Skip to main content

Defend to the Death...

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"

Voltaire

The exclusion from the UK of Geert Wilders, a Dutch MP who has some rather trenchantly hostile views about Islam was simply craven. I don't necessarily believe what he says, and I certainly disagree with the manner in which he expresses himself. However I do believe that free speech should be kept free, no matter what.

Perhaps even more offensive do I find these American nutters from the Westboro' Baptist Church, who mostly seem to be related to each other. They are childish and ridiculous controversialists. Their latest immature stunt is to picket some play in Britain, because it might not regard homosexuals as sub-humans with a one-way ticket to Hell.

Apparently these nutters picketing a school are somehow less prejudicial to public order than a private seminar inside the British Parliament Building hosted by several Members of the House of Lords.

Now following on from the same logic that banned an elected politician from a friendly country, one might expect that these pathetic bunch of nutters would also face a ban. On the other hand perhaps not.

If not, then the Home secretary should surely resign (I mean on an issue apart from her manifest greed and incompetence).

The fact is that Britain is now happy to restrict free speech all over the world through the disgraceful manipulation of our too-broad libel laws by greedy lawyers. Nevertheless a free country must have free speech, even for inbred nutters from Hicksville and certainly for Dutch MPs.

I don't necessarily like what they say, but it is not up to the state to decide whether I should be allowed to hear them or not.

Comments

Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...