One chooses his political party in line with the way they look at various contentious topics. The family, the right to life and social policies are key related topics in Malta.

Political parties help us identify ourselves in a political process. Our direct or indirect participation will help to shape the future of our country. Members of Parliament have a responsibility to the nation and to the party they identify themselves with.

In an election one is not obliged to vote to a party. One can choose party candidates who have principles that are in line with what you think. One is not committed to partisan politics. However, one has to ensure the candidates you promote come from a party with a philosophy similar to yours.

Politicians legislate and make the laws that will affect us. Their performance in Parliament also affects us. We are to ensure they have all the necessary tools, time and resources to do their job without underestimating them.

Political parties can easily be categorised on the way they face key issues. Politicians can easily be categorised by their performance and by their handling conflicts or contentious issues. Is the avoidance of taking a stand a fear of losing party support?

Issues like abortion have a different meaning in a Catholic country that believes in God than they would in a country with other principles.

If abortion had to be introduced in Malta there would be a very good possibility all politicians who vote for it would never see the seat of Parliament again.

In the case of divorce, some politicians may have a conflict of interest.

They may stand to gain directly from it. Similarly, some politicians have declared themselves strongly against divorce and have stated they will distance themselves from their party if divorce legislation had to be approved. We are now seeing the stature of these politicians. We can see their strength in values and principles. We cannot have a “free for all country” and a “free for all” Parliament. Political members should be representative of their party’s principles.

It is known that the effects of divorce on children include:

• Children whose parents have divorced are more likely to be victims of abuse.

• Children of divorced parents are more likely to perform more badly in education.

• Families who were not poor see their income drop.

Politicians should be pro-marriage and introduce legal measures towards strengthening family ties. Conversely, the electorate should elect politicians who have the family on their agenda. The question of family is not linked to the Catholic religion. The family represents unity for the procreation of our future.

Divorce increases anxiety in children. It can create new relationships causing uneasiness, confusion and uncertainty in their minds.

The drop in marriage rates and the increase in divorce rates abroad have resulted in higher proportions of babies being born to single mothers. Cohabitation and divorce are perfect recipes to help in the fall of the traditional family. There is no proof that divorce and cohabitation have positive effects.

The upholding of traditional values, integrity, beliefs and behaviour should be the four pilasters on which Parliament should give an example to the country. The behaviour of politicians who put their basic principles in the front line should be commended. Principles should not change with time or circumstance. Politicians should not try to legislate what is in their specific interest (and from which they may benefit) but for that which is in the social and economic interest of the country.

A lot of people thought that “divorce” would become the new buzzword. It would cause a positive commotion. We are now telling the anti-divorce movement they are not doing their job well. How can they?

Divorce separates people. Marriage unites. There is a natural strength in union not in separation. Marriage has a natural strength. Similarly, a union in a party has strength. The larger the union the stronger the party. What started as a bold initiative for a diverse idea is now causing friction and fear. A few were bold to stand their ground.

I once learnt that one should never promote a negative idea. One should not be against “divorce”. One should promote the opposite: strength in marriage.