If you read your link, it is heavily disputed. First it starts by saying how anti-women the Roman Empire was, then it goes on to say how Pope Gregory started moving in the right direction 500 years after the fall of the Roman Empire.

I would say that the change came because of cultural differences with northern Europeans who were more equal and egalitarian by nature. St Paul is not known to be pro-women by CAtholic feminists…

Kev,

It seems Lilliput’s ahead of Brussels’ suburbs

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20100729/local/case-for-divorce-already-rejected-by-human-rights-court

Daphne, I agree with you that if the matter is brought to a vote among MPs now, there is a strong likelihood that Joseph Muscat’s stance in favour of divorce will be defeated including by the “no” vote of some of his own MPs.

And I think this is precisely what Joseph will achieve by calling for a referendum first: he will not suffer the humiliation of seeing members from his side vote against divorce in Parliament before a referendum.

Remember that it was him who put the subject on the political agenda when he was elected leader, so a “no” result, whether in Parliament or in a referendum, could spell disaster for his political career.

But, in my contribution above, I was referring to the sum of the votes in a referendum. I feel pretty comfortable that if Joseph Muscat puts up those billboards, all Labour will vote for divorce, irrespective of what divorce may mean to the voters themselves.

[Daphne – No, I don’t think so. People who are against divorce legislation are not going to change that opinion under political direction, whatever party they vote for. They will change their opinion only when they are presented with a fait accompli as they are in other jurisdictions. That is the nature of human psychology. Once you accept that you can’t do something about something, then you accept that something.]

And if you add the non-Labour pro-divorce voters, there will be a sufficient movement for a Yes victory on divorce. Faced with such a result, it would be difficult for his MPs to vote “no” in Parliament.

[Daphne – There is a clear majority against divorce legislation. The Yes vote has no chance of success unless all the people who are in favour of legislation are driven out to vote while many of those who are against decide to stay home and abstain.]

I suggest you read the Referenda Act. There are consultative or non binding referenda as are those held in the United Kingdom. In the UK there are no binding referenda as Parliament is sovereign.

Such referenda can be held before or after a law has been approved. In Malta such a referendum requires a resolution approved by Parliament.

Typical Labour. These words are said by Labourites to anyone who reveals the truth. People like marcellu are a shame to society.

It is the reason why ‘democracy’ is often qualified as ‘constitutional democracy’ or ‘republican democracy’. Democracy alone is the unbridled rule of the majority over the minorities. That is why minorities are protected by constitutions.

The easiest way for divorce in Malta is for someone to initiate proceedings at the ECJ or ECHR – the ECJ, which has jurisdiction over the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which in turn forms part of the Lisbon treaty, is the best option since it decides ‘in the spirit of the union’ and aims for uniformity of laws across the EU.

The correct expression is “your days are numbered”.

It’s weird how people like you fail to see the irony of gleefully looking forward to a Labour government because it wreaks havoc with the freedoms you’ve enjoyed so far.