The Assembly of the Council of Europe
denounces intolerance and discrimination against Christians (
February 13, 2015
The Assembly of the Council of Europe encourages “reasonable accommodation” and denounces intolerance and discrimination against Christians The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) voted this Thursday, January 29, 2015 a Resolution on “Tackling intolerance and discrimination in Europe, with a special focus on Christians” (Res. 2036).
In a pluralistic and tolerant spirit, the text adopted
by 67 votes against 2 aims primarily to remember that if religious minorities
in Europe are victims of discrimination and intolerance, Christians are also victims of attacks and hate, without
being as well protected.
The purpose of this text is to recall the equal rights
of all denominations.
Christians suffer two major injustices according to the
author of the text, Valeriu Ghiletchi (Moldovan, European People’s Party
(EPP)). They are the first victims of vandalism: cemeteries defaced, churches
vandalised, priests attacked and faith mocked. Several cases of physical and
material damage are identified in the explanatory memorandum. The text also
denounces unfair restrictions on freedom of conscience and expression of
Christians: bishops are sued for preaching against marriage between persons
of the same sex (Belgium, Ireland and Spain), nurses are forced to practice
abortions against their conscience (Norway), conferences and seminars are
prohibited (Austria, UK), civil servants are forced to marry same-sex couples
(UK, Netherlands), and German parents are sentenced to fines and even to
prison sentences for withdrawing their children from sex education classes. The author cites numerous cases, affairs and testimonies
across
The amendments adopted during the meeting recall the right
of religious communities to be legally recognized and to publish spiritual
books. Turkey was particularly targeted by
these amendments, because it still does not recognize the existence of the
Catholic Church and other Christian denominations, especially the Syriacs’
and Protestant churches, which constitute real obstacles to religious
freedom.
Only one amendment concerned the application
of “reasonable accommodation” and
proposed to“ensure that religious beliefs are not used as a pretext for
discrimination towards any particular minority”. For example, some fear
that by allowing conscientious objection for doctors, women seeking abortion
could no longer find one who would perform such an act. But as the rapporteur
says in its explanatory memorandum, the fact that about 80 Christian
officials in the
The doctrine of reasonable accommodation is
relativistic and places “the culture of living together” at the top of
its values.
The doctrine of reasonable accommodation recommends the
tolerance, insofar as possible, of the expression in the public space of
various ideological and religious convictions.
Whereas the concept French “laïcité” is very strict in limiting the presence
of religion in public space and to ensure the monopoly of secular thinking,
reasonable accommodations theory postulates
that in a multicultural context, one must be flexible and respect the beliefs
of everyone, so that everyone feels recognized and may live according to his
or her philosophy or religion, as long as they respect the values of
democracy.
If Mr Kox, (Unified European Left) was “not
convinced” by the text, only one member truly opposed it. This is the
French Yves Pozzo di Borgo who was the apostle of the “French secularism”.
But he was not supported: the only “secular” amendment also filed by five
French, was not even voted on as no one would defend it. This is proof that
the French thinking on secularism remains largely strange to the rest of
Finally, it may be pointed out that a third of the
members supported a hostile amendment to the European Court of Human Rights,
seeking to remove any reference to its case-law in the interpretation of the
European Convention on human rights, concerning the right of parents to
educate their children according to their beliefs.
Thus, through the vote of this Resolution, a signal is not
only sent to governments to take religious freedom into better account, but
also to the Court and its jurisprudence, which has become increasingly
detached from the spirit of the Convention.
|
Sursa : www.eclj.org
http://www.eclj.org/Releases/Read.aspx?GUID=f8875269-f2d2-4153-bbf7-a25a2cc58391&s=eur
Niciun comentariu:
Trimiteți un comentariu