• theneverfox@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I sometimes wonder what the end state of social progressivism is. Is it something unimaginable, or is it just accepting everyone should be able to live their life how they like if it doesn’t affect others?

    If I woke up in a utopia, would I be brought to tears by the beauty of it, or would I be the bigoted asshole?

    • monkeyslikebananas2@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I suppose the issue comes up from the contracts we have created (social and legal contracts).

      For example, marriage comes with some rights and benefits. So if you exclude any group from the ability to take advantage of the benefits, you are creating a system where someone is getting screwed and can be discriminated against.

      A scenario: a spouse making medical choices for you. If you’re with your partner (in whatever form) and they can’t legally make those decisions, and in some case even be allowed to be near you, then there is an injustice. Then there are taxes, property rights, etc.

      The issue in this particular case comes from providing a benefit to a personal relationship. I say get rid of marriage all together.

      • theneverfox@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        I mean… Like you said, marriage is a contract. It’s an agreement between two people

        Why not expand human dignity here? If you want to give spousal rights to your best friend, why does the government get to care that you have a strictly platonic relationship? If you want to make an agreement with more people, all you should have to do is work out the details yourselves

        The state shouldn’t get an opinion over who we want to trust to make decisions for us or to define who our family is or how it works. They should just be informed when appropriate