Buttiglione is a better European than the people who dumped him

ALTHOUGH he has just been denied the justice portfolio in the European Commission, Rocco Buttiglione shows no rancour.

"I am sad because I think I would have been a good commissioner," he told me. "I think I have suffered injustice. But Socrates said it was better to suffer injustice rather than do injustice."

The Italian Minister for European Affairs is philosophical about what happened. But his downfall has raised a number of disturbing questions about the European Union. Its capacity to accommodate different viewpoints and ethical systems is now seriously in question. But the Buttiglione affair may reveal something worse a deep-down disrespect among European parliamentarians for the law of the union and the proper role of member states.

"What is odd is that all that was discussed does not fall within the competences of the European Union," says Buttiglione. "For example, according to the existing legal basis, the union cannot decide on homosexual marriage Some countries, for example Ireland, have made it clear that issues related to family and borderline questions between ethics and policy should remain within the sphere of member states. But one might suspect that some people want the Commission to go beyond the existing legal basis and try to impose pro-active policies on the member states."

Buttiglione, after all, had committed himself to upholding the EU constitution and charter, even the parts he disagreed with. And it is strange that the MEPs who opposed him so vigorously failed to mention any specific policy or proposal which they thought he might undermine.

Proinsias de Rossa's attempt to justify opposition to Buttiglione by comparing it with the EU's right to vet Turkey's human rights compliance shows how badly thought out, and illiberal, the opposition to Buttiglione was.

Turkey wants to join the EU but must first comply with basic human rights standards accepted throughout the EU. By contrast, Buttiglione shares the values of millions of members of the European family. The EU cannot justifiably exclude Christian values from public life. But tell that to the array of ex-communists and former militant leftists who were among the most vocal of Buttiglione's opponents. I ask about some of his controversial statements, and the idea of AIDS and HIV as a "divine punishment for homosexuality and drug use" a view attributed to him by the Irish Times last week.

"It is improper to take one sentence out of context from a complex theological argument and use it as a weapon in political debate," he replies.

He goes on to explain what he said at a Vatican conference back in 1989, long before he entered Italian politics. He had been talking of the Old Testament and New Testament traditions on the punishment of God for the sins of man. Complicated stuff. But vindictive towards homosexuals? He denies it. It seems his main point was that, if people have sinned, their suffering can be a way back to God. So, are people with AIDS suffering from their sins? "You cannot take the fact that one is suffering as an indication of the fact that he is a sinner," he says. He recalls a conversation he had with a homosexual friend, a well-known Italian playwright. "'Don't think you are any better than me,' he once told me. I of course agreed."

Buttiglione says he was deeply impressed by the late Cardinal O'Connor of New York who upheld Catholic teaching about homosexual behaviour but also did "wonderful work to support people with AIDS and personally attended to AIDS sufferers."

Listening to Buttiglione it is easy to understand how his words got him into trouble. He is an abstract thinker. He uses metaphors to make complex points. And there are many willing to seize on such language and twist it into a weapon against him. It's neither honourable nor rational that they should do so. But it's not unpredictable either.

"There are people who go through all that I have written in order to quote out of context," he says. He describes the allegation that he was hostile to single mothers as "a clear case of manipulation". He had been talking about American and European approaches to international problems and the view that Americans are too direct and aggressive, while the Europeans prefer a softer, culture-based approach to world affairs. "I said it was not good that Europeans should be children of a single mother, or that Americans should be children of a single father," says Buttiglione.

HIS opponents seized on this convoluted metaphor to accuse him of attacking single mothers. Buttiglione obviously prefers the two-parent family unit as a model for society, but he stresses his view that, in a society where abortion has become readily available, "many single mothers are heroines of our time".

There is no trace here of the bigotry of which Irish Times columnist Patsy McGarry, in an uncharacteristically angry piece, accused Buttiglione last week.

"His past conduct does not bode well," wrote McGarry. "As a public man he has consistently obeyed his church authorities." McGarry's words are revealing. It seems traditional Catholics follow their 'church authorities.' More enlightened people, we must suppose, follow their consciences.

To reinforce his point, McGarry cited a recent Vatican document which reminded Catholic politicians of their 'moral duty to express opposition clearly and publicly' to same-sex unions.

Supporters of extensive homosexual rights, advocates of abortion on demand, or passionate free-marketeers, may not be advocating the views of their 'church authorities' in a traditional sense. But aren't they members of new, secular churches just the same? They probably hold their views just as strongly as Buttiglione holds his.

No doubt their fellow church-members encourage them to advance their views in any office that they hold. I daresay they even follow their consciences when doing so.

Unlike Buttiglione, they seem unwilling to respect the existing EU constitution and charter when pushing their agenda. But that's OK. The Irish Times will not call them bigots. And European Parliament members will be happy to accept that they chose their individual beliefs and are now freely pursuing their ideals in politics.

Buttiglione, if the truth were told, is a better European and a more honest politician than any of them. He stood up for what he believed, while agreeing to honour the constitution to which all had agreed. That was what they deemed unsuitable.

Despite his personal disappointment, Buttiglione prefers to see the bigger picture. "People said to me that they would not now support the EU constitution or the Barroso commission. I say to both, "You are wrong. To leave Europe is to leave Europe in the hands of moral relativists. Christians should unite, participate and defend their values."

What is he doing now? "Smoking a cigar and trying to recover my balance."

Still no trace of anger. He's a bigger man than I would be.