Melita Galea, St Paul’s Bay
Instances where divorce is not a moral offence (3)
I am 100 per cent against divorce but I agree with a referendum on one condition: That only the children who suffered from a broken family can vote on this issue and nobody else. Most of us have a thirst for respect and honesty.
32 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Gerard Cassar
Sep 6th 2010, 20:23
The debate on divorce has gone well beyond what intelligent people are able to say. Now we are reading repetitions. Some are without taste, others are subject to certain common mentality, and few are dictated by personal feelings. If we continue this way come next December and Mr. Pullicino Orlando will have nothing new to write about. His leader will shut him up since he is against by all means. So why not write about the scandalous Power Station tender. The millions that will be changing hands. The suspicious dealing; the signing of the contract the after effect when completed. Divorce made us forget such scandalous dealings that affect all Maltese that are under threat of an E.U. multi million charge for irregularities. If this threat is imposed poor us Maltese we will have to find a way to collect some 200 millions x 2 or x 3 Depending on how the contract is interpreted by the E.U. the Government the BSWC .The opinion of those interested makes interesting reading particularly after the E.U letter warning the government The Sliema case filled pages and still is, how much new Power station fill. The debate will surely not abate for months
B. Cachia
Sep 5th 2010, 09:47
I think the adults who vote in referenda and elections do not normally ignore the interests of children. Almost all our political decisions will have an impact on children and on future generations and yet they are taken by adults. I don't see how this issue is any different.
M. Grech
Sep 5th 2010, 08:50
Hemm angolu iehor kif taraha din. Ghax ahjar t-tfal jghixu f'dar fl-imhabba ta' divorjati mizzewga milli fid-dar bla imhabba t'ommom u missierhom f'atmosfera ta' bruda, glied, abbuz u mibgheda ghax meta jkun spicca zwieg u relazzjoni bejn mara u ragel min dan issib.
Joe Zammit
Sep 4th 2010, 03:54
The two characteristics of every marriage are Unity and Indissolubility.
Unity means a marriage between one man and one woman.
Indissolubility makes marriage for ever, i.e., until the death of one of the spouses.
It is possible to get married for life, always by God's grace. That's why the saying goes: Three to get married: the groom, the bridegroom and God.
We must all remember that marriage is a life-long service.
George Vella
Sep 4th 2010, 01:53
Ms Melita Galea, such a very short letter on th subject of divorce but I assure you that it made the most impact, well said. Many people have the courage to comment but have no heart to understand this delicate issue where children are concerned. They fair better if they keep their mouth shut!
Joseph Calleja
Sep 3rd 2010, 16:44
It's your prerogative to be against divorce but that's only your opinion and everybody else is entitled to theirs. See Ms Galea you are 100% against divorce and I happen to be 100% for divorce. Now what? You forgot to mention a few others that should be included in your cause. What about abused and battered wives and abused children? Don't you think they should have a vote? What about the wife whose husband is cheating on her and then comes home demanding sex from his wife? What about wives who haven't been touched by their husbands for years? What about mental and physical abuse? Ms Galea as I told that other guy many times, MIN IGARRAB IKUN JAF. Because you have a happy marriage, maybe others are not so lucky. In a democratic country like Malta, everybody has a vote. One citizen, one vote no matter what religion, party affiliation color or creed. This is a civil matter not a church matter, don't confuse the two..
Ms P M Graham
Sep 3rd 2010, 18:31
What an excellent post Mr Calleja. I would also add that in many cases Divorce is a blessing to many children.
C Cini
Sep 4th 2010, 00:32
As I said before divorce effects everyone. Even Catholics and priests are negatively effected by divorce. It is called people get polluted by the mentality of society. Priests cannot teach moral issues since everything will become nonsense. We are talking like on moral issues because we have the Church (thank God), otherwise we follow what normally irresponsabile politians make us to believe, in the name of freedom. Mr Calleja and all those, who in favour of divorce should know how will effect society. Not how will effect your private life, although those who think that divorce will help to have a happy marriage life, I have my doubts. I have personally seen this in other countries. Also I have my doubts to say that divorce is a real blessing for children. When those children grow up they think twice if they get married or not. The majority they choose to co abitate. What a blessing Ms Graham!
Joe Zammit
Sep 3rd 2010, 16:25
A simple argument:
The Constitution is above all national laws.
The Constitution states that the authorities of the Catholic Church have the right and duty to teach what principles are good and what principles are bad.
Therefore, the right and duty of the authorities of the Catholic Church to teach what principles are good and what principles are bad are above ALL national laws, including the Electoral (Polling) Ordinance, such that the Church can continue to teach also in a referendum, general elections and during a vote in Parliament.
JOSEPH ZAMMIT
Sep 3rd 2010, 17:33
Your argument, though reflecting the truth of the matter, is discriminatory. I wonder what would have been your opinion were the religion of Malta been Islamic and you catholic? It is well to remind you that the people are above the constitution. The Maltese people have the power to remove Article 2 from our Constitution. It is high time that we realize this. Arrogance from the church is due only to article 2 of our constitution and also to the unawareness of the majority to this fact. Our Constitution belongs to the people and not to the Catholic church. The POWER IS WITH THE PEOPLE AND WE CAN REMOVE ARTICLE 2. I call to the Maltese to GET OFF YOUR KNEES AND start walking upright as real humans!
Joseph Calleja
Sep 3rd 2010, 19:12
@ JOSEPH ZAMMIT with caps.....hehehe Maybe Article 2 should be put up for a referendum with the divorce issue. Article 2 is confusing State with Church. The problem is the church is in control because of that article 2 you mentioned. And which of the MPs has the gall or otherwise to put such a thing on a ballot? On the other hand those of them who favour divorce are already condemned to hell anyway. I don't care which party emerges triumphant, Malta needs a big change, it is way overdue.
M Vella
Sep 3rd 2010, 19:28
Joe you said...A simple argument: The Constitution is above all national laws ,do you know that If a domestic law is inconsistent with EU law,EU law prevails.
joe aquilina-stjohn
Sep 3rd 2010, 14:56
Can someone tell me what is different from being separated or divorced, other than the re-marrying argument? In separation, the children still suffer; the innocent party still suffers, and "what God joined together" a man has put asunder (the judge)!!
There is a modicum of hypocrisy all round. Remember when Carlo Ponti (a Catholic) divorced his wife so he could marry Sophia Loren (a Catholic)? Their union was denounced by the Church, but a few years later, when all te ballyhoo died down, Sophia Loren was welcomed with open arms by the Pope.
Joseph Micallef
Sep 3rd 2010, 15:44
This reminds me of when Brigitte Neilson - former wife of Sylvester Stallone (divorced) was allowed to get re-marriad at a chapel in St. Julians! Maybe film-stars have some special privilages before God! Boq!
William P Flynn
Sep 3rd 2010, 14:26
Bishops, priests, muzewmini, can never use divorce so they are not stakeholders at the table of this debate. They bring nothing to the table except Bronze Age quotes and catechisms written by celibate unmarried men.
Catholics are forbidden to divorce by their imaginary god, so they’re not stakeholders either. And anyway they can buy their special type of divorce, called an annulment, with a few thousand Euros.
Catholic annulments aren’t available to people who follow the non-Catholic brand of imaginary gods. And the imaginary god of other Christians is untroubled by divorce. So non-Catholics who follow other more tolerant imaginary gods who are untroubled by divorce, or who follow no god at all, have a right to divorce legislation common all over the world.
Why should only Catholics have their own type of divorce?
CJohn Zammit
Sep 3rd 2010, 16:31
Civil Annulument is available right now, under Artilcle 19 and/or Article 19A of the Marriage Act.
Divorce legislation is not likely to happen any time soon. While the debate rages, which could go on until the next century, why not take advantage of current legislation? See a good lawyer :)
William P Flynn
Sep 3rd 2010, 14:06
The only moral offence here is the reprehensible abuse of power by the Catholic church.
How about if we have a referendum on the removal of Article 2 in our Constitution and only persons (and the families of those persons) who were raped by priests can vote?
The Catholic church stole the Constitutional rights of Article 2.
85% of all living Maltese were still in short pants, in nappies or unborn when this theft took place in 1964. Malta and the Maltese people have moved on and shouldn't be expected to live by the ridiculous anachronism of Article 2.
The hijacking of the divorce debate, which is purely a social/secular issue, by muzewmini, priests, and catechists is exactly what Article 2 ensures.
The Maltese people have the power to remove Article 2 from our Constitution. Our Constitution belongs to the people not the Catholic church.
JOSEPH ZAMMIT
Sep 3rd 2010, 16:04
@William P Flynn--THIS IS THE REAL ISSUE, I TOTALLY AGREE WILLIAM.
Unfortunately in Malta, as the Church pretends to be our shepherd, we, for our part, are surely living the Baaa--Baaa sheep mentality.
CJohn Zammit
Sep 3rd 2010, 16:46
Section 2 of the constitution is comprised of three sub-sections:
Sub-Section 1 -- establishes the State Religion (Roman Catholic).
It can be repealed by a ►simple majority◄ of the House.
Sub-Section 2 -- authorizes the RCC to teach what is right and what is wrong.
It can be repealed by a ►two-thirds◄ majority.
Sub-Section 3 -- makes RC doctrine a compulsory subject in all State schools.
It can be repealed by a ►simple majority◄ just like Sub-Section 1.
If the current crop of legislators were to repeal Sub-Sections 1 and 3 ... it would make the Bishops look like Samson without his hair. ☺
Dr Joe Brincat
Sep 3rd 2010, 13:57
Did I miss the news item of the proclamation that a referendum is going to be held ?
I doubt it.
Incidentally, voters have to be over 18, at least according to law.
M Vella
Sep 3rd 2010, 13:52
Divorce is a right of the minority,its a question of when not if.
patrick zammit
Sep 3rd 2010, 13:18
Do children from a broken family have a say on separations and annulments?
Darren Galea
Sep 3rd 2010, 13:11
Bias? Hah!
Chris Reiff
Sep 3rd 2010, 12:27
So now it's only the children who have a say in divorce, and not the husband and wife? What kind of logic is this?
Karl Consiglio
Sep 3rd 2010, 12:05
Ok I am the child of separated parents.
I fully agree with divorce
Dr Francis Saliba
Sep 3rd 2010, 11:55
You are presuming, without any proof, that it is only the children of failed marriages who suffer. That is not so.
Ramon Casha
Sep 3rd 2010, 11:35
Broken marriages happen with or without divorce.
Here's a better suggestion: Only those couples who tried to get an annulment can vote on this one (whether they succeeded or not).
victor pulis
Sep 3rd 2010, 10:05
Are the children hit by annullments legible to vote? I hear there are quite a few.
Joe Zammit
Sep 3rd 2010, 09:54
A simple argument:
The authorities of the Catholic Church have the right and duty to teach what principles are good and what are bad. There is no time limit for this right.
To teach means to impart knowledge through instruction and/or training, part of this instruction states that voting for divorce is grievously sinful.
Therefore, the Catholic Church has the right and duty to teach that voting for divorce is grievously sinful always, also in a referendum, general elections and during a vote in Parliament.
patrick zammit
Sep 3rd 2010, 13:16
"voting for divorce is grievously sinful"
Is it also a sin to:
1) to put Galileo under house arrest for life for his support of Copernicus' heliocentrism theory?
2) to steal a dying person's property in exchange for prayers for his soul’s salvation?
3) to burn people at the stake for not agreeing with the church's views?
4) to bury people at the mizbla and imposed the dnub il-mejjet on MLP followers?
5) to protect paedophile priests by transferring them to other unsuspecting localities (not Mexico) where they can continue to abuse more children at their new parish?
6) to castrate choir boys so that their voice would not break because according to 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 women should remain silent in church?
7) to threatened people durinf confession with not giving them absolution of their sins if they use coitus interruptus and have less than 1 child every 11 months or so, contributing to social problems like making Malta almost the most populated country in the world?
8) to support the Spanish royalty in enslaving/torturing/killing of whole civilisations (Incas/Aztecs/Mayas) running into millions of natives in their search of earthly pleasures and riches?
JOSEPH ZAMMIT
Sep 3rd 2010, 15:56
Mr JZ---But I do not give a dime what the Church says!!!! Why not quote the Quran; Upanishads; Zend Avesta; Talmud; Mormon Bible; Buddhist scriptures, etc???
Many Maltese ARE NON CATHOLICS---read that again--NON CATHOLICS and you cannot discriminate against them!!!
Divorce is a civil issue. Jesus was referring to the Jews of his time with reference to the Mosaic laws. The Catholic Church laws were established about 350 years after.
We must leave the religious aspect of divorce out of it.
And if you want a a true meaning of a grave sin=article 2.2 of our Constitution--REMOVE IT AT ONCE AS THIS IS WHAT IS GIVING POWER TO THE CHURCH.
Kenneth Cassar
Sep 3rd 2010, 09:24
How about a referendum on marriage separation, giving the vote only to children who suffered from a broken family?
What utter nonsense!