In this essay, I will discuss the beliefs of J.S. Mill, Patrick Devlin and Ronald Dworkin. These three men hold different, yet similar positions on freedom of speech, privacy and society. First, I will illustrate how Dworkin's idea of a free society includes more details than Devlin's. Also, how Dworkin's "moral reasoning" is an important aspect of freedom. Next, I will explain Mill's harm principle in relation to Devlin and Dworkin. I will also illustrate that Mill's principles relate to censorship and drug laws. Finally, I will relate Mill's principle to Devlin's and present my rationale for Mill believing in principles that would prove to be sufficient for Devlin's "free society."
             Ronald Dworkin explains how Devlin's criterion for a "free society" is lacking rational standards for restrictions on freedom. These are the ground rules of "moral reasoning" in Dworkin's opinion and are imperative to a free society. For example, on page 35, regarding homosexuality Devlin states, "We should ask ourselves in the first instance whether, looking at it calmly and dispassionately, we regard it as a vice so abominable that its mere presence is an offense. If that is the genuine feeling of the society in which we live, I do not see how society can be denied the right to eradicate it."
             Dworkin believes that if a large portion of society deems something wrong, then this action does not represent society and should be banned. Dworkin does not concern himself with the location of the occurrence of the homosexual acts. In his opinion, if society agrees, all homosexual acts should be prohibited. Devlin, on the other side of the spectrum, feels that homosexual acts practiced in the privacy of the home should not be illegal. Devlin's position illustrates the need for "public morality." However, public morality cannot in...