Skip to Navigation Skip to Main Content

Letters to the editor, February 4

Moral distinction

Whenever a conservative makes even the slightest negative reference to government, knee-jerk liberals are always quick to remind everyone that it’s only because of the inherent “goodness” of government that we all enjoy interstate highways, bridges, dams, teachers, police, etc.

The implication being, of course, that somehow federal or state governments become “moral” for providing these necessary items at collective expense.

But wait a minute. Would anyone then suggest that there aren’t modern highways or bridges in communist China? Or that there aren’t teachers and clerics in the madrasas of Iran spewing hatred and lies?

Or maybe that there aren’t police in North Korea ready to crack your head open for carrying a Bible or voicing Christian beliefs? 

Bridges, dams, highways and, yes, even teachers, are value-neutral. It’s only what we allow our government to do under the legal authority granted by the people or Constitution that makes the ultimate difference between moral and immoral.

Liberals hopelessly confuse the term government with statism. Limited and constitutional government is a necessity of life and understood by most in a limited context.

Statism, (or leftism), on the other hand,evolves from the malignant and unchecked abuse of government power.

Leftists would try to tell me how to live my life, i.e. how many gallons per flush my toilet is allowed, how many ounces in a New York City Big Gulp, or what kind of light bulb is “legal.”

Message: There is a huge moral distinction between government and statism.

David C. Zoltner,