San Marino. Don Mangiarotti: “What is wrong (and right) in the world”
We receive and publish a note from Don Gabriele Mangiarotti
“But there is no courage in attacking something old or antiquated, any more than it takes to offer that against someone’s grandmother. The truly courageous man is the one who defeats the tyrannies born at the dawn of this day and the superstitions that have just blossomed, like flowers in spring ”(Chesterton, The Fear of the Past).
This affirmation of the great Chesterton surprised me when I read the pages of that current and dramatic also in the title: «What is wrong with the world». It seems to me that it describes the attitude of many who, in the name of their own ideology, are fighting a battle that does not know how to grasp the right enemy, the one who, today, is obliterating the humanity of man.
And I’m thinking – and don’t tell me it’s now a consummate refrain, because the world (and the Referendum) has already decided the truth about the present – about what is happening with regard to education after the abortion law in San Marino has imposed that the education to be given to young people (sexual, emotional, gender …) is the responsibility of the state, in the total forgetfulness of the role of parents.
But I wonder in the name of what principle all this is happening, especially if we take into consideration precisely what is characteristic of the Sammarine system. It would be enough to read these simple notes:
1. «The Republic of San Marino recognizes, as an integral part of its legal system, the norms of international law normally recognized and conforms its acts and conduct to them. It conforms to the rules contained in the international declarations on human rights and fundamental freedoms … The San Marino legal system recognizes, guarantees and implements the fundamental rights and freedoms set out in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and of fundamental freedoms.
International agreements on the protection of freedoms and human rights, duly stipulated and enforced, prevail in the event of conflict over internal rules. ” (Art. 12 of Citizens’ Rights and Fundamental Principles of the San Marino Law)
2. “Everyone has the right to education …
Education must be directed towards the full development of the human personality and the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms …
Parents have the right of priority in choosing the kind of education to be given to their children “(Article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights)
3. «The right to education cannot be denied to anyone. The State, in exercising the functions they assume in the field of education and teaching, must respect the right of parents to provide such education and teaching according to their religious and philosophical convictions “(Article 2 Additional Protocol to the Convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms)
Families will be able to enforce their right to an education that does not impose an ideology (state or “gender”) to allow young people to grow through a commitment that respects their identity, or they will prefer to dare their own training for others, in contrast with the values to which the family has dedicated its life and which are “non-negotiable” assets for any reason?
Some friends explain themselves as follows (and they seem to me to be serious and convincing arguments): “In this historical phase, faced with the complex social and cultural reality that the family and school live today, it is necessary that the proposed educational paths respect all families, all cultures and sensitivities, all religious beliefs, pupils and teachers, pluralism and the faculty of choice of parents on sensitive educational issues within the individual school realities …
Recent attempts to involve affective and sexual education in public schools and the spread … of the so-called “gender perspective”, which impacts on teaching by involving the aspect of learners’ identity, unequivocally calling into question the very delicate question of freedom of parents’ educational choice, recalling the equally fundamental question of cultural pluralism and the democratic life of our country. The school can favor a training that tends to affirm the equality between the sexes and to facilitate and consolidate the conscious acquisition, but it cannot act on the identity of the people, contradicting the family and experiential educational intervention of families.
In civic, emotional and sexual education as well as in education for so-called “gender equality” or against discrimination, and respect for cultural and educational differences, which interpret and concretize the fundamental values of life. It follows, for example, that the parents, who are primarily responsible for the education of their children, are involved in such training activities and that they are informed in detail so that they can express their consent / dissent regarding the pressing values and educational aspects.
Today this battle is also played out on the concrete level of the recognition of the VALIDITY OF THE INFORMED CONSENT TO PREVENTLY to be requested from parents for extracurricular activities and educational and divisive topics between families, to safeguard the freedom of education of parents on all extracurricular activities relating to educational topics (related to the sphere, affective and religious) … also for the sensitive part that the school intends to attend and during school hours. ” (Association Article 26)
Then “the truly brave man … will defeat the tyrannies born at the dawn of this day and the superstitions that have just blossomed …”
Gabriele Mangiarotti