Dear Professor Francesco D'Agostino
I want to thank you for your response and immediately reassure you that, by bringing the debate back to a more nuanced level of dialogue and discussion (you will agree that a press release does not allow this), we are, as always, fully open to a public meeting, because that is the context in which arguments and definitions can be developed and tested.
It's quite clear that we relate to each other through different considerations: for us, the individual's freedom to be what he or she is (or feels he or she is) is sacrosanct and worthy of legal recognition in its individual, relational, and affective dimensions, and the limit it encounters is set by mutual respect for other individualities and identities, equally objectively entitled to the right to exist and express themselves freely and publicly.
For her, however, the limit to these freedoms and rights would seem to be sacrosanct, because it is determined by theological and moral considerations that take precedence over the manifestation of freedom itself, over its social and juridical relevance in the same manifestations mentioned above, and which not only influence the normative construction, but even the definition of "nature", "natural", "naturalness".
The issue ultimately becomes crucial in recognizing the dignity of the person and the "structure of citizenship": a complex, fascinating, and, in many cases, dramatic topic, like all those that penetrate the depths of people's lives, often causing serious consequences, crudely taken away from their control.
I therefore hope to be able to meet her soon for a public discussion.
Paolo Patanè, national president of Arcigay
