Except those are not true and only exist in your imaginary world . There are plenty of original people in the local government , and benefits are typically given to nonhan Chinese throughout China , economically and in terms of education . If you choose to ignore the small group of Islamic extremists and separatists that ' s causing a lot of terrorismlike attacks in the area , go ahead . Otherwise , the governments strict actions are not unwarranted . Sure the extent of the strictness is debatable , but it ' s obviously not a move simply based on racism or any of those reasons . <| sep |> This is exactly my perspective . I think this is the logical path and , it seems to me , the question has to be asked within the context of a diverse , pluralistic society and if personal liberties are going to be at all preserved . If those two things are the case , I continually come back to the principle of liberty or Nonaggression principle the base , lowest common denominator if you will of pretty much everybody in a rational state . So , in other words , I think it makes sense to say that we shouldn ' t legislate a particular set of moral principles even if that ' s biblical law we ' re talking about , but rather the one common principle . This has been the thought process that keeps me coming back to libertarianism and I have to say I keep getting reconvinced by it . edit to say that I also believe the preserving and lifegiving and humanflourishingpromoting nature of scriptural morals . I think the way to go here is to say that the Church is the spearhead that influences and initiates the types of movements , actions , and institutions that help the neediest people . I don ' t think that has to be in the form of Jesusfish laws that are overtly Christian , in the same way adopting an orphan is more Christian than merely having verses on your FB or a cross hung up in your house .