• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Examine the clash between ideas of "Liberty" and "Democracy" shown in the current debate about the banning of fox-hunting

Extracts from this document...


Examine the clash between ideas of "Liberty" and "Democracy" shown in the current debate about the banning of fox-hunting Fox-hunting has been a major issue on the political agenda for the past ten years because both sides have strong emotions about either a foxes rights or human rights however the debate about fox hunting also raises questions about liberty and democracy and whether or not our political system is fair. During the debate in Parliament Mr Michael urged "the Lords to behave democratically" and this shows how the Status of the House of Lords and whether or not it is a democratic institution are being brought into the spotlight once more. The House of Commons is allowed to push a bill through the House of Lords even if it has been rejected using the Parliament Act and it looks as though this is going to happen but is this democratic? Some believe that the House of Lords play an important role in checking the Government and therefore the Parliament Act should not be used over an issue which most do not view as important as other issues such as pensions. ...read more.


It can even be argued that referenda are not fairer: just because the majority wants something does not mean it is necessarily the right option. If everything were to be done through referendums than minority voices, such as that of the disabled, would never be heard. In this case it could even be argued that fox-hunters (who are usually associated with the countryside) are a minority who are having their wishes ignored because people who do not even know anything about fox-hunting have decided that they are against it. In this country our Government tends to make decisions which look after minorities therefore implying that in our democracy the will of the majority of the people should be the line that is taken unless it puts other group's at harm. Fox-hunting is difficult because those who hunt claim that if the sport were to be banned then livelihoods and a way of life would be destroyed, they claim that they have a right to hunt and by banning the sport this right is being removed. The continuation of fox-hunting could be viewed as democratic because those who do the sport claim that if it is banned their quality of life will be reduced and therefore in this case the will of the majority should be ignored. ...read more.


as being removed simply because the Prime Minister wants to regain some of his popularity. However some believe that it is unfair to allow Hunters to have this right most believe this because they see hunting as the killing of a defenceless animal despite the counter arguments such as fox are vermin. Other moral questions are raised such as whether or not a fox has rights and how much pain they are in. Those who favour the ban argue that there should not be a freedom to fox-hunt and that it should be made illegal. This raises the issue of whether or not society is improved as a whole because of increased restriction and removal of liberties. Obviously restriction is important because it makes society safer (crime restrictions) and more prosperous (tax), however fox-hunting is complex to judge because its existence does not harm people or put people at risk it just offends them. Is offence a good enough reason to take away a liberty that has existed for centuries especially when most of those who want to impose a ban have not experienced fox-hunting first hand? ?? ?? ?? ?? Jenn Beales 13SW ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Political Philosophy section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Political Philosophy essays

  1. Compare and Contrast Positive and Negative Conceptions of Liberty.

    positive liberty into a justification for oppression - which is itself a fundamental opposite to liberty.

  2. Indonesia: Transition and Prospects for Democracy

    pre-transition Golkar) and exert more control in parliament. This is important especially in Indonesia, because pre-transition authoritarian elites still exert some power over New Order parties. Even though Habibie reduced its support base by pulling the military out of Golkar and parliament, it is still is the largest political party.

  1. Can a plausible case be made for participatory democracy under modern conditions?

    To ensure, however, that the choice of representatives is neither arbitrary nor unfair, this representative system would require some form of rules for fair representation. These would include such rules as that these representatives be selected by the vote of the people.

  2. Notes on John Stuart Mill's On Liberty

    What is needed is a principle that restricts government. Mill points out that there are two types of actions that a person can take. First, there are actions which involve a harm to people other than the agent (of the action), and second, there are those actions which do not involve harm to other people.

  1. British Democracy - the bestpossible system of government

    all three major parties and done extensive research into their policies and the potential improvements and detrimental effects of their being elected, and contrast his well researched vote with that of Tim, nice but dim, who either does eeny meany miny mo with the voting slip or else votes Labour

  2. Does democracy bring peace?

    In his 1994 State of the Union address promoting the spread of democracy, President Clinton made three major assumptions, firstly that democracy is desired by every nation and secondly that it could easily be exported to every nation. History has shown that the desire of America for every nation to

  1. Extent of key political ideas in directly influencing change and development .

    in wars between Russia and France in which foreign governments appeared to threaten Germany as a whole. Therefore this, made many Germans who were normally content to think of themselves as Prussians, Bavarians, Hessians or members of other states discontented that Germany could not speak with a strong single voice

  2. Evolution of Democracy and the Athenian Constitution

    In any case it consisted of ex-Archons--with tenure for life--who supervised the laws and had punitive/judicial authority. Thus we can observe that the mass of the people (peasants) were buried under the economic inequities and overwhelming clout of the traditional aristocracy.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work