>>/35583/
I kind of disagree. With conformal - understandable and agree. But it is far from necessary to go into confrontation with any society on certain issues, especially those that do not significantly affect the lives of casual surroundings. That is, a society may well be able to include significantly different deviations from the generally accepted average.
For example, among the average biologically determined monogamy, it is quite acceptable and calm to treat polygamy, despite the fact that this is not a typical case on average by weight.
And I'll come back
> especially not significantly affecting the lives of random surroundings
I mean that in a "decent" society it is unlikely that an individual with a "bandit" mindset will be accepted, that is, encroaching on someone else's property and health. As in the reverse, in the society of "bandits" it is doubtful that can be adopted "decent", that is, standing for the right of inviolability of property and health.
Second
And to stand out, I think it is worthy of respect.
Not all possible methods of selection are worthy of respect. Here is how rus/35621@30796 gives an example - creating hype around yourself for the sake of this hype, often by means of deliberate destruction of the comfortable environment of others, in my opinion, is not worthy of any respect.
At the same time, unselfish assistance is worthy of respect.
But, from the point of view of other cultural bases, both these assertions of what to respect and what not can be viewed differently.
>>/35621/
Depends on the party. In general, at the level of state apparatus policy, no.