讀後心得

The voice actor "亞亞" faced the revocation of their residency permit by the Ministry of the Interior's Immigration Agency due to comments advocating for military unification, and left for China on the evening of the 25th. In response, 75 scholars jointly criticized the government's decision as a violation of freedom of speech. Physician and writer 楊斯棓 pointed out that this matter should be viewed through an international standard, emphasizing that freedom of speech does not mean one can threaten national security. He cited that making similar statements in the United States could lead to serious consequences, and believes that Taiwan's handling of the situation has been relatively tolerant. He called for vigilance against hostile speech in a free society to defend the democratic system.

Ayaya left on the evening of the 25th, embracing her husband before departure. The mixed-voice "Ayaya" was stripped of her residency permit by the Immigration Agency of the Ministry of the Interior due to her involvement in pro-unification rhetoric, and she departed last night. Regarding this issue, today (the 26th), 75 scholars issued a joint statement advocating for freedom of speech and criticizing the government's decision to demand Ayaya's departure.

A physician-writer pointed out the "blind spot" of the scholars, arguing that this incident should be viewed through the lens of American standards. If Ayaya had made statements threatening the nation in the U.S., she might face severe penalties such as deportation, bluntly stating that "freedom of speech is not a get-out-of-jail-free card for national security." Liu Zhenya, for advocating unification by force, had her residency permit revoked by the Immigration Agency and returned to Quanzhou, China on the night of the 25th.

The scholars released a joint statement indicating that the Mainland Affairs Council's claim that Liu Zhenya supports unification by force and the demand for her departure is "an abuse of administrative discretion." They also criticized the president for continuously using populism to rally supporters, which compresses freedom of speech in Taiwan.

Scholars noted that under the U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act, if a foreign national incites hostile actions against the U.S., even if not yet executed, it may constitute grounds for deportation. If a foreign individual claims "my homeland should unify with the U.S. by force," it could trigger national security alerts, leading to deportation or being placed on a blacklist.

They emphasized that while freedom of speech is a core value of democratic societies, when speech directly challenges the nation's existence or advocates for the use of foreign force to annex the country, it ceases to be "diverse opinions" and becomes "hostile actions" that undermine democratic systems.

They stated that in a free society, not every utterance can be made irresponsibly. If Taiwan aims to protect its democratic system, it cannot unconditionally tolerate "hostile speech disguised as freedom."