Public and private morality

Society adopting two sets of moral standards - a public morality, and a private morality - would allow us to maximise the freedom of choice of the individual in the private arena, while also maximising the right of the individual to be shielded from "temptation" or offence, in the public arena. 

The public morality would be quite conservative.  It would apply to all public places and all organs of the public media. 

For example, an elderly citizen wanting to buy half a dozen eggs should not feel compelled to enter the corner grocer with eyes downcast to avoid seeing lurid and for her deeply offensive magazine covers.  Similarly no family watching television should be forced to turn it off or switch channels because unexpected material is screened which they find offensive.

It behoves those operating in the public arena to keep “their ankles covered”, and conservative standards of public expression and behaviour should be defined and enforced. 

A conservative, and quietly understated public morality would allow Society to respect the right its more sheltered souls have not to be offended in public places and by the public media. 

In public the blatant display of your ethnic or religious affiliation, or your sexual orientation would be discouraged.  These are private matters. 

The public morality and the social infrastructure that enables it, need to be broad and tolerant enough not to discriminate and marginalise individuals and groups on the basis of their race, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, age or disability.

A separate private morality would ensure that those individuals who wish to taste more of life, and to perhaps place themselves at greater risk, may do so. 

Virtually unrestricted freedom ought to be possible in the private arena within the bounds of informed consent^[1].  What anybody does in private ought to be no one else's concern except to the extent that it involves the deliberate abrogation of another human being's choice set^[2]. 

The private arena would include private homes, limited circulation publications, restricted access electronic media, designated urban areas such as red light districts, places of worship, and any non-essential establishments to which members of the public would have access only by their express action after having been suitably forewarned. 

The dualism of distinct public and private moralities, while it will find favour neither with the absolutists nor the liberals among us, should allow the greatest diversity of values and belief systems^[3] to coexist peaceably in society.