Rocco Buttiglione

[flanker]

I am almost apoplectic with rage: why can't this man be an EU commissioner just because, as a result of his deeply held religious beliefs, he happens to think homosexuality is wrong?

 

Granted it is an outdated belief, but it is a belief nonetheless and he should not be hounded out of his job because of it.

 

What's next, banning meat eaters becuase it upsets the lentil brigade?

[georgit79]

flanker, you've made a very good point. I wouldn't be surprised if loads of them secretly have a problem with gays but don't have the balls (irony?) to go public with their beliefs.

Although, sometimes I think that stating that you are against homosexuality does mean that this is always going to be an issue.

[georgit79]

and banning meat eaters wouldn't be the same thing. You'd have to say instead banning people who think vegetarianism is morally wrong.

[flanker]

Yep, my last para wasn't particularly well put, but you get my point - In fact, the thing that annoys me is he has been hounded out of his job because the people responsible were concerned that his comments would upset homosexuals - which is nannying to homosexuals in the extreme - I haven't heard any homosexuals jumping up and down demanding he be removed.

[georgit79]

...and in the era of free speech to all as well...

[cruthinboy]

The apotheosis of the liberal!

[camille79]

I guess the thing to ask is what would the reaction be if the comments were made about blacks/jews/muslims/women/ continue ad nauseum.  There is no place in modern politics for such comments, he should have kept them to himself.

[Fat Boy]

surely the point is that it is illegal to discriminate against people because of their sexual orientation. how can you trust a man to serve the people when he has openly stated that a particular cross-section of those people shouldn't be allowed to have homosexual relationships. can't get much more discriminating than that.

[cruthinboy]

Yes, but he presumably disagrees with that as is his right!

[cruthinboy]

Yes, but he presumably disagrees with that -  as is his right!

[georgit79]

but in the same way, Fat Boy, it should also be illegal to discriminate against someone because of his/her views on a subject....?

[cruthinboy]

Wht don't we ban Tories and LibDems as they "disagree" with a  labour Government?

[flanker]

OK, where do we draw the line? I am a lapsed catholic (very lapsed in fact - I don't believe in god), and  catholicism does consider homosexuality to be a sin. Does that mean that devout catholics who embrace their faith and are therefore obvioulsly opposed to homosexuality are not allowed to be EU Commissioners? Lets go further, as Italy is a catholic nation, does that mean that Italians who are catholic are not allowed to be EU Commissioners?  

 

The racism and sexism argument doesn't work in this case because catholicism doesn't teach that it is a sin to be a woman to be black etc...

[camille79]

True, catholicism doesn't discriminate on grounds of colour etc but were the commissioner muslim I doubt it would be acceptable for him to refuse to meet the eye of a female or treat her as an equal.  People can hold and follow any beliefs they wish but, when in the public domain, it would seem prudent to keep any potentially inflamatory comments to themselves. 

[flanker]

Is that right about the Muslim eye thing? Not allowed to look a woman in the eye? I had no idea. What a horrible way to go through life - I think one of the most attractive parts of a woman are her eyes.

 

.....................she's got to have a great a4se too though (c'mon, its Friday).

 

Serious about the eyes thing though - I had no idea.

[Oneeyedvic]

crutinboy - do you really belive what you write - I am now really curious. When this was mentioned on a different thread, I found it fairly insensitive - obviously we are all entitled to our opinions.

 

I have found myself agreeing with you on some issues, and not on others. But what you say about the hypothetical  muslim eu commissioner and the liberal group (which I certainly do not fall into - though I was one who said Ken Bigley took his own risks) is just weird. Is it purely for effect or what?

 

I also do like to play Devil's advocate and were wondering if you play the same game or were you serious?

[el duerino]

yes I completely agree. another example of mob justice served up to appease the masses with little grasp of what they are actually doing. ffs, we cannot even have opinions these days. in balancing discrimination against free speech we have failed to preserve free speech, its that simple. I believe we should be able to say whatever we want, when we want, how we want with perhaps the exception being the incitement of a criminal act. When are we going to ditch the double standards?

 

ps although it was slightly unprofessional to mention such personal opinions in the public forum.

[bernardo]

It would be wrong to stop him from being an EU commissioner "just because of" his moral / religious views about gay people.  However, in his case, he is unsuitable for the job because he has not kept his private views separate from the way he does the job.  He has sought to remove sexual orientation from the list of criteria to be given legal protection from discrimination; and as a member of the Italian government he was partially responsible for the removal of asylum seekrs from Italy to Tunisia before they had had a chance to be assessed properly.

 

When I first heard about his anti-gay remarks, I was not bothered, because he is entitled to his views, and I would not have wanted him to be removed from the position for that reason alone - but a few days later I heard about the way in which his views are being translated into public policy.

 

You also say "I haven't heard any homosexuals jumping up and down demanding he be removed".  I have heard such demands (predictably) from Peter Tatchell, but also (not predictably) from Michael Cashman MEP.

 

[Hgrove]

My thoughts are as follows.  Basically, whilst people are entitled to their own beliefs etc., I would not like to be governed, or to have in the Commission, someone who might try to steer policy and law-making towards his religious beliefs.  I do not wish the law to state that divorce/contraception/abortion/sex outside marriage (you name it) are illegal.  There is a danger that someone like Buttiglione would try and bring in those laws by stealth.  The Commission is the main EU body with the task of initiating laws.  The Council and the Parliament can request the Commission to make law on certain issues but the Commission is not obliged to act on their suggestions and the Council and the Parliament are not allowed to make laws themselves. So being on the Commission is a highly sensitive job.  I would be concerned that someone with strong religious beliefs would try and legislate according to his own beliefs.

[Alej]

He is entitled to his opinion, but this opinion is linked to his religious beliefs, which have no place in politics.  If he was inteligent enough to be an EU commisioner he would have known that he should keep his religious views to himself - its not like this is the first time this kind of thing has happened.