Well I have entered many arguments in justification of a smaller government, and in religious circles have always faced the same question. "What about 'Render unto Caesar'?"
Their take is that Jesus, being perfect, would not leave the words to be interpreted.
I see it as Jesus being perfect. The question of taxes was asked of Jesus in order to provoke him, and rather than answer against taxes, which would surely allow the state to arrest him. Jesus answers the question perfectly, 'render unto Caesar'. This does not mean that taxes are meant to be given; he referred to the coins that had the face of Caesar, but currency was not originally founded by government. In fact, the Roman empire needed taxes for their everyday regulatory society. If taxes are rightly the governments to have, then as are slaves.Roman coins with Caesar on it. Government's began to put their face on currency that cycled as to extend their control.
The Roman empire could not survive without its slaves, and yet we do not justify the slaves with the saying 'Render unto Caesar'.
No, I tell you, it is only the most perfect answer to the tricky question. It is like the middle school game where you ask your friend "Have you told your family you have AIDS?" If you answered yes you admit that you had AIDS. If you had answered no, you had admitted you had AIDS. It was a catch-22. While Jesus, so perfect, was able to overcome the Catch-22.
Taxes are an unlawful taking as we have no choice but to give and if we refuse we will be punished. As God gives us free will and does not restrict us from either choosing Him or against Him, why should we think He would restrict our choice towards government taxes.
So Render Unto Caesar What is Caesar's... Nothing.