Should government legislate morality?

I want to address something that has been on my mind lately. 

Is it the government’s job to legislate morality? In my opinion, absolutely not. 

In case you do not know, I am a very religious and spiritual person. What does that mean? Well, I was born into a Roman Catholic family. Both my mom and dad are extremely religious, so I have attended mass every Sunday of my life since I was born (except on vacation because the Church pardons it). I really do enjoy being Catholic and accept its teachings whole-heartedly. I admit I am not perfect but I do think of myself as a moral and principled individual.

Getting back to the question, I believe that the federal government should protect life, liberty and property. The state and city governments should take care of the rest. The closer the laws are made to home, the greater likelihood that they will represent the constituents (note: the federal government should step in if the state and city governments undermine life, liberty and property). So, even though I do not personally believe it is the role of the government to legislate morality, states and city governments should have the option to. It is not my goal to impose my views (I’m a libertarian not a liberal, haha), but rather to persuade others that legislating morality does not work. 

Individuals are moral because humans are innately good. Laws that legislate morality (e.g. Thou shall not kill) work well because most people are already moral. If the government chose not to punish murder crimes, would that change the morality of individuals? How many would go out and murder someone just because they would not get punished for it? I’m willing to bet not many. My point is that people are moral because they choose to be, not because the government implements a law. Those who commit murder do it regardless of whether they will be faced with punishment or not. This applies to other crimes as well. Individuals who use drugs illegally do it despite facing criminal charges. The fact that it’s illegal does not stop them. If hard drugs were legalized, I do not believe individuals would start using them just because they can. Perhaps, some would... but that is freedom. Freedom harbors an environment where people can make choices. Sure, individuals will make bad choices some of the time but they will also face the consequences. You cannot successfully protect people from themselves. Fortunately, most individuals learn from mistakes. Despite the fact that bad choices will be made, I think individuals are prone to make more good choices than bad choices. 

Aside from everything I mentioned, I think legislating morality takes responsibility away from the individual. I believe that placing the choice on the individual makes them subject to their own character. Maximum individual freedom allows individuals to choose the type of person the or she wants to be. There is more virtue in choosing to do the right thing than there is in following a law out of fear of punishment. I have noticed that religious people are adamant about legislating morality, but as a religious person, I would argue this is not the stance we should take. Morality should be a choice. In my personal experience, it is difficult to be moral even when highly motivated. What makes us think that people who do not share our religious views are going to embrace our views on morality because it's the law? It won’t work. If anything, it will only be counterproductive because it will create resentment and backlash towards religious folks. No one likes to be imposed upon. I will always stand firmly behind freedom of religion. But I also will respect an individual's choice to not practice a religion or to be atheist. Faith in God comes from the heart and soul, not the government. 

I understand that it is our duty to spread the word of God but I do not believe it should be done by means of government. If we want to spread the word of God and show others he is a great, we should do so through our actions. Some of the biggest cheerleaders of war are pro-life Christians. How hypocritical is that? How will anyone take us serious? 

Gandhi eloquently acknowledged the shortcomings of Christians:  

“I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”

“I’d become a Christian if I ever met one.” 

Gandhi's constructive criticism should be a reminder that our actions speak louder than our words. Sure, you can quote the Bible all day long but at the end of the day your actions are what matter most. In my opinion, my religion is beautiful. It inspires me to be a better person. But I realize that not all people share this view. That is fine. My faith is not diminished because others refuse to embrace it. Religion is not something that can be forced upon someone. The Catholic Church teaches free will. Individuals should have the freedom to be good. The beauty of freedom is allowing individuals choose to be virtuous. I am in no way saying that you have to be religious to be virtuous because I know plenty of individuals who are not religious and extremely virtuous (this supports my argument that individuals are inherently good and do not need an entity, such as government, dictating morality). 

Perhaps my views come off as naive and idealistic. But I think that maximum freedom for an individual is still the best way to go about living a fulfilling life. Worst case scenario, individuals will not go out of their way to help others (as libertarians assume) but they also won’t go out of their way to hurt others. 

Anyway, those are my thoughts. I will try to shorten and organize them better.

Secession?

In case you haven’t heard, several states are petitioning the Obama Administration for a “peaceful withdrawal” from the United States. 

I browsed the White House petition page (https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petitions) to take a look for myself. At approximately 10:30 p.m. MST on 11/12/12, there were a total of 83 active petitions and 32 were petitions for secession. In order for the Obama Administration to review and provide an official response, the petitions need to acquire at least 25,000 signatures within a month. 

Here are the totals thus far (Yes, I took the time to write them all down): 

1. Oklahoma - 647
2. Utah - 1,430
3. Wyoming - 1,601 
4. California - 2,613
5. Ohio - 2,618
6. New York - 2,081
7. Delaware - 2,866
8. Nevada - 4,039
9. Pennsylvania - 5,346
10. Arizona - 8,379
11. Oklahoma - 8,578
12. Arkansas - 11,382
13. S.C. - 11,815 (repeat)
14. Georgia - 15,083 (repeat)
15. Missouri - 9,586 (repeat)
16. Missouri - 8,599
17. Tennessee - 14,830
18. Michigan - 10,506
19. South Carolina - 9,319
20. New York - 9,697
21. Colorado - 11,461
22. Oregon - 8,494
23. New Jersey - 8,069
24. North Dakota - 7,399
25. Montana - 8,247
26. Indiana - 10,361
27. Mississippi - 10,205
28. Georgia - 8,163
29. North Carolina - 14,428
30. Alabama  - 15,588
31. Texas - 56,630 
32. Louisiana - 25,040 

The first petition was put forth by Louisiana on Wednesday, November 7, 2012. Currently, the state that has an overwhelming number of signatures is Texas with a total of 54,725 (and counting). That is more than plenty. But we must not forget that Texas has a population of approximately 25,674,681. That means that the petition only reflects about 0.002% of Texas’ population. Further complicating the matter is the fact that non-Texans are signing the petition. 

I have joked about being in favor of Texas seceding from the United States because it’s fun to act annoyingly prideful to be Texan. However, now that there is an actual petition to secede, I feel obligated to take this serious. 

The Texas petition reads as follows: 

The US continues to suffer economic difficulties stemming from the federal government's neglect to reform domestic and foreign spending. The citizens of the US suffer from blatant abuses of their rights such as the NDAA, the TSA, etc. Given that the state of Texas maintains a balanced budget and is the 15th largest economy in the world, it is practically feasible for Texas to withdraw from the union, and to do so would protect it's citizens' standard of living and re-secure their rights and liberties in accordance with the original ideas and beliefs of our founding fathers which are no longer being reflected by the federal government.

I share the same dissatisfaction as a result of the aforementioned abuses cited in the Texas petition but I do not think that secession is the route we should pursue. Perhaps this petition is not going to actually lead to a secession but we are definitely making history. When was the last time 30 plus states asked to secede from the United States? 

It is also important to note that the Declaration of Independence states: 

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

In sum, when the people feel that their government is acting beyond its power, which is to secure unalienable rights, the people have the right to abolish the existing government and form a new government. So, when people refer to secession as “treasonous,” I would have to disagree. Secession from the British Empire was how our country was born. Ron Paul has an interesting take on secession, so watch this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=jvliy8rEJDQ. 

Moreover, I disagree with those who are calling petitioners “crazies” and “racists” because that is not entirely accurate. I am not disregarding the likelihood that some people who have signed the petition are doing it because they dislike Obama. But I am saying that a good number of those people are doing it because they are unhappy about the direction the U.S. has been heading for quite sometime. I think Obama getting reelected was the final straw for a lot of people. I can relate to that frustration because Obama has done a lot to undermine our freedom and has not received one-fourth (arbitrary number that popped in my head) of the outcry Bush received. So, yes, there are many individuals who are concerned Obama was reelected despite his horrible record on foreign policy, civil liberties, states rights and the economy. Moreover, this secession talk is nothing new in Texas, hence websites like Texas Secede http://www.texassecede.com/faq.htm and the Texas Nationalist Movement (http://www.texasnationalist.com/index.php/about-us/what-we-believe). 

I have chosen not to sign the petition because I think the best way to fix a problem is from within. If Texas secedes, how will we positively influence politics in the U.S.? I am extremely motivated to promote economic freedom, international trade, diplomacy and humane treatment of immigrants. I cannot turn a blind eye. I think nullification is a better route and something I can fully support.  

Election 2012

My thoughts on election 2012 are mixed. 

For one, I am happy that it’s over. I'm not a fan of either Obama or Romney, so I don't feel elated or miserable (as indicated by many fb pots). I disagree with both of them on a lot of issues. 

First of all, Obama and Romney both support the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)! I sound like a broken record bringing this up in most of my blog posts but it is sort of a big deal. I am still shocked that many people do not know about it or simply feel apathetic about indefinite detention of American citizens without due process of law. 

Moreover, neither of them address the unsustainable student loan debt. They both want to provide more ‘aid’ for college students. Taking out student loans to pay for a college education in a horrible economy is a bad idea (but I won't go into that here). If Romney and Obama actually care about college students, they would say something smart. For example, talk about how student loan debt is unsustainable. Financial aid has driven up the cost of college tuition because there is no incentive to keep tuition low when the government is subsidizing the cost (for the meantime). This makes college less affordable.

Also, neither Obama or Romney care to end the War on Drugs regardless of the fact that it is a complete failure. Not to mention, citizens are beginning to realize that marijuana is actually a good plant that can be utilized for medical purposes. Colorado and Washington stood up to the Feds and legalized marijuana for recreational use! Yet, both Obama and Romney refuse to address this cultural shift in thinking. Not that popular culture dictates what is right or wrong, but you'd think politicians (especially these two) would support popular stances. Popularity aside, marijuana is not even that bad of a substance. Obviously, there are powerful machines lobbying to keep marijuana illegal at the federal level. 

I also disagree with both of them on foreign policy. So, even though Romney is more of a war hawk than Obama, I am certain the wars will continue under the Obama Administration. FYI, his administration expanded war and has used more drones than any other president. Not to mention, Obama also has a kill list that includes American citizens. Obama is only marginally better than Romney on foreign policy (that’s not saying much). 

But an issue that really upsets me is immigration. Romney takes a backward stance on immigration. He actually spoke of ‘self-deportation,’ as if that were actually doable. But at least Romney impractical 'solution' is obvious. Obama pretends to be a friend to immigrants. So annoying. In reality, his administration has deported a record number of illegal immigrants (i.e., he has deported more illegal immigrants in his 4 years than Bush did in his 8 years). So, when he talks about the Dream Act, I can't help but hear a hypocrite. The Dream Act is temporary and hardly addresses the problem at hand. Sure, it's 'nice' (liberals like nice things) but not even close to what he should be doing. Especially, considering how many Hispanics look up to and admire him because they think he's pro-immigration. How about a practical immigration policy? In a free society, such as in the U.S., business owners should be able to hire anyone he/she wants to regardless of age, sex, or immigration status. I bring this up because that is the primary reason immigrants cross over illegally. They need to find work and are willing to work at anything to accomplish that. The role of government should be to ensure that the immigrants who are coming over are not criminals (yes, that includes terrorists). Also, this is the humanitarian way to approach immigration because it will stop unnecessary deaths in the Sonoran and Chihuahuan deserts. Allowing immigrants to come over with a work visa will help minimize worker exploitation because the process would be transparent. This includes workers that come over here to do the jobs most Americans refuse to touch. It will also attract professionals from around the world and create healthy competition in the workforce. When there is competition, prices go down and quality goes up. The consumers win. 

Anyway, the good thing about Obama winning reelection is that I can look forward to a liberty ticket in four years, such as Rand Paul & Justin Amash. There is a fiscal cliff nearing and if Romney had won, people would have further reason to blame free markets for the horrible economy (even though Romney is not a true free market advocate because he believes free markets require regulations). If the economy is still subpar (to say it nicely) and unemployment remains high, I doubt people will still believe it was because of Bush. God help us if they do. 

I do hope the best for President Obama and I hope our economy does get better. I would obviously like a healthy economy and strong workforce since I will graduate with my master’s this coming spring. Ahem, I want a job so I can stop being a ‘pretend adult’ and so I can begin paying off my student loan debt. 

So, liberals, conservatives and libertarians may have their differences but I know that we all want what is best for our country. We just have different solutions for achieving our shared goal. Obviously, I think my way is the right way or I wouldn't promote it so intensely. The bickering can get intense but humans will be humans... and that involves emotions. 

Anyway, our country because it was founded on maximum individual freedom. I love that notion and continue to promote it. Even though we have lost a lot of our freedoms, we are still amongst the freest societies on the planet. Hence, the reason I am not in jail for constantly criticizing Obama and Romney, amongst other politicians (though, I am convinced I am on some sort of list). 

I will stop here because I do not like long blog posts.