Anti-divorce movement seeks remedy
The anti-divorce movement is seeking a remedy from the Broadcasting Authority following the broadcast by One TV for a number of propaganda spots of two divorce groups.
The movement said the BA had already confirmed to it that the spots were broadcast in breach of the law and that it had stopped one from continuing to broadcast them.
The movement said it was concerned at the way One Television was being used during the referendum campaign. This concern had already been expressed by the movement's chairman during a meeting with Labour leader Joseph Muscat.
Advert
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
'No need for early election if PM's...
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
Advert
13 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Ms Maria Vassallo
May 15th 2011, 09:47
Legislating in favour of divorce is grave sin that separates the offender from God and puts him or her on the path to hell because God HATES divorce (Book of Malachy).
Legislating in favour of divorce is legislating in favour of evil, condemned by God.
Legislating in favour of divorce is betraying God who tells us that what he has joined together let no man put asunder!
Legislating in favour of divorce is a diabolical step that pleases only the devil.
Legislating in favour of divorce makes you responsible before God for the grave sins others will commit on account of your sinful and evil legislation.
'SALVAW LILKOM INFUSKOM MINN DAN IN-NISEL HAZIN'..........ATTI TAL-APPOSTLI
Join in the battle between God and the devil! Fight the good fight! The victory is ours, it’s already guaranteed!
L-ebda kandidat laburista m'ghandu jippretendi li niftahlu l-bieb ghall-elezzjoni tas-sena 2013.......Il-PL huwa kontra l-familja.
Mr Saliba Francis
May 14th 2011, 20:38
I did not say anywhere that condones easy access to marriage annulments. Neither did I say anything that is not in complete harmony with Pope John Paul II or Pope Benedict XVI or with what Christ said. Christ never mentioned annulment at all but what he said about invalid marriages that were "rabta hazina" from the outset is in conformity with the Church's attitude to annulments.
I only put the blame for "rabta hazina" marriages where it belongs, on couples who deceive deliberately or who contract marriage with wrong ideas in spite of pre-marriage preparation courses put at their disposal by the Church.
You are the latest commenter who does not tolerate differences of opinion by resorting to the ploy of falsely accusing those who disagree with you as being judgmental.
Mr Joe Zammit
May 14th 2011, 19:40
The great majority of PL supporters are against divorce.
The great majority of PN supporters are against divorce.
The great majority of Maltese and Gozitans are against divorce.
All these majorities are positive people: in favour of the indissolubility of marriage.
Join in the battle between God and the devil! Fight the good fight! The victory is ours, it's already guaranteed!
Mr Joe Zammit
May 14th 2011, 19:40
There can never be a responsible divorce. Divorce of any kind is evil, condemned by God for our own good.
We do not want divorce, any divorce. The great majority of Maltese and Gozitans want no form of divorce; so the vast majority will say NO to divorce.
It is a devilish deceit to try to qualify divorce. Divorce is the dissolution of a validly contracted marriage by a human person. No human person has the power, let alone the right, to dissolve a valid marriage.
A big NO to divorce; YES to the indissolubility of marriage.
EDWIN DE MARCO
May 14th 2011, 16:35
@Mr. Saliba Francis. Your POV has nothing to do whatever with the subject of annulment or divorce.?? I take hope from people like JohnPaul II & the present Pope, Benedict XVI, who are known to be more tolerant than you in passing judgement on other people's opinions, let alone miss the whole point. Both of these popes are certainly more knowledgeable as to what's happening in the present-day Cath. Church. Both popes are recorded to have said that granting easy access to marriage annulments is an offence against both justice & charity.
EDWIN DE MARCO
May 14th 2011, 13:07
I believe that everybody has the right of an opinion on divorce, more so Fr.Charles Vella who was the founder of the Cana movement & a cleric who is still wholeheartedly cherishing the Sacrament of Holy Orders, unlike some other few priests who have abondoned their commitment with God & left priesthood to embrace another Sacrament & enter another commitment with the same God! But if God created marriage how can the Catholic Church declare it 'null'? A couple is not married by the church or by the priest (celebrant) . The couple marries each other before God. The person (priest) who assists at the marriage is present, asks for the manifestation of consent of the contracting parties, and receives it (Canon 120). (A dead person is also "praesente cadavere' in church, let alone a living couple!) It is the Church's responsibility to ascertain that the couple be properly prepared & to recommend that they don't marry if there are obvious words. It is the couple's responsaibility to be forthright & honest about any impediment (Canon 1069) But Fr.C. Vella reallt hiy the nail on the head by his short 'homily'. Marriage is a public deed between the couple, God & the Church community. This is obvious when the question is asked: "Does anybody know a reason why they should not be married?" (I always keep waiting for someone to stand up & yell "YES!" The Church is called by God to be his presence on earth (Acts 1.8, Mat 16.18) so the Church has an obligation to be involved in the process. This has been the Church's role since the beginning of Christianity. The early Church was quite strict about marriage. God gave this reponsibility through Peter, "whatever you bind on earth will be bound, whatever you lose on earth will be lost" (Mat 16:18-19). CONCLUSION: Whenever an annulment is granted, it is really an admission by the Church that it did not properly meet it's obligations, that they should not have witnessed the marriage in the first place. But they're giving this a wrong twist, saying that the marriage didn't actually happen. I hope they burn their church records whenever they give an annulment, otherwise they might have registry problems.....
Mr Saliba Francis
May 14th 2011, 14:31
"CONCLUSION: Whenever an annulment is granted, it is really an admission by the Church that it did not properly meet it's obligations, that they should not have witnessed the marriage in the first place."(Edwin Demarco)
Wrong! Crimes are being committed all the time and the responsibility for that crime lies primarily with the criminal not the police or the law courts. No system of policing has ever succeeded to prevent all crime and the celebrant officiating at a marriage is no sort of policeman at all. It means that the "marrying couple", deliberately or through ignorance,succeded in peforming a fake ceremony rather than a valid marriage. The fault lies with the perpetrator or perpetrators of the mistake or the deception not with the celebrant of the ceremony.
Mr Mario P. Sciberras
May 14th 2011, 10:59
The movement's chairman might be a very good catholic, maybe the best. Does that give him the right to interfiere, pry, intrude, stick his oar in, meddle (disapproving), disturb, intervene and stick his nose in my affairs.
Mr Paul Barrett
May 14th 2011, 10:51
Anti-divorce movement seeks remedy
Yep - that is what the pro-divorce movement wants as well - its called DIVORCE LEGISLATION. :-)
Mr Emanuel Farrugia
May 14th 2011, 10:50
Cittadini, mela ma' tafux li ahna pajjiz Krisjan? Imma tkun Kristjan f'dan il-pajjiz tafu xi tfisser: trid tkun ipokrita u tinhabb ma' xi pampalun li hawn f'dan il-pajjiz, halli takkwista.
Emanuel Farrugia former Executive Secretary Mtarfa Local Council
Mr john vella
May 14th 2011, 10:37
Is this the New Labour? More of the same, shouting and interruptions, as perceived yesterday on "Affari Taghna"?
Is it a fact that the New Labour Leader express fully, he will let his supporters free to decide how to vote? Why I have not seen yet ONE SUPER ONE reporter asking a decent question to the Group of Four? Why are the same reporters only trying to get cheap propaganda for the IVA campaign?
If this is how Dr. Joseph Muscat intend to run the country, He say one his flunkies are seen to do another, I am sorry but this do not auger well for him as prim minister!
me!
Time is bring out the hidden agenda!
Mr John Cassar
May 14th 2011, 13:33
Journalist have the right to ask questions that they see fit even though to one side or another they might seem provoking. Unfortunately ZbD is very touchy about everything that goes against it's agenda, from Nazis to journalistic representations.
Probably this is because their campaign is riddled with misinformation to try and win votes.
Before criticizing any other political party, I suggest you look at the state of affairs of the ruling one. We went from Christian Democrat to an ultra-conservative confessional party similar to the tea party in the USA.
A few more years of this and we will scrap our national laws and introduce Cannon laws and religious police.
Mr john vella
May 14th 2011, 16:01
Hi John,
Your writeup is very interesting, however we are still far from becoming a religious police state or becoming similar to the Tea Party in the State. The way I see it this whole thing has been blown out of proportion.