Both the pro- and anti-divorce movements are in favour of marriage. The pro-divorce movement has announced its logo. It’s negatively atrocious – and sends out all forms of wrong signals. The only positive was the emphasis that even a pro-divorce movement is in favour of strong marriages. We’re all set for the Grand Debate of 2011 in Malta: Divorce pro or con?
All that is left is to understand whether it will be a referendum, a law, none or both that will represent the culmination point of this latest chance to take sides. Don’t know why but with the announcement of the logo for the pro-divorce movement I could only think of this song as interpreted by Johnny Cash.
Addendum: I remembered why. It’s the Maltese phrase “Kullhadd ghandu alla tieghu” (Everyone’s got his own god). Très Depeche Mode. Let’s all reach out touch faith.
Come to think of it even this version is very apt:
and once we’re at it why not link the original:
Related articles
- Life After Divorce (socyberty.com)
- Don’t Try This at Home: Adultery in the Marital Bed (nytimes.com)
- What Will People Think When They Find Out I’m Divorcing? (psychologytoday.com)
- Heading for a Divorce? Determine Your Post-Split Expenses (dailyfinance.com)
5 replies on “Personal Values”
Ejja ma ninsewx x’kienu jghidu xi xhur ilu: Dan minn fuq it-Times:
Reuben Scicluna says:
THURSDAY, 22 JULY AT 1416HRS
It is obvious that these situations aren’t caused by divorce. We don’t have divorce in Malta and these things happen. My question is: how will the introduction of divorce legislation help the situation?
[Daphne – Reuben, you don’t argue against something by asking how it will help the situation. You argue against something by saying it will make the situation worse. Clearly, as we have seen, that is not possible as marriages are breaking up without divorce. How will it help? The biggest help is psychological. Formal separation already has all the effects of divorce bar the ability to remarry. It is an absurd ‘legal fiction’ in that it terminates the obligations of the marriage contract without terminating the contract itself. Now with all other contracts, this is not possible: you cannot release the person from what the contract is for, without also releasing them from the contract itself.]
The “only” difference I can see is that you’ll be allowed to re-marry. How many people who are unhappily married will want to marry again once they’re free of their spouse? Put differently, how willing are you to repeat an unpleasant experience?
[Daphne – Put differently, Reuben, it’s none of your bleeding business, not for you to say, and certainly not any concern of yours. If even one person wants to remarry, that’s enough. They don’t have to seek permission from Reuben Scicluna. Sorry to be harsh, but I find your patronising tone quite insufferable.]
This is not a rhetorical question. Frankly, I don’t see why – if I were to leave my wife – I’d want to spend the rest of my life with another woman.
[Daphne -It’s precisely because you don’t want to leave your wife that you can’t see yourself falling in love with somebody else.]
u din ohra:
Daphne Caruana Galizia(on 11/8/08)
@Viki Camilleri – quite frankly, you’re the one who sounds babyish. The fact that Malta and the Philippines are on their own in this one should tell you all you need to know.
@Paul Paris – Go and look up the word ‘theocracy’ in your dictionary, if you have one.
@everyone who speaks about wife-beating and drunkenness and infidelity: sometimes, marriages just die. You don’t need the excuse of extreme violence or abusive behaviour to divorce. Next thing you’ll be doing what the church does, and claiming that the concealed fact of psychiatric treatment before marriage, or infertility afterwards, are grounds to have the marriage annulled.
Daphne Caruana Galizia(on 11/8/08)
@P. Busuttil: Jesus this and Jesus that – lives next door to you, does he? Go down to the pub on a Friday night with him, do you?
@Joe Zammit: you’d have been right at home in Salem, circa three centuries ago. You speak their language. Funny how religious zealots always end up sounding like they’ve just escaped from a care home.
Daphne Caruana Galizia(on 9/8/08)
Perhaps the bishops could explain why, everywhere else but in Malta and the Philippines, the Catholic Church makes it mandatory for those who apply to have their marriage annulled by the church to first obtain a divorce. We also require an explanation as to how the effects of divorce are more deleterious to society than the effects of what we have already – a high rate of marital breakdown and the formation of subsequent unions into which children are born – out of wedlock. Any society that bans divorce on religious grounds must logically also ban spouses from leaving the marital home or forming new unions. But that would make us….
Merhba lura sully. Nahseb toghgbok il-bloggata odjerna.
@ Jacques… Tghogobni hafna…u skuzani talli mlejtlek blog b’materjal ta haddiehor, imma xi drabi ma niflahomx it-tidwiriet u kutrumbajsi ta certu nies….u kulhadd jifhem dak li jrid…. imma l-ewwel nxejru l-bnadar mod imbaghad qalb wahda ma Austin Valuri….tajba wkoll…
hello sully, your surprise surprises me. is it not obvious that the political game has taken over the divorce issue that has become an accidental egg? the only thing that will surely stay is joseph l’opportunist lacking options (xi haga bhall the berlusconi rhetoric). I will just lay back and enjoy the sorry spectacle.