You fail to understand the basics of ethics 101.
1. Rights exist without any external recognition. To decide whether or not to recognize and protect those rights as a society is a moral action.
2. As I said, “is” (the State is a “purveyor of gambling”) does not equate to “ought” (the State ought to allow more gambling). (Your mama probably says, “If your friend jumps off the roof, does that mean I should let you?”)
1. Rights exist without any external recognition. To decide whether or not to recognize and protect those rights as a society is a moral action.
2. As I said, “is” (the State is a “purveyor of gambling”) does not equate to “ought” (the State ought to allow more gambling). (Your mama probably says, “If your friend jumps off the roof, does that mean I should let you?”)
You're conflating the two concepts erroneously. The protection of rights doesn't require ethics or morality, whether it's personal protection or societal. It's an innate human response.
Ok, I'll bite. By your logic, Medina's support of legalizing casino gambling is a disqualifier for office, based on moral grounds, in spite of the fact the other forms of gambling exist, and her position is actually consistent and not hypocritical. By virtue of the fact that Perry opposes casino gambling, he is more qualified for office vis a vis that issue. The logical conclusion of your comments is that no forms of gambling should be legal, and candidates should oppose all of them. However, Perry, for example, does not oppose the legalization of the lottery, in fact, the lottery has expanded during his tenure, he appointed a crony to head the lottery commission, he's suggested selling it to a private company to raise money for the state, instead of banning it altogether. So by your definition, that's moral?
Is Perry "moral" in attempting to legally force girls to get mandatory STD vaccinations? Do those girls have any rights? Is it moral to support abstinence only sex education while forcing girls to get STDs vaccines? Is taking private property owners' land while selling state authority to foreign corporations for a private toll road to ship goods from Mexico moral? Is letting illegal aliens get state money for college moral, while violating the rights of the citizens who pay taxes to fund it?