Politics without principles by Dr. Klaus Vella Bardon

Santi di Tito’s portrait of Niccolò Machiavelli, who is considered as the founder of modern political science. He described immoral behaviour as normal and effective in politics and is famous for his book The Prince
Santi di Tito’s portrait of Niccolò Machiavelli, who is considered as the founder of modern political science. He described immoral behaviour as normal and effective in politics and is famous for his book The Prince.

 

In 1908, G.K. Chesterton wrote the following reflection in his masterpiece Orthodoxy: “When the businessman rebukes the idealism of his office boy, it is commonly in some such speech as this: “Ah! Yes, when one is young, one has these ideals in the abstract and these castles in the air; but in middle age they all break up like clouds, and one comes down to a belief in practical politics, to  using the machinery one has and getting on with the world as it is.

“Thus, at least, venerable and philanthropic old men now in their honoured graves, used to talk to me when I was a boy. But since then I have grown up and have discovered that these philanthropic old men were telling lies. What has really happened is exactly the opposite of what they said would happen. They said that I should lose my ideals and begin to believe in the methods of practical politicians.

“Now, I have not lost my ideals in the least; my faith in fundamentals is exactly what it always was. What I have lost is my old child-like faith in practical politics.”

No doubt, many of us can relate with such a powerful observation, especially in the light of repeated exposure of sleaze and corruption that at long last seems to shock our undemanding electorate. The sad reality is that too often such exposures seem to be only exploited for partisan gain and are not the result of a firm commitment to clean out the encrustations of dishonesty that clog the corridors of power.

In politics, the only thing that seems to count is electoral success, and at all costs

Many of us are aware of government decisions that are anything but even-handed. Justice seems to be a slogan dragged out from time to time to score points against the opposing party. Yet those who had property or businesses expropriated or have been denied rightful permits, employment or promotions, are acutely aware of how unjust those in power can be.

To add insult to injury, seeking redress in the courts of law is too often, and at best an exercise in futi­lity, and at worst a drain on time and money that leaves the injured party worse off. The absence of moral uprightness in business and the political arena reflects poorly on the level of our country’s catechesis.

In politics, the only thing that seems to count is electoral success, and at all costs. This seems to give our politicians carte blanche to use any means to achieve power. Sadly, the politics of Machiavelli seem to be well entrenched. I am sure that there are politicians in both our major parties who deep down disagree with the shabby manoeuvring and bad political decisions made by their own leaders, especially decisions that are made without any political mandate whatsoever.

Nowhere is this more conspicuous than in the single-minded imposition of the LGBT agenda in recent years by the government in power that unreservedly champions their agenda. The logic behind it is obvious. The LGBTs are well organised and well financed. Unfortunately, they are only concerned with their own narrow interests irrespective of how this impacts the common good.

Even the Leader of the Opposition has succumbed to the blackmail politics of the powerful LGBT lobby. He seems unbelievably unaware or indifferent to the long-term negative impact this will have on family life which has been steadily unravelling as too many Maltese jettison the Christian values that once underpinned our society.

As the remarkable Rabbi Jona­than Sacks said six years ago, the freedoms we take for granted are based on our Judaeo-Christian heritage that was rooted in moral absolutes that included the non-negotiable dignity of the human person, the sanctity of human life, and the imperative of conscience and the consent of the governed. Today, every one of them is at risk.

Thankfully, there are signs that an alliance of new political forces are reacting to this sad state of affairs. Hopefully they will live up to authentic democratic values and not give in to blackmail from any quarter.

Politics with principles might then become a reality.

Dr. Klaus Vella Bardon is Vice-Chairperson of Life Network Foundation Malta

Ref: http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20160410/religion/Politics-without-principles.608402Continue reading

Gay ‘marriage’ by Prof. Patrick Pullicino

British Prime Minister David Cameron has been said to have adopted a “poisonous form of radical moral liberalism” in championing the cause of gay ‘marriage’ in the UK. The same can now be said of the Maltese Prime Minister and leader of the Opposition.

Why is it that politicians in Western countries are falling over each other to bring in gay ‘marriage’ without an electoral mandate and when it is clearly against the wishes of the majority and will only affect a small minority of the population? Endorsing gay ‘marriage’ as a form or equivalent of marriage betrays complete confusion as to what marriage is. Politicians should have the intellect to realise how seriously damaging the introduction of gay ‘marriage’ is to society, the family and most importantly of all to children.

Leading politicians who personally bring in gay ‘marriage’ bear personal responsibility before God for ravaging their own societies and attempting to destroy the family. Make no mistake about it, this is what legislation of gay ‘marriage’ would facilitate.

Marriage is a lifelong covenant between a man and a woman, blessed by God for the good of the spouses and for the procreation of children and their education. The lifelong commitment is necessary to provide a secure environment for the bringing up of children.

Divorce has already pushed much suffering on children for the sake of parents’ selfishness and becomes more likely if God is left out of marriage. Gay ‘marriage’ in which procreation is impossible and the body anatomy is used for what it was never created is nothing but a grotesque caricature of marriage.

The love between spouses in a true Catholic marriage is modelled on the love within the Holy Trinity and parents have a deep responsibility to use marriage to raise children and bring them to God. The Catholic family is the heart of society.

Malta, with the great love there is for children, should be the last place in the world in which the family and children are threatened in this way.

Professor Patrick Pullicino is a member of Life Network

Ref: http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20160404/letters/Gay-marriage.607760

 

Gender Ideology Harms Children

March 21, 2016 – a temporary statement with references. A full statement will be published in summer 2016.

The American College of Pediatricians urges educators and legislators to reject all policies that condition children to accept as normal a life of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex. Facts – not ideology – determine reality.

1. Human sexuality is an objective biological binary trait: “XY” and “XX” are genetic markers of health – not genetic markers of a disorder. The norm for human design is to be conceived either male or female. Human sexuality is binary by design with the obvious purpose being the reproduction and flourishing of our species. This principle is self-evident. The exceedingly rare disorders of sex development (DSDs), including but not limited to testicular feminization and congenital adrenal hyperplasia, are all medically identifiable deviations from the sexual binary norm, and are rightly recognized as disorders of human design. Individuals with DSDs do not constitute a third sex.1

2. No one is born with a gender. Everyone is born with a biological sex. Gender (an awareness and sense of oneself as male or female) is a sociological and psychological concept; not an objective biological one. No one is born with an awareness of themselves as male or female; this awareness develops over time and, like all developmental processes, may be derailed by a child’s subjective perceptions, relationships, and adverse experiences from infancy forward. People who identify as “feeling like the opposite sex” or “somewhere in between” do not comprise a third sex. They remain biological men or biological women.2,3,4

3. A person’s belief that he or she is something they are not is, at best, a sign of confused thinking. When an otherwise healthy biological boy believes he is a girl, or an otherwise healthy biological girl believes she is a boy, an objective psychological problem exists that lies in the mind not the body, and it should be treated as such. These children suffer from gender dysphoria. Gender dysphoria (GD), formerly listed as Gender Identity Disorder (GID), is a recognized mental disorder in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM-V).5 The psychodynamic and social learning theories of GD/GID have never been disproved.2,4,5

4. Puberty is not a disease and puberty-blocking hormones can be dangerous. Reversible or not, puberty- blocking hormones induce a state of disease – the absence of puberty – and inhibit growth and fertility in a previously biologically healthy child.6

5. According to the DSM-V, as many as 98% of gender confused boys and 88% of gender confused girls eventually accept their biological sex after naturally passing through puberty.5

6. Children who use puberty blockers to impersonate the opposite sex will require cross-sex hormones in late adolescence. Cross-sex hormones (testosterone and estrogen) are associated with dangerous health risks including but not limited to high blood pressure, blood clots, stroke and cancer.7,8,9,10

7. Rates of suicide are twenty times greater among adults who use cross-sex hormones and undergo sex reassignment surgery, even in Sweden which is among the most LGBQT – affirming countries.11 What compassionate and reasonable person would condemn young children to this fate knowing that after puberty as many as 88% of girls and 98% of boys will eventually accept reality and achieve a state of mental and physical health?

8. Conditioning children into believing a lifetime of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex is normal and healthful is child abuse. Endorsing gender discordance as normal via public education and legal policies will confuse children and parents, leading more children to present to “gender clinics” where they will be given puberty-blocking drugs. This, in turn, virtually ensures that they will “choose” a lifetime of carcinogenic and otherwise toxic cross-sex hormones, and likely consider unnecessary surgical mutilation of their healthy body parts as young adults.

Michelle A. Cretella, M.D.
President of the American College of Pediatricians

Quentin Van Meter, M.D.
Vice President of the American College of Pediatricians
Pediatric Endocrinologist

Paul McHugh, M.D.
University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins Medical School and the former psychiatrist in chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital

References:

1. Consortium on the Management of Disorders of Sex Development, “Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Disorders of Sex Development in Childhood.” Intersex Society of North America, March 25, 2006. Accessed 3/20/16 from http://www.dsdguidelines.org/files/clinical.pdf.

2. Zucker, Kenneth J. and Bradley Susan J. “Gender Identity and Psychosexual Disorders.”FOCUS: The Journal of Lifelong Learning in Psychiatry. Vol. III, No. 4, Fall 2005 (598-617).

3. Whitehead, Neil W. “Is Transsexuality biologically determined?” Triple Helix (UK), Autumn 2000, p6-8. accessed 3/20/16 from http://www.mygenes.co.nz/transsexuality.htm; see also Whitehead, Neil W. “Twin Studies of Transsexuals [Reveals Discordance]” accessed 3/20/16 from http://www.mygenes.co.nz/transs_stats.htm.

4. Jeffreys, Sheila. Gender Hurts: A Feminist Analysis of the Politics of Transgenderism. Routledge, New York, 2014 (pp.1-35).

5. American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, Arlington, VA, American Psychiatric Association, 2013 (451-459). See page 455 re: rates of persistence of gender dysphoria.

6. Hembree, WC, et al. Endocrine treatment of transsexual persons: an Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2009;94:3132-3154.

7. Olson-Kennedy, J and Forcier, M. “Overview of the management of gender nonconformity in children and adolescents.” UpToDate November 4, 2015. Accessed 3.20.16 from www.uptodate.com.

8. Moore, E., Wisniewski, & Dobs, A. “Endocrine treatment of transsexual people: A review of treatment regimens, outcomes, and adverse effects.” The Journal of Endocrinology & Metabolism, 2003; 88(9), pp3467-3473.

9. FDA Drug Safety Communication issued for Testosterone products accessed 3.20.16: http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/PostmarketDrugSafetyInformationforPatientsandProviders/ucm161874.htm.

10. World Health Organization Classification of Estrogen as a Class I Carcinogen: http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/topics/ageing/cocs_hrt_statement.pdf.

11. Dhejne, C, et.al. “Long-Term Follow-Up of Transsexual Persons Undergoing Sex Reassignment Surgery: Cohort Study in Sweden.” PLoS ONE, 2011; 6(2). Affiliation: Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Division of Psychiatry, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. Accessed 3.20.16 from http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885.

source : American College of Pediatricians

Launch of the One of Us Federation

Saturday 12th March 2016 marked an important historical step for the defence of human life in Europe. An international new force for life and human dignity has been established under the name of “One of Us European Federation for Life and HumanDignity”, abbreviated as the “One of Us Federation”. This Federation is a non-profit apolitical and non-denominational organisation. The launching in Paris at the Salle Gaveau, included 1200 participants from the 28 European countries and 31 national organizations. There were participants from France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany, Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Poland, Slovenia, Spain, Italy, Bulgaria, Rumania, Slovakia, Czech Republic and Portugal. At this launching, Malta was represented by Life Network Foundation Chairman Dr Miriam Sciberras, and International Life Network Secretary, Dr Mark Sciberras.

The President, Jaime Mayor Oreja ( former Interior Minister of Spain), opened the Forum by stressing that Europe’s citizens are keen to reclaim the human values of their founders: the respect of each and every human being from conception to natural death.

The Aims of the Federation are:

a. The unconditional recognition of the inherent, inalienable human dignity as source of human and civil rights and freedoms. Human dignity should be inviolable and protected by public authorities.

b. The development of a culture of life in Europe, through promoting and supporting activities that involve the defence of human life, especially at its most vulnerable stages of development ( conception and gestation, childhood, maternity, sickness, old age and end of life).

The topics discussed during the one day forum included the American Planned Parenthood Scandal and its consequences for Europe, the Threat or Reality of Euthanasia in Europe, Surrogate Motherhood, Eugenics and sale of Gametes.

The panel of distinguished speakers included Jean-Marie Le Mene ( President of the Jerome Lejeune Foundation), Katalin Novak ( Minister of Family Hungary), Alberto Ruiz Gallardon ( former Minister of Justice Spain), Jean-Frederic Poisson ( French MP), Miroslav Mikolasik ( MEP and Chairman of EPP Working Group on Bioethics and Human Dignity, Slovakia), Carlo Casini ( former MEP Italy), Gian-Luigi Gigli ( President of Movimento per la Vita Italy), Phillipe de Villiers ( former French Minister), Jan Figel ( former European Commissioner Slovakia) and Konrad Szymanski ( Secretary of State for European Affairs, Poland).

The panel of fiery enthusiastic pro-life speakers spoke of the challenges facing Europe today, and how, by joining forces and with a clear target we must fight for the defence of any and all human life.

The day concluded with the One of Us Award Ceremony. The first award was given to Pattaramon Chanbua, a mother of a baby born with Down syndrome who generated an international emotional outcry when her story was revealed in summer 2014. Baby Gammy was conceived together with his twin sister through an agreement of so called “surrogate motherhood. “However, as diagnosis revealed that Gammy had Down syndrome, the mother was threatened to abort as the Australian couple who contracted only wanted to keep the healthy sibling.

 

Dr Mark Sciberras
International Secretary
Life Network Malta

Press Release

The recent and unwarranted call by the Prime Minister to introduce gay marriage and the quick endorsement of the same by the Leader of the Opposition, is another blow against the institution of marriage.
​​
Life Network Foundation, would like to set the record straight and point out to the main political leaders that the issue of gay marriage never featured in their respective parties electoral manifestos.

It is presumptuous of both party leaders to make such statements without political mandate.

Maltese people who still cherish the traditional values of life and family are feeling left out.

As a result, a substantial part of the population – that part that believes that marriage should only be between one man and one woman and open to life – is no longer upheld by the leaders of the main political parties.

Do Dr Joseph Muscat and Dr Simon Busuttil presume that a substantial part of the people can be ignored?

Life Network appeals to the general public and especially to MP’s on both sides of the house to make their voices heard in defence of marriage

Euthanasia debate at University

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

On Wednesday 24th February 2016, Life Network was invited to a debate by The Malta Health Students’ Association (MHSA) on the subject of euthanasia. Speakers from other political, religious and psychosocial fields where also  invited to participate alongside you. 

View photos of the event, courtesy of the MHSA.

[/vc_column_text][vc_raw_html]

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

[/vc_raw_html][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Europe’s ‘cure’ for autism is euthanasia

In early childhood, the Dutch psychiatric patient known as 2014-77 suffered neglect and abuse. When he was about 10, doctors diagnosed him with autism. For approximately two decades thereafter, he was in and out of treatment and made repeated suicide attempts.

He suffered terribly, doctors later observed, from his inability to form relationships: “He responded to matters in a spontaneous and intense, sometimes even extreme, way. This led to problems.”

A few years ago, 2014-77 asked a psychiatrist to end his life. In the Netherlands, doctors may perform euthanasia — not only for terminal physical illness but also upon the “voluntary and well-considered” request of those suffering “unbearably” from incurable mental conditions.

The doctor declined, citing his belief the case was treatable, as well as his own moral qualms. But he did transmit the request to colleagues, as Dutch norms require. They treated 2014-77 for one more year, determined his case was, indeed, hopeless and administered a fatal dose of drugs.

Thus did a man in his 30s whose only diagnosis was autism become one of 110 people to be euthanized for mental disorders in the Netherlands between 2011 and 2014.

Case 2014-77 appears on the Dutch-language Web site of Holland’s Regional Euthanasia Review Committees, which review mercy killing in the Netherlands — but almost never find fault. Of 5,306 euthanasias listed in the committees’ 2014 annual report, the vast majority based on physical illness, regulators found a lack of “due care” in four, or 0.08 percent. The consequences of these rulings, if any, are unclear.

Now, however, doctors from elsewhere are starting to apply independent scrutiny to the increasingly common euthanasia of Holland’s mentally ill, and their findings are not so reassuring. To the contrary.

According to an analysis of 66 of the 110 cases from 2011 to 2014, by psychiatrist Scott Kim of the National Institutes of Health and two colleagues, Dutch psychiatric patients were often euthanized despite disagreement among consulting physicians as to whether they met legal criteria. In 37 cases, patients refused possibly beneficial treatment, and doctors proceeded anyway.

The Kim report, published Feb. 10 in the journal JAMA Psychiatry, undercuts the very notion of a “voluntary and well-considered” request for death from a patient who is, by definition, cognitively and/or emotionally troubled.

Dutch doctors have honored the request for lethal injection of a seemingly lucid, physically healthy woman in her 70s who said her life had become “meaningless” after her husband was euthanized a year earlier for a terminal physical illness. And they have done the same for people who were in the grip of delusions or hearing voices.

Among the obvious risks, Columbia University psychiatrist Paul S. Appelbaum writes in a companion article to Kim’s, is “inducing hopelessness among other individuals with similar conditions and removing pressure for an improvement in psychiatric and social services.”

“Will psychiatrists conclude from the legalization of assisted death that it is acceptable to give up on treating some patients?” Appelbaum asks.

Some doctors already have. In 2009, a 37-year-old Belgian woman became distraught after a romantic breakup and began seeking a doctor to euthanize her, per that country’s law, which is similar to Holland’s.

The woman, Tine Nys, had a history of mental illness, including a teenage suicide attempt, but had more recently been doing well. In February 2010, she received a new diagnosis of autism and, two months later, a lethal injection.

Appelbaum chairs the World Psychiatric Association’s ethics committee; he says it will address the situation in the Low Countries at a meeting in Munich in March.

It’s late. Once the Netherlands authorized euthanasia for physical illnesses in 2002, demands to extend this “right” to the suffering mentally ill were inevitable and, indeed, logically consistent.

Canadians are now debating how to implement last year’s ruling by their Supreme Court establishing a right to “physician-assisted dying” in cases of a “grievous and irremediable medical condition.” A panel of experts advising Ontario and 10 other provinces and territories has urged the ruling be construed to include mental illness.

And why not? The Canadian Supreme Court’s opinion specifically said that, in Belgium and the Netherlands, the “predicted abuse and disproportionate impact on vulnerable populations has not materialized.”

Ref: http://nypost.com/2016/02/27/europes-cure-for-autism-is-euthanasia/

 

Malta…Stand Up for Life!

<Update-29-09-2015>

His Grace Archbishop Charles J. Scicluna visited our Freshers’ Week stand and showed his support by signing the petition to uphold the Embryo Protection Act.

Thank you Archbishop Charles J. Scicluna.

You can sign it here: http://citizengo.org/en/29847-maltastand-life

Please ask our MPs to Protect LIFE in the Maltese Constitution

Malta…Stand Up for Life!

As you must be aware, this summer – and now, especially, in the last weeks – we have seen a radical push to legalize anti-life measures that could lead to introduction of abortion in Malta. [1 & 4]

LIFE IS NOW UNDER THREAT IN MALTA!

We, the people of Malta – who cherish our children, born and unborn, must act! We must tell our politicians, our government, in no uncertain terms: Malta is proud to be pro-life! It is a mark of honour and decency to protect the most vulnerable in civil society.

With this in mind, Life Network Malta is now gearing up to rally the Maltese people in protection of Life – to show our politicians that the majority of voters reject the Government’s recent, wrong-headed approach to this most important issue.

In addition to future street demonstrations and pickets, Life Network Malta is right now collecting signatures for an urgent pro-life petition.

This petition adamantly DEMANDS that Parliament does TWO URGENT things:

FIRST, reject any attempt to decrease protection of the human embryo in the Embryo Protection Act, which would inevitably lead to  of human life, and

SECOND, introduce pro-life protections into the Maltese Constitution. Please see our petition (the right half of this page) for a suggested pro-life amendment for our Constitution.

If you read and approve of our petition, which is addressed to our Government leaders as well as to the members of the opposition, and to all Maltese MPs, please sign now, providing your name, email address, and ID Card Number (to validate your signature) in the space provided. Don’t worry about the Zip/Postal Code! And, after signing, if you can share this petition with your like-minded friends and family, that would help to increase the total number of signatures. Thank you!

Below, please continue reading for a more lengthy discussion of the issues, including recent, documented evidence on the same.

Here is a summary of and comment on three recent events in the push to legalize abortion in Malta. For more information, please see the links at the bottom of the page.

1) At the end of July, a group called “Pro-choice Malta” came out for abortion to be legalized in Malta. [1]

2) Just a couple of weeks ago, on 6th September, the Government announced plans to introduce embryo freezing – a technique currently prohibited under the Embryo Protection Act. [2]

This is completely contrary to both parties’ electoral manifestos on life issues! [3] It is a political travesty, and it must not be allowed. This is not what we voted for!!!

Indeed, in its election manifesto, the incumbent party in government had only this to say about IVF and the Embryo Protection Act: “We will ensure that the competent authority regulating IVF receives all the necessary resources so that the recently passed law can be applied fully and be available free of charge to all couples who need this treatment.” (n.43) [3]

NB: Nothing was said and no clue was given about amending the law to allow practices such as donation of gametes, surrogacy or embryo freezing!!!

3) On 7th September, Alfred Sant, a Maltese MEP, said that abortion should be legalized to “save the life of the mother”. [4]

This last event needs a special comment because this argument is frequently used by pro-abortion forces who try to introduce abortion into different jurisdictions by muddying the waters on this issue.

In the case of an expectant mother, doctors and nurses in Malta work to save the life of two patients when there is a critical situation.

The truth is: no life-saving procedures are ever denied to expectant mothers in Malta. Unfortunately, sometimes, an unborn child may die as an indirect result of the treatment to the mother, if the mother so chooses, but this is diametrically-opposed to intentionally taking the life of the unborn child.

In fact, it is worth noting that Malta’s maternal mortality is one of the lowest in the world, far below even the US and Britain. [5] Women are simply not dying in maternity hospitals in Malta for lack of abortion, so there is absolutely no need to introduce any such measures.

Why is it important to reject embryo freezing and gamete donation?

Embryo freezing is a grave attack on the humanity of the unborn child because it facilitates the easy disposal of and destruction of innocent human life. [6] This is one reason why it is prohibited in our current legislation.

The Embryo Protection Act serves to protect the human embryo from destruction, manipulation and freezing, and, to ensure that every child will, as far as possible, know their biological mother and father. Gamete donation and surrogacy is not permitted under the Act. [7]

Why should Parliament introduce pro-life measures into the Maltese Constitution?

Our laws are a reflection of who we are as a society. As polls consistently show, 80%+ of the Maltese people to be pro-life. [8] Therefore, we now need to ensure that our laws reflect our culture and reverence for the most vulnerable human life – the unborn child, from conception.

Our politicians have a duty to safeguard and reflect this pro-life culture by seeking to enshrine Constitutional protections for the unborn child.

The fact is, that the political parties electoral manifestos never said that they would, in any way, loosen the restrictions found in the Embryo Protection Act, nor give way to the legalization of abortion. This means that the Government does not have the people’s mandate to enact such “reforms”. We are living in a democracy…not in an elected tyranny.

In 2013, Labour Minister for Social Dialogue, Consumer Affairs, and Civil Liberties, Helena Dalli, wrote in an official report, on the Government’s position in relation to Life: “…human life begins at conception, [therefore] the termination of pregnancy through procedures of induced abortion at any stage of gestation was an infringement of this right.” [9]

Affirmation of this statement by the honorable minister must be upheld at all times. Any amendments to the Embryo Protection Act that endanger human life, and the rights of that human being, make a mockery of the same law, aptly named to show that protection of the human embryo is paramount.

Life issues are human rights issues, not party politics! An absolute majority of Maltese people agree on this point!

For those of us who care about Human Life in Malta, now is the time to be courageous and act! We cannot sit idly by and allow events to overtake us. We cannot, must not, succumb to international anti-life pressures.

We must prevail in our defense of life from conception to natural death.

This is Malta’s hour – we are a people who treasure our children. We must now act to preserve one of our finest traditions – that of being pro-life.

Who knows, Malta may be the start that could lead to overturning the anti-life mentality in the rest of Europe!!

Please sign this important petition and take a stand FOR Life!

Thank you!

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

[1] http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20150727/local/updated-pro-choice-organisation-calls-for-abortion-debate.578236

[1] http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2015-09-12/local-news/Alfred-Sant-has-an-open-mind-on-abortion-in-cases-of-rape-6736141940

[2] http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/news/national/56928/prolifers_on_the_warpath_over_embryo_freezing_plans#.VgA03t9Viko

[3] Partit Nazzjonalista (n. 35): “Min ma jistax ikollu tfal: Wara li ghaddejna l-ligi li tirregola l-fertilizzazzjoni assistita (IVF) (IVF) se nitroducu din il-procedura bhala parti mis-servizz tas-sahha pubblika biex inti tkun tista’ taghmel din il-procedura b’xejn u minghajr ma jkollok ghalfejn tmur barra minn Malta.”

Nationalist Party (N35)Infertile couples: Now that the law regulating assisted reproduction (IVF) has passed, we will introduce this service on the national health service .This service will be free and available locally such that no one will need to go abroad for this treatment.
Partit Laburista (n. 43): “IVF: Naccertaw li jinghataw ir-rizorsi kollha necessarji lill-awtorita’ kompetenti sabiex l-IVF, li bhala ligi dwar kif ghandha tkun regolata ghadha kif iddahhlet ricentament, tithaddem bla xkiel u tinghata b’xejn lill-koppji kollha li jkollhom bzonn dan il-process.”
Labour party:(n43): IVF: We will ensure that the competent authority regulating IVF receives all the necessary resources so that the recently passed law can be applied fully and be available free of charge to all couples who need this treatment.
[9] Par. 25 of the report on the 19th meeting of the working group on the Universal Periodic Review on Malta of the UN General Assembly, held on November 1, 2013 in Geneva. http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20150804/letters/Malta-s-no-to-abortion.579241

Letter to Head of Schools against Gender Indoctrination

Dear Parents,

Kindly download the document linked here, print it, sign it and give it to the headmaster/headmistress of your school.

The letter starts as follows :-

‘We would like to point out our grave concern regarding what is presently being taught in states schools without our previous consultation or consent.

Our children are already being taught acceptance, love and human dignity and to encompasses all both at home and through other acceptable means.

The LGBTIQ Action plan 2015-2017, however, seeks to impose a cross sectional gender indoctrination of all segments of the population including school children.’

Parents_ Letter to schools against Gender Indoctrination