Nobody is judging Joyce Cassar or Marie Louise Coleiro Preca.

On the contrary, we – the ones who will vote Yes on Saturday – are voting this way precisely because we believe that nobody has the right to dictate moral norms and ways of life to anyone else.

We firmly believe that an individual should have the right to plan and manage his life as he or she deems fit. Arguments based on the “common good” are often suspect, abused of and can only be accepted if they are manifestly self-evident.

The fact that there is such a controversy and division as to whether divorce goes against the common good defeats the claim that it is manifestly evident.

Valentina, it is likely that the people who inflicted most suffering on your mother were the sort of people who are today ferociously against the introduction of divorce legislation. It was people of our mindset who fought for your mother’s right to live her life free from judgment and moral bigotory.

This said, your mother and Ms Coleiro Preca should have come clean and clear about their personal lives. Ironically, it would have added more weight to their arguments. But they did not. They may not have tried to hide it (could they have?) but they cetainly did not spell it out clearly either.

This is why voters have a right to know.

This is not malicious gossip – far from it. If your mother or Ms Coleiro Preca thought that they could take on this role (which at this point is highly political) without their personal lives coming under scrutiny, they are either naive, delusional or simply lack the emotional maturity and insight that one needs before waltzing into public life.

Listen here Daphne. You don’t know me and have no right to mension me and you have no idea what my life story is. I will defend my mother till the end because I know her I live with her you incidentally do not. You are an outside and know absolutely nothing. As for the situation being your business it is not your business at all. You know nothing of what my mother has been through and I think you would be shocked if you did know the complete and utter truth of how people have abused her. I suggest you keep out of other peoples business that is unless you have nothing else to do with your time. You call other hypocrites but it is people like you who are the hypocrites because you are all for helping the person in need but then you have no idea the damage you do to people by the falacies you say. Takes a hypocrite to know one Daphne.

[Daphne – Your mother is old enough to make her own declarations, Valentina, but both of you are more than a little naive (or self-deluding) if you believe that your existence is not relevant to your mother’s protestations against divorce. No, it does not take a hypocrite to know one: it merely takes information and common sense. As for the suggestion that I keepout of other people’s business, might I recommend that you direct that same advice to your mother. I have no desire to control how other people live their lives. She apparently does.]

I think it is better to look at yourself before you judge others. Do you honestly have no life? So much so that you must insist on accusing others? At least she was honest unlike you who are you? A nobody.

Some people are quick to judge such as yourself. You are no perfect woman so stop accusing others of their past mistakes. You aren’t god’s gift to earth and you have faults just like the next person has. This article is completley disgusting as I am very sure you do not know Marie Louise personally and you are just twisting words round. Before you judge others it is best to take a look in the mirror and take a look at yourself and please base your articles on facts and remember that their are others who have hidden stories at least people who are honest are brave enough to reveal the truth.

Dear Daphne

I will not get into this further than I should, but as my ex husband can confirm if he wills and is reading this blog, I met him 3 years after he had been separated from his 1st wife from whom he had 2 children and was in the process of a Church annulment. In between he had another relationship. During the time I lived with him he got his annultment but due to discretion not for my sake but for them we could not get married in the Church so we got married civilly…as prognostics on cohabitation rightly claim the marriage after it did not last. I was a broken person, never having cheated on him and made long attempts at having a good relationship. Although divorce was not available a divorcists mentality was still very much a case of some liberals at that time. He might also be very much informed about the experts of anonymous letters when he too stood up to elements of thrash that is smelling out again. My daughter was neither a result of some homewrecking affair and not registered as on an Unknown Father, yet nobody’s business.

Daphne, you try to discredit me with untruths, but documents for all to see can be found at the public registry. [Daphne – I don’t, Joyce. I merely think that your personal history weakens your stance against divorce. I have no moral view about that personal history. And I am certainly not interested in discrediting anyone. I am, however, a journalist, and as a journalist I believe that your personal history is relevant because it is at once at odds with your stance and at the same time might actually have shaped it. There is much else which you have not even touched upon in your comment here, but as you not willing to discuss it, then I won’t either. You are not a legislator, so there are limits. I am uncomfortable with invasion of privacy, in any case.]

That is all I need to say…People who have known me for many many years are aware of this, and unlike what you claim I have often made this public and considering that I have never lived my life as a whore despite attempts and lies to make it seem so. Why don’t I take legal action, is because I truly beleive that if you wish to say anything that you believe in you have a right to do so, but at least I wanted to give you the true details. There will be more and more lies, as I know that are going around even presently, but people know my truths as I never lived hidden.

Never have I betrayed my husband or left my daughter behind me for another man. Not to give her more risks of brokeness I lived my life for her as I was too vulnerable with pains of the past to get into anything else. There are a lot of attempts for discrediting me, but I am not afraid as I have spoken about my past in various programmes and do not feel at any point an hypocrite. Thank you if you decide to publish this, but no matter what further trash is thrown this is the last thing I will write. Those involved in my life past and present know that this is the truth.

Perhaps we all agree there are valid arguements both in favour as well as against divorce. At a decision level the motivations are quite balanced I would say.

The marked differences come out at a macro level. Essentially an increasingly disruptive scenario in civil societies and a marked escaltion of costs to the exchequer.

Aktar u aktar li tipprogetta ruhek fuq quddiem tal- Moviment tal-LE – il-moviment BLA RAGUNI – u thallihom juzawk ghal-propaganda taghhom.

Lesta Marie Louise Coleiro Preca tghid minn issa x’taghmel jekk ma jghaddix ir-referendum, u l-quddiem Joseph Muscat jipprezenta mozzjoni fil-parlament bhala prim ministru, kif kien wieghed li ser jaghmel?

Tivvota favur jew kontra? U meta tkun taf li jekk tivvota kontra l-mozzjoni favur ligi tad-divorzju ma tghaddix? Il-votanti Laburisti ghandhom ikunu jafu qabel jivvutaw x’se taghmel Marie Louise u ohrajn bhal Carmelo Abela, Adrian Vassallo.

Can someone just come out and say it. What did Joyce Cassar do? We have a right to know not because we are curious but because of the pedestal she’s put herself on and the role she’s assumed and defender of the bond. And don’t you love the way she says “Le!” in those horrid publicity spots?

[Daphne – I think she should have told you herself, especially since she took the trouble to write in. Unlike Marie Louise Coleiro Preca, she is not a legislator with the power to help enact or derail divorce legislation, so I have reservations about discussing her behaviour in the context of her spoken attitudes. But as you said, she has assumed the role of defender of the bond, families, and so on. Ms Cassar had a very long relationship with an older married man – quite prominent on the Maltese cultural scene – whose wife then left the country with their children (long since grown up) and divorced him. From what I gather in her arguments that she was not responsible for ‘taking a man away from his wife’, Ms Cassar appears to say that the two were apart already, that the marriage had broken down before she came on the scene. I wouldn’t know, it was a long time ago and to be honest, I don’t even think it’s our business. But claiming that he and his wife had already split up and that she is not – consequently – a homewrecker, undermines her argument that marriage is for life. Incidentally, her child is not this man’s daughter.]