(from Signposts)

There seems to be increasingly the idea that the ends justifies the means in the "war against terrorism", that there is one rule for one group of people and a totally different rules for people that are not the same as us. And in the midst of it all, we suddenly have people saying that people who have the opportunity to do so should not express their viewpoints on political issues because it would be inappropriate. Phil posted yesterday about the growing feeling that even expressing those viewpoints from the pulpit or in denominational papers might be seen as inappropriate.

Since when is the primary concern of people of conviction (whether it be a conviction about peace, justice, war or whatever) what is appropriate? Since when are statements which are not otherwise offensive (eg racist) not permitted in the public arena, simply because we might disagree with them or because they might rock the boat?