25 Apr I do, but we can’t
Arguments for and against marriage equality abound. Some people are dead set against legalising same-sex marriage, whilst others are strongly in favour. In her quest for unveiling public opinion, Alison Bezzina found that the majority of people feel indifferent. Most realise that marriage equality won’t affect their life in any way whatsoever, and are therefore open to either way that the country will sway.
Those with very strong opinions about the subject are few and in between, but have enough zest to heat up the argument on either side of the debate.
The arguments in favour of the introduction of same sex marriage are very clearly and soundly presented by Gabi Calleja – co-ordinator of the Malta Gay Rights Movement. These are summarised below, but more information on this position can be found on the MGRM’s website www.maltagayrights.org
“The position of the Malta Gay Rights Movement is based on the believe that same-sex couples and their families should be legally recognised without discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation, as a fundamental human right in, and of itself but, also as the sole portal to the effective recognition and enjoyment of other human and civil rights.
The right to marry is a fundamental human right enshrined in the major international and regional instruments. As a fundamental human right, it is to be seen as an end in itself because the equal dignity of all persons should not be up for discussion. Marriage equality and its eventual inclusion in national legislation does not have any long-term negative impact on the meaning and institution of marriage, so it should not be perceived as a social or legal threat.
In addition, Civil marriage is an institution independent of Canon Law and of the ecclesiastical authorities and, as such, should not be construed on the basis of religious belief. Furthermore, defining marriage in terms of its procreation potential excludes and offends those marriages and family units that, for whatever reason, do not include children. It also ignores the Maltese reality of several children being currently raised by gay men and lesbian women.
In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration. It is in the best interests of children to enjoy a relationship with their parent(s) that is recognised and protected by the law, regardless of whether they share a biological link with their parent(s).
Adoption of children by co-parents should be available without discrimination based on the child’s birth status or the parents’ marital status, sexual orientation or gender identity. Co-parent adoption should not be dependent upon the severance of other parental ties. Evaluations of a person’s, or of a couple’s, parenting skills should not distinguish between heterosexual and homosexual persons but should take into account the potential for offering a child an environment conducive to his/her overall well-being.
Joseph Carmel Chetcuti (78) is lawyer based in Australia. He was one of the early year activists in the gay rights movement back in the 1970s, and he is the author of Il-Ktieb Ir-Roza and Queer Mediterranean Memories. 
Joseph supports same-sex marriage on the basis of freedom of choice and equality, but he sees no reason whatsoever why same-sex couples should try to behave like straight couples.
“Though same-sex marriage has a symbolic value for some, it lacks imagination,” he says. “This is no liberation. We must learn to invent the wheel, and not go down the same road. In fact the use of phrases like husband and wife in same sex marriages are sad because the butch/femme roles are unnecessary. They trivialise same-sex love. As I see it, gay activists should be politically incorrect because homosexuality is inherently revolutionary. If we want to be like everyone else, our mind will stop thinking and we will fail to challenge the status quo.
I do not subscribe to the principle of equality for its own sake but only as a means to an end, that end being liberating society from the nonsense of some institutions and gender roles. Sadly, however, some gay men and lesbians can only think of a fulfilling life in a relationship and marriage. I believe that there are some things we would be better off not being equal on. After all, we are different and we should be proud of being so. Perhaps we would be better off trying convince society to drop the institution of marriage all together because marriage is and remains oppressive. Many gay people have been forced to embrace this institution to keep up with the heterosexual Joneses. Little appears to have changed except that their partners are of the same gender. I am totally against homo-normativity as, increasingly, those pushing for same-sex marriage tend to be homo-normative even though they say that they are not. We are now being harassed by ‘findings’ that married gay couples are happier than others, or that children in these relationships have a more balanced life. I think these findings are fake. I do not believe in mimicking straight people. I find that in their quest for marriage equality many gay people overlook the injustices that come with the institution of marriage and the recognition of relationships.”
Ruth Baldacchino (33) is a lecturer in Queer Studies and an LGBTQ activist. Ruth resonates Joseph’s position as she believes that marriage will only privilege those who are normative. 
“Marriage is only useful for those who conform and assimilate the conservative and neo-liberal ideas of one perfect relationship between two adults, preferably with two kids, a dog and the rest. Why should I be interested and fight for a heterosexist fantasy which excludes me? Why should my love depend on the recognition of the State? Do I need to be married to be in a “stable relationship”? Do I have to be in a stable relationship to be a considered a good parent? Isn’t this sending out the message that two married people are better than single parents?
It is important that people start realising that same-sex marriage is a conservative issue (socially and economically), and in other words, there’s nothing leftist, liberal or progressive about it.
LGBTI campaigner Silvan Agius who is also Policy Director at ILGA-Europe disagrees that Lesbians and gays are fundamentally different than the rest of society. 
“Most of us would prefer to have other qualities take prominence over our sexual orientation, so that we are able to go on with the rest of our life. We prefer not having to deal with situations where we are considered as ‘others’ or ‘different’, or worse, where we are asked to explain our difference.
In this respect, the call for marriage equality should also be understood as a call for ‘legal and social normalisation.’ In Belgium, where I reside, gays and lesbians blend with the rest of society without anyone raising their eyebrows. This is what Malta should aspire for, and yes, that is also why we need greater legal and social recognition, and why the government must be on the forefront in its promotion.”
John* is 43 year old skilled worker who argues that just because you call something a marriage does not mean that it is. Marriage has always be and should always be between a man and a woman because it is what nature intended. Without a man and a woman in a relationship it’s not possible to bring children into this world and that would mean the end of it.
Maria* is a 35 year old professional who believes same sex couples do not compliment each other in a relationship which in the long run will create problems of compatibility and stability hence making such relationships a risk to society should they be legally recognised.
Katya Cassola (38) , an executive officer at a local council, is not against the recognition of same sex relationships but is against gay couples having or adopting children. “I’m not against gay marriage but I’m afraid it will lead to gay adoption,” explains Katya. “This will probably mean that the child would be bullied at school for having two mummies or two mummies, and it is always in the child’s best interests to be raised by a mother and a father.” 
George* is a 28 year old retail worker who is against legalising same sex marriage because it validates and promotes homosexual lifestyles, which, according to George, should not be promoted and perpetuated in anyway. “This sort of lifestyle should not be encouraged,” he argued, “recognising such relationships on a legal level obscures moral values and dilutes the value of traditional marriage. This has nothing to do with civil rights. This is not like racial equality. This is about sexual behaviour which is not natural. A black man and a white woman can still procreate but same sexed partners cannot. This should be a deal breaker in any marriage because it is biologically unnatural.”
Ruth Baldacchino also argues that marriage equality should not be a priority because it will not bring the change in mentality that we need.
“I do not think that marriage equality will solve the issues of homophobic and trans-phobic bullying in schools.
It will not solve the lack of access to health services for trans people.
It will not stop LGBTQ young people from committing suicide, nor will it improve the treatment of LGBTQ refugees.
It will not stop parents from kicking their daughters or sons out when they discover that they’re lesbian, gay or trans.
It won’t help teachers who have to hide their sexuality for fear of being expelled.
I don’t think that marriage equality will change the general perception that people with disabilities are asexual and therefore cannot be trans, gay, lesbian, or queer.
It will not make life any better for those trans people who are sex workers either because they cannot find employment or simply because it’s their choice.
It won’t stop the gay bashings, name-calling and hate crimes or students having to give up their studies because schools and university do not have a clear policy on harassment and bullying of LGBTQ people.
Marriage equality won’t remove the shame and fear that people experience when they come out and, it will take more than marriage equality for judges and lawyers to change their mind about lesbians being fit mothers.
I do not think that marriage equality will help religious or spiritual people who have had doors closed by the religious institutions they were members of.
It will not help those of us who never know which toilet we should use if we want to avoid getting harassed or thrown out by management.”
Note from the author:
It’s been a while since I’ve made my personal opinion on this matter very public, and the purpose of this feature was to gather other people’s opinions about it. However it is only fair that I also state my position on the matter, so here it is:
In my opinion there should be no such thing as gay marriage, not in Malta and not anywhere in the world.
Same sex couples are first and foremost humans, after that, they are citizens of the country they live in, and after that they are in a consensual committed relationship.
The fact that they are of the same sex should not feature in any way, especially but not exclusively, when deciding on whether their relationship should be legally recognised or not.
Therefore, countries should not need to introduce any new legislation. They should not need to wreck their brains for fancy new names to refer to same sex unions. All they need to do is to simply do what should have been done from the beginning – to extend the existing right to marry that heterosexual couples have enjoyed since time immemorial, to all couples, equally and fairly, with all of the institution’s flaws, constraints and benefits, irrespective of sexual orientation.
