The original article is bad. It can be summed up in a key phrase the author used 3 times: Governments need to "save us from ourselves". I'm sorry but that's not

The original article is bad. It can be summed up in a key phrase the author used 3 times: Governments need to "save us from ourselves". I'm sorry but that's not the role of government. "Protect us from each other" as well as "provide us necessary public services" is closer to the actual design of government. I wish that instead of running around screaming "think of the children", the author actually respected his audience and their very real free will, rather than just wave his hands, claiming that free will does not exist, except when we use our political will to save people from themselves, or something. I wish the author addressed people like your wife, who is dealing with an ethical dilemma at work. These are the people who have the choice to stay or to leave their jobs--an incredibly hard choice for someone who has a family to think about. Let me offer my respect to your wife who is dealing with this issue first-hand. Whatever choice she makes, it will not be without much anxiety and it will not take a small amount of courage. There are other jobs out there, and I'm thankful that I live in a country where I have the freedom to choose where to work. Such a freedom--the expansion of my free will to include the needs of my conscience--was enabled by the work of men who came before me, men who used their free wills to establish a system that protects this freedom. I am grateful for this system, and I reject any attempts to pervert this system towards poorly conceived ends in the name of "saving me from myself".