|
I’m looking for opinions on a pretty serious subject: Free Speech.
So here is the deal, I’m sure many people don’t know, but a group called Wesboro Babtist Church tried to enter Canada on Thursday, after expressing publically their intention to protest two plays (both pro-homosexual in nature, one a comedy and one drama) and to demonstrate at the funeral of a man brutally murdered in Winnipeg carrying signs like ‘God hates Canada/Fags’ and the such.
The church believes that things like this murder, are God’s way of punishing Canada for legalizing gay marriage...
Anyways, Canada didn’t let them in. Stopped them at the boarder and denied them entry.
Legally, Canada had every right to deny them, but a lot of people are crying foul, saying we should respect free-speech enough to allow them in to protest. Others are saying it’s perfectly right, since what they were intending to do was hate speech and they aren’t even our citizens anyways.
So that’s the question: Does the ideal of freedom of speech mean Canada ought to allow foreign visitors' entrance after they have expressed their intention to disrupt and possibly engage in hate speech at a funeral and two theatre festivals?
[ ]
Want to answer more questions in the Miscellaneous category?
Maybe give some free advice about: Activism?
Here in Los Angeles, something similar happened.
As you probably know by now, the proposition givin to the people to vote on dealing with the legalization of same sex marriage passed in California and same sex marriage is officially illegal, as voted on by the people of my state.
Proposition 8.
I was passionately against this bill and wanted gay marriage legalized.
After the election, the "gay militia", as I call them, united in rage against those that supported and financially assisted the heterosexual-only marriage side (Yes on 8). Financial donors were publicized and if they were in any way attached to any businesses these businesses were boycotted. Good right? United in protest, right? Well in some aspects I feel this is NOT right, and I am a supporter of gay marriage.
For instance, at a restaurant here in Los Angeles which first opened its doors in the early 20th century, a 23 year employee donated $100 to the straights only marriage cause. An employee. After the election the restaurant was posted as a supporter of Prop 8, picketed daily by an angry mob and the mob shamed away all the patrons! Many of the employees, coincidentally many of them gay, had to be laid off because business was slow. Now this historical restaurant will close soon all because an employee, not the management or the ownership, donated $100 to the Yes on Prop 8 side. This employee, I feel, had this right to believe what she wanted to believe. No one should bully her into a contrary ideal. This aggressive tactic was, in my opinion, uncalled for.
Democracy is about freedom. I value differences of opinion, especially when that opinion is indepently and thoughtfully attained without the coercion of others. I love that at every political convention in the US there are areas of protest set aside so people can safely display their dissenting point of view. This is probably the solution I would of accepted in your story, assuming these people had legal papers to enter your country. Plus, it is the Canadian authorities responsibility to protect the civil rights of their citizens, so as long as nobody is harmed, protesting should occur, regardless of how you feel towards the cause.
Second, I've been to a funeral for an AIDS patient where people were protesting his gay lifestyle. They called his death right and just, and God's condemnation for his atrocious ways. I saw the faces of his mother and father who buried their gay son, and I appreciate their strength for staying in the moment. I was appalled and ashamed, but in hindsight, this only makes me stronger. Imagine a TV show without a dilemma, a movie without a villain, a book without a cause. It won't stand on contentment alone. There has to be a nemesis or the story is dull, the story will not Be. The nemesis' of the world keep us prepared. You and I and everyone in the world have a Right To Be. THAT is democracy.
]
I wish I knew all the details... But I admit this is the first I've heard. However... I have seen more than one video featuring the Westboro Baptist Church.
I don't know... So I can't say for sure... This is just a thought... They may not have been denied entry because of the actual protest. They may have been denied because, I'm pretty sure that demonstrating at a funeral would be considered 'disrupting the peace.' In which case, even if they had been allowed entry... If they had showed up at the funeral the police would have been called anyway to escort them off the premisis. You know how... When a party gets too rowdy the police show up because the neighbours are complaining? Same principle.
]
I don't think Canada can/should refuse them entry to the country based solely on that. Canadian police, however, can make sure that no major disturbances occur while the group is in Canada.
Personally, I think the church group was being completely tactless. I can't imagine someone thinking it's perfectly okay to protest at a FUNERAL, no matter the reason. So it makes sense that Canada would want to nip that in the bud.
The thing is, Americans shouldn't go into another country in such a rude fashion, expecting "free speech rights" when their sole mission is to make a mockery of that country's laws and disrespect the people in that country. It doesn't matter what somebody's personal viewpoint is... people should have respect for other cultures. Period.
Maybe Canada should respect free speech enough to allow them in to protest... but I really think the problem is that those people in the church group should respect Canada enough to show some tact. I don't blame Canadian officials for refusing them entry at all. In fact, I think it was a good decision on their part. They're just trying to keep the peace. If Americans want to protest, they can at least be mature about it.
I'm not just saying that because of my personal experience with Baptist churches and obnoxious Americans. My opinion is based on respecting other people, which is obviously what the church group did not intend to do at all.
So does the ideal of freedom of speech mean Canada should let those people in? No. I believe that was a very wise decision on Canada's part and prevented major disturbances at the funeral and theatre festivals.
]
Because I don't know the legalities, I can't give fact, but only opinion. I personally think that canada was correct in not allowing ANYONE to come into the country with the intent to disrupt a funeral and/or the festivals. It's safe to say that from here until the end of time, people will protest those things that they are strongly against. And noone is trying to fault this church for protesting or have an opinion. It's not the fact that they protested, it's the way in which they chose to do so. There are much more civilized and legal ways to protest. These options should have been explored by the church. So to answer your question, NO. I do NOT think that any freedom of speech rights should allow people to come into another country and not only disrupt and make people uncomfortable, but to also harass the citezans at the funeral and/or festivals. There is a line that should never be crossed and this church crossed that line by far. I hope this answer helped a little. Again, it's only my opinion.
<3 Leslie
]
Well, you have a whole bunch of issues here that beg to be more defined and more elaborated on.
I do NOT know of any situation where Canada simply denies entry for political reasons! SO... what is the OFFICIAL view of the Canadian government on this? What did the border crossing officers indicate as the reason for denying entry?
Did everyone in the church group have the proper national documents, such as a passport and/or visa? I do not know but I DO think that Canadian border crossing guards DO ask for the purpose of the visit, so disrupting protests may be a factor, but legally, I do not know without information of the official reason for turning the church group away.
And besides, for all of its faults and all of its favors, Canada is NOT a Democracy, so I do not understand where this "free speech" thing comes from. Canada is a Parliamentary system which is a system that puts power into the hands of the elite, and for crying out loud, they STILL think that Elizabeth Windsor is a Queen, when England has not had a monarchy since 1824 -- and Canadians STILL say they are subjects to Windsor Palace when Canada is an independent nation!!!!!
So go figure.
]
No they don't. "Free speech" doesn't mean you can go to another country and terrorize someone's funeral because of something they did with their life. There comes a point where protesting has gone to far, and when a group of people feel they have to ruin someone's funeral just to make a point- to me that's wrong.
If you want to protest, stay in OUR country and protest somewhere else. Ruining someone's funeral because you feel it's your RIGHT to protest is just rude and arrogant.
--Jack
(16/m)
]
More Questions: |