Lithuania incurs EU wrath for law against the propagation of homosexuality to children

Cranmer on the new depressing EU revelations from C-Fam

If ever proof were needed that EU national governments may no longer legislate in accordance with their own cultural traditions, or enact laws which uphold the Christian understanding of the family, it is now evident.

Astonishingly (or perhaps not), the European Parliament has considered ‘Article 7’ action against Lithuania, which could have resulted in Lithuania’s suspension from the European Union. And all because they have dared to confront what they deem to be insidious homosexual propaganda.

Lithuania is a predominantly Roman Catholic country, and has effectively passed its own Section 28: ‘A Law on the Protection of Minors against the Detrimental Effect of Public Information’ which prohibits promotion of ‘homosexual, bisexual, polygamous relations’ among children under the age of 18. The law does not ban the discussion of such issues; it prohibits their promotion. This is not ‘anti-gay’ or ‘homophobic’; it is for the protection of children. But Gay and human rights groups have condemned the law, claiming it institutionalises homophobia, is discriminatory, and violates the right to freedom of expression. The ubiquitous Michael Cashman, who spends every waking hour of his working life on the promotion of homosexuality, all at the expense of the EU taxpayer, said: “It is my duty as an elected member of the European Parliament to act strongly against grave attempts to diminish human rights of EU citizens. This new law is a spit in the face of the European values. To limit freedom of expression based on homophobia is a clear breach of EU’s fundamental rights and principles.”

No mention, of course, of the diminishing rights of EU Christians, or the buckets of saliva being thrown into their faces, or the limitations being placed on their freedom of expression.

While the Lithuanian president vetoed the measure last June, the Lithuanian parliament exercised its democratic right and overturned his veto. The law is due to take effect next March.

And so the European Parliament voted 349-218 to condemn the new law because they say it contravenes the European Convention on Human Rights. They insist that the law should therefore be repealed: it is inconsistent with EU membership.

And yet we are told that the education of children and parental rights are not a competence of the European Union. And the Irish were duped into believing that the Lisbon Treaty (into which the Charter of Fundamental Rights is now incorporated) does not impinge upon national sovereignty in these areas.

The Lithuanian parliament has expressed ‘regret’ and ‘deep concern’ that the European Parliament attempted to ‘doubt the lawfulness of the law passed by the great majority of the democratically elected parliament of a member state, although this issue should not fall under the jurisdiction of the EP’.

Yet the Lithuanian parliament can ‘regret’ and express ‘deep concern’ until the cows come home. When the European Court of Human Rights speaks, its pronouncements are ex cathedra, perfect wisdom, infallible. The will of ‘the democratically elected parliament of a member state’ is of no consequence.

Interestingly, Lithuanian Labour Party member Mecislovas Zasciurinskas asked if this is a one-off attempt to interfere with the affairs of a sovereign state or the beginnings of an absolute dictatorship. He said: “Some years back we called this ‘Moscow’s Grip,’ the tendency to meddle in everybody’s business…”

Is ‘Article 7’ the fate which awaits David Cameron’s quest to ‘repatriate’ certain competences under subsidiarity provisions? Are threats of expulsion the consequence of transgressing the divine right of the European Union?

The faithful communicant who brought this story to His Grace’s attention has attempted to get a transcript of the debate in the European Parliament. This was eventually provided, but he says that in order to understand what was going on, he would have needed to have been proficient in every European language that was used in the debate. Apparently the EP rapporteurs do not see fit to provide translations of the whole proceedings in a single language. No doubt to do so would provide too much transparency.

4 comments on this post.
  1. Yan:

    Perhaps they should ban any material that might ‘promote heterosexuality’. Like displaying heterosexual kisses and sex scenes, or displaying heterosexuality as normal, romantic, exciting, or pretty much anything else. No government in Europe should be free to pass bigoted laws like this, and I’m ashamed to be part of the same union as a backwards country like Lithuania.

  2. Andrew White:

    Amazing how many Christians want to criminalise people like myself living in stable gay relationships. How about if we ban christianity and churches and prayers? Christianity has killed and ruined more lives than anyone gay. Shame on you. Its time you supported all people in loving and consenting adult relationships.

  3. Rev. Pastor James Thompson:

    It is clear from our New Testaments – and also the moral teaching of the major churches down the decades – that promoting homosexuality is sinful. Indeed, to biologically substitute the channel of waste and defacation for that of the God ordained birth channel, is surely to substitute Christian love with that of carnal lust!

    Via sanctified sex we share with God in the process of bringing new life in to this world. Once you allow lust to take over, where does it end? Already, transvestites are seeking equal rights! Will it be Paedophiles next? True Christianity involves factors such as moral restraint and self denial. Yes, virtues that are played down by a permissive society now speedily being transformed in to the pernicious one.

    Yes, indeed, we are heading back to Sodom and Gomorrah because the people of God are becoming flabby and indulgent; void of virtuous moral fibre. Yes, spiritual jelly fish – lacking true backbone.

    We need to ‘fight the good fight’ not just against evil forces without but also within. And God forbid that we should put any stumbling block in the way of ‘one of these little ones’ by warping their young pliable minds. ‘Better for such a person that he had never been born!’

  4. Andrew White:

    Dear Pastor James… once again you show your ignorance of gay people. you assume that we are all into anal sex – i have met many many straight people who engage in it. I myself dont like it…. so there you are.

    despite this, there is nothing wrong with consenting adults engaging in a sexual practice they find pleasurable. Stop pointing the finger at gay people, and look at your own “sins” . stop picking bits of the bible that suit your own bigoted life views while ignoring others.