The tampering with the natural design of marriage will result in damage that will not only be irreparable but unexpected. The analogy is the same as if a handy-man decides to tinker with the foundations or the main structural supports of a sky-scraper, which could cause the building to collapse.

We are faced with a serious threat to marriage and the family not only because of the efforts being made for legal divorce in Malta, but because of the gradual erosion of the family unit which has come about as a result of shifting values and priorities. To be a faithful force in the days ahead, pro-family supporters will need to speak while keeping one overriding objective in mind: the strengthening the family in Malta. To protect Malta from societal suicide, the government and the opposition will need to provide tangible pro-family measures which may at times be hard to take and not just rhetoric.

It is clear that a debate on divorce will revolve around two opposing views. The anti- family camp will support a law for divorce and remarriage calling this an individual or even a human right. They will present their argument despite being unable to present any trustworthy research which demonstrates that divorce strengthens the family. Pro-family proponents will be able to tap into a gargantuan wealth of research papers, statistics and factual evidence that will demonstrate that divorce will bring nothing but more divorce, hurt, confusion, regret as well as great social and economic problems to our country. In short, divorce will weaken the family.

This is a struggle between two diametrically opposing ideologies. The anti-family side will advocate other rights, including the right to happiness, freedom of choice, discrimination and a second chance and so on. Central to their argument is their claim that the rights of individuals are supreme and inalienable. The pro-family side will argue that legal divorce impacts individuals, as well as all of society negatively and that considerations for legal divorce cannot be made solely on individual choices without consideration being given to the effect this will have on society at large.

We live in a culture where people are increasingly becoming obsessed with the self, infatuated with sex, freedom of choice, self-gain, image, expression beyond limits and personal gain – all at the expense of the collective.

Individualism is the moral stance, political philosophy ­ideology, or social outlook that stresses the moral worth of the individual. Individualists promote the exercise of one’s goals and desires and so independence and self-reliance – while opposing most external interference upon one's own interests, whether by society, or any other group or institution. Collectivism, on the other hand, emphasises the interdependence of every human in some collective group and the ­priority of group goals over individual goals. Collectivists focus on community and society, and seek to give priority to group rights over individual rights. Of course, there are different levels of individualism.

As mentioned earlier on, at the helm of the divorce movement is individualism which aggressively advocates that, apart from divorce, abortion and euthanasia are personal choices and human rights. Many of those who may be in favour of divorce in Malta are adamantly against abortion. The latter have a right to know that by subscribing to an anti-family mentality they will involuntarily be contributing to the advance of the abortion debate in Malta. The anti-family and the anti-life movements are both related ­ideologies which form part of a global culture of death and hopelessness. The weakening of the family through legalised divorce would be akin to tilling the land and sowing the seeds for more trouble later on.

There may not be a clear identifiable causal link between divorce and ­abortion. However, these are linked in an even more powerful manner, ­ideologically.