When I studied politics at school, I was led to believe that a democracy is essentially majority-rule.
If this is the case (which imo it isn't) then why is it we are told that we have to accept things like homosexuality and Islam without question, whilst at the same time being told that we are not allowed to express majority views, which are often misinterpreted as racist, sexist, xenophobic etc.
It seems to me that the modern democracy upholds views of minorities, whilst majority views are labelled as discrimination.
Is this fair?
2006-10-11 00:14:14 · 8 answers · asked by shoby_shoby2003 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I like in the UK, but I gather that this question is applicable to most modern "politically correct" Western countries.
2006-10-11 00:24:17 · update #1
Hi,
Certain groups within society capture the rhetoric and media attention, so are more influential.
No, it is not fair but it is inevitable, always people will compete for power. I don't know what country you are from but here in Britain we are rapidly becoming a Pressarchy; the press and other media wield an excessive amount of power. The views of a urban elite are represented as the voice of England, but as we say here, you don't enter England till you leave London.
Despite what is said elsewhere here homosexuality is not genetic, a moments thought will reveal that this is unquestionably true, therefore it is a choice or a mental aberration. Many homosexuals who have undergone therapy report that they came to realise that their homosexuality is a result of some early problem in their life. We do however, suffer from widespread Hetrophobia.
Yes, some minority rights are protected and that is good but which ones? And which ones are ignored? And why? The media's hidden agenda?
2006-10-11 00:22:33 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Majority should rule, however in some instances the minority must be protected, the civil rights of minoritys is an example. What if the majority feels that it is ok to own slaves, should there be slavery? All Islam is not warlike. Homosexuality is really not a choice. These people are human and at minumum their civil rights should be protected. If the majority felt it was ok to have a homosexual hunting season would you bring your club to bash their heads in. Most would not. But that is the reason why, it takes all kinds to form a village.
2006-10-11 07:24:45 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The majority has decided, in a deliberate and thoughtful way, that minority rights are protected. This sort of important decision is not made in a knee-jerk or snapshot way, but after much consideration and discussion.
Your understanding from school is adolescent. I hope you did not stop thinking just because you finished formal education.
You can and are entitled to shoot off your mouth all you want. In some public areas, that right is restricted - calling the women at work "*****" will get you fired, and it should. In your home, in your writings, and on the street you can do this as much as you want.
"Is this fair?" seems a bit whiny. Knock it off !
There - I just exercised my rights. Ain't the USA grand !!
2006-10-11 07:30:58 · answer #3 · answered by John the Revelator 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Society decides what is aceptable or unacceptable. Majority rules but the rights of all citizens have to be addressed. Freedom of religion is a foundation of this country.
The problem as I see it that politicians do what ever to get votes including tromping on the majority opinions in the name of protecting minorities, and we have become more of a socialist society than some of the former socialist countries in the former eastern block.
2006-10-11 07:29:13 · answer #4 · answered by waggy_33 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No person is sovereign to judge morality.
Law is dictated by natural logic, ethics, and evidenciary support by context, action, and effect, whether or not a thing is moral, ethical, or downright evil.
No matter who is "in charge", raping women and killing babies will still be wrong.
That fact alone means that right and wrong are consistent, objective concepts which are NOT in man's control. Therefore, the closest we can come to achieving justice is to listen very carefully and observe the natural law of the universe, and then draw our written laws accordingly. The conscience is the proper observer of natural law, and should be our guide.
Some consider these laws to be set by God, others by nature, others by coincidence. Nonetheless, they are apparent, if one is intelligent enough to recognize them.
2006-10-11 07:24:17 · answer #5 · answered by askthepizzaguy 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
US is NOT a democracy, it is a republic. Not "mob rules", but "law rules". The problem is that law makers are overly concerned with votes, not with being reasonable. With a few exceptions all the necessary laws were written 150 years ago.
2006-10-11 07:20:34 · answer #6 · answered by something'srotten 4 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Old men over the age of 50.
2006-10-11 07:16:18 · answer #7 · answered by Janji 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
That's called Secular Progressiveism, a policy the liberal losers have been sponsoring for a long time.
2006-10-11 07:17:46 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋