I refer to your editorial “Moving away from a two-part stranglehold” (TMIS, 8 July). At the end you state that the moral majority might not vote AD because the party is in favour of divorce; their other objection is AD’s policy on the illegal immigrants’ situation, which I find people have completely misunderstood. It is, however, the matter of divorce that I wish to discuss.

The fact that AD has brought the issue out into the open is merely due to their lack of political hypocrisy. They have rightly recognised that two well-intentioned people, who had started out being in love with each other, have, over a period of time, fallen out of love. Is this so strange? Is it so unusual? Has no one ever done something they genuinely believed to be the right thing to do, then later discovered they had made a mistake; an error of judgment; had been seduced by an illusion? Why is it so hard to “forgive” them their honest mistake and lift their life sentence of misery?

Having spent most of my adult life living in countries where divorce is allowed, and worked most of that time in direct contact with the public, I was fortunate to have made many friends and many more acquaintances. I personally know couples who have been married for almost 60 years, others not for many less. My youngest friends have been married for 18 years. It is nonsense to think that because the option of divorce is there everyone will take it.

There are three main reasons that enable marriages to last in Malta, regardless of whether divorce is available. These, on an equal footing, are the strong presence of the Church, the continued interest of parents and their guidance in their offsprings’ lives and the size of the island, as on all small islands there is a closer-knit family life.

The main reason that people usually quote against divorce is, “What about the poor children?” Yes! What about them? Is it better that they should see their parents drifting apart, perhaps quarrelling, even physically fighting; that they should see either parent, or both, go off as discreetly as they can, with another person? Is that a better example to set youngsters? Children are not stupid! They know what goes on! I have, of course, also met many divorced couples, some of whom had remarried. The children were naturally sorry about the situation but the scarring was not there, as the other parent was allowed access to them. In fact, in some cases the children looked forward to going to stay with the absent parent who may have remained single, or remarried. Sometimes they even liked the choice of new husband or wife, and experienced the satisfaction of having an extended family. In some other cases things did not work out well, but does everything work out well in life?

I find it is heartless to punish a couple who had made an honest mistake and not to allow them the opportunity to live a more contented life either on their own with their children if there are any, or legitimately with another partner. As people get older they usually mature and grow wiser so they may not make the same mistake as before and be less blinded by what is called “falling in love”. Can this self-righteous moral majority be so mean of character and lacking in compassion that they take pleasure in denying some of their poor fellow humans a chance to have a more satisfying life; to feel loved and cherished again? If two people do not get on any more it does not mean they will automatically seek a divorce as the admission of failure in their lives is usually very hard to take. Their families’ and perhaps professional guidance or counselling quite often brings them together again. Sometimes nothing can bring them back together, but forcing them to stay married to each other can become a living hell for all the family, especially if they are devout Catholics! To hear the moral majority (?) speak, one would think there are more divorces than marriages!

The people who knowingly commit real sins are the ones who should not be forgiven by their fellow men! It is somewhat sad and ironic that some people who allow themselves to be bribed can apply for a presidential pardon, with past records showing that they are not setting a precedent, even feeling cheated when they are sacked for cheating, as another person in very similar circumstances was not! It is sad and ironic that a Minister, who should have known better and should have distanced himself from the unsavoury mess, finally decides to resign but is forgiven and allowed to keep his job! It is sad and ironic that for decades some Catholic priests in the USA had allegedly sexually molested children and the Church had apparently known long before it was made public and had “forgiven” them their sins by covering up for them. As things stand it seems that men’s forgiveness is only available to you if you are close to, or actually belong to, the clique.

Alexander Cortis

ZABBAR