The debate over removing the sales tax from food comes down to a classic, courtroom decision. The arguments for doing it are stronger than the arguments against.

Verdict: the sales tax on food should go.

Those who oppose abandoning the sales tax point to all the revenue that will be lost — as much as $160 million. They also say it is the one tax that hits everybody equally across the board.

But if revenue were always the top concern in Utah, the state would have legalized gambling. Clearly, doing the right thing trumps the tax man. The state has no mandate that allows it to starve people because they can't afford to pay a government tax, any more than the state has the right to force people to wither away from dehydration because they can't afford the tax on a glass of water. To survive, people must eat and drink. Being merry is another thing. Tax the merrymaking. Tax cars, condos, trains, planes and automobiles, but bread is the staff of life and everyone has a right to be nourished by it.

As for the second argument — that the sales tax on food hurts everyone equally — that, too, is far from the truth. The percentage of income that millionaires pay as food tax is minuscule compared to the amount inflicted on the homeless and hungry.

It is time to aid the widow and her mite — though she may have little political clout or few perks to pass out.

Some legislators have looked for middle ground, asking that vouchers, credits or tax rebates be used. But just the paperwork makes those programs almost unworkable for many Utahns. And many of the ones left out in the cold — the confused and tempest tossed — lack the wherewithal to function within the system as it is, let alone with added obligations.

In the end, it's a question of the rights that Americans share. Newspapers aren't taxed because Americans have a right to free speech and a right to know what their leaders are up to. Poll taxes were abolished because people have a right to vote. And, think what you will about the unborn, the living and breathing among us indeed do have a right to life. And to sustain that right they need air, water and food. As one wag put it, if you're going to tax food, why not tax the air people breath — charge those who take the most and biggest breaths more tax than shallow breathers.

It's a ludicrous idea.

Like taxing food.