Can it ever be legitimate to legally prohibit an action solely on the basis that

Can it ever be legitimate to legally prohibit an action solely on the basis that

Law

Can it ever be legitimate to legally prohibit an action solely on the basis that it causes offense in a part of the population and nothing else? It is clear to me that some of these actions will be regarded as morally objectionable by almost all ethical theories. But can taboo breaking alone be sufficient to forbid something by law, or should such laws always require other justifications as well?

Read another response by Thomas Pogge
Read another response about Law
Print