Legislating Morality
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
Motto: "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God"
Which party do you suppose works hard to make the constitution of no effect by legislating
morality? Freedom of speech and right to privacy have all come under attack at one time
or another by the arm of the Republican Party known as the Religious Right. Their
intentions of regulating morality have been no secret to informed citizens. Indeed, they feel
it to be their moral obligation to criminalize that which they deem to be reprehensible.
Strangely enough, some of the very ones accusing Republicans of suppressing freedom
are aboard the same sinking ship as they campaign to impose their own brand of morality
on others. No, it is not religiously packaged, but it's a morality all it's own, just as
dangerous and just as fearful.
What we're talking about here is universal health care. That's right, the Democratic Party's
political platform includes a pledge of health care for most and perhaps all Americans, and
the justification for such is a morally based argument. The reason, we are told, for a
government controlled health care system is because moral responsibility constrains us to
provide this benefit to our countrymen. It is our duty and our obligation to take hard earned
money away from one group and give it to another because our government tells us that it's
the right thing to do.
Who would believe that the Democrats would find themselves tangled in this yoke of
legislative bondage? After all, our Democrat lawmakers are the party of moral choice,
allowing each and every person to think and believe as they choose on all matters of
morality, even claiming "personal liberties for all" (democrats.org).
Now we find out that it's different. Regarding this government sponsored health care,
Senators Clinton and Obama in a recent CNN debate (January 31, 2008) each made
statements about "moral responsibility" (Clinton) and "moral obligation" (Obama). We
discover that Obama and friends will force us into their code of morals just as a certain wing
of the Republican Party wants to forcibly make us obey their own form of morality. It's the
same song, only the dance is different.
Our government has no right to enact laws of morality whether religiously or economically
based. One must make a moral judgement to forcibly take money away from one to
provide health care for another. The arguments used to prop up such nonsense don't jive
with the liberties which were established to protect all of us in every situation. Only
individuals have a right to legislate morality within the confines of their own mind. When the
halls of Congress enact laws of moral obligation we are left less free and more controlled.
Please say no to universal health care and yes to a Libertarian leaning candidate who will
say yes to personal freedom every single time.
morality? Freedom of speech and right to privacy have all come under attack at one time
or another by the arm of the Republican Party known as the Religious Right. Their
intentions of regulating morality have been no secret to informed citizens. Indeed, they feel
it to be their moral obligation to criminalize that which they deem to be reprehensible.
Strangely enough, some of the very ones accusing Republicans of suppressing freedom
are aboard the same sinking ship as they campaign to impose their own brand of morality
on others. No, it is not religiously packaged, but it's a morality all it's own, just as
dangerous and just as fearful.
What we're talking about here is universal health care. That's right, the Democratic Party's
political platform includes a pledge of health care for most and perhaps all Americans, and
the justification for such is a morally based argument. The reason, we are told, for a
government controlled health care system is because moral responsibility constrains us to
provide this benefit to our countrymen. It is our duty and our obligation to take hard earned
money away from one group and give it to another because our government tells us that it's
the right thing to do.
Who would believe that the Democrats would find themselves tangled in this yoke of
legislative bondage? After all, our Democrat lawmakers are the party of moral choice,
allowing each and every person to think and believe as they choose on all matters of
morality, even claiming "personal liberties for all" (democrats.org).
Now we find out that it's different. Regarding this government sponsored health care,
Senators Clinton and Obama in a recent CNN debate (January 31, 2008) each made
statements about "moral responsibility" (Clinton) and "moral obligation" (Obama). We
discover that Obama and friends will force us into their code of morals just as a certain wing
of the Republican Party wants to forcibly make us obey their own form of morality. It's the
same song, only the dance is different.
Our government has no right to enact laws of morality whether religiously or economically
based. One must make a moral judgement to forcibly take money away from one to
provide health care for another. The arguments used to prop up such nonsense don't jive
with the liberties which were established to protect all of us in every situation. Only
individuals have a right to legislate morality within the confines of their own mind. When the
halls of Congress enact laws of moral obligation we are left less free and more controlled.
Please say no to universal health care and yes to a Libertarian leaning candidate who will
say yes to personal freedom every single time.
| Legislating Morality With Universal Health Care by John T. Lewis June 17, 2008 |