Jae C. Hong, File, Associated Press
In a recent article ("Should Congress ban old-fashioned light bulbs?" Aug. 21), Matthew Auer defends the upcoming ban on incandescent light bulbs. He attempts to show it's not really a ban, even though the effect is the same.
Auer's thinking is the type that destroys liberty — one well-intentioned step at a time. His all-too-familiar leap of logic is, "This is a good idea; therefore the government should mandate it."
Yes, newer bulbs may save energy and may work well in some situations, but that's beside the point. Instead, let people decide for themselves, without government involvement. It's called freedom.
- 33 Mark Twain quotes that prove he was an...
- Richard Davis: Can a Mormon not be a liberal?
- Jay Evensen: We're becoming a nation that...
- In our opinion: Utah gun law that canceled...
- Jay Evensen: Unfortunately, Canada may never...
- Anne Loeser: Reverse trends about breast cancer
- In our opinion: Dropouts face high risk of...
- My view: New treatment can cure Hepatitis C
- In our opinion: Utah gun law that... 151
- Richard Davis: Can a Mormon not be a... 73
- Jay Evensen: We're becoming a nation... 43
- Letter: What is ‘common good?’ 31
- Robert Bennett: Former Defense... 30
- Letter: Lessons for Greg Bell 28
- Letter: Uninformed candidate 27
- In our opinion: School reformers should... 26