The Control Factor: New Legislation Coming from the U.N. and European Parliament
February 07, 2014 | Christine Pasciuti
Share this article
What do the United Nations and the European Parliament have in common? Recent actions by both have reflected an accelerated momentum to use legislation as a control mechanism to promote a very liberal agenda, seemingly common between the two organizations. One wants to change existing law, and the other aims to enhance existing law to allow for special treatment. Both governing bodies are insisting on the integration of secular sexual ethics within statutory law.
A 15-page report was just released by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, conveying the panel’s displeasure with the way the Vatican has responded to the sexual abuse of minors by priests. There is much more to the report than first meets the eye, because the true goal of the U.N. panel is to require the Catholic Church to change Canon Law in order to adopt the U.N. Convention’s precedence over internal laws and regulations.
In what way? On pages 12-13 of the report, the panel says it wants the Holy See to change its teachings on abortion and contraception, and also recommends the Church do more about HIV/AIDS. In addition, a Canon law change for the term “illegitimate children” is recommended, and the Vatican is directed to order Catholic schools to change their textbooks in order to omit any "gender stereotypes." Page 8 instructs the Vatican to end corporal punishment, insisting on the amendment of "both Canon Law and Vatican City State laws."
Dr. William Donohue, president and CEO of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil
Rights points out, these demands would include ending the practice of “baby boxes”. Orphanages in many countries have drop boxes conveniently placed so that unmarried girls and those who can’t care for their babies may leave them so others can care for their child. “It is a humane practice”, assures Dr. Donohue, “one that is widely practiced in South Korea. What is not humane is to kill babies in utero, which is precisely what this U.N. panel recommends”.
One of the primary objectives of the U.N. listed in its Charter is:
To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion.
Is the U.N. unnecessarily forcing its hand on the Catholic Church in an effort to control its actions worldwide? And if the Church adheres to conforming with the U.N.’s secular standards, what impact will it ultimately have on how other Christian churches are permitted to operate, who base their standards on Biblical principles?
Next, we have the Lunacek Report, presented to the European Parliament by Austrian Green politician Ulrike Lunacek, arguing for designation of LBGT (Lesbian, Bisexual, Gay, Transgender) special rights and privileges, allowing LGBT lobby groups to veto any legislation that goes against their interests. Additionally, LGBT groups could be given immunity from freedom of speech limits that are applied to other areas of EU law, and homophobic hate crimes would be classified as a completely separate category.
The institute, which states that its goal is to "protect and promote human dignity based on the anthropological truth that man is born in the image and likeness of God," approved the controversial Lunacek Report, adopting it by a vote of 394 to 176, with 72 abstentions.
J.C. von Krempach, a writer for ‘Turtle Bay and Beyond’—a blog focused on international law, policy and institutions—described the decision as follows:
“…the European Parliament has with today's vote rejected the principle of universality of human rights. This is a day of shame."
"The Lunacek-Report, if it gets adopted, will not be legally binding anyway. But the huge mobilization against it evidences that the real concern of people is not about so-called 'homophobia,' but about the surreptitious falsification and manipulation of human rights."
The president of the International Committee on Human Dignity, Nirj Deva MEP, also expressed contempt for the EP’s actions:
"Ms. Lunacek's report is the latest example of overzealous europhiles seeking to impose their personal social doctrine upon all member-states; irrespective of national parliaments and irrespective of national cultures."
Will the application of these new measures of exclusivity for the LBGT groups set precedence for others also seeking political favor, to jump on board the “special rights” bandwagon? Is this the beginning of a ‘two-tiered’ system of justice, where universality and equality for all have been quietly swept under the carpet?
These recent legislative actions by both the U.N. and the EP may have lasting consequences on how Christians worldwide will be able to exercise their religious freedoms… or not.