> You aren’t allowed to put up booze and cigarette stores near schools.

Huh? Where? In many countries grocery and convenience stores sell both. When I was in school I could have gone across the street to get both. Everywhere I've travelled it's been even more accessible. The only place I've seen these restrictions are in very religious places, which are not analogous to morality in any way.

Lets play a little though experiment: Is it okay for me and my friend to send each other messages over the internet? Can we send images and videos? What about a group chat with all of our friends? What if our neighbourhood joins in? What if our city joins in? What if our country joins in?

Can you identify the precise step in which this becomes unallowable? Can you articulate a logical reason why it's unallowable, but the previous steps are fine?

Can you do this without it becoming a subjective question about your personal moral values?

This is the problem with laws and mandates. They can't just be based on your own subjective feelings. And as humans, we have very different thoughts and feelings on what is good and bad, what should be allowed an unallowed. Furthermore, many things are perfectly legal despite causing harm. If I reject someone's advances and they suffer negative mental consequences, have I violated their rights? They've suffered harm after all. To whom are their obligations for?

There can be claimed "fuzzy second order effects" to every single human action. Authoritarians believe they are smarter than everyone else and have the right to enforce their subjective and often incorrect opinions on everyone else. In another country, on another topic, this would be about something else - maybe religion. This does not form a solid legal basis for anything.