As many know by now, the city council in Berkley, California has made a decision to ban Marine recruiters and everyone is up-in-arms about it (pun intended).
Of course, this has caused a major stir among citizens, veterans groups, and even some members of the federal government who have threatened to withhold federal money to the city! Having been threatened by the feds, the city government of Berkley is now changing their tune.
The prevailing reasoning for disagreement with the local government of Berkley is that the Marines have been an organization who have ensured that Berkley (and the rest of the country) have the kind of freedom that we have, which I readily agree with, and so banning the Marines from the area is considered disgraceful, especially during a time of war.
However, if the rest of the country is going to use freedom as the excuse for dictating the kinds of choices a local government should be making, perhaps the following two questions should be given some thought:
1. What is the point of having the freedom that the Marines ensure if the use of such freedom is frowned upon?
2. If we expect Berkley not to use the freedom that the Marines have ensured, are the Marines really ensuring them with any freedom at all?