Neither the fact that a mode of conduct may be harmful in excess, nor the fact that, whether harmful or no, society dislikes it, seems to me in itself a just ground for its suppression by the law.
Laski argues that societal dislike or potential harm does not justify legal suppression of conduct.
Share
More from Harold J. Laski
Ultimately, that denial is always made upon the same ground: it is insisted that the doctrines or practices attacked are subversive of the civil order.
When attacks on liberty are political or economic, it is their motive rather than their nature that changes.
We grant it in religion to deny it in politics; we grant it in politics, to deny it in economic matters.
Each age finds that the incidence of freedom is significant at some special point, and there, once more, the lesson of freedom has to be learned.
Other voices in this conversation
