What a shame that the divorce debate is associated with this man
Emmy Bezzina is detrimental to the credibility of the pro-divorce lobby. Because he has set up something called the Malta Divorce Movement, of which he remains the chairman, nobody else wants to be associated with that movement. When anyone credible speaks in favour of divorce, they must first make a point of saying that they have nothing to do with Bezzina. This is complicating matters.
When the international media alights on the fact that Malta and the Philippines are the only two countries in the world without divorce, as they do from time to time, they look up their contacts list and head straight for the Malta Divorce Movement and Emmy Bezzina. A year or two ago, I had a telephone call from BBC World, who were putting together yet another radio show about the fact that Malta has no divorce. The journalist who rang told me that she had spoken to Bezzina. “For heaven’s sake,” I said. “He has no credibility at all. He’s the equivalent of a circus act. You can’t possibly quote him. He’s actually outside the debate
because he can’t be taken seriously.”
Now here’s more about Emmy by Emmy, from www.emmybezzina.org.
Meeting Emmy Bezzina …. Dealing with values
EMMY BEZZINA, as he is popularly known, has written numerous specialized articles particularly related to Family Law. He is the CHAIRMAN of the MALTA DIVORCE MOVEMENT and the Founder and Chairman of the FAMILY RIGHTS’ ASSOCIATION, two Organizations that compliment one another.
Dr BEZZINA is equally planning to publish a book DIVINE THOUGHTS in 2004. In recent years, Dr BEZZINA has become very active with the Reverend Dr MOON’s Organization, the Unification Movement. He was indeed also made an AMBASSADOR OF PEACE in 2001, the United Nations’ Year dedication to Non-Government Organizations. Recently, he was one of the co-founders of
the Interreligious and International PEACE COUNCIL in NEW YORK, between October 1 – 4, 2003, 11PC, marching with about 12,000 people next to the United Nations Headquarters in New York on Friday, October 3, 2003.He also attended the celebrations of Rev. MOON’s 80 Birthday in SEOUL – South Korea, between JULY 10-14, 2003, where he was very active during discussions featuring also in the magazine produced by the Movement.
Dr Emmy D. BEZZINA LL.D., had taken an active role in True Families as the Foundation for World Peace in the New Millennium, Third International Seminar, OCTOBER 10-14, 1999 in WASHINGTON, DC, where the Interreligious and International Federation for World Peace was founded. He was also founder-member of the Organization’s WORLD MEDIA ASSOCIATION.
Dr BEZZINA is a fearless fighter for the Truth & Justice, outspoken on social injustices and a Flag Bearer for the Fundamental Human and Family Rights & Freedoms. He is frequently invited to give talks on radio and tv and in Forums and Conferences, particularly on topics that related to social, serious issues like AIDS and World Peace. He is a fervid believer in Rev. Moon’s vision of MAN being intimately connected to COSMIC ENERGY and that without such synchronization MAN’s mission as a Divine Entity
would not be correctly fulfilled.
17 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
I agree that the “divorce debate” will hardly benefit much from being associated with the lawyer who published such a write-up about himself on his own website. However, I ask whether there should be any debate at all about divorce in this country. Were one speaking of introducing such widely controversial legislation as euthanasia or same-sex marriage in Malta, one would understand the need for debate or the existence of lobbies but when one is talking of an institution accepted in all countries of the world except Malta and the Philippines (nice country to share a record with) then one begins to realize what a sorry state we’re in where it concerns civil rights. Divorce should be enacted as part of Malta’s law as a matter of course without need for debates or lobbies but, before the elections, both leaders of the major parties spoke of the need for public national debate before anything is even contemplated on this matter. It seems evident that divorce will not be on the statute books for the generations alive at present and that democracy as known in the rest of Western Europe will remain a relative concept in this country. There can be no true democracy in its widest sense when the religious beliefs of one sector of the population are imposed on another. And the reasons for not introducing divorce cannot be other than religious. No argument of a non-religious nature is applicable against divorce without being equally applicable against separation. So far, nobody is campaigning to remove separation from the statute books for this is also accepted by Canon Law. It is the dissolution of marriage which is not (barring the Pauline and Petrine Privileges).
@freethinker
May I beg to disagree with your statement ‘It seems evident that divorce will not be on the statute books for the generations alive at present’.
I think that if major political parties agree that divorce as a principle should not be used as an electoral tool, then this issue will be freely discussed in the coming months.
Let’s face it – if you take a look around you, you would find that the need for divorce legislation is felt by many Maltese, even those whose religious convictions would make them not to take into consideration such a step.
Apart from dogmatic wranglings, I think that the Church in Malta surely acknowledges that NOT having divorce legislation in Malta is not making our families stronger.
I agree with the Church and other institutions in Malta that we need to strengthen our families, but surely not having divorce legislation is not an answer, rather, divorce legislation could maybe solve some of the hardships that unfortunately, broken families are currently passing through.
We need to have a choice. It’s simple enough, if you’re religious and don’t believe in divorce then just don’t do it. No need to control everyone elses decisions too.
@ E Falzon
Unless you don’t ever depend on the common coffer, you can do whatever you like!
But that IF is very very important….
DIvorce & the Public Funds: Please do explain your last comment. Are you suggesting that anyone who receives benefits should not be able to divorce but people who have their own income should be able to do so?
@ Corinne
First of all I must congratualte you for the comments you post. Great indeed.
Re Divorce: What I mean is that unless no funds are availed of from public funds resulting from divorce in itself, anyone can do whatever he/she likes…. Kapixx?
Unless the guilty partner is not let free fro paying his/her dues, and no claims are made onto the social security system, I’m in favour of divorce. However, this is quite difficult. As anyone can notice from other countries, the state had to pay the bills!!!! And what happened? Funds allocated to other needs had to make good for them.
amrio: I agree with what you write and would be more than happy if I am proved wrong and divorce legislation will be introduced before the present living generations are all gone. I will never have time to benefit from divorce legislation at my age: even if a law is eventually passed, and this will take years,by the time all the cases are heard and decided I will be a goner.
What most people in this country need to understand is that the introduction of divorce will not automatically force all practicing catholics (or anybody who disagrees with divorce) to file for divorce. It is simply a matter of choice.
How would we react if infidelity or sex before marriage were to become illegal! They are both sins according to Catholic teaching, but it is does not automatically follow that they should be applied to the laws of the land, but this is exactly what we are doing in the case of divorce.
I think that the divorce debate in Malta will not gather steam until it stops being regarded as a religious/moral issue and starts being discussed as an issue of choice and respect for the freedom of the individual.
If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all. – Jacob Hornberger
E. Falzon: Corinne Vella was right to ask for an explanation. Divorce will make absolutely no difference to the present situation with separation only. Divorce will not increase the number of those entitled to state aid if they qualify. They would qualify just the same if separated. Divorce judgements will condemn parties to pay alimony and child maintenance just as they do with separation. As I said, there are no social effects of divorce which do not already exist with separation. If anybody knows of any, let’s hear them. It is really religion and its imposition on all and sundry, believers or not, which is the real motive behind our lack of divorce law. Period.
Sorry, my last comment was directed at Divorce and Public funds. Apologies to E Falzon.
Vote for me as MLP Leader and I will include Divorce in my, ooops sorry, our, electoral manifesto.
My proposal is this:
We will create a “marriage-free” zone. Anybody who transfers his residence to this zone will automatically have his/her marriage considered as null and void…AS LONG as he/she remains within the parameters of said zone.
This is not a new concept. Many business men, holiday-makers, students etc, make use of this concept when they are abroad and want to have a quickie. My proposal will remove this injustice and provide the benefit of leaving your spouse without having to go abroad and without the messiness of so-called traditional divorce/seperation/anullment.
After much consultation with the interested sections across a wide spectrum of society, I feel safe to say that the above proposal will meet the approval of many and will secure the “rebha” in 2013 (unless JPO forces us to take charge sooner).
The only problem left is to identify where to locate the “Marriage-Free” zone. But rest assured we will be consulting with all. We will not impose it on anyone and its not like pushing a button eh?
Divorce and Public funds: what you state happens in other countries concerning divorce would happen just the same with separation. Where the civil right to divorce exists (practically everywhere), hardly anyone resorts to separation and so you only read of statistics concerning divorce. Had there been no divorce, you would have read the same statistics but applied to separation. Kapixx you now? Elementary, my dear Divorce and Public Funds. I hope nobody comes up with the ultimate non-argument to convince that the social effects of separation are different from divorce. This is the famous “mentalita’ divorsista” which is supposed to ensue upon divorce legislation. This is the equivalent to Custor’s Last Stand of those that have no cogent arguments to offer. But anything will do for the religious belief-imposers who are too embarrassed to admit that their reasons are really religious and nothing else.
Guzeppi Grech: please forgive me but your piece is not worth the pixels it occupies. If you meant it as a joke, you have failed miserably to entertain. If you can’t contribute some intelligence to a serious debate, may I kindly suggest you spend your time more profitably?
[Moderator – I thought it was quite funny. But then again, I’m computer designed to deal with humour programmatically, so what do I know? Beep blip beep.]
@Freethinker
Divorce? Serious debate? In Malta?
Your freethinking is in dire need of loosening up. But I’ll make way for your highly enlightened pixels.
In the meantime, support my bid for MLP leader:
http://daphnecaruanagalizia.com/?p=303#comment-5361
Ronnie: Your contribution is very sensible and just. I like the quotation at the end of your piece. Some others who have posted here make me yearn for Plato’s rule by philosopher kings rather than democracy by universal suffrage.
Hey! I take umbrage sir! My election is dependent on universal suffrage. Where would we be if we depended on Plato for leadership eh? After all he’s been dead since 347 BC. And Actually Plato refers to Philospher rulers not kings. Check out Part VII of “The Republic”.
Ah, the advantages of education and a well stocked private library :)
Was it Emmy who had – probably as far back as the early ’80s – set up some kind of movement (with a John Caruana, if I am not mistaken) called something like “Ghaqda rgiel msawwta”