Minority might and the majority’s right

As many countries continue to stand firm and reject gay marriage, the Maltese Parliament decided to go through all its stages and readings to amend the Marriage Act and introduced gay marriage in Malta on 12 July.

About 24 countries around the world allow gay marriage, with Malta becoming the 15th European country to allow same-sex couples to marry.

At a time when standards and absolute God-ordained laws are being rendered increasingly obsolete and becoming a rare commodity, many politicians, in order to please minority groups, are allowing majority rights and values to be trampled on and flushed into oblivion.

As a result, individualistic and subjectivistic philosophy is creeping in and becoming the norm as people continue to make a mess of what marriage life really consists of. This they do by twisting God-ordained laws to horrendous extremes. It is becoming a worldwide fashion to marry practically anything and anyone under the sun (plants, animals, objects, and imaginary people, marrying more than one person at a time and many other novel and ‘trendy’ ways).

It is becoming indeed absurd, and sometimes hilarious, to see what some individuals can come up with to please their carnal senses.

But the dangers and risks attached to these new forms of relationships and marriages are dark and sinister and are anything but humorous as alarming and serious issues arise: • Who is going to defend the traditional family consisting of one man and one woman? • Who is going to defend helpless children, who did not have a choice and who find themselves born into a gay marriage (through IVF or surrogacy)? • Who has the courage to speak out in favour of the values that form the basis of family life in this country? Maltese politicians speak about values but are they, in their majority, just demagogues acting their part? Are they truly and sincerely confused as to what constitutes standard values, ethics and moral yardsticks in their mad rush to please voters and lobby groups? One moment they say one thing about values and in the next they contradict themselves galore ad nauseum (and this not only on values connected with the family but also on other important issues, such as the environment and good governance).

Our champions of honesty and consistency are the exception rather than the rule and only a few stick out their neck to protect values. Both sides of the House seem to be in collusion with each other to please the gay rights movement (which is a minority lobby group) in order to secure the thousands of votes they garner through their strong lobby group.

However, this does not in any way release the members of the House to wash their hands of the moral and constitutional obligation to defend family values.

Indeed gay votes may sway an election result and that is what mainly interests politicians (power and more power), but there is more at stake than just votes and utilitarianism.

Indeed, this country is one of the most progressive when it comes to gay rights. However, it is also becoming one of the most oppressive and dictatorial when it comes to the exercise of one’s freedom of conscience and choice and the protection of majority rights, especially those connected with the most precious asset of the country, the family as instituted by God.

This attitude of our two main political party leaders begs many questions:

Why do both main political party leaders exert so much pressure on members of both sides of the House who cannot vote freely according to their conscience on such delicate moral issues? Can a person forget his/her conscience and just vote regardless? • Why are the leaders of the two main political parties just people-pleasers and forget that God and His people need to be represented in Parliament as well? • Why is the crucifix and kissing of same form part of the protocol when the freedom of conscience of Members of Parliament is taken away? If a Christian person ever had any reason to be offended and hurt, it is now as the civil law is attempting to remove the words ‘mother’ and ‘father’ from the nation’s syntax semantics and pragmatics.

Indeed, this is not only a secular abomination but also more condemnable if one uses God’s law and standards.

There again, more questions arise: • Will Mother’s Day and Father’s Day be allowed any more or will they offend the gay rights movement under the new legislation (Civil Marriage Act, 2017)? • Will it be offensive to gays to address your parents ‘Mum’ or ‘Dad’? • Who are the ‘religious members and officers’ mentioned for protection in the Maltese Constitution (Article 32a)? • Do ‘religious members and officers’ include faiths other than Catholic (such as Anglicans, Orthodox, Baptist, Evangelicals and Pentecostals)? Answers are needed in these critical and challenging times for Maltese Christianity, and especially for Christian moral values.

We are at a moral crossroads. There are those who hate Christian values and are indifferent to them, but there are also those who deep down love to be at peace with their conscience.

Are we going to allow the wave of liberalism to carry us to destruction or shall we stand tall and protect these values as well as the Maltese people who cherish and love such values. Anthony Zarb Dimech