Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-01-16-Speech-1-067"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-01-16"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Homophobia in Europe2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060116.14.1-067"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-01-16-Speech-1-0682
lpv:speaker	lp:Philip Claeys2
lpv:spokenAs	member; AFET (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; NA (2004-07-20--2007-01-14)3 unknown; Vlaams Belang (2004-11-15--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation for relations with Australia and New Zealand (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 substitute; CULT (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; Conference of Presidents (2005-07-20--2007-01-14)3 member; SEDE (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I do not think there is anybody in this House who would accept homosexuals being discriminated against, attacked, intimidated or whatever on account of their orientation, but that is not, in fact, what today’s discussion is about. The question for discussion is whether it is still possible to criticise the spirit of political correctness that is gradually suffocating the free expression of opinion. Although the time when homosexuality was a taboo subject is fortunately in the past, these days it has become taboo to raise objections about some types of behaviour or complain about some homosexuals, even though this is completely unrelated to discrimination, hatred or whatever. The Buttiglione case is still fresh in the memory. For example, anyone who is opposed to homosexual marriage is promptly written off as homophobic and criminalised. Commissioner Frattini talked about diversity a moment ago, but it is important that we remain open to diversity of opinion, for the sanctimoniousness of 19th century sexual morals is gradually giving way to the sanctimoniousness of political correctness."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph