#individual autonomy

The UP law infringes people’s rights to privacy, choice of partner, and freedom of conscience. Religion, after all, is an idea; one can believe it, disavow it, disregard it, embrace another idea, or choose not to embrace any religious idea at all. Not only is that consistent with respect for the individual’s dignity, it is also consistent with freedoms assured by the Indian Constitution. The UP law on interfaith marriages ignores an individual’s autonomy. It strengthens regressive authority. Its effect has been to frighten a religious minority with the prospect of subjugation. And it draws from the belief that those who make up nearly half of India’s adult population—its women—cannot be trusted to decide what’s good for them. Such a repressive law deserves scorn and needs to be repealed.

The sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because, in the opinion of others, to do so would be wise, or even right. These are good reasons for remonstrating with him, or reasoning with him, or persuading him, or visiting him with any evil in case he do otherwise. To justify that, the conduct from which it is desired to deter him, must be calculated to produce evil to some one else. The only part of the conduct of anyone, for which he is amenable to society, is that which concerns others. In the part which merely concerns himself, his independence is, of right, absolute. Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign.