The Curia, as expected, has come out in defence of religion and against the decriminalisation of pornography as envisaged by the government.

In a position paper issued today, the Curia said that religious belief plays an important role in society, particularly in pluralistic societies. There is therefore a social interest in promoting and defending respect for religious beliefs and non-beliefs.

It was expressing its views on the Criminal Code (Amendment) Act, 2015.

The government is proposing the complete removal of articles 163 and 164 of the Criminal Code, meaning that the vilification of the Roman Catholic Apostolic religion and other religions will no longer be a crime.

Porn shops will also soon be able to open in Malta after legal reforms that will allow pornographic material to be displayed so long as clear warnings are made outside the shop.

It will still be illegal to distribute pornographic material in public places and to expose children to such material. Justice Minister Owen Bonnici said the reforms showed that government is not the moral custodian of adult people.

In its position paper, the Curia said the introduction of more recent legal sanctions against hate crimes does not warrant the removal of Articles 163 and 164 which prohibit the vilification of religion, which is wholly different from criticising, ridiculing, censuring or even disparaging or hating. To vilify is to “render vile” and so what the law prohibits is the malicious, abusive debasement of religion, its adherents and its leaders.

Article 2 of the Constitution of Malta is not to be seen in isolation but as part of Chapter One which lays down the following six most fundamental and equal civic values: the Republican governance of Malta, the Religion of Malta, the National Flag, the National Anthem, the National Language and the Constitution itself. Since the National Religion is on a par with the other five values, one cannot choose between them by requiring five to be treated with reverence and allowing the sixth to be subjected to vilification.

Articles 163 and 164 should, therefore, not be deleted. However, there should be no differencebetween the sanctions imposed on those vilifying the Roman Catholic religion and those vilifying any other religion, belief or non-belief.

The Bill states that the reason behind the amendment and the aim to be achieved is “to provide for the better implementation of the right to freedom of expression with regard to the striking of the necessary balance between the right of everyone to receive and impart information and ideas and the need to protect society and vulnerable persons in particular from certain forms of pornography and indecency.”

The licensing of sex shops has nothing to do with the “freedom of expression” or the right “to receive and impart information”. It is simply part of the sex industry and trade.

One should ask how this fits into what the Constitution of Malta established on public morality, decency or morals. The safeguarding of public morality is so fundamental that it even expressly overrides the enjoyment of all fundamental human rights, let alone of profit making.

The commercialization of the human body is always harmful to the dignity of the human person, even when this occurs with one’s own consent. Sex and sexuality are more than just gratification and pleasure but they are a gift and an invitation for self-giving and for an interpersonal relationship with others.

Why should it not be self-evident that the arguments in favour of public decency are more compelling than those in favour of public indecency.

Position paper