WHILE broadly agreeing with the Rev Fraser’s concern for the increasing tendency of the state to encroach on personal freedom Letters, October 29), I feel that he omits an important, if not over-riding sovereignty, from his list of three which he claims counter-balance our freedom. That is the sovereignty of the individual. John Stuart Mill puts the matter clearly: “Over himself [the individual], over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign.”
Nowhere could this be more relevant than in the matter of organs for transplant. The proposal is up, and will likely be adopted through legislation, that use of organs post mortem should not be in the gift of the individual (to whom they rightly belong) by express or rightly assumed consent as now but should be via confiscation by the state in the absence of express or rightly assumed denial of that. Thus a worthy end is to be achieved perhaps by unworthy means overriding, by presumption, the individual’s sovereignty over his/her own body.
Rev Fraser claims and illustrates that “the Scottish Government has authoritarian tendencies and contempt for civil liberties”. I do not think, however, that it travels that path alone. Politicians generally appear to believe that their raison d’être and justification is to legislate, often without clear vision of practicalities and consequences; in particular if laws are to be properly monitored and policed. Pursuing that policy they are thus likely sooner rather than later to encroach upon the liberties and rights of the individual and increasingly so.
Until our politicians can be persuaded to legislate merely to keep society on the ordered side of anarchy will the freedoms of the individual vis-à-vis the restrictions and impositions of the state be brought into proper balance.
Darrell Desbrow,
Overholm, Dalbeattie, Kirkcudbrightshire.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel