SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Neocon who wrote (538047)2/10/2004 12:59:30 PM
From: Kevin Rose  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
I agree with the premise that sometimes, tolerance seems to take time. It is an unfortunate fact of human nature. One generation digs its heels in against progressive change, and it is up to subsequent generations to realize that progress.

I also agree that it is the law protects against potentially dangerous activities. However, I disagree that there should be a moral component to legislation. Laws protect our young from predatory behaviors, exploitation, and abuse, because they are not yet old enough to make their own choices. Thus, laws that prevent youths from smoking, buying certain legal drugs, and even restrictions on driving, are all protective laws that do not attempt to impose any morality, but instead use 'common sense' to protect those who cannot adequately protect themselves.

I believe eventually many laws that are based purely on 'morality', or its historical equivalent, will fall away as a natural result of democracy. I believe this is what many of the religious moralists see as the 'decay of our society'. As a society obtains more freedoms, it naturally grants freedom to individuals to make lifestyle choices that are seen as deviant and even abhorrent to others. As long as these 'freedoms' do not endanger others, and the proper protections are in place for our youth, it is an inevitable benefit of the progress of a democracy.