Van der Laan, Brands Kehris: LGBT agenda is important, parents’ rights aren’t

jurekThe members of the European Parliament’s LIBE Committee appear to have been informed of the three short-listed candidates for the post of Director of the EU Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) only one or two days before they were going to interview them – so it is no wonder that most of them seem to have been quite unaware of those candidates’ radical social agendas.

One of the few MEPs who apparently did inform himself prior to the hearing was Marek Jurek, a conservative MEP from Poland. When in the hearing he gets a chance to ask a question to Mrs. Lousewies van der Laan, he inquires about how she is gong to address the concerns of parents whose children are at risk of being indoctrinated with radical gender-ideology through compulsory “sex education” programmes that some countries impose on school children in open disrespect of the right of parents to be the primary educators of their children. Here is the question and the answer:

See what the lady is doing? She simply ignores the question that was put to her, and answers a question that Mr. Jurek didn’t ask. For her the rights of parents (which are well-established and universally recognized in documents such as the UDHR, the ECHR, or the EU Fundamental Rights Charter) appear to be of no importance at all, so she can simply ignore them. By contrast, what is important to her are so-called “LGBT Rights” that are not legally recognized in any major human rights treaty, but which she thinks should be the FRA’s absolute priority.

Mr. Jurek asked his question in Polish, and the (English) translation appears to have been far from perfect – but certainly his words were not translated into “Dear candidate, what do you think the FRA could do to increase the indoctrination of children with gender ideology”.  While of course we do not know which translation she has been listening to, it definitely seems like “LGBT Rights” are the only “rights” Mrs. van der Laan knows about – whereas parental rights simply do not seem to exist in the universe she inhabits.  

By the way, Mr. Jurek made allusion to Article 14 of the EU Fundamental Rights Charter, which stipulates:

Right to education

1. Everyone has the right to education and to have access to vocational and continuing training.
2. This right includes the possibility to receive free compulsory education.
3. The freedom to found educational establishments with due respect for democratic principles and the right of parents to ensure the education and teaching of their children in conformity with their religious, philosophical and pedagogical convictions shall be respected, in accordance with the national laws governing the exercise of such freedom and right.

It is evident that Mrs. van der Laan’s reading of this provision is competely lopsided: for her this Article speaks only of the right to education – and “education” is the indoctrination she and other politicians of her ilk want to compulsorily impose on other people’s children. Mr. Jurek, however, had referred to paragraph 3 of the provision, which is there precisely too underline the obligation to respect parents’ rights.

Mrs. van der Laan’s  selective and biased reading of the Charter that serves as the basis of the FRA’s work is disturbing when one thinks of her as a possible next Director of that Agency, pontificating on “Fundamental Rights” and “EU core values” all over the continent…

Mr. Jurek then asked the same question to Mrs. Brands Kehris, the candidate from Latvia:

Well… that’s hardly better. The candidate at least appears to have understood the question – but her answer is that, even though parental rights may be important, the indoctrination of children with gender ideology is even more important… these are, in her view, the EU’s core values…