Well, I think that pretty much frames the discussion. You believe that state governments have the right to trample the liberty of their citizens, unfettered by the Federal government. And that view is shared by, well, practically no one.
State constitutions must be framed in such a manner that the state governments are similarly restricted from trampling the rights of their citizens. A requirement for inclusion in the union for a state would be that the state constitutionis written similarly to the U.S. Constitution and that it limits the state government from enacting laws restricting freedom of speech, right to arms, etc.
My view is that of original intent of the Constitution - not the "living document" that too many people believe exists. I'm shocked that so many people were so ignorant of the original intent that they would let the incongruous 14th Amendment be written as it was and ratified (oh wait, it wasn't properly ratified).