Amazon.com Widgets

Is it acceptable to curtail individual rights in the best interest of society?

  • Yes, it is acceptable if it prevents other individuals from being harmed

    Some things people want to do may cause harm to other people. For instance, smoking in a bar could cause physical damage to the people around them force to inhale the secondhand smoke. For this reason it is acceptable to curtail individual rights if it is in the best interest of others.

  • In the interest of the world.

    Let's start off with the basics of human rights. Everybody regardless of race, gender or sexuality is (or should be) guaranteed the rights to personal freedom, the legal ability to self defense (with the use of weapons specifically), and the right to unhindered self determination. Those are most of the basics, but I may have left out a few. The government should have nothing to do with the legal actions of its citizens, due to a minority's dissolution to the actions being performed. Nobody should ever have the power to force other human beings to live a certain way because that one person, or a small minority' thinks that their way is the best. If a law abiding citizen wishes to carry an AR-15 in public, the government should have no say in it, as long as said citizen is doing such actions safely. Adding on the fact that when the previously mentioned minority's riot and whine when they aren't allowed to restrict the basic human rights of other people, especially free speech. Thanks for reading, i'm always open to debate.

  • Individual rights must be preserved.

    It is not acceptable to curtail individual rights even if it will benefit society. There is a certain cost and risk of freedom which is often more than we wish and in turbulent times the subject of curtailing individual rights always seems to come back up. The problem is once we have relinquished our rights it is much more difficult to get them back, and we would really miss them.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.