Controversial „Lunacek-Report“ breaks all records: most unpopular non-binding EP resolution ever

By J.C. von Krempach, J.D. | January 26, 2014

The controversial “Lunacek-Report”, on which this blog was the first to publish an analysis, seems now set to become a new milestone in the European Parliament’s history: the most unpopular non-binding document the House has ever debated.

"Queering human rights": Ulrike Lunacek is the author of what might be the EP's most unpopular non-binding report in history.

When some weeks ago the so-called “Estrela-Report” drew an estimated 80.000 protest e-mails from angry EU citizens to their elected MEPs, many may have thought that this unprecedented mobilization of citizens was unlikely to be repeated. But the “Lunacek-Report” seems to spur even stronger discontentment. Petitions asking MEPs to vote against the draft have already been signed by more than 60.000 citizens, and the mobilization is just beginning. What seems to motivate many people to sign those petitions is that (according to the organizers) each signature automatically results in a protest letter being sent to each MEP. As one has heard from EP staff, the inboxes of MEPs are cracking full…

This illustrates what the "Lunacek-Report" seeks to implement: special rights and protection for one privileged group, whereas the rest of society is left to wait in the rain.

Of course, given that those e-mails have a standard text, no MEP will read them, or answer them, individually. As the drafter of the controversial report, Mrs. Ulrike Lunacek, has stated (with regard to the Estrela-Report, of which she also was a very supporter): “those e-mails go directly into the junk file. I don’t read them.”

CitizenGO organizes petitions against the Lunacek-Report in various languages

But even this kind of “junk” conveys a clear political message: citizens don’t want the Lunacek-Report. MEPs usually do notice what fills their junk files, and they do draw conclusions therefrom. Not all MEPs are as provocatively uninterested as Mrs. Lunacek in the opinions of the citizens they should be representing. They know that behind each of the 60.000 messages they have received so far there is a real and individual person, and that that person has a vote in the upcoming elections. And they also know that, given that it is all about a legally non-binding “initiative report”, 60.000 protest mails are a spectacularly high number, showing that people think there is something seriously wrong with the way in which some EU politicians seek to falsify the concept of human rights, turning it into an agenda of homosexual privileges.

Besides the deluge of written protest, on 2 February there will be public rallies in favour of marriage and family in various European capitals. These rallies, too, will voice protest against the Lunacek-Report, which is going to be voted (as we have come to expect, without debate!!!) in the European Parliament’s plenary just two days later.

Of course, there are also some politicians and media outlets who still seek to defend the controversial draft. Their main argument appears to be: the Lunacek-Report cannot have the negative effects that its opponents decry, because it is not legally binding. It is a mere recommendation. It is just harmless… So, apparently, the best argument in favour of the document is that it has no binding effect?? MEPs should vote for it, because it is irrelevant?? Well, if the supporters of the draft have nothing but this to say, then the case they want to make must be really weak.

And of course they want to downplay the public protest against their draft. 60.000 signatures, theymight  say, is not a big deal. But, on the other hand, is there any similar mobilization in favour of the report?? Who, except the usual lunatic fringe inside the EP, does actually want the EU to adopt such a paper?

Shortly before the EU elections, it is time for politicians in Europe to understand that the radical LGBT agenda has no support within the electorate. In particular the Christian-democrat European People’s Party (EPP) should be aware that lending support to a document like the Lunacek-Report is not what they have been elected for. The EPP is expected to lose up to 100 of the seats it currently occupies. It’s inertia regarding the attempts of the political left to re-invent human rights may be part of the explanation.

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter