Carol Culver Rzadkiewicz, click
here to update your pages on AuthorsDen.
Blogs by Carol Culver Rzadkiewicz
Levy "Sin" Taxes on Actual Sins 5/14/2009 11:55:04 AM
Nowhere in the Holy Bible does it say, “Thou shalt not smoke or chew tobacco.”
On April 1, 2009 federal taxes on tobacco products significantly increased, with most of the anticipated revenue slated to fund President Obama’s new bill expanding the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (Tinsley, 2009). Arguably, however, although uninsured children are entitled to healthcare and, in fact, one might contend it is the duty of this nation to provide healthcare for all citizens, is it fair for one-fifth of the American population (20.6 percent) to be singled out to support this or any government program?
How much of a tax increase is it? To put it mildly, the tax is quite exorbitant, for example, 154.3 percent on large cigars; 156 percent on chewing tobacco; 157.3 percent on pipe tobacco; 158.9 percent on cigarettes; 2,152 percent on roll-your-own tobacco; and 2,425 percent on little cigars (Advocate, 2009, p. 8A).
Health officials maintain that increased tobacco taxes will both encourage smokers to stop and discourage young people from beginning a habit that is responsible for the deaths of more than 400,000 Americans each year and results in smoking-related illnesses that cost this country approximately $200 billion per fiscal year (Tinsley, 2009, p.8A). Other people, for example, Louisiana House Speaker Pro Tem Karen Peterson, justify the increase by calling it a “sin” tax, perhaps because they personally feel that smoking is a vile habit for anyone to undertake (Millhollon, 2009, p. A1).
In reality, however, neither inhaling nor chewing tobacco products constitutes a sin. A sin, by its most commonly used definition, is the breaking of “a religious law or moral principle” (Webster’s, 2006, p. 1328); moreover, nowhere in the Holy Bible does it say, “Thou shalt not smoke or chew tobacco.” The Bible does clearly state, though, that certain other behaviors are moral and religious transgressions; so if the government is going to insist upon levying “sin” taxes, shouldn’t these be the behaviors that are penalized, not smoking?
According to early Christian teachings, there were Seven Deadly Sins: gluttony, pride, covetousness, envy, anger, sloth, and lust. Granted, these particular vices, called cardinal sins, were used for purposes of instruction and not specifically listed in the Holy Bible. InGalatians 5:19-19, however, the Apostle Paul teaches, “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, wrath, strife, sedition, heresy, envy, murder, drunkenness, reveling, and such like . . . ” (Scofield, 1981, p. 1247).
Just consider for a moment the damage done to human lives and to the healthcare system by the aforementioned “immoral” behaviors, whether they’re classified as Deadly Sins or works of the flesh. For example, gluttony has led to the doubling of obesity rates in this country since 1980, resulting in a corresponding increase in more than 30 serious diseases and at least a quarter of America’s healthcare costs now being directly related to obesity (Trust, 2009).
Even more alarming is the impact America’s tendency to overindulge in calorie-laden foodstuffs and drinks is having upon its children. As revealed by a recent study conducted by Ohio State University’s Sarah Anderson and Temple University's Dr. Robert Whitaker, one in five four-year-olds in this nation is now morbidly overweight (obese); and according to Dr. Glenn Flores, a pediatrics and public health professor at University of Texas Southwestern Medical School in Dallas, “’Without interventions, the next generation ‘will be at very high risk’ for heart disease, high blood pressure, cancers, joint diseases, and other problems connected with obesity” (Tanner, 2009, para. 6).
So, considering that Americans, young and old, are endangering their health by eating way too much and far too often, and since gluttony is a recognized sin (unlike smoking), the question is this: Why doesn’t the government levy “hefty” taxes on items like double-cheese burgers, banana splits, pizza, fried chicken, and triple lattes, etc, instead of levying them on tobacco products, which, by the way, often help prevent overeating and subsequent weight gain? If fattening items were steeply taxed, leading to a decline in their consumption, not only would Americans be thinner and feel better, healthcare costs would correspondingly decrease, resulting in its becoming more affordable for everyone. Plus, consider the additional benefits of a thinner population. For example, flying would more than likely become cheaper since airlines would no longer have to outfit their planes with double-wide seats in order to accommodate double-wide passengers nor would the planes demand as much fuel because it would take less fuel to keep thin people aloft. In the way of other benefits, although it may be a stretch of the imagination, global-warming would probably decelerate since heavy people expend far more body heat than thin people.
Furthermore, in addition to products that contribute to gluttony, high taxes should be levied on any and all items that foster the kind of aberrant behavior condemned by St. Paul; and these products include alcoholic beverages; X-rated movies; revealing clothing; ostentatious homes and vehicles; celebrity-focused magazines; fireworks; Halloween costumes; and party favors (Refer to St. Paul’s list for justification of these items).
Of course, in reality, if excessive “sin” taxes were levied on the aforementioned items, everyone (other than probably a few smokers, that is) would rise up in mass, claiming their rights had been violated; and leading the rebellion would be those same politicians who had so resolutely campaigned to punish a mere 20.6 percent of the American population for indulging in an activity that isn’t even really a sin.
Millhollon, M. (2009); $1 tax increase on pack of cigarettes proposed; The Advocate; Baton Rouge, Louisiana; March 18, 2009; p. 1A.
Scofield Reference Bible (1981); New York: Oxford University Press.
Tinsley, A. (2009); Tobacco taxes catch fire this week; The Advocate; Baton Rouge, Louisiana; March 29, 2009; p. 8A.
