The culture of resignation is damaging

When I switched on my computer to find that this had been written for the Daily Express. In particular, the comments of Lord Rodger, a Justice of the Supreme Court, were dismaying:

Just as male hetero­sexuals are free to enjoy themselves playing rugby, drinking beer and talking about girls with their mates, so male homosexuals are to be free to enjoy themselves going to Kylie concerts, drinking exotically-coloured cocktails and talking about boys with their straight female mates.

This is, of course, an unfair stereotyope and something I fundamentally disagree with. People should not use stereotypes because they perpetuate myths about certain sections of society. They're also usually very incorrect. I don't agree with his comments and he should probably apologise for any offence caused. However, calling for his resignation is wrong.

As a liberal, I fully defend the right to free speech. People should be able to say what they like, though, as someone who also likes politeness, they should probably be considerate of others' feelings. That is still a matter of personal choice, however. But as I support freedom of speech, I cannot then credibly call for someone's resignation the moment I disagree with something they say. It undermines my belief in free speech, even if I have a fine record in defending the right of other people to say what they like. This does not mean, of course, that I cannot disagree with what others say. Of course I can, and I do, frequently. But I disagree strongly that someone have to resign for comments like Lord Rodger's.

Similarly, calls for Theresa May to resign, less than a week after she took office, over her past votes on Section 28 and other gay rights issues, was equally wrong. Furthermore, it wholly ignored the fact that laws - including those on gay rights - are decided by Parliament, not the Home Secretary. It was another case of false choice: say what you want, vote how you think is best, but you'll have to resign afterwards.

Another recent demonstration of this, in America, is the comments of Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele. He criticised the war in Afghanistan and said that the US should leave. He has now been called unpatriotic by a spokesman for the Democratic National Committee, and various conservative figures have called on him to resign, although Senators Lindsey Graham, Jim DeMint and John McCain demurred. Yet, as EJ Dionne writes,

Even if Steele was just popping off, he had a right to offer his opinion without being accused of undermining our troops or "rooting for failure".

That is absolutely right. We can't have a political culture in which people are castigated or forced to resign for having different opinions. Even if those opinions are ones we disagree with fundamentally, it undermines our personal record on freedom of speech. More than that, however, it forces out talented people, both by getting rid of people who say such things, and discouraging those who have diverse views. Theresa May is competent, certainly, and somewhat talented; I know little about Lord Rodger but he has a fine legal record. (I would not count Michael Steele in the talented category, however). We constantly call for politicians (and others) who are 'real', who don't tell 'lies'. Yet, the moment they say what they think, we call on them to resign. It is a fundamentally dangerous and damaging foundation on which to build a political culture.