We are not a mature people; well some of us are, but a good majority are not. We are referring to the divorce debate and the fallout that has come with it.

The gutter sniping, personal attacks, scaremongering and attempts at intimidation are coming from all corners, most notably from the anti-divorce movement.

On a subject where families are involved and going through pain, one would have expected a sense of maturity. Yet, if we take a look at the billboards that have been unveiled, we can see that the anti-divorce movement has simply tried to make demons out of two people in particular, Deborah Schembri and Jeffrey Pullicino Oralndo. The billboards are almost reminiscent of the character assassination of Alfred Sant in the 1998 and 2003 elections. This is not surprising, given that the Nationalist Party machine has been aiding and abetting the No movement.

One of the billboards asks whether it is right for Deborah Schembri to “line her pockets” if divorce is introduced. Two others are quite sickening in their content, in terms of a baby and a child saying that lies are wrong, yet one is forced to call someone else “daddy”. The other is equally jaqq, with a baby saying that he doesn’t get to see his daddy often because he has to “look after the other mummy”. This campaign, is quite frankly, tasteless and base. We ask the No movement to put those questions to children who are already in that situation; either because one of their parents is co-habiting, or cheating, on the side.

On the other hand, we welcome the declaration made by Mr Justice Philip Sciberras who has had the courage of conviction to say that the Church has taken such an entrenched stance against divorce because it stands to lose so much financially. At least, there are some other people out there who are not afraid to call a spade a spade.

The truth of the matter is that this goes beyond a Yes or No vote. What we are witnessing is merely a symptom of the greater malaise afflicting this country. As our standard of living increased dramatically, many people found it more convenient to ignore the fundamentalism simmering just below the surface. It has now reared its very ugly head.

* * *

We will also dedicate some space to show just how softly-softly, intimidation tactics are being used. On Saturday’s issue, on the front page, this newspaper published a story about a pro-divorce priest that was on his way to Malta from Canada. It was clearly inferred in the article that we were of the belief that it was a hoax and a case of impersonation. We were in touch with the Curia throughout. The Gozo Curia has asked us to publish a letter (on this page, the right hand column). The Curia is, of course, well entitled to publish the letter, and it is written in good taste. But, the part that was not for publication, we reproduce here: “Kindly note that failure on your newspaper’s part to publish this rebuttal will render it an accomplice in the perpetrator’s hoax and may render it, too, liable for any criminal action that may be undertaken at the appropriate time.”

The Malta Independent is responsible, and we know our duties. We will wait for the police to contact us for information. But the paragraph above, penned by the Gozo Curia’s legal team, is just the type of intimidation we refer to. This publishing house will not be intimidated, by anyone. This is the Malta of 2011. Like it?