There is something fundamentally core to us as human beings that does not wish to be controlled. We wish to live the lives we want to live without the interference of others. And yet, we also would like to control the behavior of others so that it does not interfere with our own. It’s a conundrum! And the more aware we are of this double standard, this paradox, this pull, the more likely we are as a society to make rules that provide the minimum interference and maximum freedom for the largest group of people possible.

If, instead, we determine that only people like us deserve freedom, and interfering with others is virtuous when they fail to think or act like us, we fall into tyranny regardless of our own perceived morality.

Philosophy and religion (and everything that is meaningful absent from true and pure science like calculating gravity or physics) both have the capacity to become liberators or jailers. The ability to tolerate the opinions and actions of those you hate or even feel threatened by is the hallmark of a liberator. A jailer reliés instead on shaming, censorship, and ultimately violence.

We have chosen each time a new philosophy has arisen to ultimately lapse into the role of jailer. Millions have died in the efforts of -isms and religions to liberate through the actions of a jailer. It does not work. The question for today as new philosophies and religions emerge and old re-emerge is whether we will repeat history in our certainty or whether we will allow the humility of history remind us that jailers only create prisons for themselves and everyone else.

We know better. And yet, we are allowing this to repeat again. An open society should result in offending everyone some of the time. Offense isn’t a sign something is wrong. It’s a sign you exist in an open society.