French Protestors March Against “Government Family-Phobia”

r

Photo Source: Reuters

A lot of French people joined marched for the traditional family on February 2.

Estimates of the numbers of marchers vary so widely that it appears the estimators were either at different marches, or they are deliberately giving politically-slanted numbers. 

Despite this, a few things seem clear. There is little doubt that large numbers of French people are continuing to resist government-mandated changes in the family.

It also appears that French government officials have no problems disrespecting their own citizens by labeling them “dark forces” and “far-right zealots.” That seems to be going a bit far, considering that the protestors are asking for the preservation of the same family structure that has been prevalent throughout all of Western society for the past 2,000 years. 

I do not know where this will end. But I don’t think it is a one-off event in one country. It is, rather, a harbinger of things to come. We are at the same place with the destruction of the family that we were with the destruction of the sanctity of human life that occurred at Roe. 

That is to say that those who support traditional marriage are confused, baffled and unsure what to do next. At the same time, many in the larger culture have been successfully propagandized into a naive and false view of the issues. 

Demonstrations such as those happening in France are not the end. They are a beginning. 

From Reuters:

(Reuters) – Over 100,000 conservative French marched through Paris and Lyon on Sunday accusing the government of “family-phobia” for legalizing gay marriage and other planned policies they say will harm traditional families.

The marchers, expressing growing frustration with the unpopular left-wing government, denounced new sex equality lessons in schools and urged the government not to legalize medical procedures to help same-sex couples have children.

Most demonstrators were middle-class families, some pushing little children in prams, posing no apparent risk of violent confrontation with the police that Interior Minister Manuel Valls had said would be dealt with severely.

The government of President Francois Hollande, suffering poll ratings near record lows, has delayed further social reforms until after next month’s municipal elections following massive protests against legalizing same-sex marriage last year.

One Paris protester, Severine Chevrier, said: “Mr Hollande doesn’t listen to us or want to talk to us (and) Mr Valls … will do everything to shut us up.”

“We have the same message (as last year), we just want it to be heard,” said Michel Girard, also marching in the capital. “It’s the defense of children and the family.”

  • SisterCynthia

    The world is always changing, but it feels like seismic shifts are taking place. “Pax Americana” is fading fast and the old powers are shifting to fill the vacuum. The West is morally bankrupt (and financially, too, tho we’re pretending we aren’t!). Confusion, frustration, and uncertainty seem to be the norm. Apart from Christ, the old foundations seem to be shattered, right down to the family. I really wonder what things will be like in 10-15yrs. I didn’t wonder 10-15yrs ago, things seemed a lot more stable then. Now? I am glad I’m a Christian, there are no other rocks but Jesus. Really, there never has been, but even the illusion of stability is being swept away!

    • Bill S

      You’re right about us being financially bankrupt. Is there really any other problem anywhere near as critical? Gay marriage? I don’t think so.

      • Sus_1

        I agree. Gay marriage has affected my life only because I get so upset at how it’s tearing people up on both sides.
        My worries are centered on my family and how we are going to afford finishing raising up our kids while still having enough to retire decently.
        If they were passing laws that required the Catholic Church and priests to marry gay people, I’d be in the streets protesting. That’s not what’s happening and it isn’t going to happen.

        • Bill S

          I would also protest any effort to require the Church to marry same sex couples. While I find it to be a bad business practice to discriminate against them, I sympathize with businesses being sued and prosecuted for not wanting to provide their services for gay weddings. I think the pendulum has swung a little to far the other way. A little. Not a lot.

          • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

            This is a change. Since when do you NOT want every Catholic in America to accept homosexual marriage on the altar?

            • Bill S

              I still do. But the government cannot force a church to perform a ceremony that goes against its teachings/laws/rules.

              • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

                And yet, you are constantly advocating for the government to do exactly that.

        • oregon nurse

          The marriage piece isn’t happening yet but it will. The Church will eventually have to stop participating in the civil process and people who get married in churches who refuse to perform SSM will have to go through both a civil and a church ceremony. Not that any of that is necessarily bad but don’t kid yourself it isn’t in the works.

          It is evident by what is happening in Catholic schools that we will not be able to follow our religion even on our own church property. Employment contracts with Catholic school employers are not worth the paper they written on anymore. This is a weak area right now and I fully expect to see people seeking these jobs and lying about their intent for the purpose of bringing lawsuits.

          It is all about marginalization and making us a hated minority that it is OK to discriminate against.

          • Sus_1

            Catholics are who are making Catholics a hated minority.

            • oregon nurse

              Because Catholics don’t toe the liberal politically correct line? Hate is hate even when it comes from the ‘tolerant’ left and hate belongs to the hater not the hated.

        • FW Ken
          • hamiltonr

            Thanks for the link Ken.

          • Bill S

            Ken,

            I don’t know if England has an equivalent to the First Amendment. It obviously didn’t when the Pilgrims emigrated. We do. End of story.

            • FW Ken

              It doesn’t. In fact, until recently they had a blasphemy law, although “homophobia” and “islam-ophobia” are more likely to get you in trouble these days. However, the chatter is around over here and I expect that if the HHS regulations stand, same-sex couples will start suing for marriage in churches, seeking punishment for those who don’t comply. I’m fact, gay rights activists were saying as much as soon as the SCOTUS decisions came down last year.

          • Sus_1

            That couple is suing. They haven’t won and I doubt they will.

            • pesq87

              Of course they wont. If any of you can name one occasion where the US gov or a US state gov forced the RC church to perform a religious sacrament I will send you $100.

      • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

        Moral bankruptcy creates financial bankruptcy.

        • Bill S

          People (and countries) can go bankrupt for reasons other than immorality. We can go bankrupt taking care of the sick and aging. Is that moral bankruptcy, Ted?

          If we euthanize them and balance the budget, does that make us moral?

          • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

            If we take care of the sick and the aged, we are anything but bankrupt.

            Perhaps I should put it another way- true wealth is not material. Financial bankruptcy is caused by failing to share material wealth.

    • http://ashesfromburntroses.blogspot.com/ Manny

      The Pax Americana is ending because of Obama! He will not be in much longer. But the culture is and has been deteriorating for years, actually decades. It started with the sexual revolution of the sixties.

      • SisterCynthia

        I agree, the culture has been on the skids for a couple of generations now. I guess it just seems we have reached a kind of critical mass for rapid-fire societal redefinition of right/wrong, good/bad behavior. Not just pertaining to the place of sex in society, but to honesty vs. lying to get ahead, hard work vs. working the “system,” crimal rights and criminalizing victims vs. allowing victims to stand up to their attackers and punishing those who attack others, valuing bling over substance. These are all things that spring from human flaws, but no longer is there any shame to indulging one’s baser instincts–it’s lauded and those who say “wait, this isn’t right…” are the ones who face censure.

        As for Obama being the reason for the end of our place as the West’s superpower, I agree there, too. His policies have been such to convince our allies we won’t follow thru on pledges to protect them from those who would devour them, and to convince our enemies that we, indeed, WON’T follow thru on threats to stop them. As Japan and Germany both decide they need their own functioning militaries, lest China and Russia go into full-on Empire mode, I don’t see those developments being reversed by whoever follows Obama (and especially if we are cursed with another democrat). Not that I mind our military staying out of conflicts in distant lands, but I sense more conflicts will occur, thanks to the belief that there will be no reprisal. The UN is a bad joke when it comes to settling conflicts, and even “little” conflicts have the ability to grow into ones that eventually force the world to get involved.

        • http://ashesfromburntroses.blogspot.com/ Manny

          Agree on our foreign policy disasters, and (I hope Rebecca reads this) that’s why I was so adamantly against leaving Iraq and adamantly for defeating Assad in Syria. That’s what it means to enforce stabilty across the world.
          As to the culture change, I do think it’s hit a critical mass as you say, and I think it can be traced to the passing away of the WWII generation and the Boomers taking control of the culture, with the younger generations not caring about morality and tradition.

          • SisterCynthia

            The ones lining up to replace Assad don’t seem to be an improvement, so I mostly just wish the Prez hadn’t drawn a line in the sand at all. Once he did, it was a no-win situation where we would lose credibility or imperil civilians no matter what we did. Unless you’re utterly convinced you must act, and know you CAN get people behind you, threatening action is just a bad idea–your bluff will eventually get called, esp. if you’ve started being inconsistent with your follow thru. Bratty kids figure that out with weak parents, bully countries figure that out with weak politicians. :(

            • oregon nurse

              If we cared about going to war to protect innocent civilians from despotic governments and outlaw militaries we would have been fighting all our wars in Africa instead of the middle east.

        • Dave

          Great comment, Sister! The reality is that we’ve been living on the “accumulated deposits” of Western Civilization for a couple of generations, as you said. For a generation or two, people still had and taught some level of virtue even if they didn’t understand or follow the God who is at the root of all of those virtues. But we all know that we can’t coast by on inheritance forever, and the rejection of God is now being followed by the rejection of virtue. Ideas have consequences, but they usually take a couple of generations to come to fruition.

          We are financially bankrupt as you and Bill said. We are morally bankrupt as well.

  • Bill S

    “That is to say that those who support traditional marriage are confused, baffled and unsure what to do next.”

    Why don’t they just stop trying to blame same sex attracted people who want to marry for their problems and look at themselves? The former are not the latter’s problem.

    There is much to do to support “traditional” marriage without picking on non-traditional marriage. I applaud the politicians who choose to do what is right despite what the zealots try to push as public opinion. Most of the real public have better things to do than their protests. The Church is to blame for most of the chaos.

    • Dave

      “There is much to do to support “traditional” marriage without picking on non-traditional marriage.”

      How can we be “picking on” something that didn’t exist until 10 years ago and even now doesn’t exist in most places? That’s like saying “stop picking on marijuana legalization.”

      You do have a point about there being plenty to do to improve true marriage. I’m sure we could do both.

    • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

      I am convinced same sex attracted people are created by contraception minded marriages. The two go together like peas in a pod.

      Until contraception and divorce are illegal, we will have the problem of gay marriage. Until government coercion in the bedroom is illegal, it’s just going to be a shell game of who are we going to oppress today.

      • Bill S

        “I am convinced same sex attracted people are created by contraception minded marriages. The two go together like peas in a pod.”

        Gee. I think that can be proven to be an absurd presumption. And I don’t think contraception and divorce are going to be made illegal any time soon.

        • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

          Then why wasn’t marriage equality an issue until after the sexual revolution? And why didn’t the sexual revolution itself happen, until the medical separation of sex from procreation was possible?

          • Bill S

            Everything is about sex to you. What do you think people do day in and day out in a marriage? Perform sex acts? Sex is only the key component to gay marriage to the zealots that oppose it.

            • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

              Good, so let’s require celibacy in return for gay marriage, if it is so unimportant. Solves everything.

              • Bill S

                You’re obsessing about sex again. Let it go.

                • oregon nurse

                  and you’re still repressing the truth about sex. Get help.

            • FW Ken

              Apparently this is the latest talking point. What hypoctisy! Google the Folsom Street Fair.

              • Bill S

                Ken. There is being same sex attracted and there is being an exhibitionist or a pervert or a pedophile, etc. Do you equate one to another?

                • FW Ken

                  Go watch a season of Queer as Folk and get back to me.

  • kenofken

    Clearly gay marriage does not enjoy universal support in France, but it’s also clear that this is not a case of an ignored majority suffering at the hands of the elite. I’ve seen figures anywhere from a few tens of thousands to half a million. Let’s say it’s 100,000. Those people came in from all over the country to press their case in Paris, and bully for them for expressing their beliefs. But 100,000 is about 0.15% of the population in France. On the highest estimate of the demonstrations, we’re talking about three quarters of 1%. Should their views be ignored wholecloth? No, but the reality of democracy is that demographic sliver minorities don’t get to drive the bus either.

    • hamiltonr

      Ken, you are making the assumption that the people who showed up at this one march are the only ones in France who have this viewpoint. This is almost certainly inaccurate, and by a great number of people.

      First of all, other marches which took place just a few months ago, had as high as a million participants.

      Secondly, in politics, it is assumed that 1 letter is always equal to at least 10 other people who didn’t write, but feel the same way; that is AT LEAST. In the case of people who go out in the winter cold and march, the number would be much higher.

      These political assumptions are tested out each election cycle and have, over the years, been shown to be fairly accurate.

      These highly emotional issues where people organize are sometimes off the mark in one direction or the other, but not by as much as you would think. The question for an elected official (at least insofar as interpreting crowd actions) is whether or not the crowd is representative of his or her constituency. For the president of a country, the answer is always “yes,” it is representative of their constituency, since the whole nation is his or her constituency.

      The French president is doing an injustice to his country and violating his responsibilities by pushing this over the heads of the people. His refusal to even give these people the dignity of their beliefs, but to attempt to demonize them, disenfranchises them, which in turn radicalizes them and leaves them open to following someone who will listen to them. He may very well make his accusations true with this despicable behavior of his.

      Leadership isn’t about issues. It is about leadership, which he is not exercising.

      • Bill S

        If gay marriage is a basic human right, it doesn’t matter how many people oppose it. Right is right and is not based on popularity. Nor is it based on any religion.

        • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

          Government sponsored Marriage isn’t even a basic human right, gay or otherwise. It didn’t even exist before the Reformation.

          • Bill S

            It really doesn’t matter how long it’s been that the government has been licensing and recording marriages. Does it? The fact is that the federal government recognizes marriage equality as do 17 or so states and DC. Eventually, state laws that deny marriage equality will be found to violate the 14th amendment and will be struck down. What a country!

            • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

              Your claim is that it is a basic human right- like food, shelter, water, clothing, life, and liberty. How long it has been around certainly does matter to that claim, regardless of what some modernist government attempted to foist a lie onto people claim.
              —–
              Based on Pesq87′s response below, I need to add to this response. Marriage *is* a basic human right- but only heterosexual marriage. According to the UNHDR, Article 16:
              Article 16.

              (1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
              (2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
              (3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
              ——————-
              The fact that the right to marry is about founding a family- procreation- means that gay marriage is not a natural human right.

              • pesq87

                shelter is a basic human right?

                • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

                  Yes, as a subset of the basic human right to life. Cultures that deny the necessities of life to certain people are practicing what Pope Francis has called “an economy of exclusion”- and denying people their most basic civil rights.

                  And yes, I am well aware that I’m writing that from a country that has a small but persistent population of homeless- people die every year in my city from exposure.

                  • FW Ken

                    Ted,

                    Homeless folks are not objects to be moved around by social engineers. You live in Portland, right? A quick search found 5 homeless shelters in the vicinity. But the presence of services doesn’t ensure anything. Homeless folks are a unique breed.

                    When I worked in a homeless shelter, we had what passes for a winter storm here. 3-4 days of temps in the 20s, snow and ice. Of course, we stayed open during the day, but a few old coots would not come inside. They huddled around a camp fire on the south side of a concrete wall. Of course, we kept an eye on them and took them food and coffee, but they were not going to come inside.

                    So a death from exposure may or may not say anything about your local community.

                    • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

                      I wish there was adequate shelter in the Portland area, there isn’t. We have, on average, about 3000 homeless people, and even on a night when the emergency shelters are open, only about 1800 beds.

                      Having said that, you are completely right. Some forms of mental illness and drug addiction cause a form of claustrophobia that, given the option, may cause a person to sleep outdoors even in the worst conditions.

                  • pesq87

                    Ted, thank you for inspiring me to think about this. I’m not sure where I stand. I did some research and found the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights to be….informative, shall I say? Indeed, housing is expressly listed. As is the right to enjoy the arts. Hmmm. Personally I tend to think of human rights as more basic than the UN does – like the right not to be enslaved, and the to own something as mine and not yours. It’s easier for me to understand housing as a human right if I think of it as the right to “seek” housing or the right to house myself.

                • FW Ken

                  Whatever the legal status as a “right”, in decent communities, people don’t die of exposure to the elements. This is why Christians are wont to open homeless shelters and operate charitable programs that help with housing.

        • oregon nurse

          Who said marriage is a basic human right? We don’t put rules and criteria on basic human rights and they don’t vary from state to state. Because if it IS a basic human right then you better apply it equally to EVERYONE who wants to get married. Start from a position of error and you are probably going to end up at a position of error.

          • Bill S

            Who said marriage is a human right? Reasonable people just know that it is. The international community knows that it is. Those who deny that it is are influenced by their own subculture and do not use logic and reason to support their opinion. They use their own cultural values such as those that say that the parents arrange who their children will marry or couples of the same sex cannot marry.

            • oregon nurse

              Your argument is basically “because I say (know) it is”. There is no basis for your opinion in either law or religion. Marriage throughout human history has always been regulated in some form or another. It is you and your subculture that are in denial and are not using logic and reason to support your opinion. You just want what you want when you want it. It goes no deeper than that.

            • Smithgift

              Is then, marriage a right because “reasonable people” think it is, or is it objectively, morally, a right? Because if “Rights are rights and are not based on popularity” you cannot use the opinions of any population, no matter how massive or “reasonable” to “prove” that a right exists.

              • Bill S

                In this country, everything is good if we accept the Constitution as the framework for how we are governed. Then the Bill of Rights and other amendments. Then laws, court decisions and executive orders. Other countries have similar models better or worse, more effective or less effective than ours. That’s the way the world operates.
                Somehow, people’s rights fit in there.

        • Smithgift

          “Right is right and is not based on popularity.” Again, I ask, do you believe in objective morality or not? I am sincerely asking.

          • Bill S

            The short answer to your question is no, there is no objective morality. It is relative, which I know is a dirty word to you. Moral values are instilled in us, first by our parents and then by society in general. In that society varies from culture to culture, so to do morals.

            Your society may be centered on the Catholic Church. If so, your morality is dictated to you by Church teaching. You may think that to be objective, but it isn’t.

            • FW Ken

              Then the it’s only power. Survival of the strongest, gulags for the rest.

            • Archaeopteryx

              If objective morality doesn’t exist, then you don’t get to go around claiming that barring gay ‘marriage’ is any sort of ill, because there’s no such thing. If there’s no right or wrong, then there’s only opinion, and everyone knows what those are worth.

    • http://ashesfromburntroses.blogspot.com/ Manny

      Rebecca’s reply is correct. To get a few hundred thousand people to coordinate schedules and pay for the expense of getting to the location is exceptional. How many “million man” marches of African Americans are planned for a demonstration in Washington and they only get a hundred thousand? And yet most African Americans are lock step on the issues; 90% of African Americans tend to support the same positions. Out of the millions of potential African Americans who support the march, they get a 100,000 or so to show up.

    • http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/ Theodore Seeber

      If this was only about civil government, then civil unions would be enough. No, it’s not good enough to create gay marriage, the next step is to finish the destruction of the traditional family.

  • http://ashesfromburntroses.blogspot.com/ Manny

    Except for the Tea Party, conservatives do not protest much, the Pro-Life march being the only exception. It’s been something that’s bothered me for a long time. It needs to change. We need a Tea Party movement for cultural issues, or perhaps expand the Tea Movement beyond tax and spend issues. How do we organize?


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X