This letter is written to respond to Robert Haslag's letter printed in the News Tribune Jan. 16.
I wonder just how much Mr. Haslag is willing to give up to achieve his utopian world of everyone just getting along for the "common good?" Granted, his letter doesn't say that, however, it's what I get from the body of his letter. It sounds as if disagreement and debate are good as long as everyone eventually agrees and there are no winners or losers. Oh, I might mention also that I wonder how Mr. Haslag would deal with the government taking his property for a Walmart or to protect a kangaroo rat for a "practical solution" or "the common good."
Is it a "practical solution" or "common good" to limit free speech to attempt to stop all deranged individuals in this country? It is folly to think that only allowing certain levels of speech controversy will end senseless violence. It sure doesn't sound like what our founding fathers did to create this great nation or what they intended in order for this great nation to survive.
Granted, there needs to be and is within our justice system, controls in place to deal with those who are not able mentally to deal with differences in opinion or ideology without violence. What is obvious is that political correctness has so tied the hands of our justice system such that dangerous criminals are not adequately controlled.
How can there be freedom if we always have to give up our beliefs just because some politician's perceived intent for the "common good" is for only for votes. Is one to just stand by and let our country be destroyed while the politicians and media decide what the "common good" is? The terms "common good" and "practical solution" are themselves endlessly debatable. On whose opinion should we rely for what is the "common good" or "practical solution"?
As long as we have a president who has said (and apparently believes) "if they bring a knife, we'll bring a gun" to solve problems then Mr. Haslag can forget about civil discourse. What this statement should tell anyone that whatever politician or bureaucrat attempts to stifle public discourse in any way will not be truly for "the common good."