We can theorize that "you and I are different ', but often doubt if you're not me.
Maybe it's a good philosophy of life allow everyone cares as long as there proved sufficient conditions to do so: if you have a disability to care, it seems imperative that the other, pursuant to our sole mission is to take care the species, both individually and collectively, we impose our protection until it is able to look after himself.
As we all have a public life and a private life, the above criteria also applies with adjustments as required.
Let me explain:
Capitalism (public life) does not care how sexually every citizen and the spouse (privacy) is not interested in what your partner in public.
She wants her husband to remain as nice as when they were dating but does not have to be interested in what he is like as an employee, officer, professional, entrepreneur.
But this is too theoretical and in practice does not work so well.
Because it works so well this isolation roles of scenarios of interest, we have some unavoidable interference.
- Maybe she did not want him to be late for work;
- Perhaps he advises on issues of health concerns her alone;
- Maybe the state use its power to induce certain habits communication with the pretext of improving the quality of life of its citizens;
- Maybe she is upset because he does not leave the happy hour on Friday, off from work;
- The laws tend to forget that you are not the parents of their grandchildren and intend to continue imposing its educational criteria.
In short: We can theorize that "you and I are different ', but often doubt if you're not me.
Note: Original in Spanish (without translation by Google): (Quizá) tú no eres yo.
(Este es el Artículo Nº 1.977)