‘In your face’ actions do nothing to bring about tolerance of gay rights movement

P. Vincenti

Nov 4th 2010, 18:24

Those most earnestly and frantically working to denounce any mention of divorce and abortion also seem to be the people who are most in agreement that Malta needs both. In the same breath, they deny any association and then defend both. Why is this I wonder? What have they to lose should an association, albeit a distant one be made?
The anti-family movement will stop at nothing to denounce anyone who has an opinion that contradicts or threatens their stance. If there is no association at all, then why do they panic so when an opinion is expressed that suggest this possibility? The language is always the same. The tone is always angry and accusatory? Why is this?

Joe Xuereb

Nov 3rd 2010, 14:02

Some just can't get it.
Divorce and abortion connected by ideology? What else could be added by ideology?
The Liberals....'are generally in favour of both these two matters'. Generally? Therefore not all, so One should be cautious about self-serving generalisations.
Working towards 'abortion on demand'? Hence the paranoia stated earlier.
Let the woman victim of a monstrous rape speak up. It has to be a woman as man cannot be raped. Some try by pseudo-rationale but, as we say, a free man runs faster than a would-be rapist with a salivating tongue sooooo long, he trips over it (the take is, of course, a woman with her skirts up runs faster than a rapist with his Y-Fronts round his ankles. But wouldn't stand a change with a brute who uses all his all his 'end' - arms, legs, etc. - to restrain. Hence the need for an abortion. One of a few other instances when termination is justified. Get it?!
Excuse any errors, like I excuse errors . This is not about literature but about clear thinking, in my case, with no hidden agendas. That's quite a claim but it happens to be true.
A homosexual atheist-CUM-moralist, with crystal-clear ever-evolving-ideologies.

P. Vincenti

Nov 2nd 2010, 20:26

One is either pro-life or not. Abortion in certain circumstances is still abortion no matter how one attempts to repackage it. There is no such thing as restricted or limited controlled abortion. Abortion is always deadly for the unborn child . When one discusses a limited or controlled formof abortion, they are simply trying to wedge the door open, even just ajar, to allow abortion on demand over time.

P. Vincenti

Nov 2nd 2010, 20:24

The writer of this letter states he is concerned that the current Government is too conservative to allow for divorce, abortion as well as other issues such as gay rights, I quote ‘… I fear that issues such as divorce, abortion or gay rights will not be discussed, and civil liberties will remain very much in the shadows’ now, People in the comments section can stamp their feet in frustration as much as they wishes. They can demand that THIS discussion is only about homosexual issues but it is not Nobody has the right to not have the right to determine what people speak about. This is a democratic pluralistic country were we are free to express our opinions. Some people in this debate have expressed that they are favour of divorce and abortion. This indeed is my point. The two are connected by ideology. The leading edge of those who are working for so called civil rights are generally in favour of both these two matters. The majority are unaware of the resolve of the liberal movement to later fight for abortion rights once divorce is neatly tucked away.

Joe Xuereb

Nov 2nd 2010, 15:34

3) Heterosexual people (hate the word straight - a positive - since they're anything but, and also, because it implies I'm bent - a negative) need not bother telling homosexuals how to behave to gain acceptance. How patronising.! How parochial! How 'provinciale' as an Italian would say! How would they like me telling them how to put their house in order, because, believe you me, their house is in total disarray. As I said earlier my heterosexual 'brothers and sisters' - I've nothing against them, but for them I wouldn't be here - have enough to contend with without 'putting me in my place to be tolerated' (it's there, in the title of the letter in case it was missed). How dare they?! .
Yes, we have to be careful whom we call friends, regardless of the bedding arrangements.

Joe Xuereb

Nov 2nd 2010, 15:17

2) This letter's about gayness. Why bring divorce and abortion into the discussion? Why bring in Liberals and their agenda-ridden tactics? Gay people are seen as Liberals, hence Gay Pride here. Hence the connection.

Yes, I'm all for divorce. Or better still - cohabitation, no strings attached, very adult, very mature. And being ever vigilant who I call 'straight-friend. Abortion, as I said, under strict rules. In any case, abortion hardly figures in my life. I don't do things for show. I don't bow to society's expectation just for approval. Ghat-turija tan-nies!/cont.

Joe Xuereb

Nov 2nd 2010, 14:52

1)P., and I would caution - how very subtly Maltese! - you saying that I gloat at anything. You were so anxious to get your point across that your point was full of errors and, may I say, confused thinking. Objective tranquillity is the name of the game.
P., I am so glad that 'some of your dearest friends are gay' - how typical. As in, 'some of my dearest friends are black, but......'. Sounds like these dear gay friends of yours tell you that they want divorce and abortion to be legal in Malta? You can keep these dear friends, P.
Quote: ' was referring to the writer who bundled them together mate. I never said what you have tried to attribute to me'.
Sounds like you yourself are against divorce AND abortion. I see divorce as a step towards the common good. Abortion is fine by me provided it is carried out under strict provisos. The Liberals are out to obfuscate the issue/s, according to you. Excuse me for pointing out that Liberls could well refer to gay people who are far from having achieved their rights. Hence the confusion/.cont.

Joe Xuereb

Nov 2nd 2010, 01:42

Paranoia rules OK!
@ P.Vincenti,
So you reckon that the Liberal Gay Movement is out to change the world and will do so with one issue at a time, starting with divorce, and convincing people that divorce and abortion are entirely separate (they are). Then, divorce achieved (and this would be a victory for homosexuality?), they go on to the next round, abortion (and this........ditto....?). P., What you need to worry about P. is that divorce WILL come. And in some form, abortion too. Neither issue affect homosexuals personally. These are issues that affect the heterosexual contingent and if they have the strength of their convictions, they should fight it out amongst themselves. Leave the gay kids alone. You've enough on your plate and stop scapegoating, a criminal tactic so transparent to people in the know.
Paranoia - such unnecessary, misplaced energy!

Joe Xuereb

Nov 1st 2010, 13:06

This one is dedicated to the one I love, one Joe Zammit.
Joe, you 'cut-and-paste', a seamless, unseemly kantiliena (a continuous drone not unlike a drone that's lost its sting). I, on the other hand, write volumes, all original, all off-the-cuff. It's all inbuilt and growing in leaps and bounds and that is the prize for free-thinking - the sky's the limit as we say (which is not to say I'll end up in the sky unless of course, I am burned at the stake). You could take a leaf from my book Joe, and fly like Priscilla's diaphanous scarf in the wind, excited as she goes to meet her hunk. I can promise you a bit of 'heaven' Joe and certainly no hell. It's a deal.
Joe, you're not really out to damage the Church by subterfuge, are you? How very Maltese!!

P. Vincenti

Nov 1st 2010, 12:36

Though there is no direct correlation betrween the two issues for most, few realise the resolve of the liberal group in Malta who will stop at nothing to legalise abortion in the end. Divorce in a sense is a distraction that has to be dealt with first. They will work on trying to dissassociate the two until divorce is legalised. They will work to keep people from making a connection between the two for they know that if this happens, it is curtains for their cause.

Many unsuspecting pro-life people are of unaware of the power they liberal movement in Malta has to affect public opinion as has happened elsewhere.

P. Vincenti

Nov 1st 2010, 12:25

Bill Andrews writes ...'However, having heard Home Minister Carm Mifsud Bonnici, who would have us live as an isolated island trapped in the past, I fear that issues such as divorce, abortion or gay rights will not be discussed, and civil liberties will remain very much in the shadows' is he in favour of all these? I mean, am I missing somthing here?

i thought divorce and abortion were not related? Once divorce is outta the way, the liberals and humanists will train their guns on the abortion issues the next day. Here is where they are related. In some of the very people presently leading the fight for divorce. By and large, they seem to be the same lot who also are pushing the case that life does not begin at conception. They are the ones against giving teh unbroin child the clear constitutional right to life.

Divorce is acceptable to many pro-life people.

Divorce and abortion are very acceptable as so called civil liberties to the few trying to direct the debate through their significant influence in the media. They will work hard to change opinion after divorce. They will have no other distractions like silly divorce.

Joe Xuereb

Nov 1st 2010, 00:29

..............and I must never say anything like that to him ever again.

4) He's come back since as if nothing ever was. What am I?!! Heterosexual people are soooo sensitive and touchy when they feel THEIR orientation is under scrutiny/doubt. A taste of one's medicine and all that. Now where's that hussy Priscilla who took up with a married bloke in the outback? Yuck!!


Maybe I shouldn't say this but I'm in the mood, so I will. Homos and Heteros are all in the same boat struggling with their demon. Of course some claim to be still in love after 40 odd years of marriage. How DO they do it? I couldn't. I don't play happy clappy anything. I don't tell lies least of all to myself.

It's been a roller-coaster of a day and I never even went anywhere near the dodgem-cars.
That Fernando, he's so nimble as he darts from one car to the other collecting the fares (and keeping the change a` la maltaise). And his sweaty hairy bare chest, open to his navel, don't half give me the vapours Prisci!

Joe Xuereb

Oct 31st 2010, 23:57

3) But I went back and gave them a piece of my mind. In a loud voice a` la maltaise. They slunk away, their tails between their legs (and that's another thing one must never ever do to a middle-class English gentlemen. Draw attention to him in public and he goes all mortified). I told them to go home to leafy Surrey (they were that type), play with each other or single hand-jobs, and make sure they pay their mortgage. A young Aussie guy approached me and asked what all that was about. I made a new friend. I am a free person. I express my feelings. And religion certainly doesn't fell me.
PS Beware of anybody who expresses sympathy towards homosexuals and in the same breath declares his (usually it's a he) marital status. Some of my best friends are, but......syndrome.
PPS Someone very married on here was all kindness and light about my proclivities. Until one day, in conversation on skype, I gave some details of an encounter I had with a married man. He told me that that disgusted him and I must never say anything like that to him ever again.
continued

Joe Xuereb

Oct 31st 2010, 23:41

.......Don't ask and I'll tell you no lies sort of thing.
2) These people (a lesbian couple incidentally) concede one meeting a year and it takes planning, and free days, and consultation of diaries, and 'we're doing you a favour' sort of attitude. And don't ever, ever turn up unannounced. Not done. The Maltese are far from perfect but they don't mind you touching them when conversing. I find that endearingly human.
I was on my own at this year's Pride. There was a float with a huge poster of a Tom of Finland hunk. I, in my very foreign Turkish trousers (like I was about to give birth any minute), every now and then caressed the poster's nipple and kissed my fingers. I noticed to English gentlemen both wearing dark shades on the SAFE side of the metal barrier and they looked none too pleased at my antics. I approached them and invited them to cross over to the RIGHT side of the tracks. They gave me a look like I was dirt and one of them dared dismiss me, in other words f.off. And I walked away.
continued

Joe Xuereb

Oct 31st 2010, 23:20

1) @ Joseph Carmel Chetcuti. I take your point of course. Having lived in UK I have come to understand the usefulness of 'sang-froid'. It's what made Britain an empire. It works at a professional level as long as one is super alert (especially if a foreigner unaccustomed to 'sang-froid', the respect for space and physical distance (in England, two men must never, ever stand closer than a metre from each other when conversing. Funny to us but it happens to be true). Of course the working-class are a bit different but since when has the working-class in Britain have any say or clout? You're talking to a right bastard (me, lest there be some misunderstanding) here who misses nothing. Fine on a professional level. Get personal and effusive people like us get precisely nowhere. An example. I've known a woman for 45years and to this day I know not her belief-system or her political leanings. I kid you not. Those are taboo subjects, off limits, private. Don't ask and I'll tell you no lies sort of thing.
continued

Joseph Carmel Chetcuti

Oct 31st 2010, 20:38

Bill Andrews says he deplores the actions of one demonstrator who demanded to know if he was homophobic and he does not like the "in you face politics". I would like to hear from the demonstrator before accepting Bill's story. As to the "in your face" comment let me say that the world is made up of different human beings with different political agendas and different political strategies. The purportedly live and let live philosophy of Bill apparently does not extend to a recognition that not everyone subscribes to his political strategies. As a gay activist of almost 40 years I heard this before. Gay men and lesbians decide their fate and political strategies. We do not need to be told by self-styled tolerant heterosexuals how to behave. If Bill did not like the demonstration he could have closed his eyes. The streets belong to everyone and not just those who think others should model their behaviour on theirs. As to his right to hold hands with his wife in public, I doubt that any gay man or lesbian ever tried to stop him from doing so. Bill strikes me as a homophobe who does not know that he is.

Joe Zammit

Oct 31st 2010, 19:53

God has created humanity men and women, on purpose for marriage. He could have created us just men or just women, but we are not that. God does not create homosexuals but human beings.

After Original Sin, all people have some evil tendency. Some have the evil tendency of homosexuality but are not homosexuals for that matter. They become so if and when they start indulging in homosexuality. The can resist the temptation as well, always by God’s grace. But homosexuality remains a grave sin that separates the sinner from God and puts him or her on the path to hell.

In Genesis 19: 1 – 29 we read that people committed the grievous sin of homosexuality. God punished them severely for this sin and sent on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from heaven.

Joe Xuereb

Oct 31st 2010, 19:47

2) In other words, human sexuality is not as clear-cut as we like to think, conveniently. This is most often seen in different societies which have different social mores. Some societies don't bat an eyelid at two STRAIGHT men holding hands in public. Can you imagine two straight English lads holding hands on a London street? No way!!
I've been in UK for longer than I care to admit. As a new arrival I quickly noticed that it was the occasional handshake when people met fomally. Between friends, nothing happened other than breaking the ice by commenting on the weather followed by the usual pleasantries. This was indeed the educated Britain of the textbooks just left behind (l'educatissima, elegantissima Inghilterra the Italians call it still - rather naively of course) These days, and for a long time since, air-kissing is the norm. Very un-British. Maybe the EU did it for us here. I am of course talking about metropolitan London. Men in a mining-town in deepest Lancashire?/Yorkshire?or the Welsh valleys - if there is such a thing, still - no, such men would never have caugt on to air-kissing. It is cultural, see!!

Joe Xuereb

Oct 31st 2010, 19:38

1) @ Bill Andrews. Allow me to apologise for this person's inappropriate behaviour when he grossly invaded your space. Gay Pride is new to Malta, some, in all ignorance, get all hyped up. I hope he reads this and recognise the error of his way. Gay Prides are very strong political statements and they work best when a code of behaviour is respecrted. I know because I have been going to Gay Prides in London these last forty years.
May I pick on something else you said. Quoting Nature as creating gay people by an extra this or that - not so, I'm afraid! Reasoning so is tantamount to saying homosexuality is an entirely separate nexus excluded from the rest. This may appear so in practice but in fact, human sexual orientations very often overlap both emotionally and physically. Of course most, let's say bisexuals, do not act out their leanings so as not to complicate their lives. In other words, human sexuality is not as conveniently clear-cut as we like to think.
continued

Paul Konti

Oct 31st 2010, 12:53

@Anthony Mifsud
How did you conclude that Mr. Zammit "DEMANDS" others to base their life on the bible? He is merely expressing his views - no more, no less. And every practising Catholic should do so with regards to divorce, sodomy, gays, abuse of children, wives AND husbands...
The Holy Bible is not the kind of book one reads from cover to cover. It needs to be studied not simply quoted. Otherwise one would find contradictions. And, unless one studies the Bible, it would be foolish to contradict the interpretation of the Bible given to us by the Church Authorities.This would be analogous to a layman contradicting a surgeon, a doctor, a lawyer...

Tracy Caruana

Oct 31st 2010, 12:39

@ Joe Zammit: Are monks in convents included in your assumptions?

mark johnson

Oct 31st 2010, 11:43

Which is the worst sin of the two, Joe: Divorce or Sodomy?

Joe Zammit

Oct 31st 2010, 11:20

Par. 2359 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church states:

“Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.”

The worst enemies of homosexuals are those who somehow help them to continue to live in sin.