Pro-Life Counseling Becomes Illegal in France
by MARIE MEANEY
France, the land of the French Revolution, of liberty, fraternity, and equality, is displaying few of these qualities these days. Not that the French revolutionaries ever did in their time. They guillotined those who belonged to the wrong class, the wrong (i.e. losing) political party, those adhering to Church and King and ultimately each other. It is no consolation, however, that the revolution ended eating its own children. These days France is guillotining free speech. It is forbidding anybody from trying to convince women not to abort their unborn child. No information may be tendered on the internet or in counseling regarding potential negative consequences of abortion. The latter are considered lies and if caught spreading them, one faces 2 years in prison and up to $37,000 (€30,000) in fines.
Jean Frédéric Poisson, the deputy for the department of the Yvelines, president of the small Christian-Democrat party, and a presidential candidate who unfortunately only got 2 percent in the primaries last November—though he is the most consistent, most pro-life and most Catholic candidate out there—spoke out against this new law which passed from the national assembly to the French Senate and back. As he pointed out, if there is freedom of thought, there must also be freedom of speech. If one proceeded to shut down every site with false information, the French socialist website should have been closed long ago. The right answer would have been to explain how these claims are false (which they are not), start a public debate, rather than dogmatically ban everybody who doesn’t follow the party line.
The politically correct opinion these days is that abortion is not only an innocuous intervention, but also a woman’s right to the point that she may not hear any reasons against it (for those reasons are by definition mendacious). False information spread by the pro-abort side, on the other hand, is free from any criminal penalty. Hence, the woman may not be given any alternatives to abortion, which might persuade her to change her mind. Ironically, these lawmakers believe that women are not autonomous enough to make their own choices if presented with contrary information. One may well wonder who respects women’s “rights” more, the pro-abortion or the pro-life side?
.............
Read more: www.crisismagazine.com
France, the land of the French Revolution, of liberty, fraternity, and equality, is displaying few of these qualities these days. Not that the French revolutionaries ever did in their time. They guillotined those who belonged to the wrong class, the wrong (i.e. losing) political party, those adhering to Church and King and ultimately each other. It is no consolation, however, that the revolution ended eating its own children. These days France is guillotining free speech. It is forbidding anybody from trying to convince women not to abort their unborn child. No information may be tendered on the internet or in counseling regarding potential negative consequences of abortion. The latter are considered lies and if caught spreading them, one faces 2 years in prison and up to $37,000 (€30,000) in fines.
Jean Frédéric Poisson, the deputy for the department of the Yvelines, president of the small Christian-Democrat party, and a presidential candidate who unfortunately only got 2 percent in the primaries last November—though he is the most consistent, most pro-life and most Catholic candidate out there—spoke out against this new law which passed from the national assembly to the French Senate and back. As he pointed out, if there is freedom of thought, there must also be freedom of speech. If one proceeded to shut down every site with false information, the French socialist website should have been closed long ago. The right answer would have been to explain how these claims are false (which they are not), start a public debate, rather than dogmatically ban everybody who doesn’t follow the party line.
The politically correct opinion these days is that abortion is not only an innocuous intervention, but also a woman’s right to the point that she may not hear any reasons against it (for those reasons are by definition mendacious). False information spread by the pro-abort side, on the other hand, is free from any criminal penalty. Hence, the woman may not be given any alternatives to abortion, which might persuade her to change her mind. Ironically, these lawmakers believe that women are not autonomous enough to make their own choices if presented with contrary information. One may well wonder who respects women’s “rights” more, the pro-abortion or the pro-life side?
.............
Read more: www.crisismagazine.com
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario