Justifications for Political Coercion 1.To prevent harm to others (harm principle) 2.To prevent offense to others (offense principle) 3.To prevent harm to oneself (legal paternalism) 4.To prevent immoral conduct (legal moralism) 5.To force people to improve their own conditions (extreme paternalism) 6.To force people to improve the conditions of others (welfare principle) (592-93)

Limits on Political Coercion: The Harm Principle Governments are justified in restricting liberty only to prevent harm to others Where behavior is merely offensive, or where self-improvement, preferences, or conscience is concerned, persuasion—not law or social coercion—is permitted: this is to prevent the tyranny of the majority But what distinguishes harm vs. offense? J. S. Mill

Limits on Political Coercion: The Offense Principle Profound offenses differ from mere nuisances in virtue of their intensity, duration, extent, and avoidability Governments are justified in prohibiting by law profoundly offensive behavior—that is, unavoidable behavior, the very thought of which is widely and impersonally considered as violating deep moral sensibilities Joel Feinberg