Christian Peregin
Divorce: winners and losers
An unexpectedly strong victory for the pro-divorce movement spells a defeat for those campaigning against its introduction. Christian Peregin lists the key players who will gain from this result and those who have the most to lose.
Winners
Couples who need divorce
Many people have been waiting for years to be able to divorce their estranged spouses and marry their present partners. This referendum result means Parliament will most probably legislate on divorce, finally giving them a chance to get the marriage status they have been seeking and allowing their children to be born within wedlock. Divorce legislation will also be good news for family lawyers and wedding planners who are bound to benefit from a spike in business.
Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando
Nationalist MP Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando took a chance when he presented a Private Member’s Bill on divorce less than a year ago and pitted himself against his one-seat majority government. But this result vindicates him as one of the few MPs to read the country’s zeitgeist. Although his political future had long been considered blurry, he has now etched a niche for himself as one of the more liberal Nationalist MPs.
Deborah Schembri
Deborah Schembri went from being a relatively unknown family lawyer to the leader and most prominent member of the pro-divorce campaign. She has made a name for herself as an eloquent and level-headed politician-in-the-making and a female role model. Although she said she would keep her options open to a career in politics, it has yet to be seen whether one of the two big political parties will rope her in.
Joseph Muscat
Pro-divorce Opposition leader Joseph Muscat was instrumental in getting a large majority of Labourites to vote in favour of divorce. He was also the one to insist on a referendum when it became clear that a divorce Bill would be rejected in Parliament. Although the promise of divorce legislation could have been one of his pledges to win the next election, this issue has helped him project himself as the alternative Prime Minister for people who feel Lawrence Gonzi is too conservative.
Alternattiva Demokratika
Although it never managed to elect any MPs, this is AD’s second referendum victory (the party also backed EU membership). AD is also the only political party to have taken a stand in favour of divorce, which it did many years ago. Dr Pullicino Orlando has also publicly acknowledged that it was on AD’s insistence that he looked at the Irish divorce law to see how it could be adapted to Malta. But can this victory help it do better at general elections?
The other Yes campaigners
The Yes movement brought together a number of prominent and lesser-known politicians who carved a niche for themselves. Among those who will definitely benefit from this experience are Labour MP Evarist Bartolo (who has already been declared spokesman for civil rights by his party) and Nationalist local councillor Cyrus Engerer, who has actively campaigned for gay rights. Former Nationalist minister Michael Falzon may also find that the campaign has expanded his sphere of influence.
Losers
The Church
By taking an active role in campaigning against divorce – with some of its most prominent members even intimating that voting for divorce is a sin – the significant Yes victory means a big blow for the Church. This is the first time in recent history that the Church’s influence has been tested, and the outcome was not what many of its members were hoping for. But worst of all, the Church’s words and actions alienated many pro-divorce Catholics. The Church may rethink the way it expresses its opposition to changes in legislation which go against its teachings.
Nationalist Party
Adopting an anti-divorce stance has left the governing political party with a bitter pill to swallow. This may spark an identity crisis within the party which is now struggling to unite social liberals and conservatives under its Christian-Democrat umbrella. However, with the divorce issue out of the way, the PN still has chance to recharge itself before the next general election.
Lawrence Gonzi
Vehemently against divorce, Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi always gave the impression that divorce would not enter the statute books under his watch. But the people have now told him he must legislate, whether he likes it or not. On this issue Dr Gonzi has consistently been made to look weak and at the mercy of his one-seat majority in Parliament. This undesirable referendum outcome could haunt him throughout the next two years and at the next general election.
Parliament
After Dr Pullicino Orlando tabled his divorce Bill in Parliament, it became increasingly clear that his proposal did not enjoy the support of the majority of MPs. In fact, a number of MPs threatened to vote down the Bill before even discussing it, prompting the Labour Party to suggest a referendum. On this issue Parliament has been seen as shirking its duties to legislate and can now be criticised for not being truly representative of the people’s aspirations.
Taxpayers
Taxpayers forked out €4 million for this referendum to be held, making it a costly exercise which could have been avoided if politicians had gauged the public mood better. The campaign also shifted attention from more important issues such as the reform of Air Malta, the impact of the Libyan crisis and the controversy surrounding the salaries of Cabinet members.
People who don’t want to be divorced
Divorce legislation, as is being proposed, will allow people to divorce their spouses unilaterally, meaning some people who prefer to remain married to their estranged spouses will now have divorce imposed on them. It also means those who were comfortably cohabiting and using the lack of divorce as an excuse not to marry their partner will have to explain the real reasons why they do not want to get remarried.
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...
98 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Mr Joe Zammit
May 31st 2011, 06:59
The two characteristics of every marriage are Unity and Indissolubility. All marriages, religious nor not, are indissoluble!
Unity means a marriage between one man and one woman.
Indissolubility makes marriage for ever, i.e., until the death of one of the spouses.
It is possible to get married for life, always by God's grace. That's why the saying goes: Three to get married: the groom, the bridegroom and God.
What we must all remember is that basically marriage is a life-long service.
Remarriage after divorce = Cohabitation
Karl von Brockdorff
May 31st 2011, 10:30
Sometimes I wonder if you are actually human at all..
Something tells me this is a spamming computerized bot. I cannot understand how someone/thing can be so programmed.
Ray Gatt
May 31st 2011, 12:51
There's another saying Joe. Two's company, three's a crowd.
Mr John Caruana
May 31st 2011, 17:00
Nispera li m'intix minn dawk li jsejhu lilhom infushom Kattolici, imbaghad ma jaghtux kaz tar-rieda t' Alla.
Mr Peter Korsten
May 31st 2011, 20:47
"It is possible to get married for life, always by God's grace. That's why the saying goes: Three to get married: the groom, the bridegroom and God."
I think you just described a marriage in one of the more progressive countries, the first one being the Netherlands. (Hint: you meant to say 'bride and bridegroom'.)
Henry S. Pace
May 30th 2011, 16:39
Taxpayers
'Taxpayers forked out €4 million for this referendum to be held, making it a costly exercise which could have been avoided if politicians had gauged the public mood better'
No . Paarliament had no right to debate the divorce bill . This was a 'Bolt in the blue. by JPO.
The 4 million that the taxpayer had to fork out from the State coffers will in future would have to fork out much more than this amount to make good for the future divorcees.
Ms D Galea
May 31st 2011, 10:36
In a few years time the effect of the burden on social services will be felt. The irony is that it will be felt more by the younger generation which voted for divorce in such huge numbers.
As things stand at present, young working people are already paying through the nose in taxes and National insurance WITH THE CERTAIN KNOWLEDGE THAT THEIR OLD AGE PENSION WILL NOT BE GUARANTEED. The added social services burden will have to be shouldered by them in the form of futurehefty increases in NI and income tax. I hope they will take comfort in the fact that they will spend the rest of their lives subsidizing these social services and not THEIR OWN old age pensions.
Edgar Azzopardi
May 30th 2011, 15:33
The YES vote won becuase the YES campaign was for more credible than the No campaign as were their members.
The No had the likes of DJ Pierre, who will, from today look at his wife wondering whether to divrorce her or not; Anna Vella who gives up on love as soon as she tops size 10; Joyce Cassar, who was one of the most non- credible characters of the No,and who kept trying to impress us with the studies in tthe US- forgetting her own lifestye; Andre Camilleri and Arthur Galea Salomone- who given a collar could easly pass for a couple of qassisin, but who above all showed us that they are living in another planet.; the Clyde person, who kept mentioning Kristu every 3rd word- exasperating even the good Lord Himself - not to mention the other characters who amongst them did not manage to come up with one single decent reason for voting NO.
Then we got the YES team - all more likeable and smart than the NO team. Debbie Schembri, who was calm and composed all through the campaign; JPO and Varist Bartolo- who are both down to earth and have the gift of the gab; Micheal Falzon who represents the liberal PN voter and who did not mince his words; Marlene Mizzi who appeals to the more sophisticated voter but who managed to speak the language people understood and related to; Cyrus Engerer; who represented the young gay without being overly obvious.
All in all the YES team won because they had a better team and better arguments. I wonder what the margin would have been if the 2800 young voters would have been allowed to vote.
Insomma, with all the buzullotti of the PN, the Church , Fenech Adami and the No team, the Maltese are no longer gullible dodos, Praise the Lord!
Mr M Borg
May 30th 2011, 19:56
Was that as we say a " slip of the tongue "
How can you Praise the Lord and vote in somehting that goes against His teaching ?
The IVA might have won but that did not change the meaning of divorce in the eyes of the church.
G. Cachia
May 31st 2011, 12:39
Sur Azzopardi:
'Nirrispetta l-Intelligenza tieghek' - jghid il-Malti. Kemm jekk inhi stupida u ahjar jekk m'hiex.
Edgar Azzopardi
May 31st 2011, 17:12
Mr M Borg : No it is not a slip of the tongue at all. I did not know that the Lord was the exclusive property of people like you. He is not you know!
I am a Catholic who voted YES and did so with a clear conscience. Who are you to decide otherwise?
The patronising/ holy/ tones of people like you have done so much harm. Now please stop. Praise the Lord ,always.
juanita debattista
May 31st 2011, 18:50
@ Mr E Azzopardi, who in a very examplary manner has demonstrated what a Catholic should be.. sweet in words, non judgemental, never a harsh word, tolerant to all those who dont share his views..
Mr Joe Micallef
May 30th 2011, 15:25
I cannot see why "people who don't want to be divorced" was exclusively placed under Losers! At least the other partner will be a winner since he/she will know what the relationship is all about.
Other winners
- Physically and emotionally abused spouses as the proposed divorce should solve their problems
- Abandoned spouses and children who can now look forward to guaranteed maintenance
- Small party organisers as I believe pompous wedding receptions will give way to smaller dos. Divorce parties will be an addition to their services.
- Greeting cards importers who will now be able to market "divorce" cards. Although this may be offset by falling sales of Wedding and Anniversary Cards
- Divorce Lawyers. Although they may at first be inhibited by the perception given that divorce in Malta will be cheap, I believe that the better lawyers will soon start making a good buck of it
- Creativity in general until all the nuts and bolts of how to use and abuse this legislation are generally exhausted
Other Losers
- Big "wedding" businesses who provide a take it or leave it catering-hall offer.
- Florists who will probably see their services generating less turnover as parties will become smaller and church weddings will diminish. This may be offset by more parties per indiviudal
- The UK economy (generally) which will loose the money it made from hosting well to do Maltese divorcees
Ms D Galea
May 31st 2011, 10:41
A NEW BEGINNING INDEED. Throw away the first wife and kids and leave them to the mercy of the tax payers whilst the second , or latest wife gets it all, including old age pension.
Henry the eight, him of the six wives wold agree with you , but which male chauvenist pig would not? Marry a woman, wear her out and when you get fed up walk away and after four years divorce her and set up a new house with a fresh wife......or stay comfortably at home with dear old mummy doing your room and cooking your lasagna and washing your dirty linen.
Bud Moureaux - Flanders (BE) & Xemxija, SPB (MT)
May 30th 2011, 14:32
To all Maltese citizens!
Having witnessed the charade by the Church, the conclusion is obvious. We should now strive for two things within the shortest possible time,
- first, the separation of State and Church, i.e. abolish Article 2 of the Constitution and
- secondly, the correct delineation between Church and State, excluding any interference whatsoever by the Church in State affairs.
Therefore, to this effect, let's start
(1) A FaceBook group.
(2) Set up a Movement with an appropriate name, e.g. No more State within the State; Malta-Secular YES, Malta-Church NO, ...
(3) Organize the necessary lobbying work for putting all this into laws to that effect.
In the past weeks leading up to Saturday's referendum, the Maltese voters have learnt how the Church has been scaremongering and lying to their flock and they have witnessed the utter hypocrisy the Church has shown by their belated apology. The voters are now much better armed to resist the Church's dirty tricks in the next campaign.
The correction of the relationship between the State and the Church in Malta 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 citizens will effectively be able to decide for themselves without fearing to be bullied by Mgr. XYZ 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.
Maltese voters are mature, conscientious people. They have shown it last Saturday, the D-Day for Divorce legislation. So, let's go for it, under the motto 'YES, we can do it!'
Bud Moureaux, partially residing in Flanders, BE and in Xemxija, SPB, MT.
Mr Joe Grima
May 30th 2011, 15:29
'Maltese voters are mature,...' Probably that is why the yes won, since children, who are considered 'immature', did NOT have any say in it. And yet, THEY are the most vulnerable ones in society!
Mr edwin formosa
May 30th 2011, 16:27
"a new beginning" ?? a new beginning through a second hand marriage !!!!!!!
vincent zerafa
May 30th 2011, 14:09
I was one of those who voted 'yes' and am really glad that the yes vote has prevailed. I am especially glad for two reasons. First that freedom has prevailed over the present situation of a church-state in Malta. And second that spiritual terrorism was defeated in such a big way! Now those who are against divorce are free not to make use of it, while those who wish to have a new beginning have the freedom to do so.
By the way, what's become of Joe Zammit? Is it true he went to the Philippines? :)
vincent a galea
May 30th 2011, 14:01
You ask the question about AD, "Will the Yes victory help it do better in General Elections?"
The YES result shows that the people are gathering MATURITY FAST and FURIOUS... !!
It is time to seriously look at the very questionable situation that the effects of the TWO PARTY SYSTEM are having on these Islands
This GREEN PARTY has much more to OFFER Malta and Gozo than people care to think about!
The next step is to BREAK the POLITICAL MONOPOLY that has been GRIPPING these Islands for DECADES !!
William Hooton
May 30th 2011, 13:10
Congratulations to the Yes movement on their stunning victory! One more nail in the coffin of the greatest opponent to your hedonistic lifestyles!
So whats next for the Maltese New Liberal Elite on it's march towards a politically correct, materialist, secular socialist utopia? The complete abolition of the Church from Malta? Why stop there? Just push for Post-natal abortion now! The sky's the limit!
Ms D Galea
May 30th 2011, 13:07
Net winners =divorce lawyers,social services scroungers and the last of a series of wives.
Net Losers= the long suffering tax-payer,the discarded first wife and children and the institution of marriage.
Ms B Cassar
May 30th 2011, 15:35
Bad losers. Min jaf kieku kienet bil-kontra is-sitwazzjoni x'kontu tghidu. Mur oqghod bikom kieku imma alla ma jhobbx ipokriti u nies li jinsultaw l-inteligenza ta haddiehor. Gawdu issa.
Ms D Galea
May 30th 2011, 22:42
@Ms B Cassar;
nice to note that in spite of your gratuitous barbs you did not quite contradict my comments.Ergo, you are in total agreement and are quite pleased with yourslef if the net losers will be the tax payer and first wife and her children.
I salute you.
Mr David Mangion
May 30th 2011, 12:55
Malta has made a step forward.......but towards the wrong direction.
The next step is a vote for a "responsable" abortion.
......and people will still expect the church to remain silent on the issue.
The arguments in favour will still be the same as those that have been used throughout this referendum.
Simon Scerri
May 30th 2011, 12:35
You forgot to include JOE ZAMMIT in the loser's list.
Steve Elliott
May 30th 2011, 12:34
and of course don't forget the biggest winners of all in this................... solicitors
vincent zerafa
May 30th 2011, 12:32
Well, afterall, the official results contradict Joe Zammit, who for months had been posting ridiculous statements like:
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!
Well Mr Joe Zammit, you were completely wrong not only on this but on other ridiculous statements you had been copying and pasting ad nauseam. Your tactics did not work. Suits you well!
vincent zerafa
May 30th 2011, 12:29
I was one of those who voted 'yes' and am really glad that the yes vote has prevailed. I am especially glad for two reasons. First that freedom has prevailed over the present situation of a church-state in Malta. And second that spiritual terrorism was defeated in such a big way! Now those who are against divorce are free not to make use of it, while those who wish to have a new beginning have the freedom to do so.
Malcolm Alden
May 30th 2011, 12:07
Err, one question.
How are people who do not want to get divorced losing?? It is quite a simple answer, just don't get divorced. And, here is an idea, just stick to what you think is right for you and your family.
Mr William Flynn
May 30th 2011, 11:51
I just wish cut and paste nuisance apologists who were continuously telling us about the religiosity of the Maltese people, that Malta is Catholicissima, and all the other rubbish, would just shut go lick their wounds from their cilices and go use the "discipline" (a knotted whip) on their buttocks as they recite the hail mary's as demanded by that masochistic narcissistic Escriva of Opus Dei - and STFU.
Ms Maria Vella
May 30th 2011, 12:08
William Flynn
Your comment above shows the typical intolerance that many Maltese have shown during this referendum Campaign.
If people want to follow their Catholic beliefs, let them be. The referendum result is out, the people have decided and the decision respected.
There is no need to be arrogant and intolerant.
STFU to you too - perhaps this is the language you understand
konrad borg
May 30th 2011, 13:27
Your comments say more about yourself than about your preferred subject. You should deal with your issues after which some more sensible and tolerant comments may be forthcoming.
Mr M Briffa Viva malta
May 30th 2011, 11:28
Sorry to disapoint U mr.Gozitan friend, i think Gozo is always the loser which ever way one looks at it, its the forgotten rock that has nothing to offer except maybe empty properties that nobody wants Oh forgot Flies everywhere
\\\\\\\\\\\///////////////
Mark Galea
May 30th 2011, 11:41
Well my friend, think what you like ... my comment was not directed to you but to the PL and PN who are already analysing the data of the referendum on which to base their campaign. You may complain how much you like, but we may be the key in next elections ...
N Mifsud
May 30th 2011, 13:17
U dak dubbien fitt !!!
N Mifsud
May 30th 2011, 11:25
X'ghandu x'jaqsam Mr Galea??? Ahjar tifthu naqa mohhkhom u tindew tghixu fit 2011 u mhux ghadkom fil 1011!!!
Albert Fsadni
May 30th 2011, 11:21
In this case there are no losers. The people who are against divocrce can stay out of it. The contract is / was between the divorcing couple
Mark Galea
May 30th 2011, 11:16
@Joseph Muscat & PL
WE GOZITANS were the real winners. Be careful for next election, dear Joseph. The Maltese are happy with what you gave them with but a bridge or tunnel is the only way you can win our district and have a chance for next election.
Ginevra Alvarado
May 30th 2011, 11:28
LOL! Who told u that all gozitans want the bridge or tunnel?!
R. Schembri
May 30th 2011, 12:03
Lol Mark... jiddispjacini hafna ghalik ta' siehbi imma bla bridge jew tunnel ha tibqa. Mhux l-Ghawdxin kollha iridu bridge nassigurak jien. Winners? qas xejn siehbi... il-fatt li qed thallat il-hass mal-bass bizzejjed prova li ma rbahtu xejn, ghax No vote kellkom u b'No vote ha tibqaw. Wake up Mark, m'adniex fi zmien in-neandertal... ax huma jgibu ruhhom bhalek -.-
Ms B Cassar
May 30th 2011, 12:13
Tkunx arroganti sur galea. Giovanna ma ghamlitulkomx il-pont u xorta bqajtu tivvutawlha. B'min trid tidhak int?
Jekk tridu issa il-pont mur ghid lil Gonzi. X'aktarx bir-rata li ghaddej biex jigbor xi giex voti ilestijulek f'sena u nofs.
Kif tridu jaghmlilkom il-pont Muscat jekk qieghed fl-oppozizzjoni? U int min tahseb li int biex tghid NOW? Ibqa cert li l-anqas jekk jaghmilulkom NOW ma tivvotawlu ghax fil-medju evu kontu u fil-medju evu tibqghu. U kieku stess min qallek li il-pont iriduh l-ghawdxin kollha? Imbaghad bye bye Gozo channel li thaddem tant ghawdxin, imbaghad bye bye farm houses li ghandkom, Imbaghad bye bye tqisuna bhala turisti u tipprovaw tisolhuna lilna il-maltin.
Mur ghid lil Giovanna nanna, dik forsi tamilulek issa, ghax hi il-prim ministru ta ghawdex. Oqghodu hemm issa u gawdu il-frott tal-mentalita maghluqa li tlett kwart mill-ghawdxin ghandkom. Oqghodu gawdu lil l-isqof Grech li hlief jitajjar minn fuq il-pulptu ma jafx jaghmel.
Mr j mifsud
May 30th 2011, 11:12
ok so divorce is going to be legalised..however, what is the government going to do now to strengthen the marriages in the first place? is it going to provide any help for newly wedded couples or counselling sessions to those people who are about to get married in order to give them proper advice on how to strengthen their relationships? because divorce is not a solution..it will dissolve the marriages of those people whose relationship didnt work out but at the end of the day the answer is not divorce but proper preparation to marriage..
Philip Bonello
May 30th 2011, 12:22
You have a point , Mr. Mifsud but do not expect much. Governments help in the economics of running a family but not much else.
Mr Joshua Briffa
May 30th 2011, 12:37
I really don't think the government should do anything. This one thing I really hate about Maltese citizens. The government isn't "daddy" or "nannu". Get on your feet and do something yourself. I don't believe Maltese people get married just for fun. It's not something ANYONE take lightly. The fact that love doesn't really last forever (as nothing else does) is human nature. This doesn't mean, however, that if something doesn't last forever than it isn't meaningful. Proper preparation to marriage is something personal. Being married is not a priest putting his hand over 2 heads and calling them husband and wife, that is the ceremony - real marriage is a state of mind two people enter in BEFORE the ceremony. I believe this is obvious to anyone with a brain. Blaming the government for your own incompetence is immature.
Mr j mifsud
May 30th 2011, 14:23
mr.Briffa
i do not think that offering guidance to people is immature..if it is so obvious then we wouldnt even need divorce in the first place..and as for love not lasting forever - are you saying that there are more separated couples than married couples? i dont think so..so yes love can last forever and that is why some people need guidance..
Gerry Cowie
May 30th 2011, 11:00
52% would have been cited as a very close call had the "No!" camp won. What about the "minority" 48% - many people crow about minorities being included!
People actually hiding behind invented names below must be afraid of making themselves known for some reason!
The result is for yes to legislation - it is not for yes to gloating! The pro movement put a lot of Catholic Maltese off voting for them and caused many to abstain. Thus they remained a weapon for the anti movement.
As for the puerile suggestion below that to abstain is to say no, what is the point of trying to put words and thoughts into people's mouths and minds?
Time to move on!
Raymond Sacco
May 30th 2011, 13:04
mr.cowie, the instructions of the catholic church authorities was very clear: VOTE NO. they never instructed their followers to abstain. so in simple words, those 28% chose to ignore the catholic church leaders! this was never a case of any dis-respect towards losing minority mr.cowie, but a dis-respected minority which was fighting for their rights, and won!
Jean Marc Galea
May 30th 2011, 10:59
EVERYBODY IS A WINNER BECAUSE EVERYBODY HAS THE CHOICE TO DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES... if you think that a couple will give up more easily because there is now divorce then you are most probably pretty thick! and if you think that divorce is a sin then don't use it, you have the choice!
Mr l. theuma
May 30th 2011, 10:58
It's nonsense to classify the Church with the losers. The church since its inception, symbolized by Peter's boat, for two millennia, has met and survived great tempests. Its Lord, Jesus Christ, promised her to be with her till the end of time. The losers are the miserable that jump down from it into the troubled waters for they will surely perish. Sic.
Daniel Azzopardi (Naxxar)
May 30th 2011, 13:16
That is what you believe. Your church, your rules. Our state, our rules.
Clarissa Cassar
May 30th 2011, 10:49
Another loser: the offspring...our children...has anyone considered what they would want? ...was their future considered?...bad luck teachers...more attention seekers and trouble makers at school lacking love and attention from their parents and their 'partners'.
Mr Tony Camilleri
May 30th 2011, 12:22
Clarissa Cassar can you tell us what future would the children have with a violent parent?
Ms Eve Axiaq
May 30th 2011, 10:41
Il- poplu mhuwiex pupazz li joghqod jigi mbezza li k'tivvota iwa jew anke jekk ma tmurx tivvota tkun qed taghmel dnub. F'din l- haga l-knisja zbaljat bil- kbir.
Ma naqbilx ma divorzju imma ma mortx nivvota. Ghax il- knisja rritatni bl-ghagir taghha.
Mr Joseph Cauchi Senior
May 30th 2011, 10:38
Malta is the real loser!
This is a Pyrrhic victory!
JC.
Anonymous Anonymous
May 30th 2011, 10:32
I can't believe it, at last a new Malta has risen and with it a lot of respect for the church has been lost, the church and who rides on their roller coaster apologized, but to me, that was the cry for the respect they lost, and the respect they'll never get back (from me at least), the cry knew that it lost!
and if it was me whose in power, i would strip the church from voting, because in my opinion they don't have the right to vote as they aren't married, they don't know what it means to be married. and never will.
Best wishes,
carmen galea
May 30th 2011, 11:17
DOES A DOCTOR HAVE TO EXPERIENCE SICKNESS HIMSELF TO BE ABLE TO DIAGNOSE YOUR/ MY ILLNESS?
Mr Joe Grima
May 30th 2011, 11:42
Mr or Ms Anonymous.
So, according to you, male gynaecologists are cheating, because they can NEVER really know and feel what women go through during labour! No wonder you shied away from showing your identity!
Joe A M Grima
Mr David Mangion
May 30th 2011, 12:48
"Never" is a very very very long time.
I would think it twice before stating in public that "the church would NEVER get back my respect"
I do know a handful of cases, when faced with the reality of an incumbent terminal disease, they suddenly re-discovered God, through his ministers on Earth.
We all have to die, one day.......let nobody ever look over this fact.
Mr Joe Grima
May 30th 2011, 15:34
So, according to your comment about the church being banned from voting, male gynaecologists should never practice their profession, since they can NEVER experience labour and childbirth! No wonder you shied from revealing your name!
Ms Rudi Mcbeal
May 30th 2011, 10:21
You failed to mention the biggest loser - The Maltese society (yes-voters included).
The only winner is Deborah Schembri. Oh, and the divorce lawyers.
Mr Aristide Galea
May 30th 2011, 10:58
The real winner is Democracy and the Right of Choice to everyone and without any imposition.
Mr Tony Camilleri
May 30th 2011, 11:19
Step out of the dark ages Rudi.
Ginevra Alvarado
May 30th 2011, 11:26
Freedom is the really winner.
Ms Maria Vella
May 30th 2011, 11:48
Ms. Alvarado
Freedom to do what everybody wants irrrespective of whether this has an impact on overall society?
Philip Bonello
May 30th 2011, 12:17
Bet that all those lawyers on the 'No' bandwagon will now refuse to deal with divorce cases!?
Ms Rudi Mcbeal
May 30th 2011, 13:18
I did that years ago, Mr Tony Camilleri.
@ the rest: only time can tell.
Mr Carmel Gatt
May 30th 2011, 10:17
" However, with the divorce issue out of the way "
It is not out of the way. It still has to be voted by the majority of our MPs, and we know what a delicate concsience they have. Wait and see.
Philip Bonello
May 30th 2011, 10:16
So finally the truth won through. Now is the time for some people to reassess their position. I was shocked to hear Lawrence Gonzi say that the referendum passed against his better judgement as if he were the party and the party was him. These are the words and thoughts of a benevolent dictator. I wonder how he feels now that many, many nationalists voted against their own party. I doubt that the PN can now say that they represent the people or that they feel the public pulse. I think a change in leadership is long due.
The church must reassess its position too. Although what is right remains right and the wrongs remain wrong the Catholic church in Malta must now swallow the bitter pill of realising that even though it is still the largest church in Malta (for how long?), it does not speak for the majority of the people. It doesn’t even know or feel the aches and needs of the people. Things change, and even though it is not always for the better, we cannot ignore the fact. The church must now learn to stop shooting itself in the foot and rethink the way it is “selling” itself to the faithful before it’s too late.
As we have been learning since the days we went to doctrine lesson when we were children, the church is not the buildings but the people (and neither, may I add, is it the arch-conservative canons in the upper hierarchy at the Curia). The church must exist for the people and must find ways and means to attract these people and motivate them towards the teaching of Christ. The church is not there to fight the people. The days of holy crusades are over.
"Il-Borma fuq tlieta toqghod" and I hope that the archbishop will not ever need to apologise a third time. He must now reconsider which people he needs to keep in his inner circle. The days when the church maintained its faithful “bil-bullutini” and fear of sin is over. The people are pulled over by conviction.
Hopefully we will soon put this episode behind us and divorce will take its place in the people’s perspective on the same shelve as legal-separation and annulment. When the law goes through I hope there will be many who will avail themselves of the opportunity to legalise their second families. If we get a decrease in the number of children born out of wedlock I will be happy.
Mr Tony Camilleri
May 30th 2011, 11:20
This reflection found in a foreign media must fit some of our politicians.
"Politicians and nappies should be changed often, and for the same reason"
Mr Michael Buhagiar
May 30th 2011, 10:14
The only losers I see are all those who voted YES therefore going against the will of God. They will have to sort it out themselves how to reconcile with him. The only losers will be those silly women and their offspring who will be abandoned by their irresponsible and cunning men who first used them, abused them and then abandoned them for other much more pretty women. The other losers are those who dont have any family values but who are spiteful of other people's worthy lives. The Church is surely no loser. The Church is founded on rock and has God's dictum that the evil of this world will never have the upper hand and will never destroy her. it has been with us ever since Christ founded His church. and no matter the persecutions, it still is going strong. The real losers are the labour party and the media since what they have sown will be reaped in the future.
Mr mike Knight
May 30th 2011, 10:04
Finally MALTA has seen the light, and now wakening up to reality. The people that dictate to others as to how they should live their lives have LOST so i say holier then thou grin and bear it.
Mr Mark Zerafa
May 30th 2011, 10:00
Winners: The people of Malta who have triumphed over the Church's tyranny and can now enjoy living in a truly secular, democratic society.
Mr Joseph Cassar
May 30th 2011, 09:56
The author of this article forgot the biggest loser, the Maltese Family, now it is confirmed that the present Maltese electorate has lost its most fundumental values, that is why the majority turned to divorce, which is one of the worst form of family destruction actions, I am sorry for my childred who now has to live in a society without the basic values.
Mr FRANS H SAID
May 30th 2011, 11:00
You are out of date. The Maltese family has been going down hill since cohabitaion was no longer a crime, even so with the proposed new cohabitation bill
Mr Victor Laiviera
May 30th 2011, 13:03
Mr Said want to throw people who cohabit IN JAIL??
Travis Brannon
May 30th 2011, 09:55
It is too bad that the result of this referendum is being framed in such way as to point out "winners" and "losers," as this were some sort of sporting event. There is only the life of the individual, a life which was often colored by suffering, the individual who now, thanks to the majority of the Maltese population choosing mercy, love and freedom over dogma and Pharisaical legalism, is getting a second lease on life. Modernity, with all its strengths and weaknesses, has rightly succeeded in penetrating these isolated shores. And this, in my opinion is a good thing. If there is going to be any genuine soul-searching for the ideological power structures in Malta, the issue should be framed in such a way as to examine who is failing to realize their self-professed goals in society. Christianity is a religion of love, and in this sense, some philosophers argue the highest of all the world's religions. In the Gospels, Jesus teaches love over empty, religious legalism. How can we as so-called Christians condemn our neighbor to a life of torment and suffering, because of dogma, and feel we are doing God's will? In his book Religions, Values and Peak Experiences, the psychologist Abraham Maslow talks about how organized religion almost always degenerates into empty ritual and legalism, and this because the avergae human being has trouble finding the capacity for the genuine spiritual journey. They want to be told what to do, instead of searching themselves. This is exactly what has happened in the Catholic Church and exactly what the Jesus of the Gospels warns against. The idea is for the human being to achieve the very difficult task of giving love, something I believe goes against the grain of the unenlightened human heart, to give love which is not contaminated by selfishness or a neurotic need to control others, a task that our civilization makes more and more difficult, but not impossible. The Church is failing in its mission to teach individuals how to love. This is a very pragmatic task, but the Church is so utterly lost in its supernaturalism, charismatic tongue-speaking, and ideas of human transformation through an invisible Holy Spirit that it is very, very, very far removed from reality. The Church has become a clique of those who buy into this supernatural mumbo-jumbo, pitted against those who do not accept this charismatic chaos. In the Western World, the Catholic Church is losing its vitality and the way the Church has conducted itself during this campaign, in trying to manipulate people through fear and guilt, Medieval tactics indeed, has clearly shown its level of understanding. Fr Peter is right: there was no intelligent discussion about this issue, and I would add, especially not in the Mass.
Christian Sciberras
May 30th 2011, 09:37
"Losers: Taxpayers"
I disagree. Money spent fixing our broken legislature is money well spent.
Face-lifting Valetta, on the other hand, is most certainly not.
Ramon Casha
May 30th 2011, 10:22
I think the article means that this is a matter that should have been tackled by parliament. Perhaps at least this referendum will tell MPs not to assume that the Maltese people are as conservative as some might think.
Daniel Camilleri
May 30th 2011, 10:24
yes ok. money well spent.....but parliament should have taken the decision without the referendum.. we would have saved 4 million....!!
Mr Tony Camilleri
May 30th 2011, 11:27
Daniel Camilleri perhaps you are too young to remember Eddie Fenech Adami proclaiming that "Money no problem" although later it turned into "Problem, NO money" even though Gonzi still thinks that "Money no problem" because he is not paying for his excesses but we are.
Mr John Micallef
May 30th 2011, 09:33
Yes, the biggest loser in this is the PN, but the worst thing is that the PN seems unable to take this in, to the huge disappointment of all those that have supported this party for so long.
Dr. Gonzi's hiding behind a camera and recorded message soon after the realisation of the result did not help and continued to show a man unable to admit to the reality around him.
For years, the leadership of the PN has shut the door in the face of many who honestly wanted it to open its eyes and wake up. While in Government, the PN has shunned so many people that these have now been disenchanted and so disappointed that should a snap election be called, I think that the result would simply reflect that of the referendum (Yes-MLP, No-PN)
Worst of all is the way GOnziPN stuffed everything it wanted down people's throat, with no repsect towards the individual needs, the environment or anyone, at that. The stance and attitude of certain ministers and MPs is disgusting people. The paternalistic approach in simply not bearable any more.
Lately we've been saying that JPO's career is over. Following this weekend's GonziPN debacle, I would say that Dr Gonzi will most likely be the one on the way out...
It's a pity that the PN continue to be so adamant in certain views and postitions. But perhaps they've grown tired of governing.
Mr Joe Gatt
May 30th 2011, 09:25
By taking an active role in campaigning against divorce – with some of its most prominent members even intimating that voting for divorce is a sin –
The irony is that the same church leaders stating that to abstain from voting was also a sin, indirectly meaning vote `NO`
This meddling, which has been going on forever on these Islands has and is causing great harm to a very powerful,`by local standard` Institution.
This intererence is just so that the local catholic church maintains its power and control, and not out of love to its followers and neighbours
Mr Ernest Vella
May 30th 2011, 09:10
Telliefa wkoll hargu; it-tfal ghax 71.3% jaqblu li t-tfal ha jbatu; il-vittmi tat-tkissir fejn waqt li huma kienu fidili dawk li kissru z-zwieg ghax marru ma haddiehor ha jinghataw il-permess mill-istat biex jergghu jizzewgu, ghalkemm kienu irresponsabli; in-nisa msawwta ghax min sawwathom ha jinghata c-cans jerga jizzewweg; il-pajjiz ghax irid ihallas prezz ekonomiku wkoll; is-socjeta maltija ghax fl-ghatx li tkun bhal haddiehor rammiet l-identita taghha. "Mhux kull ma jleqq hu deheb"....u l-ghajta ta kisba ta drittijiet ohra se jitfa il-pajjizna f'xifer l-irdum.
Il-Knisja m'ghandiex tithalla tigi uzata mill-istat, u ghanda tirtira mill-hidmiet li m'humiex propja taghha u tiffoka fuq dak li hu tassew importanti. z-zmien li nidhru sbieh spicca. Il-Knisja m'ghandiex izzewweg lil kulhadd, il-Komfermazzjoni ma ttihiex lil min ma jkollux preparazzjoni sura. X'jiswa li kulhadd jitghammed meta r-realta turi li din kollha tradizzjoni. L-Ghaqdiet wasal iz-zmien li jgeddu lilhom infushom, il-Moviment ta Kana ghandu jaggorna ruhu u mhux kull min jitlob biex jizzewweg, dan jinghata dan id-dritt; Il-Knisja ghanda tinqata mill-istat u b'hekk tkun libera li titkellem; u fl-ahhar it-Tribunal Ekklezjastiku ghandu jhaffef il-processi u ghandu jkun hemm trasparenza fil-finanzi, kemm jigi jiswa kaz...halli hadd ma jghid li qieghed isir xi qliegh
Christian Sciberras
May 30th 2011, 09:56
Oh come on do you really believe that crap?
As if children before divorce didn't suffer or wouldn't suspect anything wrong between their parents.
In fact, it is well known that children get to know about this issue before their parents...!
Philip Bonello
May 30th 2011, 10:26
The suffering children have always been there. this can be confirmed by any educator who has worked closely with children. It will not happen because of divorce; it happens because families break down and parents seperate. This has been happening from time immemorial and will continue happening because some marriages just don't work. At least divorce will give these new families the chance to exist in a legal framework. As for the abused woman, do you really expect people to believe that the woman should remain abused just not to let her husband have the chance to marry again. LOL
Joseph W. Galea
May 30th 2011, 09:05
But whatever the divorce legislation will be, the Church will not recognize a disunion via divorce as legal, especially if the couple initially were married in a Catholic church.
Also, Catholics who get a divorce will not be able to remarry in church.
These are the Catholic Church rules around the world as far as I know.
They will be able to get married at city hall, a marriage the Church will not recognize.
But I presume that not many people getting divorced will care what the Church does in their situation.
Mr S Cachia
May 30th 2011, 10:14
i think the church has lost its faith especially with all the bullying and fear-of-sin preachings. if a poll among the young couples was done i think a good % will say that they don't believe in the church/lost all faith in it and most young couples still marry in church (i) because it's tradition (ii) to avoid disgruntle from their parents (iii) avoid gossip. maybe i'm right maybe i'm wrong.
i lost faith in church long long ago because it uses religion for its own ends. The madonna weeps, yes, but not because of the Yes vote, but because of the state the church is in.
Robert Grech
May 30th 2011, 08:59
Another Loser: Marriage
Ms S Micallef
May 30th 2011, 10:17
we've been at it for 3 months Robert Grech and it seems like you still haven't understood much!
Mr W Cassar
May 30th 2011, 10:30
No its a winner, for people can now marry again. Anyway it doesn't matter YES won :))))))
Mr Joseph Brincat
May 30th 2011, 08:54
A very good observation of recent happenings!
(jb)
Chris Farrugia
May 30th 2011, 08:49
I'd put Joe Zammit as the biggest loser.
Christian Sciberras
May 30th 2011, 09:54
GOOD ONE!!!
Karl von Brockdorff
May 30th 2011, 10:51
I second that.
What I'd give to taste Joe's tears as he reviews his mantras for one last time.
J. Falzon
May 30th 2011, 11:07
It seems as if the devil has took over the world, the "guaranteed" victory was for the secularists, and not the conservative religious right-wingers. I haven't seen Joe yet since his fight against the devil was lost :D
Huzzah for secularism!! Huzzah for the 21st century!!
Mr Tony Camilleri
May 30th 2011, 11:28
I hiope he hasn't done something silly because we haven't heard anything from him since the result was announced.
Mark Galea
May 30th 2011, 08:41
@Joseph Muscat
WE GOZITANS were the real winners. Be careful for next election, dear Joseph. The Maltese are happy with whay you gave them with but you must give us much more than divorce to make us happy.
I.E. we want the permanent link NOW.
Mr Tony Camilleri
May 30th 2011, 11:29
Pick up your pick and start digging.