Graham

The word I prefer is libertarian (note, that's with a small "l" to distinguish it from American Libertarians who mostly seem to want to be able to own lots of guns!)

The problem is that it *is* the meaning (and/ or usage) of the word that causes me difficulties!

As I've mentioned in other threads, some people act as if morals are graven in stone when they're really nothing more than bits of tribal ethos which have "seniority" because they've been around for a long time.

The point is that there *are* no real hard and fast rules, only the ones we make for ourselves eg you can argue that killing is wrong, but then there's the exception of not if you do it in a war or in self-defence.

It's possible to create all sorts of "moral dilemmas" that are not easy to answer or even to do the same but with loaded questions if someone's trying to make (or force) a point, however real life is never that simple.

Maybe someone should slip me some Moral Viagra?!

But seriously even that question is loaded in its way because it implies (although I'm sure not deliberately) "weakness", in the same sort of way that the Tories and Labour accuse each other of being "soft on crime" (a nice soundbite, but usually inaccurate).

If there are any principles to which I think people should hold they might be "An it harm no other, do what thou wilt", although it could also be "To thine own self be true" or "judge not others lest ye also be judged" or possibly several others that haven't sprung to mind at the moment.

The point is, though, that I think the world would be a better place if everyone minded their *own* business and stopped trying to mind everyone else's if nobody's getting hurt by it.

Not at all. It's a fair question.