This is what happens when you use such broad vague statements like, “if it’s allowed then it’s acceptable”.

Oh come off it. Don’t pretend. It’s not vague at all. Allowed by whom? Accepted by whom? Why would they be separate questions with different answers? Why would you make that assumption? Why would a rule determining whether something is allowed be measuring its acceptance against anything other than their own standards?

you’re allowed to talk racist shit in public. Does that mean that every lawmaker alive rn finds that acceptable?

Don’t move the goalposts. Not every lawmaker alive, no, but the legal system would certainly seem to find that acceptable, yeah.

You think every individual lawmaker finds smoking acceptable?

I already pointed out this fallacy. Moving on.

Things aren’t so binary.

Irrelevant statement as I already said

something being unacceptable doesn’t mean something should be disallowed.

Would you, then, allow actions in your home you deem to be unacceptable? Of course not. If you find something to be unacceptable, you would not allow it.