Question

I asked this in the column, but apparently it escaped the Rabbi’s notice.
In the case of a stubborn and rebellious son, he is killed on account of what he will ultimately become.
In our completely democratic country, people are punished for incitement to violence and not only for committing physical violence with their own hands.
What is so terrible about a non-democratic country dealing forcefully with a large organized movement [which is itself a sin in their eyes] that persuades people against vaccines [and creates epidemics, suffering, and disasters], that persuades people against science and evolution [preaching backwardness and ignorance]? This will necessarily bring evil and suffering upon the nation [assuming that progress and science improve the world, and the opposite does the opposite]. And I understand that they also demonstrate against scholars who explain their errors [silencing anyone who dares to think, unlike that same group]. And at the end of the day this is not a democratic country, and whoever does not like the government’s way of operating there, which is accepted there in order to benefit the citizens [or at least what the government sees as such], should go off to the deserts and the like, or to democratic countries that allow such craziness to flourish.
There it is not suitable.
Why does the Rabbi see this as something so terrible?
[It has not escaped my notice that the whole aforesaid group, or most of them, are probably inadvertent sinners in their stupidity, or even like children taken captive by stupidity, and still, in the government’s view, they are harmful and dangerous.]