Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Referees decide where your freedom ends and mine begins

Referees decide where your freedom ends and mine begins
Getty IMages

Leland R. Beaumont is an independent wisdom researcher who is seeking real good. He is currently developing the Applied Wisdom curriculum on Wikiversity.

Introduction:


The idea that “my freedom ends where yours begins” is a fundamental principle that lies at the heart of a harmonious and just society. This concept encapsulates the understanding that while individuals have the right to exercise their freedoms, those freedoms must not infringe upon the rights and freedoms of others. In cases of conflicting interests, a referee, whether in the form of laws, institutions, or social norms, plays a crucial role in resolving disputes and upholding this principle. This essay explores the concept of “my freedom ends where yours begins” through several examples, emphasizing the need for a referee to mediate and ensure a fair balance of individual freedoms.

Examples:

1. Freedom of Speech vs. Hate Speech: In a democratic society, freedom of speech is a cherished right. However, when one person’s expression of this freedom crosses the line into hate speech or incitement to violence, it endangers the safety and well-being of others. In this case, the referee is the legal system, which steps in to protect individuals from harm while preserving the principle of free speech. Laws against hate speech exist to strike a balance between the two conflicting freedoms.

2. Property Rights vs. Environmental Conservation:

An individual’s right to own and use property must coexist with the collective interest in environmental protection. When a property owner’s actions threaten the environment, the government or environmental agencies act as referees. They impose regulations and restrictions to ensure that one person’s freedom to use their property does not harm the broader community’s right to clean air, water, and a healthy environment.

3. Religious Freedom vs. Non-Discrimination:

Religious freedom is a fundamental human right, but it cannot be used as a shield to discriminate against others. When religious beliefs clash with the principle of non-discrimination, the legal system often serves as the referee. For instance, businesses that refuse to provide services to certain groups based on religious beliefs may face legal consequences, ensuring that the freedom of religion does not infringe upon the rights of others.

4. Parental Rights vs. Child Welfare:

Parents have the right to make decisions about their children’s upbringing, but this right must be balanced with the welfare and best interests of the child. In cases of child abuse or neglect, child protective services act as referees, stepping in to protect the child’s rights and safety. They ensure that parental freedom ends where the child’s well-being begins.

5. Freedom of Assembly vs. Public Safety:

The freedom to assemble and protest is a vital aspect of a democratic society. However, when protests escalate into violence or pose a threat to public safety, law enforcement agencies serve as referees. They work to balance the right to protest with the need to maintain order and protect the safety of all citizens.

Conclusion:

The principle that “my freedom ends where yours begins” is a cornerstone of a just and civilized society. It acknowledges the importance of individual freedoms while recognizing that these freedoms cannot come at the expense of others’ rights and well-being. To strike a fair balance, a referee is essential. Whether in the form of laws, institutions, or social norms, the referee plays a crucial role in mediating disputes and ensuring that the boundaries of individual freedom are respected. In doing so, societies uphold the ideals of justice, equality, and the protection of human rights.

This essay was generated by ChatGPT responding to the prompt: “Write an essay on the topic ‘my freedom ends where yours begins’. Include several examples illustrating this concept. Highlight the need for a referee to resolve disputes and identify the referee in several examples.”

Read More

Understanding the Debate on Health Secretary Kennedy’s Vaccine Panelists

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., January 29, 2025 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Chen Mengtong/China News Service/VCG via Getty Images)

Understanding the Debate on Health Secretary Kennedy’s Vaccine Panelists

Summary

On June 9, 2025, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), dismissed all 17 members of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). Secretary Kennedy claimed the move was necessary to eliminate “conflicts of interest” and restore public trust in vaccines, which he argued had been compromised by the influence of pharmaceutical companies. However, this decision strays from precedent and has drawn significant criticism from medical experts and public health officials across the country. Some argue that this shake-up undermines scientific independence and opens the door to politicized decision-making in vaccine policy.

Background: What Is ACIP?

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) is a federal advisory group that helps guide national vaccine policy. Established in 1964, it has over 60 years of credibility as an evidence-based body of medical and scientific experts. ACIP makes official recommendations on vaccine schedules for both children and adults, determining which immunizations are required for school entry, covered by health insurance, and prioritized in public health programs. The committee is composed of specialists in immunology, epidemiology, pediatrics, infectious disease, and public health, all of whom are vetted for scientific rigor and ethical standards. ACIP’s guidance holds national weight, shaping both public perception of vaccines and the policies of institutions like schools, hospitals, and insurers.

Keep ReadingShow less
MQ-9 Predator Drones Hunt Migrants at the Border
Way into future, RPA Airmen participate in Red Flag 16-2 > Creech ...

MQ-9 Predator Drones Hunt Migrants at the Border

FT HUACHUCA, Ariz. - Inside a windowless and dark shipping container turned into a high-tech surveillance command center, two analysts peered at their own set of six screens that showed data coming in from an MQ-9 Predator B drone. Both were looking for two adults and a child who had crossed the U.S.-Mexico border and had fled when a Border Patrol agent approached in a truck.

Inside the drone hangar on the other side of the Fort Huachuca base sat another former shipping container, this one occupied by a drone pilot and a camera operator who pivoted the drone's camera to scan nine square miles of shrubs and saguaros for the migrants. Like the command center, the onetime shipping container was dark, lit only by the glow of the computer screens.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Trump 2020 flag outside of a home.

As Trump’s second presidency unfolds, rural America—the foundation of his 2024 election win—is feeling the sting. From collapsing export markets to cuts in healthcare and infrastructure, those very voters are losing faith.

Getty Images, ablokhin

Trump’s 2.0 Actions Have Harmed Rural America Who Voted for Him

Daryl Royal, the 20-year University of Texas football coach, once said, “You've gotta dance with them that brung ya.” The modern adaptation of that quote is “you gotta dance with the one who brought you to the party.” The expression means you should remain loyal to the people or things that helped you succeed.

Sixty-three percent of America’s 3,144 counties are predominantly rural, and Donald Trump won 93 percent of those counties in 2024. Analyses show that rural counties have become increasingly solid Republican, and Trump’s margin of victory within rural America reached a new high in the 2024 election.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hands Off Our Elections: States and Congress, Not Presidents, Set the Rules
white concrete dome museum

Hands Off Our Elections: States and Congress, Not Presidents, Set the Rules

Trust in elections is fragile – and once lost, it is extraordinarily difficult to rebuild. While Democrats and Republicans disagree on many election policies, there is broad bipartisan agreement on one point: executive branch interference in elections undermines the constitutional authority of states and Congress to determine how elections are run.

Recent executive branch actions threaten to upend this constitutional balance, and Congress must act before it’s too late. To be clear – this is not just about the current president. Keeping the executive branch out of elections is a crucial safeguard against power grabs by any future president, Democrat or Republican.

Keep ReadingShow less