Marine Le Pen on Bioethics

Last month, Marine Le Pen, in an interview with the Catholic website La Croix, presented an overview of her policies on bioethical issues such as euthanasia, the Veil Law on abortion and embryonic research:

- If you were a deputy in the National Assembly, would you take part in the debate on bioethics?

- Yes, because it is a subject that is absolutely fundamental, that affects our vision of man and the roots of our civilization. But it's not only the Front National that has been sidelined from the debate. The French people have been also. We saw this clearly with the "medicine baby": they learned overnight that you could create a baby to treat another.

Note: A "medicine baby" (what we call a "donor baby") is one that is conceived in vitro and carefully monitored for the presence of disease and compatibility with its siblings. The baby's purpose on earth, therefore, is to become a blood or tissue donor to a sibling in need. According to Le Monde the practice is not new in the United States or in Spain, but the birth, on January 26, 2011, in France, of a little boy of Turkish origin, was a first.

A full English version of the story is at France 24.

Marine Le Pen goes on:

Despite all the compassion that we have for the families of children afflicted with rare genetic diseases, we may find ourselves tipping the scales. When you choose one embryo, and discard the others, with the only goal being to make a donor baby, you are edging closer to transforming the human being into an object.

- In general, what do you think about embryonic research?

- That it must be banned, pure and simple. Furthermore, a certain number of researchers, opposed to the utilization of the embryo, emphasize that it's taking the easy way out, that there are other ways to advance research, such as stem cells from the umbilical cord. The role of political leaders is to place limits.

- Would you like to review the Veil Law?

- To review the law or to apply it? Because this law that provided for abortion as an last resort has been denatured. Today, when a woman goes to Planned Parenthood, they offer her an abortion or … an abortion!

It is imperative to restore conditions that would allow a real choice. This means information, financial assistance to families and prenatal adoption. I also think that we must stop reimbursing abortion. There are sufficient means of contraception today. In general, we have to promote respect for life in or society.

- Isn't that in contradiction with your desire to bring back the death penalty?

- Not at all. We were speaking of innocent life! However, when someone is himself the bringer of death, of barbarity, the role of leaders is to protect society. I am therefore in favor of a referendum on this issue.

- What is your position on euthanasia?

- That we must not cross that line. The Leonetti Law seems adequate to me, it provides a bit of balance. If we go beyond it we will once again be tipping the scales, even if there has been a lot of progress in terms of accepting financial responsibility, and pain management.

Note: The Leonetti Law was passed in April 2005. It forbids "active" euthanasia, encourages comfort care, and controls "passive" euthanasia which prevents doctors from trying heroic measures to save a life when there is clearly no hope for the patient. Many Catholics objected to this law.

- Doesn't the success of the PACS prove that it corresponded to a social need?

Note: PACS refers to the law on civil unions, passed in 1999, under Socialist Prime Minister Lionel Jospin.

- No. The objective of the PACS was to accustom people's minds to the coming legislation on gay marriage. It's a success because it is above all a tax break. I remind you that only 6% of the PACS involve homosexuals. I am therefore in favor of making it useless by increasing the desirability of marriage through tax breaks.

- Should family subsidies be granted on the basis of income?

- Not only should they be universal, but they must be substantially reevaluated. For twenty years, families, more so than others, have been largely abandoned by the politicians. The FN's key measure is the creation of a parental salary equivalent to the minimum wage, starting with the first child. In other words, a real choice given to the mother to take care of her children.

Furthermore, large families should benefit from privileged access to public housing. It is understood that, within the framework of national preferences, all of these subsidies ought to be reserved for French families. Foreigners who come to live on our territory must be able to take care of their own needs.

- Do you believe that Islam is compatible with the Republic?

- Yes. But we are seeing a very troubling rise in Muslim fundamentalism which IS incompatible with republican principles, and French traditions, mores and life style. What are the authorities waiting for to stop it?

My fight for laïcité also aims to protect our compatriots of the Muslim faith from fundamentalist pressures - dress, food, etc… - that are leading them to radicalize a religious practice that was compatible with France and the Republic until recently.

- Are you in favor of the building of mosques?

- I disagree with the claim that there are not enough mosques in France. Be that as it may, the construction of mosques ought to be subject to several conditions, beginning with respect for the 1905 law that has already been violated by the public financing of religious associations, posing as cultural associations, and by the granting of long-term leases.

I am also against financing by foreign powers who refuse to allow the construction of churches on their soil. In short, if Muslims want more mosques, let them finance them. And finally, there must be no giant mosques and no minarets.

Note: Obviously, this is not quite what we expected from her. On bioethics, she is fine. On Islam, she is making the mistake so many others have made, that of imaging that there is a moderate Islam compatible with the Republic, and a fundamentalist Islam that deviates from the norm. She is therefore, on the nature of Islam, closer to Nicolas Sarkozy than to the Bloc Identitaire or Riposte Laïque or conservative Catholics, all of whom have made it clear, over and over, that there is only one Islam.