I can't see what all the fuss is about this guy.
Last night on Vincent Browne one of the MP's suggested that it was fine for him to hold these views privately as long as his "public views" were in line with the EU principles.
But that's hyprocisy. I'd much rather know where a politician stood. If his views were popular enough then there would be enough like minded MEP's to ratify him.
The fact is that this is exactly what democracy is about. Baroso stupidly put forward a candidate who's beliefs were likely to be unpopular with a majority of MEPs.
Had he appointed this man to another position I'm sure a majority of MEP's would have decided that although they disagreed with his beliefs, they could still accept him in a role where those beliefs were not relevant.
I don't buy this nonsence about the EU not being able to tolerate other beliefs, etc. Or being anti-religous or anti-Catholic.
Would the MEP's be expected to accept a communist in a financial portfolio???? In the Interests of inclusion???? Of course not. Perhaps we should tolerate commissioners who believe that whites are the superior race, to do otherwise would show intolerance and prejudice. Nonsence. It's perfectly acceptable to intolerant of the intolerant.
You'd be hard pressed to find a majority of Catholics who share this mans beliefs, much less a majority of Europeans.
When the day comes that the Catholic Churches bigotry is accepted by a majority of Europeans, then there will be enough Bigoted MEP's to ratify nominations like this.
Until then, Y'all are just going to have to accept that Europe is a Secular Liberal Society, and the Catholic Church's beliefs are incompatible with the beliefs of the society as a whole.
Far from a crisis, this is the EU showing that it works.
It's a confirmation of Europes Liberal Secular position, which
I welcome.
-Rd