Nothing good is possible without limited government.
Is that (to your thinking) an "absolute" good or a tactical goal?
What do you mean limit government?
Cut its size (how many people are in it, number of cabinet posts?
Cut its scope (number of Government bureaucracies?)
Cut its funding ( so we can remove the Deputy Understudy to the Vice Superintendent of Redundancy Department)?
Cut the number of areas of our life over which it has authority?
And if the latter, which areas do we remove from governments' purview?
Food safety, marriage, rape, affirmative action, drug use, drug dealing, sodomy, prostitution?
And if pluralities of the population differ on which areas to cut, how is it to be decided which group's preferences will prevail?
Please elucidate.
Cheers!
“Please elucidate.”
Cut the size and scope of the federal government. All of the things you mentioned will do.
In this way, and in this way only will it be possible to limit the influence of those who seek to use the power of government against what is right and what is moral successfully.
The size of government, it’s cost, it’s restriction of freedoms, and it’s impeding of the pursuit of happiness is the fundamental immorality at play here.
If government is small(er) then it’s impact on those who wish to live a life of traditional, biblical morals will be much smaller.
If we Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s - while making sure Caesar has little influence and control over the rest, we’re at a good spot.
It is a foundation that we can use to rebuild the moral government that I think all freedom-loving people want.
You just reminded me, I need to go weed eat the yard.
Hey! That's the Deputy Understudy to the Assistant Vice Superintendent of the Department of Redundancy Department!
Heck! ;-D