I would like to finish up by reading the last paragraph of the article, and maybe shed some light on why MacIver feels that the Golden Rule is “deeply beautiful.”

the process of attempting to make ones’ principals universal, one would compromise their own values in doing so. MacIver uses the example of communist and totalitarian governments. One of their main weapons in gaining political favor is to offer rights which in turn will use to destroy the rights of those who grant them. One example that I will take form the text is the example of the Catholic Church. “The Roman Catholics know that they possess the truth; therefore they should not permit others to propagate error.” All parties will have beliefs and believe that their beliefs are the right beliefs, they are the true beliefs. MacIver says that this is a must because that is what beliefs are. However, one should not prohibit another from having different beliefs solely because one believes his or hers to be true. People convince others to join their groups, reasons being ones of free thought, allowing people to change their minds to change their beliefs in order to assimilate. When one does not want to assimilate, their freedom of different beliefs and their freedom to change their beliefs is frowned upon, or in severe cases, attempted to be taken away. Other examples would be ones of race and socio-economical status.

Would there be a need for Judges and would there be criminals if everyone

Some topics in this essay:
Golden Rule, University Academic, Roman Catholics, golden rule, Catholic Church, Robert MacIver, maciver example, treat treat, ones self, beliefs beliefs, ethical rule, principals universal, beliefs universal, ye unto, change beliefs,