55

Oh they can, absolutely.

However, since they are politicians, it makes sense for people to see what they stand for before the next election comes.

JOe Gatt

Jul 30th 2010, 15:59

Petitions will not make much the change.
Ignore all the garbage. Yr vote will make the difference. Make the change yourself @ election time

cfarrugia

Jul 30th 2010, 14:56

Dear Mr Zammit,

'God unites a couple in marriage' if the marriage is a church marriage. And what about a state marriage ?? Does God have 'jurisdiction' here as well??

Joe Zammit

Jul 30th 2010, 16:34


Mr Farrugia, God is always uniting two together in every valid marriage. Christ was clear enough, speaking of all marriages: "What God has joined together let no man put asunder!" In all marriages the man and the woman leave their parents and family to unite together and they become united together for life by God. God has created humanity and God has created marriage. So only he has the right to put rules to it.

victor pulis

Jul 30th 2010, 19:02

Joe does that include a Hindu, Bhuddist, Muslim, marriage? By the way are you still of the notion that only catholics go to heaven? And if you happen to meet a pro divorce activist in the street would you talk to him/her knowing that he/she's in league with the devil?

C Fenech

Jul 30th 2010, 21:31

The Orthodox Church allows that a person gets a divorce for up to 3 times. They are also Catholics :)

B. Cachia

Jul 30th 2010, 22:45

@ Joe Zammit: No, he obviously was not referring to civil marriage, as this is considered to be totally non-existent by the Church. So much so, that a couple married in a civil ceremony only need not even obtain a separation, let alone a divorce, before marrying other people in Church (without any civil effects, of course).

Sabrina Borda

Jul 31st 2010, 08:14

If marriage is forever and a break from it is evil, then how come the church granted over 600 annulments in just five years? Marriage is not forever to many. Love dies. You are happy to see broken people suffer.

joe gatt

Jul 30th 2010, 11:39

Pro, Against, Religion etc etc. All irrelevant, simply disregard all the BULL Excrement & do not even bother.
HANDS UP, all those in favor and be counted.
At election time use your brains and vote wisely, if you want to make it, VOTE IT IN.

Small kids love Candy as much as politicians need yr vote. Show resolve & attitudes will change.
Do not permit others to dictate, but take charge & control yr own destiny

Charles Zammit

Jul 30th 2010, 17:33

Well said Joe.I think many people are thinking like you.

Kat Gauci

Jul 30th 2010, 19:32

The only question is: Will any political party include it in their electoral manifest?! The promise of a free vote is a joke so it's AD for me next time!

victor pulis

Jul 30th 2010, 19:06

Think again Michael. Joe Zammit still thinks that only catholics go to heaven if there was such a place.

Ramon Casha

Jul 30th 2010, 11:03

Good point. Facebook does not allow people to join in a discussion without joining the group first, although personally I prefer to join, post the comments then leave the group - just so that I don't show up as a "supporter".

G.Debono

Jul 30th 2010, 12:02

Agreed, but please respect my intellegence and don't talk crap saying that you don't know if you joined a facebook group or not. I mean, if the guy is suffering from dementia, then representing the people in parliament is a no-no and he should resign.

To me, this man is after fame and he is playing a chess game, toeing a fine line to please people's perceptions. He did it in the past when he created that mess in parliament and he is doing it now.

MBorg

Jul 30th 2010, 13:07

Is there any need for you to defend Franco Debono ? I hope you are not doing this because you think that by joining this Facebook group he might lose votes of the pro divorce brigade ?

I trust that our MPs have the guts to stick to their principles in somthing that is so important to our nation and that they just do not run after votes.

David Spiteri

Jul 30th 2010, 11:08

"Divorce is a human wrong, destroys the family and hurts women and children." I think the anti-divorce side is missing some thoughts.... a family is destroyed WELL BEFORE DIVORCE is granted. A family is destroyed for many reasons BUT NOT FROM DIVORCE. No family which is living happily, come one day and decide to divorce.
Also, if divorce is introduced, IT WILL BE NOT IMPOSED!!! This is not an imposed tax or any other contribution towards the country but it's something that SHOULD YOU NEED IT and SHOULD YOU WANT IT, you can file for divorce. Divorce or not, families will still brake up and children will still continue to struggle from broken families.

Paul Barrett

Jul 30th 2010, 11:11

@ J Farrugia
Quote: Divorce is a human wrong, destroys the family and hurts women and children Unquote.
Divorce is not a sexist process nor does it destroy the family. By the time you get to the divorce stage, the marriage is already over, the hurt to both spouse and children is already done by separation. Divorce is only a stage which will allow one or both of the spouse a chance to future happiness should they wish to do so.
Is it better for society if people live together and even produce children outside marriage as is happening now or better that they have the option to be allowed to get married and form a legally recognised marriage with legitimate children.
The only reasons other than religion for preventing divorce after a legal separation is jealousy and spite - that is a human wrong.
Discard religion in this debate as divorce is a civil matter.

Joe Grima

Jul 30th 2010, 12:23

Your prejudices give the campaign for divorce the impetus, the power and speed it needs to become a living reality. You call people whose marriages have failed and who are living with new partners "pogguti". What right do you have to call ayone else names? How do I know what kind of life you yourself are leading so that I could find the right appellative for you? After all there must be hundreds of maried meen and women , if not thousands in this country who have mistresses or lovers in secret, who visit prostitutes or who have a fetish for young children? Does that make their lives more proper and more socially acceptable than those who are openly living with new partners and raising new families? You can dig your heels into the ground as much as you like . Mr Farrigia. Get the Bishops to give you a helping hand and then hide yourself somewhere as the divorce case goes forward in Malta's courts first. As the motor car dumped the horse and cart so will the likes of you disappear when divorce in Malta becomes a reality.Keep on writing., The pro-divorce lobby needs you. .

rgalea

Jul 30th 2010, 12:30

Catholic compassion oozes out of your comment.Your use of the term "pogguti" used in a derogatory fashion is quite an eye opener.

From what statistic do you deduce that cohabiting couples are the only people requesting divorce?

Now a practical scenario:
One of the spouses has suffered years of abuse and her/his partner has been finally locked away for good.
Should the other spouse not have the possibility of rebuilding her/his life?

About God....well, God seems to play by different rules depending on the culture you are born in.It's not a question of being cynical but of being objective.



Peter Korsten

Jul 30th 2010, 12:53

Your problem is that you think you can decide what's good for other people. You can't. If there's one wrong that must be eradicated, it's the idea held by certain people who feel that they must interfere and tell others what to do.

It's none of your business.

Jeremy J Camilleri

Jul 30th 2010, 13:35

J Farrugia..if there was ever a perfect example of someone who uttered statements so contradictory to Christ's teaching, that someone would be you.

I suggest you go and read the new testament. Your rhetorics have no place in a civil society, Catholic or otherwise.

Fenech MD

Jul 30th 2010, 12:40



Alison, l-ewwel trid titghallem id-differenza bejn annullament u divorzju.
Annullament iz-zwieg qatt ma sar/mhux validu minhabba xi haga gravi f'xi hadd mill-mizzewwgin li qatt ma giet murija qabel iz-zwieg.
Divorzju - Iz-zwieg kien validu imma issa tkisser/spicca.


Alison ghalkemm naf li HADD jew talanqas hafna minn min jizzewweg ma jkollu intenzjoni li jkisser iz-zwieg tieghu, xorta nemmen li d-divorzju mhux ser jirranga l-affarijiet. Jien naf hafna separati li jghidulek li la ma rnexxiex l-ewwel zwieg ma jharsux aktar lejn zwieg. Jippreferu 'jpoggu' ghax jekk jinqala' xi haga, kulhadd telaq ghal rasu, bla qrati xejn.


Min jghid li z-zwieg huwa xi haga facli biss? Fih is-sabih u t-tajjeb tieghu, imma jekk veru temmen fih, tiggieled kwalunkwe intopp li ssib u fejn ma tasalx titlob l-ghajnuna. Dan bhal bniedem drogat; hawn hafna tghalim u ssib hafna jaqghu fil-vizzju tad-droga. Min jibda jghidlek nieqaf meta rrid, imma hadd ma jirnexxilu jaqta' dal-vizzju minghajr ghajnuna. L-istess iz-zwieg, flok naqtghu qalbna nfittxu l-ghajnuna.





Andrew Farrugia

Jul 30th 2010, 14:59

Yes we know that you have a blog where you do your scribbling and waffling; no need to constantly advertise your wares, honey.

D Vella

Jul 30th 2010, 11:02

They are victims of their indoctrination. They haven't been taught to think for themselves but simply to believe what they are taught.Who was it that said"Give me the child to the age of seven,and I'll show you the man"?.

J Farrugia

Jul 30th 2010, 10:25

l-iswed ghidlu dejjem iswed u l-abjad dejjem abjad. Mhemmx tan-nofs.

R. Pace

Jul 30th 2010, 11:38

Farrugia jien la jien miżżewweġ u anqas separat, allura la naf ir-realtajiet ta' zwieġ ħieni u wisq anqas id-dieqa ta' zwieg li mar ħazin.

Imma nassiguark li jekk l-Eżekuttiv jitfagħha fuqi biex nagħżel, nivvota favur sempliċiment biex nagħlaq ħalq il-Farrugiajiet u z-Zammitijiet ta' din il-gżira.

Qed tihem issa x'riedet tgħid Cauchi???? Hemm mod u mod kif l-iswed tgħidlu iswed u l-abjad tgħidlu abjad.

Ramon Casha

Jul 30th 2010, 11:05

If God comes over and tells us that in person, I'll take his views into consideration.

Adrian Cardona

Jul 30th 2010, 11:21

So don't divorce if you believe in God...and leave the rest of us in peace. Your prejudiced comments full of hatred at anyone who doesn't believe in your 'God' make anyone with a reasonable disposition weep in frustration.

victor pulis

Jul 30th 2010, 19:29

I agree. They have a right to voice their opinion but they also have a duty to at least remember if they have joined a facebook group!! And another thing, you said that divorce destroys the family and hurts women and children. What does annullment do?

Ramon Casha

Jul 30th 2010, 11:01

Another lapsus perhaps :)

David Caruana

Jul 30th 2010, 10:31

That would be the day!

The Maltese pro-marijuana-legalisation group holds double that number!

Andre Cilia

Jul 30th 2010, 10:43

ask the PL...

Charles Sammut

Jul 30th 2010, 10:09

Who is "God"? A figment of Man's imagination and in whose name the most horrific crimes have been committed.

Nobody denies your right to believe what you will, but do not impose it on others. You can believe that the Earth is the centre of the Universe because that is what "God" used to want people to believe in the Galileo's time. Or that Man's evolution did not happen because that is what "God" used to insist on in Darwin's days.

"God" is also known to have changed his mind on various things according to the Old and the New Testament. Who knows whether he might change his mind again in the future?

Whatever your "God' might want, people will still get on with their lives and either separate and take new partners or not get married in the first place. We can choose to regulate that with divorce, or we can bury our heads in the sand and brag about an illusion called Malta Cattolicissima in the vain hope of pie in the sky.

A.Attard

Jul 30th 2010, 10:25

Charles chill out, he is not imposing nothing it is his right to believe what he wants.

“Looking up at the cross, I said six simple words, ‘What have I got to lose?’ Afterwards my whole life has changed. It’s been hard, but I wouldn’t change it for anything. Rather go my whole life believing that there is a God and find out there isn't than live my whole life thinking there isn't a God and then find out, when I die, that there is."[14]

Dave Mustaine

Charles Sammut

Jul 30th 2010, 10:36

@ A Attard

Your attitude sadly reflects widespread Maltese mentality, "majteswel". It is also how every gambler reasons. Majteswel niehu biljett tas-sooper fajf, x'ghandi x'nitlef?

A.Attard

Jul 30th 2010, 11:45

You are very wrong once again Charles

Am I saying those words ?... No so give us some space to breathe before judging.Afterall a ''majteswell'' mentality as you call it for a good reason is better then living a live in sin ax ''Xalabiebek'' .Yes we are here to live our life ,majteswell live it good and for others.

victor pulis

Jul 30th 2010, 14:20

A Attard would you change your way of life if you found out there was no God? Do you think that all those who don't believe in a god are living a sinful life? On the contrary, many are living an altruistic life because they are not expecting a reward after they die. If, when they die they do find themselves in front of a god I'm sure he would understand them. Of one thing I'm certain. They will not be accused of transgraetions done in his name.

martin saliba

Jul 30th 2010, 15:30

My god wants divorce. So are we now going to have fights between gods ?

A.Attard

Jul 30th 2010, 15:43

We do not judge who is sinfull Victor Pulis.We neither judge who is waiting for a reward or not, Start working volantary work Mr Pulis without getting paid, or you do want your reward after a months work? :) .

victor pulis

Jul 30th 2010, 19:14

Yes I get paid for my work for the simple reason that my family and I need food on the table. So your feeble comparison holds no water. Contrary to what you said there are persons on these comments who have stated that only catholics are destined for heaven. So they do judge.

Advert
Advert