Wilders appearence highlights a difficult dilemma

On Friday contreversial Dutch MP Geert Wilders came to the UK. He believes the Islamic holy book the Koran should be banned in his home of the Netherlands and came here to debate why he believes, the Koran and the customs that come from it, are a threat to European culture, including in the UK.

The peer who invited him, Lord Pearson, does not ebleive the Koran should be banned, but wans much more debate around the subject. The two disagreed on this in a civlised manner. That is more than can be said for some of the protesters who showed up to attack the decision to let Widlers here at all. They seem to be determined to prove Wilders has a point.

I don't except the case for banning the Koran either. But the portesters response does beg the question whether actually freedom for some extream groups needs to be restricted to protect the freedoms we value in society. When I refer to extream groups, I do not mean Builders, I mean the proteserts who took the chance to call for Sahriah law (which includes barbaric punishments such as 100 lashes, stoning to death and hand and foot amputation for certain 'immoral crimes' as they put it), and some for Builders himself to be sentenced to death for his views.

Lord Pearson points out such people are a small minority of Muslims, and this is of course true. On the other hand anything to toughen the laws on these people will be seen by many mainstream Muslims as an attack on them. It's a difficult dilemma for anyone who cares about Freedom, does that include the freedom to call for the full imposition against peoples will of Shariah law, or the right to call for someone to be put to death? or is allowing this a step by step approach to accepting an Islamic state and restrictions against people who support an Islamist (the pursuit of a world under Shariah law) agenda a neccersary evil in the short term to route them out, and imprison or send home if they are not from here, people abusing our freedom to pursue this agenda? Could current incitement laws by extended to include such people automatically? Should the next protest that has people calling for others to be put to death be met with the entire protest being shut down by arrests foreveryone holding such placards, as they are inciting hatred and our a threat to our culture by definition?

Wilders appearence creates more question than answers. Many will be baffled however over why so many are so concerned with Wilders coming here, yet those calling for public stonings or people to be sentenced to death for holding a different point of view, are allowed to protest in such away without so much of a flicker of a suggestion that this is not acceptable.