[California Patriot]

There may have been a better response, but we weren't there.

My sympathies are completely with the old man. This is an example of civil society, instead of the state, enforcing moral standards. If more of it happened, we'd need fewer laws ... and more important, we'd be a healthier society.

The fact that so many FReepers don't understand this is disappointing. They don't seem to understand that there will always be some form of authority. The question is what form it takes.

[California Patriot]

At a minimum, prosecuting him was an outrageous abuse.

[O.C. - Old Cracker]

This is an example of civil society, instead of the state, enforcing moral standards. If more of it happened, we'd need fewer laws ... and more important, we'd be a healthier society.

Yes! Thank you.

Public shame over immorality was once the norm, but then the 1960s came and we have been careening downhill ever since.

[monday]

"This is an example of civil society, instead of the state, enforcing moral standards. If more of it happened, we'd need fewer laws ... and more important, we'd be a healthier society."

I disagree. It happens all the time and almost always ends badly. Who decides what behavior is unacceptable and how much force to use in correcting the offender? Everyone seems to want the right to correct others misbehavior. Enforcers have shot people who rudely cut them off in traffic or flip them off. Is this their right?

A punch in the nose for offensive language falls into this same category of misdirected vigilante justice that isn't acceptable in civilized society.

If you claim the right for you to correct others misbehavior, you must be aware that others will demand the same right for themselves as well?

Most people will not be as judicious as you might be in the enforcement of "moral standards". Indeed. Not everyone shares the same "moral standards".

You would prefer everyone was given the right to enforce their own "moral standards"?