Czech Republic does not ratify the Istanbul Agreement

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kw08fCGT0JI

Peter Kopa, Prague, 1.2.2024 – The English version follows below

The Czech Republic does not ratify the Istanbul Agreement

Text of the agreement: https://www.boe.es/eli/es/ai/2011/05/11/(1)/con. On October 1, 2023 it was ratified, surprisingly, by 21 European countries, including Spain. We offer an annotated summary of the article on the subject that appeared in ‘Milujte se’, Prague, written by Pavel Zahradníček on the basis of documentation prepared by the ‘Alliance for the Family’ (www.alipro.cz) and by the Church. I raise a wake-up call on this issue, even though currently the globalists of the Davos Agenda 2030 are the subject of general laughter and distancing around the world, as seen a few days ago at the recent World Economic Forum in Davos. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hR0i6–_mQo

The agreement imposes pure and hard ideologies.

In May 2016 the Czech Republic protocolally received the International Agreement in Istanbul that aims to redefine the family, and with it, many aspects related to it.  Likewise other countries did so then, and all this was pending ratification by their respective parliaments.  This ratification was rejected a few days ago by the Czech Parliament. The reason for the rejection is a series of absurd and harmful clauses that we mention below.

First of all, the text of the agreement introduces a wedge between men and women, ideologically assuming a struggle between them. This is basically an updated variant of the Marxist ideology of the struggle of the poor against the rich classes.

Then, in the ‘second birth’, the Istanbul agreement openly intends to gradually liquidate the traditional family under the pretext of protecting women against abusive harassment by their husbands. This means that it introduces the principle of genderism, which in turn opens the possibility for the state to intervene in marital relations in order to divide the spouses from each other. At the same time the agreement aims to cancel concepts such as father or mother, to replace them with parent 1 and parent 2. This led in Germany 2018 to the legal introduction of a third gender, under which anything can be included. Currently we already have 23 gender variants, which we mention below.

Thirdly, the Istanbul agreement wants to introduce into the Czech legal system the concept of gender identity, intending with this to prohibit alleged discrimination, not only on the basis of gender, but also on the basis of gender identity. What does this mean?  The ideological approach in this matter is confusing: it simply states that gender cannot be clearly defined because human nature would be subject to continuous change. According to the Australian Human Rights Commission, approximately 23 different genders have already been defined in 2012. Some of them are, for example: male, female, homosexual, bisexual, transgender, transsexual, androgyny, agender, pansexual, drag king, gender fluid, intergender, third sex, sister girl etcetera. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9u0h7Es4Zo  

In fourth place, the Istanbul agreement demands to replace or overcome all kinds of prejudices, customs, traditions and other similar practices because it says that they are based on stereotyped conceptions about the role of women and men, with the latter dominating over the former. No limitations of any kind are placed, so that anything can be imagined, including the fulfillment of the mother’s obligations as well, or the conjugal act itself, as understood in the traditional family, as the basilar cell of society: man, woman and children. It is also about overcoming the education of children according to Christian values or another type of culture, custom or tradition. And the concrete means to achieve this in society would be, where appropriate, the judicial withdrawal of parental authority from parents with respect to their children. The Istanbul agreement would lead to giving full powers to the judicial authorities to enforce its provisions. https://thinktanklatam.org/2022/08/16/los-ataques-de-cancel-culture/

Fifth, the Istanbul agreement proposes a diametrically different vision of the family and of society, which is intended to be binding and obligatory. It demands that the State be obliged under this agreement to impose the genderist point of view at all levels of school education, as well as in State institutions and in all private sectors, such as sports, the media, etc. This would be in opposition to the rights of women and men. This would be contrary to the fundamental rights stipulated in the Constitution of the Czech Republic.

Sixth, the agreement is intended to take absolute precedence over any national law. This means that the agreement would impose genderism in the Czech Republic, which would penetrate as a fundamental legal principle in all sectors of the state and in all aspects of social life, practically leaving aside the Constitution itself. This principle could be interpreted in such a way as to lead to the liquidation of culture in the Czech Republic, or it could lead to the brutal prohibition of any religious denomination, or it could lead to the liquidation of marriage, of the family and to the liquidation of the parental authority of parents in the education of their children. This point means that if the parents are ‘disobedient’ – based on a complaint from a child or a third party – the judge could withdraw the parental authority. This happened in the case of the Barnevernet family in Norway. It could also mean the obligation to adopt homosexual children, as well as the exercise of the ‘right’ to change one’s sex.  The genderist pretensions of the agreement could even close schools, businesses and institutions that do not adhere to the gender ideology envisaged in the agreement.

To top it all off, the Istanbul Agreement even calls for a body called the ˇGroup of Experts on Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence’ (GREVIO). It is a body composed of 15 members, of which 13 would be women and two men. This control instance would enjoy the privilege of immunity for life of its members, in case they commit any error in the exercise of their functions or are attacked in any way. That is, even if GREVIO or its people commit a serious crime, they could not be called to account and would therefore have enormous influence over national legislation. And in cooperation with other non-governmental organizations they could force the Czech Republic to change its legislation.