Letter From Europe (About the European Parliament)

Controversial “Lunacek-Report” Draws Negative Publicity for European Parliament

Posted on | January 22, 2014 

By J.C. von Krempach, J.D.

Turtle Bay and Beyond

For many decades, the European Parliament had an image problem: it was considered unimportant and didn’t catch much attention. People had a certain interest in, and knowledge of, the politics of their own countries – but when it came to the EU’s 700 elected representatives, nobody really knew what they were doing, and, even worse, nobody actually wanted to know: it all seemed remote, boring, and irrelevant.

Over the last few years, this attitude has changed, and many people have become aware that the EU’s decisions directly affect them. There has been, in recent times, an increasing number of instances in which massively negative reactions from citizens have caused the EU to abandon ambitious policy initiatives. It began with the so-called “Bolkestein-Directive” on the free circulation of services, followed by the Software-Patenting-Directive, and ended with ACTA (the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement).


But all those so-called “shit-storms” had in common that they affected very important legislative proposals that, if adopted, would have had a concrete and measurable impact on people’s lives. Nowadays, however, the European Parliament is making a completely new experience: it continues provoking outrage and protest with so-called “initiative reports” that, if adopted, would have no binding effect.

Indeed, such “initiative reports” never caught any public attention. In fact, MEPs themselves (except, of course, those directly involved in drafting them) hardly took notice of their existence, let alone their content. But that has changed with the ominous “Estrela-Report”, in which some extremist left-wing MEPs with close links to the abortion industry tried to make the Parliament adopt an absurd text that would have elevated child-killing into the rank of a human right, and masturbation into a compulsory curriculum for toddlers aged 0-4. Completely unprecedented for a legally non-binding report, this draft managed to draw negative reactions from citizens, including a massive influx of protest letters and two protests on the Parliament’s premises, while inside the building it became the subject of two of the most tumultuous sessions in that institution’s history.

Citizens have become aware that inside the European Parliament there is a coalition of politicians who have as their common objective the destruction of culture and civilization, which they seek to replace with their fetishes: casual sex, homosexuality, abortion, and militant secularism.

Following the Estrela-Report’s narrow defeat, the newest attempt to push this anti-civilizational agenda comes in the guise of the “Lunacek-Report”, which has the purpose of replacing the traditional understanding of human rights through group-specific “gay rights”. If adopted, this report would lend an appearance of legitimacy to policies that would turn freedom of expression and protection against hate-speech into a group-specific privilege of homosexuals, while withholding similar protections from all non-homosexuals.

 Like the Estrela-Report, the Lunacek-Report is provoking a huge public outrage: two weeks prior to the vote, more than 10.000 citizens have already signed a petition against it. 10.000 signatures may not seem that many – but in fact in the European Parliament’s entire history there are not many petitions, and in particular not many non-binding “initiative reports”, that have drawn similar public interest and similarly negative reactions.

If so many citizens oppose the Lunacek-Report, is there a similarly important number of citizens in favour? So far, this does not appear to be the case. It is time for mainstream politicians in EU to understand that giving undue privileges to people with un-normal sexual behaviours is not likely to win them respect and support among normal citizens. If the upcoming elections to the EU are likely to be won by euro-sceptic movements, one of the core reasons may be that citizens feel abandoned by mainstream parties (such as the liberals, Christian-democrats, or socialists) that continue lending support, or fail to consistently oppose, the “queering” of society.

There is a growing estrangement between the electorate and a political caste that, instead of resolving the Euro-crisis and other serious issues, prefers to come up with solutions for which there is no problem.
Where are the happy times when the European Parliament was considered remote and irrelevant? The institution’s current image problems seem far worse than that. A clear and resounding NO to the Lunacek-Report could be a last chance for Europe’s political mainstream to avert the approaching disaster.