SOCIALISTII EUROPENI ATACA RELIGIA
Socialistii europeni ataca nu doar familia si casatoria ci si, din nou, credinta. Mai devreme in an un europarlamentar lituanian a compilat un raport privind libertatea religioasa si necesitatea protejarii ei. E cunoscut ca Raportul Andrikiene. El urmeaza sa fie supus votului in Parlamentul European. Socialistii europeni, secularizati si secularizanti, nu-l iubesc. Pe 10 iunie Veronique De Keyser, Vice Presedinte al Grupului Socialistilor si Democratilor din Parlamentul European a emis un comunicat de presa care ataca Raportul, numindu-l, de loc respectuos, un “religious rant”, adica “palavrageala religioasa”.
Press release by Véronique De Keyser, Vice President of the Socialists and Democrats Group
This week in Strasbourg the European Parliament will vote on the Andrikiene report. In other words, on the “EU Guidelines on the Promotion and Protection of Freedom of Religion or Belief”. Who could be against the idea of protecting freedom of religion and of conviction? The problem is what Mrs Andrikiene, a Lithuanian MEP from the European People’s Party, made of the initial proposal from the European Commission. It has been transformed into a real religious rant. If we follow her with this report, nothing will oppose creationism in schools any longer, nothing will require children to follow classes in biology, gymnastics or swimming, nothing with prevent the carrying out of dangerous and backward religious medical practices. In terms of education, “parents’ right to educate their children in accordance with their convictions, whether they are religious or not, includes the right to deny any undue interference in said education, being from state or non-state actors, if it is against their beliefs, whether they are religious or not.” I cannot imagine the possible religious or sectarian excesses (for it is the countries and not the EU which define what they consider being religious or philosophical associations) in these areas. In fact, this report is also a challenge to the idea of formal education: parents’ choice of what can and must be thought to their child is, for Mrs. Andrikiene, the ultimate reference: what a step back in the design of education! We are not even talking about health or women’s rights; if this report passes, women risk being faced with conscientious objections of their caregivers, without any guarantee to their rights. Conscientious objection is promoted as a “legitimate exercise of freedom of thought, conscience and religion, in morally sensitive issues”, (abortion, assisted reproduction, euthanasia, etc.). As it stands, this report is unacceptable. It was rejected by the socialists and democrats in the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and will be again in plenary if it does not undergo a complete facelift, that is to say, if large parts are not pruned by rejection votes.