Red herrings in the debate

The other day, the anti-divorce lobby Żwieġ Bla Divorzju issued a press release saying, among other things, it disagreed with a directive issued by the Broadcasting Authority requesting broadcasting stations to submit programme details before the transmission of any production on the family or marriage as this directive gave the impression that marriage and family were a matter of controversy when this was not the case. The Broadcasting Authority directive was issued in the light of the referendum on divorce that will be held next month.

In the last two weeks, the broadcasting media have been flooded with religious and discussion programmes depicting divorce as being anti-family and anti-marriage and, therefore, the Broadcasting Authority directive makes sense.

Divorce is a controversial matter of public policy and both the Constitution and the Broadcasting Act obliges the authority to ensure balance and impartiality in the broadcasting media in the circumstances. Allowing an unbalanced debate on divorce under the guise of discussions on the family and marriage is obviously not on. But the anti-divorce lobby played the card that, as there is no controversy on marriage and the family, programmes concerning these matters should not be controlled. Their lack of respect for the intelligence of the people is patently obvious.

Writing in this newspaper last Thursday, Austin Bencini, a prominent member of the anti-divorce lobby that had issued the said press release, tried to push the lobby’s anti-divorce stance by pontificating on marriage and the family. If anyone wanted proof that the Broadcasting Authority was right and the anti-divorce lobby was wrong on this issue, this was provided by Dr Bencini’s article.

This obvious contradiction belies the insincerity behind many stances of the anti-divorce lobby that is becoming very proficient in pushing red herrings to confuse people. Dr Bencini, for example, wrote that “the climate of personal intimidation against ordinary citizens is reaching intolerable levels”. Was he referring to what the anti-divorce lobby is doing with schoolchildren in Church schools?

According to him what is at stake in the divorce referendum is marriage, when, in fact, what is at stake is the situation of people whose marriage has irretrievably broken down.

Marriages do not need to be propped up by the state denying divorce in cases where a marriage no longer really exists. What is at stake, therefore, is not marriage but marriages that no longer exist except on paper, marriages that are dead and buried where people have moved on with their life while the state keeps insisting they are still legally and technically married.

Moreover, the proposed divorce legislation would change the law on marriage not our family law, as alleged by Dr Bencini.

A favourite ploy of the anti-divorce lobby is to confuse the family with marriage. The family is the intimate relationship two human beings freely set up together and from which they usually have children to whom the family gives emotional support and a loving upbringing. Marriage is the recognition by the state of that relationship, giving several advantages over simple cohabitation. Without divorce, the state is telling people who have freely set up a second family after their marriage irretrievably broke down not to bother with marriage but just to cohabit.

The anti-divorce lobby has still not explained why the state should force people to cohabit rather than allow them to remarry civilly and how this perverse situation can ever be described as a pro-family policy.

Yet another red herring, also evident from Dr Bencini’s last contribution is to depict the anti-divorce stance as one against no-fault divorce. This gives the impression that another sort of divorce would be acceptable when, in fact, he and the lobby he forms part of are adamantly against divorce per se, irrespective of whether it is no-fault divorce or otherwise.

Confusing the issue will not make for an informed debate but will, perhaps, earn the anti-divorce lobby some brownie points!

micfal@maltanet.net