Rules for Whom?

Idk Rob. Following rules are what creates and maintains a society. We don’t get to choose which ones we like or dislike.

I don’t know any of the details of the dog incident(s), but I do have a view about rules and laws.

First, laws are, in principle, written by the powerful (read wealthy). They are written not to serve the people, but to serve those who created them.

(I don’t know enough about Mexican politics, but the Canadian parliament consists of 70%. Only 14% of MPs are under 40 years. I know that doesn’t reflect my community. I suspect the US Senate and House are likewise dominated by rich, middle aged or older, White males.)

As Anatole France said,

“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.”

Second, as a corollary, is that progress does not occur by following the rules made by rulers, but by defying those rules.

It seems to me that rules and laws ought to:

1. Be based on moral principles.

2. Reflect the values of those who will be subjected to the rules.

3. Not be designed in a manner that unduly disadvantages certain individuals or classes of persons.

4,. Be consistently applied.

Women in Canada did not achieve reproductive freedom because a bunch of rich, middle aged or older, White males saud, “Let’s treat women as responsible adults who have agency regarding their lives.” It was because women said we won’t obey your laws.

Following rules might create and maintain “a society”, but I suggest it is a society designed for the benefit of the ruling classes, not for those who are ruled.