Despite the appeal by this newspaper to allow the festive season pass without the bruising controversies which marked all of 2010, there is an escalation in verbal violence.

Evarist Bartolo, a pro-divorce front runner, launched an unprovoked attack on family members of President Emeritus Eddie Fenech Adami just because their marriage had broken down and had to resort to proceedings for annulment. These tactics should not be adopted against anyone, let alone a former President of Malta. Can the political elements in the pro-divorce committee realise once and for all they are acting as private citizens outside the context of a partisan electoral campaign.

The unity of the family is a value which unites believers and non-believers and the Heads of State of every civilised country urge their respective governments to do the utmost to create the necessary social conditions for couples who choose to marry and raise a family to do so in a durable and successful marriage.

President George Abela has on countless occasions expressed what the vast majority of the Maltese believe in: “We must work hard to prevent family fragmentation because the consequences for children and society are severe” (DOI release, October 6, 2009).

The aim of society therefore is to guarantee a family which endures in time. So why the moral violence against a former President who participates in a non-political debate? Dr Fenech Adami had asked: “Does this mean we will be contracting marriage for a defined period if divorce were to become law? Will we have to change the definition of marriage?”

Only a year ago, President Abela asked the same question: “The Maltese traditional family model is changing… This raises the question as to whether the strong family values of marriage and fidelity, child bearing and rearing and the family bond will continue to resist the daunting challenges ahead.”

The family must never become the battle ground of partisanship and the first ones to give the example must be politicians taking a front-line position in the debate.

Mr Bartolo had better apologise for his outburst to restore the serenity needed to enter into the referendum year. Raising the temperature of the debate does not augur well at all for 2011.

Another outburst from a pro-divorce committee member saw a sarcastic reference to Christians believing in “papal infallibility, transubstantiation and the Virgin birth” as an argumentation in favour of the state removing any vestige of interaction with the Catholic Church. Why attack the religious beliefs of the faithful just to score a point against the current state-Church relationships?

Dr Abela had clearly advocated greater unity between the Church and the state where the family is concerned. “Dr Abela also underlined the role of the Church, pointing to the work of the Diocesan Family Commission and the Cana Movement,” the Department of Information reported the President saying. He saw these organisations working hand in hand with many other worthy state, NGO and volunteer organisations he mentioned specifically by name. So why do members of the pro-divorce movement advocate the strict separation of Church and state as part of their campaign?

Above all, why adopt the intellectually superior attitude of the “rational” non-believer over the believer? Is the purely “scientific” after all so comprehensible? The secular The Economist, commenting on the latest scientific theories on how the universe came about, felt compelled to state: “It is well known that fundamental physics is full of ideas that defy what humans are pleased to call common sense.” The quote in question was not on “transubstantiation” or even “the Virgin birth” but on the most recent theories on how the Universe came about.

Famous scientist Stephen Hawking, while studying the universe, has the profound belief that extra-terrestial life exists even though he cannot prove it scientifically. So what wrong is there for numerous scientists who equally study the universe to harbour the profound belief that God exists even though they cannot prove it scientifically?

Christianity prepares itself to re-live the most momentous event in the history of mankind centred around the Holy Family.

The renowned National Geographic felt it should include a feature on Gaudi’s masterpiece, the cathedral of the La Sagrada Familia of Barcelona, recently inaugurated by the Pope. It illustrated that human intellect is capable of making humanistic and religious concepts co-exist and interact for the achievement of harmony. “Gaudi envisioned a soaring visual narrative of Christ’s life.” He did this by “bridging art and science” deriving his inspiration from nature.

Humanism, faith and reason must co-exist. Reason and not insults must be the tools for a democratic debate. Are we fools to expect so much from 2011?