Human Rights ALWAYS Supercede

In your opinion, how much time need go by before something is a time honoured tradition?
What constitutes whether something is time honoured?
Should society always be obliged to continue a time honoured tradition, no matter what? If so, on what merits? Should a time homoured tradition ever be re-evaluated?

Slavery could have been an American tradition had not a brave group (who could sense truth beyond dogmatic practice) pushed past the obvious afront on human rights.

What is your thought on the "time honoured tradition" of removing the clitoris of a women so she cannot enjoy sexual
stimulation, or the time honoured tradition of a women having to hide her face in public or....(all borne out of religious dogma)?

How does allowing gay marriage to be certified, hurt society as a whole?

In issues concerning human rights, the notion of duty to accomodate is what fuels most decisions (especially in Canada). The only caveat being that this duty to accomodate must not cause undue hardship to any parties concerned.

Concerning the issue of gay marriages, I see no undue hardship placed on any party. I do, however, see another "time honoured" sacred cow meet its over due demise.

Human rights are human rights and should always supercede
"time honoured" traditions.

Everyone is part of minority or another (microcosm). We become a majority (macrocosm) only in the threads we commonly share.

Let me put it this way, your individual freedoms can only fly when other's freedoms are allowed to fly (even if you don't happen to share a belief in those particular freedoms). It is then that your freedoms can also fly(even though others may not share your particular and individual beliefs)

By limiting others freedoms (of choice or otherwise), you in effect limit your own potential as well as society's potential. Microcosm affecting macrocosm.

Freedom has many faces.


Tweet