Comments on: What a shame that the divorce debate is associated with this man

By: Amanda Mallia

Amanda Mallia — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 20:33:23 +0000

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”

By: Guzeppi Grech

Guzeppi Grech — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 15:23:06 +0000

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 :)

By: freethinker

freethinker — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 15:06:12 +0000

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.

By: Guzeppi Grech

Guzeppi Grech — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 14:31:29 +0000

@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

By: freethinker

freethinker — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 14:16:44 +0000

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.]

By: freethinker

freethinker — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 14:13:55 +0000

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.

By: Guzeppi Grech

Guzeppi Grech — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 14:10:34 +0000

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?

By: freethinker

freethinker — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 13:53:30 +0000

Sorry, my last comment was directed at Divorce and Public funds. Apologies to E Falzon.

By: freethinker

freethinker — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 13:50:34 +0000

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.

By: Ronnie

Ronnie — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 13:47:37 +0000

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