Reply #23: I still think there is a difference in interpretation [View All]

[tocqueville]

the problem is not that you are a nice guy with a gun that you use for hunting and goes to a nice church and help your neighbours. The fact that you have those freedoms can still interfere with others. That why society has to put rules = limits.

Society doesn't have to take the risk to have somebody killed because it's easier to do it with a gun than without, besides the fact that you can go to prison if caught (we don't even take that risk). Therefore it can put a limit on the conditions for ownership of the gun, the gun type and its purpose. Your freedom in this case is an exception granted as a privilege and not the rule.

The practice of your religion can interfere with others : the fundies are a good example of that. In many other western countries they would be stopped by the simple fact that for example laws (majority rule) prohibit the use of religion in other spheres than private. That is to say they can express the will of teaching creationism at school, but they can't because its's forbidden in law (Majority says school = neutral). The pnly way they can change it is by CONVINCING by legal means (elections) that the law can be changed. Which means that they have to take a majority in government.

We agree about majority rule, you expressed better than I did.