To start with, people with some sort of morals are going to be much more likely to work instead of suck off of welfare. They’ll actually be contributing to it.
More morals means less crime and the expenses involved with that.
If we weren’t pandering to the gays, we wouldn’t have the expense involved with dealing with the consequences of their lifestyle.
If people were more moral, they’d be picking up the slack in helping the poor privately instead of pushing off the responsibility onto the government, which is going to cost because the government has to pay for it somehow.
The most moral people tend to be very patriotic and support the military. We’d have that strong defense that we need.
The most moral party in this country is the Conservative Party and everything it stands for is what real conservatives are looking for.
Fix the moral issues first and the fiscal ones will follow as people are more responsible.
Try to fix the fiscal ones, and you’ll fail. The moral ones will not automatically follow. That’s liberalthink. That’s the justification behind welfare and every other expensive social program the government runs. Liberals blame the moral breakdown on not enough money, just give them enough and they’ll straighten out.
That’s worked out real well for us now hasn’t it?
What you describe are talking points and not policies that fit within our Constitutional framework. You can't force people to be moral by pointing a gun at them.
You can force them to be moral by not giving them a choice. No support from welfare. No excuses or blaming society. You earn your way or you live off the charity of private organizations.
You cannot mandate Patriotism either. Ask the Russians how that worked out for them. You can make your Country worth being proud of.
Reducing the FedGov to just its Art 1 Sec 8 powers cures two ills. It reduces spending and it gives us back our liberty.
We can handle the moral issues on our own from there.