Like you, I've had trouble even understanding the refutation! The problem is that what's implied and inferred are often entirely different things. Assuredly, we can't legislate a state of, the condition of, morality any more than we can legislate honesty or chastity or cleanliness. We most certainly can (and do) legislate punishment for a breach of some aspect of morality. Or at least we used to . . .
Interesting how a group of people (liberals-socialists) could demand absolute obedience to their will on issues such as smoking, guns, and alcohol; yet they insist on freedom of every single thing that will bring destruction to our children on a personal level.
Each law that is passed is a legislation of morality, but if they have their way they will pass laws to legislate immorality.
I don't get the stance that we establish regarding our resoning for what we believe. We either believe in the natural law which proves itself out through time and trial and error; or, we believe in the law of God handed down through the scriptures. Either of these will leave us with a clarity on the purpose and function of the social contract.
The bible gives no such liberty of the government to usurp the function of the individual. The people that go to Romans 12 and claim submission to the govt. is the will of God forget that in that same passage it defines the "ministration" of the will of God as punishing evil and rewarding good. Whenever the government decides to go against that mandate then they are off base and are no longer the "minister of God" any more than the preacher is when he is boffing the secretary.
The purpose of government, according to scripture, is to reward good and punish evil. If they stray from that purpose and begin to punish good and reward evil then they are not the ministry of God for that nation. There is never given to any governing authority in this earth the liberty to demand submission based on the idea that they represent God's desire for order, as if to say order trumps all.
Yes, it is important to have order, but be assured that order for the sake of order is not an idea put forth in the Bible. The order that is promoted and spoken about that demands submission is the order that punishes evil and rewards good, period!
This point must be clearly taught and understood. The natural law also demands order in that the whole world about us is orderly. However, each level of species and order is specific in it's function. So you cannot even draw the idea that order or governance can be absolutely supported and submitted to wihtout examining the purpose of that order and it's effect on those governed by it.
Whenever legislation is established that goes beyond the basic moral law, for instance "thou shalt not kill," or "thou shalt not steal," it mostly is a trampeling of our basic rights as citizens. We must be constantly aware of the problems of letting others decide all the things that we should be deciding about conducting our lives. We don't need any group of governed to tell us what to do to live, and mostly when they want to or attempt to they are intruding in our life.
The only law that should be submitted to is the moral law based on absolute right and wrong as found in the scriptures and the ten commandments. Our system of government is built on that being the moral law, though it does not say that is the only thing we can believe, we do have freedom of religion. The founders put those laws into effect and if we want to change it then we should have to sell it to the majority of the people.
The social contract can at any time be disbanded or disregarded by anyone who feels that it has started to punish good and reward evil, or who just plain doesn't feel like it governs their interest.