ponder this when someone does something that merely "offends"

[acroyear]

Dispatches from the Culture Wars: Solzhenitsyn the Social Conservative:

[...] human rights and human obligations are synonymous. We are obligated, by virtue of demanding our own liberty, to protect the liberty of others. That is our primary obligation, to respect the right of others to make choices that we don't like when those choices do not undermine our own equal right to do the same. Only when those choices are in conflict does "society" - i.e. the government - justly get involved.

Solzhenitsyn and Thomas would no doubt call this "moral relativism," but that is a hollow argument. It is, in fact, merely the assertion of a moral absolute that they disagree with, the assertion that it is immoral to deny others the right to self-determination within the boundaries of the equal rights of others.

Comments

[eiredrake.livejournal.com]

So... it's ok to invade other countries as long as you claim to be fighting for their human rights despite the fact that you're killing them by the hundreds of thousands?

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

no - that is denying the rights of those killed. if you can't solve the problem of a repressive government diplomatically, well, you keep finding ways to solve the problem diplomatically.

when you cross that line of killing to prove your point (as opposed to killing because you or someone you were defending were explicitly attacked), you've violated rights and become a hypocrite.

at a certain point, you have to say we can do no more. and you CERTAINLY have to admit that at a certain point, intervention is more harm than good (the Brits figured this out in the 1920s in Iraq; well documented, too).

by offends, I was more referring to the offenses of speech and action that many would like to be illegal, like pornography or the right to criticize religion (a BIG one that the fundies are fighting for, and in Europe, thanks to the Danish cartoons controversy that shouldn't be one, they are succeeding).

no one has the right to not be offended, but no one has the right to act on that offense through violence.

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

case in point - I was not in favor of the afghan invasion because i thought the taliban sucked as far as their treatment of their citizens and their rights goes.

the afghan invasion was critical because that specifically was the training ground for al quaeda and the government of afghanistan was explicitly encouraging the actions of that group throughout the world.

[uncle-possum.livejournal.com]

Reminded of the legend over the main entrance of an Iowa library, built, iirc, during the Depression:

"If nothing in this library offends you, please complain"