Anti-divorce ‘common good’ argument likened to Nazism

The common-good arguments raised by the anti-divorce movement were akin to those used by Adolf Hitler’s Nazi party, Marlene Mizzi said.

She was speaking during a debate organised by Media Today on Wednesday evening.

Constitutional lawyer Austin Bencini, a member of the anti-divorce movement, said the accusation held no water because in Malta fundamental individual rights were protected by law. However, divorce, unlike the right to a family, had never been considered a fundamental human right.

Joyce Cassar, a member of the Marriage without Divorce lobby, asked whether all minority rights should be tolerated, including same-sex marriage and abortion. The reference to the latter sparked an uproar, with audience members calling for the issues not to be confused.

Ms Cassar said her main contention with the proposed law was that it allowed a partner to “impose” divorce on his or her spouse. “If divorce were consensual and only for particular cases, I would probably not be here to campaign against its introduction today,” she said.

Deborah Schembri, who chairs the Yes for Divorce movement, said it was not fair for someone to prevent his/her spouse from getting a divorce out of pique, simply to hold on to the illusion that their marriage still existed, even if it had been irrevocably broken down for four years. However, after a divorce, no one forced any of the parties to remarry.

Ms Cassar warned that the introduction of divorce would result in people taking marriage less seriously and leaving their spouses just because they found someone younger.

However, Ms Mizzi, who had unsuccessfully contested the last European Parliament elections on behalf of the Labour Party, said she had more faith in the Maltese, who were not as “fickle” as they were being portrayed.