In a democracy we have freedom yet are bound by some limits. Those are what some call moral boundaries which we cannot infringe; or we should not infringe. We can express our opinions yet cannot go too far to vilify another or spoil another's person in our assumption of unlimited rights. As the anti-tobacco advocacy chants “your freedom ends where my nose begins” or in the case of violence prevention, “your liberty to swing your fist ends just where my nose begins” depict, freedom has its social limits indeed.
In life, we are on a leash. In a governance process characterized by autocracy our leash is short and our limits bound by the edict of the perpetrator, whereas in a democracy our leash is longer and bound by moral principles that come from God. These we cannot infringe; if we do, there will be no law or order. In a democracy the rule of law is one of its most revered tenets. How else can we ensure freedom for all when otherwise the strong and powerful in bodily strength or fiduciary influence will make life for the many a continuing nightmare? That is what autocracy does and that is why we shun it and choose democracy instead, for every human being within the depths of his very being, yearns for freedom. But that freedom will cease to be free and turn into violence if we don't exercise our sense of moral responsibility which is characterized by such boundaries. That must be the meaning of democracy.