It has been reported that Civil Liberties Minister Helena Dalli urged society “to compare the Civil Union Bill with civil, not Church marriage”.

Why are we giving two versions of marriage in order to suit our political interests? Why don’t we define marriage before we decide whether the union between homosexuals should be considered at par with marriage?

Why is it that whenever the Church speaks out on social issues we wear blinkers and the only comment we make is that “The Church has a right to talk” (but we have the right not to heed what she says)?

Why are we so biased against whatever the Church teaches even though her only concern is the dignity of the human person and the common good?

Why focus on the interests of gay couples without looking, primarily, at the good of society as a whole with regard to marriage and the adoption of children?

It has also been reported that “the Government believed civil liberties should be strengthened because no one had the right to interfere in the free choices made by individuals”. We agree but on condition that the free choices made by individuals do not interfere with the common good.

We cannot please everyone at the detriment of society.

The good of society as a whole is sacrosanct and, therefore, both the integrity of marriage and also the good of adopted children should take priority over all other individual rights.