ABSTRACT
In this chapter, the author focuses on three illustrations and tries to make clear both the applicable counsels of tolerance and their neutralist distortions. The main objective here is to show that, contrary to many neutralist arguments, true tolerance is not necessarily violated by such regulation. However, certain other kinds of relationship have special properties that jointly make their regulation proper—and it is a counsel of tolerance to regulate no relationships but those that have all three. These properties are: that the common good is intimately dependent on their stability; that their stability is intimately dependent on very close adherence to the relevant social norms; and that either because of universal human weakness, or because of the characteristics of the society in question, these norms are too fragile to thrive without additional support from the law. However, because our economy is organized around private ownership and voluntary exchange, another obvious candidate for regulation would be the relationship of contract.
