I disagree with the live and let live paradigm when applied in a wholesale manner.
If that was the case and Adolf Hitler was left to live as he chose where would the world be? What about a rapist, should they be allowed to live and let live? What about a child molester, or one who engages in slavery for profit?
Someone always has to take action against humans that work in counter-productive ways, because (some) humans do bad things and act in ways that negatively impact others. Should they be left to act as they see fit? Is what these types do, a beauty of life as you call it above? Yes, diversity exists, but humans have shown propensity for great good, and bad behaviour and the live and let live ethos is not one I agree with in some cases. People need to be addressed at times.
I speak of the 'Live and let live' in a different context. One that is right and legal. A case whereof people are forced to follow the paths made by their predecessor. Barely allowed to explore in the legal ways that they see fit.
I agree with you on this. Certain ways need to be addressed and put in check that is why just as you stated above, there is the good and the bad.
It's always situational, case-by-case.