Tarabella Report: a self-contradictory outcome

The European Parliament has adopted the controversial Tarabella-Report on gender equality, but the outcome of the vote is contradictory. On the one hand, it was not possible to mobilize sufficient support from conservative MEPs to remove from the report language that bizarrely puts the abortion of children into the context of a “fundamental right” of women, while on the other hand an amendment was introduced to recall that all matters relating to abortion and “sexual and reproductive health” are in fact an exclusive competence of Member States, not of the EU. (This reconfirms what was already stated in the resolution that replaced the infamous “Estrela Report” in December 2013, and can thus be seen as a pro-life success)

As a result, the report adopted today is not only not legally binding (which is always the case for such so-called “initiative reports”), but it pronounces an EP position on a matter for which the EP, in the very same documents, asserts to have no competence.

The vote also has made clear that the S&D Group, of which rapporteur Marc Tarabella is a member, has a consistent policy aiming to frame the brutal killing of unborn children as a “fundamental right” of their mothers. According to a statement recently published, the group even wants to include this newly-discovered “right” into the EU Fundamental Rights Charter. This is the quintessence of their outdated concept of Feminism that, rather than valuing the femininity of women, considers it to be an obstacle to their happiness.

The S&D are thus distinguishing themselves as the European Parliament’s champions of child butchering, thus completely decredibilising anything that any member of this group utters with regard to universally applicable human rights. From a scientific point of view, it is completely uncontested and unchallenged that the human embryo, right from the moment of its conception, is a human individual that is separate and distinct from its mother. It logically and unavoidably follows that, as a human being, it must possess human dignity and human rights – otherwise, human rights would no more be “universal”. A “right to abortion” is therefore in complete contradiction to any serious-minded concept of human rights.

Advertisements