A Maltatoday survey published this Sunday provides us with the eye-opening statistic that a total of 59.4% of respondents can be said to be in favour of the introduction of divorce. Yes, it’s a survey, and yes, there is the annoying matter of the “ayes” including the enigmatic “in certain cases” that stinks of busybodiness as much as a blinding no but we have a new figure to play with.

Let’s get that “in certain cases” out of the way. 18.7% of the respondents did not reply with a straightforward “Yes” when asked the question “Do you agree with the introduction of divorce for persons who have lived apart from their partner for the past four years?” but they chose an option (presumably provided by the surveyors in question) that read “in certain cases”. Is this the scientific equivalent of agreeing with divorce “as such”? If it is not a wholehearted “Yes – and get a life” then why is it being counted/totalled with the ayes rather than with the nays? My problem here is that the “in certain cases” bit smells of busybody assessments such as “only in the case of irremediable breakdown” or some bullshit of the sort.

You either have the dissolution of a civil contract or you don’t. You don’t have “in certain cases”. I believe that the part of the question that stated “for persons who have lived apart from their partners for the past four years” was enough of an all-encompassing “certain case” to be able to forego any further caveats and qualifications. The “Don’t Knows” on the other hand have been slapped onto the end of the “nays” in a reminiscence of the Great Santian Assumption. They would be a quasi-insignificant portion (3.3%) were it not for the fact that once you remove the as-suchers (18.7%) out of the equation they are basically the difference between the Ayes (40.7%) and the Nays (37.3%) . With the “Don’t knows” thrown in with the “Nays” you have an infinitesimal 0.1% difference between the Ayes and Nays. Weird innit?

Which brings us back to the “as-suchers”. They could turn out to be the deal clincher if (and I stress the if) this were something to be determined on the basis of majority vs minority – which it obviously isn’t. What this survey (and others which that will surely follow) does is turn the tables on that ridiculous assumption of “catholic Malta” that is one hell of a fallacious premise in today’s world. Bishops, PMs and other Mullahs of the Catholic Imposition are warned. Hopefully the shift to a more laique (secular) discussion will be speeded up.

I’m melting here. Is this what global warming is all about? More blogging this afternoon.