“We are very far from the spirit of the Veil law,” says LR deputy Philippe Gosselin, who voted against

Invited Monday on franceinfo, Les Républicains MP Philippe Gosselin, who voted against the constitutionalization of the right to abortion, wonders about “the importance of a debate that is above all foreign.”

“We are very far from the spirit of the Veil law”asserts Monday March 4 on franceinfo the LR deputy for Manche Philippe Gosselin, who is one of the 72 parliamentarians to have voted against the introduction to article 34 of the fundamental text of the sentence: “The law determines the conditions under which the freedom guaranteed to a woman to have recourse to a voluntary termination of pregnancy is exercised.” 780 parliamentarians voted for.

Philippe Gosselin expresses his questions about “the importance of a debate that is first and foremost foreign. I believe that our legal elements in France are not at all comparable: the Constitutional Council has already ruled in favor of abortion four times. also on my side and undoubtedly among the 71 others a question about the enforceable nature of this right, which could go as far as possibly removing the conscience clause.”

A “complicated balance between women’s freedom and respect for the unborn child”

According to him, the right to abortion “is not threatened from a legal point of view in France, on the other hand those who are entirely in favor of its extension or for its practice would do better to question the effectiveness of this right in France. We can put all the statutes we want, if tomorrow a certain number of people cannot have recourse to abortion, it will be more of a problem than its inclusion in the Constitution.”

Philippe Gosselin affirms that we are “very far from the spirit of the Veil law.” He advances “that today we may no longer find the balance of 1974-1975”, which he defines as a “complicated balance, precarious no doubt, between the freedom of women, which is entirely respectable, and respect for the unborn child”.

“If it’s a question of seeking unanimity at all costs, that doesn’t make much sense. It seems good to me that democratically we can oppose on subjects like that, and which do not call into question the background, moreover. Democracy also means accepting difference, minorities, a diversity of opinions”, he said.