But they DO have the right to tell you that what you're doing is immoral. First amendment, and all that.
I have no problem with the free exercise of inalienable rights.
However, the reason that people who believe in such things as the "immorality" of poker join political groups, is to seek ways to elevate their opinion to law.
Requiem æternam dona eis, Domine; In memoria æterna erit justus, ab auditione mala non timebit.
Beauseant!
Oops - that's called "free assembly," and the Constitution doesn't place limits on it, either.
Come to think of it, the Constitution doesn't put any limits on the efforts of people to, say, ban poker, or anything else not specifically covered in that document.
That's why we have a little thing called "public participation," part of being a "republic," where the principle of the people being the "original legislative jurisdiction" comes into play. You want to keep playing poker, then join a political group and oppose the people you disagree with. Just don't pretend that the Constitution somehow limits them from pushing for political goals you don't like. Oh, and for the record, I don't support banning poker, etc., even though I do find it immoral. In a sense, I'm probably on the same side as you, as far as political positioning is concerned, I just find your reasoning a bit insufficient, is all.
I have never, ever heard of any individual or group who wants to outlaw poker.
State promoted gambling, yes. But that wasn’t the issue.