People have asked me why I seem so focused on moralism. There are multiple reasons, including having too much personal experience with people who operate as moralists, but what it really comes down to is that if we take moralism broadly to be a view that we should use the machinery of law to impose a moral view on the jurisdiction, most people in politics today are moralists. (So, not just a justification of a specific law, but of the whole system of law. A loss of viewpoint neutrality.)
On the right, we we have what are called “common good constitutionalists” or “common good conservatives” who basically say we should interpret the Constitution of the United States of America in such a way that will get us the common good of society. Of course, what they mean by “the common good” follows from their conservative beliefs (see Patrick Deneen and Adrian Vermuele).
On the left, you see basically the same thing without the claim made explicit. You have people pushing a particular view about how to guarantee equality and freedom in society, meaning a particular view about how society should be set up—and of course, that is a way meant to attain their view of the common good.
Of course those on the left and those on the right disagree about what the common good is. This is what “culture clashes” are. So, for an obvious example, the two camps here would take opposing sides with regard to today’s SCOTUS decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization. One side (or at least some on that side) thinks all human life is deserving of the same basic respect as all other human life; the other thinks women deserve the respect that would enable them to control their own lives.
Both sides seem to believe that the machinery of the state—the law—should be used to make society moral, given their own (competing) views about what that entails. (And we are likely to see this play out from SCOTUS fairly quickly.)
Importantly, libertarians are different. We believe that people should be free to live their lives as they see fit subject only to the restriction that they don’t wrongfully harm others. Some might say that this is a form of moralism as well—one wherein the view of morality is simply thinner than those of the other two views. Perhaps that is right, but consider how it plays out. Those on the left would want to force people to recognize and work for equal rights for women and to pay for programs meant to help with that. Those on the right want to force women to carry pregnancies to term. Meanwhile, libertarians want to force people not to force people to do anything. That last seems obviously better.