Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-12-15-Speech-2-365"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2009-12-15"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Defence of the principle of subsidiarity - Display of religious and cultural symbols in public places (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20091215.21.2-365"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2009-12-15-Speech-2-3662
lpv:speaker	lp:Manfred Weber2
lpv:spokenAs	vice-chair; EPP (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; LIBE (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; Delegation for relations with India (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; REGI (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; DROI (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the countries of the Andean Community (2009-09-16--2013-03-20)3 unknown; Christlich-Soziale Union in Bayern e.V. (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, I am grateful for the opportunity to hold this debate. Mr López Aguilar referred to the fact that in his opinion, as a lawyer, we are not responsible. I am not speaking as a lawyer, but as a politician. Millions of people in Europe are affected by this judgment by the judges in Strasbourg. This is why it is a good thing that we are discussing it here. The relationship between church and state in Europe has always been disputed and has led to bloody conflicts. It is right and proper that the European Union has managed to separate the state from religion. This is a good thing. However, we have a wide range of different models in Europe. France is clearly a non-religious state, while in Great Britain, the Head of State, the Queen, is also the head of the church. We have different models of how the relationship between church and state has developed. For this reason, I believe it is a good thing that we are calling for subsidiarity in this area and that every country can go its own way. I would even like to take things a step further. I do not want to talk about subsidiarity, but about the basic issue that, from my perspective, the European values of solidarity, subsidiarity and freedom are unthinkable without a foundation in Christianity and in the Judaeo-Christian understanding of religion. Why do we not find these values in China or in the Middle East? This is because they are based on our culture and our religions. It is possible to mention this without forcing anyone to accept the same faith. We are proud of our religious freedom. There is religious freedom in the sense that it is possible for me to decide to be an atheist. That is acceptable and legitimate and we have fought for this. However, there is also the right to have a faith. In my region, where more than one million people live, over 80% are Catholics. Just as atheists call for others to show them tolerance, so the Catholics who make up more than 80% of the population are calling for non-believers to be tolerant of their faith. They want to be able to show their faith in public, to represent it and to have Christian symbols accepted by the minority in this majority society. This is also legitimate in terms of religious freedom. Anyone who calls for tolerance must also show tolerance to those who practise a Christian faith."@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph