Everyone has their own definition of morality, but is there an objective standard? I see the beginnings of one in the foundations of a few ideas:
Desire, the foundation of our inalienable agency: Wanting what cannot be - to defy nature. Wanting without working. Wanting to build and grow to full potential. Nature is the only moral path.
Family, the foundation of sustenance, security, and social synergy: Submission being the tool of tyrants through the abdication of responsibility; the futile attempt to dismiss one's own inalienable judgment, responsibility, and desires for those of another. Mutual respect unlocks the beauty and power of society from the family to the state.
Faith, the foundation of growth: Ignorance holds the premise that knowledge can truly exist without, or even contrary to, experience. Experience is required for accurate, and complete understanding, and those who would deny experience prefer to maintain a monopoly on social power. Faith is a student's learning tool through the assumption of unsupported facts, not a manifestation of knowledge or spiritual development.
The respective virtues then seem to be: Natural desire for industry and development/ascension, social equality and mutual respect, and lastly, faith as a developmental tool for obtaining experience.
Government is the law, and Good government is moral laws. Therefore, laws must support personal industry and growth in social equality with faith that experience will educate and ascend the masses.