[MD] Tea Bagging

[Arlo Bensinger]

[Mark]
In the building of a mosque it is up to the community to decide, not 
the government, and certainly not some interpretation which will change.

[Arlo]
This sounds like a good path to the tyranny of the majority. Civil 
government protects us from this. Even if there are only two Jewish 
families in a particular community that is otherwise Christian, those 
families have the right to build a Synagogue and practice their 
religion. This is not an imposition on the "freedom" of the Christian 
community, this is a strengthening of the "freedom" for all, lest one 
day those same Christians find themselves on the shallow end of the 
majority pool, and find their ability to build churches denied.

I understand the impetus for local governance, and I think the trend 
is a good thing. But there are intellectual principles that supercede 
the "right" of a community to coerce or restrict its minority populations.

It is not an "intrusion" for the government to recognize the 
consensual marriages of adults that enter in unions that displease 
you. It is not "coercion" on the part of the government to demand 
interracial marriages be recognized by all public and civil 
authorities. It is an act that encourages freedom, that strengthen 
freedom, as its says that NO ONE, not someone else today or potential 
YOU tomorrow, can be denied civil benefits on the basis of who you 
choose to enter in such a contract with.

By ensuring communities do not have the "right" to practice 
intolerance, everyone's freedom increases tenfold. Even yours.

And if you accept Platt's inanity that "intolerance of intolerance is 
intolerance", it is not, "intolerance of intolerance is tolerance", 
but it is certainly true that "tolerance of intolerance is intolerance".

A slave-owner is not made "less free" with the elimination of 
slavery. He is made more free, because this removes any possibility 
that he himself could ever become a slave.