Ban Vs. Educate?

Ban Vs. Educate?

Which is optimal?

A ban aims to prevent a behavior. When the behavior is violated, a punitive is given. Punishment. The punishment is to serve as a justice for the behavior violation; it’s labeled a crime.

The justice process, going through the punishment is to assist the new criminal with a change process: rehabilitation.

Once finished with the justice, the criminal is expected to return to society with a new start. Of course this is distorted. The justice process is based on human ideals and not universal law.

Banning doesn’t elevate the individual’s consciousness; it just puts a roadblock in front of what someone may still want to do. If creative enough, the banned will find an innovative way to fulfill the desire.

Education provides information and awakens knowledge within, and offers experiences that stimulate awareness in people.

The awareness facilitates internal changes that alter inner states and the moral compass. By knowing, not guessing, an individual consciously chooses not to commit a certain act intuited as a “No,” with or without a ban in place.

If a ban is in place, the educated can form a reasoned understanding of the Why, not of the ban but for the reason as to why the act should be refrained from. Education is a longer-term but truer solution; it’s an investment that requires time and energy.

The wiser a people, the less bans are needed. The wiser a people, the more attuned to nature the group becomes. The wiser a people, the more people naturally “do the right thing.”