[CatoRenasci]

Ensuring that we have the right to do what we ought is a sound basis for extending rights and for allowing the limitation of them. What do you find objectionable in the statement if it is not that there is a basis for limiting rights?

Because people don't agree on what we "ought" to do. It's that simple. As Cromwell put it, "I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken."

[Greg F]

Because people don’t agree on what we “ought” to do.

___________________________________________________

People don’t need to agree on what is right and wrong to make a law in our system. It’s a majority rule system with some rights guaranteed in the Constitution. All else is a matter of persuasion and numbers. Shorhand, but you get my point.

I think it is much, much more important to fight for the right to do things we “ought” to do, for example speak freely, than for things we “ought not” do, such as prostitution or drug use.