“Aside from the adoption issue, what really rankled about the vote on the civil unions bill was the sheer hypocrisy of Muscat & Co posturing as champions of human rights and equality.”
I have received the following email:
Aside from the adoption issue, what really rankled about the vote on the civil unions bill was the sheer hypocrisy of Muscat & co posturing as champions of human rights and equality.
The sight of the lot of them parading rainbox scarves, flags and lapel pins to suck up to the manufactured audience outside reminded me of the PL’s pre-election antics when they held elaborate events solely to provide campaign pictures and footage.
Anyone who doubts that should take a second look at the smug smirk of the home affairs minister waddling out of the palace wearing a rainbow lapel pin and the pumpkin headed awkwardness of Muscat clapping Ray Calleja on the back as Calleja hugged him on stage.
Champions of human rights, liberalism and equality before the law? I don’t think so. And not because they’re openly uncomfortable embracing the idea of homosexuality despite their bravado.
These are the men who openly threatened to deport a boatload of immigrants without allowing them to apply for asylum, in clear violation of their rights. A few months later, the same men tried playing tough guy with Italy over another boatload of immigrants, eventually allowing it to capsize and sink killing several hundred including many children, among them, Mabrouk, a baby who was only a day old.
The bleeding hypocrites rewrite their party’s historical record of human rights violations, continue to violate rights and then pose outside parliament wearing rainbow flags so they can be photographed as liberals for campaigns to come.
By cheering the rainbow-toting political troglodytes, those people in the square outside parliament have only demeaned themselves.
8 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Let us keep things in perspective. As the prime minister has put it in one of his statements, the crowd outside the palace was effectively celebrating the right to submit an application to adopt a child, not the right to adopt the child. In my view, the adoption part of the bill is just a gimmick because I expect that there will be very few cases where applications from LGBT persons will be accepted.
As for civil union, this was in the electoral program of the PN as well, and the PN made it amply clear that they were in favour of the bill in that respect.
Ciccio, I’d fell better if I could view this gay adoption as an insignificant side gimmick to this strategic and opportunist MLP bravado.
In my view this gimmick has breached the important distinction between human and natural rights, and given the amoraliy of this lot anything becomes possible.
Yes, given the amorality of this lot, anything is possible.
But that amorality could also mean that Joseph Muscat was effectively taking the LGBT community for a ride, by granting them the right to submit an application for adoption, but then effectively stopping them from adopting when the children available for adoption are allocated to parents.
This reminds me of development applications submitted to MEPA. Anyone can submit any type of development application to MEPA – even one to develop the Auberge de Castille into, ahem, a circus – but does that mean that MEPA will necessarily grant a permit?
Meanwhile, Muscat has secured the vote of those in LGBT who are gullible enough to believe that Muscat gave them “the right to adopt children.” We all know that such right does not exist under international law.
Even if one child’s life is ruined because of this half-baked law , it’s enough .
Well, I don’t yet think the concept of equality has yet filtered down to the Malta Customs Service.
Last Friday, I was going through the airport returning from the UK. Of the hundreds of people there, the customs officers only stopped the sole (you guessed it) black guy. And it took four of them. It was so blatant, I just stared.
Idiots they may be Daphne called the celebrators. Liberated may be what others call them. Feeling finally equal in the eyes of the law must be a liberating experience. (Yes Daphne we know you don’t see it this way but that’s why sometimes there is no wrong or right in this world, just opinions as one thinks)
What this great comment above highlights is the sad reality that many voters ultimately care only of what effects them personally. They will easily forget the past and focus on the present and future. Is that sad? Oh maybe not!
Before long, we will have yet another photo opportunity after Malta’s ‘first transgender wedding’ celebrated by the camp mayor of Zurrieq with Joseph Muscat as the star guest: the first same-sex marriage with Muscat as witness.
And then we will have the first visit of a same-sex couple with their adopted child to the Auberge de Castille, to pose with the prime minister.
It will be milked to death.
You can be sure that the Adoption Board has already been advised that we need a token ice-breaker for publicity purposes.
A “token ice-breaker for publicity purposes” may lead to a public backlash. 80% of the Maltese are against adoption by same-sex couples.