Immorally Yours
The primary responses I've received to my "Religion on Sunday" note concerning former Secretary Robert Reich's comments, have been about my assertion that those with faith or a belief in a higher power are in fact the greater supporters of individual liberty. My example was simple - our founding fathers.
Those who doubt me point to modern moralist and ministers as those who are believers yet do not value individual liberty as a primacy. Why, because they don't support legalized vice of all natures? It's simple, the thinking lover of liberty, supports the individuals right to have his vices, what he doesn't support is the spread of them into his backyard. The moral virtue is greater to support liberty, and then to forbid for yourself that which you would permit another to partake in.
It used to be that Nevada was the land of vice and every good southern baptist new it. Each time he went with his church group he could see and participate in them all. Now that the vices are spreading, the so-called moralist has to deal with them being in his backyard, and unfortunately, in his kitchen, living room and his childrens school. So he seeks abolition. Not because he wants to rid you of liberty, but because your freedom is costing him his virtue and his children their innocence.
There was a time when a man could and would have the decency to take his vice in private, now that we no longer do so, many consider the vice to be no longer an issue injurious only to those who partake.
I for one, liked the days when Vegas was Sin City and my home town was for Mom and Apple Pie.
