Have you ever grumbled while sitting at a l-o-n-g red light, watching a car two blocks down approach, going the other direction, and sail right through? ("Not fair!") ...I've done my share of complaining, and have thought about the reasoning behind traffic laws many times while waiting. I recently read the following short article in a favorite magazine of mine, Answers, and took the liberty of publishing it here. It succinctly presents the same conclusion I've come to...It is impossible to pass a law that is free from moral implications. The real question is not whether man
can legislate morality, but
which system of morality will be legislated. All laws are either explicitly moral or procedures that uphold a moral concept. Even laws requiring traffic lights impose "morality". The purpose of traffic lights is to stop people from having accidents, thus protecting property and preserving life.
Even simple laws, like traffic lights, presuppose that:
a) order is good and chaos bad
b) property rights should be honored, and
c) life should be preserved
Each of these principles is rooted in the Genesis (Biblical) account of origins:
a) God the creator, who declared His work "very good" (Genesis 1:31), is not the author of confusion (I Corinthians 14:33)
b) He commanded man to bring order into creation by taking dominion over the earth, thus laying the foundation for property rights (Genesis 1:28), and
c) He established the sanctity of life as the first principle of lawful government (Genesis 9:5-6)
These are the unspoken moral assumptions behind a traffic light.
