- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
To the emergence of same-sex unions, openness and freedom of speech.
Same-sex unions are a consequence of many changes, not a cause of them. The requirements for how we justify bans and punishments have increased. Legalizing same-sex unions is part of the same trend as abolishing the death penalty, for example. Previously, it was enough for people to decide that a person was guilty of murder to hang him. Today, this is no longer enough. Similarly, it used to be enough to point out homosexuality to justify a loss of rights, but today we need to explain the reasons more seriously.
And the demands have grown, because the value of life has grown. And even not just grew up, but in general ceased to be measured in something.
The legalization of same – sex marriage is already yesterday. Today, this trend is leading to euthanasia. It would seem – as an increase in the value of life leads to help in death-but it does. Because today your life has ceased to be a public resource, but has become your good. And if it is no longer good for you, if you can no longer live happily, if life itself has become a source of suffering, but you cannot stop it yourself, your life is in our hands-then can we demand that you continue to suffer? This is the question that is raised during euthanasia.
This vector is more or less unambiguous, the rest is more complicated. Because they don't really exist.
In both cases, there are two opposite aspirations (while the previous vector is not and cannot be adequately opposed, well, who in their right mind would say that people should be tormented or oppressed for no reason?) – the pursuit of personal freedom and the pursuit of public safety. The pursuit of freedom requires the right to privacy and the right to free speech. The desire for security requires openness and restrictions on what is permissible to express. Finding a balance between these things is not easy. It is even more difficult to keep it. You have to wander back and forth. Technologies actively participate in the confrontation, giving an advantage to one or the other. This pendulum will continue to swing, only the forms that the opposition takes will change.