Should government legislate morality?

I want to address something that has been on my mind lately. 

Is it the government’s job to legislate morality? In my opinion, absolutely not. 

In case you do not know, I am a very religious and spiritual person. What does that mean? Well, I was born into a Roman Catholic family. Both my mom and dad are extremely religious, so I have attended mass every Sunday of my life since I was born (except on vacation because the Church pardons it). I really do enjoy being Catholic and accept its teachings whole-heartedly. I admit I am not perfect but I do think of myself as a moral and principled individual.

Getting back to the question, I believe that the federal government should protect life, liberty and property. The state and city governments should take care of the rest. The closer the laws are made to home, the greater likelihood that they will represent the constituents (note: the federal government should step in if the state and city governments undermine life, liberty and property). So, even though I do not personally believe it is the role of the government to legislate morality, states and city governments should have the option to. It is not my goal to impose my views (I’m a libertarian not a liberal, haha), but rather to persuade others that legislating morality does not work. 

Individuals are moral because humans are innately good. Laws that legislate morality (e.g. Thou shall not kill) work well because most people are already moral. If the government chose not to punish murder crimes, would that change the morality of individuals? How many would go out and murder someone just because they would not get punished for it? I’m willing to bet not many. My point is that people are moral because they choose to be, not because the government implements a law. Those who commit murder do it regardless of whether they will be faced with punishment or not. This applies to other crimes as well. Individuals who use drugs illegally do it despite facing criminal charges. The fact that it’s illegal does not stop them. If hard drugs were legalized, I do not believe individuals would start using them just because they can. Perhaps, some would... but that is freedom. Freedom harbors an environment where people can make choices. Sure, individuals will make bad choices some of the time but they will also face the consequences. You cannot successfully protect people from themselves. Fortunately, most individuals learn from mistakes. Despite the fact that bad choices will be made, I think individuals are prone to make more good choices than bad choices. 

Aside from everything I mentioned, I think legislating morality takes responsibility away from the individual. I believe that placing the choice on the individual makes them subject to their own character. Maximum individual freedom allows individuals to choose the type of person the or she wants to be. There is more virtue in choosing to do the right thing than there is in following a law out of fear of punishment. I have noticed that religious people are adamant about legislating morality, but as a religious person, I would argue this is not the stance we should take. Morality should be a choice. In my personal experience, it is difficult to be moral even when highly motivated. What makes us think that people who do not share our religious views are going to embrace our views on morality because it's the law? It won’t work. If anything, it will only be counterproductive because it will create resentment and backlash towards religious folks. No one likes to be imposed upon. I will always stand firmly behind freedom of religion. But I also will respect an individual's choice to not practice a religion or to be atheist. Faith in God comes from the heart and soul, not the government. 

I understand that it is our duty to spread the word of God but I do not believe it should be done by means of government. If we want to spread the word of God and show others he is a great, we should do so through our actions. Some of the biggest cheerleaders of war are pro-life Christians. How hypocritical is that? How will anyone take us serious? 

Gandhi eloquently acknowledged the shortcomings of Christians:  

“I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”

“I’d become a Christian if I ever met one.” 

Gandhi's constructive criticism should be a reminder that our actions speak louder than our words. Sure, you can quote the Bible all day long but at the end of the day your actions are what matter most. In my opinion, my religion is beautiful. It inspires me to be a better person. But I realize that not all people share this view. That is fine. My faith is not diminished because others refuse to embrace it. Religion is not something that can be forced upon someone. The Catholic Church teaches free will. Individuals should have the freedom to be good. The beauty of freedom is allowing individuals choose to be virtuous. I am in no way saying that you have to be religious to be virtuous because I know plenty of individuals who are not religious and extremely virtuous (this supports my argument that individuals are inherently good and do not need an entity, such as government, dictating morality). 

Perhaps my views come off as naive and idealistic. But I think that maximum freedom for an individual is still the best way to go about living a fulfilling life. Worst case scenario, individuals will not go out of their way to help others (as libertarians assume) but they also won’t go out of their way to hurt others. 

Anyway, those are my thoughts. I will try to shorten and organize them better.