Legislating Morality?

The phrase "legislating morality" has become a bit of a catch phrase in the political realm. When we hear the phrase we generally think of the "Moral Majority" or "Right wingers" trying to make abortion illegal, or ban gay marriage, adoption, etc. "You just can't legislate morality." While I understand the statement and I don't believe that the (mostly religious) beliefs of the few can be used as legal weapons against the many - I've been thinking about legislating morality in a different sort of way. 

Let me explain. 

I saw the above photo on Facebook today and it really got me thinking. 

Aren't businesses in business to make money? Don't all wise business people watch their numbers? Many restaurants, retailers, etc. operate with mostly part time employees. Most companies consider somewhere between 34-40 hours weekly "full-time." Those "full-time" employees are eligible for whatever benefits packages the company has to offer. In restaurants and retail settings, this is generally reserved for management. Obamacare mandates that companies cover any employee who works at least 30 hours per week. That extends "full-time" benefits to many, many "part-time" employees. It's obvious that this directly affects the bottom line of these businesses, so it stands to reason that they will make the necessary staffing adjustments to keep their costs at a minimum. They will, most likely, cut those 30-34 hour per week employees to under 30 hours in order to avoid extending their health care package that was reserved for their full time staff. Otherwise, they are greatly increasing their expenditures and will have to raise prices to compensate for this. 

Now, Papa John's is being demonized because John Schnatter has a huge home and is assuredly very wealthy. We are asking folks to boycott his business because he is adjusting his staff to avoid a government mandated health care cost (that - regardless of how wealthy he is - will cost him a fortune.) Why are we questioning this man's morality, as if he hates his employees and mistreats them and is just out to get them because Obama was re-elected? From what I've read about John Schnatter - he is an honest man who started at zero and has built an empire. No one said he's done it alone. But why do folks demonize someone who has earned great success in their lives? Why is an attack on this gentleman's morality okay simply because he's passing on costs (the 10 to 14 cent increase he's stated may take place) and avoiding a huge increase in expenses (with no return on his investment?) He and his franchisees (shocker... not every location is owned by Mr. John... these are small business owners....) can employ forty 25 hour/week employees cheaper than they can employee thirty four 30 hour/week employees. It just seems like simply business math to me. 

Feel free to discuss in the comment section. I'd be interested to see others' take on this. Respectful debate is always appreciated.