Buzz  Feed
no date but published at RCP on August 5, 2014
   

The Rise Of Europe’s Religious Right
“For too long a time in Europe, pro-life people did not  really say clearly 
and directly what they believe.” After years on the  margins of European 
politics, social conservatives are learning to fight  back
 
 
J Lester  Feder
 
 
ROME — On a hot Friday in late June, the walls of a  15th-century marble 
palace in a secluded corner of the Vatican were lit up with  the face of 
Breitbart News Chairman Steve Bannon.

“We believe — strongly  — that there is a global tea party movement,” 
declared Bannon, who took over the  American conservative new media empire 
after the death of its founder, Andrew  Breitbart, in 2012. Speaking via Skype 
to a conference on Catholic responses to  poverty, he said, “You’re seeing a 
global reaction to centralized government,  whether that government is in 
Beijing or that government is in Washington, D.C.,  or that government is in 
Brussels… On the social conservative side, we’re the  voice of the 
anti-abortion movement, the voice of the traditional marriage  movement.” 
Events across the Atlantic do look familiar to American eyes: an uprising  
against long-established parties in Brussels amid economic stagnation. But 
these  elements have been around a long time in European politics. What is 
new — and  what feels so American — is represented by the group Bannon was 
addressing:  Europe is getting its own version of the religious right. 
“There is an unprecedented anger because the average citizen [sees] what is 
 being done in their name without their consent,” said Benjamin Harnwell, 
who  founded the group that organized the conference, called the Human 
Dignity  Institute. Harnwell is a former aide to a longtime Eurosceptic member 
of 
the  European Parliament, who founded the organization in 2008 to promote 
the  “Christian voice” in European politics. It is one of many new groups 
that have  sprouted on the continent in recent years with missions they 
describe as  “promoting life,” “traditional family,” and “religious liberty” in 
response to  the advance of laws to recognize same-sex marriage and abortion 
rights. Some are  technically secular organizations, but their strength, 
their leaders concede,  largely comes from churchgoers. 
The analogy with the tea party isn’t perfect for these groups, and some  
bristle at the comparison because they aren’t uniformly conservative on other  
issues. Harnwell prefers “silent majority,” but said he draws inspiration 
from  the tea party movement because they also see their battle in part as a 
fight  with a political establishment that has long ignored them. 
These groups are still learning to work together, but after years on the  
political margins in much of Europe, they have suddenly begun flexing 
political  muscles that progressives — and maybe social conservatives 
themselves — 
never  knew they had. They have made themselves a force to be reckoned with 
in Brussels  by learning key lessons from American conservatives, such as 
how to organize  online and use initiative drives. European progressives, who 
long thought  debates over sexual rights had mostly been settled in their 
favor, were  blindsided.  
“A bomb with a long fuse has been lit,” said Sylvie Guillaume, a French 
MEP  supportive of abortion rights and LGBT rights, who recently stepped down 
as vice  chair of the largest center-left bloc in the European Union’s 
parliament. “We  don’t know what’s going to happen.”
 
One month before Bannon addressed the Human Dignity  Institute, elections 
for the European Parliament sent a shockwave through the  political 
establishment in Brussels. Far-right parties calling for an end to the  
European 
Union doubled their numbers to hold around 20% of seats. Parties like  France’s 
National Front and Britain’s UKIP won pluralities in their  countries. 
Some of these parties ran on explicitly anti-LGBT platforms, particularly 
in  Eastern Europe. (Hungary’s ultranationalist Jobbik Party, for example, 
printed  posters featuring a blond woman with a Hungarian flag standing 
opposite drag  Eurovision champion Conchita Wurst with an EU flag, along with 
the 
caption: “You  Choose!”) For the most part, though, issues dear to social 
conservatives were a  side issue in elections driven heavily by economic 
frustration. Some on the far  right even support LGBT rights, most notably 
Geert 
Wilders of the Dutch Party  for Freedom, who has _tried_ 
(http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-11443211)  to recruit LGBT  voters for 
his anti-Muslim, 
anti-immigrant platform. 
Social conservatives made themselves a force months before the election. In 
 December, the European Parliament took up a resolution known as the 
_Estrela  Report_ 
(http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+REPORT+A7-2013-0426+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN)
  that called on member states to 
provide comprehensive sex education  in schools, ensure access to safe 
abortions, and take other steps that its  supporters consider basic to 
safeguarding 
sexual health and rights. The  resolution would have had no practical impact 
— the EU’s own rules bar it from  regulating such issues — and its 
supporters considered it consistent with  previously adopted resolutions. The 
vote 
was expected to be perfectly  routine. 
Then, as if someone had thrown a switch, emails started pouring into MEPs’  
offices calling for the resolution to be rejected weeks before the final 
vote on  Dec. 10. After an acrimonious floor debate, the center-right bloc 
helped defeat  the Estrela Report by a small margin in favor of a conservative 
alternative that  essentially said the EU has no business talking about 
these issues. The result  stunned progressives, who couldn’t recall another 
time 
that the parliament had  rejected language supportive of reproductive 
rights. 

In a sense, someone  had indeed thrown a switch. A few months earlier, a 
new online petition platform  called _CitizenGo_ (http://www.citizengo.org/)  
sent out its first  action alert. CitizenGo was conceived of as a kind of 
MoveOn.org for  conservatives. It was based in Spain, but it had aspirations 
to be a global  platform and now has staff working in eight languages, with 
plans to add Chinese  and Arabic. It has an organizer in the U.S., too, named 
Gregory Mertz, who works  out of the Washington offices of the National 
Organization for Marriage — Mertz  actually wrote some of CitizenGo’s _Esterla 
Report  petitions_ (http://citizengo.org/en/1150-reject-estrela-report) . 
In the weeks leading up to the Estrela vote, several petitions  appeared on 
CitizenGo, garnering 40,000 signatures here, 50,000 there. 
These kinds of campaigns are so common in the U.S. that they are little 
more  than background noise. But they were new in Brussels, especially in the 
hands of  conservatives. Grassroots mobilization on sexual rights hadn’t been 
common on  either side, and progressive advocacy groups had won many 
important victories  relying heavily on an elite lobbying strategy.  
MEPs had no idea what hit them and many of them folded, said Neil Datta, of 
 the European Parliamentary Forum for Population and Development, which 
promotes  reproductive rights. 
“If you have a big cannon, the first [time] you shoot it, everyone runs 
away  scared,” Datta said. 
CitizenGo’s founder, Ignacio Arsuaga, had spent more than a decade adapting 
 online organizing techniques from U.S. to Spanish politics before 
launching the  group. He had been drawn into internet advocacy while studying 
at 
Fordham Law  School in New York in the late 1990s. He had been “amazed” by 
MoveOn.org, he  said in a phone interview from Spain, and he began signing 
petitions by groups  such as the Christian Coalition, Americans United for 
Life, 
and other  organizations that were “defending the rights of religious 
people — specifically  Catholics — to express our faith in the public sphere.” 
“That’s real democracy — that’s what I lived in the U.S.,” Arsuaga said.  
“Spanish citizens aren’t used to participating. They’re used to voting to 
every  four years, and that’s it.”  
To change this, he created an organization called HazteOír (a name that 
means  “make yourself heard”) in 2001. It ran some campaigns throughout the 
early  2000s, often under separately branded sites, but it was the group’s 
mobilization  against a 2010 bill to liberalize abortion laws passed by Spain’s 
socialist  government that made the group a beacon to conservatives around 
the world. It  helped get _hundreds  of thousands_ 
(http://www.20minutos.es/noticia/459945/0/anti-aborto/marcha/manifestacion/)  
of protesters on the 
streets of Madrid and kept up the drumbeat  through the 2011 elections when 
the conservative party Partido Popular won  control. Its efforts appear to 
have paid off. In December 2013, the _cabinet  approved_ 
(http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/20/spain-government-restrictive-abortion-law-opposition)
  legislation that opponents say would give Spain the most  restrictive 
abortion laws of any democracy in the world, and it seems to be on  track for 
final approval by the parliament this summer.  
Arsuaga has steadily been working to build a broader movement. His group  
hosted the 2012 _World Congress of  Families_ (http://worldcongress.org/)  in 
Madrid, a global summit of social conservative leaders organized  by an 
institute in Rockford, Ill. It bussed supporters across the border to  France 
in 2013 when a new organization, La Manif Pour Tous (Protest for All),  
organized large protests against a marriage equality law reminiscent of Spain’s 
 
anti-abortion protests. 
The protests organized by these two groups were a turning point for  
conservatives throughout Europe, said Luca Volontè, a former Italian MP who now 
 
runs a social conservative _foundation_ (http://www.novaeterrae.eu/en/)  in 
Rome and sits on  CitizenGo’s board. They showed that a progressive victory 
was not inevitable.  And, in their aftermath, conservatives have won 
victories, especially in Eastern  Europe — in recent months, Croatia and 
Slovakia 
both enacted marriage equality  bans in their constitutions. 
“So many people in Europe are standing up, because this ideology appears 
and  [is] felt, really, as totalitarian,” Volontè said, referring to advances 
for  marriage equality. 
La Manif Pour Tous is now following the same path as HazteOír, continuing 
the  fight against marriage equality in France even though it became law in 
May 2013  and reorganizing itself as a permanent, international organization. 
The group  launched a “Europe for Family” campaign in the lead-up to the 
EU elections in  May, and 230 French candidates signed its _pledge_ 
(http://www.europeforfamily.eu/les-principes/)  opposing marriage  equality, 
trans 
rights, and sex education. 
Twenty-three signatories _won_ (http://www.europeforfamily.eu/)  won  seats 
in those elections, 11 of them members of the far-right National  Front.
 
 
The suddenness with which social conservatives became a  force in Brussels 
has many progressives _speculating_ (http://euobserver.com/lgbti/116769)  
that they are the  creations of American social conservatives seeking to “
export the culture  wars.” 
“As far as I understand [social conservative groups] have quite some money 
in  them [from] the U.S., similar to all those missionary and evangelical 
groups  that do work in Uganda,” said Ulrike Lunacek, an Austrian Green Party 
MEP who is  now vice president of the European Parliament. Lunacek, who 
co-chaired the  Parliament’s Intergroup on LGBT Rights in the last session, 
authored a report on  LGBT rights that groups like CitizenGo and La Manif Pour 
Tous tried  unsuccessfully to defeat this winter. 
A review of tax disclosures conducted by the progressive advocacy group  
People for the American Way found that several U.S. groups — many of which  
boomed in the 1990s — had recently invested in conservative drives across  
Europe: The American Center for Law and Justice, founded by Pat Robertson, sent 
 $1.1 million to its European branch, the European Center for Law and 
Justice, in  2012, which is the most recent year for which tax disclosures are 
available.  Another group founded by well-known American social conservatives 
called the  Alliance Defending Freedom spent more than $750,000 on European 
programs that  year. The Federalist Society, which promotes conservative 
legal philosophy,  reported spending nearly $800,000 in “conferences and 
seminars” in Europe that  year. Personhood USA, a small Colorado-based group 
that 
has tried to pass ballot  measures that would give fetuses the legal status 
of “persons” — a strategy for  rolling back abortion rights that is 
controversial even among pro-life activists  — poured $400,000 into Europe in 
2012, 
just after one of its ballot measures _went down_ 
(http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/67966.html)  in  flames in 
Mississippi. (Personhood USA 
President Keith Mason declined to answer  questions from BuzzFeed about which 
organizations received the funds or what  they were used for.) 
But while there are links to the U.S., the movement is very much homegrown. 
 Arsuaga said neither HazteOír nor CitizenGo get funding from U.S. groups — 
and  they don’t need it. Arsuaga said 99% of HazteOír’s 1.9 million euro 
($2.5  million) annual budget comes from donations from Spanish citizens. 
CitizenGo has  been raising 30,000 to 40,000 euros (roughly $40,000 to $55,000) 
each month from  the 1.2 million members it’s signed up worldwide since its 
October launch.  
Today, American ties seem much more about a shared vision to build a global 
 conservative movement rather than leaning on stronger and wealthier U.S.  
partners for support. Arsuaga, Volontè, and La Manif Pour Tous President  
Ludovine de La Rochère were all in Washington on June 19 to support the 
National  Organization for Marriage’s March for Marriage. Their more important 
business,  however, might have been in a closed-door summit the next day, where 
 representatives of around 70 countries met to discuss creation of an  
International Organization for Marriage, according to Volontè and another  
participant. A follow-up meeting is planned for next year.
 
 
Many LGBT rights supporters _mocked_ 
(http://www.advocate.com/politics/marriage-equality/2014/06/19/twitter-hrc-mock-crowd-noms-march-marriage)
   the 
March for Marriage’s paltry turnout. So these Europeans appeared as if they  
were there to encourage a beleaguered movement, not the other way around — 
they  now possess the vigor that has evaporated from the U.S. movement as 
opposition  to marriage equality has collapsed. 
European social conservatives contend that they may have a new energy and  
sophistication, but Europeans have never been pro-abortion rights or  
pro-marriage equality. Dissenters just weren’t given the floor, and they didn’t 
 
know how to fight back. “[We] didn’t know how to arrive here at the 
European  [Union] level and make their voice heard in parliament,” said Sophia 
Kuby,  director of a four-year-old organization based in Brussels, European 
Dignity  Watch. 
Polling data doesn’t appear to bear this out, at least in Western Europe.  
Support for marriage equality ranges between 52 and 79% in all seven Western 
 European countries included in a _June Ipsos  poll_ 
(http://ipsos-na.com/news-polls/pressrelease.aspx?id=6551) . Less than a third 
of respondents from 
the two Eastern European  countries included — Poland and Hungary — 
support same-sex marriage (and both  countries have banned it in their 
constitutions), but more than 50% support some  form of legal recognition for 
same-sex 
couples. Opinion seems to range more on  abortion, which is available in 
most countries at least before 12 weeks, though  waiting periods and other 
restrictions are _not  uncommon_ 
(http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/08/in-liberal-europe-abortion-laws-come-with-their-own-restrictions/2
78350/) . An _April  Pew study_ 
(http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/04/15/global-morality/table/abortion/)  found 
substantial pluralities in countries 
including France,  Spain, and the Czech Republic say they believe abortion is “
morally acceptable,”  while there are even more lopsided pluralities saying 
abortion was “morally  unacceptable” in places such as Poland and Greece.  
But anti-abortion activists effectively used a new mechanism for direct  
democracy that the EU introduced in 2012 — called the European Citizens  
Initiative (ECI) — to make a show of popular support. One of the first ECIs 
ever  
launched, dubbed “One of Us,” was a proposal to cut off EU funding to any  
activity that destroys a human embryo, which in practical terms would mean  
ending support for stem cell research and foreign aid to family planning  
programs that perform abortions. If organizers could get at least 1 million  
signatures from seven countries, the EU’s executive body, the European  
Commission, would have had to hold a hearing on it.

The signature drive  was led by Grégor Puppinck of the European Center for 
Law and Justice, but the  continental campaign itself was funded entirely by 
Spanish and Italian  foundations. It quickly sailed past the 1 million 
signature hurdle, collecting  over 1.8 million signatures from more than 20 
countries by the time the hearing  was held on April 9. Despite this impressive 
show of popular support, there was  little doubt that the commission would 
reject the proposal even as the witnesses  for One of Us walked into the 
hearing room — Science Commissioner Máire  Geoghegan-Quinn had said as much in 
a 
_January  press conference_ 
(http://ec.europa.eu/avservices/audio/audioDetails.cfm?ref=I-084718&sitelang=en)
 .  
The commission summarily dismissed the proposal in a _seven-page  
statement_ (http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-608_en.htm)  issued on 
May 28 —
 just three days after the European elections,  which left some organizers 
feeling like the commission was deliberately trying  to prevent it from 
affecting the vote. 
But that doesn’t mean it was a defeat for opponents to abortion rights. 
Well  before the process had come to an end, the One of Us campaign _signalled_ 
(http://www.oneofus.eu/faq-2/)  on its website that it had  bigger goals 
than just changing EU funding policy. 
The drive “could be a starting point of a new Europe-wide mobilization of 
the  pro-life movement,” the site said. “Every experience we collect here 
can be used  for campaigns on other pro-life issues in further course. In that 
sense, it can  be expected that the outcome may be very enduring.” 
It also taught anti-abortion rights activists that they didn’t have to pull 
 their punches.  
“For too long a time in Europe, pro-life people did not really say clearly  
and directly what they believe because [they feared] it was too much” for 
most  Europeans to accept, Puppinck said in an interview in his Strasbourg 
office. “We  are more direct, more open, more clear, we don’t really try to 
negotiate on the  truth…. This is why, for us, the most important [thing] is 
to be able to  speak.” 
And from a political standpoint, the rejection of the One of Us initiative  
may have been a blessing for social conservatives hoping to build a 
movement.  The U.S. anti-abortion movement was built in response to the 1973 
Supreme Court  decision establishing abortion rights, a ruling that thrust 
abortion into the  center of American politics for the last 40 years. And they 
can 
now frame it as  a question, not just abortion. 
That’s exactly how the Parliament’s largest bloc, the center-right 
European  People’s Party, is already poised to embrace One of Us’ cause. The 
EPP 
chair,  German MEP Manfred Weber, told BuzzFeed he was “disappointed” that 
the European  Commission did not act “when there are so many people standing 
behind an  initiative.” 
“We have to bring people closer to the European process,” Weber said, 
adding  that the EU must not go beyond its mandate. “Europe should not be the 
political  body which is intervening … in this question of family rights, of 
abortion. Very  crucial and very important.” 
This battle now heads to the courts. On Friday, Puppinck filed a challenge  
before the EU’s judicial arm asking that it take away the European 
Commission’s  veto power over initiatives. The suit “is not only about the 
right to 
life, but  firstly about democracy,” Puppinck stated in a press release 
announcing the  suit. 
In this fight, Puppinck said, “You can really say it’s the opposition 
between  the people and the elite.”

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to