Arrest for Dancing in Jefferson's Memorial

[Sapphire]

I don't exactly agree with the US court system, either.

Private Universities are privately owned, so they can designate their own rules. As for pissing everywhere in public, there is something to be said about putting people in harm's way through contaminating them with one's own biological waste, which would of course be more of a threat to the health and well being of others than just dancing next to them.

Someone will ALWAYS disagree, because we are human, and we have different perspectives and values.

Exactly. Someone will always disagree. The point is not putting someone (or everyone) in harm's way because of it. The notion that "someone will disagree, but oh well, most people agree, or at least the people in power, sort of," is a notion that leads to the death of millions (let's say the war) and the oppression of even more people due to the decisions of the few in power.

Thus, to make a change, you need to change the opinion of the majority.

Yes, this is how society evolves. This works by exposing evil via talking, recording it, revealing it for what it is, discussion, etc.

However, that the majority has the right to control the minority is ludicrous, especially since we know that EVERYONE has a different opinion about how life should be lived. (And I'm agreement with you on the above quote)

Even public places can have designated uses with laws surrounding how people behave there.

Whenever there are laws regarding the usage of a public place, there will always be disagreement because the public does not all agree on everything.

Solution 1: Do not arrest people for non-violent crimes.
Solution 2: Eliminate public property.

Edit: By public property I am going by the statist definition of public property, not private property for public use.

If you don't like it, change the system, or move somewhere with a different system.

I feel that this premise is a very slippery slope. It seems to imply that living in one's own house is a privilege, or that the state gives one permission to live here. It's almost like when an angry father says, "This is my house and my rules, if you don't like it, leave". Instead, I consider the house I own to be my own private property, or the place I rent out to be a private contract between me and the tenant. The "if you don't like it, leave" idea seems to imply that the state has some sort of proprietary ownership of the land I live on.