Laws are only as meaningful as we allow them to be. If our elected representatives no longer represent the will of the people, they must be removed to preserve the integrity of our society. Often they are not, which is unfortunate.
Just look at the body of unelected officials that, as a whole, are hell-bent at dismantling precedents in the name of constitutionalism, allowing for states to pass inane laws restricting rights under the guise of morals.
There is cancer in our society and it begins with our swill laws that are selectively enforced, are never revisited, and likely do not reflect the will of the people, and ends with legislative incumbents that do not represent modern progressive values.
I have a suspicion (shower-thought level, not held strongly) that "morality" is merely the set of rules that are beneficial for a culture. Laws are normally described like that; I would say the difference is that lawmakers are a subculture who make laws to encode what is beneficial for them, and therefore a nation's morality and laws only line up to the extent that the lawmakers represent the interests of the broader society.
Just look at the body of unelected officials that, as a whole, are hell-bent at dismantling precedents in the name of constitutionalism, allowing for states to pass inane laws restricting rights under the guise of morals.
There is cancer in our society and it begins with our swill laws that are selectively enforced, are never revisited, and likely do not reflect the will of the people, and ends with legislative incumbents that do not represent modern progressive values.