So one of my Facebook friends shared a story from the Putnam County Sheriff’s department. A hapless individual bought some methamphetamine from a drug dealer and subsequently “had a bad reaction” to his illegal substance consumption. The mental giant felt that it was untoward that someone should be selling such a detrimental product and contacted the Sheriff’s department to file a complaint. Ever willing to be helpful to the public, the Sheriff’s department told this upstanding citizen that they would be glad to test the product for him. He just needed to bring a sample in for testing. Feeling that he might finally get the justice he desired, the citizen complied. The department helpfully tested the sample, and sure enough, it was methamphetamine. The Sheriff’s deputies immediately informed the citizen of his rights and placed him under arrest.

If you are laughing right now, I am with you. Yes, this is what is known as stupid people doing stupid things and getting stupid prizes. However, I decided to take a look at the comments in reaction to this particular posting. Many people like myself thought the incident justifiably entertaining. However, others took exception to the fact that the police saw fit to arrest the citizen.

Some called it entrapment. Wrong. Entrapment is when a law enforcement agent induces an individual to commit a crime that they would otherwise not commit. The individual had already engaged in his illegal activity. It was not unlawful for him to bring the narcotic to law enforcement for testing. Deputies charged him with possession of an illicit narcotic. The police did not ask him to buy it. They did not sell it to him. He bought the drugs and thought it was the responsibility of the authorities to regulate the quality of illegal narcotics. I am sure that the judge will consider if he helped remove the dealer from whom he made his purchase.

Others did not see anything wrong with his possession of an illegal narcotic. These people come from the school of thought that anything that doesn’t “hurt” someone else should be legal. The same attitude implies that people will do what they want; it doesn’t matter if it is illegal. Funny thing about this position: it never takes into account the ruined lives of not only those who engage in that activity but also the harm it causes to their families and communities.

Sin taxes and “legal” sins

There are many “legal” avenues of sin. The government often subjects those avenues to what to a “sin tax.” Governments collect additional taxes ostensibly to offset the additional costs to the community to regulate the activity. When we legalize an activity, our communities absorb more damage for which we cannot account. How many families have suffered from the effects of alcoholism? What of accidents caused by intoxicated drivers?

Pornography is another “legal” sin. Pornography is considered “normal” in some circles. However, pornography serves to desensitize a person to others. It transforms people into objects of pleasure and dehumanizes them. Many will object that what happens between consenting adults is between those adults. The objection doesn’t account for the damage done to purveyors of smut, nor damage to their relationships, both present, and future. How many women suffer from body image problems because of the oversexualized images seen every day? How many people are reduced to a photo on a dating app then dismissed for arbitrary reasons?

Another consequence of our surrender to the collection of additional taxes for sins is that we fail to address the underlying problems of those sins. We think that providing additional services for the community fixes the issues introduced by the vices. We fall into the trap “I pay taxes for good of society.” Yes, taxes should benefit the public square, but how often do those programs become employment programs? The public employee is now a huge voting block in our country. How does this entity warp our society to serve its own ends?

The Danger of Governmental reliance

When you think “the government should take care of that,” you dismiss your obligation to address the need. You are also giving up any restriction that you might place on persons benefitting from the “help” from the government.

Many churches withdraw from traditional roles in community service because they cannot compete with the government, which places no constraints on aid. The no-strings approach and the government’s visceral need to intervene have led to the homeless situation in California. The government raised taxes to pay for programs that enabled irresponsible behavior of individuals. The additional taxes led to higher prices for goods and services in the state. Property owners raised the rents, and the costs of property likewise increased.

More individuals began despairing of any promise of a future because of the growing hill to be climbed. Some of these individuals fell into the “legal” sin activities to gain some small amount of relief from their impoverished lives. These “legal” sins had more consequences for individuals and the community, necessitating more relief without strings from government agencies. A greater need for services meant a greater need for tax money to pay for those programs. More significant taxes led to less giving to charitable organizations, including churches that normally help some individuals.

The government attitude is that there are always more people that can be taxed, especially in the “Golden State.” While it is true that there are many wealthy individuals in California, there are also many more impoverished individuals, both spiritually and monetarily. Jesus told us that we would always have the poor. Spiritual poverty often leads to material impoverishment.

You may note that what started with a simple story posted on Facebook has led to a lament on the conditions of a state. A ship does not sink from just a teaspoon of water or even a bucket. But if there are billions of teaspoons or thousands of buckets of water poured into a ship, it will sink. If there is a leak and no one tends it, the ship will eventually succumb. Yes, it was just one story about one individual, but remember all those people who lamented the police’s actions instead of laughing with the rest of us. There is a leak. What are we doing to stem the tide?