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.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

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

Large Bipartisan Majorities Oppose Deep Cuts to Foreign Aid

The Program for Public Consultation at the University of Maryland releases a new survey, fielded February 6-7, 2025, with a representative sample of 1,160 adults nationwide.

Pexels, Tima Miroshnichenko

Large Bipartisan Majorities Oppose Deep Cuts to Foreign Aid

An overwhelming majority of 89% of Americans say the U.S. should spend at least one percent of the federal budget on foreign aid—the current amount the U.S. spends on aid. This includes 84% of Republicans and 94% of Democrats.

Fifty-eight percent oppose abolishing the U.S. Agency for International Development and folding its functions into the State Department, including 77% of Democrats and 62% of independents. But 60% of Republicans favor the move.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Super Bowl of Unity

A crowd in a football stadium.

Getty Images, Adamkaz

A Super Bowl of Unity

Philadelphia is known as the City of Brotherly Love, and perhaps it is fitting that the Philadelphia Eagles won Sunday night's Super Bowl 59, given the number of messages of unity, resilience, and coming together that aired throughout the evening.

The unity messaging started early as the pre-game kicked off with movie star Brad Pitt narrating a moving ad that champions residence and togetherness in honor of those who suffered from the Los Angeles fires and Hurricane Helen:

Keep ReadingShow less
The Paradox for Independents

A handheld American Flag.

Canva Images

The Paradox for Independents

Political independents in the United States are not chiefly moderates. In The Independent Voter, Thomas Reilly, Jacqueline Salit, and Omar Ali make it clear that independents are basically anti-establishment. They have a "mindset" that aims to dismantle the duopoly in our national politics.

I have previously written about different ways that independents can obtain power in Washington. First, they can get elected or converted in Washington and advocate with their own independent voices. Second, they can seek a revolution in which they would be the most dominant voice in Washington. And third, a middle position, they can seek a critical mass in the Senate especially, namely five to six seats, which would give them leverage to help the majority party get to 60 votes on policy bills.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Bureaucrat’s Dilemma When Dealing with a Charismatic Autocrat

A single pawn separated from a group of pawns.

Canva Images

The Bureaucrat’s Dilemma When Dealing with a Charismatic Autocrat

Excerpt from To Stop a Tyrant by Ira Chaleff

In my book To Stop a Tyrant, I identify five types of a political leader’s followers. Given the importance of access in politics, I range these from the more distant to the closest. In the middle are bureaucrats. No political leader can accomplish anything without a cadre of bureaucrats to implement their vision and policies. Custom, culture and law establish boundaries for a bureaucrat’s freedom of action. At times, these constraints must be balanced with moral considerations. The following excerpt discusses ways in which bureaucrats need to thread this needle.

Keep ReadingShow less