Much as I am tempted to write again about the marriage equality legislation, I think it’s now time for us all to move on. Just as when civil marriages were introduced in 1975, divorce in 2011 and civil unions in 2014, those people who feel that their entire existence has been threatened by the fact that two persons of the same sex can now get married will soon realise that life goes on and that if society is changing, they need to adapt rather than wage a crusade.

Incidentally, I was struck by what Archbishop of Munich Cardinal Reinhard Marx said recently – that Germany’s acceptance of same-sex marriage was not a defeat for Catholicism and that the Church should be more concerned about a history of intolerance towards homosexuals.

When speaking about equality and anti-discrimination, we often use the word ‘tolerance’. It’s not a word I like too much. To me, tolerance has negative connotations. It indicates that once nothing more can be done to oppose something then one has to accept it and learn to live with it. Acceptance of diversity needs to be wholehearted. It should be based upon genuine conviction.

In this country, though where LGBTIQ issues are concerned I think we have really moved on, when it comes to racial or ethnic origin, or religion, for instance, we have barely made it to the tolerance level.

Only a few months ago, all kinds of excuses were brought up to stop Muslims from having a second mosque built to cater for the growing number of Muslims in Malta. I hear it said so often that Islam will become the first religion in European countries and that we, therefore, have to defend ourselves against this ‘invasion’.

I wonder, and I’m being ironic here, whether at some point someone will express the fear that we might need to stop commemorating the victory of the Knights of St John over the Ottomans in the Great Siege of 1565.

We would probably have to abolish Victory Day together with Fathers’ Day and Mothers’ Day (with apologies to the honourable gentleman who came out with this assertion during the debate on the Marriage Amendment Act).

Change must be accompanied by a genuine attempt to educate and to support those concerned

Likewise, I feel that our acceptance of individuals of different racial or ethnic origin is not a position based on conviction. One often finds people expressing themselves in language that reveals an underlying almost racist streak.

I recently heard some friends speaking about an incident when they last went to buy some plants. When asking the shop attendant at the flower nursery for assistance to load the plants into the car, the reply they got was “issa jiġu s-suwed”, literally translated as now the black ones will come.

On the one hand the shop owner was doing something praiseworthy in employing, though hopefully without exploiting, migrant workers, yet then having other employees refer to them in such a demeaning manner.

It may well be that more education is needed. People need to be educated or trained on how to integrate others in communities, schools and at the workplace. I recall how at work I once had to handle a situation of a person who, as a result of a serious illness, had a serious impediment that no longer allowed him to carry on with his job at his previous workplace and was employed by our organisation on the basis of the law that obliges entities to employ a certain number of persons with disabilities.

In itself, this law is praiseworthy. However, in our case, we received no support at all in terms of how to handle the situation. As a result, despite all good intentions, rather than being a positive experience, it turned out to be a very bad attempt at seeking to integrate a person with a disability in a conventional working environment.

I am one of those who disagrees that one first needs to change mentalities before proceeding with change. However, change must be accompanied by a genuine attempt to educate and to support those concerned.

This is why I consider the European Union to be such a positive force for change. When one looks at the younger generation and how, to the vast majority, differences simply don’t matter at all, one is encouraged to believe in a better future.

The main obstacle is that as they grow older, they will start to be influenced by their peers who, blinded by prejudice, will lead them to start questioning what they took for granted since birth, that is, the fundamental equality of all human beings. I am often present at events that bring together young Europeans and I sense that to them there are no barriers at all.

If EU membership has had any influence on Maltese society it is precisely because of the fact that it has brought us in contact with so many other different realities present in different parts of the continent. The EU has been very successful in breaking down barriers that divided peoples and nations.

This is why we must do all we can for it to inspire future generations as it did when it was first set up after World War II.

One of the most rewarding aspects of my job over the past nine years has been to assist individuals and organisations from different sectors of society to participate in projects that bring them in touch with their counterparts in other European regions. We owe it to them and to future generations not to jeopardise all that has been achieved because of narrow-minded interests that reflect political or philosophical thinking of a bygone era.

Going back to outdated notions of nationhood may threaten the entire edifice. Thanks to the overcoming of the pre-World War II notions of statehood and nationhood, Europe has become a leader when it comes to fundamental rights, individual freedom and civil liberties. With President Trump’s ‘America First’ policies that are leading the US to be once more introverted and less of a global player, Europe needs to be there more than ever.

Thanks to the European project, many of us have moved beyond tolerance and fully embraced diversity as a truly enriching experience.