Universal Law?

A lot of what Hegel said made a lot of sense to me, although I found some statements to be overly exaggerated and to certain extent, unreasonable. For example, “What we properly understand by Africa, is the Unhistorical, Undeveloped Spirit…” (Hegel 99). But the one thing that really clicked for me was when Hegel discussed the fine line between personal and universal morals/ideals, particularly the line “For the fancies which the individual in his isolation indulges, cannot be the model for universal reality, just as universal law is not designed for the units of the mass” (Hegel 35). If i understand this line correctly, it makes a lot of sense to me. Being raised in an extremely religious household, the question of “imposing ‘our’ ideals on ‘them’” has always been a personally troubling one for me. I know I must not be the only one because these questions (abortion, death penalty, gay marriage, and others) and their supposed answers seem to be all over politics and the news today. In what I could understand from reading this passage from Hegel, how does one keep “the fancies of the individual” out of ‘universal reality’? These topics are extremely personal ones, and ones that seem to upset and divide people. Whatever side of the fence you may be on, people get extremely defensive of their positions. What Hegel exemplifies that I see in today’s society is the struggle of “things as they are, with (their) idea of things as they ought to be” (Hegel 35). That seems to be everyone’s struggle: wanting what they personally believe to be true, to be made or not made into a law. But as Hegel also says throughout the piece is the idea of history being a struggle. Perhaps laws will or won’t be passed regarding these issues, but there will never be an easy or all encompassing happy medium.