Skip to main content

Latest resolution against homophobia exceeds the competences of the European Parliament


The resolution against homophobia – or better: the resolution on public control of the individual and collective mind-set of citizens in Europe passed as expected in plenary vote yesterday in Strasbourg.
As EDW reported on Wednesday, the resolution is highly problematic. One point of particular concern is the pressure that this resolution puts on member states to legalize same-sex marriage – an area that is wholly outside of the competences of the EU.The text was voted with the overwhelming majority of 430 for, 105 against and 59 abstentions. Check here how your MEP voted.  The most scandalous part of the resolution is, however, the way it was put on the political agenda of the European Parliament. 


Here is some interesting background information:
The agenda with items to be voted in plenary is discussed on Wednesdays before plenary by the conference of secretary generals. In this meeting last Wednesday, no such thing as a resolution against homophobia was discussed or tabled for the agenda.

The agenda is then submitted on Thursdays to the conference of presidents of the political groups. At this meeting, the president of the EPP group was not present due to an official obligation elsewhere. Nobody was informed that the resolution against homophobia was to be put on the agenda. 

On Monday mornings, plenary adopts, usually a quick and formal vote, since the discussion is supposed to have happened before. Suddenly, the agenda included the resolution (obviously difficult to spot among a multitude of items).

A common resolution - based on a well-prepared text of the LGBT Intergroup at the European Parliament  - is hastily “negotiated” on Tuesday afternoon and tabled just before the deadline at 7pm. The deadline for amendments of the proposal is set only one hour later. The resolution is suddenly being noticed my MEPs on Tuesday evening, after the deadline for amendments. Too late to do anything substantial about it, except asking for nominal votes. Thanks to this, we have the names of who voted in favor, against or abstained. You find the list of names here.

Recommendation of action:

Please write an email to or call your MEP! Check on the list how he or she voted and express either your opposition to such resolutions or your gratitude in case your MEP voted against it. You easily find all contact details of your MEP if you type his name here.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Christmas Greeting

Corruption Scandal on the Sale of Schengen Visas in Malta discussed in the European Parliament

Ivan Grech Mintoff (leader of the ECPM-Member Party Alleanza Bidla) presented in the Maltese court  a transcript of the testimonies of several Libyans who claimed that in 2015, they bought an unknown number of humanitarian medical visas from an official in the Office of the of the Maltese Prime Minister. These medical visas are not supposed to be sold. Following an agreement between Malta and Libya, they are issued for free. The documents submitted in the court also claim that Schengen visas were illicitly sold at the Maltese Consulate in Tripoli over a period of 14 months (in 2013 and 2014). In this period, 88000 Schengen Visas (300 visas per day including Saturdays and Sundays) have been sold. This illegal scheme could have earned the perpetrators millions of euros.  Although the Consulate in Tripoli has closed, it is unclear if this practice has stopped or is still continuing via other countries or Malta up to today. On the 27th of June, ECPM invited Mr Mintoff to the E...

Biases Attack Pro-Life and Pro-Family Organizations

  The debate on abortion was stirred up again after the recent leak of the draft proposal of the US Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade. Mainly negative reactions to this news circulated in the media. The debate on abortion has become increasingly subjective where, particularly, the pro-life arguments are marginalized and negatively framed. Last February, we saw this in the European Parliament as well where the FEMM committee (Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality of the European Parliament) held a public hearing on the ‘Countering the anti-gender movement today to secure a gender equal Europe tomorrow’ , a side event of the Future of Europe Conference. As the title of the hearing suggests, this event was a one-sided story on the topic, seeking to invalidate other opinions and attacking several Christian organizations on their pro-life advocacy and promotion of Christian values. The hearing displayed the immaturity of the debate on abortion and gender issues. There is n...