As Joseph Muscat’s political legacy is being analysed, the public and the media focus on the negative impact it had on the environment, financial services, status of the independence and integrity of the checks and balances that safeguard democracy, and so on.
On the other hand, other aspects of his legacy that included the redefinition of marriage as part of his aggressive promotion of so-called ‘civil liberties’ is actually being praised. This is a sad reflection on the abysmal lack of awareness of the implications of these changes and what is at stake.
Although everyone is endowed with profound dignity deserving respect, the relationship of a homosexual couple is, by its very nature, different to that of heterosexuals. It is only the sexual bonding between a man and a woman that has the potential of fertility.
It is in the interest of the country that it encourages and safeguards the right of children to be brought up in stable families where they can relate to their parents and siblings and close relatives.
All these far-reaching changes to the concept of marriage were inconceivable not so many years ago. In 2008, President Barack Obama had stated he was opposed to ‘gay’ marriage. Yet his views ‘evolved’ on attaining power, and in 2015, by five votes to four, the Supreme Court legalised ‘gay marriage’ in the US despite most Americans opposing the redefinition of marriage.
Like Obama, Muscat also ‘evolved’ and changed his stance on marriage once in power. Without public dialogue and consultation, and in defiance of public opinion, he forced through this so-called ‘progressive’ legislation.
Shamefully, when steering this legislation in Parliament, Muscat denied a free vote for his government MPs, and equally disgracefully, the then leader of the Opposition, Simon Busuttil, agreed with him and followed suit in denying a free vote to Nationalist MPs.
To his eternal credit, Nationalist MP Edwin Vassallo risked his political career when he voted against this unjust imposition.
As Monica Migliorini Miller wrote in the August 2012 edition of the National Oxford Review: “It is totally ignored that same-sex sexual relationships are not the moral, social, cultural equal to heterosexual marital unions and should not be granted equal status in law. Legal recognition of homosexual bonds as marital bonds ultimately means that gender, human sexuality, being a husband or a wife, motherhood and fatherhood have no objective moral meaning.”
We ignore these facts at our peril. Laws impact our culture and the undermining of the meaning of marriage will have long-term negative consequences on society.
This is definitely a part of Joseph Muscat’s toxic legacy that he should not brag about.
When engineering these far-reaching changes he was crafty enough to introduce them step by step and exploit the general public apathy that prevails. Yet we must wake up to where all this is leading to.
The next so-called ‘civil liberty’ will be a further assault on the unborn. Even freedom of expression will soon be under threat, and tolerance for opposing views will end up being severely curtailed and penalised, as in countries of the Western world such as the US and UK.
Respecting the human dignity of one and all should not be used as an excuse to abuse and criminalise those of us who expose the truth and fight against the denaturing of the family structure.
As G.K. Chesterton prophesied: “This triangle of truisms, of father, mother and child, cannot be destroyed; it can only destroy those civilisations which disregard it.”