Legislating Morality: Is It Really the Government’s Job?

Texas Local Government Code, Title 7, Subtitle A, Chapter 211, Section 211.001 grants local governments the authority to create laws "for the purpose of promoting the public health, safety, morals, or general welfare." It also empowers them to protect places of historical, cultural, or architectural importance. At first glance, this might sound like common sense—after all, regulations around health, safety, and public welfare are foundational. But there’s a curious phrase tucked in there: morals.

This inclusion implies that local governments have the authority to legislate morality. But when we pause to consider, it raises a fundamental question: is it the government’s job to decide what our morals should be?

Morality: A Personal Responsibility

As individuals, we each define our own values. Morals are deeply personal; they’re shaped by culture, religion, upbringing, and personal beliefs. When the government steps in to enforce what it deems as "moral," it treads on our individual rights to determine what we believe is right or wrong. The idea that officials, elected or not, should shape our personal code of ethics goes against the fundamental concept of individual liberty.

The Dangers of Overreach

When governments begin to legislate morals, it sets a dangerous precedent. Who defines what’s moral? Today, they might enforce one set of values; tomorrow, those values could shift with changing political winds. What was once “moral” can easily become “immoral,” depending on who holds power.

Consider examples where governments have legislated morality in ways that ended up infringing on personal freedoms. In many cases, these regulations may have had unintended consequences, limiting personal choices and stifling individual expression. Over time, such overreach erodes trust in the system.

Historical and Cultural Protection: Worthwhile, but with Limits

Protecting places of historical and cultural significance is valuable. It’s understandable why a community would want to preserve sites that hold a shared heritage. However, there’s a fine line between preservation and control. While keeping history alive is essential, it should not come at the expense of individuals’ freedom to use their property as they see fit.

Promoting "Public Morals" Is Not the Same as Public Safety

Health and safety regulations protect us all—standards for clean water, some building codes, and some traffic laws are examples of government intervention that directly contributes to the common good. But morals? That’s a different matter. The government has granted itself the power to enforce its version of morality, expanding that power into other aspects of our lives, controlling what we do in private, with our property, or with our bodies.

Individual Liberty Over Imposed Morality

The government’s primary role should be to protect the rights of individuals, not to dictate how we should think or live according to some predetermined code. Morality is not one-size-fits-all, nor should it be. When individuals are allowed to freely pursue their values—so long as they’re not infringing on others' rights—it fosters a society of diversity and growth, one where people can truly pursue their happiness.

In the end, it’s not the government’s job to decide what’s moral. That’s our choice to make.