Il-Ministru lest jemenda l-Liġi tal-Ugwaljanza

Il-Ministru lest jemenda l-Liġi tal-Ugwaljanza

Il-Ministru Edward Zammit Lewis qal li huwa lest jemenda ż-żewġ abbozzi tal-Liġi tal-Ugwaljanza li hemm fil-Parlament. Il-Ministru tal-Ġustizzja semma li huwa lest jemenda l-artikli li jagħtu lil dawn l-abbozzi supremazija fuq kull ligi oħra barra l-Kostituzzjoni u anke l-partijiet li jolqtu ħażin lill-iskejjel tal-Knisja. Iżda kompla jgħid li mhux lest li jdaħħal fl-abbozz klawsola li tintroduċi d-dritt tal-oġġezzjoni tal-kuxjenza.

Il-Ministru Zammit Lewis kien qed jieħdu sehem f’diskussjoni fuq Newsbook.com.mt l-Ħamis wara nofsinnhar. Fid-diskussjoni li tmexxiet mill Fr Joe Borg ħa sehem il-Membru Parlamentari tal-PN Karl Gouder.

Gouder qal li l-PN jaqbel li titneħħa kull diskriminazzjoni u li jkun hemm ugwaljanza veru. Kompla jgħid li iżda trid li titneħħa l-klawsola li tagħti lil din il-liġi supremazija fuq liġijiet oħra. Huwa ddeskriva din il-klawsola bħala perikoluża u bħala klawsola li qed iġġib ħafna reazzjoni negattiva mill-għaqdiet professjonali.

Il-Klawsola tas-supremazjija: problema

Il-Ministru qal li huwa qed jisma’ lil kullħadd u lest li jemenda l-klawsola tas-supremazija waqt li ċaħad bil-qawwa li din il-liġi qed issir biex tħejji t-triq għall-introduzzjoni tal-abort u l-ewtanasna. Huwa qal li mill-banda l-oħra jħoss li f’liġi dwar l-ugwaljanza ma hemmx post għall-klawsola li tagħti dritt għall-oġġezzjoni tal-kuxjenza.

Meta, waqt il-programm il-Ministru kien preżentat bil-kritika li saret minn diversi gruppi professjonali u kritika li saret fuq Newsbook Q&A mill-Prim Imħallef Emeritu Vincent DeGaetano, l-Ministru qal li ma jaqbilx mal-kritika tagħħhom.

Tul il-programm kien hemm intervent minn Fr Jimmy Bartolo SJ li qal li l-abbozzi jħeddu lill-iskejjel tal-Knisja u jġibu fix xejn id-dritt tal-ġenituri li jibgħatu lil uliedhom fl-iskola tal-għażla tagħhom. Fr Bartolo qal li l-iskola tifforma lill-istudenti mhux waqt il-lezzjonijiet tar-reliġjon biss. Huma riedu li jkollhom id-dritt jagħżlu għall-iskejjel amministraturi u għalliema li jkunu jistgħu iġibu ‘l quddiem l-ethos kattoliku tal-iskejjel tal-Knisja u ma jħadħlux amministaturi u għalliema li jmorru kontra dan l-ethos.

Il-MP tal-PN Karl Gouder qal li jaqbel dwar dan.

Zammit Lewis qal li għalkemm se jinsisti li l-liġi tkun approvata huwa lest li jkompli jitkellem mal-iskejjel tal-Knisja biex tinstab soluzzjoni għad-diffikultajiet li qedgħin isemmu.

 

This is a Newsbook Online opinion piece

Ref: https://newsbook.com.mt/il-ministru-lest-jemenda-l-ligi-tal-ugwaljanza/

Pharmacists join call for conscientous objection in Equality Bill

Pharmacists join call for conscientous objection in Equality Bill

Say Bill discriminates against pharmacists

The Pharmacy Council is concerned about implications on the pharmacy profession in the Equality Bill.

In a statement on Thursday, the council said the proposed law, which is aimed to provide a legal framework against discrimination, discriminates against pharmacists and other healthcare professionals and undermines pharmacists’ professional autonomy, moral convictions and integrity.

Moreover, it does not include a conscientious objection clause.

Pharmacists, in practising their profession, take decisions based on science and ethical principles inherent to the pharmacy profession and their conscience, the council said.

But the Bill’s articles seven and eight contemplate placing pharmacists into a conflict of conscience in relations to their legal obligations to render a professional service which goes against their conscience.

Acting against one’s conscience was also in breach of the pharmacists’ fundamental right to Freedom of Conscience and Religion as enshrined in the Constitution, the European Convention of Human Rights and the Charter of Fundamental Human Rights of the EU.

A similar call has already been made by doctors and the bishops have warned about serious implications on individual freedoms.

The council said it is most concerned about the proposed articles three and 32, the supremacy articles.

These rendered the proposed legislation supreme over any other present and future legislation, the code of ethics of the pharmaceutical profession and the oath taken by pharmacists to practice

“It is inconceivable that pharmacists would be obliged to render a professional service, which is in breach of the oath they have pledged to adhere to,” it said as it called for the deletion of article 32.

The council said it is imperative to include a conscientious objection clause under article six (exceptions).

“This clause must include a proviso stating that patients are informed of any conscientious objection in a timely manner, and that the State should make provisions to ensure access to lawful health services to protect patients’ rights.”

Malta as a Democratic State should ensure that pharmacists and other health care professionals are protected from a conflict of conscience and from any other form of discrimination, the council insisted.

 

This is a Times of Malta print opinion piece

Ref: https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/pharmacists-join-call-for-conscientous-objection-in-equality-bill.823159#.X37XNzDz8ks.whatsapp

Persecuted by Equality – Miriam Sciberras

Persecuted by Equality – Miriam Sciberras

A number of medical associations, the Episcopal Conference, lay Catholic groups, Catholic Voices Malta, representatives of Church schools, the Independent School Association, the Malta Employers’ Association, Life Network Foundation and Christian groups have all sounded warnings and presented their objections in the discussions on the new equality bills, but to no avail.

The red light is on. It is an appeal to our authorities to take note and intervene in the best interest of our country, in the name of freedom.

It has been said ad nauseam that “the equality bills will not make anything that is illegal in Malta legal, so there is no need to worry”. This is at best naïve and concrete amendments need to take place in order for us to be reassured.

The two bills numbered 96 and 97 contain a supremacy clause that prevails over any other ordinary law that runs counter to them. Resistance to the removal of the supremacy clause logically leads one to think that there may be existing laws or others in the future that may be stealthily amended through such a clause.

In our legal system there are two ordinary laws, the European Convention Act (ch. 319) and the European Union Act, which are considered as supreme vis-à-vis any other ordinary law. The equality bill legislation as proposed will have supremacy over them, as well as over the Embryo Protection Act and the Criminal Code. This is another cause for legitimate worry.

It was stated that: “This government will not compromise on the principle of equality for all. It is the backbone of our belief system and the equality bill will further strengthen the legal framework in this regard.” Commendable words indeed, had this not really been a case of doublespeak at its best.

Catholics will have their religious freedom in the public square taken away

The bills will clamp down on anyone who as much as touches upon the ‘protected characteristics’ in a way deemed offensive by anyone, be it in journalism, media and or day to day living. This, in practice, will mean that Christians and Catholics will have their religious freedom in the public square taken away, the right of Church school administration in choosing employees representing their ethos in the senior management teams is no longer guaranteed, the fundamental right of parents to educate their children in their philosophical belief is threatened and the right to conscientious objection is excluded. This is not strengthening of our backbone but reducing the country to a cripple.

In January 2020, Prime Minister Robert Abela, when meeting the Archbishop at the Dar tal-Kleru, stated in a televised interview that he did not see a need for a change to Article II of the Malta Constitution, regarding religion, more so because Malta is a tolerant nation. The prime minister is right – we are a tolerant people. Love your enemy is at the heart of the gospel!

Equality as a principle based on human dignity and the intrinsic value of every person from conception to natural death is a principle easily understood by all people. Tolerance is a virtue we all need to learn and to live in a pluralistic society. We are obliged to accept, love and tolerate each other to live in peace.

However, the equality bills go too far when they include endorsement and promotion within the law. One cannot be forced to endorse and promote lifestyles that run contrary to one’s faith. Freedom of expression, religious freedom in day to day life and conscientious objection are seriously threatened.

Parliament approved the bill decriminalising porn and repealing religious vilification in 2016 in a bid to remove censorship. In 2020, we want to introduce a new censorship, this time a gag order on anyone who will not endorse or promote gender ideology. How can this even start to make sense? 

As we pitch gender ideology versus religious freedom, we will see indoctrination attempts rammed down our throats. The targets will be innocent children (who in the name of a false equality will be bombarded by WHO-endorsed early sexualisation programmes in school curricula), ordinary families and individuals. People who just want to go on living their faith as they have always lived it in the last century will be labelled homophobic and ridiculed.

The stage is being set for the persecution of believers.

Miriam Sciberras, Chairman, Life Network Foundation Malta

 This is a Times of Malta print opinion piece

Ref: https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/persecuted-by-equality-miriam-sciberras.822289

This equality bill that will destroy diversity – Alan Deidun

This equality bill that will destroy diversity – Alan Deidun

There are those who will resort to every trick in the book to silence the Church

The term ‘diversity’ is normally a byword for abundance, choice, alternatives and a plethora of other positive connotations. The positive timbre of the term extends to different contexts and domains, from the biological sciences (the safeguard of ‘biodiversity’ has become a global conservation priority) to philosophy (having a ‘diversity of views’ in society is seen as the best antidote to an authoritarian view) as well as to human rights (which advocate against discriminating towards the diverse minorities within society on the basis of sexual orientation, religion or creed, race, etc).

It is against this backdrop that the current equality bill 96/97 is being peddled by Parliamentary Secretary for Equality Rosianne Cutajar, with such a bill being bandied about as the champion of diversity, when in actual fact it’s anything but.

In fact, some of the clauses within the bill have an inherently homogenising effect, by promoting the watering down of any differences in ethos between Church and non-Church schools on these islands, thus effectively doing away with the supposedly cherished diversity in schooling, reeking of a communist, one-size-fits-all philosophy.

Perhaps two of the most maligned provisions of the equality bill concern the recruitment of educators and the relegation of their Catholic ethos to the religion class only, in Church schools.

Concerning the first issue, I heard a very fitting anecdote from a friend of mine within a similar mindset on the proposed bill. According to him, removing the discretion of Church schools to screen applicants for a post at their premises on the basis of their ethical/moral constitution is tantamount to a casino running the risk of recruiting applicants who are vehemently against gambling or to a wildlife sanctuary management organisation running the risk of recruiting a convicted arsonist.

Swinging the pendulum back from such extreme scenarios, Church schools have not shied away from employing individuals who might not be viewed as complying with the tenets of Catholic ethos, embracing diversity in views and lifestyles in a practical way. Thus, the trepidation within the movement behind the proposed equality bill is hard to fathom, especially when considering the inclusive human resources recruitment track record of Church schools. The relegation of any moral/ethical teaching to the prescribed religion class can be couched within the decades-long debate in this country concerning the role in society that the Church should take.

While the secular nature of our republic and the distinct separation between Church and state matters are cast in stone and recognised by all and sundry, the attempt at rendering the Church ever more redundant in today’s society by relegating its teachings to religious buildings and activities only betrays a lack of understanding of the Church’s mission as a key societal stakeholder, that of promoting its ethos and lifestyle model in everyday life.

“Parliamentary secretary Rosianne Cutajar would do her portfolio justice if she endeavoured to make the Equality Bill less discriminatory and more inclusive”

Given the Church’s advocacy role in contemporary society, on issues related to environmental degradation, human rights and dignity (being evident in debates on abortion, migration, drug legalisation), there are those who will resort to every trick in the book to silence it as they are uncomfortable with the message it is conveying. Church schools are just the latest battleground in such a struggle.

The merits of the argument are even easier to grasp if we limit ourselves to Church schools only. Presumably, most, if not all, parents of students attending Church schools do so since they specifically wish their offspring to be instilled in a Catholic ethos and not just on academic grounds. It’s a conscious decision and choice, and the parental faculty to decide on their children’s education will be eradicated if the equality bill gets the green light. The same proposals also avoid giving any quarter to an educator’s right to conscientious objection on the premise that this is discriminatory, paving the ground for witch-hunts of staff members deemed as incompliant and despite the fact that such a right is entrenched within the legal books of many countries and institutions.

Proponents of the ‘equality bill’ repeatedly refer to the agreement between the Holy See and the Maltese Republic on Church Schools (1991) which supposedly gave successive Maltese administrations an implicit foothold in the running of Church schools on the premise that teachers employed within such schools are being paid for by the state. In doing so, the same proponents are implicitly or explicitly oblivious to the fact that, within the same agreement, the Maltese state recognises the right of the Church to establish and direct its own schools according to their specific nature and autonomy of the organisation and that the Church was true to its end of the bargain by passing over vast tracts of land to the state.

This agreement obliges Maltese Church schools to follow the National Minimum Curriculum submitted by the education division but not to shy away from promoting the Catholic ethos. From a more mundane perspective, the state’s subvention of Church schools is limited to just the core/regular teaching staff and an additional 10 per cent payment, with parents having to financially support the engagement of assets such as counsellors, lay chaplains and inclusion coordinators among others, besides regular maintenance and upgrading works within Church school buildings.

It is inherently hypocritical to witness those who profess to be firm believers in a diversity of views, sexual orientations, religious creeds and races to concomitantly be so against a diversity in schooling on these islands. It is perhaps more sinister to witness the same paladins of human rights being so openly discriminatory against those (who are definitely not the ‘privileged few’) who consciously opt for an inclusive Catholic education for their children.

Parliamentary secretary Cutajar would do her portfolio justice if she endeavoured to make the equality bill less discriminatory and more inclusive.

Prof. Alan Deidun is Director of the International Ocean Institute – Malta Training Centre and a Fellow of the Royal Society of Biology (London)

This is a Times of Malta print opinion piece

Ref: https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/this-equality-bill-that-will-destroy-diversity-alan-deidun.819829 

There is nothing more progressive and liberal than protecting human life – Bishop Galea-Curmi

There is nothing more progressive and liberal than protecting human life – Bishop Galea-Curmi

Homily by Bishop Joseph Galea-Curmi for Mass organised by the LifeNetwork Foundation in memory of abortion victims around the world 

Today, we are commemorating the precious human lives which were cut short during their development, and thus could not be born. They never had the opportunity to show the world their potential. We mourn the loss of these unborn lives, because human life should always be cherished. Their loss is a great loss for us all. It is not only a loss for those who believe in Christ, but also a loss for all those who, in one way or another, value human life from its conception.

However, today, we also mourn with those who took the decision to terminate human life in its early stages. There could have been so many reasons for them to do this.  They might have found themselves in a situation where they could not understand fully what they were doing, and what the consequences would be. Perhaps they faced great hardship and did not find the support they needed. Instead of finding people to help them, they could have been under pressure to terminate human life. Whatever the reason, may they now find people to support them as they go through the process of forgiveness in order to arrive at complete healing. May those who made this wrong decision find the help they need to be able to start afresh, and work fervently in favour of life.

Whoever wants to end human life in its early stages is not progressive but regressive. It has been said correctly that the strength of a society is measured by the progress of the most vulnerable.

Protection in Society

We are also here today to renew our commitment to work actively in favour of life, even when we are faced by a mind-set that is promoting a culture of death. We should remember that, when slavery existed, this mentality was commonly accepted. By time, thanks to the involvement of courageous people, a number of societies understood the injustice involved, and began to work wholeheartedly against slavery, rejecting the concept completely, because it went against human dignity.

Today, in various parts of the world, there is a mentality which accepts and promotes the ending of a human life which has been conceived, but not yet born. It is a widespread mentality. We hope and pray that the time will come when, just as different societies saw the error of their ways and worked wholeheartedly against slavery, they will do the same in the case of human life, that is, become fully aware of the reality, and work passionately against the idea that someone can end another person’s life.

Progressive and liberal

At times, it is said that if one is progressive and liberal, one must advocate for the right to choose to eliminate human life that has started, but has not yet been born. However, if you take the time to reflect on the meaning of progressive and liberal, you will realise that there is nothing more progressive and liberal than the safeguarding of human life.

We pray for consistency where the cherishing of life is concerned … Anyone who is begging for help because he is drowning, literally or metaphorically, should also have his or her life safeguarded.

What does it mean to be progressive? It means that you want progress; you want people to move ahead in life. I presume it means that you would want progress for everyone. A person is progressive when s/he can guarantee that the few cells that are present at the beginning of human life can continue progressing. On the contrary, whoever wants to end human life in its early stages is not progressive but regressive. It has been said correctly that the strength of a society is measured by the progress of the most vulnerable.

What does it mean to be liberal? It means that you treasure liberty, and that you do not want anyone to obstruct liberty. This implies that we should respect everyone’s liberty to develop and have a better life. When there is human life at an early stage, being liberal means allowing it to live, not eliminating it.

A Prayer

Today we ask the Lord to strengthen our resolve to value life and protect it from all danger. In a special way, we value the life of the most vulnerable, those without a voice, those who depend on others completely.

We pray for consistency where the cherishing of life is concerned – that is, from the moment of its conception to its natural death, and in its every stage. Anyone who is begging for help because he is drowning, literally or metaphorically, should also have his or her life safeguarded.

We pray that doctors, nurses, and those who work in the health sector, will always be faithful to their mission of upholding the value of life, as is their duty, and to do this even when it means obeying their conscience and saying ‘No’.

We pray especially for those mothers who are facing difficult situations, that they may find the help and support they need for the protection of life, and that they never end up victims of abusive systems.

We also pray for our country, that it will never succumb to the pressure against life but will be a country that accepts and appreciates every human life, creates awareness about the value of life, and has laws that protect and safeguard life.

Joseph Galea-Curmi Auxiliary Bishop, Archdiocese of Malta

 

This is an article from The Archdiocese of Malta Website 

Ref:  https://church.mt/there-is-nothing-more-progressive-and-liberal-than-protecting-the-human-life-bishop-galea-curmi/

A call for diversity and more transparency

A call for diversity and more transparency

The Equality Bill as presently formulated has several shortcomings

The quest for social justice, equality and the adherence to fundamental human rights has always been embraced by Church schools. As many students can attest, our schools safeguard and promote these values – which is why we welcome initiatives such as those included in the draft legislation Equality Bill 96 and 97.

We are stakeholders in the national effort to promote equality but we are also educators with a mission and a duty to uphold our school ethos and tolerance. We work hand in hand with those hundreds of parents who send their children to our schools to learn about our Christian faith and our ideals. We want a law which respects diversity, not one which is oppressive, imposes a bland uniformity on all and leads to persecution by prosecution.

This is the reason why we put forward proposals to Parliamentary Secretary for Equality Rosianne Cutajar. The Equality Bill as currently formulated has several shortcomings, several of which threaten freedom of religion and freedom of expression. The Venice Commission (European Commission for Democracy through Law) has also commented unfavourably on certain aspects of the draft equality legislation which shows that we are not the only ones to voice concern about it. The Independent Schools Association has also presented its amendments to the bill. Sources from other faith communities are also very concerned.

Our proposals to the parliamentary secretary Rosianne Cutajar were primarily twofold. In the first place, we want to continue our mission to promote and celebrate our particular school ethos by being allowed to employ persons who respected that ethos, particularly in the leadership roles within our institutions. School leaders are the interpreters of faith to the community. It is not discriminatory to expect the leaders of our schools who will perpetuate that ethos, who are not hostile to it and who will fashion a framework around that Christian ethos.

We want to retain the freedom to engage such educational leaders in this crucial role. We cannot understand why the parliamentary secretary is so adamant in closing the door to this eminently reasonable suggestion. The leaders of a political party, of trade unions are expected to embrace its ideals, so why are Church school educators and leaders being denied this right? Why is this being described as discriminatory only when Church schools wish to engage leaders who reflect and perpetuate their values? It is ironic to see that legislation, which is supposed to promote equality, is actually discriminatory in effect.

If the law is enacted as formulated, Church schools will have next to little choice as to whether to engage persons who are openly hostile to their values. This is utterly disrespectful of the hundreds of parents who wish their children to experience religious values and norms in a communal educational setting. There are parents who wish to send their children to Church schools specifically for this reason.

We want a law which respects diversity, not one which is oppressive and imposes a bland uniformity on all

Relegating religious values to a 40-minute slot during a religion lesson is not what the parents wish for their children. Such values are imbibed during all lessons, activities and extracurricular outings and yes – we would like to be able to engage people who are willing to participate in these holistic activities. We don’t understand why Cutajar continues to describe this as discrimination. We are hurt to see her thinly veiled attacks on us, describing us as “the privileged few” and portraying us as being hostile to the LGBTIQ+ community.

It is a known fact that members of this community form an integral part of educational communities – even at senior management level. We value them and appreciate their contribution just like anybody else.

We also asked the parliamentary secretary to introduce a clause to allow persons to register a conscientious objection based on belief, creed or religion to perform, participate, endorse or promote any measure. This was deliberately misrepresented as a request for a licence to discriminate.

It is nothing of the sort. On the contrary – forcing people to participate or endorse acts to which they object because of deep moral objections is undemocratic and despotic.

The right to conscientious objection is recognised in many democratic states. In the Declaration on the Importance of Strengthening the Fundamental Right to Freedom of Conscience made in Brussels, on April 21, 2016. Members of the European Parliament stressed that freedom of conscience is a fundamental right that needs to be protected everywhere.

Only recently, 14 associations representing various medical specialities called for the inclusion of a conscientious objection clause in a new law on equality, currently before parliament. The associations stated that “Doctors should not be faced with clinical situations where they are forced to act against their ethical convictions or be deemed liable if they exert their freedom of conscience.” Like us, their support for the introduction of a conscientious objection clause is also motivated by the implications of the supremacy clauses included in the bill. These will allow the new law to override criminal and civil laws if a matter of legal contention arises.

Despite these repeated pleas to listen to reason and experts in the field, our suggestions have not been taken up. The process by which the bill is being passed through parliament is obscure and not transparent. It is a pity that stakeholders’ concerns and suggestions are not being taken on board. We are ready to continue promoting non-discrimination in good faith. We hope that our proposals will not continue to fall on deaf ears.

Fr Charles Mallia is Delegate for Catholic Education; Fr Jimmy Bartolo is Rector of St Aloysius College and coordinator of the Church Schools Association; Claire Bonello is representative for Church Schools Parents’ Associations; Sr Rachel Frendo is Provincial of Augustinian Sisters and vice president of the Council for Religious Major Superiors.

This is a Times of Malta print opinion piece

Ref: https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/a-call-for-diversity-and-more-transparency.818551

 

At the mercy of equality – Miriam Sciberras

At the mercy of equality – Miriam Sciberras

As parliamentary committees reconvene after the summer COVID-imbued break, the Equality Bills discussion rears its ugly head again.

Why should equality laws cause worry and concern to the ordinary law-abiding citizen?

Why have so many people – educators, doctors, employers, organisations, parents, faith groups, schools and NGOs – sounded warnings over such a seemingly innocuous positive legislation?

The dual Bill legislation 96 and 97 is set to change our Maltese landscape like nothing else before.

Vague definitions that include harassment will pose a threat to peaceful people who dare express an opinion on any of the protected characteristics.

Pitching in both sexual orientation and religion together as protected characteristics in these Bills will obviously lead to an escalation of controversy at some point in time.

All Christians, including Catholics, have clear teachings on sexual conduct which no law can change. This has never been a problem until now because people are free to believe, to reject or to embrace their faith and live it in the public square as they deem fit for them.

The Equality Bill makes a mockery of religious freedom by relegating it to a barely tolerated issue– Miriam Sciberras

If Bill 96 sails through without including an overriding clause on religious freedom and conscientious objection, faithful believers will be sued and will be at the mercy of a police state where they will be suddenly under a gag order if they fail to endorse what they do not believe in.

There will be an obvious conflict established by the new law, and the hierarchy of rights will be challenged.

Treating people with respect, tolerance and love of neighbour can never mean endorsement, support or approval of behaviour that goes against their conscience or faith.

Imposing acceptance or endorsement in the name of equality is unacceptable. Threatening people into compliance is tantamount to brainwashing and Marxist indoctrination.

This moral code, which has been the backbone of families and our country for centuries, is now at the mercy of an ‘anti-discrimination law’, which ever since its evil inception was targeted at believers and marketed as a desirable quality. In fact, anti-discrimination laws worldwide do not allow religious freedom and conscientious objection because that is what they are targeted to exclude.

One look at the aftermath of equality laws in other countries shows that peaceful law-abiding citizens are being persecuted for simply living out their faith.

People have been taken to court for wearing a cross around their neck; pastors preaching the Gospel have been sued; children have been taken from their parents if the letter failed to endorse hormone treatment of their minors; midwives have been struck off the register for failing to assist in abortion procedures, and doctors struck off the register or paediatricians sued; writers have been questioned by the police over the publication of leaflets on human sexuality; and schools have been forced to close unless they change their curriculum. These and so many other examples are there for all who want to look up and see what’s in store for us unless we get some serious amendments in these Bills that will make living with them acceptable.

We are moving from freedom as a way of life to freedom as an exemption under these laws.

This is very serious for those who cherish journalistic freedom of expression and religious freedom in the public square.

Religious freedom as a pre-eminent right will now fall under exemptions. How can one relegate a cherished value set in our constitution to an exemption? Exemptions imply bare tolerance that can be removed over time.

The Equality Bill makes a mockery of religious freedom by relegating it to a barely tolera­ted issue. This is a very dangerous subtle attack on the Church in Malta, on faith and on all believers.

The time to speak out is now.

 

Miriam Sciberras is chair, Life Network Foundation Malta.

This is a Times of Malta print opinion piece

Ref: https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/at-the-mercy-of-equality-miriam-sciberras.818071

Let politicians know that society wants to protect the life of the unborn, marchers told

by 

 

‘Malta will eventually be made to hold a referendum on whether or not to introduce abortion’ — pro-life movement

 

The forthcoming European Parliament and local council elections were an ideal opportunity to let politicians know that society wanted to protect the life of the unborn, and that life started from conception, pro-life demonstrators in Valletta were told on Sunday.

A sizeable crowd took part in the march in the afternoon, held “in defence of the unborn”. The fourth annual March for Life was organized by the Life Network Foundation.

The demonstrators, who included civil society, priests, nuns, the head of evangelist movement River of Love, and even former Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi, gathered in front of Parliament holding placards that read; “love the most vulnerable”, “be a voice to those who have none”, and “love them both”.

Foundation chairperson Miriam Sciberas told those gathered how Malta was changing faster than many would like. Foreigners were changing the island’s demographics, fake news was pushing agendas onto society, and national discussions were all staked in favour of special interests.

In all this chaos it was hard to focus on the essentials – the values “that make us Maltese”.

The introduction of the Morning After Pill was being followed by mounting pressure for Malta to move towards introducing abortion.

“They ask why we are not like other European countries, why we are different,” Dr Sciberras said.

This, she added, was made worse by a manipulative media.

She said Malta will eventually be made to hold a referendum on whether or not to introduce abortion as political parties cannot deal with this hot potato themselves.

She urged those gathered to make their position clear with politicians.

The European Parliament and Local Council Elections were fast approaching and this was an ideal opportunity to let politicians know that society wanted to protect the life of the unborn, and that life started from conception.

The foundation, she said, was working to provide a chat line for expecting mothers and those who had gone through with abortion, specialized councillors, financial assistance, and even a shelter for homeless mothers.

In closing, Dr Sciberras said Christmas was a celebration of birth and the born child.

Earlier the crowd heard from US speaker Jennifer Christie, a victim of rape who raised a child which she insists has always been a gift.

She said many had asked her what it was like raising “a rapist’s child”, to which she has always answered she was raising her child and God’s child.

Her son, she said, was not a reminder of rape but a reminder of “the joy that can come from darkness”.

Ref: https://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20181209/local/let-politicians-know-that-society-wants-to-protect-the-life-of-the.696354

Woman raped and beaten, discovers she is pregnant

Climbing the stairs, I ring the doorbell to be greeted by a rough, heavily-accented American voice. I explain that I am the journalist who has come to interview them. Having covered many human stories by now, I am no longer nervous when I meet people for the first time who I know will have to recall sometimes difficult stories.

This was different. I was meeting a woman who had been raped, beaten and left for dead. She subsequently discovered that she was pregnant and she and her husband decided to raise the baby as their own. How do you respond to something like that?

The gruff voice greeted me at the door. He was tall and bear-like, with an overgrown beard. Someone who could protect you I thought. Jeff, the husband, welcomed me into the apartment in which they were staying.

I caught sight of Jennifer, his wife, in the kitchen. As I sat down on the couch, still feeling uneasy, Jennifer asked Jeff to open a bottle for her. Jeff and Jennifer sit on the other end of the couch. The first thing you notice about Jennifer is her strikingly beautiful blue eyes which are like the ocean, so full of life yet so weary. The bright blue held her emotional currents and told a tale of ups and downs. Her pale skin was in stark contrast to her fiery red hair.

I could tell she was weary; perhaps she had seen too many journalists in front her, asking her the same questions, over and over again. Or perhaps she was just tired. I had been told that still suffers from seizures following the blows to her head during the rape. Jennifer sits cross-legged on the couch as we start discussing what had brought them to Malta and the long journey they had had to endure to get here. I spot a colourful tattoo on her leg and make a mental note to ask about it later.

They tell me about their five beautiful children and their life back in the United States. Apparently, Jennifer and Jeff had been visiting schools during their time here in Malta. I was surprised to hear that she was telling her story to school-age children but she informs me that here in Malta children are told about subjects such as abortion and rape.

She comments that she has experienced little resistance here when discussing abortion and says that people in Malta have been very ‘respectful’, even if they do not agree with her stance. Jennifer is a sign language interpreter which basically means she uses sign language to translate for deaf people. In 2014, in America, she was hired to provide her interpretation services at a conference a few hours’ journey away from her home.

Jennifer describes the January day as being snowy and cold, so she was wearing a hood and, as a result, did not notice that a man was following her. At the door to her hotel room, she put the armful of bags containing her belongings down on the floor and, sensing something, turned around to find a man standing behind her.

He was young, not much older than her oldest child, good-looking and not immediately threatening. She thought perhaps he needed help but he punched her in the face. She fought him, but he was a foot taller than her. Jennifer thought she was going to die so she stopped fighting. At that point, she describes that she just retreated back into her own mind and imagined crawling inside herself.

She eventually lost consciousness. The man proceeded to rape her and took her nearly naked body out to the place where the hotel rubbish was left for collection.

Laying in the snow, with just a piece of her bra on, Jennifer woke up to a woman yelling and trying to cover her with her coat. She was freezing and tried to lift herself up from the ground only to realise she could not because she was hurt. She put her hands up to her face and realised they were covered in blood.

Jennifer was taken to hospital where doctors told her that she had several injuries and a brain bleed. Since then she has needed six further operations. Weeks later, Jennifer had a work assignment on a cruise ship that had been booked months in advance. She was not doing well at home so, after discussing it with Jeff, they decided that she should not cancel the booking. They believed that she should get out and continue life: that the rapist had taken enough.

On the second day out at sea, Jennifer felt really sick so, in accordance with protocol, she was quarantined in the medical unit on board. Antibiotics were not working, so she was asked, as a precaution before giving her something stronger, if there was any chance she was pregnant. She immediately responded that there was not but then she stopped and did a quick count in her head and told them that she had been raped a month earlier.

It was the first time she had used the word ‘rape’ out loud. She had been so preoccupied about diseases, her injuries and the horrible incident, that pregnancy had not even crossed her mind. A pregnancy test was carried out and  it was positive.

Jennifer sat there, holding the test result, in total shock. She knew she had to tell her husband. The nurse saw her visible shock and told she would have to wait before having an ultrasound because she had been sick. At the ship’s next port of call, in Colombia, Jennifer was taken to a hospital. She says it looked more like the basement of a building.

It was dark and no-one spoke English. She was all alone, surrounded by strangers, and at that point she felt that she did not recognise her life anymore. She was wheeled over an old ultrasound machine and flipped on the screen and although at that stage there was not much to see, she had had enough babies to recognise that dark ‘P’.

At that point, she just smiled. Something in her came to life again and she had a reason to keep going for the first time since the attack. At this point, Jennifer pauses. Jeff is visibly emotional. She tells me that he does not often hear her telling her story. He has been holding Jennifer’s shoulder all along, supporting her as she talks to me, but it is obvious that this is hard for him too.

Jennifer continues recalling how she rang Jeff and asked him if he was sitting down.

“I’m pregnant,” she told him. A small pause followed. “Ok,” Jeff replied. “Sweetheart, this is a gift. This is something beautiful from something terrible. We love babies. We can do this.”

Jennifer had never doubted that Jeff would react in that way. She knew the person she had married 20 years before. I ask Jeff how he felt, saying that once he found out Jennifer was pregnant: “That was it, we were having a baby.”

Having the baby was not easy, as she had a difficult pregnancy. She was put on strict bed rest which meant she could not work. As a result they lost their house and had to move in with Jeff’s parents. “We were just trying to survive,” Jennifer says.

At that point in the interview, the photographer interrupts us to take a few photographs outside. Jeff holds Jennifer from behind and hugs her tightly as they pose for a photograph. They joke and laugh and kiss and I cannot help but remark on the beauty of their relationship.

Despite all they have been through in their 20 plus years together, these two are clearly in love and are each other’s support system. Jennifer smiles and tells me that  she would rather be with him than anyone else: he is her best friend.

I feel so much warmth from both of them that I do not want the interview to end. Although they have been interviewed many times, it is not about regurgitating the story. Jennifer does not tell the story, she recounts and relives the memory each time.

She gave birth to a beautiful baby boy, Joshua, who is very much part of the family. He scribbles on the wall like any other child, and fights and plays with his big brothers. His sister likes to take him out and pretend he is her own: Jennifer is not too amused about this.

The emotional and physical scars of the trauma are still visible. It has been a difficult trip here in Malta for Jennifer, as she has had several interviews. She has had to miss some of them due to illness. She still has seizures and with Christmas lights everywhere, which are a big trigger, it has been very difficult for her.

I ask how she feels emotionally and if her rapist was ever caught. She tells me he went on to rape and murder other women, all redheads like her. A couple of years later he was found and killed by the brother of one of his victims. And so he was dead. She could finally breathe again.

The interview draws to an end but we continue chatting about her children. Jennifer brings her telephone and shows me a lovely photograph of all of them joking and laughing on their porch. Then she shows me a picture of Joshua. His eyes are the same ocean blue as his mother’s and  when I tell her he looks like her, she proudly smiles.

As I leave, Jennifer gives me a warm hug and I am just so amazed by this couple. They give me a business card with their email address so that I can send them the photographs. When I get back to my office I turn the card over and see a quote by Dr Seuss: “A person’s a person, no matter how small.”

Jeff and Jennifer are in Malta on behalf of the LifeNetwork Foundation and will be speaking at today’s annual ‘March for Life’ in Valletta.

Ref: http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2018-12-09/local-news/Woman-raped-and-beaten-discovers-she-is-pregnant-6736200582

Standing up to abortion – Klaus Vella Bardon

In Malta, the promotion of abortion as a woman’s right is now being peddled with an increasing crescendo. This should not be surprising. Now that Ireland has legalised abortion, Malta is the last country in the European Union that safeguards nascent life.

We are being repeatedly reminded that abortion should not be a taboo topic for debate. In a society that gives lip service to the concept of freedom and freedom of expression, it is an approach that cannot be contested.

As a representative of Life Network Malta, I can assure you that pro-life advocates welcome debate, so long as the purpose of debate is to seek the truth of what is at stake.

One hopes that we all agree with the hallowed maxim ‘The Truth will set you free’. Yet, we must make a clear distinction between an honest attempt to seek the truth of an issue and an organised campaign to present evil as a choice to be considered.

Here in Malta, we have already had the disgraceful situation where the abortifacient Morning After Pill was legalised on the false assumption that it is only a contraceptive.

We all remember distinctly the farce of a so-called public debate that preceded its introduction. This false claim is being challenged in court.

With regard to abortion, we want to ensure that public opinion is not hoodwinked in a similar fashion.

It is beyond debate that unless impeded, humans develop in stages from conception to adulthood. At all stages, the right to life is present

It is beyond debate that unless impeded, humans develop in stages from conception to adulthood. At all stages, the right to life is present. The value of life is literally incalculable: we cannot calculate it.

Promoting the killing of nascent life to attain a good end is not just contrary to natural law, it violates the morality Christianity has taught from its beginning.

In the West, over the past half century, the coarsening of conscience with respect to procreation and unborn human life has been astounding. It has abandoned the 1959 United Nations General Assembly declaration stating that “the child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth”.

The underhand strategies employed in the Irish referendum should serve as a warning. It is a fact that in Ireland, powerful overseas interests played a role in funding the pro-abortion lobby. But there were other factors at play.

One of the most dishonest claims by the pro-abortion activists was the claim that the 8th Amendment in Irish law placed pregnant women’s lives at risk.

The tragic death of Savita ­Halappanavar was dishonestly exploited under the false premise that her life was sacrificed as medical intervention to save her life would have killed her foetus.

In Malta, there are those who are brazen enough to peddle the blatant lie that pregnant women are denied treatment if it places the child’s life at risk. With modern medicine, such cases are very rare indeed and the decision to opt for treatment rests with the mother.

Another attempt at justifying abortion is the case of women who are victims of rape. The pro-abortion strategy is always the same. Very rare cases are used to break down the law and our culture that defends life from conception. 

The evil action of rape is then compounded by the evil of eliminating innocent life. To sensitise public opinion to this false contention, Jennifer Christie and her husband are being invited to Malta. Jennifer was brutally assaulted, raped and almost killed. Following the rape she was expecting a child and both friends and medical people advised abortion as a solution to her dramatic situation.

Jennifer chose life and insisted that an innocent child should not be sacrificed. On the contrary, she upholds, that if anyone should be punished, it should be the rapist. Life Network Malta will be holding its annual march on Sunday where Jennifer and her husband will give their stirring pro-life testimonies. We invite people of good will who cherish life to join us.

Klaus Vella Bardon is deputy chairman of Life Network Foundation Malta.

This is a Times of Malta print opinion piece

Ref: https://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20181205/opinion/standing-up-to-abortion-klaus-vella-bardon.695910