FRENCH PEOPLE AGAINST THE RIGHT TO ‘MARRIAGES’ OF THE SAME-SEX PEOPLE
Włodzimierz Rędzioch talks with Eugenia Rocella – a vice-president of the Commission for Social matters of the Italian Parliament, a participant of the Paris manifestation on 26 May 2013 against the legalization of homosexual couples
The social movement ‘Manif ‘pour ‘tous’ (Manifestation for everybody) on 26 May 2013 organized another demonstration in Paris against introducing the right to marriages of homosexual couples by the socialistic government of France. Eugenia Rocella, the vice-president of the Commission for Social Matters of the Italian Parliament was invited for the manifestation in Paris. I conducted an interview with her, for better understanding the significance of the general mobilization of the French society against the ‘anthropological revolution’, imposed on the French people by president Holland. (W. R.)
WŁODZIMIERZ RĘDZIOCH: – The French authority and pro-governmental media emphasized that in the manifestation which had taken place on 26 May 2013 in Paris, was attended by only 150 thousand people. It is obvious that it was meant in order to diminish the significance of the protests of the society. How many protesters were in reality?
EUGENIA ROCCELLA: – There were at least a million of us, considering the fact that the square ‘Esplanade des Invalides’ where the manifestation took place, was completely crowded with people and it has 10 hectares. One can just look at photos. Besides three processions met together on this square and there was not even enough place for everybody.
– Who belongs to the movement ‘Manif pour tous’?
– This is a movement which was set up in a bottom-up way, a spontaneous movement, which organizes itself and finances itself on its own. In majority it consists of young people – one can just say that a man responsible for safety and technical aspects of the manifestation was 22 years old, similarly as a presenter who was not a professional. France was considered as a country which is very secularized, but it is just the country in which the society started to revolt. Certainly, the movement consists of many associations – there are family associations, pro-life movements, etc. It gathers supporters of various political parties and believers of various religions- in majority these are Catholics. Although this movement is not an initiative of the Catholic Church, the Church shares the anxieties and fears of the society.
– You were asked, as the only politician from Italy, to speak at the time of the manifestation. What did you say in your speech?
– I said that the homosexual ‘marriage’ cannot be treated as a method of granting the same right to everybody. Marriage is not an individual right, but a thousand-year-old institution, which is not ‘widened’ in this way, but completely deprived of a sense- its purpose is giving life, so, it is supposed not to protect a married couple but offspring. All people are children of a man and a woman – children of a father and a mother. If we start to negate what is fundamental in our human nature, an objection spontaneously appears. Because we still want to call our parents ‘dad’ and ‘mum’, we want our children to call us in this way. This is the essence of the matter, and it has nothing in common with homophobia.
– What is hidden behind demands of acknowledging a relation of the same-sex people as marriage and the right for adoption by homosexual couples, introducing the gender ideology, establishing laws against homophobia? What is the stake in this game?
– We should note the fact that in all countries where partnership relations were introduced, ‘marriages’ between the same-sex people were recognized. It happened so in Denmark and Portugal, and recently – in France and in England. In Germany the Constitutional Court granted all marriage rights to partnership couples.
– Some people deluded themselves that by acknowledging partnership relations, the introduction of ‘the same-sex marriage’ would be avoided…
– It is not completely so. The purpose of the organization of homosexuals are not partnership relations or some individual rights, guaranteed by already existing rights or by legislation. The problem lies in the fact that they are aiming at complete perversion of the notion of marriage and differences in sexes. It is the same with homophobia – only ordinary legal provisions would be enough in order to fight against this phenomenon. Therefore, is there a desire to create a special category of discriminated people? This all is meant to prepare an area for the ‘marriage’ of the same-sex people, with a possibility of adopting children through laboratory practices, in order to receive a right for inheriting pensions. However, this all is contradictory with anthropology on which our civilisation used to be based.
A big problem connected with demands of homosexual groups are techniques of in vitro. It is not accidental that the next step of Holland was to be surrogate motherhood, in practice hiring a uterus. Adoption of children is only going to legalize the idea of having children by homosexual couples, which just now use the possibility of a new market of artificial conception.
Today gametes and embryos are sold. In the United States there are even special banks where it is possible to buy embryos. An uterus is hired, as if motherhood and fatherhood could be reduced to a ‘biological mixture’. Thanks to modern techniques of artificial conception, a child can have a genetic material of four people, that is, have 4 biological parents and two- two female/ two male ‘social’ parents. We do not know how far there will be consequences of this genetic chaos on the plan of physical and psychic health. Unfortunately, the victims of the procedures are women, because this big business is developing around their bodies.
– What can people do in other countries, who do not want to look passively at the perverse vision of the human being and family, imposed on us?
– I think that the example of France is very important. In Catholic Italy such a reaction would be obvious, in Spain Zapatero protests of the society were immediately defined as uprisings of clergy - reactive groups, opposing the progress. In France, after 13 years of partnership relations (Pacte Civile de Solidarite – PACS), against which nobody was protesting, Holland did not expect the reaction of the society at all, the reaction which was so general, long and determined. The President resorted to the policy of the so-called done facts, by introducing the law a month earlier, but the society reacted, because Holland had hurt deep feelings of people. This is a sign opposing to domineering trends, and it proves that touching some delicate strings causes a reaction of the society.
– What can we all do?
– First of all, everyone should act and conduct a fight in his own country. Secondly- we should organize a European net of resistance. In Europe, through judicial verdicts, EU resolutions, pressures from homosexual communities in particular countries, there are attempts to destroy the notion of sexes, understood as a man and a woman. Homosexual ‘marriage’ becomes something obvious, and a normal result of progress, and not a radical anthropological transformation of unknown consequences.
– How does it happen that aggressive homosexual groups have unconditional support of most cultural, media and political communities?
– First of all, it should be explained that the campaign of homosexual groups was a prepared in the 80s of the XX century marketing operation which was very successful. The purpose of this campaign was to convince people that homosexuals are fighting for equality, and against discrimination. In the same years it was possible to observe a process of loosening social relations in the society and more individualization of the society, where every person is aiming only at achieving their own happiness, understood as realizing of current desires. In this way, the anti-family culture was created, because the family was shown as a place of violence and repression, especially of women and children. Christopher Lasch was speaking about ‘anti-family culture’ in the 70s of the last century. After some time, when the Christian personalism was replaced by individualism without roots, the human being became, first of all, a consumer, and not a person living in the network of inter-human relations. But the idea of complete self-determination is not consistent with reality. It can only be said that the human being is born in the womb of a woman, that is, he has a very strong relation with another person. In childhood, in his old age, during an illness, in periods of weaknesses, the man depends on others, like others need us. If we understand freedom as independence from the network of human relations, then there appear an idea of happiness perceived as the realization of egoistic desires and abolition of any restrictions, as there has been a notion of limit, restriction in the western culture so far.
– While the French people were manifesting in defence of the marriage of a woman and a man, at the festival in Cannes the Golden Palm was granted to a film about love between two women, with sex scenes. The homosexual propaganda is running at full speed.
– Homosexual marketing was acting and is acting very well. It proves that it is not allowed to speak about homosexuals discrimination, because the same–sex couples are completely accepted in political, cultural environments and media, so special rights against homophobia are not necessary.
– In the end, I would like to touch on a very worrying issue: the French police was arresting protesters. The most known activists of the movement must have an escort for fear of attacks. Cooperators and volunteers of the ‘Manif’ movement became the object of curses and physical aggressions. Did the French democracy become Jacobean?
– Unfortunately, it did. In the Western Europe there is a domineering cultural attitude which is not only politically correct, but it must be ‘secularly correct’. On the guard of this autocratic secularism there are also state apparatuses. For this reason we, the Catholics, are facing up to an enormous problem of religious freedom which is systematically restricted.
I will give one particular example. During my stay in Paris I was living in a hotel in the centre of the city. In order to check the text of my speech, which I had prepared it in French, I asked for help in the reception. One of employees also spoke Italian and helped me correct the text. Next day this girl – a practicing Catholic woman – also attended the manifestation. On these days I got a message from her that they wanted to dismiss her from work for alleged homophobic behavior and for organizing ‘a party meeting’ in the hotel! She had to ask an attorney for help and it is not known how this matter will end. The situation is really getting difficult.
– It looks like hunting alleged homophobes. Who knows whether in Europe there will not be ‘Crystal nights’ against Catholics who are politically incorrect…