. . . as long as it wasn't a Catholic one. Or in New England, an Anglican one. Or in Virginia, a Puritan one. The "simple fact of the matter" is that you can't overlook that when you make your grand, sweeping generalization about this subject.
Which Christian religious influence was, or is, the correct one? Do the Mormons have it right? The Presbyterians? The Unitarians? The Methodists? The Baptists? The Seventh-Day Adventists? The Congregationalists? Or are we supposed to believe that some amalgamation, or overlapping, of all of these Protestant sects have it right? And if so, what's the proper equation for blending it all together?
After all, if such a thing is to be the basis of secular criminal law, we should strive to get it right, shouldn't we?
In sum, while a certain morality should be the underpinning of criminal law, morality in and of itself should not dictate criminal law. Where morality and law overlap and intersect is generally a happy place, and a good one, but just as you cannot get grain from whiskey even though you can get whiskey from grain, you cannot get morality from law, even though you can extract law from morality.