Within the legal perspective, a state that provides for civil marriage must have the means to regulate dissolution of the same contract, meaning divorce.
It is also discriminatory that a state formally recognises a divorce obtained by Maltese in Europe but refuses to grant it to those who do not have the means and resources to seek remedy overseas.
I believe anyone who seeks redress in a constitutional and/or human rights judiciary court must base the arguments on these two premises.
The discourse on the impact to society is irrelevant since nothing holds back couples from getting separated with all its implications to interested parties including children.
Divorce is simply a legal matter to anyone who wants to remarry. Those who prefer to pursue any religious doctrine and refrain from remarrying would be free to do so. But determining the introduction of divorce or otherwise by means of a popular referendum is an anathema tothe values and liberties on which democratic countries are founded.
Unless we want to align ourselves with theocracies found in other remote areas of the world, as much as one particular Labour MP seems inclined to do.