A great controversy has been unleashed by a decision of the Constitutional Court that oblies the Prosecuter’s Office to rectify false medical informations and biased judicial interpretations in relation with the subject of abortion.

It is foten spoken from the friends and the enemies of peace, as if they were two groups clearly distinguished between them. However the talks with the subversive give raise to a more complex debate.

Three weeks ago, on my column, I criticized the consequences that come from the fact of loving countries as if they were mothers to whom we owe our existence. Daniel Mera, columnist in this journal, criticized me saying that I was mistaking patriotism with nationalism.

In his recent visit to Jerusalem Mitt Romney, the american presidential candidate, said that the development of nations lied on culture and that this explained the differences between Israel and Palestina.

In the middle of last century we had a railroad network, a social security institute, a national postal, and a telecommunications company. National integration (the little there was) was achieved by these companies. Today almost nothing remains of it. Who then fulfills the function of integrating the country?

The love for one’s country is a religious feeling as the love for God. Lord Acton had already implied this back in 1862 when he said that “patriotism is in political life what faith is in religious life.”