Brilliant Bry *：歡樂吧！生命

「歐盟的價值不是『自助餐台，可以讓成員國挑挑揀揀』」。歐州委員會秘書長戴維斯（Terry Davis）十月二日抨擊波蘭歧視同性戀的時候這樣說。我花了一點時間終於找出來這個讓我「眼睛為之一亮，心底為之一笑」的英文原句：「These values are not a smorgasbord from which governments can pick and choose as they like.」

很多時候，我們也會遭遇同樣的情況。譬如說，明明遊戲有規則但是偏偏有人就是要求特例。說到某些普世價值的時候，偏偏就會有人跳出來說，這樣這樣不算，那樣那樣不行。最近，大家身邊就有兩個很好的例子！（喔，又是跟某些縣市挺扁有關；又是跟保守教會反同性戀有關…這真的是因為那兩群人實在太好拿出來說嘴了！所以，不說白不說！）

先來說遍地開花的倒扁環島巡迴演出吧！其實就是一群對扁政府有異議的人士，環台一週宣傳他們的理念。在靜坐和螢光圍城之後，大家也有目共睹，知道這群人是和平的。所以，和平的人士環島抗議巡迴一場並沒有什麼不妥呀！當然，有些與這些人不同意見的人並不喜歡他們這樣做。某些縣市長（好像是台南縣和高雄市吧！）就希望這些和平環台一週的人不要來，然後排好陣勢，哪些地方不准去。這就是一個很詭異的政策決定喔！如果要防範，那是應該要防範有暴力傾向的人吧！如果要保護，那是應該要保護和平抗議的人呀！可是怎麼今天變成另一個樣了？

我不知道，原來台灣的人權原來是像「自助餐台」一樣，可以讓縣市長自己挑挑揀揀選自己愛的方式解讀和執行的哩！

然後，果然發生衝突了！（廢話，如果一縣一市之長做出那種詭異的決定，是不是就是變相鼓勵另一群人站出來來執法了哩？）挺扁的人看不下去倒扁的人浩浩蕩蕩從台北一路下來環島一圈，而且在「縣市長」表明不歡迎之後，還繼續來，所以站出來對峙、丟石頭…

這是民進黨執政版的重新搬演美麗島事件嗎？

另一個寶貝團體則是保守的基督教和天主教教會。一天到晚就是拿個索多瑪和蛾摩拉出來說嘴，不然就是拿使徒保羅說過的種種出來碎碎念。真是一點新意也沒有！也很沒有誠意！

有點新意的話，就去找個新說法嘛！有點誠意的話，這兩個命題都已經被同志們抨擊回答破解了，還幹嘛拿出來獻寶？

很好笑的事情是，對於這些「基本教義」的基督教徒和天主教徒，聖經原來也是自助餐台呢！因為他們就只挑某些章節出來說嘴，其他會刺到自己的章節就完全不提。譬如說，在創世紀索多瑪的故事之中，把因為驕傲，不虔敬，沒有同情心而受罰扯成因為整個城都行同性性行為而被誅滅。但是卻對於利未記之中諸多不潔和應當獻祭贖罪的行為視而不見。好嘛，如果你說聖經是金科玉律，那麼就一律適用呀！女子月經就是不潔，她碰過的、坐過的、採過的、踏過的通通都不潔。那你就每天都小心翼翼地去好好看看自己碰過的、坐過的、採過的、踏過的都沒有被有正月經中的女子給觸碰到吧！可是，說到這個的時候，「基本教義」信徒就開始有選擇了哩！說這個是舊約時代的曆法，現代已經不適用了！又說主耶穌基督的寶血已經洗淨了人過去的罪惡，blah blah blah…這不就是只挑挑揀揀一些自己愛的，然後對於自己不愛的就大家撻伐嘛？我還真不知道主耶穌基督有這樣教導過人哩！

所以，回到這句話，我們稍稍改變一下，「這些價值不是自助餐台，可以讓人挑挑揀揀的！」我們周遭生活之中，的確存在很多人，尤其是既得利益者，都會吝於釋放出自己已經擁有的既得利益而對於自己所歧視的族群搞出這種「自助餐台」的行為。這種「拿了自己喜歡的菜」還指指點點批評責難其他「自己不喜歡的」的行為真的就是一種很離譜而且最應該被指責和要求改進的態度！

回到戴維斯的發言，其中有一句話很好：「Genuine tolerance requires acceptance, understanding and respect.」真正的包容是需要接受，了解以及尊重的！尤其對於與自己不同的人、事、物，我們應當時時捫心提醒自己。

(2nd October 2006: BBC中文網)

這個歐洲保障人權機構威脅波蘭盡早解釋為何將負責翻譯"歐洲人權手冊"波蘭語版本的官員撤職。

該委員會秘書長戴維斯在波蘭的主要報章上表示，如果波蘭不盡早提出合理解釋，他就會向歐洲委員會的理事會提報波蘭違反歐盟準則。

內容不妥
今年6月負責翻譯"歐洲人權手冊"波蘭語版本的謝拉蒂茨基被波蘭政府撤職。在宣佈撤職的時候，波蘭教育部長蓋爾蒂赫表示該手冊內容不妥。

蓋爾蒂赫說，"歐洲人權手冊"稱同性關係等同於男女婚姻關係，並且宣傳同性戀價值。

歐洲委員會秘書長戴維斯則對波蘭歧視同性戀行為表示擔心。波蘭的同性戀團體也經常指責波蘭官方歧視他們的權利。

波蘭境內天主教徒眾多，該國前總理馬爾欽凱維奇曾經形容同性戀是"不自然的行為"。

提報制裁
戴維斯警告說，如果波蘭政府不及早另外解釋為何將謝拉蒂茨基撤職，他就會要求歐盟理事會採取行動。

戴維斯還說，波蘭加入歐盟時就承諾遵從歐盟的價值，而歐盟的價值不是"自助餐台一樣，可以讓成員國挑挑揀揀"。

by Terry Davis, Secretary General of the Council of Europe
(2nd October 2006, Council of Europe)

A year ago, I was one of many people in Europe and around the world who thoroughly enjoyed the Polish riposte against the negative rhetoric in the run-up to the French Referendum on the European Union Constitution. The handsome Polish plumber telling the French that he was staying at home but inviting them to visit was a masterpiece of public relations and an effective response to xenophobic messages in France.

But a few months ago, I was considerably less amused by some of the news coming from Poland. The wave of intolerance targeting especially gays and homosexuals, came as a surprise and was in stark contrast to the positive image of an open and modern society which used to give a lesson in tolerant behaviour to its European neighbours. I was particularly disappointed by some politicians who endorsed and propagated homophobic views instead of standing up against the language of prejudice and hate.

To be perfectly honest, the image is not entirely black and white. Unlike some other capitals in Europe which continue to violate the right to the freedom of assembly guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights, a Gay Pride Parade in Warsaw was not only authorised this year, but took place without incident. But to tolerate – grudgingly - those who are different is not enough because genuine tolerance requires acceptance, understanding and respect. In the Council of Europe, we are not in the business of imposing values on anyone because this would be meaningless and counter-productive. In any truly open and democratic society these values are embraced, not pushed down people’s throats.

The key is education, and the Council of Europe has developed a multitude of tools and programmes to help our member states in teaching the values which our Organisation was set up to defend and extend. One of them is Compass, a manual on human rights education for young people, produced by the Directorate of Youth and Sport of the Council of Europe on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the European Convention on Human Rights. Since its first publication, Compass has been translated into thirteen languages, from Spanish to Arabic.

In May 2005, the Polish version of Compass was launched on the occasion of the Council of Europe Summit in Warsaw, and we were all very proud. A year later, the new Polish Minister of Education dismissed the Director of the government agency which financed and distributed the manual, and we were all very puzzled. Reportedly, the Minister objected to the Compass chapter on homosexuality and homophobia.

Naturally, I asked the Polish authorities for a clarification of a decision which seemed, to put it mildly, unusual in the light of Poland’s membership in the Council of Europe and its commitment to the values it represents. These values are not a smorgasbord from which governments can pick and choose as they like.

I have now received a reply from the Polish authorities, but I am afraid that their arguments fail to fully alleviate my concern of government sanctioned homophobic behaviour.

How this story will unravel, it is too early to say. If any individual’s human rights have been violated as a result of the government’s action or omission to act, the case may come to the European Court of Human Rights. Eventually, if no satisfactory explanation is provided, I will report the matter to the Committee of Ministers, and it will be to the member states’ governments to decide on whether and how they want to react. But at the end of the day, what is really important is what Poland does to honour its word to the Council of Europe and to its own citizens - not in response to external pressure – but out of Poles’ own sense of honesty and self-respect. As a friend of Poland for more than 60 years, I have no doubt that a country I like and admire will do the right thing and dispel any doubts about its commitment to freedom, tolerance and human rights.