Image

EU Fines France for Violating Feminist’s ‘Rights’ Over Kill Christmas: Abort-Jesus Stunt

“Kitted out with ox livers to illustrate the termination of a baby’s life in the womb, Bouton then urinated on the floor in full view of the congregation.”


The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has reprimanded French courts for upholding a feminist’s conviction over an abortion stunt in a Catholic church.

Abortion activist, Eloïse Bouton, was charged, and sentenced by French courts in 2013 after disrupting a Christmas carol rehearsal dressed as Mary wearing a crown of thorns.

Bare-breasted, the woman mocked mothers in front of an altar, pretending to be Mary aborting the Christ child.

Kitted out with ox livers to illustrate the termination of a baby’s life in the womb, Bouton then urinated on the floor in full view of the congregation.

The feminist is a former member of Femen, a far-left – our ‘God is a woman’ – Ukrainian extremist group, known for protesting topless and painting slogans on their bodies.

Part of an apparent “kill Christmas” campaign, Femen took full credit for the pro-abortion – “Christmas is cancelled!” – stunt, gloating in a post online: “The holy mother Eloïse has just aborted the embryo of Jesus on the altar of the Madeleine.”

After complaints, French courts charged Bouton for what amounts to indecent exposure, handing the feminist a ‘one-month suspended prison sentence.’

The courts then ordered her to ‘pay the parish 2,000 euros (EUR) in respect of non-pecuniary damage and to contribute EUR 1,500 to the other party’s [presumably legal and clean-up] costs.’

Reprimanding this, the October 11, 2022, ECHR court ruling, overturned Bouton’s 2013 conviction, claiming the French court (including the High Court) was in violation of Bouton’s right to ‘freedom of expression’; loosely justified as a breach of Article 10 in the EU’s Human Rights convention. (PDF)

In their Résumé juridique (legal summary) ECHR judges defended Bouton’s actions, calling her indecent exposure, and pro-abortion stunt, a “performance” ‘to be regarded as a form of expression.’

Condemning French authorities, ECHR judges said, they were ‘struck by the severity of’ Bouton’s sentencing, stating ‘her conduct had not been insulting or hateful.’

Given her well-adjusted character and lack of criminal history, the EU court declared there was ‘no justification to impose [the one-month suspended] prison sentence.’ (Parenthesis mine).

‘Moreover,’ they added, ‘[France’s] domestic courts had not examined whether the applicant’s action had been “gratuitously offensive” to religious beliefs, whether it had been insulting or whether it had incited disrespect or hatred towards the Catholic Church.’

The ECHR inferred that her protest was brave, adding that because her actions did not take place during Mass, and Boudon left when asked to do so, the feminist should get a free pass.

Citing precedents to support this bad precedent, the ECHR used the George Soros-fundedPussy Riot” case to rule in Boudon’s favour.

The EU Human Rights court ordered France to ‘pay the pro-abortion activist 9,800 EUROs for moral damages, legal costs, and expenses.’

In a justified written response to the new ruling, Dr. Grégor Puppinck, Director of the European Centre for Law and Justice (ECLJ), called out the ECHR for practicing a double-standard.

Puppinck said the case was another example of the ECHR, ‘Siding with anti-Christian blasphemers […] It’s becoming a habit at the ECHR to defend these attacks in churches and against the Church. But its position is quite different when it comes to Islam.’

The ECLJ director pointed to a 2018 case, where the ECHR ‘upheld the criminal conviction of an Austrian lecturer who was accused of having equated Mohammed’s sexual relationship with Aisha, then only nine years old, with “paedophilia”.’ 

‘The Court,’ Puppinck rightly asserted, ‘would never have supported such a macabre display if it had taken place in a mosque or in the precincts of a courthouse.’ 

Bouton’s (as well as Femen’s) far-left free-pass, and payday for her bloodthirsty, baby-hating Christophobia, comes down to those who sit behind ECHR’s judges.

A lengthy report, packed with recommendations for reform, published by the European Centre for Law and Justice presented to the ECHR in 2019, exposed the ‘conflicts of interest between 18 judges of the Strasbourg high court and 7 NGOs funded by Georges Soros, including the rich and controversial Open Society.’ 

Responding to the report, the ECHR did not refute the findings. They promoted one of them – Bulgarian lawyer, turned judge, Yonko Grozev – to ‘section president’ instead.

Incidentally enough, according to ECLJ this is the same former Soros employee, who represented the “Pussy Riot” vandals.

Grozev is also now part of the panel of judges unanimously condemning French authorities for punishing “political speech,” declaring that France had “shockingly violated” abortion activist, Eloïse Bouton’s right to “freedom of expression.” 

There is no doubt, given the protective political lawfare coddling Islam, and the BLM, and LGBTQ+ acronym club, had Bouton carried out her 2013 pro-abortion publicity stunt in a Mosque, the repercussions would have been severe.

The far-left feminist – and Femen – would have been charged, convicted, and condemned, by hijab-wearing apologist bureaucrats, legacy media, and left-wing lobby groups, as “Islamophobes,” and ‘domestic terrorists.’

The Caldron Pool Show

The Caldron Pool Show: #9 – George Christensen
The Caldron Pool Show: #6 – Lauren Southern (Canada Special)
The Caldron Pool Show: #14 – Dr Stephen Chavura
The Caldron Pool Show: #34 What is Christian Nationalism? (with Doug Wilson)
Image

Support

If you value our work and would like to support us, you can do so by visiting our support page. Can’t find what you’re looking for? Visit our search page.

Copyright © 2023, Caldron Pool

Permissions

Everything published at Caldron Pool is protected by copyright and cannot be used and/or duplicated without prior written permission. Links and excerpts with full attribution are permitted. Published articles represent the opinions of the author and may not reflect the views of all contributors at Caldron Pool.