That's a bit paradox, isn't it? If the only allowed way to change the rules is in response to behavior you deem unhealthy to society, how can we should not int

That's a bit paradox, isn't it? If the only allowed way to change the rules is in response to behavior you deem unhealthy to society, how can we should not interfere if the rules have not been broken? And deeming something as being unhealthy to society is a sort of process of dislike in a subjective notion since there is no objective way for a society to be unhealthy.