JPO: Victory for 'no' camp would be success of 'spiritual terrorism'

Mr Peter Agius

May 26th 2011, 20:57

I will not be voting PN in the next General Election, like I did since i was 18. Persons like yourself send shivers down my spine ( as well as Franco Debono from the legal camp ). You should not bother much thou since you can always present yourself as a PL candidate.

fredu debono

May 26th 2011, 15:25

jien minghajr dubju ta xejn se nivvota le avolja il-mara ilha li telqitni 7 snin. kelli niehu s-separazzjoni minghajr ma ridtha u ma rridtx li nerga niehu d-divorzju bil-fors. kellu bzonn kullhadd jiftah ghajnu u jivvota le. ma rridtx nivvota ghal haddiehor, min irid id-divorzju jivvota ghalih hu. jien ma rridux u se nivvota ghalija, allura se nivvota LEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE.

Mr Michael Parlato Trigona

May 26th 2011, 15:18

Dear Dr J Pullicino Orlando, unfortunately your statements in the above article can’t be left unanswered:
1) Your opinion that a No vote will only be the result of fear mongering and all other such accusations is anti democratic and in the event that the people vote against you, this seems to be a preview of just how much you’re going to stamp your feet and throw a tantrum - a form of manipulation similar to the ‘scaremongering’ that you imply others are engaging in.
2) Wikipedia defines management by crisis as “the process by which an organization deals with a major event that threatens to harm the organization, its stakeholders, or the general public. Three elements are common to most definitions of crisis: (a) a threat to the organization, (b) the element of surprise, and (c) a short decision time.” So let’s see who is responsible for management by crisis: (a) the reality of family breakdown as a threat to society, (b) your private bill as an element of surprise (c) as a result denying the government/opposition and the people of Malta the right to seriously study the impacts of divorce and real alternatives, thus single-handedly forcing our country into making a rushed decision without proper research and education.
3) The concept of an ideal family - in respecting the privacy and challenges that you and your family may have been through and all who have passed and are passing through a similar situation, I beg to differ to the way you refer to your experience in defining it as ‘ideal’, when the real definition of ideal is something that is perfect or a model for imitation. I therefore cannot agree with you and trust that you don’t even believe yourself when making such a claim, effectively insinuating that all families should aspire to pass through such a difficult and painful experience with such negative impacts on all involved as well as the whole of society.
4) as a result of your actions you forced the short time left for debate to spiral into an uncoordinated conflict which brought more heat than light, when in fact both parties are actually in agreement with Mgr Vella’s opinion that it was about time that the country discussed solutions for people having marital problems. I guess you did it your way!

Mr Fenech MD

May 26th 2011, 13:39

JPO hekk kont thossok int meta ktibt li d-divorzju ikisser l-istabbilita tal-familja? izzat spiritwalment?

Jien kont konvint li ser nivvota IVA imma wara li sirt naf b'dak li kien kiteb JPO u n-nofs veritajiet li qed tghid Dr Schembri iddecidejt li ahjar kif ahna milli kif nistghu inkunu, ghax kif jien naf u kif nista nkun ma nafx.

Kas tipiku fejn Dr Schembri inqabdet tghid nofs verita hija meta fuq ONE TV nhar it-Tlieta Simone Cini staqsietha x' differneza hemm bejn id-drittijiet ta tfal li jitwieldu fiz zwieg u dawk li jitwieldu barra z zwieg.

Dr Schembri gabet ezempju ta ragel li ghandu 2 itfal li ssepara minn mal mara. Minn mara ohra kellu 2 itfal ohra. Dan gie nieqes. It-tfal li twieldu barra z zwieg (qalet) li jirtu inqas. Kienet pronta qamet Avukata li taqbel ukoll mad divorzju, u qaltilha li dan mhux il kas, ghax jekk ikun irid jista B'TESTMENT ihalli lil uliedu jirtu kollha ndaqs. Merietha avukat li hi FAVUR id-divorzju mhux kontra.

Dr Schembri avukat. Taf il ligi sew aktar min cikku l-poplu allura qed tghid nofs veritajiet biex tiggustifika li d-divorzju ghandu jidhol.

Ghaliex ghamlet hekk? Bhala avukat missha taf ahjar.

Imma jien meta bniedem meta bniedem ma jidliex il-verita ma nibqax nafdah.

U ghalhemm nhar is-Sibt ser nivvota LE ghax tal-IVA qed iqarrqu bin-nies.

karl pace

May 26th 2011, 11:06

I think it is about time that we start thinking for ourselves instead of letting the church or the government or any other authority think and decide for us. I'm not sure I even agree with marriage, church or state, so divorce will not affect me, but I will vote in favour cause I believe that every individual has the sense to decide for himself and does not need the church to decide for them.

let's vote for individuality and freedom!

Ms Maria Vella

May 26th 2011, 10:22

"Rejection of the responsible divorce that was being proposed would rest on the conscience of the leaders of the 'no' movement when, in 10 years' time, Malta faced the problems of a huge number of children born out of wedlock, Dr Pullicino Orlando said."

Quite frankly the responsibility of the huge number of children born out of wedlock is that of their parents, and not those people voting No. Everybody demands rights but little think about responsibility towards society and in this case the children they bring into the world fully aware that they are out of wedlock.

Everybody wants to have their cake and eat it in this world

N Mifsud

May 26th 2011, 10:03

I still don't understand why certain people can take decisions about other people's lives. How can I decide whether Mr/Mrs X deserves a better future? Who am I? Who are you 'No' voters? I hope the 'Yes' passes but if the 'No' passes and you or your children or family will be in a horrible situation where starting a new life will be the best option, you will regret this selfish decision you are going to take. All the suffering children & parents will Thank all the 'Yes' voters for giving them a chance. Can't say the same to the 'No' voters...
Remember: Live and let live

Mr Christopher Grech

May 26th 2011, 09:38

@ Marianne Borg

If you think that the Roman Catholic Church is the only authorized church of Christ, than you are sorely mistaken.

The many Bible vs church doctrine contradictions are exposed here:

http://100777.com/spiritual/lettertoparishpriest

http://100777.com/node/1931

Both the yes and no camps send many half-truths and downright lies, thus confusing the people even more.

Mr Denis Pace

May 26th 2011, 08:51

To me it is very obvious that:
A YES vote is on the cards for whoever has current marriage difficulties
A Yes vote won't improve our situation
Divorce is NOT a civil right

BUT
Voting YES does not mean you agree with divorce. It is about giving others that right.

Is this acceptable?
Up to individuals to decide.

Mr J.A. Ebejer

May 25th 2011, 22:40

JPO insults many people like myself who will be voting NO.

I will be voting NO for reasons totally unrelated to religion. Divorce legislation as being proposed will change the nature of marriage resulting in more marital breakups and weakening of the family.

To speak of spiritual terrorism is downright ridiculous.

The people from the Yes camp see themselves as being enlightened and keeping up with the times. They consider those who disagree with them as being brainwashed and unable to think with their own mind.

Hopefully, once the referendum is history, the intolerance and insults from JPO and Co. will stop.

Marianne Borg

May 25th 2011, 21:28

Fil-kamapanja tal IVA rajna hdura assoluta lejn il-Knisja ta' Kristu. Hija OVVJA li il-Knisja se xxandar li qal Kristu KONTRA id-divorzju. X'tistennew allura li toqghod 'at the side' u thalli kollox ghaddej il Knisja?
Tkunux oqbra imbajjda.. taparsi Insara li ha tivvotaw IVA - HELLO ! THIS IS A CONTRADICTION !... either or...ma tistax tlahhaq m'Alla u max-Xitan.. Issa aghzlu intom liema side tridu tiehdu.

About terrorism.. tgerfxux in-nies.. Ghax terrorism hija kelma tqila hafna.. In-nies meta jisimghu il-kelma terrorism jitkexxku ! Ghax f'pajjizi ohra li gieli issemmew .. ezempju... jekk ikollok mara adultera tigi imhaggra ! Hija OVVJA li Malta hadd ma jaqbel ma dan it-tip ta terrorism.. Mella hallina JPO... chose a better word - Don't try to scare people..Don't panic :)

M Piscopo

May 25th 2011, 20:37

Over the past few months, we have seen thousands of people in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya…willing to fight and die for their rights. In Malta we are lucky. We have the opportunity to gain a right that we don't have at the moment. The right to rebuild ones life after a failed relationship, the right to make someone happy, the right to give marriage a second chance. We don't need to fight or die for this right. All we need to do is vote YES. How can anyone possibly refuse?

My wife and I have been happily married for 23 years. Not all couples have been as lucky as us. They deserve a second chance. We are voting YES for them.

Mr M Borg

May 25th 2011, 18:56

Women should not allow themselves to be fooled by the IVA mevement when they are told that they will not suffer because of divorce.
Women must understand that their husband can leave them without any valid reason. IVA do not want their "responsible " divorce to be described as a divorce " without reason " however that is what it is !

A wife can find herself divorced even if she does not want it . She can be divorced against her will, and this divorce without reason gives her husband the right to do so.

We all know that we have in Malta a large number of women who never worked . Who will see to the good of these women and their children ? Will IVA help ?

These women will suffer if ever their husband had to divorce them. They would have to live on the maintenance provided by their exes . They will find that they will have to spend days at court fighting for the right to live when the " guaranteed maintenance " promised turns out to be a joke !

They will be left without any pension and they will spend their days begging from their children and Govrnment .

Remember there is no limit to the number of divorces one can get. How can a man on one pay support two, three, or more families.

This is a very important question IVA never answered.

Mr M Farrugia

May 25th 2011, 18:02

Jiena niskanta kif nies li jaghddu kliem bhal "spiritual terrorism" jistaw isejhu lilhom infushom insara ta veru. Mela jekk tispjega x'tghid il-kelma huwa terrorizmu spiritwali issa. Jidher li fil-kamp tal-IVA qed jahkem paniku kbir u qed jippreparaw id-difiża jekk inkun hemm telfa.

Gary Grima

May 25th 2011, 17:32

I find this article funny in its contradictions:

First Mr. Orlando starts off by saying that the 'no party' and the church are guilty of 'fear mongering'. Then, in the same breadth!!-he says that 'in 10 years time Malta will have problems due to the huge number of children born out of wedlock'! He states this as if it were some looming, factual, out of control leviathan that we have to appease by passing divorce through. When in fact it is the opposite. The choice as to whether or not that happens is in our hands! And it doesn't need to involve divorce! Though admittedly it does involve the novel and radical idea of trying to control ourselves! Imagine that!


Then Mr Orlando apparently states that:
'He appealed to the 'no' movement to stop saying that there was a divorce 'without reason' because that insulted all those who went through the traumatic annulment, separation or divorce.'

This statement makes the unspoken assumption that all those people involved in divorce are victims, people who have no responsibility in the misfortune brought upon them. I find this generality misleading. Each case of marital problems is unique. One can't legitimately say that those couples that are 'tired of each other' or 'don't have a spark anymore' or 'always fight over little things' are innocent victims.


One might counter by saying something along the lines of: "Well in such divorce simply wouldn't be granted. It would only be applied to those couple who have serious sources of conflict"--whatever that would entail

But that is exactly the point! You look for such things before getting involved in a marriage! The only way a married couple have irreconcilable differences because they simply aren't compatible is BECAUSE they entered into the marriage not truly getting to know each other; not loving each other; because they know that whatever comes up that they just don't feel like dealing with they can just go: "Oh we don't get along anymore cause of this key issue or belief or how you behave or your attitude.
Such a way of thinking about it is akin to kicking the can down the road; they don't want the whole package; they ignore they boring or nonfun parts and instead focus only on the exciting and appealing parts and put off truly getting to know each other, wholly.

Having the option of divorce doesn't ENCOURAGE fidelity and thoughtful, deliberate considerations of feelings towards one another before entering into a marriage it DISCOURAGES it. Because it provides a [fake] 'jail free key'

If you are going to get married to someone it has to be with the sincere want and intent to uphold your vows because you love that person and you keep your promises both because it is right to do so and because you love them!
And that comes with a certain measure of understanding and acknowledgement that you very well may need to give more, to make a greater effort to growing as human being both with your wife or husband and as an individual.It comes with an understanding and acknowledgement that life may not work out exactly the way each of you want it to--you may not get the pay raise or promotion; you might have to give up a hobby or 2 to have more free time to help each other with the kids.
In short the life you two will lead together might be a bit harder on you than you expected--for external reasons and for internal reasons--character flaws or bad habits that might become burdensome or irritating. But that's ok!!! because in the first set of problems you will be happy so long as you can be with each [because you love each other] and in the second set [because you love each other] you will consistently work to try and reduce your own lackings and help each other to do so as well!

If you are the kind of person who thinks that divorce has a legitimate place in a marriage then you simply aren't ready for marriage!
And I don't say that to dismiss the pain or hardship a spouse feels because her husband has abandoned her. I understand that pain is real. But in such extreme cases where the man is such irreconcilable scoundrel that he just doesn't care about his wife (and/or children) perhaps we should try better teaching our children the importance of love, devotion, empathy, promises and all the like.
And speaking of children what kind of example does this set for them? We are adults! Not children! If we don't take responsibility for our own actions who will?

Mr Aaron Vella

May 25th 2011, 17:25

Well said JPO. This isn't a referendum on divorce anymore with all this meddling by the church in our rights. This has become a referendum between the Maltese people and the church. Disgusting! Xejn m'hawn sura f'dal-pajjiz! And besides, all these people commenting, so the church can threaten the believers by not giving them the eucharist (which I believe Jesus didn't give that right to any priest, bishop or pope, afterall) if they are exercising their CIVIL RIGHT TO VOTE HOW THEY SEE FIT, and this man cannot say the facts! Talking about the free speech you preach about when the church threatens the maltese people!! Shame on you, what a bunch of hypocrits! Some people are lucky that heaven and hell are imaginary, used to control the close-minded people's lives, or else the majority of the maltese "do-gooders" will end up there! I am proud to say that I'm going to vote a resounding YES!, maybe the Maltese church will be put at its place at last, giving spiritual guidance to those who want to hear it not meddling in the civil rights of everybody, even those who see the church as it is!

Ms D Galea

May 25th 2011, 17:02

Stuff the terrorist spiritualism ! Most people I know who are voting a most resounding NO ,are doing so because they are heartily sick and tired of paying taxes to subsidize the RIGHT of others to live as they please!

Dragging into the equation the church or offending the creed of the majority of the Maltese in an attempt to bully voters into voting YES is dishonest, self-defeating , unworthy and a heck of an insult to the intelligence of the majority of tax payers.

J. Debono

May 25th 2011, 15:54

In England there has been divorce for 500 years.

75% of children are born out of wedlock, nowadays in England!!!!!

Statistics show you are wrong JPO!!!!!

With divorce, children born out of wedlock will increase.

thomas grima

May 25th 2011, 15:41

you are wrong jpo..nobody is afraid of this stupidity you called spiritual terrorism.in the sixties it worked in favor of the church,, nowadays it will work against it.if the divorce does not pass the church will feel the whiplash of this decision...as a bbc commentator said..WE ARE THE LAUGHING STOCK OF EUROPE and he wasn't referring to the euro-vision song contest.

B Camilleri

May 25th 2011, 14:18

It's always the same story!!! EVERYBODY can say ANYTHING, except the Church! Whenever the Church opens its mouth, we claim "spiritual terrorism!", "imposition!" and "middle-aged mentality!" The only terrorism I see is the arrogance of the YES camp who try and shut up all opposition by continuously painting themselves as the victims, and by trying to force the NO voters into guilt! This BULLYING has been going on since the Referendum campaigning started!

I wouldn't worry too much though. The Maltese people are able enough to understand who the hypocrites are.

Mr Victor vella

May 25th 2011, 14:03

Whatever they say the reverndum will not pass. And the bubble will burst in the face of those who had good intention in the matter. The PN had made of the issue a political snowball to preserve its grip on the power that is corrupting the regime every day that passes by.

Mr Joseph Cauchi Senior

May 25th 2011, 13:56

Does Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando (JPO) really believe that he has any political future on this island, irrespective of the outcome of the CONSULTATIVE Referendum of next Saturday?

JC.

Mr M Borg

May 25th 2011, 13:42

May 29 1998 " I disagree with the introduction of divorce in our country as I feel this could weaken the foundations of Maltese society : the family. " JPO

1997 " When a patient goes to a doctor with a splinter in his foot, the doctor tries to remove the splinter and not amputate his leg . To help a minority of couples whose marriage is beyond hope, we cannot put hindres of other couples in danger. " JPO

" The rapid rise in divorce is attributed to a divorce mentality brought about through media influence and accessibility to divorce . " JPO

These words did not form part of any pastoral letter , Bishop Mario Grech did not say them , Fr Rene Camilleri did not say them, they were not said in any church in Malta or Gozo, these words were said by JPO.

I agree with all of them . That is why , together with others who think like me, I will be voting NO on Saturday.

To vote No we do not need to be " brainwashed " all we have to do is face facts. Facts tell us that " divorce will waken the foundation of society, the family. "

On the other hand IVA can stop trying to brainwash us to vote in favour of divorce, we do not want to bring ruin to Malta.

For the person who believes ,the Word of God and of His Church can never be called " spiritual terrorism "

Iva cannot change the words of God. It cannot " brainwash " us into believing them and not God

Divorce was, is and will always be a sin , this is a fact not " spiritual terrorism " .

Mr l. theuma

May 25th 2011, 13:03

I would like to ask Dr. Pullicino: Is the police criminal squad engaged in 'spiritual terrorism' in performing its duty to enforce the law. Is the Pope a 'brain washer' in conveying Christ message.

Noel Cuschieri

May 25th 2011, 12:43

Spiritual terrorism??!!!! This is sheer arrogance again. JPO is untrustworthy! He is an opportunist. This man should never be elected again!

Philip Hili

May 25th 2011, 11:25

It is very very shameful for this person to call me and others a terrorist after I and many others elected him in Parliamet to represent us in the highest institution of the Island!!!!!
Mur u inheba please.
Make us a favour.

Ms Rudi Mcbeal

May 25th 2011, 10:29

Oh dear, JPO gave a passionate speech! Another charade.

And Mr Decesare wants a divorce but never got it from abroad in all these years because he wants it from his own country. You know what, Mr Decesare, I don't believe you. Pull the other one.

Mr C Muscat

May 25th 2011, 10:24

My friend, a lady married for 20years with three children is voting no because according to this divorce law her husband will be able to get divorce by simply being separated for four years. There is no need for any specific certificate or document stating the date of the separation. Since he left 4 years ago, all she will be receiving according to this civil law will be a note that she is now divorced and at her own free will she might find a partner and remarry. She told me that there is no way for any guarantee or maintainance in such case and if the law is enacted her tension will be to see if her husband has some other partner to change the pair.
And for the children?????
I do not agree with annullments but at least annulment is dificult to get and it requires a reason that has to be proven. Annulments and God forbid us Divorce are both shameful certificates of failures.
Therfore, I have no option but to vote NO.

Mr M Cachia

May 25th 2011, 09:51

All I can say is that it's nice to see that JPO is so tolerant of other people's opinions......

Nathalie Frendo

May 25th 2011, 09:35

On Saturday we have the chance to tell the church to remain in its place. The church is there to take care of our soul not our civil rights. I was under the impression that church and state are separate in our country. Sometimes it seems hard to see. The state should acknowledge our right to get a second chance. It is not a choice to divorce. It is simply an end for a begining.

Etienne Farrugia

May 25th 2011, 09:30

Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando said today that rejection of divorce at the referendum on Saturday would mean that 'spiritual terrorism' and 'brainwashing' would have prevailed.

To be influenced by whatever the Church is saying you must first believe in what the Church teaches, so anyone that does not believe in Christ and his Church cannot be scared of what the Church is saying.

On the other hand if what the Church is saying has any influence on one's conscious or is of any relevance than that means that deep inside that individual believes in Christ teachings.

So Dr. JPO why worry about what the Church is saying, it will only have an influence on those that share the Church's faith?

Carmelo Romano

May 25th 2011, 08:43

Why is it so difficult to understand? One is either a Christian or not. A person cannot live two separate lives. As a Christian, the choice is easy. Christ said: "What God has united, let no man divide." (Mark 10:9) Therefore, when a person votes in favour for divorce, the person is taking part in each divorce as a result of the "YES" vote. Meaning that all those who vote "YES" will, indirectly, be particpating in dividing what God has united.
As a Christian, I know how I will vote. And no, this is not "spiritual terrorism", one is either a Christian or not.

Ms Sarah Attard Gialanze

May 25th 2011, 08:35

One should also mention the blatant exploitation of children by the No camp! They should really and truly be ashamed, putting up images of children on their billboards to try and gain sympathy. This is the lowest level they have reached to date. So they would much rather see a married couple whose marriage is no longer working, grin and bear it, and stay together just for the sake of their children's happiness? That would be a facade and a farce! Some reasoning they have! Separated parents should have the right to happiness and the right to divorce. Nobody has the authority to decide on someone else's behalf.

Mr Mario Genovese

May 25th 2011, 08:29

In 1492 Christopher Colombus found America and subsequently imposed Christianity under threat of execution. We Christians of today are not doing much better ......... 500 years after!!! We need to stop imposing our beliefs on anybody else around and start being tolerant.

Antoine Grima

May 25th 2011, 08:20

It is the YES Movement who are terrorizing the Maltese. Just because a few want divorce, they are enforcing their "need" onto others, and, if anyone does not agree with them, well, then these are fundamentalists!
To gather more backing, you even stooped so low to place the referendum under a political agenda.
I, for one, do not want that children be dragged into a ping-pong game of two days here - two days there! Is this the life that you want for the next generation?

Mr Lawrence Fenech

May 25th 2011, 08:16

Chin up Jeffrey, we look forward to a "YES" victory. Married, single, cohabiting most of these are on your side. Your efforts will be rewarded.

Mr Joe Micallef

May 25th 2011, 08:12

JPO you lost it! You and certain elements (official and self appointed) of the church should STOP bullying people!

Mr Joseph Galea

May 25th 2011, 08:06

I agree 100% with JPO. We are living again medieval times with hysterical bigots trying to play God.

A win for the 'No' means a travel backwards in the dark times.

Ms B Cassar

May 25th 2011, 07:57

I agree fully with JPO. This is reality. Yesterday I heard about more black mail coming from some priests telling elderly that they will be refused communion if they vote yes. This has become a taliban state and unfortunately the government and authorities are accomplises of the false church institution we have. I never thought I would live the Interdett so much described to me by my dad since I was young.

Even if the le wins it will be simply a false winning because they have invested everything in manipulating the elderly, the minds of children and of the church's followers to get what they want. I never understood why they are imposing so much pressure to interfere in people's private life.

I refuse to live in a taliban state and I am going to vote YES with all my heart. At first I decided for a YES with reasons but now I am more sure about the YES because I want to go against these miserable egoist people as much as possible. No one dictates to me what to do let alone a manipulist institution like the church and the LE movement that includes some people that should first see their past and then play the holier than the pope part.

In the first place no priests, no nuns and people over 70 shouldn't have been let to take part in this referendum. No one of them will ever use divorce and they will never need it especially the first category. This is a completely funny referendum based on corruption and manipulative behaviours. I guess Jesus never approved such behaviours. The first time a priest comes to my door I will be the first to shut the door in his face, the same as they are doing with who is voting YES. As if I care about their black mail.

Mr john vella

May 25th 2011, 07:48

@Dr. JPO, MP, NP?
Sir,
What do you call someone who openly call him self a Roman Catholic and again as quoted today he says in Public by rejecting divorce the church will be the cause of 'brainwashing' and 'Spiritual Terrorism'?
I am against divorce not because of the church but because of my family experience only led to broken human being.
This is not an election campaign, this is madness caused by one man who felt offended for not being invited with his new found girl friend during the pope visit.

Mr Paul Abela

May 25th 2011, 07:45

'Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando said today that rejection of divorce at the referendum on Saturday would mean that 'spiritual terrorism' and 'brainwashing' would have prevailed'
This is exactly the opposite of what you said 13 years ago. You want us to beleive in what you are saying?

Alfred Falzon

May 25th 2011, 07:42

A NO FAULT DIVORCE as the one being proposed by the Pro-Divorce Movement with no penalisation inflicted on the culprit behind a marriage breakdown is, to all intents and purposes, a travesty of social justice!
Our country's nuclear family structure deserves much better!

Mr Charles Falzon

May 25th 2011, 07:37

For the NO Movement....mela if today I am married and I have 2 kids and for a reason or another I get separation and go with another women and I will have another child....I have to give the maintenance to the 3 kids no? Allura ser jibqa kollox l istess regarding il manteninment. Mela ghalfejn qed tbezzghu lin nies meta toqghodu tghidu li jekk jidhol id divorzju b paga wahda ma tkunx tista tmantni lit tfal???? This gives me more courage to go and vote YES FOR DIVORCE next Sat.

Albert Debono

May 25th 2011, 07:31

Now may JPO reconcile his words with the political badge he stands for?

Vincienne Chircop

May 25th 2011, 07:10

I agree 100 % with you JPO - This is religous fundamentalism and terrorism. These groups
are a threat to our society and as far as I know they are breaking the law. What about the
corrupt practices act ?? Why is the government not taking action ?? This referendum is
taking place under threats and I will never and ever forgive the Nationalist Party for this
behaviour.

Mr joseph saliba

May 25th 2011, 07:03

JPO's motion was/is a blessing to our conservative mentality. It triggered a hulabaloo of discussion oiling our otherwise rusting brainbox. I liked every moment of it cool reason, accusations, spiritual terrorism, and all it takes. Neither libel was missing. What impressed me most was the focus on marriage, family and children from both sides each claiming to be the champions. I heard them all. I changed my mind twice already. Now please, let me think, next Saturday I decide. YES, NO, ABSTAIN - This is not the end.

Peter Galea

May 25th 2011, 06:51

Ta kontra id-divorzju, f'wahda mil iskuzi taghhom hija li wiehed ma jistax izomm zewg familji b'paga minima ta madwar 1,000 euro fix-xaghar. Donnu li skond huma li kull min jiddivorzja huwa b'dan l-income biss, ma ghandu l-ebda propjeta jew xi capital, ma ghandu l-ebda income iehor jew jahdem overtime, Il-mara ma ghanda xejn anqas, u ghalkhemm zghira ma tmurx tahdem, minkejja li il-gvern qed ihajjar lin-nisa mizzewgin johorgu jahdmu b'hinijiet konvenjenti ghalihom. U anqas jista ikun li dawk li jiddivorzjaw ma jkollhomx tfal. Issa dejjem qed jassumu li l-mara qatt ma trid divorzju lanqas meta tkun imsawta jew haga ohra. Mela dari, meta ma kienx hawn l-ebda social benefits (il mara xorta tibqa tiehu ic-children allowance illun) ftit li xejn opportunijiet ta xoghol, la sick leave, pagi mizeri, u l-ebda sigurta tax-xoghol. Jithallsu bil-gurnata. IL-KNISJA KIENET TINSISTI LI L-MIZZEWGIN IKOLLHOM TARBIJA FIS-SENA U JKOLLHOM, SEBA, TMINJA, DISA TFAL U AKTAR. X'GARANZIJA TA MANTIMENT OFFRIET IL-KNISJA. . Tfal jigru fit toroq hafjin, jisirqu xi haga x'jieklu. Imma ghal knisja dak kien tajjeb. L-aqwa li ir-rigni f'ideja.
Peter Galea Iklin.

Mr J Tonna

May 25th 2011, 06:50

JPO for heavens sake.....no need to be so aggressive in your comments and remarks.

The political party you embrace is reknowned for a school and culture of well mannered and educated representatives who have full respect for all that is ecclesiastical.

All movements should stick to the subject and put their arguements in favour or against the introduction of divorce without levelling disparaging remarks and usless insinuations.

Mr Carmelo Aquilina

May 25th 2011, 01:31

What the 'no' movement seem to mean by bequeathing us the 'model of permanent marraige' is like saying that the 'no to death' movement will continue to ban death certificates to bequeath us immortality...; when a marriage has died it is dead and thechildren, the spouses need to move on legally. Divorce is acknowledgeing legally the end of a process it does NOT produce it. Malta please wake up, grow up and join the 19th century !

Mr Alex Buds

May 25th 2011, 01:22

Vote YES - a small step towards moving Malta out of the dark ages!

Ms Agnes Bezzina

May 25th 2011, 01:20

How can we be sure that JPO is convinced of what he is saying this time round?! It may be worth reading his words said at a time when he too was adamantly NO!

"Hu fatt li fis-soċjetajiet tal-punent id-divorzju żdied b'mod allarmanti f'dawn l-aħħar għoxrin sena. Dan ma kienx dovut għal xi bidla radikali fil-mod kif jittrattaw lil xulxin il-miżżewġin. In-natura umana ma tinbidilx b'mod daqstant drastiku fuq medda ta' ftit snin. Iż-żieda hi riżultat ta' mentalita' divorzista li daħlet minħabba l-effett tal-medja u l-aċċessibiltà għad-divorzju" - Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando, In-Nazzjon, Friday 28 February, 1997

Mr Joe Borg

May 25th 2011, 00:49

L-ewwel jargumentaw li id-divorzju ghandu jiedhol ghax ghandu ikun hawn il-liberta. Umbad x'hin jiftah xi hadd halqu kontra il-ligi tad-divorzju proposta jibdew jajruk li int persuna tat-tielet dinja, jew ta wara l-muntanji. Mhux kulhadd ghandu id-dritt jesprimi dak li-jahseb li huwa sew. Ahjar minflok hargu bdin l-arja kolla ta progressivi u fattru ligi tad-divorzju bazwijja, intefghu ma mejda u iddiskutu biex johorgu bl-ligi tad-divorzju sura.

Philip Hili

May 25th 2011, 00:30

" said today that rejection of divorce at the referendum on Saturday would mean that 'spiritual terrorism' and 'brainwashing' would have prevailed."

WOW!! .... At last, it is a bit late, but better late than never.

Conclusion, voting "yes" it is not for the introduction of divorce as quoted above, Therefore, why is the state going to fork out 4 million euros from the honest tax payers' pocket to hold this referendum on divorce?
As declared above if the "yes" lose this referendum, it means that 'spiritual terrorism' and 'brainwashing' ould have prevailed "


ELECTORATE PLEASE NOTE AND REMEMBER ON SATURDAY THE ABOVE STATEMENT.

Issa ahjar!!, l-ewwel mal-PL, u issa ma' l_Alternattiva!!!!Le qeghdin sew.

Igri jasal zmien il-kontijiet!!! ghax ghandna kontijiet x'naghmlu.!!!!!..

Mr Joseph Cauchi Senior

May 25th 2011, 00:28

Why do we have to attack the Church, when all the Church is doing is what its founder Our Lord Jesus Christ told her to do?

For the Yes group to be credible they have to attack the message and NOT the messenger.

And who is that arrogant to tell the Church what to do when it comes to the core substance of its mission?

You either belong to the Church and follow her teachings or else find another “church” or club for that matter and do whatever your whims tell you.

Whenever the Yes people bring up this subject, is a clear sign that they do not have any arguments to counter the Church’s legitimate position and thus resort by attacking the Church.

The Church of Jesus Christ is not a reed that blows with the wind.

This is a clear sign that the Yes are losing the argument.

JC.

Mr MARIO ZERAFA

May 25th 2011, 00:10

The arguments in the NO camp have only been based on fear which is inexistant. They have mixed up the civil law with the Bible and church teachings. Their arguments are an insult to the Maltese society and have no respect for those who unfortunately have had serious problems in their marriage. When two persons who are coming from different backgrounds and decide to marry they will enter into a new way of life. It is not enough to say that we have to prepare couples better before getting married because the reality is that when they are experiencing life under one roof what matters. Beside the fact that a persons life is in a continuous state of change that might affect his/her behaviour. By voting YES to a responsible CIVIL LAW on divorce one is offering a remedy to the difficulties such couples experience. By voting NO these couples will continue to separate and everyone going in his separte ways without any possible that one can find his true love and settle his/her life. The best option is to give people a chance to start again and as christians we are duty bound to forgive the mistakes of others as Jesus did to the prostitude women. HE asked all those who were ready to stone her that if any one was without sin he should be the first to throw stones but none of them did and so Jesus who had no sin was left alone with the women and forgiven her and asked not to sin any more. This is the attitude which should guide us to respect others and therfore give those in need a chance by voting YES to a Law long overdue.

Mr John Agius

May 24th 2011, 23:52

"Great-Minds-Discuss-Ideas; Average-Minds-Discuss-Events; Small-Minds-Discuss People." This is symbolically represented by the YES Movement, the UNDECIDED and the NO Movement in the current divorce referendum debate.

On Saturday I will be voting YES (IVA) because I feel I have no right to IMPOSE onto others what to do. I will be voting IVA because I am a staunch advocate of DEMOCRACY and DEMOCRATIC FREEDOM and strongly OPPOSE DICTATORSHIP. As a democratic person, believing in a FREE and DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY, I feel I have no right to DICTATE onto others how to live their life. So YES, on Saturday, I will be voting IVA because I trust future generations to decide their future. I will vote IVA because I strongly believe that IMPOSITION is something of the past and the past taught me that IMPOSITION is undemocratic, shameful and most of all a reflection of MISTRUST in future generations.

A YES vote ensures EVERYONE is a FREE INDIVIDUAL capable of deciding his/her own destiny in a FREE and DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY. All IVA votes will allow “Great Minds” to continue to discuss and decide “Ideas” in a truly democratic and free society.

Ms Emma Xerri

May 24th 2011, 23:47

"Permanent Marriage" !! There is nothing that is permanent upon this earth, and that includes marraige. Read Ecclessiastes in the Old Testament.

Mr Richard-Nazzreno Farrugia

May 24th 2011, 23:46

So, according to JPO, only those who vote yes are intelligent and free human beings while those who vote no are brainwashed and terrorized people. How insulting! Well, I would then say that Victory for the "yes" camp would be success of "pro-divorce terrorism". I find it contradictory that those who favoured a debate on the issue presume - with arrogance - that a considerable number of Maltese people don't have the capacity to reason, to listen opposing views, to question social issues according to their values, including spiritual values (for man is body and spirit), and decide. I'm really worried but these kind of fundamentalist attitudes that disregard the capacity of humans to think. And you call those "progressive"...it more sounds to me that people are treated as though they swallow whatever they are told. JPO's affirmation is medeival and fundamentalist indeed with no respect to any opposing view. As a Maltese citizen, I demand MORE respect for any decision I take and would not be called brainwashed or terrorized by nobody.

Mr Joseph Calleja

May 24th 2011, 23:46

Win or lose the sure people that will come out winners in this referendum are the people that took the round trip offer of €35 euros given by Air Malta, compliments of GonziPN. If the anti divorce people win, it will show how condescending the Maltese citizens are. In one sentence, led by the nose. They will affirm the fact that people will not get married but cohabit at will. Time will tell. As for the pro divorce movement they will get a chance to exercise their vote in the next general election. GonziPN and the church can scare some of the people some of the time but they cannot scare all of the people all of the time. Those 2800 votes he denied the young voters will come to haunt them someday.

Mr K.M Edwards

May 24th 2011, 23:39

JPO is getting desperate indeed!

So now, voting "no" makes one a terrorist.

So much for respecting both sides of the debate.

Anti-terrorist who is proudly on the "no" side ...

George Camilleri

May 24th 2011, 23:38

My goodness - 'spiritual terrorism' ! That's certainly a phrase to frighten the wits out of everyone. Get the ghost-busters, Jeffrey!... Seriously though, why are people so surprised that the Church has come out in full voice against the divorce proposal. These are indeed momentous times when the Church should speak out, and we should not blame the bishops for doing their duty! Indeed, had it been otherwise, and divorce would come in, I can envisage many voices crying out: 'And where was the Church? Why didn't she speak out more loudly? Were the bishops asleep?' and so on and so forth. So let's be tolerant and let the Church do exactly what she is entitled and in duty to do.

Bud Moureaux - Flanders (BE) & Xemxija, SPB (MT)

May 24th 2011, 23:27

Divorce in most cases is not at all an easy way out but a realistic way to end the suffering of a marriage broken down beyond repair, both for the spouses and their children.
Therefore the only sensible and courageous choice for Malta to make is:
(1) To introduce a well balanced civil divorce legislation, respecting the rights and interests of all parties concerned, the spouses and their children.
... and in a later stage ...
(2) To separate State and Church, i.e. abolish Art.2 of the Constitution immediately.

This is already 50 years overdue. An untenable situation will then finally cease to persist. In this way, Malta will become a real secular society where Maltese effectively can decide for themselves without fearing to be bullied by Mgr. XYZ or Mr JZ and consorts. The Church in Malta should restrict its role to its teaching and advice to its own flock, i.e. Catholics, but refrain by all means from scaremongering and dictating what others should or shouldn't do.

So, Saturday 28th, the right choice is IVA - YES for the benefit of those who have been less fortunate in their life than others! For them AND for Malta your YES vote will make the difference.

Mr John Camillleri

May 24th 2011, 23:20

Wow, How democratic! His principles changed so much since last election. Unrecognisable. I did not support him for this. Times really have canged and so the people.

Mr Denis Pace

May 24th 2011, 22:56

JPO

Not convincing

You were elected on the PN ticket.
Divorce was NEVER on the cards

Mr Alfred Cassar

May 24th 2011, 22:44

Did JPO shed some tears this time too? For me he lost all credibility after the Mistra scandal. How can we trust him and believe that he is saying the truth!

Mr Joseph Carmel Chetcuti

May 24th 2011, 22:43

So JPO is motivated by pesonal interest? I imagine as the Maltese were when they sought independence. Were they too motivated by personal interest? Anyone has a right to make a point including those with a personal interest in the matter, just like Catholics are able to promote and pursue their sectarian interest to the detriment of the 'common good'.

Mr Carmel (Nenu) Aquilina

May 24th 2011, 22:35

@Sinjur Maltin u Għawdxin,

Illum kulħadd jista’ jgħin u jgħid kelma għall-ġid, u huwa dmir tagħna lkoll, li naħdmu għall żwieġ b’saħħtu, u familja Maltija b’saħħitha!

F’dal mument, m’ għandniex nieqfu nipperswadu lill-uliedna, lill-qraba, lill-ħbieb, lin-nies li nafu, fuq il-postijiet tax-xogħol, kull fejn niltaqgħu magħhom, li d-divursju huwa ħażin għalina, għal uliedna u għal pajjiżna!

Għax fil-pjan u l-ħsieb ta’ Alla għall-bniedem qatt ma kien hemm l-iċken ħsieb għad-divorzju!

Għax Alla għall uliedu lestilna l-aħjar!

Għalhekk huwa nsult li xi ħadd jgħid li ser jibqa jipprova sa kemm jirnexxielu jdaħħal id-divorżju F’Malta u f’Għawdex!

Min qed jgħejd dan, qed jilgħab mal-valuri nobbli nsara u l-kultura sagra tal-familji Maltin u l-Għawdxin!

U min jirnexxielu jfarrak dawn il-valuri speċjali ta’ familji maqgħudin ta’dan in-Nazzjon nobbli Malti, verament ma jħobbx il-familji Maltin!

U l-Maltin u l-Għawdxin ma huma ser jaħfruwilu qatt!

Mela morru ivvotaw LE,

Julian Delicata

May 24th 2011, 22:23

How disrespectful!!!!! The Church has for decades been the only institution in our country that has tried to held families in need. I won't deny that mistakes have been made along the way but the least the Church deserves is that one respects its believes. One may not necessarily agree but describing its actions as terrorism is way out of line!!!!!

Mr Marius Zulgis

May 24th 2011, 22:11

"the model of permanent marriage was what should be bequeathed to the next generation, rather than a different model."

Why? It is typical of the No camp to make sweeping statements like this without backing them up with reasons.

Mr Paul Licari

May 24th 2011, 22:07

Explaining what is going on should not scare anyone. Everyone is entiltled to be informed.
If you want answers to many of the queries see and hear Fr. Hayden’s talk

“In-Nisrani quddiem id-Divorzju”

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?p=PL53CEF994615F4831

and

www.frhayden.org

Mr William Flynn

May 24th 2011, 22:05

The description of Religious Terrorism is spot on.

Schembri Ray

May 24th 2011, 22:04

When someone loses trust, it's hard to get it back Mr. Pullicino.

R Sammut

May 24th 2011, 22:01

The fact that JPO said this does not mean it is true.

I am against divorce. However, my decision is not based on fear. Decisions should not be based on feelings but on absolute values. Whenever decisions are based on feelings, wrong and rush decisions may be taken. I may come in a situation where I think I would need a solution, and divorce may be the solution I would want. However, I would be glad that I would have voted against the introduction of divorce as this may trigger an alternate solution, maybe trying harder to patch things up.
All laws and rights are based on the idea of common good. And, although divorce may seem to be good for the 'parties' concerned, it is not good for the common good.

Mr K Pullicino

May 24th 2011, 21:58

So, you're capable of getting "responsible" divorce but you're unable of being "responsible" during marriage? What irony.

Ms Elizabeth Aquilina

May 24th 2011, 21:47

JPO if you're in a hole stop digging!!

Joe Grech

May 24th 2011, 21:40

How unfortunate - and disgraceful - this Divorce battle has become! I suppose there are people on both sides of the divide who have personal interests in the issue....what's wrong with that?
To date I have not heard any one of the numerous speakers explain what the financial repercussions of Divorce / No Divorce will be on the country and taxpayers. Hopefully somebody will see fit to comment on this please.
Will Divorce be abused the way Single Parenthood is being widely abused - with taxpayers footing the bill and politicians just looking on?
Lou Bondi unfortunately yet again lost his cool yesterday during Bondi Plus. He kept butting in during the debate to offer viewers his own personal convictions which he should not have done of course. He should apologise to the gentleman speaking against the introduction of divorce. But will he?

Mr Chris Grillo

May 24th 2011, 21:32

I think that the way the church is handling matters is nothing but scandalous and unbecoming of such an important institution.

A voice of reason for those who are in pain can be achieved simply by decent thinking.

B Gatt

May 24th 2011, 21:23

brainwashing - one would be brainwashed if one watches all the discussions on the TV - the media is the source and not the church
mur ara din l-10 minuti omilija meta tqabbel mas-sighat twal ta programmi televisivi, diskussjonijiet u gazzetti - mela nesa li 50% ma jmorrux quddies!! u ghidu jhallina kwieti pls!!

George Lewis

May 24th 2011, 21:19

So we now have another moving and passionate plea or speech by JPO.We had that a couple of years back and it resulted in his favour.

Regarding his quoting once more Mgr.Charles Vella is he aware that he is once again twisting what was said to what suits him?

Regarding what was said that one prefers divorce to annulment since the latter means that marriage never existed,I would prefer that to something I would have broken myself.Are the children of an annulled marriage better , worse or lesser than those of divorced couples?Are they not hurt whether it is one of the other?

Jason Borg

May 24th 2011, 21:12

An extremely democratic statement: exercise your right to vote NO and your opponent labels you a terrorist. JPO's arrogance has gone too far now.

Mr Jo Camm

May 24th 2011, 21:07

BDEJNA BLI SKUZI, Dr JPO??? Jaqaw qed ixxomm it-telfa??

Kellu bzonn kull min hu kontra d-divorzju jmur jivvota.