3 ms·

Do you really believe that? "Can't bring any good to anyone" is such a low bar for making something illegal. I understand restrictions in the case that an acti

Do you really believe that? "Can't bring any good to anyone" is such a low bar for making something illegal. I understand restrictions in the case that an action actively hurts someone, but only permitting actions that the government deems good is a worrisome trend. Even if an action appears to do some small harm, I would argue it is often more harmful to ban it. A ban suggests enforcement and punishment, and in marginal cases, the cost of banning an action can be greater than the reward of its absence. Finally, some people believe that the ability to determine for oneself whether an action is good is a benefit in its own right. I for one would much prefer for the government not to tell me with such absolute certainty the morality of my expressions. Just my personal stance.

astrobe_ 11y ago
> Do you really believe that? I do, but it's not important. I was trying to state the average point of view of European countries. > "Can't bring any good to anyone" is such a low bar for making something illegal Perhaps the wrong wording, but by this I meant "obviously" bad actions. Driving while being drunk doesn't right away cause harm (if you're lucky enough), but it is dangerous and therefore unacceptable. Hate speech doesn't cause direct harm because "that's just words after all", but hatred is dangerous and spreading it is considered not acceptable by a majority of people. > I for one would much prefer for the government not to tell me with such absolute certainty the morality of my expressions Individual rights and the rights of the People are in conflict (e.g. the right to go naked versus the right not to have to see you naked). In democratic countries, it is solved by letting the people vote laws to strike a balance between the two. At least in theory, it's not the government that tells you what moral and what is not: it's the people around you.

astrobe_ 11y ago

> Do you really believe that? I do, but it's not important. I was trying to state the average point of view of European countries. > "Can't bring any good to anyone" is such a low bar for making something illegal Perhaps the wrong wording, but by this I meant "obviously" bad actions. Driving while being drunk doesn't right away cause harm (if you're lucky enough), but it is dangerous and therefore unacceptable. Hate speech doesn't cause direct harm because "that's just words after all", but hatred is dangerous and spreading it is considered not acceptable by a majority of people. > I for one would much prefer for the government not to tell me with such absolute certainty the morality of my expressions Individual rights and the rights of the People are in conflict (e.g. the right to go naked versus the right not to have to see you naked). In democratic countries, it is solved by letting the people vote laws to strike a balance between the two. At least in theory, it's not the government that tells you what moral and what is not: it's the people around you.