Wednesday, February 25, 2004
I am not being extreme simply because I say that it is wrong for the government to interfere in people's personal lives in the name of maintaining moral health of the society. It is the cornerstone of liberty, and needs to always be borne in mind. This definitely not my own morals. Yes, I do absolutely believe that I have every right to decide what I do with my life, and my body, as long as it does not cause harm to the rights of another person. At the same time, I need not restrict my rights just so you will not be offended. This law goes for everyone. Even in the very issue we are discussing, viz gay rights, I would always side with the conservatives if something were to try restricting their right to criticize the gays. It is their right, as long as they do not cause physical harm (or forced mental harm), I would say the gays just have to turn a deaf year to them and lead their lives.
This standard does not exist in your view. What is deemed right and wrong, and what I could, and could not do, is completely at the hands of the government, and a majority of the society to decide. That is the greatest threat to individual rights, and I abhor it. I do not see why I should temper it any.
As to your last comment, well, if you think I should have undergone personal persecution to feel anger at something that is wrong, well, all I could say is that we are different, and that is not so with me. And one more thing - please stop asking me to cool down, I can assure you that I have not been a bit angry with any of your stands (even though I disagree with them completely).
Comments: Post a Comment