Compassion, stones, and the curious case of making wrong things legal | Mariana Debono

Mariana Debono, Philosophy PhD candidate, poet and writer

The Malta Women's Lobby says it does not want to “throw the first stone”. Admirable. It then proceeds to throw the entire Criminal Code out the window.

Because this is the quiet move their article makes: If punishing something feels unkind, then the solution is not to rethink punishment but to stop calling the act a crime altogether. That, we are told, is compassion.

Let’s slow down.

The lobby insists it is possible to be morally opposed to abortion while supporting its decriminalisation. This sounds reasonable until one realises it rests on a basic confusion. There is a crucial difference between decriminalisation and depenalisation, and collapsing the two does not make us humane; it makes us incoherent.

If abortion is morally wrong and it involves the deliberate ending of an innocent human life, then removing it from criminal law is not an act of mercy. It is a declaration that the law no longer wishes to recognise that wrong as a wrong. Compassion does not require legal amnesia.

What is legitimately open to discussion is penalisation. Who should be punished? How? To what extent? With what accompanying support, care, and healing? These are precisely the questions a humane society should ask, without pretending the act itself is morally neutral.

Here, clarity matters. In the overwhelming majority of cases, the woman does not carry out the abortion herself. The direct act is performed by the doctor or provider, often professionally, repeatedly, and for payment. If the law is serious about justice, primary legal responsibility must fall on the one who intentionally performs the act. Blurring this distinction does not protect women; it distorts responsibility.

This does not mean the woman bears no responsibility at all. But her penalisation should reflect reality—fear, pressure, abandonment, lack of information, or coercion. Penalisation, in her case, can and should include mandatory counselling, healing programmes, community service, and restorative measures that acknowledge harm without compounding it. Prison should never be automatic—but neither should it be declared unthinkable in every circumstance. A humane legal framework allows for case-by-case judgement, not blanket absolution disguised as kindness.

The Women’s Lobby warns against “throwing the first stone”, yet decriminalisation does not prevent stones from being thrown, it simply ensures that only one life is left unprotected by law. If we genuinely believe women are often vulnerable and misled, then the law should reflect both truth and mercy, affirming the gravity of the act while recognising diminished culpability and prioritising support over retribution.

Much is made of the distress caused by court proceedings. No one denies this. But distress alone has never been a reason to legalise injustice. Courts are distressing because moral failures are distressing, especially when they involve irreversible loss. The answer is not to pretend nothing wrongful occurred, but to ensure responses are proportionate, compassionate, and oriented toward restoration rather than vengeance.

And beyond law and punishment lies a deeper responsibility. The goal should not merely be to manage abortion once it happens, but to build a country—and a state of affairs—in which a woman does not even feel the need to seek one. A society that truly supports women before, during, and after pregnancy; that does not leave them choosing between their child and their livelihood, their education, or their dignity, is the most pro-woman policy of all.

A cross-party discussion is welcome. But honesty is required about what is being discussed. This is not merely a healthcare adjustment or a procedural reform. It is a question about whether our law still has the courage to say that some acts are wrong, even when responding to them demands patience, mercy, and care rather than harsh punishment.

Compassion does not mean refusing to throw the first stone. It means refusing to pretend there is no stone at all.