Full Answer Section

Proponents of the individual rights perspective believe that the state should be limited in its power to interfere with the rights of individuals. They argue that individuals have the right to make their own choices and to live their lives free from government interference.

Public order perspective

The public order perspective emphasizes the importance of maintaining order and stability in society. Proponents of the public order perspective believe that the state has a right to restrict individual rights when necessary to protect the public good.

Examples of public order restrictions include laws that prohibit violence, theft, and fraud. Proponents of the public order perspective argue that these restrictions are necessary to protect society from harm.

Example

A good example of the difference between the individual rights perspective and the public order perspective is the issue of free speech.

From the individual rights perspective, free speech is a fundamental right that should be protected even when it is offensive or unpopular. Proponents of the individual rights perspective argue that free speech is necessary for a democratic society to function properly.

From the public order perspective, free speech can be restricted when it incites violence or hatred. Proponents of the public order perspective argue that these restrictions are necessary to protect the public from harm.

Conclusion

The individual rights perspective and the public order perspective are two different ways of thinking about the relationship between the individual and the state. Both perspectives have valid points, and it is important to balance the two when making decisions about public policy.