Commissioner Lahbib may find this ‘smart’, but for most Europeans it is simply an obscenity: not only is the European Commission redefining abortion as a ‘health service’ from the lectern of a press conference room in order to empower itself to finance it at the taxpayer’s expense, but in addition it wants to use the European Social Fund for this purpose, which in practice means that the funds to finance the killing of children will come precisely from a fund that was created with the purpose of helping the poor, the needy, and large families with small incomes. But the ESF, like any fund, is limited in size, and what is spent on killing children cannot be spent on helping the poor.

In other words: it is precisely the poor at whose expense the Commission wants to fund “abortion on demand”, the trademark of a morally irresponsible lifestyle. This is part of what they call “Social Policy”.

Continue reading “Plundering the Social Fund” →

The surprising announcement yesterday afternoon by Commissioners Lahbib and Mînzatu that abortions can now be financed by the European Social Fund (ESF+) is probably one of the most outrageous abuses of power in the history of the European Union, which is by no means lacking in such brazen transgressions. It is an attempt to change existing law without any legislative procedure, simply by means of a ‘communication’ – suddenly interpreting it in a completely different way than it has been understood until now. The Commission, to believe its own words, thinks that this is ‘smart’.

No, this course of action is not at all ‘smart’, but it is a clear violation of EU Treaties, which require that legal changes can only be enacted through legal procedures, not simply by holding a press conference in which it is announced that a law has, for reasons unknown, changed its meaning overnight. It also shows that the Von-der-Leyen Commission, which lectures everyone else on the importance of the “rule of law”, has a rather cavalier approach to that foundational legal principle and, it must be suspected, has probably no clue what that term even means. From a constitutional point of view, this rupture of constitutionality and breach of the rule of law is without doubt illegal and should give every democrat cause for concern, regardless of their worldview. If the executive power is allowed to re-interpret rules in this way, then nothing and nobody is secure anymore.

Continue reading “Legislating by press statement??? The Commission’s policy announcement on abortion is grossly unconstitutional” →

ONE OF US alarmed by the European Commission’s decision to fund abortions

The European Federation ONE OF US notes that no new EU fund will be created by the European Commission to finance cross-border abortion but expresses its deep concern and indignation at the European Commission’s response to the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) My Voice, My Choice’. For the first time, the Commission will open the possibility for an existing fund, the ESF+ (European Social Fund Plus), to finance abortion.

Continue reading “PRESS RELEASE: Statement by ONE OF US on the abortion initiative ‘My Voice, My Choice’” →

Interview of the Italian newspaper Il timone with the president of Movimento per la Vita (and former president of ONE OF US)

Continue reading “Marina Casini: ‘My Voice My Choice? That’s how Europe would pay for trips abroad to have abortions.’” →

According to latest infformation, the European Commission’s response to the highly controversial pro-abortion ECI “My Voice, My Choice” willl be presented this afternoon at a press conference in Brussels by Vice-President of the Commission for Social Rights Roxana Minzatu and European Commissioner for Equality Hadja Lahbib. The Commission, it has transpired, will not propose new legislation. Instead, it might provide provide Member States with “guidelines on how to use European funds to finance abortion services”.

If such guidelines are indeed published, or if EU funds are indeed used to fund abortions, this would not only stand in contradiction to the statement published by the Commission in reaction to the ONE OF US initiative in 2014, which remains the by far most successful ECI in terms of statements of support collected, but it would also raise serious legal questions. Since the EU has no competences concerning abortion, it has also no right to finance abortions. Any use of EU funds for such purposes would thus very likely be illegal.

Today’s press conference on the abortion initiative ‘My Voice, My Choice’, one day before the expected publication by the European Commission, is a particularly disgusting attempt to politically exploit the suffering of a woman who is probably not even aware of how she and her situation are being used. The abortion lobby has once again exposed itself – its inconsistency in argumentation, its cavalier and manipulative approach to facts, its willingness to drag the private lives of others into the public eye whenever it seems politically ‘useful’.

The press conference does not seem to have attracted many journalists, but a video has been put on internet. We put it here because we believe it ultimately will not help the pro-abortion campaign, but instead provides a striking illustration how the abortion lobby routinely seeks to influence public opinion and political decisions through the manipulative use of sensationalist snippets of information.

Continue reading “Stirring up moral panic for political purposes: “Right now, a woman dies because…”” →

Apparently, the European Commission’s position on the abortion initiative is not yet a foregone conclusion. The abortion lobby is mobilising all its forces to put pressure on the Commission, with advertisements, open letters and even threats of legal action. And Equality Commissioner Hadja Lahbib, whose ideological bias on this issue is no secret (but in fact a logical necessity, because the appointment of an Equality Commissioner can in itself have no other purpose than that of institutionalising the ideological bias that Ms. Lahbib stands for!) , is optimistic that she will be able to overturn the leaked draft, which appears to deny the organisers of the initiative some of what they are demanding, at the last minute.

Will there be a contentious vote within the Commission, and does the Commissioner hope to win over a majority of her colleagues to a counter-proposal, which would mean that the Commission would, as one must assume, override the expertise of its own Legal Service?

Continue reading “Commissioner Lahbib is “very confident” that Commission will endorse abortion. And 105 left-wing MEPs threaten legal action if it doesn’t” →

Today, Politico magazine is publishing a full-page advertisement in the form of an open letter to the European Commission. Twenty-six signatories, including internationally renowned politicians such as Hillary Clinton, Justin Trudeau, Mary Robinson, Tarja Halonen, Dalia Grybauskaite, Sanna Marin, and several other lesser-known figures, are calling on the Commission to break EU law in order to establish a special fund to finance abortion tourism, as demanded by the pro-abortion ‘My Voice, My Choice’ initiative. Bizarrely, abortion is framed as “a step for equality”, as if creating a “right” for one category of people (women) to kill another category of people (children before birth) were not one of the most striking and self-evident examples of inequality.

This advertisement alone cost €15,000. It is financed by an (obviously well-funded) American group called Vital Voices Global Partnership, which states on its website that it is funded by the American government, but also by various major private donors such as the Gates Foundation, PayPal, Verizon, Airbnb, Uber, Google, Procter & Gamble, and others. It is unclear whether this is part of the ECI’s officially stated expenditure, which already is close to 1 million Euro.

Continue reading “The pro-abortion initiative has a lot of money and a lot of political clout. But it lacks support from citizens” →

The interested public is eagerly awaiting the publication of the European Commission’s opinion on the ECI ‘My Voice, My Choice’, which is now expected on Thursday because the Commission’s weekly meeting has been postponed by one day. The spokesperson for the initiative’s organising committee, Nika Kovač, is already close to tears because she has heard that the special fund to promote abortion tourism will probably not materialise. But if one is to believe the Dutch newspaper “De Volkskrant”, which claims to have seen a draft of the text to be released by the Commission, then the pro-life movement has also no reason to be satisfied, but rather cause for protest.

Continue reading “Did the European Commission lie when it responded to ONE OF US in 2014???” →

After an e-mail campaign with fake senders and an NGO campaign with fake NGOs, now there is also an open letter from ‘leading legal scholars’ with fake science. The notorious US-based Centre for Reproductive Rights (CRR) has posted a letter from around 30 so-called ‘leading legal scholars’ on the internet, with which it apparently hopes to sway the European Commission’s decision on the ‘My Voice, My Choice’ abortion initiative at the very last minute.

It may be the case that all the signatories are professors at law faculties – but their output is such that one must seriously question their professional and characterial qualifications for this. Not only do they express themselves with extreme confidence on a matter that is essentially outside their field of expertise, but they also misquote and spread untruths that are easily recognisable for everyone. If this letter is meant to harness the prestige of the authors in support of the pro-abortion campaign, the sad conclusion that any serious-minded reader will draw that there has never been any comparable sell-out of academic reputation for the purpose of promoting an ideologically motivated political purpose.

We charitably refrain from mentioning on this page the names of those who, by signing up to this delusional and self-undermining strange piece of workmanship. Whoever wants to know who the authors are can find them listed on the CRR’s website (unless, and until, following better insight and in order to protecting the signatories from the damage they are inflicting on themselves, CRR decides to withdraw the list). On the other hand, however, and much to our regret we cannot simply leave this so-called ‘expert opinion’ uncommented.

Continue reading “‘Leading legal scholars’ support the abortion campaign” →