“You shouldn’t force your morality onto others.” Yep. I ran across that today. Some responses to that idea leave much to be desired. They reveal an eagerness to use the state to mold the behavior of strangers in ways that have nothing to do with justice. I’m not sold on that. I’d want to respond differently. But how?
First, forcing morality is strange way to put it. People don’t literally force it like force-feeding medicine. So I’d ask what they mean. In return, I would probably get a few examples of government-forced behavioral conformity. Eventually the other person would concede that they have no problem with legislating against things like murder and theft even though such things are also present in various moral systems. They’re just against forcing conformity to things that are only features of (arbitrary) moral systems. For example, they would object to the Amish getting in power and imposing their voluntary abstinence from electricity, which seems quite reasonable.
So, I’d want to restate the claim in clearer language and get confirmation that the clearer formulation truly IS what they meant. (No Cathy Newman maneuvers here.) Maybe it would be something like this:
Conformity to moral ideas that are beyond the basic honoring of natural rights should not be compelled under threat of force, especially by the government.
Once we get a clear picture of the idea, there are options. For one, we could just drop the matter. After all, there’s a time to every purpose. This topic might just be getting in the way of more important ones. Alternatively, we could agree with them. It is not obvious that government should be big enough to enforce such things, or that doing so would be within its just purview (if it has one).
The author I read today went a different way. He thinks the opposition to forced moral behavior is self-defeating, that it fails in the same manner as when someone says, “I never use words.” But, I don't see how. There’s no force involved in merely saying morality shouldn’t be forced. Furthermore, people seem to have a natural right to go peaceably about their business, and if that’s correct, then a moral against violating that right would in the same category as the other morals that can be enforced (Thou shalt not murder, Thou shalt not steal, etc.). So where is the contradiction?
That’s where I am with it, anyway. I welcome your feedback, and if you like my stuff, please subscribe below.
Penjammin grew up in a labyrinthine cavern. Later he ran with the wolves and lived every moment marinated in the sweet scent of his game, until pirates landed and… See About for full story, and get his eletter at penjams.com/subscribe.