Rand Paul: “I rise with great concerns over this legislation--both over its content and what it represents. First, I think it is…”

“I rise with great concerns over this legislation--both over its content and what it represents. First, I think it is absurd that the U.S. Congress believes it has the responsibility and authority to rectify the inappropriate statements of individuals in foreign countries. Have we moved beyond meddling in the internal affairs of foreign countries--as bad as that is--to even meddling in the very thoughts and words of foreign leaders and citizens? It is the obligation of the U.S. Congress to correct the ``wrong thoughts'' of others that have nothing to do with the United States? Additionally, is it our place to demand that other sovereign states, such as the members of the European Union, react as we say they must to certain international events? More troubling than what is stated in this legislation, however, is the kind of thinking that this approach represents. The purpose of this legislation is to punish inappropriate thoughts and speech--to free debate on difficult topics and issues. In this, it contains a whiff of totalitarian thinking. This legislation advances the disturbing idea that condemnatory speech that does not explicitly incite violence is nevertheless inherently dangerous. It asserts that even debating controversial topics inevitably leads to violence. This is absurd on its face: it is only debate that leads us to come to understandings over controversial topics without violence. That is why nations engage in diplomacy.…”