Civil marriages should not remain gender specific - MGRM
Malta Gay Rights Movement has launched a position paper on marriage equality in which it is asking that the legal definition of civil unions does not remain gender specific.
Lawyer Neil Falzon, who was commissioned to draw up the paper, emphasised that it tackled civil union and was not, in any way, asking the Church to redefine its understanding of marriage.
He noted that allowing gay people to marry civilly would grant them full equality and would grant them access to a whole range of rights that come with signing a marriage contract.
These rights - such as the right to adopt, inheritance and pensions - were not necessarily covered through the cohabitation law government has promised.
Gabi Calleja, from the movement, pointed out that cohabitation law did not recognise the relationship between the couple.
"No harm ensues to society from the granting of equal rights to same-sex couples and therefore any delay can not be morally justified... Equality is not a luxury, it is a basic human right and the time for it is now," she said.
Dr Falzon stressed that granting gay people the right to marry did not diminish the rights of same-sex couples and did not threaten Church marriage.
It was important that the state stopped giving marriage a religious based meaning.
The divorce debate had already shown that the definition of civil marriage could change - away from a union that lasted a life time. Now it was time to debate changing the definition of who could get married, he said.
The position paper will be given to the major political parties and policy makers.
The movement also launched its new website www.maltagayrights.org
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...
Second group of migrants arrives
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
78 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Chris Harris
Jan 15th, 13:36
To be perfectly honest i think alot of Masltese lead a sheltered life and should get out more and learn a thing or two. they tend to think the worse out of any given situation, however if they were to think positive and get to learn and realize that these are not the pre war years and now trhey are also part of europe(just) the better it will be all around. In otherwords respect other's way of life failing this is to Mind their own. As far as their Catholic teachings in my case i have my own reserve opinions on that.
Alfred G Grech
Jan 14th, 05:07
The state definition of Marriage should be "a union between a man and a woman" simply because that promotes more of an "ideal" setting for the raising of a child. That is not to say that all such marriages are ideal but all of the other legal unions, if they include children do not provide the richness that the two different sexes together have to offer.In that sense one is better than the other and therefore not the same.
Mike Hunt
Jan 14th, 13:59
Growing up mostly in Malta I used to share your views until as fate had it I found myself with a fair few of my friends and colleagues being as queer as they get. Gay couples who are eager (and deemed fit by the same criteria as any man-woman couple) to adopt make caring parents with a lot more to give than dysfunctional couples or women who popped a few out (I suppose in east london you get to see it all).
What would you rather have? A kid brought up in a dysfunctional family with domestic abuse, one of many in an overstretched state creche or a caring environment that happens to have same sex guardians?
Joe Xuereb
Jan 14th, 02:58
A very close female relative told me if her son grew up to be gay, she would love him still. This she said in front of her mother - all three sitting at the kitchen table. Her mother, usually someone who accepted homosexuality retorted: 'God forbid!'(that the son should turn out to be gay. She looked at me, red as a beetroot in the face, and bit her lip. As well she might! Talk about double-faced, hypocritical lip-service! And another dead giveaway is when commenters here claim that a child brought up by two men(or two women) will be damaged, i.e. will grow up to be homosexual. Betrays an otherwise 'liberal' commenter's distaste towards homosexuality. In any case, I was sired and raised by a very heterosexual couple but, thank god, I still turned out the way I did. Vive la difference (same difference really at this stage in life).
Malta is religious with a capital R. Therefore marriage is seen in this light which is the stumbling block in this discussion. Nobody is threatening religious marriage(whatever that is! but we do! a social setup masquerading as 'heaven-sent'). A gay civil partnership will be a purely civil affair.
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20120109/world/liberal-family-values-threaten-humanity-pope.401656
David Seychell
Jan 13th, 20:26
I'm in favour of introducing some kind of Civil Partnership that would legally recognize those who are partners in life as such and I don't think this should be limited to two partners only because some among us have more than one partner. However this civil partnership should not be a photocopy of Marriage except for the name but should come with rights and responsibilities that reflect the reasons why it was needed in the first place.
"Civil marriages should not remain gender specific - MGRM"
Marriage should continue to be a union between one man and one woman only because children are always the result of a union between ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN ONLY.
Ms. P.M Graham
Jan 13th, 20:09
Every time an article like the above is printed, the debate always, but always comes round to raising children and adoption. Why is that?
Is it the word "marriage" and that one automatically assumes marriage = children?
What about all the heterosexual couples who don't want children?
What about all the homosexual couples who don't want children?
This article is about the basic human rights of same sex couples to have their union recognized and not their "rights" to raise children.
David Seychell
Jan 14th, 07:40
"Every time an article like the above is printed, the debate always, but always comes round to raising children and adoption. Why is that?"
Because the main purpose of Marriage is intrinsically related to having children.
The institution of marriage is very old and pre-dates any written record. But there was a time when it did not exist. To understand why marriage was created one needs to imagine being a man or woman living in those times. One of the biggest social problems at that time was to establish who was the father of which child. The DNA test did not exist. Imagine for example the following scenario: a woman sleeps with more than one boyfriend during the same month and then she discovers she's pregnant. Her former boyfriend claims he's the father but the woman says the father is the current boyfriend. But the current boyfriend doesn’t believe her and he don't want to assume the responsibility of the child. These kinds of situations were a big problem for everyone; it was a problem for the mother, the child, the real father and for society too. Society needed a legal framework that would establish who the real father was so that he would be 'forced' to assume his responsibility towards his children and that's why Society created the institution of marriage so that both parents are wedLOCKED to their responsibilities towards their children and so that the father would have a legal way of knowing and proving that he's the father of his child. It is therefore understandable why marriage includes the promise of being faithful to each other because that was the only way the husband could be assured that he's the father of any offsprings she might bring to light. For the same reason, men used to prefer to marry a virgin woman so that in case the wife gets pregnant soon after they get married, he would know it's not the result of a pre-marital affair with another man.
The institution of marriage was was also needed by the mother. At that time, few women earned money and so many of them depended on men. Before the invention of marriage, women had a difficult choice. Imagine you were a woman at that time and a man claims he loves you and will be with you for the rest of your lives. If you get pregnant and then you discover this man was only after sex and leaves you alone with the child, you would find yourself unable to sustain yourself and your children. For this reason, women needed the marriage contract, so that before having sex with this man (keep in mind that in those times contraceptives did not exist), he is required to 'prove' to her he's serious about his intentions by legally committing himself to co-shoulder the responsibility of the family.
The institution of marriage pre-dated the written word so this mutual promise needed to be formalized by having a public ceremony where the man and woman promised to be husband and wife in the presence of the community. Marriage needed to be a public declaration so that there are witnesses and everybody is warned that the woman is now 'taken' and her future children will be legally considered as her husband's offsprings -in other words, you're warned that if you have an extramarital affair with the bride you then can't claim to be the father of any children she might subsequently have.
Different societies around the world, independently from each other, created "Marriage" because in every society existed the same and identical need. The need to create a social and legal structure that would regulate the various rights and responsibilities that come part and parcel with the eventual offsprings.
Centuries after the invention of Marriage, Society started to notice significant differences between those families with children born outside wedlock and those with children born within marriage. Children born outside wedlock had, on average, a higher chance of having one parent abandoning them or not assuming paternity at all. This is because these parents jumped to the sexual act before ensuring that they are seriously committed to each other. This resulted in more single parents, poorer families, and unhappy children. On the other hand, those who had children within marriage, were seen by the community, as doing the right thing, because before having babies, they first of all, built a stable relationship which was solidified even further with the Marriage commitment. This was one of the reasons why religion classified sex before marriage as a sin because this was considered to be an irresponsible behavior towards the potential children and society itself.
At this point, the benefits of Marriage started to be widely noticed and the community switched from simple approval to actually encouraging men and women to choose the marriage commitment because amongst all the other types of relationships and commitments it offers the best environment for children to be born and raised in. The institution of Marriage aims to strengthen the union of a man and a woman who love each other in order to encourage procreation within a children-friendly environment and to create long term stability that children needs.
Ms. P.M Graham
Jan 14th, 10:25
To David Seychell:
"
Because the main purpose of Marriage is intrinsically related to having children."
No, it's not. People don't get married just to have children.
The rest of your post, with respect is outdated.
David Seychell
Jan 14th, 16:02
"No, it's not. People don't get married just to have children."
Very true. People don't get married just to have children. Some people do get married because they want to raise a family and some don't. Some people do get married because they want to obtain the citizenship of a particular country. Some people do get married because they want to acquire the money or property of the husband/wife. Some do it "ghal ghajn in-nies". Some do it for the wrong reasons but the different reasons why people get married are irrelevant to the argument at hand.
Men and women may decide to get married for various reasons, reasons that may have nothing to do with children. However, the purpose of marriage is not determined by the reasons why men or women want to get married, it is determined by the will of the creator of the institution of marriage: the State. The State want men and women to choose the marriage commitment because amongst all the other types of relationships and commitments it offers the best environment for children to be born and raised in.
Ms. P.M Graham
Jan 14th, 18:16
to David Seychell
"The State want men and women to choose the marriage commitment because amongst all the other types of relationships and commitments it offers the best environment for children to be born and raised in."
In their opinion, and as we all know, those with the most opinions often have the fewest facts
Kenneth Galea
Jan 13th, 18:41
@Charles Bayliss
I agree with you that Dr Muscat will do his utmost to stop discrimination between straight couples and gay couples. Why should gay people be left out in the cold and they are harassed on the basis of their sexual orientation?? This is what Dr Muscat is trying to pursue, end this utter hatred against gays, legalise gay 'marriage' which happens in the form of civil partnership for example in the UK. The church in Malta will never ever allow gays to marry, gays have more chances of seeing pigs fly. However civil partnership can be achieved to give gays SAME rights as straight couples.
Charles Bayliss
Jan 13th, 20:23
The general feeling of us gays is that we are citizens of Malta and not of the Vatican. As like heterosexual people, we gays have all the duties towards the country as much as they do (and in certain instances perhaps even more). Therefore we expect the Government to legislate in our favour, no more no less. I for one is against gays getting married in any type of church, not just the Catholic one. The Maltese people must anchor in their minds that we seek what we have the right for from the country (government) only.
Norman E Grech
Jan 13th, 17:13
I am not religious and I am very open-minded but in this case I have my reservations.
I am all for granting the same financial rights to gay people opting to 'tie the knot' as it were. However one must not feel in any way pressured to state that 'a marriage is between a man and a woman'. Call it a union or whatever you like but it has to be different from a marriage because with respect, we are different!
Moreover I do not agree that gay couples should be given the legal right to raise kids. Apart from the fact that every child should have access to a good male and female role, the very nature of being gay, the very sexual act of being gay does not ensue the bearing of children, so why should they raise them? Yes we are different, if all the people in the world were gay, our species would be wiped out! Think about that!
In addition, if the reasons put forward by gay people are that a person should feel free who to love and live with, this same argument can also be used for polygamy!! In conclusion, in my opinion, if gay marriages are accepted, so why not group marriages? Where do we draw the line?
Yaz Tabone
Jan 13th, 17:46
Norman.. i will ask you again - since you didn't "see" my comment on your letter..
i am a single mother who lives with her mother - so that's 2 women, just in case you didn't catch up... so should my son be taken away?
lets say i was bi sexual, and got into a relationship with another woman after having my son.. will that be considered wrong to you?
A. Schembri
Jan 13th, 17:47
Excellent thought..i agree..
Martin Saliba
Jan 13th, 18:58
Nice one Yaz . What if a man has a son and looses his wife at a young age is living with his widowed father .
Would the son have to be taken away so as not to become gay ?? I think not.
Joseph Sammut
Jan 13th, 19:43
@Yaz Tabone: being a single mother living with your mother doesn't make you gay, so I don't see the correlation between your situation and the subject issue. I am sure your son will benefit in knowing that your live-in partner is your natural mother, his natural grandma. And for your last comment, you do mean a sexual relationship, don't you? By the very nature of you asking the question tells me that you youself are not at ease with the notion.
Yaz Tabone
Jan 15th, 01:54
it's the fact of being gay? how does being gay harm a child?
don't have an answer to my second question then.. thought not
Mr Peter Korsten
Jan 13th, 17:07
I know at least one person who left Malta because he is gay, and this is not a very nice country to live in if you're gay. He's happy where he lives now. Here, there are too many people who think they know what's best for other people.
Claudio Cilia
Jan 13th, 17:01
I love God, I love my parents, I love everyone but if they really love me, they would let me marry someone who I really love and would like to spend the rest of my life with! :).
.. I know many hate gays, I know , even I once was a hater but when you realize you are gay ...trust me you would then understand what it means to be one.. especially here in Malta.. and the thing is ..that you can't do nothing about it , but accept it and try to make to most of your life ... We are asking here for Marrige not for killing or something which is harmful ..since when was love a bad thing??
David Seychell
Jan 13th, 19:34
It is not that simple Claudio. Some people love their dog or his/her football club more than anything else in their life. The point is that the purpose of Marriage is not to recognize whatever is it that you love as Marriage. If that were the case, then a Muslim who loves 3 partners would also have a right to marry them all.
Martin Saliba
Jan 13th, 16:39
You know what you have to do if you want to move forward. Do not trust the PN as the hunters did , look where that got them.
Logan Fenech
Jan 13th, 16:02
Wow if gay marriage actually becomes legal, Malta will be one of the leaders in something besides obesity instead of just following every other big nation. Make it happen!
Mike Hunt
Jan 13th, 17:00
I'm glad I'm not the only one to find this homophobia disturbing...
...but on a lighter note:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sz6HIcnh26I
Maria Borg
Jan 13th, 15:42
How many of you out there, had to be reborn, would want to be adopted by two men who thinks children need no mothers? How many of you would want your children to be adopted by samesex homosexual couples instead of normal married male-female couples?
Do not wish unto other's children what you would not wish upon your children.
Salvinu Buttigieg
Jan 13th, 16:04
Yes most definitly, besides i don't quite see your point in your last sentence......can u elaborate,does that mean that your are for or against (?) no comprehendo my dear.
Luke Lanzon
Jan 13th, 16:19
whats wrong with you?? I wouldn't change my parents for anything but if I was brought up with parents that beat me up I would have been first in line to be born with loving parents, be it hetro or homo...
Patrick Zammit
Jan 13th, 16:23
Your questions lead you nowhere.
Would you like to be reborn to heterosexual couple who separate and in the process use you as a weapon against each other?
Martin Saliba
Jan 13th, 16:41
You were against divorce also , werent you maria.
Yaz Tabone
Jan 13th, 17:29
i would LOVE to have the choice who my child ends up with if i ever came to the point of having to. the important thing is love for a child, n not sex! i would be more than happy if my son was to go with 2 gay men.. why not?? i have gay friends, my son is always happy around them.. they know how to treat kids and you know it's real.
btw.. what is "normal married male-female couples"?
grow up
mike Dobson
Jan 13th, 19:55
As an English man ( straight ) and believe in live and let live, do us all a favour my Maltese friend and that is to tie a knot in it and use your tiny little brain when commenting, please do not dictate to others as how to live their lives, some people choose to live their lives the way they prefer to live it and not the way you want yours. ............. thats pure ignorance in this day&age, i suggest you go back to basic and catch up with the rest of europe, and we shall all live happily ever after------------Amen.
Charles Bayliss
Jan 13th, 15:34
I have been in a serious relationship with my partner Mark for over 7 years and it hurts me deeply that I cannot finalise my commitment to him. We share home and share our lives together. Why should we worry that third parties can benefit against our wish because we cannot declare in a civil way our relationship? I get very sorrowful that I, a Maltese citizen, am being treated as a Second Class citizen only because I am GAY. We should be ALL EQUAL UNDER THE MALTESE CONSTITUTION.
Joe Grech
Jan 13th, 15:20
If two persons of the same sex want to live together may they do so. But it would be sheer folly to allow them to adopt. The repersusions on the child/ren would be immense! That is my frank opinion. Remember not all gays are born gay....a good percentage become gay as a result of the gay company they keep.
it would be unacceptable for any legislation to allow gays to adopt children. If they wish to adopt persons over 18 ready to be adopted by them good luck to them. But children NO! and hopefully nobody will interpret this as being homophobic!
David Caruana
Jan 13th, 15:50
Yes truly, yours isn't a homophobic comment! LOL!
Please Joe, PLEASE, give us a sensible answer on why should an upbringing by a homosexual couple have repercussions on their adopted children?
The only repercussion I can think of is that they will grow to be more tolerant towards others, unlike some of us on this blessed (sic) island of ours.
Patrick Mulholland
Jan 13th, 15:53
May I correct you Mr Grech: All gays are NOT born gay.
Charles Bayliss
Jan 13th, 15:55
Mr Joe Grech. You cannot turn a person gay or straight as much as you cannot turn a person black or yellow. Some gays develop their gayness at an early age and other realise that they are gay at a latter age. But all gays are born that way. We believe and it is scientifically proven that a person is form in the womb of his mother. Physically and mentally that is. So how you can say that some gay people become gay as a result of the gay company they keep!!! What a load of rubbish. Maltese mentality at it's best.
Joe Grech
Jan 13th, 16:55
@ David Caruana - I believe that if a child lives with a gay couple there is more chance of that child becoming gay him/herself. Surely I am entitled to this opinion! They may grow to be more tolerant towards others, as you yourself belief, but that is besides the point I made.
@ Patrick Mulholland - What I said was exactly what you repeat: gays are not necessarily BORN gay; their environment and the company they keep may encourage the change.
@ Charles Bayliss - You are of the opinion that all gays are born that way. That may be so, but I still believe that one's company - and environment very probably has an effect also. A person may be heterosexual but experiment with gay experiences. Ultimately these may become more pronounced Not quite ''load of rubbish'' you unjustly say that it is! Cheers!
Norman E Grech
Jan 13th, 17:14
Totally agree Joe!
Mike Hunt
Jan 13th, 17:28
Patrick, while I do believe there are some gays of convenience as there are gay men married with kids the vast majority of homosexuals are born that way and it is, to them, their natural sexuality.
It is very arrogant and narrow minded to label it a disorder. What would you propose? To 'treat' homosexuals to cure them from their illness?
Jo Grima
Jan 13th, 17:30
this video might fix your ignorance Joe !!
Martin Saliba
Jan 13th, 18:53
Remember not all gays are born gay....a good percentage become gay as a result of the gay company they keep.
Who pushed this down your throat ? Do you have any idea how many gay people married and are now out of the closet ? Give us an idea of what a good percentage ammounts to. Do you know that 1 out of ten people are gay which means that if you have 3 children with two children each there is a great probability that if you are all ( 10 persons ) in the same room at the same time one of you is gay. It could be the husband , wife , one of their children or one of the grand children.
Jo Grima
Jan 13th, 19:16
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMLZO-sObzQ
Mike Hunt
Jan 13th, 20:25
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vS9H3vc49kY
David Cole
Jan 13th, 15:09
Its about time that Transgender and Gay rights are given in this country. They are normal people like us. After all what does normal mean? I hope that the next government will change the laws and give civil marriage to these people immediately.
Borg Mario
Jan 13th, 14:59
Here they are....All the homophobs of this country... Those giving lesson to everyone...If only you were perfect to judge anyone!!!!!! I wish I could have all of you in front of me... But it is so easier to hide yourself in front of a screen and release all your personal frustration on the Times of Malta... You are just cowards...Shame on you...
Mark Anthony Cassar
Jan 13th, 14:38
I never understood this hate towards gays, homosexuality often portrayed as a disease and unnatural. Although I am not gay myself, I fully agree they should be given full rights for a civil marriage.
Maria Borg
Jan 13th, 14:32
MGRM was never elected by anyone. Gabi Calleja is not representing all gays, infact mamy homosexuals disagree with her ideas. Does she know how many gays in Malta are religious people (priests friars and so on)? It's sufficient to look at the numbers present at their last gaypride march to realise this.
William Calleja
Jan 13th, 15:25
did she NEED to be elected by anybody? what manner of elections could a minority group hold anyway? besides, since we're a democratic country and all that, in order to fight for your rights you must have the accordance of a majority?
Emma Xerri
Jan 13th, 15:28
Those that cannot (priests) or those that do not want to, can remain single. However, the basic right to a civil union should be extended to same-sex couples. It is only fair and just.
Charles Bayliss
Jan 13th, 15:28
Gays are not present at the Gay Pride because they are afraid that people like you might harm them. They are afraid of being discriminated because there is no law to protect them. MGRM is a non-profit organisation who is trying hard to fight for gay rights. Of course they are not elected because with the situation in Malta, people have to have the guts to be OPEN.
A. Schembri
Jan 13th, 13:50
I agree that they should be protected but i am absolutaly 100% against homosexuals to adopt. That is an act of arrogance because you can potentially ruin the child's life. A child is not a pet you for own sake but they deserve to be taken care how nature intended.
V Cassar
Jan 13th, 14:41
I totally agree. I would only consider standing against same-sex marriages due to the fact that this will lead to appeals regarding adoption by homosexuals.
I am certain the MGRM people are genuine in their causes. My doubt remains in the future gay generations which will find the laws ready for them rendering them without any appreciation or genuine wishes to raise children.
Apart from that, homosexual couple guardians are a very bad image to the children.
An example for argument's sake: It is very normal that children born from catholic parents tend to be catholic or at least retain their catholic morals throughout their lives. [ I mentioned 'catholic' as an example and there is no religious reference in my argument]
Yaz Tabone
Jan 13th, 14:42
what?? how dare you.. how can it ruin a child's life??
S Scerri
Jan 13th, 14:44
Wow... a textbook example of stinking homophobia. So in your opinion straight people are allowed to raise kids, gay people can only be allowed to raise pets? Don't you think that is highly discriminatory? And if I'm a stable, smart, decent person who happens to be in love with another similar - of the same sex - ,it's instantly more 'dangerous' than a couple where one of the partners is an abusive alcoholic, repeatedly unfaithful or just not fit to raise kids. What twisted thinking!
As far as I know, single people - hetero or homosexual - are already free to adopt. So what's wrong with a couple adopting, regardless of their orientation? And please don't go on about 'nature' - society's norms as we know them have been modelled and adjusted over time, by people like you and me. For all we know, in primitive times the biological father would have only stuck around the mother and child for a few years.. if at all (they might not even have know who their child was)! Would you want us to go back to such a 'natural' system?
To you and others who feel this way I suggest that you watch this eye-opening speech by a son raised by a gay couple: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMLZO-sObzQ
Borg Mario
Jan 13th, 14:55
How can you say Gays could ruin a child's life. What about beaten or rapped children? In most of the case the harm is made by straights? Or parents fighting with their children in the middle.
When you, straight people will be 100% perfect you will be in a position to judge others. I feel sorry for you...poor idiot...
David Caruana
Jan 13th, 14:56
Unbelievable!
Act of arrogance?!
Who cares about the orphan kids! Let them live in orphanages instead of being brought up in a loving family, a family made up by Jack and John or Jane and Jenny.
And please do explain to us how a homosexual couple can ruin a kid's life. Please try to give us a decent answer because I'm really curious to know your logic (or lack of it, really)
Ramon Casha
Jan 13th, 15:02
Have you ever stopped to consider that the child may already be the biological child of one of them, is going to be raised by them in any case, and the adoption is a legal formality to ensure that, should anything happen to the biological parent, the only other parent they've ever known will be able to take over rather than having the authorities take the child into custody as an "orphan"?
Here's an idea: How about dealing with every case on its own merits?
William Calleja
Jan 13th, 15:27
Yep, how nature intended, like the Heterosexual couple who broke up their marriage and one ended up killing the other, in a VERY natural way.
Mike Hunt
Jan 13th, 15:30
Every case should be as thoroughly evaluated as a man-woman couple adoption. Shame the same cannot be said about people who procreate.
Joe E Galea
Jan 13th, 15:33
Then tell it to the many hetero parents who ruin many children's lives by abusing and neglecting them.
David Caruana
Jan 13th, 15:38
V Cassar
Then with your superb logic, can you explain to us how a homosexual individual is born to a heterosexual couple?
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -Albert Einstein
Emma Xerri
Jan 13th, 15:41
Most gay married people I know are loving persons and not only have the finances (double incomes) but also tend to be in the higher income bracket (for example, doctor married to a judge, and so forth). They make loving parents to some lucky child or children.
Those of you here talking nonesense should look at conventional marriages - the children there are subjected to all sorts of abuse by incompetent parents and nobody here is saying that this type of marriage is not normal and that they should not be allowed to have children or adopt. So why the two weights and two measures?
I know that I would prefer to be adopted by a gay couple, no matter their gender, then to linger in an orphange, living my childhood in an institution (now that is surely bound to have an effect on my psyche). You people writing here against adoption by same sex couples, what would you prefer?
Patrick Mulholland
Jan 13th, 15:52
@David Caruana
Spot on with your quote David "human stupidity" - an individual is not "born" homosexual!
It's called SSAD.
V Cassar
Jan 13th, 17:00
@David Caruana,
the parents are not the only people posing influence on the children, they are already getting enough from the liberal media as it is... As an analogy, criminals can be born from a moral family, but you can bet that a broken down family will produce a broken down child, you cannot deny that fact.
The exceptions do not rule out the rule.
As a liberterian i am not a homophobe; if somebody wants to be gay that's his only choice, but please do not put the children into this to satyisfy your paternal needs.
And do not pervert einstein's quotes for your own purposes. His quote means we cannot know everything as human beings, because knowledge is infinite. Ignorance is the lack of knowledge and is not stupidity, as you intended it to mean.
A. Schembri
Jan 13th, 17:24
Have you people at least how the child would feel living in a family far different than that he sees on tv or that he learns at school....did you consider the fact that these kids could go through turmoil in their teen lives by other people....the world is not perfect you will find people who will make fun of his situation...i do not think it is good for kids especially from a young age....
Thats what i meant by arrogant....
Yaz Tabone
Jan 13th, 17:41
V. Cassar - are you re reading before you post? what a mess..
a gay does NOT choose to be gay.
do not put children into this? it's like they're saying they wna tie them up n burn them alive.. gays are very very loving people. i am lucky to know so many, my son has been around many and i can honestly say that i will trust them more than others.
i met a gay couple, one fathered a child - you can come up with your own story on how that happened - and i got to speak to this boy who is 11. he spoke to me bout this girl he liked but didn't have time cos he wanted to be this famous footballer etc - this boy looked very happy indeed and didn't seem bothered at the least that his parents are gay
Mr andreas bone
Jan 14th, 00:10
@ V Cassar, automatically by saying "we cannot know everything as human beings, because knowledge is infinite" (which makes absolute sense) you are making David's point even stronger hence your point makes absolutely no sense.
Kenneth Galea
Jan 13th, 13:05
This is something which I believe it is in PL's manifesto. Good way forward, no discrimination between gays and straight couples.
I have confidence in Dr Muscat that this will be an issue he is eager to tackle to end bullying at shools, work place and stop discrimination.
The PN always dragged its feet on this issue.
Charles Bayliss
Jan 13th, 13:38
Correction: the PN never gave nor will give a toss about Gay Rights, let alone Gay Marriage. That is why I will be voting for the first time for the PL (with the hope that Joseph Muscat, who I met personally on this issue will keep to his promise).
E Schembri
Jan 13th, 13:02
What a load of bollocks!
I agree that gay people should have rights and be protected by the law, however to claim that a same sex marriage is the same as heterosexual marriage is nonsense!
Why do they have to change the natural structures of the entire human race to accommodate their lifestyle.
Why do they want the same definition of heterosexual couples to apply to them when they themselves acknowledge that they are not like heterosexual couples. The two will never be the same, so fight for your rights, but don' expect to change thousands of years of natural evolution to accommodate your aspirations.
Yaz Tabone
Jan 13th, 13:39
what are you on about?? are you seriously saying that gay couples do not deserve all the rights?
yes they should be allowed to marry. yes they should be allowed to adopt. yes they should be entitled to "inheritance and pensions" just like everyone else!
Mike Hunt
Jan 13th, 13:40
Why should it make a difference to you if two guys or women care about each other and are ready to make the same commitment to each other as many heterosexual couples do and be recognised as such by society and in the eyes of the law?
Carmelo Aquilina
Jan 13th, 13:54
Homsexuality is natural and is found in many species, so so much for the "natural evolution argument" and before you reply read http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/04/magazine/04animals-t.html?pagewanted=all or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals
David Caruana
Jan 13th, 14:02
And you have the nerve to talk about bollocks?!
"Natural structures"?! So you are now calling all homosexuals "unnatural"?! Do you even know that you can find male-male and female-female attraction in all species of the animal kingdom, humans included.
There is nothing unnatural in love, whether that is for Jane or for John.
Well, prepare yourself for some surprises dear E Schembri because the introduction of same-sex marriages is not a matter of IF but of WHEN.
Ramon Casha
Jan 13th, 15:00
What does "natural evolution" have to do with marriage? Marriage is an entirely man-made concept, and its meaning has changed continuously through the ages. Until a very short time ago, marriage was purely about inheritance of property, so much so that it was often arranged by the parents, rather than the couple themselves - and in many cases only the man's consent counted. The idea of a marriage between two persons who love one another is a recent one - and one which applies equally to same-sex couples.
Patrick Zammit
Jan 13th, 15:15
E Schembri
"Thousands of years of evolution" have produced a majority of heterosexuals, a minority of homosexuals and another minority of omnisexuals.
There is nothing wrong with that and it is as natural as a tree and is not limited to humans, just do some research on Bonobos.
Unless of course you belief in God where you can argue that God created the diversity we see in sexual preferences.
Mariano Camilleri
Jan 13th, 12:44
the church should not dictate what people want to do. the bible says god gave us free will and every person has the will to do what they want... what the church is doing by not letting ga get married is not letting anyone to live how they want
Peter Borg
Jan 13th, 12:43
Absolutely correct. It is a gross injustice to deny homosexuals the same rights as those enjoyed by heterosexuals.