P
Philip_P
Guest
In several recent threads there has been discussion on various protests and other demonstrations related to the Iraq war. On the one hand, those who oppose the war have been arguing that free speech is important, even when the nation is at war. On the other hand, those who support the war have been arguing that such speech must be responsible.
This criteria - of responsibility - seems worth focusing on specifically. What does it mean, exactly?
At one extreme it would seem to outlaw all dissent during war time completely. Dissent is “aiding and abetting the enemy” hence treason, hence illegal, hence not allowed. On the other extreme, going over to Iraq to fight with the insurgency, or giving weapons and money to those who are fighting in the insurgency, may claim “free speech” but in actuality would be treason.
Here is where I draw the line: Active, explicit material support for those we are fighting (i.e. sending money to Al Queda) or physically attacking our soldiers is crossing the line. Marching, participating in a demonstration, writing letters to the editor, or other forms of public protest, however, are completely legit, and in fact are a sign of the strength and vitality of democratic society.
It seems that the burden of argumentation here is on the pro-war side. I don’t think I’ve met a single person on the boards who has argued that a pro-war demonstration should be disallowed or is irresponsible. More than a few, however, have either explicity or strongly suggested that anti-war demonstrations should either be disallowed or run very close to treason. So here’s your chance to clarify your position. What is “responsible” protest? Can one ever publicly protest against the war? Are you literally saying that such protests ought to be prevented, or simply that you disagree with the message?
This criteria - of responsibility - seems worth focusing on specifically. What does it mean, exactly?
At one extreme it would seem to outlaw all dissent during war time completely. Dissent is “aiding and abetting the enemy” hence treason, hence illegal, hence not allowed. On the other extreme, going over to Iraq to fight with the insurgency, or giving weapons and money to those who are fighting in the insurgency, may claim “free speech” but in actuality would be treason.
Here is where I draw the line: Active, explicit material support for those we are fighting (i.e. sending money to Al Queda) or physically attacking our soldiers is crossing the line. Marching, participating in a demonstration, writing letters to the editor, or other forms of public protest, however, are completely legit, and in fact are a sign of the strength and vitality of democratic society.
It seems that the burden of argumentation here is on the pro-war side. I don’t think I’ve met a single person on the boards who has argued that a pro-war demonstration should be disallowed or is irresponsible. More than a few, however, have either explicity or strongly suggested that anti-war demonstrations should either be disallowed or run very close to treason. So here’s your chance to clarify your position. What is “responsible” protest? Can one ever publicly protest against the war? Are you literally saying that such protests ought to be prevented, or simply that you disagree with the message?
