Each person has their own set of moral values, but Universal Morals are the only ones that should become law. How does that happen? Smart people like our Founding Father wrote a legal framework that creates a representative republic, which does it's best to restrain non-universal morals from becoming law, and a the Constitution and SCOTUS does it's best to ensure we adhere to maximum individual liberty. Is it perfect? No. Nothing is. But, open discussion and free speech allows bad ideas to be confronted by good ideas, and reasonable people tend to push toward reasonable laws.

EDIT: Thank you for asking these questions!!!!

Let's take the Ten Commandments, as an example, and using the Non-Aggression Principle (do no harm to others).

| Commandment | Universal | Reason | | ------ | ------- | ------- | | Thou shalt have no other gods before me | NO | | | Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image | NO | | | Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain | NO | | | Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy | NO | Violates one's right to not observe. Forced association. | | Honour thy father and thy mother | NO | | | Thou shalt not murder | YES | Murder violates one's right to life. | | Thou shalt not commit adultery | MAYBE | If marriages are a legal construct, then a marriage is a contract, and an adulterer may be in violation of that contract. If, however, marriage is a religious construct (which it should be), then no because it's a religious ritual. | | Thou shalt not steal | YES | Theft is a violation of another person's right to property | | Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour | YES | Fraud | | Thou shalt not covet (neighbour's house/wife/slaves) | MAYBE | As far as property, YES, but when speaking about wife/slaves/etc, then NO because individualism prohibits one person from owning another |

Each person has their own set of moral values, but Universal Morals are the only ones that should become law. How does that happen? Smart people like our Founding Father wrote a legal framework that creates a representative republic, which does it's best to restrain non-universal morals from becoming law, and a the Constitution and SCOTUS does it's best to ensure we adhere to maximum individual liberty. Is it perfect? No. Nothing is. But, open discussion and free speech allows bad ideas to be confronted by good ideas, and reasonable people tend to push toward reasonable laws.

EDIT: Thank you for asking these questions!!!!