To ban or not to ban...

The papers reported today that a Dutch court has refused to ban the Brotherly Love, Freedom and Diversity Party (PNVD). Anti-paedophile campaigners brought the case in an attempt to prevent the party (which supports the legalisation of child and animal pornography and would allow violent porn to be shown on television) from running in the next general election. However the court refused to ban the party, stating that “it is up to the voter to give a judgement on the arguments of political parties”.

The reports that I read were fairly neutral in tone, but it was interesting to note that it was the child pornography, the animal pornography and the (obviously) violent pornography that were causing problems not your ordinary run of the mill porn pornography. I’m not suggesting these aren’t wrong but surely if one type of porn is wrong all porn is wrong or is that just naïve? I wonder if there would have been such an outcry if they had simply been campaigning for porn on daytime telly without the rest of it, and to be honest I’m not sure there would have been.

These are pretty contentious issues, and I empathise with the campaigners who wished to see the party outlawed. However I can’t help thinking that ultimately the court’s decision was the right one. Banning political parties has the effect of making them appear more serious, a genuine alternative. By allowing them to run in the election it is to be hoped that they will prove themselves to be a joke and thus contribute to their own defeat.