You seem to think that morality is bad.
It is incumbent upon the State - upon individuals who make up the government of the State - to do no harm. That’s a moral position, as is “Do not murder” and deciding the degrees of homicide, “Do not steal” and the parameters of misdemeanors and felonies.
The State already regulates these practices, we’ve already decided that limits are appropriate. Now, it’s just a matter of defining those limits.
It is incumbent upon the State - upon individuals who make up the government of the State - to do no harm. That’s a moral position, as is “Do not murder” and deciding the degrees of homicide, “Do not steal” and the parameters of misdemeanors and felonies.
The State already regulates these practices, we’ve already decided that limits are appropriate. Now, it’s just a matter of defining those limits.
Morality isn't bad, forcing it on people by law is.
The state not doing harm is not a moral position, it's a liberty issue. However, not allowing gambling by private corporations when the state has a conflict of interest by operating a lottery, and allows track betting, is inherently unfair and a violation of liberty. Medina is for it, you seem to think it's a major disqualifier, it isn't, esp when a majority of self governing citizens want it.
No fault divorce is here to stay.