Chances are...

The analysis is quite logically simple but emotionally difficult... First, jot down your list of moralities versus immoralities. Exhaustive or brief list, theological or philosophical list, (seemingly) logical or sentimental list, it matters not. Now list your political positions, domestically or internationally applicable, determined by your previous list, it could be in forms of rights, policies, programs, laws, taxes, regulations, fines, bans/prohibitions, wars and more.

Chances are, most or all items on your lists are not desirable, agreeable even tolerable by all effected and/or involved.

Chances are, you know not all will desire, agree upon nor tolerate your politics.

Chances are, you support the use of political, judicial force upon those unconvinced by your politics.

Chances are, your acceptance of political, judicial force is preceded by presumption that feels more like religious, moral and/or educated principle(s).

Chances are, those who oppose are regarded (and be honest) as mistaken, misguided, unprincipled even selfishly stubborn or simply stupid necessitating the use of force for their "own or common good" of course.

Chances are, you (as most others) see as less tyrannical the democratic majority rule on such matters over oligarchical minority rule, though both result to using force by some upon others.

Chances are, most if not all items on your lists will disregard one or more individuals' singular human right to consent or not consent, inseparably, disrespect one or more individuals' peculiar human ability to reason.

If you are struggling with this analysis, began by merely inquiring in this way. When is force upon one preceded NOT by presumption of another, and when can the presumption of a consenting few, some, many or most religiously or morally trump the prerogative of dissenting others.

If you are not struggling, instead you disagree, then you highly regard your own political presumptions therefore prefer trumping others' personal prerogatives. Any other view of it is arbitrary regardless the religious or moral trappings.

As a tangent note, I purposely used the verb "trump" for many despise the current president (perhaps rightly so). But is not the aforementioned "trumping" far more despicable logically thus ethically, indicting all presidents, politicians, bureaucrats, agents, officers and more critically, indicts our own politics as citizens as well condemns our own covetousness for political power over others.

Come let us Reason. Peace is always a Choice.