When French students are obliged to justify abortion...

The French Baccalauréat (A-level) is a passage obligé for almost every French student who wishes to study in the university (even though its success rate is of almost 80 %). Well, in the last session, on June 9, the students who had an examination of sciences were confronted with an exam question asking them to develop, on the basis of an article of the newspaper Le Monde which was favourable to abortion, arguments for a legalization of abortion in France.

French catholic associations have denounced what they call a "heinous manipulation" obliging students who might be against abortion to argument in favour. The French association Choisir la vie threatened to begin an action in justice against the French state if the academic authorities do not renounce to evaluate students on the basis of that question (which was an optional question and which was graded for 2 points (on a total of 20).

Here are the questions as they were given in French:

Question 4 (2 points) Saisir des informations et mobiliser des connaissances pour argumenter
a) À l'aide du document 4, dégager des arguments en faveur de l'autorisation légale de l'IVG en France.
b) Argumenter l'idée selon laquelle l'avortement n'est pas considéré comme un moyen de contraception.

The question had to take support on this extract of article:

Document 4 : IVG : la stabilité des chiffres cache de nouveaux comportements. Trente ans après l'entrée en vigueur de Ia loi Veil, "la contraception et, en cas d'échec, le recours à l'IVG ont permis le passage d'un modèle de maternité sous contrainte à celui de maternité choisie, contribuant ainsi à redéfinir la parentalité au féminin, comme au masculin" estime "Population et Sociétés". Et, contrairement à ce qu'affirmaient les opposants à l'avortement lors de l'adoption de la loi, la légalisation de l'IVG n'a pas eu d'impact démographique. "Une IVG ne constitue pas une naissance en moins mais une naissance reportée à plus tard dans un contexte plus favorable" explique Mme Bayes. La fécondité française, qui avait fortement baissé de 1964 à 1976, est stabilisée : depuis trente ans, le nombre d'enfants souhaités par les français est inchangé et les femmes en ont toujours autant.
Source : Extrait du Monde du Jeudi 9 décembre 2004

You may find the whole document of the exam (in French) here . No further news were heard of the possible law suit against the State...

And here you may find a justification of the French academic authorities.

LESSONS OF THE ITALIAN REFERENDUM: THE FAILURE OF THE SECULARIST ACTIVISTS

In a new article published on the web site http://www.chiesa.espressonline.it/ of Sandro Magister, an analysis of Pietro Di Marco on the Italian referendum on assisted reproduction was published. Di Marco is a lecturer of Religion Sociology at the University of Florence and a specialist of Religious geopolitics.

The analysis is interesting because it gives some lessons on the influence of the « dictatorship of relativism » or, if you prefer the secular school of thought, and the ways of counterbalancing its influence.

Di Marco points out that there was a mobilization of the radical secular and feminist activists which accounts for about 20 % of the population. On the contrary, most of the population remained indifferent to ideological trends of the secular activists.

He also confirms the intelligence of choosing the strategy of abstention, since the secular activists had made the calculation that even a call to vote « no » would end up in giving a majority for the « yes » while ensuring that the quorum of 50 % + 1 would be obtained. Hence, the only viable strategy for opposing the referendum was of not voting. Nevertheless, even among those people who went to vote, about 12 % replied « no » to the first three questions (selection and use of embryos and therapeutical cloning) and 22 % replied « no » to the fourth questions (authorization of heterologous IVF).

Di Marco also stresses that the pro-referendum activism was the fact of « sociétés de pensées » which designate a section of the intelligentsia with secularist tendencies which tend to present themselves as having alone legitimacy to speak in the name of the society.

The phenomenon analysed by Di Marco is interesting in that it is reproduced also in France and in Belgium, where the same « intelligentsia » has deeply influenced (or sought to influence) evolutions in the fields of bioethics. Generally situated at the left of the political exchequer, this intelligentsia is also over-represented within university and secundary school lecturers.

The conclusion of Di Marco is that, in Italy at least, the conditions are present to establish a project of society between secularists and Catholics around a form of « Christian intelligence». This points out the necessity of developping a viable counter-argumentation around questions of bioethics, if life is to be defended.

To read the full article (in Italian) click here.

A Marking victory for the Church in Italy

As I had alluded in my previous post, the Italian referendum on assisted reproduction and other ethical questions failed to obtain the quorum required for the results to be validated.

The total participation was of only 26 %, one of the lowest participation rate in the Italian popular initiative history. The historically low participation got analysts rushing to attribute the victory to this or that factor. The Italian magazine Panorama attributed the loss of the referendum to the « menefreghismo » (absence of concern) of the people towards the « plight » of sterile couples deliberately refusing to consider the effect of the Church’s stance on the question, while other analysts considered that it was an outright victory for Cardinal Camillo Ruini and the Catholic Church.

An important factor stressed by some French medias was that the failure of the referendum was the first great victory of Benedict XVI’s papacy, in its fight against the « dictatorship of relativism ». The Pope had thrust himself into the battle expressly supporting the intervention of the Italian Church in the debate.

If there is a victory to be found, then it is a victory on two fields for the Church and I’ll delve into both these fields, but it also holds a dispiriting finding for the Italian society.

First of all, Cardinal Ruini had a modest triumph: « this is not my victory, I only did my duty » he said yesterday, as the polls had closed and the final participation was known.

But, in fact, it spells the victory first on the merits of the case, the first field of which I wrote, and in the second place, in the strategy chosen to obtain this victory.

French Newspapers stressed (notably Le Figaro) that the victory was also the failure of the referendum to mobilize the man on the street around controversial and complex ethical debates. They agreed to find that these subjects cannot be discussed in referenda. One can’t help thinking that had the Italian society decided the other way round, those newspapers would have held exactly the other reasoning. While one can agree that ethical subjects should never be submitted to demagogy, I also believe that it is impossible to legiferate on these subjects with compromise as an objective. One has to keep in mind a clear view of what is the Common Good, and seek to enforce it through legislation. Hence, the work of legislators as well, ought to be evaluated at the light of the Common Good. A vote given to a representative is not a blank check to act in our name: it requires also being accountable to the elector and to justify the decisions before a view of the Common Good.

Now, on the merits, it ought to be recalled that before the Act n° 40 was voted, Italy was a sort of lawless land as far as reproductive bioethics were concerned. Now, since this act was enforced, a legislation has finally come in place to rule the experimentations which were already verging on human reproductive cloning. The Italian people clearly did not wish to see that situation return to the status quo ante . On the other hand, one must notice that there was an adhesion of the Italian people to the message of the Church in those fields: therapeutical cloning and excessive manipulation (such as congealing) of embryos, and IVF for homosexuals were clearly refused. That has maybe also to do with another factor: the rebirth of Catholic practice in Italy, where according to media sources, about 40 % of the people are practising Catholics.

On the strategy of the Catholic Church in this referendum, the low participation confirmed that the best choice was to recommend abstention. In fact, by expressing through that gesture the protest against the confiscation of direct democracy to serve the interests of a fraction, the Church evidenced that it was a means of getting the voice of Catholics heard beyond the astounding silence of the medias.

The strategy of abstention was a two-fold sound strategy: first, it denied legitimacy to a scrutiny put in movement by a minority of the public opinion; secondly, it was the only strategy with a reasonable chance of success given the complexity of the questions voted.

However, the choice made of calling to abstain, and the whole weight of the Church thrown behind that choice, has also another more unexpected effect: not one party can claim victory, on the failure of this referendum. While a number of parties and of leaders had made the choice to call to vote « yes », and some as Romano Prodi, went as an « adult Catholic » to vote four times « no », none engaged unreservedly behind the abstention. Of course, there were courageous individual leaders who made the choice of announcing their support of abstention, but no organized party had a clear position against the referenda. That speaks of a flagrant lack of communication between the political elites and the people, a lack of communication that could already been seen in the results of the French and Dutch referenda on the European constitutional treaty.

If you click on the title of this post, you may read an interview of Mr. Rutelli, who analyses the outcome of the referendum. You have to understand italian though...

THE ITALIAN REFERENDUM STARTS: IS VICTORY AT THE DOORS FOR THE CHURCH?

Tomorrow and after-tomorrow, the Italian referendum on assisted reproduction starts. We remind the readers that the referendum was initiated by the leaders of the Italian Radical party, and that it aims at authorizing stem cell research, pre-implantation diagnosis, the freezing of embryos for IVF, and heterologous IVF (IVF with the games of a donor(s). Cardinal Camillo Ruini, the leader of the Italian episcopal conference, with the strong support of Pope Benedict XVI recommended to Italians to abstain from voting in the referendum.

The turnout of the Italians living in foreign countries (about 2.5 million electors) furnished some encouraging results for the Catholic Church. Only about 400,000 electors voted (16 % of the electorate in foreign countries). And the latest polls have shown that about 40 % of the Italians thought to go to vote.

It would be hazardous to make now already projections on the possible failure of the referendum to reach the quorum, but should this prove to be the case, then the Catholic Church could possibly claim the first victory of Benedict XVI’s papacy on the field of bioethics. It would have proved the necessity for the Church of facing directly, in the political field, proponents of bioethical perversions.

At the moment, the polls are pointing out the fact that most Italians don’t really know what to think about these referenda. That might be deemed a progress if progress there is: if the media and the Radical party had been left to their own devices, three quarters of the population would have repeated the point of view of the proponents of the referendum.

But it will also speak of a moral emptiness in most of Italy’s political world: none of the parties was able to define a clear and coherent position with respect to these ethical questions, and none will be able to claim the fruits of its campaign in favour of abstention. Retrospectively, a victory of the abstention will also show that the Catholic Church is now passing on another gear: it will now have to go down in the field of politics itself , in Europe - and its campaign will have been sufficiently efficient if the referenda fail.

Is that a rebirth of theocracy? No, definitely not. Nevertheless, when there is a moral void in the authorities, the Church has taken up the message of the Common Good. Theocracy, itself, was a reply to the moral disorder of the middle ages, and it helped to open the door to the modern ideas. So now, when the concept of human being is questioned, it is logical that the Church expresses itself. But I will probably analyse it in more detail after the referenda’s exits are known.

A new development in the Italian referendum on assisted referendum: Rutelli calls to abstain

In a remarked public expression, the leader of the party Margherita, a component of the Ulivo coalition announced that he would be abstaining in the referendum on assisted referendum foreseen for the 12-13 June in Italy. He justified his choice by explaning that the changes proposed in the referendums on assisted reproduction amounted to « a massacre » and that it was necessary to give limits to man who could not be « omnipotent ». You can read an account of his position on the site of the Italian daily Le Monde reported at the beginning of the week that this debate was a « test » for the Catholic Church, but the tone of the article seemed to indicate that it was a lost battle. In fact, the French newspaper noted that in the latest polls published, the participation rate would be hanging around 44 % - just a hitch under the 50 % needed to ensure victory for the proponents of the referendum.Read the article here:
http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0,36-656808,0.html

I'm giving you the text hereunder, because it will not be available online for long:


L'Eglise catholique reprend l'offensive sur la défense de l'embryon
LE MONDE 01.06.05 12h44 • Mis à jour le 01.06.05 14h04 ROME de notre correspondant
OAS_AD('Frame1');

OAS_AD('Top2');


'Eglise italienne met tout son poids dans la bataille du référendum sur la procréation médicalement assistée, programmé les 12 et 13 juin.
Le cardinal Camillo Ruini, président de la Conférence épiscopale italienne (CEI), a pris la tête des opposants à cette consultation d'initiative populaire qui vise à faire abroger les quatre points les plus controversés d'une loi très restrictive, adoptée le 19 février 2004. Les évêques s'opposent à toute modification d'un texte qu'ils avaient largement inspiré. Ils ont reçu, lors de leur assemblée annuelle, qui s'est tenue les 30 et 31 mai au Vatican, le soutien du nouveau pape, Benoît XVI. "Vous vous employez à éclairer le choix des catholiques et de tous les citoyens, a-t-il déclaré. Dans cet engagement, je suis proche de vous par la parole et la prière."

Bataille américaine sur les cellules souches
Le président américain George Bush a répété, mardi 31 mai, lors d'une conférence de presse à la Maison Blanche qu'il mettra son veto à une loi permettant le financement public de la recherche sur les cellules souches, au cas où cette mesure, qui implique la destruction d'embryons, devait être adoptée par le Sénat.
"La question est de savoir si nous utilisons l'argent du contribuable pour détruire la vie dans l'espoir de trouver un remède à de terribles maladies. Je ne crois pas que nous devrions le faire" , a affirmé George Bush.
La Chambre des représentants, pourtant largement dominée par les alliés du président, vient d'adopter une loi visant à lever l'interdiction de financer avec des fonds fédéraux la recherche sur les cellules souches embryonnaires. Cette interdiction avait été imposée par George Bush en août 2001. ­ (AFP.)
[-] fermer
OAS_AD('Middle1');
La campagne d'explication de l'Eglise devait prendre, mercredi 1er juin, un tour plus concret avec la distribution aux 25 000 prêtres du pays d'un opuscule en dix questions réponses, que certains appellent déjà "le vade-mecum du bon catholique". Pas question de revenir sur l'article 1er de la loi selon lequel les droits de l'embryon sont équivalents à ceux de la personne ­ position invariable du Vatican.
Jean Paul II avait rappelé, le 10 janvier, que "l'embryon est un sujet identique à l'enfant qui va naître". Lundi, Benoît XVI a répété, lui, "le caractère sacré de la vie humaine". L'Eglise ne peut admettre qu'on abroge les trois autres articles soumis à référendum : celui qui interdit toute expérimentation sur les embryons ; celui qui limite à trois le nombre des embryons créés pour une fécondation in vitro, sans possibilité de les congeler ; enfin, celui qui empêche de recourir à un donneur extérieur au couple.
L'Eglise italienne n'appelle pas à voter non, mais à s'abstenir. Une tactique que Mgr Ruini a expliquée devant la Conférence épiscopale : "Nous sommes pour une non-participation consciente qui équivaut à un double non : d'abord sur le contenu du référendum qui aggrave irrémédiablement et vide la loi ; (...) ensuite sur le recours au processus référendaire pour un sujet aussi complexe et délicat." En invitant les catholiques italiens au boycott, le cardinal Ruini compte faire échouer toute l'opération : "Voter non, étant donné que cela peut contribuer à faire atteindre le quorum requis, est une aide, même involontaire, aux défenseurs du référendum", confesse-t-il. En effet, pour que le résultat d'un référendum d'initiative populaire soit homologué, il faut une participation d'au moins 50 %. Selon des sondages publiés par le quotidien La Repubblica, 44 % des Italiens sont d'ores et déjà certains d'aller voter. "Qui n'obéit pas à la consigne d'abstention n'est pas un vrai catholique", ont menacé plusieurs évêques, se souvenant sans doute que sur des référendums identiques, concernant le divorce et l'avortement, dans les années 1970 et 1980, l'Eglise a été désavouée par les urnes.
"CHEF DE FACTION"
L'intervention du pape a fait monter d'un cran la tension d'une campagne électorale passionnée. Pour la députée européenne Emma Bonino, l'une des principales promotrices du référendum populaire, Benoît XVI se comporte "en chef de faction", tandis que Daniele Capezzone, le secrétaire du Parti radical, dénonce "une offensive sans précédent qui vise à mettre la démocratie italienne sous la tutelle du Vatican". La ministre pour l'égalité des chances, Stefania Prestigiacomo, trouve l'attitude de l'Eglise "misogyne", car elle ne prend pas en considération la santé des femmes "menacée par plusieurs articles de la loi".
Une bonne partie de la gauche partage ce jugement face à "une loi cruelle et injuste", qui interdit par exemple les diagnostics avant l'implantation de l'embryon. Ce qui ne permet pas de déceler le risque pour le futur bébé de développer une maladie héréditaire.
Le débat traverse la société italienne sans respecter les lignes de fracture politiques traditionnelles. Les principaux leaders s'expriment avec circonspection sur le sujet. "Je ne donnerai aucune indication parce que je respecte la liberté de choix des Italiens", a prévenu le président du conseil, Silvio Berlusconi. Romano Prodi, catholique pratiquant et chef de l'opposition de centre gauche, n'est pas moins prudent. Pour avoir dit qu'il voterait oui à trois des quatre questions du référendum, Gianfranco Fini, le vice-président du conseil, a provoqué un séisme à l'intérieur de son propre parti, Alliance nationale.
C'est donc principalement la société civile qui anime la campagne. Les actrices Monica Bellucci et Sabrina Ferilli prêtent leur sourire au Comité des femmes pour le oui et de nombreux scientifiques se sont ralliés à l'appel en faveur du oui du Prix Nobel de médecine, Rita Levi Montalcini.
Jean-Jacques Bozonnet
Article paru dans l'édition du 02.06.05