|
|
I would agree, but with an addendum to your statement:
"not as sad as that there are still people around who want to control how others can/cannot live where it effects no one else other than themselves and consenting adults"
The state nor anyone else should be able to dictate what we want to think or do in private or that we choose to do to ourselves as long as we are not clinically mentally impaired and a danger to ourselves and others.
Examples, sexuality, beliefs, recreational drug use, risky or dangerous sports etc.
The State should be able to control how we live with regards to the impacts of actions or innactions that do have an effect on others, specifically those that are unwelcome by those effected.
Examples, stealing, assault, unreasonable nuisance etc.
Laws, rules and social pressures to conform to a certain lifestyle based on controlling the moral behaviour of individuals which include those that effect no one else tend to be by and large religiously based. There are examples of non religious ideologies where a persons private affairs are controlled, but they tend to be very rare, extreme and certainly for Western societies, anachronistic anathemas*.
We still however have a soft spot for religion, especially for those that were historically integral to our political and legal systems of power and influence.
To this day we make exception and exemptions for religious groups and bodies from equality laws even with regard to who they employ in tax payer funded schools.
* Historic examples of totalitarian communism for example that are generally considered to be failed, disastrous and often abhorrent events in human history. There are still a few examples of communist states like China, but even they are changing if slowly. |
|
Author: Bl4ckGryph0n
26-11-2019 02:58:51
Author