People choose not to marry because they do not want contractual obligations.

Ironically in many cases such relationships function better. Once obligations are imposed, the relationship is ruined – only the lawyers will benefit.

I think it will be interesting to see if Labour uses the whip for this legislation or allows a free vote. Imagine finding yourself on the same side as Franco Debono and Labour.

[Daphne – I won’t be on the same side as Franco. Franco will vote against the bill out of spite and for the purpose of blackmail, not because he shares my views. With Labour, it’s the same story.]

Woe betide the PN if it ever accepts him to run on its ticket.

Rather than just a landslide the election result would be a second Fukushima.

Kieku kellek tohrog ghall-elezzjoni cert li ma taqbisx it-30 vot. Weggajt lil min ivvutalek u qed tkompli.

Il-partit ma jistax jaccettak u int a jaqbillkx tohrog. Ammetti li l-froga int ghamilta u issa ma hemmx x’taghmel ma tistax tibqgha tirrikatta ghax aktar taghmel hsara lilek innifsek.

Kellek tirrispetta r-regoli tal-maggoranza tmexxi u tiddeciedi anki jekk ma taqbilx. F’gieh ir-rispett ta’ min ivvutalek ieqaf.

Kieku jien nitlaq issa mill-parlament u nieqaf hemm. Hekk biss tista’ tevita umiljazzjoni u tigbor gieh.

Wouldn’t it make more sense if such regulations are wilfully entered into by the concerned individuals?

[Daphne – My point exactly. And if they are going to be ‘wilfully’ entered into, then they might as well use the system devised originally for the purpose and called marriage.]

I would have thought that simply being registered under the same address would not automatically oblige two (or more?) individuals to make commitments they may not wish to make.

[Daphne – You thought wrong.]

Don’t you think it will regulate those relationships in which the same-sex couple wish to be regulated but at present they don’t have the option to?

I totally agree though that it’s a way out of responsibility for those who can get married instead.

[Daphne – I do not agree with imposing obligations on people just because they live with somebody else. The very notion of ‘contract by default’ is anathema to me.]

It’s only a half-hearted method of giving homosexuals something which sounds like marriage without using the word marriage itself. Just so not to irk the Catholic Church.

[Daphne – Wrong. Try reading it before you jump to conclusions.]