Sunday, May 29, 2005

Holier than Thou

Our beloved deputy prime-minister has managed to divide our country on a topic that until a few weeks ago everyone thought that there was a consensus upon. In Catholic Malta no one would even dare to debate, let alone legislate, a law in favour of a woman’s choice to abort. But this time the topic is not about women’s choice but future generations to legislate, no? Does it sound undemocratic? Well of course not. We have a right to impose on future generations our interpretation of when life starts and ends and since today we are an overwhelming majority we have the right to impose that in the future a simple majority is not enough. We are so holy.

The thing is women in Malta have the right. Yes, they have the right to go abroad and abort there, at least if they have the money to do so. So again it is just a division between the haves and have not. But I can understand Dr. Borg, our constitution does not protect life and we need to do something…..wait a minute…..our constitution does protect the right to life, not only for unborn children but for everyone. Chapter IV stipulates the following;


Protection of right to life.
33. (1) No person shall intentionally be deprived of his life …………

So why all the fuss? Why put into the constitution something that is already there? Why not entrench into the constitution a ban on smoking for example? As far as I know quite a few people die of smoking related illnesses yearly and anyone who is truly pro-life cannot but agree. I think that there are a million other things that could be written in our constitution. Why our politicians never did it? That’s why there are laws.

Today I watched the repetition of Xarabank, aired last Friday. My conclusion? This is a country full of fundamentalists. Forget Bin Laden, forget al Qaeda, we shove our beliefs down people’s throat, and then try to be holier than the pope. Dr. Anglu Farrugia, even suggested that women that go abroad to abort, who till now do not infringe any law, should be investigated when they come back and possibly incriminated. What’s this the inquisition? Will women stop aborting just because it is written in the constitution or is it just the easiest thing to do? Of course investing more in educational programs, so that future generations can come to their own conclusions is much more difficult to propose, organise and fund. Investing in subjects such as PSD does not win you votes. On the other hand changing the constitution is much more fun, it gives exposure, political mileage etc.

So again, why all the fuss? Maybe to deviate attention from the poor performance of the present legislation? No of course not. Maybe to give breathing space to the Prime-Minister who in the last few weeks has been under pressure to reshuffle the cabinet? No of course not. Maybe because the pro-choice movement is gaining ground and we need to act fast. Yes that’s why. Eh? Which pro-choice movement?


Fausto Majistral said...

Eh? Which pro-choice movement?

Emmy Bezzina and John Zammit. Although I'm not quite seeing them gaining ground.


Antoine Cassar said...

Did Anglu Farrugia really say that???


mistoqsija said...

May I correct you on one point.. it is true that the constitution protects the right to life but the whole issue is another... and thus with regards to WHERE and AT WHAT POINT life begins. To some it starts at conception whilst to others it starts at a particular moment in the pregnancy.

If there is a clause that protects the life of the embryo in the constitution it is that referring to Roman Catholic Apostolic Malta. Being so, it would be largely inconsistent to introduce something within the legislature of such a country that goes against a very strong fundamental principle of the church.

Using the same argument, because of this latter clause, the right for the mother to choose the fate of her embryo can never be legalised under Maltese law unless this religion clause is abrogated.