You ready to go toe to toe and defend your (and the state's) version of morality against mine?
I think we should. We might have a better idea of who's being snookered here with faulty science, absolutely malleable public opinion, "lifeboat" ethics and flat out lies.
That's how it should have been done from the get-go. Unfortunately, the blissfully ignorant don't always pay a lot of attention to the exact means by which the so-called "people's will" is forced on them ... court case by court case as rubberstambed by Legislators and FORCED on the population at large.
Because my argument is strictly free of artificial sweeteners (and thus may taste a little sour to a sweet tooth like you), I have every confidence I can beat you on the merits.
Despite your continued anti-clericalist chirping on the dire prospect that would be my imposing my strictly Catholic beliefs on you, I know you will be pleasantly surprised to find that my arguments would results in a drastic reduction of the State's intervention in folks' private affairs and ensure the maximum rightful sovereignty locused always most closely to the individual.
There's a reason the State is always interested in the "consequence free" solution for folks. The State knows (as do I) that authority only comes with responsibility.
As folks cede responsbility for their actions -- primarily by availing themselves of the State's artificial realities and taking part in the Legal Lotto that shunts the brunt of paying for one's own mistakes to a deep pockets insurance collective or corporation -- they also cede their claim to authority over their own lives, even.
This is why folks don't really have choices anymore. The most glaring example being dimwit women who -- seeking to "have it all" courtesy of the State's making all things equal -- end up with nothing but a woeful life of "choices" to short either their career or their kids.