Gender ideology pushed at EU through bogus data methods: pro-family groups
BRUSSELS,– Pro-family organisations are again sounding the alarm across Europe at an attempt by homosexual activist EU politicians to force member states to teach children “gender ideology” under the guise of mandatory “sex education,” programmes that would include promotion of homosexual activity as normative.
At the same time, the groups are calling foul on the methods used to obtain the data being used to back the effort, accusing the EU’s Fundamental Rights Agency of fabricating data to bring about a foregone, ideologically motivated conclusion.
Some time between February 3rd and 6th the European Parliament is expected to debate and vote upon the report by Ulrike Lunacek, an Austrian MEP and the co-president of the European Parliament’s homosexual rights group.
The Lunacek Report, titled “Roadmap against homophobia and discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity,” seeks to force all member states to implement a “sex education” mandate that will, opponents say, impose “gender ideology” on even very young children.
The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), in the UK, has reissued their warning against the report in a media release from earlier this month and translated it into French, German, Italian, Portuguese and Spanish.
SPUC warns that the Lunacek Report is calling for EU-wide recognition of homosexual unions across all borders and calls upon member-states to register so-called “hate crimes” against homosexuals, the definition of which is left up to homosexualist activists. The report demands criminal legislation covering “sexual orientation and gender identity” that is to be unified across the EU.
It demands also that the EU Commission continue its current monitoring of homosexual and gender identity issues in countries applying for EU membership, in order to make acceptance a precondition.
SPUC said, “These attacks [on natural marriage] inevitably leave very many innocent and vulnerable victims. Marriage as an institution protects children, both born and unborn.”
J.C. von Krempach, J.D., a lawyer who works with the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute, said the process for bringing the report to the European Parliament has been a “grotesque” exercise in the outright fabrication of data.
Writing on the website of the European Centre for Law and Justice, von Krempach said that the EU’s Fundamental Rights Agency compiled data for the process of bringing the report to the table, “with a brilliant example how to use bogus surveys and statistics in order to manipulate the public opinion.”
He also notes that the Lunacek report seems “set to become a new milestone in the European Parliament’s history: the most unpopular non-binding document the House has ever debated.” He recalls the online grassroots campaign opposing the previous Estrela Report, which sought to impose restriction-free abortion throughout the EU, “drew an estimated 80,000 protest e-mails.”
Lunacek, he said, seems to have prompted “even stronger discontentment” with more than 60,000 EU citizens having already signed petitions asking MEPs to vote against it, and “the mobilization is just beginning.”
Core Issues Trust, a UK-based group that defends the rights of people with homosexual desires to leave the lifestyle, issued a statement asking for EU citizens to oppose the report. The Trust blasted the EU’s Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) for bias in its data collection.
The FRA has provided a website that gives the findings being used to justify the Lunacek Report. But the Trust says that they have failed “to properly define the survey’s population group, that is, who its participants were and how the data were collected.”
The survey asked respondents if they have “felt discriminated against” during “the last 12 months” because they were homosexual. Forty-seven per cent said “yes” throughout the EU as a whole. The Trust, however, cited a recent analysis by the National Health Service in Britain, the “Adult Psychiatric Morbidity in England, 2007” study, that found only 4.9 per cent of respondents answering “yes” to the same question.
“That is 4.9 per cent compared with 44 per cent. Something is seriously wrong,” the Trust said.
The Trust also noted that the NHS survey was a poll of the general population, which would have been “likely to embrace ordinary homosexuals and not just activists” when asking questions about sexual orientation.
“By contrast, the EU Study was specifically concerned with LGBT issues and was therefore likely to attract a disproportionate number of activists who see it as an opportunity to advance their cause.”
The Brussels watchdog group, European Dignity Watch (EDW), also warned in 2012 when the survey was announced, that the EU was spending €370,000 of taxpayers’ money on a survey, the results of which would certainly be a foregone conclusion.
“The claims are predictable: laws need to be changed, privileges granted, dissenting opinion prosecuted as ‘hate speech’. Now the ‘facts’ have to be fabricated.”
Sophia Kuby, head of EDW, wrote, “In a few months from now, the EU Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) will publish an alarming report, affirming that the rampant discrimination of homosexuals and lesbians is one of the most serious social problems in the EU, and that radical legislative measures are necessary to address it.
“We may safely assume that the report is already in the course of being drafted. What is still missing, however, are the ‘facts’ on which the report will be based. These still need to be fabricated.”
Click here to sign the Lunacek-no petition.
Click here to contact the MEPs for your country.
