An individual can't possibly be involved in every cause in every country.
Where did I give the impression that I believed an individual could?
We however can and should be informed and make judgments about the moral and ethical correctness of activities we tolerant for ourselves and others in our community and society in general. However this does not by definition mean imposing our own standard on everyone.
There is a difference between imposition and persuasion. Some ethical positions and practices that I believe are wrong in other cultures, I beleive should be dealt with by persuasion - and others by state imposition. Sorry if I gave you the impression that I beleive all ethical judgments should be imposed (via legislation), that's not the case.
I think most people operate with a hierarchy of values, and even if we determine a behaviour as immoral it may be of greater detriment to outlaw it, because it may infringe of the higher value of self-determination ie. the war on drugs.
However I think that every state on the planet should impose laws to prevent unwilful physical harm, slavery, and child abuse.
Which would equally go to say we have no right to force anyone to see things as we do.
I suppose the keywords in this part of my thought are condemning and forcing. The defending of anothers right to choose differently is a fundamental part of our own freedom to make our choice.
Because I beleive in making ethical judgments doesn't mean that I necessarily believe that what's morally wrong should be outlawed.
Like I previously said we can do cost-benefit analysis and beleive that although a behaviour is morally wrong, it would be a greater evil to curtail self-determination.
I get the impresion that you beleive I'm advocating moralizing? If that is the case, then I'm definitely not.
However I agree with Sam Harris' postion on morality. If a person's foundation of morality is sentient well-being, and if you agree with the underlying assumption of the scientific method, that the universe is - in principle - predictable, then there are objectively - in principle - right and wrong ways to faciliate well-being.
This doesn't of course mean that we have to impose ethical frameworks on others, but it means that we can attempt via; experiments, research, thought experiments, critical thinking, etc, to determine what is right, wrong or neutral ethically. And we can analyze ethical frameworks and cultural practices based on this foundation.
This might be of interest;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hj9oB4zpHww