Equality Before the Law - Enlightenment and Autonomy of Thought

The idea that government should not interfere with its citizens holding certain ideas, except ideas which advocate or incite the violation of others' rights, can be recognized from an Enlightenment-valuing perspective.

The Enlightenment, as I understand it, had as its central tenet that it is up to individuals to decide what to believe. The king does not have the right to tell his people what to believe, nor is truth determined by what he says. Neither can priests and religious institutions. "Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-incurred immaturity. Immaturity is the inability to use one's own understanding without the guidance of another" (Kant, What is Enlightenment?). One must decide for oneself what one believes because one is responsible for one's beliefs.

What we have lost to a large degree in America is our respect for individual responsibility for one's ideas (both that it is X's place to determine what he believes and it is X's fault if he chooses to embrace false ideas). As long as ideas are not advocating or inciting harm of others, neither the law nor the government should exert influence on which political/religious/social beliefs people hold.

With this in mind, those who appreciate Enlightenment ideals should agree that the government should neither condone nor outlaw ideas for its citizens. The government should stay as far away from prescribing a set of beliefs for its citizens as possible.