I should have worn heels -- life at 5'3" - Freedom of Speech or National Security?

09:02 pm - Freedom of Speech or National Security?

Whenever I have to send a package at the post office, I'm asked if there are any hazardous or dangerous items in my package.  Often I'll joke with the postal worker, saying, "only ideas."  Well, hazardous or dangerous ideas are no joke in the U.K.

I was listening to NPR today, and they were discussing on World Have Your Say the U.K.'s list of 16 people banned from entering the country for "fostering extremism or hatred."  I read these people fell under the far-right religious, anti-gay, anti-abortion, racial separatism, etc. headings. Now I couldn't disagree more vehemently with their viewpoints, and I'm all for advocating tolerance and acceptance of people of all lifestyles, races, sexes, orientation, etc.  But it does seem odd to me to ban certain people from entering a country because they've got some crazy ideas they want to express.  If they are doing so in a lawful way, then why not let them?  They can then be lawfully ridiculed for being nuts (or short-sighted or narrow-minded or whathaveyou).  It is unfortunate that the message many of the extremists is hurtful to so many groups.  But banning these people isn't going to change their minds or their message; it will only fuel their delusional vitriol.  I'm pretty sure that the argument for tolerance and acceptance can withstand any civil debate these people can dish out.  Healthy debate keeps us from becoming a stagnant, unquestioning population of drones. 

I'm still not sure exactly how this becomes a National Security issue requiring banned entry into the country.  Are these people plotting bombings?  Gathering terrorist cells?  From what I heard, it sounded like they just wanted to blow hot air and hold demonstrations. 

Now for all I know, the U.S. could have similar lists of banned people.  It would not surprise me if we did, but it would sadden me. 

The networks show the movie "The American President" on TV quite often.  It's a good film.  Michael Douglas, Annette Benning.  And I remember the first time watching it, the scene at the end where Michael Douglas as the President addresses the American people.  He has this big, long, moving, Hollywood-style monologue that wraps up the movie in a nice little bow and leaves you feeling all tingly about being an American.  Hollywood aside, there was a bit in that monologue that always stuck with me.  He says:

"America is advanced citizenship. You gotta want it bad, 'cause it's gonna put up a fight. It's gonna say, "You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating, at the top of his lungs, that which you
would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours."

It's a reminder that our rights and freedoms aren't intended for when things are easy and everyone's in agreement.  We have these rights and freedoms exactly for those times when we don't agree.  Everyone gets a voice.  Even the crazies.  Besides, who's to say that one day, I might be labeled the "crazy" with the subversive ideas?  And if that time comes, I'd want to know that I still had a right to my voice... before the people with the butterfly nets came for me.

Current Mood: thoughtful