They do in fact regulate morality. Murder could even be considered a moral issue. Anyway, I think it depends on the issue, and whether is fits within the intent of the Constitution.
Yeah, this and some other individuals posts similar (paschendale I believe) was kind of my point.
There are a number of laws that one could make an argument DO regulate based on morality to some degree depending on a persons view.
Murder is a wonderful example. My making it illegal to murder people, the government is also in a sense suggesting it backs the notion that murdering someone is immoral and thus regulating morality.
However, it could also be argued that the law's primary and/or singular purpose isn't simply to enforce morality but to protect the rights of one person from being infringed upon by another.
Then again, someone could say that such a notion is in and of itself one based off the notion of a "moral" argument.
That's why I'm not one to pound the table going "GOVERNMENT SHOULD NEVER REGULATE MORALITY". Well, no...because that's such a broad notion.
I think there are some basic jobs of government that are set out in our founding documents. Now whether or not those jobs are based on the notion of enforcing morality or not is debatable. But to me, a law needs to connect to that pretty tangably as it's main reason for existing.
A law stating you can't have consensual anal sex is something I can't fathom any legitimate reason for OTHER than a notion that it's immoral and should be frowned upon.
But this is definitly the type of thing that SEEMS like a cut and dry question on the surface, but isn't. It seems cut and dry because people think of it in terms of what I just said above. "Oh no! We shouldn't have laws keeping people from having consensual sex in whatever manner they want!".
But look at something different...what about a law that authorizes the government to help fund a museum.
Could it be argued that instilling a sense of culture and history in the citizenry is something that is felt as morally important? At the very least, could it be argued as a law/act of government that is trying to instill or promote a general notion of a style or type of culture?