Civil liberties
I support individual rights, equal treatment under law, representative government, and the separation of church and state. Democratic government gives people a say in collective decisions. It does not make every decision a majority supports acceptable. Rights matter especially when the people exercising them are unpopular with those who hold power.
As a queer trans woman, freedom in our private lives and relationships is personal to me. I do not accept that our freedom should depend on securing majority approval of who we are. Personal beliefs do not justify using authority to discriminate against people at work or elsewhere. The ability to make a rule and the justification for imposing it are different questions.
Privacy deserves nearly absolute protection. Harm to others can justify exceptions, including intervention to prevent it, but the claim that an intrusion will protect someone needs examination. I have not settled every question about the seriousness of harm or the evidence that should warrant intervention. That uncertainty cannot serve as permission for unrestricted interference.
I distinguish disagreement from targeted harassment and credible threats. Engaging with someone does not mean endorsing their views, and refusing to endorse a view is different from using government power to suppress it. Communities can set expectations for participation. Government restrictions on speech require a much higher threshold. The authority being exercised matters alongside the conduct at issue.
Leadership and accountability
I value leaders who listen to people and communicate honestly. That’s much of what I admire about Zohran Mamdani. People in power should help those they serve and meet them where they are. Punishing people for raising problems discourages the candor a leader needs to understand what is going wrong. Dismissing their concerns also refuses them a part in decisions they have to live with.
Cave Johnson makes a good caricature of the leader who treats a warning as an offense.
“Science isn’t about WHY. It’s about WHY NOT. Why is so much of our science dangerous? Why not marry safe science if you love it so much. In fact, why not invent a special safety door that won’t hit you on the butt on the way out, because you are fired.” — Cave Johnson (Portal 2)
Listening does not require agreeing to every demand. Leaders should weigh people’s needs fairly, make decisions, and explain them. They should address harmful conduct while respecting privacy, and admit when something isn’t working. Their responsibility continues when the decision is difficult or the answer is unwelcome.
I oppose using authority to keep people subordinate or enable discrimination. A government order or a court’s approval does not make an action morally right. Trump’s 2025 executive order excluding gender identity from its definition of sex makes this personal. So does the Court’s Skrmetti decision, which upheld Tennessee’s restrictions on puberty blockers and hormones for trans minors against the equal-protection challenge. I see these as attacks on our autonomy. A decision can have institutional authority and still deserve opposition because of what it does to the people affected.