Thought I'd offer up some ideas I've wrestling with, on general principles rather than specific issues.
I tend to think that some of the worst things in this world are done not so much by selfish types who don't give a monkeys about anyone but themselves (although there's plenty of people like that around), but by self righteous types who 'know' what's good for everyone else.
As supportive evidence I'll point out that Hitler and Stalin both fell into the latter category.
This is part of the reason I tend to agree with J.S.Mill that as long as you're not harming anyone else (who doesn't want to be harmed) then what you do is entirely up to you.(see John Stuart Mill 'On Liberty')
This is, of course, some way beyond what we've got in the UK or the USA, but anyway, that's my personal opinion.
However, if I'm looking for people who have ideas about how other people should behave, then I have to include...Myself!
When all they're harming is themselves, then I'll let them get on with it, but when they start harming someone else (eg. murdering random strangers to pick an example extreme enough that we can probably all agree on) then I feel fully justified in saying they're out of order.
This seems to be a bit of a paradox to me, if I go to far in telling other people they're wrong (morally) then I can easily end up being wrong myself.
'If you would go fighting monsters, beware you do not turn into a monster yourself' to quote Nietzsche.
So I think the solution is to always worry deeply about what you think others should do, and never stop asking yourself if you really are right.
The problem with this is that it can so easily lead to quietism, ie. letting bad things happen when you could do something about it.
It's a heck of a balancing act to pull. So how does everyone else deal with this?

Stevie H