Had a conversation regarding perception and progress today, among other topics.
It seems that mankind's progress is not without consequences.
As people continue to seek rights, freedoms and individual acceptance according to their own tastes, something may be traded away in pursuing equality and acceptance.
It is easy to “live and let live”, and this approach to life seems to 'work' until someone's desires encroach on the rights, moral convictions and ethical alignments of others.
Since the laws, ideas and efforts authored by mankind are authored by humans, and since “to err is human”, the effort to perfect society in accommodating all people and their personal desires, has inherent fault.
Not that all people cannot be safe, justified or included by the laws of men or the aims of rights, but where can the line drawn be drawn in seeking a freedom for one person if that freedom causes restrictions for another person?
What needs to be found is the backstop, the bottom-line and the basic and universal truth of what is right and wrong regarding rights, freedoms, laws, consequences, etc..
But what if some folks desire not to follow what has been a constant reality since mankind began to gather together to form societies?
What if mankind desires to make for themselves a new method of law and order, now calling what is arguably 'wrong' as 'right'?
How can you convince someone they are not what popular culture suggests they are?
The conversation meandered into sexual preferences, with one conversationalist mentioning their personal interests as something they were born with.
The question was asked if bestiality or pedophilia would be acceptable or something that a law or government could allow, protect or defend as a right.
For those who indulge in such depravity, how could they be convinced of their depravity or that their desires are problematic?
It is easy to conclude how the slippery slope of arguing for the rights of individual freedoms can trump sensibility, for what may be acceptable for someone could be outright wicked for someone else, contributing to the eventual destabilizing of society [please read] that objective historical overviews reveal.
Can law and order be based on a culture's current tastes or the demanded acceptance of what for aeons has been considered decadent, depraved and void of decency?
If not, why then does mankind desire to replace and undo the order that Today's societies and cultures have been built upon and are currently enjoyed?
Consider the following when reflecting upon the cultural climate of your city, state, nation / country:
As dead flies give perfume a bad smell, so a little folly outweighs wisdom and honor.
The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.
Even as fools walk along the road, they lack sense and show everyone how stupid they are...
There is an evil I have seen under the sun, the sort of error that arises from a ruler:
Fools are put in many high positions, while the rich occupy the low ones.
I have seen slaves on horseback, while princes go on foot like slaves.
Whoever digs a pit may fall into it; whoever breaks through a wall may be bitten by a snake.
Whoever quarries stones may be injured by them; whoever splits logs may be endangered by them.
Words from the mouth of the wise are gracious, but fools are consumed by their own lips.
At the beginning their words are folly; at the end they are wicked madness—and fools multiply words.
No one knows what is coming—who can tell someone else what will happen after them?
Woe to the land whose king was a servant and whose princes feast in the morning.
Blessed is the land whose king is of noble birth and whose princes eat at a proper time—for strength and not for drunkenness.
- Ecclesiastes 10: 1-3, 5-9, 12-14, 16-17