In one of the first great acts of her tenure as Home Secretary, Theresa May MP has banned the Muslim public speaker Zakir Naik from entering the UK to give a series of talks. She has cited the reasons for this action as being the "unacceptable behaviour" of Naik, regarding certain unidentified comments. It is at this point that I take it upon myself to highlight to the Home Secretary the pompous folly of her actions, and the myriad issues surrounding the suppression of free speech that are once more called into play with this announcement. Certainly, Mrs. May should be well advised to think carefully before crying "unacceptable behaviour".
As disclosed in the midst of post-election confusion and cabinet speculation, May's voting record in the House of Commons reveals some highly questionable opinions from the person who is now both Home Secretary and Minister for Women and Equality. Having repeatedly voted against the banning of fox hunting, adoption by unmarried gay couples, and abstaining from such votes as that to lower the age of sexual consent for gay couples to 16, Theresa May herself would herself be considered guilty of "unacceptable behaviour" by many liberally-minded sectors of British society. I certainly find her views no more acceptable than I do those of Islamist preachers. And if persons might be denied entry to the UK based on views regarding propagation of 'extreme' religious views, should not a state visit from Pope Benedict XVI also come into question, after he claimed that Britain's legislation to equalise gay rights "violates natural law", and in previous statements has claimed condom usage proliferates HIV/AIDS? I believe it should. Theresa May, whose party has long decried New Labour's 'Nanny State', obviously disagrees with me.
Yes, this is all another murky puddle of 'free speech' and 'no platform' business. Recently I have oft found myself using the quotation attributed to Voltaire: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." In the same way that I find the dispositions of May and her fellow Conservative Party MPs to be unacceptable- nigh on offensive- I accept that, in a society that we proclaim to be democratic, while I may not believe that what they say is valid, I believe entirely that their right to say it is. Geert Wilders should not have been barred from showing his film Fitna, in the same way that Naik should not be barred from speaking words that might be likely to offend. For this is not simply a matter of allowing others free speech, but of strengthening our own also. The further we limit our exposure to extreme or offensive opinions, the further we limit our propensity to construct an informed and effective response. Censorship is never the answer- silencing what we hear only has the effect of silencing what we say.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment