Curious George
Veteran Member
Can we draw a line by which we say a government authority ought to be limited? If so, where is that line? In the U.S. we have levels of scrutiny by which Court systems review whether a statute violates the government's authority as detailed by our constitutions (state and federal).
For fundamental rights strict scrutiny is often involved. However, there are lesser degrees of scrutiny which courts employ based on the type of law, the people affected, and the rights affected.
In addition to this we have some areas that are carved out as it was never the intent of the people to limit the government in regulation.
I often hear, or see written, the notion that "your freedom to swing your arms ends where my nose begins." While this is pragmatic for conceptualization it is hardly coherent.
Most would want some form of limitation. I want to know what your line is, how you rationalize it, and to discuss whether or not such lines are consistent.
Some issues to consider: Vaccinations, guns, discrimination, abortion, freedom of speech, circumcision, freedom of religion.
For fundamental rights strict scrutiny is often involved. However, there are lesser degrees of scrutiny which courts employ based on the type of law, the people affected, and the rights affected.
In addition to this we have some areas that are carved out as it was never the intent of the people to limit the government in regulation.
I often hear, or see written, the notion that "your freedom to swing your arms ends where my nose begins." While this is pragmatic for conceptualization it is hardly coherent.
Most would want some form of limitation. I want to know what your line is, how you rationalize it, and to discuss whether or not such lines are consistent.
Some issues to consider: Vaccinations, guns, discrimination, abortion, freedom of speech, circumcision, freedom of religion.