In a Facebook update, Sword Of The Lord editor Shelton Smith suggested that upon seeing a police officer, firefighter, or member of the military in a dietary establishment, one ought to purchase such civil servants a complimentary meal.

Would that include law enforcement such as those that drafted guidelines that would categorize constitutionalists and the religiously devout as potential terrorists or those that raid Amish dairies?

The two officers didn't deserve to be murdered on the streets of New York City.

However, from that presupposition, it does not follow that the officer that ended a life over an untaxed cigarette should be relieved of the burden of handling his own restaurant tab.

Aren't these functionaries provided a salary or stipend with which to acquire necessities and simple pleasures?

These are not voluntary positions.

No one is forced to pursue this line of work.

Apart from the solider perhaps, the police officer and professional firefighter are paid at a rate not that far below that of others in the working or middle classes.

Granted, these individuals provide an essential service.

But so do a lot of other people.

So since he grew the food that the restaurant prepared, does that mean that the farmer or the field hand that harvested the nutritional consumables shouldn't have to pay for their own meals either?

A number of historians conjecture that the flush toilet may have done more to expand the human lifespan than nearly every other medical advancement.

Therefore applying the principle that public safety personnel are for some reason entitled to complimentary meals, does that mean plumbers and sewage treatment workers should be lavished with free healthcare?

by Frederick Meekins