Skip to main content

A Catholic EU health commissioner

The European Union Parliament approved a controversial choice for their top health official:
The European Parliament backed a devout Catholic as EU health commissioner on Wednesday, brushing off critics who fear the Maltese politician could row back on EU policies on stem cell research, abortion and gay rights.

Greens, Liberals and Socialists in the European Parliament had said they would vote against Tonio Borg, a former foreign and justice minister in Malta, saying his beliefs could influence EU policy.

As commissioner, Borg's remit would include access to healthcare and contraception and the control of sexually transmitted diseases.

Borg, who was in Malta on the day of the vote according to an EU Commission official, told EU lawmakers before the vote that his personal views would not affect his role as health commissioner. (Source: Chicago Tribune)
Or is he a controversial choice? I don't know anything about Mr. Borg or the powers that come with his portfolio as health commissioner-- he could be a figurehead that oversees a largely entrenched and independent bureaucracy, for example. I don't think the fact that he is Catholic, by itself, should disqualify him from the position. While the Catholic Church has obviously influenced reproductive politics in many countries over a long period of time, lay Catholics, even "devout" ones, obviously disagree with the Church on many issues and are capable of exercising independent judgment.

The question of how Christians can or should reconcile the requirements of their faith with the messy business of politics has been debated since St. Augustine of Hippo in the fifth century. Politicians and bureaucrats having to figure out how to reconcile personal beliefs with their professional responsibilities is nothing new.

I wonder if the fact that Mr. Borg is from Malta, one of the few countries in Europe (or anywhere) that bans abortions without exception, is leading to increased concern about his candidacy. For this reason, the timing of Mr. Borg's appointment, on the heels of the controversy in Ireland over a similarly absolute abortion ban, is poor.

Links:

Reuters article published in the Chicago Tribune about the EU Health Commissioner from Malta (November 21, 2012): EU lawmakers approve abortion critic as top health official

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Medically necessary abortions: The battle of the experts

Apparently, Representative Joe Walsh is not entirely alone! The assertion that an abortion is never medically necessary has been floating around in the pro-life universe for at least a little while. We are now witnessing a battle of the experts. One the one side is Joe Walsh and friends. Walsh himself released a pdf document with quotations from several doctors-- including some historically prominent pro-choice doctors, like Alan Guttmacher-- making the 'never medically necessary' claim seem quite reasonable. Also on Walsh's side are several doctors  who particpated in a recent "International Symposium on Maternal Health" in Dublin. Ireland, despite a European Court of Human Rights ruling in 1992 , has a total ban on abortion. Irish pro-lifers want the country's politicians to resist pressure to implement even a life exception, so the question of medical necessity is directly relevant there. The "Dublin Declaration," released after the S

Four ways the presidential election could change reproductive politics

Setting aside all of the claims and counterclaims of the candidates and all related white noise, there are four concrete ways that the 2012 presidential election could cause policy changes on abortion, contraception, and family planning. If Barack Obama is reelected, little will change. If Mitt Romney is elected, I predict the following: The contraceptive mandate, issued by the Department of Health and Human Services, would be withdrawn.  Barriers to defunding Planned Parenthood could be removed. As it is now, federal courts are stopping the complete defunding of the organization (i.e., withdrawing all federal funding) due to their interpretation of federal legislative language. With Romney as president, that language could be modified (assuming the changes could get past a Democratic Senate). The composition of the federal judiciary, particularly the United States Supreme Court, would be modified through appointments. If, say, Stephen Breyer or Ruth Bader Goldberg retired, Pres