Per my recommendation for making gambling debts unenforceable, I am getting the government out of people's lives, except to the extent that organized crime trying to collect gambling debts constitute a quasi government power that should also be gotten out of people's lives.
I may have missed the sarcasm in your post if there was any, but it seems to me that a legitimate government function would be to intervene when gambling debts go unpaid. Why should gambling debts be unenforceable? If someone borrows money to gamble, and they lose it all, that’s a matter for contract law and the courts to resolve if the debtor is unable or refuses to pay. And in this case, the government only gets involved because one party to the contract has violated its terms and the courts have been asked to intervene.
Making gambling debts unenforceable would actually be a case of the government getting involved where it doesn’t need to, since laws would have to be drafted specifically to say that such debts are unenforceable, and this would also de facto end most financing of gambling activities, which could be construed as the government flexing its legislative muscle to outlaw, essentially, something it doesn’t like.