Gays’ right to get married
It was with great pleasure that in a recent meeting between Alternattiva Demokratika – The Green Party and the Malta Gay Rights Movement, we were in synch in all issues under discussion. To put things simply, AD is the only political party in Malta which fully endorses the official proposals of MGRM. Compared to AD’s position, the Nationalists’ and Labour’s LGBT pronouncements – or the lack of them – offer either a bad deal or a hotchpotch of vagueness.
We Greens believe that there should be full equality in all aspects of social and family policy, irrespective of one’s sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression. We are also proposing that Malta’s Constitution be amended to prohibit any form of discrimination on the basis of these grounds.
Our position does not come out of nowhere. Indeed, Malta is at rock bottom on LGBT rights in the EU. A key indicator of equality in this regard is the right to marriage, irrespective of one’s sexual orientation. AD has long believed in equality for all in social and family rights. In the past weeks, our executive, following a lengthy internal process, decided to put this ideological infrastructure in more concrete terms than was previously the case.
Indeed, we are now fully endorsing MGRM’s position for recognition of marriages of same-sex in Malta. It does not make sense to speak of equality in family and social policy while only allowing opposite-sex partners to marry. Such exclusionary practice effectively means that symbolic and significant aspects of marriage, such as being “husband” or “wife” can only be articulated, experienced and recognised if one marries someone of the opposite sex. It is indeed ironic that in a day and age of increased separations and divorce, couples who wish to marry are denied this right solely because of their sexual orientation.
If anything, recognition of same-sex marriages can lead to the strengthening of the concept of the family, through a process of social inclusion and recognition of different family forms.
More and more societies, governments, NGOs, political leaders, opinion makers and political parties are increasingly recognising this. Within the EU, the influence of the European Greens is of great importance for such progressive change. Green Parties in government coalitions and within the European Parliament have frequently been the prime movers for such legislation.
As regards adoption, AD believes there should be no discrimination on this right and that every case should be considered on its own merits, irrespective of the identity (like age, sexual orientation, status) of the prospective parent/s, and always taking into consideration the best interests of the child.
This means that ideological opposition to adoption on the grounds of unfounded stereotypes should be done away with.
Children can experience happiness in different family forms, provided that they are loved and cared for. As far as I know, love is not an exclusive monopoly of one particular identity.
With regard to the current IVF debate, AD also believes there should be no form of discrimination, for example, as regards one’s sexual orientation, in access to this right. I have had the opportunity to discuss this in more detail in a recent article in The Times.
Last but not least, AD also endorses MGRM’s Gender Identity Act proposal, which calls for expedient legal gender recognition and for gender reassignment procedures under the national health care service.
Transgender people keep experiencing marginalisation in Maltese society, and Joanne Cassar’s European court case is a case in point. It is shameful that Malta’s State institutions discriminate against citizens who are trying to have their identity recognised.
Instead of such Kafkaesque identity annihilation, we Greens are proposing that discrimination against transgender persons should be formally addressed within Malta’s legislation.
Our recent meeting with MGRM was not the first one, and it will not be the last. As a Green activist, and in the past three years, as Green chairperson, I have learned a lot from this movement which continues to stand up and be counted despite the adversities it encounters. AD wants to learn more from the LGBT community and our election in Parliament would lead to a parliamentary process of continuous consultation to address discrimination in policy and legislation. For us, LGBT rights – like other civil, family and social rights – are not to be dealt with as handouts, usually of the vague type. We are for rights and social justice and not for the begging of favours to political patriarchs. Our position is based on principle and ideological clarity and not on mathematical convenience.
In short, LGBT persons should no longer be made to feel as second class citizens. As chairperson of the Green Party, I am personally committed to ensure that such discrimination becomes a thing of the past.
The author, a sociologist, is chairman and spokesman for economic policy and culture of Alternattiva Demokratika – the Green party.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
37 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Mariella Farjallah
Oct 19th 2012, 09:43
If al political party has these against nature ideas how can they rule a country in a normal honest way. Even the smallest insects abides by nature male and female. If we accept same sex marriages and also adopting kids our country will go down the drain
Raymond Bezzina
Sep 1st 2012, 23:41
@ Ramon Casha
Correction : I forgot to insert the word "in" to my middle sentence regarding my last comment to you.
The middle sentence should read thus:
"Something which does not exist, in this case in the embryo, cannot come into existance on its own".
my apologies for the mistake.
Carmel Lino Vella Clark
Sep 1st 2012, 11:49
For the information of Mr. Micahel Briguglio, the meaning of the word "marriage" as found in the English Dictionary is: "THE LEGAL UNION OF A MAN & A WOMAN". If man ignores Natural Law he becomes worst
than an animal, because even in animal world, a male looks for a female and procreate!!!!!
Carmel Vella Clark, Msida
Luke Lanzon
Sep 1st 2012, 13:11
wrong check again.....
Mr Joseph Carmel Chetcuti
Sep 1st 2012, 15:11
Dictionaries are made for the service of men and women, not the otehr way round. Yes, if the dictionary you have consulted has not changed the meaning of 'marriage', then may I respectfully suggest that you have an outdated one.
Ramon Casha
Sep 1st 2012, 15:56
First, there is no "THE English Dictionary". There are many, and each has many editions, and they correct meanings from time to time. Here for example is the Merriam-Webster dictionary's take on it:
1 a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage> b : the mutual relation of married persons : wedlock c : the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage
2: an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected; especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities
Second, there is no natural law, and if there were, and it somehow follow nature, then same-sex relationships have been observed in most mammal and bird species, but marriage is an exclusively human affair.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals
Karl Freedman
Sep 2nd 2012, 09:52
It's already been pointed out that your comment is inaccurate on every count, but I'd just like to add that I've never really understood the animal argument.... Even if we were to ignore the fact that homosexuality has been observed in thousands of species and assume for argument's sake that it does not exist in the animal world, so what?! Animals don't cook their food. Animals don't drive cars. Animals don't comment on timesofmalta.com! So are humans wrong in doing these and the countless other things that animals don't do? Judging what is right and wrong on the basis of what animals do or don't do is very queer. (Anyone who takes offence at the last phrase - check the English Dictionary)
Karl Freedman
Sep 1st 2012, 05:57
Gay marriage doesn’t affect society one way or the other, so why the fuss? To me, gay marriage being illegal is as bizarre as not being allowed to work on Sunday (or whichever Sabbath it is you subscribe to). And for you bible bashers out there who feel it should not be legalised because “it is a sin”, read Matthew 22:21. You seem to believe everything else in the bible, so why not this?
Note to Joseph Agius (1st commenter above): I find people like you very scary.
Mr Joseph Carmel Chetcuti
Sep 1st 2012, 00:31
I agree with the right of gay men and lesbians to get married and I applaud AD for adopting this policy. However my support is not for the institution of marriage which I consider patriarchal and has a history of oppressing women and children but for (a) for the individuals within it and (b) for the right of gay men and lesbians to decide for themselves whether to marry or not. I do not agree with the suggestion that the LP "offer[s] either a bad deal or a hotchpotch of vagueness". Minor parties have the luxury of taking on policies without worrying about their electoral impact. There is much more work to be done with respect to gay rights - anti-discrimination legislation, anti-vilification legislation, revision of Malta's laws and regulations that discriminate against gay men and lesbians, their identification being a massive task, the introduction of a registration scheme which the current Bill before parliament is not, legislation that tackles how parties in dispute resolve their problems which the current Bill does not adequately tackle, matters relating to wills, probate, the rights of next of kin and on and on and on. Marriage will not tackle these problems. I think the priority of gay men and lesbians at the forthcoming election is to make sure that the PN is out of government and for a long time. An incoming administrationm must have a very comfortable majority.
Joseph Agius
Aug 31st 2012, 17:27
When I read this kind of news, i rejoice because the Words of Jesus are coming true. He said at the end of times, the world will be like Sodom and Gomorrah, and like the time of Noah. Read the first few chapters of Genesis and see what the life style was like in those days, and how the sanctity of marriage was neglected. God judged that kind of lifestyle. Jesus is coming soon! get ready. However, if you wish to be "modern" and disregard the Bible, go on with your futile thinking. God gave you the freedom to choose. But His holiness will stand.
Charles Bayliss
Aug 31st 2012, 19:43
Probably you are one of those who rake the bible literally. Tell me were Jesus Christ, in the bible condemned Homosexuality? In the Old Testament there are manny connotations to homosexuality. One that comes to mind in the "Love of David (the King) for Jonathan". The translated bible do not profess clearly this fact but there is proof in the Original that male to male live existed, and I am not saying this but some liberal theologists confess this.
Ramon Casha
Aug 31st 2012, 20:24
Sodom and Gomorrah? How well do you know your Bible Mr. Agius?
Ezekiel 16:49-50
‘Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen.
See? Not a single mention of homosexuality or even anything sexual at all. Now you should be asking yourself this: What was the agenda of whoever led you to believe that this story was against homosexuality? And, if they twisted the Bible to make it fit whatever they wanted people to believe, how else have you been misled?
Happy Weekend :)
a friendly atheist
Cornelius Murphy
Aug 31st 2012, 22:00
Here are some other things banned by the Bible:
Shaving - Leviticus 19:27
Football on Saturdays - Exodus 20:8
Eating lobster - Leviticus 11:10
Eating pork - Leviticus 11:7
Cotton/polyester clothing - Leviticus 19:19
Associating with women who are having their periods - Leviticus 15:19-20
I trust you also disapprove of all of those, Mr Agius, and want them to be illegal.
Paul Pulis
Sep 1st 2012, 11:52
Since you quoted Genesis, here is something to think about. "God gave you the freedom to choose".
Wrong: In Genesis, God forbids Adam and Eve to eat from the tree of 'knowledge,of good and evil" Since one cannot make an informed decision without knowledge and an ethical sense, one does not really possess freedom of choice. This fact also absolves Adam and Eve from the sin of disobedience since they were not able to make free choices. It is only after eating from the tree that' their mnids were opened". Gods(in most religions), are jeleous gods who want to be paternalistic. Our God wanted our first parents to remain 'innocent', that is depending solely on him. It is Satan who informs them that by acquiring knowledge (science/arts), man would attain a god-like nature through his new creative abilities.
God becomes angry because of their newly acquired nature and after punishing satan for letting the secret out, punishes our first parents by sending an angel to prevent them from eating from the second tree - the tree of life. "Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”— "He placed a cherubim at the east of the garden of Eden, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to guard the way to the tree of life. God never intended man to evolve through knowledge and free choice.
Mr Peter Barbara
Aug 31st 2012, 15:49
...."If anything, recognition of same-sex marriages can lead to the strengthening of the concept of the family, through a process of social inclusion and recognition of different family forms. "
.........if this does not take the biscuit, - or the cake, or whatever - I do not know what will !
Gerry Cowie
Aug 31st 2012, 12:01
What is the AD position on the value of human life from conception until natural death?
The unborn are a silent minority who also deserve protection.
Karl Consiglio
Aug 31st 2012, 13:43
Nonsense.
Luke Lanzon
Aug 31st 2012, 13:57
I think you should stop saying natural death, because if it wasn't for science the natural death age would be much lower. Also I can't see how an embryo with no brain functioning and no hearth beat can be considered HUMAN life.
Raymond Bezzina
Aug 31st 2012, 18:50
@ Luke Lanzon
I believe that every part of the human body already exist in the embryo, otherwise it would not become a fully developed person. Something which does not already exist in the embryo cannot come into existance on its own.
Although we do not see the brain functioning and the heart beat in the embryo, this does not mean that these do not already exist in the embryo.
Only God can make something out of nothing, and this is called Creation.
Luke Lanzon
Aug 31st 2012, 19:31
No offence Mr Bezzina but there is a difference in what you believe and what is scientifically true, but I can see you're a creationist so its pointless arguing.
S. Vella
Aug 31st 2012, 20:10
I despair when I read Mr Bezzina's contribution. How is it possible for people to access and use the internet and yet manage to believe that the foetus is some kind of micro-human from the moment of conception?
It is just a bunch of cells - an amoeba has more life than a blastocyst.
Ramon Casha
Aug 31st 2012, 20:26
@Raymond Bezzina: An embryo consists of undifferentiated cells so it has no "parts" at all.
Raymond Bezzina
Aug 31st 2012, 23:53
@ Luke Lanzon
Mr. Lanzon, without passing any judgement, and provided that I understood your last comment correctly, may I say that, if your belief in search for the truth rests only on scientific proof, then your source in finding the truth is extremely limited and very poor.
Raymond Bezzina
Sep 1st 2012, 00:12
@ S. Vella
Mr. Vella, according to you, when does the life of a human being begins to exist ?
Mr Joseph Carmel Chetcuti
Sep 1st 2012, 00:15
Gerry, what do you have against gays? Have you ever met gay men and lesbians. There are plenty on the island in Malta including Gzira!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Raymond Bezzina
Sep 1st 2012, 00:20
@ Ramon Casha
Do you believe that human life begins at conception ?
Charles Grixti
Sep 1st 2012, 03:18
@S. Vella
I believe what Mr. Bezzina is referring to is the legendary "homonculus" of the Middle Ages - the tiny but perfectly formed human that the man injects into the incubator, sorry the woman, with each ejaculation.
P. Vincenti
Sep 1st 2012, 12:05
Ramon , no you are wrong.
Luke Lanzon
Sep 1st 2012, 13:16
Science could be poor right now but limited I don't think so, just look how science has improve the last 50 years imagine in 2000 years. I can tell you for sure what is limited and poor, the bible and to add to that it is primitive.
Ramon Casha
Sep 1st 2012, 16:06
@Raymond Bezzina: At a cellular level, life is a continuous thing that started around 3.6 billion years ago and hasn't ended yet. However a person is more than cellular life. What gives us the qualities of a person is our brain, and that simply is not present at the embryo stage. So, in short, no I do not.
Raymond Bezzina
Sep 1st 2012, 18:44
@ Ramon Casha
If, in some form or another, the human brain is not present in the embryo, then from where does the brain comes ?
Something which does not exist, in this case the embryo, cannot come into existance on its own.
As I have already said further above; only God can make something out of nothing, and this is called Creation.
Raymond Bezzina
Sep 1st 2012, 19:13
@ Luke Lanzon
Mr. Lanzon, if in your last comment you refered to the Roman Catholic Bible, please know that this Bible is the greatest book that has ever been written, and it is as relevant today as it was when it was written, and for sure it will remain relevant for eternity.
Luke Lanzon
Sep 1st 2012, 23:12
Well everyone has their own opinion which is the greatest book ever, but it is definitely the most profitable book ever. It may not vanish but it will definitely be less relevant I mean even if you compare how relevant it was 100 years ago to now the number of people who use it has gone down drastically. so you can imagine.
Charles Grixti
Sep 2nd 2012, 20:41
@Raymond Bezzina
You said, "If, in some form or another, the human brain is not present in the embryo, then from where does the brain comes ?"
I think that the answer is too complicated to explain to you in this medium but a good course in genetics and biology would do you a world of good to understand the world around you.
Raymond Bezzina
Sep 4th 2012, 13:26
@ Charles Grixti
I believe that to be able to understand the World around us, it is much more necessary to start by taking a good course in the Catholic Religion than a good course in genetics and biology.
Learning and practicing the Catholic Religion gives us wisdom and the understanding of truth.
I ask you;
1. Are you a Roman Catholic ?
2. Are you an expert in genetics and biology ?
Mr C Galea
Aug 31st 2012, 11:19
I wholeheartedly agree
Karl Consiglio
Aug 31st 2012, 10:17
I like AD, no beating around the bush
Please choose the reason of your report below: