Wiki informs us that
Social progressivism, the belief that traditions do not carry any inherent value and social practices ought to be continuously adjusted for the greater benefit of humanity, is a common component of liberal ideology.
social progressives throughout the world advocate a wide variety of different social changes, and separate groups of social progressives may oppose each other because they support change in different directions. For instance, social progressives may be either left-wing or right-wing, depending on the kind of social mores they wish to change. A social progressive advocating feminism in the United States would be seen as left-wing, whereas a social progressive campaigning to outlaw recreational drugs in the Netherlands would be seen as right-wing.
Now, on what basis would you suppose
social progressives would want to outlaw recreational drugs?
Another regulation that really sets Liberals on edge is "seat belt laws". On the one hand, traditional Liberals argue that the individual should have the right to endanger him or herself by not wearing one, since it has no impact on anyone else. On the other hand, social progressives argue that everyone suffers indirectly when a serious injury or death results from such risk-taking, as is often the case.
Similarly, even if cigarette smoking harmed no one but the smoker, everyone pays for the overall reduction in the health of the population that results from widespread abuse of
any drug, whether nicotine, alcohol, or crack cocaine. Smokers already pay higher health insurance premiums, but are they high enough? Or are non-smokers subsidizing smokers' habit?
My Beloved Partner also suffers from allergy to
some perfumes. But not everybody does. In fact, few people do. On the other hand, everyone suffers from the noxious fumes produced by motor vehicles. Hence, each and every state in the union has laws regulating vehicle emissions. Similarly, everyone suffers from the noxious fumes produced by smokers.
