I was immediately taken aback to see this quote from Rep Mike Pence (R-IN) in this morning’s headline article- behind a paywall- (House Cuts Spending, Regulation) in the Times-Argus:

It is morally wrong to take the taxpayer dollars of millions of pro-life Americans and use them to fund organizations that provide and promote abortion.

How shockingly right Mr Pence is.  It is also morally wrong to take the taxpayer dollars of millions of anti-war Americans and use them to wage war, or to fund the building of war machines.  It is also morally wrong to take the taxpayer dollars of millions of non-racist, non-discriminatory Americans and use them to build walls and military installations along our borders in order to keep out people who are merely seeking a means to provide for their families (their own economies destroyed by trade policies which were designed in favor of our ruling elites).

The problem for Mr Pence is that he probably never took- and certainly never passed- a college level class on applied logic.  Because if we apply Mr Pence’s logic universally, instead of just towards issues which fit his own personal beliefs, we find that the entirety of ‘the state’ is impossible.  Name any single action or function of the government and undoubtedly we can find scores and scores of American taxpayers who are against it; which means if we apply Mr Pence’s logic universally and fairly (a requirement of what is “logical”) there would be no place for a government at all.

A conclusion I personally support.  Of course, each community (and community of communities) have no shortage of things which must collectively be accomplished for the personal and social betterment of all.  Thus, by definition of our existence as social animals we must pool our resources to accomplish that which ensures our lot.  A problem, however, in a model which says “we’ll do our thing and support those services which we believe in and you do yours” is that over time we’ll find people leaving places which don’t provide things in favor of communities which do.  Imagine, if you will, that South Burlington took a radical free-market approach to it’s community while Burlington took a radical communalist approach.  Over time, those left out of prosperity in South Burlington (a reasonable conclusion we can assume, given the evidence of history) would seek support and refuge in Burlington.  Such a scenario would leave Burlington over-crowded and unable to meet the service needs of a population far larger than the community was designed to provide for.

Making such a design unsustainable.  We cannot simply say “if those are your beliefs, you’re free to be over their and have a society which does this, that and the other” while doing likewise ourselves.  We must remember that providing for all people, everywhere, the means and support to ensure their own material and intellectual survival and prosperity is the only sustainable path towards our own.  That, unfortunately for Mr Pence, means offering services and freedoms which we may ourselves not like or agree with, but that we recognize others do.